Perfect sort (inbound)

[MrT]

Maybe i missed where she said 1 hour unload but she has mentioned that they get they get both trucks, or triples, done within the 4.5 hours of the unload shifts. But with the line being set up and doing both trucks back to back im assuming with a quick 15 in the middle of the 2 thats still 2 hours per truck. Even seen her mention doing multiple trucks at once. Thats not a possibility in my store but you shouldnt be taking more then 2 hours with a fully staffed inbound team. Also a+a shouldnt be taking up your time as you should just sending them down the line and taken off to have them sort it out, mayne your team doesnt have enough space allocated? We had that problem at the start.
We have the same amount of people on the line but you should also have a person running the bulk pallets of the truck during unload, and my bath tm pushes the excess beds/bath on the p2 side as well as the domestics repacks during unload which really helps prevent clutter during unload.

 

[allnew2]

I do 2 trucks in 3 hours now . But I’m doing it at the same time 2 throwers 5 on the line.

 

[jenna]

I do 2 trucks in 3 hours now . But I’m doing it at the same time 2 throwers 5 on the line.

Our backroom isn't big enough for an unload of two trucks at the same time. We can barely hold one truck's worth of freight.

 

[MrT]

To be fair they are working the truck as they unload, my backroom could only do this if we did it overnight because we only have 3 bays on our dock and one is always occupied by ups, so we would need to have one cleared for vendors before they get arrive.

 

[allnew2]

To be fair they are working the truck as they unload, my backroom could only do this if we did it overnight because we only have 3 bays on our dock and one is always occupied by ups, so we would need to have one cleared for vendors before they get arrive.

I wish I was overnight . But nooooo every time I even bring it up I’m being looked at like I’m either crazy or just speak a different language 😂

 

[TheQuietStorm]

I wish I was overnight . But nooooo every time I even bring it up I’m being looked at like I’m either crazy or just speak a different language 😂

My whole district and most of the group went overnight.

 

[MrT]

My whole district and most of the group went overnight.

Yeah my district was a mandatory overnight

 

[JohnSith373]

I do 2 trucks in 3 hours now . But I’m doing it at the same time 2 throwers 5 on the line.

I wish I was overnight . But nooooo every time I even bring it up I’m being looked at like I’m either crazy or just speak a different language 😂

Two trucks being unloaded at the same time?
You have 4 docks to handle triples or 3 docks? One dock for vendor/pFresh.
Nearly whole district went overnight. Only exception was if the store didn’t have enough payroll aka my store.

 

[allnew2]

Two trucks being unloaded at the same time?
You have 4 docks to handle triples or 3 docks? One dock for vendor/pFresh.
Nearly whole district went overnight. Only exception was if the store didn’t have enough payroll aka my store.

Yes 2 at once . Yes 4 docks. And finally I was able to get everyone on board for inbound to go overnight . Also getting an other team for overnight to do returns, zone , pulls and backstock one for one. P1 and market still comes in at 4 however they work truck only , p2 comes at 8 and do the same thing as p1 and market.

 

[JohnSith373]

Yes 2 at once . Yes 4 docks. And finally I was able to get everyone on board for inbound to go overnight . Also getting an other team for overnight to do returns, zone , pulls and backstock one for one. P1 and market still comes in at 4 however they work truck only , p2 comes at 8 and do the same thing as p1 and market.

Midnight unload?
How do you manage unload double trucks at the same time? It seems you make anything thats impossible, possible.

 

[allnew2]

Midnight unload?
How do you manage unload double trucks at the same time? It seems you make anything thats impossible, possible.

Two throwers , and the 5 on the line. I do have enough skates , as well as my skates are electric. Yes midnight unload. Not to give to much away.
P.s Im the type a person that if someone says I can’t do it , I’ll prove that I can😎

 

[Unleashed Dog]

Wow. That’s amazing. You’re kinda motivating me to actually go forward and take over inbound at my store... The thought of finding ways to make it more efficient sounds interesting. And I did enjoy starting out on an inbound team.

