Tales from the WMS Side
Five logistics managers share their stories about the highs and lows of selecting and implementing a warehouse management system.
By Bridget McCrea, Contributing Editor -- Logistics Management, 7/1/2006
Technology can be a double-edged sword for logistics managers. On the one hand, it eases the pain of laborious manual processes, lightens the load on staff, and promotes error-free, seamless transactions. On the other hand, technology implementations can be disruptive as resources are allocated to the pending rollout and employees struggle to learn new ways of doing their jobs.
Anyone who's implemented a warehouse management system (WMS) knows that all too well. And as the LM readers who tell their tales below have learned, sometimes you win and sometimes you lose. Some of these shippers had it easy, but others were put through the wringer, hoping to come out on the other side with a workable system. Still others are already dreaming of a time when they can toss their current WMS out of the warehouse door and find something more compatible. Here are their stories.
Missed Opportunity
Back in 2003, Blackwell's Book Services knew exactly what it wanted from a new WMS. The company, which handles nearly 750,000 stock-keeping units (SKUs), purchases academic and research textbooks on consignment, warehouses them in a 60,000-square-foot facility, and sells them to libraries and academic institutions.
In essence, Blackwell's wanted to automate its existing operating methods. "We needed a system that could handle high transaction volume," says Mark Maloney, vice president of book operations. "We wanted to have the best for our current processes."
After selecting a vendor, implementation took about 18 months. The company spent another 18 months digging its way out of the backlog created by the new software and by mistakes made by both customer and vendor.
According to Maloney, the vendor "severely underestimated" the shipper's transaction volume. "They weren't prepared for the amount of data and transactions hitting the system," he says.
Miscommunication also caused headaches, particularly when it came to system modifications and customization. "We would request a change to their system. Then we'd get it, look at it, and say, 'This isn't what we wanted,' and they'd say, 'That's what you asked for,'" says Maloney. "There was definitely a disconnect between what we wanted and how we were communicating what we wanted."
Finally, Blackwell's was so focused on automating its existing processes that it neglected to consider systems that might have improved productivity.
With the WMS now stabilized, the system is managing receiving, picking, packing, shipping, and returns. Maloney has confidence in the system but expects he'll need to find another to support future growth. When that time comes, he'll be better prepared: He plans to mobilize software experts to analyze available systems, and he'll spend more time researching WMS capabilities and modification options.
He'll also urge the team of experts not to dwell too much on the uniqueness of Blackwell's business. Instead, he wants them to look at how other companies with similar needs are getting the best value from the WMS products under consideration. "If you get into the mindset that your business is unique," says Maloney, "you can get yourself into trouble."
Not So Fast
When Priority Solutions International went looking for a WMS three years ago, it did so with a single client in mind. That client demanded that the pharmaceutical distributor have a system running smoothly just 30 days after implementation. That wasn't enough time, says Dan Randall, general manager of Memphis operations, but that didn't stop his company from trying to meet the stringent deadline.
When researching software for the company's 173,000 square feet of warehouse space, Randall first considered the requirements set down by the pharmaceutical industry. For example, the system needed to comply with regulations mandating production-lot and product-expiration control.
"All of that had to be integrated into the system," says Randall, who wanted a "canned" WMS that could be customized to meet those needs. The one he chose is now being used for inventory management, reporting, receiving, cycle counting, and fulfillment.
Installation took 18 months, in part because the vendor had to automate a comprehensive set of business rules in a way that would comply with all U.S. Food and Drug Administration requirements, including the current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP) regulations for pharmaceutical and medical-device manufacturers. The task was tedious, Randall says, but the vendor worked closely with Priority Solutions to make sure all of the necessary modifications were made.
Randall is pleased with the results and says the only thing he'd do differently is ask the client for more time. "We had about 30 days to roll it out, and it really wasn't enough time," he says. "Having more lead time would have been a great help."
To managers who would like an equally smooth implementation, Randall advises doing extensive research up front, including visiting installed systems and digging into the details with potential vendors' clients. "It all looks good in the brochures and on PowerPoint presentations," he says. "But when it really comes down to it, you should see the system in action and talk to people who are using it before making your decision."
Grappling With Change
People are naturally resistant to change, and at no time is this more obvious than when you're smack in the middle of a major software implementation. Kelly Ingersoll, director of transportation and warehousing at Freudenberg Household Products, found this out when the company rolled out a new WMS last year.
For the manufacturer of mops and brooms, selecting a WMS for its 210,000-square-foot warehouse was easy: Freudenberg's German parent wanted its U.S. subsidiary to use the same program it was using in Europe.
But any simplicity ended there. Configuration required extra work, and some oversights became apparent once the system was up and running. The biggest challenge was getting the staff to embrace and use the system. Previously, for example, employees were able to apply their own, manual processes to some functions. Introducing a structured approach put them on guard, and it took months to break down those barriers.
"It was a complete culture change," says Ingersoll. "We had to show them that while it may not [appear to] make sense to now go to five different locations to pick an order, the system will ask them to do that in order to optimize bin locations. Those are the types of issues we had to work through."
Despite those difficulties, the WMS has improved efficiency, and the warehouse now ships about 17 percent more product than it did before the system went live. Freudenberg is now looking for more accuracy from its picking and packing operations, and plans to add radio frequency soon. It's a feature Ingersoll says he wishes had been implemented from the beginning.
Expect Imperfection
Joe Bardowski didn't mess around when it came to choosing a WMS. The director of global logistics, trade, and compliance for Haworth Global Manufacturing & Logistics mobilized a team to review systems on the market. "We went through an exhaustive process of evaluating vendors based on our desired design, the financial viability of the vendors, and interviews with their WMS customers," he says.
But even the best-laid plans don't always work out. Haworth, a designer and manufacturer of workspace furniture, planned to install the WMS at four distribution centers. But its first stab at automation was disappointing.
"It went poorly for the first site," says Bardowski, who points to long downtimes, system instability, and slow system response as the key challenges. "This went on for several months."
But Haworth and the vendor stuck with it, and subsequent implementations were progressively better. The last one wrapped up in 2004; since then, Haworth has closed some facilities; it now has two DCs and several cross-dock centers, all using the new WMS.
If he had to do it over again, Bardowski says, he'd have more support on-site for at least three months after implementation. "Expect things will not go perfectly, and plan for them," Bardowski advises. "And realize that it takes two years after implementation to work out all the bugs and get things working as you would expect them to."
From Many, One
Taking 90 software programs—inherited from a string of mergers and acquisitions—and streamlining them into a single system is a tough assignment, but Bob Sims, manager of SCM logistics for Raytheon Missile Systems, took on that challenge.
Sims first created a "roadmap" of how the company should integrate its existing systems into a new WMS. Before making a selection, he considered WMS providers' reputations, their experience with recent defense-industry deployments, and their ability to support an operation like Raytheon Missile Systems, which encompasses five separate divisions and several warehouses. "We wanted to make sure that it fit our business, and that it would be flexible enough," he says.
Sims also educated employees about the improvements that would come from one, companywide WMS. "We went about this in a very deliberate fashion," he says. "We didn't just drop this on people."
Raytheon Missile Systems selected a WMS in 2004 and rolled out the system last August. All of Sims' advance legwork paid off, and the system has provided a higher level of consistency and reliability in the warehouses, he says. "We're still working through some issues," he adds, "but at this point I think we've reached the capability of the system and are really using it for its intended purpose."
View All On-Demand Webcasts