240 likes | 379 Views
Tim Edwards. Summary. Development of the Co-operative Group Recent history Development of the distribution network Requirement for Yard management Pilot site Implementation and beyond. Cooperative Group History.
E N D
Summary • Development of the Co-operative Group • Recent history • Development of the distribution network • Requirement for Yard management • Pilot site • Implementation and beyond
Cooperative Group History • 1844 -- Rochdale Pioneers Society established based on their eight 'Rochdale rules', including distributing a share of profits to members • 1863 -- Co-operative Wholesale Society (CWS) established • 1896 – Co-operative Society acquires its first farm • 1900 -- A total of 1,439 co-operative societies now registered • 1942 -- First self-service shop opened by the London Coop • 1973 -- Scottish CWS merged with CWS • 1992 -- The co-operative stocks Fairtrade products in every food store • 2000 -- CWS and CRS merge, creating the world's largest consumer co-operative • 2007 – The Co-operative Group and United Co-operatives merge • 2009 -- The Co-operative Group acquires Somerfield,
Co-operative Group today • UK’s largest mutually owned organisation • t/o £13.7 bn (2010) • Profit £414 m • Employees c. 110000 • Outlets c. 5200 • Wide range of businesses – “cradle to grave” • Food • Farms • Finance (Banks, Insurance, Investments) • Funeralcare • Travel • Pharmacy • Motor Group • Legal services
The Co-operative Food now • UK’s largest convenience store operator • UK’s 5th largest food retailer • Full range of food and non-food products • Award winning range of own label products • Numerous awards for corporate social responsibility and ethical approach • 85% of Cooperative Society volume • Supplier to Independent Societies • Deliveries to 4046 outlets of which 3000 are Co-operative Group stores
Network (inc Somerfield) 2003 • 1 Regional Composite Distribution Centre • 17 Ambient only RDC’s • 13 Chill only RDC’s • 4 Frozen only RDC’s • 1 National Distribution Centre • 1 Stockless Cross-dock Platform TOTAL 37
Project Lidia LogisticsInfrastructureDevelopment to ImproveAvailability Conclusions of strategic review in 2003/4 • Move to composite RDC’s • NDC for slow-moving ambient products and bond • Move to composite deliveries where practical • Use of stockless cross-docking platforms for outlying regions • Requirement for 24/7 operation • No existing sites suitable for conversion to RDC’s or NDC Review post Somerfield acquisition • 2 sites in network usable as composites • Further integration with Independent Cooperative Society sites
Network –Current -2011 • 5 Regional Composite Distribution Centres • 1 Twinned RDC • 4 Ambient only RDC’s • 2 Chill only RDC’s • 2 Frozen only RDC’s • 1 National Distribution Centre • 1 Stockless Cross-dock Platform TOTAL 16
Network –Post Lidia-2013 • 7 Regional Composite Distribution Centres • 1 Twinned RDC • 1 National Distribution Centre • 1 Ambient only RDC • 2 Stockless Cross-dock Platforms TOTAL 12 Inverness Newhouse Birtley Carrickfergus Lea Green Castlewood Coventry Huntingdon Avonmouth Thurrock Andover Plymouth
Network Change 2005-2013 • 6 new RDC’s built • 2 RDC’s redeveloped • New NDC built • 32 sites closed
Project Odyssey – Systems Requirements New network required new systems: • Warehouse Management System (WMS) – first implementation 2006 • Transport Execution System (TES) – first implementation 2005 • Bond Management – implemented 2010 • Time Management – first implementation 2010 • Labour Management – in pilot • Yard Management – in pilot
YMS Requirements Greater complexity of new RDC’s: • Typically 2-3 x size of old sites • Multi-chamber • Greater use of cross-docking and trans-shipments • Wide range of vehicle/trailer types (c.20/site) • Requirement for computerised solution Objectives: • Reducing operating costs by minimising shunter moves • Improving yard visibility by providing a real time view of all vehicles within the yard • Reducing the time currently spent locating and allocating vehicles • Reducing potential delivery delays from being unable to locate the correct vehicle type
Key Requirements • Interface from WMS for outbound loads • To define and manage the physical and time based constraints on yard usage • Automatically (in real time) • allocate the most appropriate vehicle to an outbound load. (Where feasible allocate inbound vehicles) • locate returning vehicles to either an allocated dock or bay - interface to TES • to create shunter tasks to move loaded vehicles from dock doors to bays or empty vehicles from bays to dock doors as required to support loading. • Minimise shunter tasks whilst maintaining a smooth workload for shunters. • Shunters to use hand held or truck mount devices.
Key Requirements (contd) • To track the status of all locations and vehicles within the yard. (e.g. Empty, Loaded, Allocated etc ) • To allow for manual vehicle moves or allocations • To provide management information in regard to yard, vehicle, shunter utilisation and shunter performance • To manage the receipt and dock / bay allocation of transhipment deliveries from other Co-operative Group warehouses • To manage inbound supplier deliveries • To manage de-kitting and associated docks Although not in scope of the initial project possible future requirements include: • To accept an interface from TES for vehicle departures, arrivals, ETA’s, VOR etc. • Management of tractor units
Timeline to Pilot • 2007 – RFI issued • 2008 – C3 chosen as supplier • 2009 - Project held due to Somerfield integration • 2010 • Project re-activated • Pilot implementation approach agreed • Andover RDC chosen for pilot • 2011 – Pilot implemented
Integration Phase 1 • Scope • feed from WMS identifying loads created and available • Options • Excel file transfer • Web Services • Considerations • Coop unfamiliarity with Web Services • Flexibility for the future • Learning opportunity • Decision • Use of Web Services • C3 support during development
Integration Phase 1 • Challenges • Lack of in-house knowledge of Web Services • Development to fixed deadlines • Effort • Technical training sessions • Use of both on-site and remote support • Benefits • Implementation of agreed design • Achievement of business case objectives • Development of in-house expertise for future integration
Integration – Phase 2 • Interface with TES • TES to Yard Smart • Automatic creation of incoming gate events • Updating of vehicle ETA • Event completion when vehicle crosses geo-fence • Automatic update of zone and task on task completion in TES • Vehicle powered and un-powered from TES • Request vehicle position from Yard Smart • Send vehicle XY coordinate to Yard Smart • Automated completion of gate out event • Yard Smart to TES • Message sent when task for powered vehicle created
Integration – Phase 2 2. Tighter Interface with WMS • WMS to Yard Smart • Updated shipping runs when details change • Route cancellation • Yard Smart to WMS • Door selected for shipping run • Trailer resolved for shipping run • Interface with visual display boards • Automated messaging to vehicles awaiting unloading