 

[No I in Team]

Congratulations, I think?

Let's look inside the numbers of what appears to be a good idea.

You went from roughly 4.5 (15 min break, you still have to account for the time) hours for two trucks to 3 hours.

Your throwers went from 2.25 hours/truck to 3 hours/truck to unload. A .75 hr increase per truck.

If you use 2000 pcs./truck, your throwers are off loading at the following rates:

4.5 hours:

Thrower A/B: 135 min (2.25 hours)/each at 14.82 boxes/min each.

3 hours:

Thrower A/B: 180 min (3 hours)/each at 11.11 boxes/each.

Net loss of 3.7 boxes per thrower.

So where did the 1.5 hour difference come from?

Yes, more math! All things staying the same we'll look inside the numbers.

At 4.5 hours you were sorting at

5 sorters at roughly 1.48 pcs./minute (2000 pcs/1350 minutes (5 X 270 minutes)).

At 3 hours you were sorting at

5 sorters at roughly 2.22 pcs./minute (2000 pcs/900 minutes (5 X 180 minutes)).

An increase of .74 pcs.

The GOOD is that cut the process time by 1.5 hours.

The BAD is that you unintentionally increased your throwers time on the truck by 45 minutes without a break. You also increased your sorters workload by one box a minute or by 90 pcs per truck.

None of this seems to bad. But if you look at the weight per box, it takes a toll. Let's use 20,000 lbs/truck. That equates to about 10lbs/box.

Your sorters just picked up another 900 lbs./truck.

The throwers went from 74 lbs./min per truck to 111 lbs/min per truck.

Remember theses are averages so there is a variance. But most likely not enough to make that much a difference either way.

Queueing is your problem between the the activities.

I hate to say it, but you will end up running off your crew. Fatigue will set in unless you increase your crew size substantially. That's where the engineers come in.

Some times you can come up with something that works well or appears to short term. But sustaining it is a whole other ball game when you look inside the numbers.

 

[MrT]

Congratulations, I think?

Let's look inside the numbers of what appears to be a good idea.

You went from roughly 4.5 (15 min break, you still have to account for the time) hours for two trucks to 3 hours.

Your throwers went from 2.25 hours/truck to 3 hours/truck to unload. A .75 hr increase per truck.

If you use 2000 pcs./truck, your throwers are off loading at the following rates:

4.5 hours:

Thrower A/B: 135 min (2.25 hours)/each at 14.82 boxes/min each.

3 hours:

Thrower A/B: 180 min (3 hours)/each at 11.11 boxes/each.

Net loss of 3.7 boxes per thrower.

So where did the 1.5 hour difference come from?

Yes, more math! All things staying the same we'll look inside the numbers.

At 4.5 hours you were sorting at

5 sorters at roughly 1.48 pcs./minute (2000 pcs/1350 minutes (5 X 270 minutes)).

At 3 hours you were sorting at

5 sorters at roughly 2.22 pcs./minute (2000 pcs/900 minutes (5 X 180 minutes)).

An increase of .74 pcs.

The GOOD is that cut the process time by 1.5 hours.

The BAD is that you unintentionally increased your throwers time on the truck by 45 minutes without a break. You also increased your sorters workload by one box a minute or by 90 pcs per truck.

None of this seems to bad. But if you look at the weight per box, it takes a toll. Let's use 20,000 lbs/truck. That equates to about 10lbs/box.

Your sorters just picked up another 900 lbs./truck.

The throwers went from 74 lbs./min per truck to 111 lbs/min per truck.

Remember theses are averages so there is a variance. But most likely not enough to make that much a difference either way.

Queueing is your problem between the the activities.

I hate to say it, but you will end up running off your crew. Fatigue will set in unless you increase your crew size substantially. That's where the engineers come in.

Some times you can come up with something that works well or appears to short term. But sustaining it is a whole other ball game when you look inside the numbers.

