Latest Flavor of the Month: Send Agains

[pretzel_man]

The problem is not the metric. The problem is fear.

The manager who fears for his job cannot focus on making good business decisions because he is too focused on making the good metrics that will keep him from getting fired.

The problem only gets worse when Atlanta decrees that a particular metric will become the new "flavor of the week". Everything that we have done up to that time in order to generate the old metric goes out the window when we suddenly have to shift our focus to the new one.

For instance, this months flavor is Stops Per Car. There is an arbitrary number that we as a center must generate, whether it makes any sense to do so or not. The lengths that we will go to in order to produce that metric are beyond absurd.

As an example, I was on TAW last week for a minor injury. I was sent out in a package car to shuttle some misloads between two drivers in different loops. I was fully cleared to drive as long as I did not handle a packge over 5 lbs. Due to a variety of communication and traffic issues, I was unable to meet with these drivers in a timely manner.

But I had a DIAD, and the packages in question were under my weight limit. So I messaged in and asked if I could just go ahead and deliver them myself. I did this from the parking lot of one of the businesses that the misloads were addressed to.

I was told no. I was instructed to bring the packages back and sheet them as missed....because if I delivered them I would show up on a report as an additional route, which would drag the center's Stops per Car metric down. In other words....generating the metric was more important than servicing the customer.

There is no rational basis for such a decision. I was on TAW and making the same amount of money whether I delivered anything or not. And it would be foolish for me to assume that such institutionalized stupidity is unique to my center alone.

P-man---you guys have a serious fear problem which is forcing your people to make a lot of stupid decisions in order to placate the bean-counters in Atlanta. That fear problem is pretty much the underlying cause of every other issue we face as a company. Fix your fear problem, and the rest will fall into place.

Sober,

There is a lot in this post that I agree with...

However, I see the true problem as something different. I think that fear is the sympton not the cause....

The cause is management that is either unskilled, untrained, or ineffective. As you said, its NOT the metric.

Here is MY example... I was in a center this week... I saw something wrong and told the business manager that he needed to make a change. He said he could not, because he was measured on that element and if he was less than x% would be called on it.

I decided to train him on what the metric meant. How to properly achieve it. Just because x% is the goal, it doesn't mean that every driver has to be at that %. I taught him about controlled dispatch, about dispatch principles, and about how the systems work.

We fixed the problem that I saw, and also found other drivers that needed to have an adjustment. In the end, the metric was met (or pretty close) and we improved the business.

My point is that the metric was good in this case. The problem was a blanket statement and not understanding why the metric is there. When someone does not know how to achieve a metric they try to do so by brute force. This is a problem.

Of course, I understand that after 34 years, I may not be afraid of any consequences and therefore have no "fear".. I'm hoping he now has no fear of this metric either.

P-Man

 

[soberups]

Sober,

There is a lot in this post that I agree with...

However, I see the true problem as something different. I think that fear is the sympton not the cause....

The cause is management that is either unskilled, untrained, or ineffective. As you said, its NOT the metric.

Here is MY example... I was in a center this week... I saw something wrong and told the business manager that he needed to make a change. He said he could not, because he was measured on that element and if he was less than x% would be called on it.

I decided to train him on what the metric meant. How to properly achieve it. Just because x% is the goal, it doesn't mean that every driver has to be at that %. I taught him about controlled dispatch, about dispatch principles, and about how the systems work.

We fixed the problem that I saw, and also found other drivers that needed to have an adjustment. In the end, the metric was met (or pretty close) and we improved the business.

My point is that the metric was good in this case. The problem was a blanket statement and not understanding why the metric is there. When someone does not know how to achieve a metric they try to do so by brute force. This is a problem.

Of course, I understand that after 34 years, I may not be afraid of any consequences and therefore have no "fear".. I'm hoping he now has no fear of this metric either.

P-Man

It is fortunate that your seniority and experience will allow you to make reasonable accomodations and adjustments to the metrics that are being demanded from Atlanta without having to fear for your job.

