3 ms·
Eh, I'm not sure if they are that new, they have been around at least 15 years as far as I know. And some sort of half-version of this has been going for decad
by Closi 5y ago
Eh, I'm not sure if they are that new, they have been around at least 15 years as far as I know.
And some sort of half-version of this has been going for decades. In my first warehouse job we used to have a legacy warehouse system but had worked out performance targets which varied by the make-up of work you got (e.g. a combination of total weight picked, types of order you had picked, orderlines picked and units picked).
IMO the only difference is that these new algorithms are generally 'fairer' (the old issue was that rogue department managers could to give preferential treatment to some employees, or put them on the 'best' jobs) but they are also more complex and opaque, which leads to employee mistrust.
Where I worked a union actually audited the calculation so it is possible to do this in a somewhat 'open' way, although the problem with opening the algorithm up to everyone is that it is complex and can be easily misunderstood/misinterpreted, particularly if you do not have training in how it all works (which then also requires WMS training!). There were always misconceptions with how the calculation works, because all users saw was a rolled-up number and it's quite a complex thing to understand (even department managers would describe how it works wrongly, and the union would also describe it wrongly, which would confuse people further which obviously isn't a good place to be).
- raxxorrax 5y agoWe have that too in our production, although it isn't down to the individual. It is pretty extensive monitoring by line mainly for situation where things go wrong. Sure, there could be a case where the chemistry between line worker and manager doesn't work out. I think these cases are rare and people must find alternative arrangements. We must be productive since we produce in a first world nation on an international market and line workers are low wage workers, no illusions about that. We can calculate needed material and expected output. We plan with that. If that is reached, we have succeeded. People help each other when things go wrong. Far better than a mediocre developer fantasizing about KPI and making stop watches for people taking a shit. Obviously creating a condition where workers are competitors might be a hindrance here. No wonder your factory sucks on productivity, everyone is a adversary and if others are slower I will look better on performance sheets. Genius management approach.
- Closi 5y agoWorkers aren't competitors in these systems - Workers output is compared to the measured standard, they are not competing against each other. I'm not going to debate if it is / isn't a good thing, because that's individual opinion, but in a distribution setting these systems absolutely help improve performance/output when put into a DC operating at Amazon-scale (at smaller warehouses it's pointless). > We have that too in our production, although it isn't down to the individual Fair, I mean specifically individual user performance tracking has been happening for at least 30 years - because it used to be in a legacy system I used to use. And the time & motion based performance management a-la-Amazon has been around at least 15.