Appreciate the math but how does that increase the amount weight a person does, the trucks physical size arent changing, and how does the amount of weight per hour a truck thrower go up per hour when you are saying its taking longer for them to do each truck, just getting it done quicker since they are done simultaneously. Logically that just doesnt make sense. Also the average weight per box you are giving are drastically higher then i believe is the actual average weight, the amount of pallets, particularly the water pallets vastly change the weight of the trailer.

 

[No I in Team]

Appreciate the math but how does that increase the amount weight a person does, the trucks physical size arent changing, and how does the amount of weight per hour a truck thrower go up per hour when you are saying its taking longer for them to do each truck, just getting it done quicker since they are done simultaneously. Logically that just doesnt make sense. Also the average weight per box you are giving are drastically higher then i believe is the actual average weight, the amount of pallets, particularly the water pallets vastly change the weight of the trailer.

You have the overall process which was reduced by 1.5 hours.

Then you have the parts; truck unload, primary sort, and to the floor.

Nothing was changed physically regarding the inbound freight.

Nothing was changed in material handling of said freight.

The only change was the incorporation of the two trucks into one sort in less time. So in this case, everyone's amount of weight to pickup increased per minute by the reduction of time to perform the process.

The sorters workload went from 4.5 hrs down to 3 hrs. This in turn increased their work load per hour. So instead of unloading 40,000 lbs of freight in 4.5 hrs or 148.15 lbs per minute , you're now unloading 40,000 lbs in 3 hrs or 222.22 lbs per minute PER process.

As in the throwers case it in creased PER truck as you lost the rotation of another thrower.

If I were to include things like water pallets and such, the trailer weight would have been around 25,000 lbs plus. I am unloader and have been watching the numbers for quite a while.

When you add in the variables like pallets, spills, and load condition, it can drastically change the workload if you stay within the times listed above.

 

[MrT]

I see where you are coming from. The thing is its 2 throwers simultaneously, so instead of each one doing a truck in 2 hours they now get 3 hours so thats less work per hour. I also see where that increases workload on the sorters, but unless im misunderstanding the process she has 1 additional sorter then before to keep up with the increased pace. Im not doing the math but that would decrease the amount of workload per person per hour. The only thing that stays true is that each person has to wait an additional 45 minutes before break. I also just mentioned the water pallets just to say that they are not sorting all 20000 pounds of a trailer and that trailer weight varies so much it doesnt seem fair to go off of weight rather then cases or units, but either calculations have flaws.

 

[allnew2]

You have the overall process which was reduced by 1.5 hours.

Then you have the parts; truck unload, primary sort, and to the floor.

Nothing was changed physically regarding the inbound freight.

Nothing was changed in material handling of said freight.

The only change was the incorporation of the two trucks into one sort in less time. So in this case, everyone's amount of weight to pickup increased per minute by the reduction of time to perform the process.

The sorters workload went from 4.5 hrs down to 3 hrs. This in turn increased their work load per hour. So instead of unloading 40,000 lbs of freight in 4.5 hrs or 148.15 lbs per minute , you're now unloading 40,000 lbs in 3 hrs or 222.22 lbs per minute PER process.

As in the throwers case it in creased PER truck as you lost the rotation of another thrower.

If I were to include things like water pallets and such, the trailer weight would have been around 25,000 lbs plus. I am unloader and have been watching the numbers for quite a while.

When you add in the variables like pallets, spills, and load condition, it can drastically change the workload if you stay within the times listed above.

I respect everything you said. However this is something that I decided along with the team. They been doing this for years and even tho this my seems hard for some , for them is really all about let’s finish this 2 At once so we can move on to the 3rd. All my unloaders never want to be rotated. They all know who does which truck . And the bulk always gets build inside the truck and any Pipo pallets I support with.

 

[allnew2]

45 minutes before break.

I tried to send them to break at their regula time and all I get is no let’s just finish it first. So I go with what they want . My team doesn’t want to take a break when they are a block or half of block from finishing . They rather come back and support with push then be back on the line and to be honest so do I .

