Case Study:  Procter & Gamble -- Lima Ohio

The large site makes liquid Tide.  As this product's popularity and market share rose, the attached plant warehouse became increasingly overburdened.  Able to hold less than 2 days of production, the site had many outside warehouses.  Only 40% of customer shipments were shipped from the plant--meaning 60% was double handled.  Once AutoScheduler started to deploy inventory based on orders,  determine the best ship-site for each order and manage the repositioning of product, the 40% number became more than 80%.  And that resulted in more than $2 million savings per annum. But the benefits didn't stop there.  Other areas of waste were also reduced as:

• More product went straight from the palletizer to the truck
• There were more opportunities to cross dock
• The workload was spread more evenly by flexing the drop-lot

Customer satisfaction increased as they received shipments in-full and on-time.  Additionally, staff were pleased by a significant reduction in stress.

Keeping it simple vs. Synchronize -- which is better?

Eliminating complexity by using simplifications such as "ship everything to an outside warehouse,"  can be quite expensive.  One of our clients learned this the hard way.  Instead of maintaining shipments from the plant site, they moved every box 26 miles down the road for storage and later shipping.  Analysis showed that 30% could have shipped plant-direct saving $900,000 per annum.

Dan Gilmore, in a recent article talks of the value and importance of synchronization.  You can see his article by following this link:  Supply Chain Digest   While Dan does not know about the wonders of  AutoScheduler, the concept on which AutoScheduler is based in synchronization.  AutoScheduler recognizes that:

• The shipment can't go until the cases are picked
• Picking can't take place if the product hasn't come in form the other warehouse
• The Product can't be received unless there is a dock door free
• The shipment can't be made unless there is an order
• Etc.