Most of your partners in operations-level managment are not so fortunate. For them, the metric is inflexible and no allowance is made for common sense or logic. Generate the metric, and they survive for one more day. Fail to generate the metric, and they are fired.

You speak of management that is "unskilled, untrained, or ineffective". Well, I am going to give your partners in management a little more credit than you do. Virtually every management person I have ever worked for in my 23 years has, in my opinion, been a skilled and effective individual.

Their issues, almost without exception, have had nothing to do with any lack of skill or training. Their issues, almost without exception, have had everything to do with being deprived of the resources, authority, and job security to manage their operations effectively.

They are micromanaged and set up to fail by a corporate culture that buries them in an ocean of conflicting metrics and impossible expectations. They cant manage the business because they arent even allowed to make a decison.

If Atlanta would just shut up and get the hell out of the way, we would be unstoppable. We have some good management people working for us. All we need to do is let them manage.

 

[pretzel_man]

It is fortunate that your seniority and experience will allow you to make reasonable accomodations and adjustments to the metrics that are being demanded from Atlanta without having to fear for your job.

Most of your partners in operations-level managment are not so fortunate. For them, the metric is inflexible and no allowance is made for common sense or logic. Generate the metric, and they survive for one more day. Fail to generate the metric, and they are fired.

You speak of management that is "unskilled, untrained, or ineffective". Well, I am going to give your partners in management a little more credit than you do. Virtually every management person I have ever worked for in my 23 years has, in my opinion, been a skilled and effective individual.

Their issues, almost without exception, have had nothing to do with any lack of skill or training. Their issues, almost without exception, have had everything to do with being deprived of the resources, authority, and job security to manage their operations effectively.

They are micromanaged and set up to fail by a corporate culture that buries them in an ocean of conflicting metrics and impossible expectations. They cant manage the business because they arent even allowed to make a decison.

If Atlanta would just shut up and get the hell out of the way, we would be unstoppable. We have some good management people working for us. All we need to do is let them manage.

I think I wasn't clear on a point. In my example, we came very, very close to the metric. Certainly within an acceptable range. We just did it right.

If the problem is not the metric, and its not management, I don't understand what is left....

Are you saying the metric is not attainable? In most cases, they are certainly attainable and make sense. The issue is How management goes about achieving it. If they are skilled, then there should be no fear from the accountability from above.

Your Stops per Car example is a sympton of not understanding the metric and how to achieve it. The root cause is having to shuttle missort every day....

Fix the preload. Do it properly. I have done that many, many times, and I know its achievable.

The bottom line is that if anyone wants to improve, a way to measure that improvement is needed. In the case of a business, accountability is needed. If that generates fear such is life...

P-Man

 

[dilligaf]

I think I wasn't clear on a point. In my example, we came very, very close to the metric. Certainly within an acceptable range. We just did it right.

If the problem is not the metric, and its not management, I don't understand what is left....

Are you saying the metric is not attainable? In most cases, they are certainly attainable and make sense. The issue is How management goes about achieving it. If they are skilled, then there should be no fear from the accountability from above.

Your Stops per Car example is a sympton of not understanding the metric and how to achieve it. The root cause is having to shuttle missort every day....

Fix the preload. Do it properly. I have done that many, many times, and I know its achievable.

The bottom line is that if anyone wants to improve, a way to measure that improvement is needed. In the case of a business, accountability is needed. If that generates fear such is life...

P-Man

P-man, I have to say that I understand what Sober is trying to say and I don't disagree with him. Let me explain why.

2 years ago we had 17 FT bidded rtes. Now we are running at 12 - 14 rtes regularly. That, in and of itself, has been reasonably attainable. Just recently my OR/Disp sup was told that on Mon and Tues we can only have 11 rtes. That is unattainable and simply outrageous. I know. I posted on another thread that I was forced out at 7:30pm to help another driver. The reason for that was solely to blame on having had only 11 rtes out. This particular day was on a Tues. On Mon, the day before, I was also directly involved in the area of the 12th rte that was broke out. It was a complete and total disaster. I had missed businesses. I was threatened in an ODS. This particular metric is completely insane. We have many rural rtes here and IE has no clue what it is like to try and run business and resi in 3 (yes 3) different towns with an avg of 130 - 150 stops. Not a good decision. After having had missed busi on Mon I had to field the challenges from my center manager on Tues morning. The only thing he got out of me was a bad attitude and where is my steward.