 

[No I in Team]

I see where you are coming from. The thing is its 2 throwers simultaneously, so instead of each one doing a truck in 2 hours they now get 3 hours so thats less work per hour. I also see where that increases workload on the sorters, but unless im misunderstanding the process she has 1 additional sorter then before to keep up with the increased pace. Im not doing the math but that would decrease the amount of workload per person per hour. The only thing that stays true is that each person has to wait an additional 45 minutes before break. I also just mentioned the water pallets just to say that they are not sorting all 20000 pounds of a trailer and that trailer weight varies so much it doesnt seem fair to go off of weight rather then cases or units, but either calculations have flaws.

Your struggling with the Law of Diminishing Returns. It's finding that point at which a combination of inputs maximizes the output to the point if you add one more input you start losing the advantage gained.

Calculation for the throwers is per truck with two rotating. Remember, you go from two to one thrower per truck.

The rotation method has one thrower spending 1.0625 hours per truck (less 15 min break). With a total time spend on two trucks at 2.125 hrs per thrower.

If I'm not mistaken she was using five (5) originally, just that one was also a rotating thrower who now unloads a single truck.

You roughly decreased the inbound time about 30% by increasing labor by roughly 16%.

Two questions; was the marginal increase in labor offset by the cost savings and if it was a true cost savings, could you gain even more by adding even more labor?

Burden/work would have also increased per person given that nothing else would be introduce to increase efficiency per worker. You would have nullified any relief by reducing the time from 4.5 (4.25) to 3 hours.

20,000 lbs was the amount I calculated less the burden of pallets and bulk freight including water. I did this over 4 trucks. Each truck was in excess of 2000 pcs and weighed over 25,000 lbs ea. surprisingly it was fairly close calculation.

These are averages for a reason. I would say that Target, like most transportation companies scale their trailer after loaded given what our freight consist of. It would be impractical to try using actual weight of each carton given all the irregularities. You would require a more controlled environment and even then averages would be used.

Heavy items such as water pallets, get a little different treatment regarding the number loaded per trailer. Ours is a cubing (volume) issue.

 

[No I in Team]

I respect everything you said. However this is something that I decided along with the team. They been doing this for years and even tho this my seems hard for some , for them is really all about let’s finish this 2 At once so we can move on to the 3rd. All my unloaders never want to be rotated. They all know who does which truck . And the bulk always gets build inside the truck and any Pipo pallets I support with.

From reading your post, it would appear that your are using "Group Dynamics" to reach an objective point.

"Group Dynamics" is when you have a number of people who are willing take up certain positions/roles/work within a process to achieve a desired outcome. In other words they not only work well together, but compliment each other in their strengths and weaknesses. The problem is that change within the group quickly leads to the end of such success.

Examples are sports teams, fire fighters, and other crews who by working together not only achieve, but excel amongst their peer groups.

It looks good now, but is not sustainable, nor practical, and could lead to some serious problems down the road when it comes to the inbound process.

Here's the first litmus test I had to do to see if I was engaging in this practice.

First measure your current process outcome.

Second, rotate all your team into a different position for one week and measure the outcome.

Third, repeat until all the team has experienced every work area.

If you have actually improved upon a process, your numbers at the end of each rotation will mirror your original process measurement. If not, you have used "Group Dynamics" to reach a desired outcome.

From what I recall, Target does not have a team member profile requirement for the inbound process. So all team members, unless Target has made specific arrangements for, should be able to perform all inbound task.

"Group Dynamics" is an acceptable practice in certain organizations, but not at Target. We're not compensated in that manner.

