Archived Whats this .90 .99 BS added to all revision labels?

[Bullseyes]

The .90 or .99 is actually REALLY USEFUL for me doing tune in Tuesday for online video games, movies and books. I love it. It's just something that needs to be taught to other TM so that people don't freak out.

 

[unknown]

The .90 or .99 is actually REALLY USEFUL for me doing tune in Tuesday for online video games, movies and books. I love it. It's just something that needs to be taught to other TM so that people don't freak out.

The problem isn't that the new system is hard to understand. The problem is replacing whole aisles of labels when only one item gets revised.

If anyone disagrees, please see the revision for tools/gadgets for the week of 4/26. There is one shelf item revised. But there are 274 pegs that will need new labels.

How is this efficient?

 

[Bullseyes]

The problem isn't that the new system is hard to understand. The problem is replacing whole aisles of labels when only one item gets revised.

If anyone disagrees, please see the revision for tools/gadgets for the week of 4/26. There is one shelf item revised. But there are 274 pegs that will need new labels.

How is this efficient?

I specifically said for tune in revisions. Today I noticed on my revision that not all the labels had to get changed because it was probably a .90 last week, so agree the first time a pog is revised, the next revision will only swap out the former .99 to .90 and the new .99. So after we get settled into the new system i'm sure it'll be less time.

 

[unknown]

I specifically said for tune in revisions. Today I noticed on my revision that not all the labels had to get changed because it was probably a .90 last week, so agree the first time a pog is revised, the next revision will only swap out the former .99 to .90 and the new .99. So after we get settled into the new system i'm sure it'll be less time.

Sorry if that sounded argumentative. It wasn't meant to be. But speaking of tune in ...

Are you telling me you reprinted every single schematic label for shelves that didn't get new labels? Because that is what it comes down too.

For instance, in new books 2, I only received label strips for 3 shelves. I would have to go back and reprint the entire pog, not just revision labels, to get the other two shelves.

That is my problem with the new system. It is too much work for too little payoff.

And in my earlier example with the tools and gadgets, I'm allotted 12 minutes to finish. Take that times 30 or 40 revisions. It's a planning nightmare.

 

[LogisticsFox]

Getting rid of that is the entire reasoning behind the new .90 .99 process. Now revision labels are all supposed to go in numerical ascending order, and the way to tell changes is by the 90 or 99 which should be ignored by everyone not resetting the POG.

instead of your .01 .02 example now you should only see this for revisions:
1-1-1.90, 1-1-2.99, 1-1-3.90, 1-1-4.90, 1-1-5.99 etc with the .90 meaning an item with no change and the .99 for items that changed.

Ok, this I understand. Thanks for putting it in laymans terms

 

[PlanoBitch]

There is a tool/gadget wall revision the week if 4/26. One item gets changed on schematic 8-4-6. It changes to 8'-4-6.99. I looked. Every ... Single .... Peg gets a new number.

That is 274 pegs people. But wait, hq only gave you 0.2 hours or 12 minutes to do it.

Ridiculous!! Isn't there any common sense anymore?

I am not changing those. That would take at least an hour.

The problem isn't that the new system is hard to understand. The problem is replacing whole aisles of labels when only one item gets revised.

If anyone disagrees, please see the revision for tools/gadgets for the week of 4/26. There is one shelf item revised. But there are 274 pegs that will need new labels.

How is this efficient?

It is my understanding that not all of the .90 labels will print out. From what I have seen so far only whatever is greyed out on the planogram will print labels.

Example: The infant bottle aisle. All I had were 2 shelf strips. All peghooks showed a .90 at the end but did not print new labels. They were not greyed out on the planogram either. All locations now when scanned changed to 1-p1-1.90, 1-p1-2.90, and so on but the labels remain 1-p1-1, 1p1-2, and so on. Whoever is pushing product to the aisles now has to pretend that the .90 isn't there and just stock to the normal location.

Im probably not explaining this right but I don't think you will have to replace all 274 labels for the kitchen wall revision.

 

[PlanoBitch]

Sorry if that sounded argumentative. It wasn't meant to be. But speaking of tune in ...

Are you telling me you reprinted every single schematic label for shelves that didn't get new labels? Because that is what it comes down too.

For instance, in new books 2, I only received label strips for 3 shelves. I would have to go back and reprint the entire pog, not just revision labels, to get the other two shelves.

That is my problem with the new system. It is too much work for too little payoff.

And in my earlier example with the tools and gadgets, I'm allotted 12 minutes to finish. Take that times 30 or 40 revisions. It's a planning nightmare.

For this one, no you not change what you don't have strips for. There is no need to print out new labels for the other 2 shelves.

 

[unknown]

It is my understanding that not all of the .90 labels will print out. From what I have seen so far only whatever is greyed out on the planogram will print labels.

Example: The infant bottle aisle. All I had were 2 shelf strips. All peghooks showed a .90 at the end but did not print new labels. They were not greyed out on the planogram either. All locations now when scanned changed to 1-p1-1.90, 1-p1-2.90, and so on but the labels remain 1-p1-1, 1p1-2, and so on. Whoever is pushing product to the aisles now has to pretend that the .90 isn't there and just stock to the normal location.

Im probably not explaining this right but I don't think you will have to replace all 274 labels for the kitchen wall revision.

I get what you're saying. And I've explained this to the tl's of instocks, flow, etc.

I have to say though .... It's a weird system if you have to tell people, "Pretend those 90's aren't there."

Not everyone will understand this concept.

 

[PlanoBitch]

I get what you're saying. And I've explained this to the tl's of instocks, flow, etc.

I have to say though .... It's a weird system if you have to tell people, "Pretend those 90's aren't there."

Not everyone will understand this concept.