 

[pretzel_man]

Dill,I certainly don't know if the number of routes planned in your center was right or wrong. Based on what you say it was wrong. (At least something is wrong)Let me try and prove my point that the cause is not the metric, but management, and how they go about creating and attaining the metric.Here is how the planning process works.....I.E. starts by forecasting the number of packages and stops by day. They then look at the number of stops per car that is planned. This number (metric) is jointly created between the package operators and I.E. Dividing the number of stops by the SPC gives the number of routes needed. In your case 11. (This is over simplified, but generally correct) Was the cause a poor forecast? Was the cause an improper SPC target? I don't know, but both of those are the responsibility of local management.The true measurement is Stops per Car, not number of routes. If Stops are up, the SPC stays constant and the number of routes should change. If stops are down, routes should go down.Of course, there is another variable... Its the dispatch. In many, many cases the forecast is okay. The SPC target is okay. The dispatch makes the goal unattainable.As I said, I have no way of knowing which variable was amiss in your case. I do know that all of them are created locally in the district. Atlanta does not create them. They will hold the district accountable to executing that local plan however.My final point. Look at what happened in your case. Management didn't tell you how to meet the goal. They just made a blanket statement. This shows me that they don't understand the metric.This was my original point. The problem isn't the metric, its management that doesn't understand what it means or how to attain it.P-Man

 

[over9five]

And I have to ask P-Man, how about Sobers example of sitting in a customers parking lot with their packages AND a Diad and being told not to make service. Shouldn't that manager be disciplined? That is outrageous.

 

[dilligaf]

Dill,I certainly don't know if the number of routes planned in your center was right or wrong. Based on what you say it was wrong. (At least something is wrong)Let me try and prove my point that the cause is not the metric, but management, and how they go about creating and attaining the metric.Here is how the planning process works.....I.E. starts by forecasting the number of packages and stops by day. They then look at the number of stops per car that is planned. This number (metric) is jointly created between the package operators and I.E. Dividing the number of stops by the SPC gives the number of routes needed. In your case 11. (This is over simplified, but generally correct)Was the cause a poor forecast? Was the cause an improper SPC target? I don't know, but both of those are the responsibility of local management.The true measurement is Stops per Car, not number of routes. If Stops are up, the SPC stays constant and the number of routes should change. If stops are down, routes should go down.Of course, there is another variable... Its the dispatch. In many, many cases the forecast is okay. The SPC target is okay. The dispatch makes the goal unattainable.As I said, I have no way of knowing which variable was amiss in your case. I do know that all of them are created locally in the district. Atlanta does not create them. They will hold the district accountable to executing that local plan however.My final point. Look at what happened in your case. Management didn't tell you how to meet the goal. They just made a blanket statement. This shows me that they don't understand the metric.This was my original point. The problem isn't the metric, its management that doesn't understand what it means or how to attain it.P-Man

Ok, I see the point you are trying to get at and it should work if the SPC are spread out in one area over several other rtes. This is not the case here. They broke out a rte that covered 90% of one town. A town that had to be covered by 1 other rte that normally would not have been in that area (this rte has 2 other towns) and 1 rte that only should have had a few resi stops in that area.

In other words, they broke out the wrong ******* rte. Unfortunately, that is where the metric comes in to play. And it does have to do with the metric. If the SPC are down in the areas around the town that was broke out then it is logical to 'fix' it in that area. The problem is that mileage is not taken into consideration. You will say that this is a mgt issue and you would be right. Sober is saying that local mgt is not given a choice and he would be right as well. How does it make sense to break out a rte (because of metrics) when it causes service failures and pissed off drivers because we have to work until 10pm to try and comply with the metric.

 

[pretzel_man]

P-man, I have to say that I understand what Sober is trying to say and I don't disagree with him. Let me explain why.

