From SCDigest's On-Target E-Magazine
- Nov. 7, 2012 -
Logistics News: How Do Companies Rate the Specific Capabilities of their WMS and TMS?
Chief Supply Chain Officer Insights Finds WMS and TMS Users Find Higher End Capabilities Lacking
SCDigest Editorial Staff
How do companies rate the specific functional capabilities of the Warehouse Management ans Transportation Management Systems?
That's a question SCDigest has rarely of ever seen asked.
SCDigest Says: |
 |
| All told, it is clear TMS users believe they have less adequate technology support than do WMS users," CSCO Insights says in the report. |
|
What Do You Say?
|
|
|
|
Recent research from Chief Supply Chain Officer Insights took a look at that issue, finding that many current WMS and TMS users see weakness in many higher end areas of funtionality, perhaps good news in a sense for providers of WMS and TMS software, as perhaps many companies are looking for something a little better. A large percentage of even many large firms have aging WMS and TMS solutions.
That observation comes from the recent Supply Chain Execution Technology 2012 Benchmark report from CSCO Insights, the research arm of Supply Chain Digest, which covered a lot of ground relative to WMS, TMS, Labor Management Systems (LMS), supply chain visibility and other aspects of supply chain execution.
The report received input from more than 300 respondents to an on-line survey, which in part asked them to rate the capabilities of their company's current WMS possesses across a number of different individual
functional areas on a scale of 1-5, with 5 being the most capable and 1 the least capable.
CSCO Insights then took an average of
all the scores for each capability. The capabilities range from some that might be considered to more basic to others that are more advanced.
As can be seen in the chart, "inventory control" had the highest average, with a score
of 3.2, well above the mid-point of the scale of 2.5. That was followed by capabilities to manage the "flow of goods"
in the DC, with a score of 2.9.
These two areas of functionality are somewhat general in nature, and it is not are not surprised they came out on top.
More specific and advanced functionality, however, scored lower. Support for kitting and value-added services had
the lowest average score of just 2.3. Labor planning/management and wave planning/execution were next lowest,
each with scores of 2.5, right at the mid-point.
Source: CSCO Insights
We will note that kitting/value-added service support continues to grow in importance due to trends in distribution
and growing customer requirements for such additional services that must be performed in the DC.
(Distribution/Materials Handling Story Continues Below
)
|