Yeah the flow team at my store is having a hard time with it. At least my ETL understands it and knows we aren't screwing up or not doing our job the right way.

 

[UnderpaidOverworked]

So you don't have to print all labels? People go to scanning stuff and are quick to want to say you didn't do a revision right. It would be nice if the company sent something at least explaining the change so people don't get in trouble or do more work than they have to cuz today on the one of the revisions in electronics I printed all the labels

 

[PlanoBitch]

So you don't have to print all labels? People go to scanning stuff and are quick to want to say you didn't do a revision right. It would be nice if the company sent something at least explaining the change so people don't get in trouble or do more work than they have to cuz today on the one of the revisions in electronics I printed all the labels

We haven't been. We only print the revision labels or the batch that creates when you tie it in. I do not go back and print the whole pog and replace all the labels that they don't send or don't print out. That would take entirely too long and I don't have hours for that. The flow team has already been accusing us of not doing something right but our ETL is there to say no, they aren't and explain it. Some of them still don't get it but I don't really have a better answer for them then just pretend the .90 isn't there. It sucks but I can't be changing whole aisle schematics when I am only given 5 minutes for a revision and it doesn't print out in the first place.

 

[RightArm]

I think the only thing I find confusing about that is that you're saying that flow should ignore the .90s... Are you telling me that when they scan an item it says on the my device that it's at 1-1-1 when the shelf label says 1-1-1.90 ? I had issues with ad signing because it seemed to be doing the reverse. The sign would say it went on 1-1-1.90 and when I looked I couldn't find that number on the shelf at all.

 

[Jack of all Workcenters]

So if we can ignore the 90s... Why do we even bother with them?

 

[Ohnoes]

I think it would make more sense to not have a decimal on product not moving and adding a decimal on product that is. For example for a revision it would look like 1-1-1, 1-1-2, 1-1-3.01, 1-1-4.01, 1-1-5, 1-1-6, etc. with the middle two being the changed/moved product. When looking a revision shelf strip both .90 and .99 look pretty similar unless you are really close to the label strip.

 

[Sushi2Go]

So you don't have to print all labels? People go to scanning stuff and are quick to want to say you didn't do a revision right. It would be nice if the company sent something at least explaining the change so people don't get in trouble or do more work than they have to cuz today on the one of the revisions in electronics I printed all the labels

I had this thought as well. No one told me about this new change and I ended up doing a whole POG for Mens Basic/Backwall when it was just a revision. I hope HQ realize that small changes like this can cost a lot of hours and money for nothing. Keep it up TARGET!

 

[PlanoBitch]

I think the only thing I find confusing about that is that you're saying that flow should ignore the .90s... Are you telling me that when they scan an item it says on the my device that it's at 1-1-1 when the shelf label says 1-1-1.90 ? I had issues with ad signing because it seemed to be doing the reverse. The sign would say it went on 1-1-1.90 and when I looked I couldn't find that number on the shelf at all.

No, the my device will say 1-1-1.90 but the shelf will still say 1-1-1.

 

[PlanoBitch]

There was a link on Workbench today about this. I printed it and gave it to all LOD's and TL's and we talked about it in the huddle. I made sure my planogram team knew about these changes when it rolled out so they didn't waste time printing whole POG's when it is not needed.
Also, the link stated that it will remain with the .90 until the aisle completely resets. Which could be months depending on when the area transitions.

 

[PlanoBitch]

So if we can ignore the 90s... Why do we even bother with them?

I think it was supposed to make it easier for the planogram team to set revisions. Basically if it says a .90 we don't touch it and if it says .99 then we do touch it. Why they couldn't just do the .99 and leave off the .90 for non moving things is beyond me. I wish I knew the thought process behind that.

 

[LogisticsFox]

I think it was supposed to make it easier for the planogram team to set revisions. Basically if it says a .90 we don't touch it and if it says .99 then we do touch it. Why they couldn't just do the .99 and leave off the .90 for non moving things is beyond me. I wish I knew the thought process behind that.

I think it has to do with flushing out the old system.. 3-2-13.01, 3-2-13.02, 3-2-13.03.. If new labels didn't print for everything, it would be near as possible to push to that shelf.

 

[RightArm]

No, the my device will say 1-1-1.90 but the shelf will still say 1-1-1.

I wonder if this is true for ad signing then? If the ad sign says 1-1-1.90... then it goes with 1-1-1 ? I'll have to double check on my next signing shift. Thanks PB! 🙂

 

[Hardlinesmaster]

I ignored it on ad signing. I went with the last digits of the dpci.

 

[mrknownothing]

I ignored it on ad signing. I went with the last digits of the dpci.

This is what I do. Since the sign schematics don't match what's on the shelf label sometimes (because revisions and Target), I try to match up the DPCI.

 

[RightArm]

I match up the dpci too but first you have to have a general idea of where the item is actually at. I'd hate to scour the entire shelf just to find the dpci I needed. It slows down the signing.

 

[salesfloor10]

I had this thought as well. No one told me about this new change and I ended up doing a whole POG for Mens Basic/Backwall when it was just a revision. I hope HQ realize that small changes like this can cost a lot of hours and money for nothing. Keep it up TARGET!

I did that revision and a lot did move (I think they were trying to fix the merona shirts spacing issues), so there were a lot of .99 labels. It basically was a pog when I got done with it.

 

[unknown]

I did that revision and a lot did move (I think they were trying to fix the merona shirts spacing issues), so there were a lot of .99 labels. It basically was a pog when I got done with it.

I did both of the revisions on this. When I did the first one, March 8?, I thought to myself, who puts three sizes of boxed shirts on one peg? I actually printed out the entire pog since mist of it did move. Still a waste if time that could have been avoided.