2 years ago we had 17 FT bidded rtes. Now we are running at 12 - 14 rtes regularly. That, in and of itself, has been reasonably attainable. Just recently my OR/Disp sup was told that on Mon and Tues we can only have 11 rtes. That is unattainable and simply outrageous. I know. I posted on another thread that I was forced out at 7:30pm to help another driver. The reason for that was solely to blame on having had only 11 rtes out. This particular day was on a Tues. On Mon, the day before, I was also directly involved in the area of the 12th rte that was broke out. It was a complete and total disaster. I had missed businesses. I was threatened in an ODS. This particular metric is completely insane. We have many rural rtes here and IE has no clue what it is like to try and run business and resi in 3 (yes 3) different towns with an avg of 130 - 150 stops. Not a good decision. After having had missed busi on Mon I had to field the challenges from my center manager on Tues morning. The only thing he got out of me was a bad attitude and where is my steward.

Dill,I certainly don't know if the number of routes planned in your center was right or wrong. Based on what you say it was wrong. (At least something is wrong)Let me try and prove my point that the cause is not the metric, but management, and how they go about creating and attaining the metric.Here is how the planning process works.....I.E. starts by forecasting the number of packages and stops by day. They then look at the number of stops per car that is planned. This number (metric) is jointly created between the package operators and I.E. Dividing the number of stops by the SPC gives the number of routes needed. In your case 11. (This is over simplified, but generally correct) Was the cause a poor forecast? Was the cause an improper SPC target? I don't know, but both of those are the responsibility of local management.The true measurement is Stops per Car, not number of routes. If Stops are up, the SPC stays constant and the number of routes should change. If stops are down, routes should go down.Of course, there is another variable... Its the dispatch. In many, many cases the forecast is okay. The SPC target is okay. The dispatch makes the goal unattainable.As I said, I have no way of knowing which variable was amiss in your case. I do know that all of them are created locally in the district. Atlanta does not create them. They will hold the district accountable to executing that local plan however.My final point. Look at what happened in your case. Management didn't tell you how to meet the goal. They just made a blanket statement. This shows me that they don't understand the metric.This was my original point. The problem isn't the metric, its management that doesn't understand what it means or how to attain it.P-Man

 

[pretzel_man]

And I have to ask P-Man, how about Sobers example of sitting in a customers parking lot with their packages AND a Diad and being told not to make service. Shouldn't that manager be disciplined? That is outrageous.

From my perspective, yes....

 

[dilligaf]

Dill,I certainly don't know if the number of routes planned in your center was right or wrong. Based on what you say it was wrong. (At least something is wrong)Let me try and prove my point that the cause is not the metric, but management, and how they go about creating and attaining the metric.Here is how the planning process works.....I.E. starts by forecasting the number of packages and stops by day. They then look at the number of stops per car that is planned. This number (metric) is jointly created between the package operators and I.E. Dividing the number of stops by the SPC gives the number of routes needed. In your case 11. (This is over simplified, but generally correct) Was the cause a poor forecast? Was the cause an improper SPC target? I don't know, but both of those are the responsibility of local management.The true measurement is Stops per Car, not number of routes. If Stops are up, the SPC stays constant and the number of routes should change. If stops are down, routes should go down.Of course, there is another variable... Its the dispatch. In many, many cases the forecast is okay. The SPC target is okay. The dispatch makes the goal unattainable.As I said, I have no way of knowing which variable was amiss in your case. I do know that all of them are created locally in the district. Atlanta does not create them. They will hold the district accountable to executing that local plan however.My final point. Look at what happened in your case. Management didn't tell you how to meet the goal. They just made a blanket statement. This shows me that they don't understand the metric.This was my original point. The problem isn't the metric, its management that doesn't understand what it means or how to attain it.P-Man

Did you intend to repost this?

 

[pretzel_man]

Did you intend to repost this?

Nope.... I was trying to edit my post because there were no paragraphs. I edited it multiple times and somehow ended up duplicating it.

 

[dilligaf]

aaah, I see. Something is most definately going on.

 

[pretzel_man]

Ok, I see the point you are trying to get at and it should work if the SPC are spread out in one area over several other rtes. This is not the case here. They broke out a rte that covered 90% of one town. A town that had to be covered by 1 other rte that normally would not have been in that area (this rte has 2 other towns) and 1 rte that only should have had a few resi stops in that area.

In other words, they broke out the wrong ******* rte. Unfortunately, that is where the metric comes in to play. And it does have to do with the metric. If the SPC are down in the areas around the town that was broke out then it is logical to 'fix' it in that area. The problem is that mileage is not taken into consideration. You will say that this is a mgt issue and you would be right. Sober is saying that local mgt is not given a choice and he would be right as well. How does it make sense to break out a rte (because of metrics) when it causes service failures and pissed off drivers because we have to work until 10pm to try and comply with the metric.

Dill,

Again, I don't know your situation but I think I need to stick ot my point....

Sounds like in your case the problem is the dispatch, right? They needed to break up a route and picked one that generated more work than the original route? They created a poor dispatch, right?

Changing the number of routes needs to be done right. Doing it wrong creates a pocket dispatch. That pocket dispatch generates a lot of additional miles.

The dispatch is absolutely the responsibility of the local operation. I wonder if the PDS knows how to dispatch per loop concepts? Do the loops make sense? Is the trace right?

I know that you don't know this and its not your job. It is the job of local management though. When the SPC target is made, it assumes that the dispatch can be adjusted per the CD methods. If that is not true, SPC will be very difficult to attain. Again, back to the original cause, management that knows how to create a dispatch...

You do bring up a very good point however. The biggest variable is miles and the systems do not help there. The PDS is not warned if a pocket dispatch is going to create excess miles.

Of course, there is another metric for this. It looks at stops per sequence break.... We can hold off discussing that metric for a while.

P-Man

(I guess we will see if paragraphs work this time)

 

[dilligaf]

I do understand what you are saying and I am not disagreeing with you. I believe you are right about the pocket dispatch but what else can be done if the SPC are only down in that one area. The rest of our rtes can't be touched because the SPC are within the guidelines. This creates a situation where dispatch either has to remove that rte or not remove and answer for not removing it. Sobers point about mgt being micromanaged is a valid point. There ARE always exception to the rules. Which is worse, having bad dispatches and service failures or ignoring the metric and leaving a rte in with no service failures or late nights for drivers?

 

[pretzel_man]

I do understand what you are saying and I am not disagreeing with you. I believe you are right about the pocket dispatch but what else can be done if the SPC are only down in that one area. The rest of our rtes can't be touched because the SPC are within the guidelines. This creates a situation where dispatch either has to remove that rte or not remove and answer for not removing it. Sobers point about mgt being micromanaged is a valid point. There ARE always exception to the rules. Which is worse, having bad dispatches and service failures or ignoring the metric and leaving a rte in with no service failures or late nights for drivers?

Dill,

If stops are reduced in just a single area and the loops and trace are good, then you are right. The route cannot be broken up.....

Generally however this is not the case.

Here is what I usually see......

Stops are reduced and not in just a single area. Reducing a single route then takes making adjustments to many routes. You give the A driver more work, adjust the B drivers, C Drivers, and so on. Then the baseline drivers handle the remaining. This is what is supposed to happen.

Usually, the PDS doesn't want to do the work, doesn't know how to do the work, (or more often doesn't have time) so a pocket dispatch is created. This leads to the situation you mention.

BTW, when I go and see what people are doing instead of this important planning, they are running missorts or putting out other fires. That is the additional important cost of missorts...

I'm not disagreeing what what you see from the drivers standpoint. What you see is an impossible dispatch and a directive to make it work. It won't work... You are right.

From my position however, I can't give up on pushing the operation to do the job right...

P-Man

 

[soberups]

If the problem is not the metric, and its not management, I don't understand what is left....

Are you saying the metric is not attainable? In most cases, they are certainly attainable and make sense. The issue is How management goes about achieving it. If they are skilled, then there should be no fear from the accountability from above.

Your Stops per Car example is a sympton of not understanding the metric and how to achieve it. The root cause is having to shuttle missort every day....

