From SCDigest's On-Target E-Magazine

- June 11, 2013 -

Supply Chain News: Are Warehouse Management System Modifications Going Away? Should They?

Trend is Towards Much Fewer Mods, but They Have Not Disappeared; