I'm sure these new GPS Time Studies will work as great as PAS/EDD........enough said!!!
I happen to think that PAS/EDD, in general, work well. The major contributing factor to their demise is human error. Bad slaps and misloads = human error. Routes configured incorrectly in EDD = human error. There are several centers in the country that run very well with EDD. I've seen the numbers, and its amazing how some parts of the country can run in trace so efficiently, while others are very poor in their trace percentage. Some centers are very proactive and try to address these issues. Others are satisfied with the status quo.
My center for example, is satisfied with the status quo. When I follow trace by 80% or better, I am easily between 1.5 and 2 hours over allowed. When I run it my way, approx. 50-70% trace, I run under by an avg. of -.80 (roughly).
Could my dispatch sup or whoever is in charge change my loop and trace order where I can still run under and have a higher trace percentage? Simply put...YES. Do they...not yet.
I am not denying that there are issues that need to be addressed, but all in all, they work out ok, assuming that human error is kept to a minimum. The PAS implementation teams are taking a lot longer to implement EDD into centers now, than they have ever before. Hopefully, this means that transitions will be made a little smoother and done more effectively.
With that said, do you honestly think that when an I.E. time study is done in person, that there are no errors made? They have to count every stop sign and every traffic light, count every step they make, and keep track of your package selection time. They do all this while simutanesly inputting the information into the palm pilot, watching where they are going, and keeping a conversation with the driver (atleast in my case, we talked the whole time). There are several opportunities for human error to be made.
Surely the GPS based time study will have its issues, especially at first, but I think in theory, it could be done successfully. Remember, time studies take the average time per stop within each shelf section (1000, 2000) etc.. GPS can indicate when a vehicle is stopped and when it starts rolling again. I.E. already has a set package selection allowance, so your package selection time should not vary too much, assuming you follow methods (charge your shelves aka slide stuff foward so that you are not walking to the back of your truck at every stop). Yes you get your occasional odd-size pkg and over 70, but for the most part you can grab and go. And you get extra allowances for over 70s, assuming you key it in.
They will know how long it takes you from the point you stopped your vehicle, give you a set allowance for package selection, and know when you start rolling again. This data, along with maps, can get a decent average of how long it takes you to deliver a section. In fact, I believe that this technique would benefit the driver with a more generous time allowance, than an actual in-person time study would. They will be able to use this technique for most routes. Baselines, malls, convention centers, and some other "non-traditional" routes will still have to be time studied in person.
I'm sure I'll get flamed for this one, so bring it on. Just don't make me cry
... this is simply my opinion.