P-man, you may have misunderstood me.

I understand that we need to set goals, and that metrics can be a valuable tool to help determine whether or not those goals are being met.

The problem we are having here is very simple; the particular stops-per-car metric that Atlanta is requiring us to meet is not realistic.

Its not a preload issue. It is not a missort issue. The issue is that too many stops are being forced into too few cars, and the hours that the drivers are having to work in order to service the packages is a gross violation of Art 37 of the labor agreement. The most skilled management person on earth cannot force 10 gallons of poop into a 5 gallon bucket, no matter how hard he tries. The real solution to the problem is simple; a bigger bucket. Atlanta's "solution" to the problem is also simple; to pretend that the bucket is big enough and then threaten to fire whoever lets the poop spill on the floor. One solution will work, and the other one wont. It isnt rocket science.

The management team in my center is well aware of what the problem is. They simply lack the authority to solve it . Collectively, they possess over 100 years of experience as UPS supervisors, yet their overseers in Atlanta do not trust their judgement enough to grant them the authority to dispatch an adequate number of cars.

Metrics themselves are not the problem. Unthinking, fear-based obedience to an obviously flawed metric is the problem.

 

[dilligaf]

Dill,

If stops are reduced in just a single area and the loops and trace are good, then you are right. The route cannot be broken up.....

Generally however this is not the case.

Here is what I usually see......

Stops are reduced and not in just a single area. Reducing a single route then takes making adjustments to many routes. You give the A driver more work, adjust the B drivers, C Drivers, and so on. Then the baseline drivers handle the remaining. This is what is supposed to happen.

Usually, the PDS doesn't want to do the work, doesn't know how to do the work, (or more often doesn't have time) so a pocket dispatch is created. This leads to the situation you mention.

BTW, when I go and see what people are doing instead of this important planning, they are running missorts or putting out other fires. That is the additional important cost of missorts...

I'm not disagreeing what what you see from the drivers standpoint. What you see is an impossible dispatch and a directive to make it work. It won't work... You are right.

From my position however, I can't give up on pushing the operation to do the job right...

P-Man

LOL I know we are both right on our points. Of course you can't give up. It is frustrating from both sides of it. At the end of the day, though, you get to go home at 5 (presumably) and I am the one that is sitting out there at 7, 8, 9 or even 10pm in some cases. What, if anything, can I tell my sup that will get him to see the light? Cuz, what he is doing right now is not working.

 

[pretzel_man]

LOL I know we are both right on our points. Of course you can't give up. It is frustrating from both sides of it. At the end of the day, though, you get to go home at 5 (presumably) and I am the one that is sitting out there at 7, 8, 9 or even 10pm in some cases. What, if anything, can I tell my sup that will get him to see the light? Cuz, what he is doing right now is not working.

Again, from your perspective, I agree with you. You are the last one down the line and have to clean up the mess.

I usually work by getting management to accept responsibility for their situation and decisions. Probably not something you can do.

P-Man

 

[dilligaf]

Again, from your perspective, I agree with you. You are the last one down the line and have to clean up the mess.

I usually work by getting management to accept responsibility for their situation and decisions. Probably not something you can do.

P-Man

You would probably be right on that.

 

[soberups]

Dill,

Usually, the PDS doesn't want to do the work, doesn't know how to do the work, (or more often doesn't have time) so a pocket dispatch is created. This leads to the situation you mention.

BTW, when I go and see what people are doing instead of this important planning, they are running missorts or putting out other fires. That is the additional important cost of missorts...

I'm not disagreeing what what you see from the drivers standpoint. What you see is an impossible dispatch and a directive to make it work. It won't work... You are right.

From my position however, I can't give up on pushing the operation to do the job right...

P-Man

The operation will do the job right if it is given the resources it needs.

The operation will do the job right if the expectations placed upon it are realistic.

The operation will do the job right if those who manage it are given the authority to make the necessary decisions.

The operation will not do the job right if it is starved of resources, burdened with impossible expectations, and denied the ability to make day-to-day decisions.