Okay... Explain this then
- We all agree that UPS is cheap and wants to increase profits.
- They installed Telematics first in 1500 vehicles and analyzed them.
- Then they installed Telematics in over 10000 vehicles and spend a very large amount of time analyzing the results.
So, with all this analysis by highly skilled finance people, why did UPS decide to continue and install more? Believe me, the accountants would like to NOT spend the money.
Don't you think they analyzed this? I looked at the same reports as they did.
If its a loser, doesn't it make sense that they would then stop?
P-Man
You left out some steps:
- They installed Telematics first in 1500 vehicles and analyzed them.
* They created arbitrary goals and then brow beat the daylights out of center managers to get the desired results.
* They sat in their Chicago (and other) offices, accused drivers of cheating and stealing time, and then found out that bad sensors and software flaws skewed some of the results. Shoot first, ask questions later.
* They discovered that misloads really do make drivers drive off area often (although they didn't want to address the systemic misload problem).
- Then they installed Telematics in over 10000 vehicles and spend a very large amount of time analyzing the results.
* They continued to brow beat the center managers to meet the arbitrary goals.
* They accused drivers of driving off area for lunch (still from their seats in Chicago), but then realized the drivers were just meeting other drivers to exchange misloads. They did not (and still do not) have an answer for the systemic misload problem.
* They did not talk about safety items. Item #1 is production.
* They did not realize that the brow beating was responsible for much of the productivity gain.