Page 17 - Warehouse Annual 2022

WMS

In addition, when compiling your budgetary request, you on what the system truly needs to do. When it comes to
need to ensure that the tasks you are responsible for are the details, client stakeholders and SMEs have a natural
adequately defined with appropriate contingencies. This is tendency to view functionality and feature requirements
especially true for the resource requirements that you will through the prism of how things work today. This can result
have to provide to support set-up, facility preparation and in missed opportunities to increase operational efficiencies
testing. and improve service levels.

All of this won’t entirely eliminate the possibility of ending The flip side to this situation is when client stakeholders
up with an insufficient budget. No one wants to go back have what they think is a great idea to improve operational
to executive management asking for more money and/or performance. This can jeopardise the schedule and budget.
communicating a schedule pushback when this occurs, but The stakeholders don’t want to give up on the nifty idea and
bad news will not improve over time. The cost of addressing the software vendor or integrator is too hesitant to push
any resource gaps and the impact of any schedule slippage back.
tends to grow over time.
Open, direct communications are the best avenue to
Unfortunately, the established schedule and budget may avoid these pitfalls. Client stakeholders and SMEs should be
be inflexible. If you must play the resource and timeline hand constantly challenged to consider better ways of doing things.
originally dealt, then you need to look at what functionality Vendors and integrators need to be encouraged to push back
and features can be deferred or offloaded to a subsequent whenever they believe a specific process is heading down a
phase. Continuing without directly addressing the shortfall path that will add unwarranted implementation complexity
will not turn out well. and risk. Project management needs to make sure that all
parties feel comfortable speaking their respective minds.
Misaligned and hidden requirements
Most WMS implementations depend on a detailed design Project plans that fail to deliver value
process to deliver the required functionality and features. Behind every WMS implementation there is some form of
During the process, the WMS vendor or systems integrator project plan. While necessary, they do not always live up to their
develops design documentation and specifications that potential and can become an unwieldy tool that consumes
drive configuration and any software extensions that must too much effort for the value produced. An exhaustive list of
be developed. This is generally done through a mixture tasks is compiled with little consideration given to resource
of observations, workshops and reviews with key client requirements. The list with its task dependencies is typically
stakeholders and subject matter experts (SMEs). defined based on a pre-detailed design perspective with
individual task durations shoehorned into the overall desired
The challenge here is that team members can always project timeline. Tasks are viewed as strictly linear when they
see things differently especially given different personal may need to reflect a more iterative process. All of this can
perspectives and project roles. This is compounded when result in a project plan that delivers diminishing value over
a distribution operation has a lot of requirements that exist the project life cycle with too much time spent inventorying
outside of documented standard operating procedure. the individual trees on a weekly basis instead of assessing
These hidden requirements may not be fully articulated to the overall health of the forest.
the vendor or integrator by the SMEs because they seem
obvious, or they get lost in the shuffle. Developing a well-structured plan is key to avoiding this
pitfall. When appropriate, summarise instead of detailing.
The best remedy is frequent playback sessions where Many detailed activities are better managed through punch
relevant processes and features are reviewed end to end, lists by the responsible workstream than buried within a
covering everything from design approval all the way through massive plan. The plan structure should be adaptable to fit
delivery. These sessions will enable you to discover and changing conditions and insights that impact the original
address any misalignment between the vendor or integrator assumptions used to develop the plan.
and client stakeholders and SMEs.
The plan structure should support an earned value
Too little or too much thinking outside of the measurement mechanism for monitoring budgetary
box performance that needs to go beyond a fixation on
Hopefully, key business and operational requirements perceived duration and critically evaluate when value is
were defined and vetted during the selection process, earned. Finally, avoid walking through project plan details
but as already discussed, there is generally a vendor or during weekly project status meetings. These meetings
integrator led detailed design process that drives solution should focus on the health of the various sections that
configuration and any extension development. This process make up the forest rather than a discussion on the status
relies on client stakeholders and SMEs to provide the input of individual trees. •

Warehouse Annual 2022 15