 

[MrT]

Im not struggling to understand what you are saying, but you are saying that her teams efforts will not be sustainable. But that is saying that saying that the team was moving at maximum capacity before the change and that any increase in workload isnt sustainable. If youve been an unloader for years then i think you know there are plenty of dull moments during unload and it seems her idea her is to just minamize the dull moments to increase efficiency rather then to for her team to be more productive. I like the math, its a great tool. Even the group dynamics is true to a point. Spot will not have her team change things up because that would disrupt there workflow and still only prove it works in her store. Spots approach has always been to pilot in stores for proof of concept and then increase sample size buy implementing into other stores. It would be foolish to believe spot doesn't look at those numbers but numbers only go so far. IMO the real bid downfall with modernization is that it gives so little room for error and that everything is so calculated that one mishap can throw off an entire system.
Edit to add: I dont want to hijack this thread anymore, perhaps you are right. You should keep looking at the numbers, and if you can use it to help improve your store. I would say instead of just going over numbers and saying that it isn't sustainable or that it might not work with a different crew. Maybe try and add some suggestions or add to the post rather then just saying congratulations? And saying that it won't work long term. I use this forum to help increase my knowledge and help myself be a better leader and team member. And to just see what insight i can get coming to the future of Spot.

 

[allnew2]

It looks good now, but is not sustainable, nor practical, and could lead to some serious problems down the road when it comes to the inbound process.

Seems like it is sustainable giving the fact that stores has to fallow suit.

Second, rotate all your team into a different position for one week and measure the outcome.

Why are you under the impression that I haven’t done this? My team has been rotated any of them can do whatever area I put them in. My team is made of seasoned tm , tm( inbound process ) who use to wear the store on their backs way before modernization, so this to them only got easier not harder ( and that’s a quote from them) .
They have been able to accomplish something that came very easy to them, it might seem hard to attain and sustain to others

 

[No I in Team]

Seems like it is sustainable giving the fact that stores has to fallow suit.

Why are you under the impression that I haven’t done this? My team has been rotated any of them can do whatever area I put them in. My team is made of seasoned tm , tm( inbound process ) who use to wear the store on their backs way before modernization, so this to them only got easier not harder ( and that’s a quote from them) .
They have been able to accomplish something that came very easy to them, it might seem hard to attain and sustain to others

Turnover and the inability to backfill, plain and simple.

For any change in a process it has to withstand turnover. You are using a seasoned team that is dynamic.

So if you have rotated your team, and your results were the same for each team member in each position (recorded). You should be able to pick 6 random team members out of hat and obtain the same results at the end of one week. With only one parameter, less than two weeks tenure.

As for other stores, I am not buying it. Modernization was treated and discussed in the same manner by a few stores. The results, way too many other stores are struggling with it to this day. This board contains an enormous amounts of failures vs success stories.

Then we have ASANTS. The cancer that Target ignores.

I like the idea you that you worked on continuous improvement. I even took it to my ETL only to get it thrown back at me.

But my experiences with such in my past lives tells me that no one kept stats, nor did they research Target's control documents for rule conflicts, nor did they measure all of the financial aspects of the process in its entirety.

Proof? Did you pull the lastest revision of Target's internal operating procedures to verify that what you implemented did not conflict with any of the prescribed policies? Or did you implement this under the "Best Practices Policy"?

One of the worst fallacies I've experienced at Target is "they did it so can you" mentalities. Not only do we have ASANTS to deal with, but there is too much variation in store layouts.

I'm not being facetious towards you either. I can't tell you how glad I am to see someone try to streamline this process.

But my observations are from my experience being heavily involved in continuous improvement programs.

 

[jenna]

@allnew2 -- you're fortunate to have such a fantastic team. We basically have a revolving door. We have a few key players, but they are scattered within the store.

 

[allnew2]

@allnew2 -- you're fortunate to have such a fantastic team. We basically have a revolving door. We have a few key players, but they are scattered within the store.

I am very grateful for them . As much as target is changing if it wasn’t for them to adapt and see the whys behind it , I would be posting a horror story.
That is why when someone comes after them I need to remind them that the inbound is what keeps the store together .
Today was the first overnight shift and they all felt like back at home with just us kicking in . So much got done 😂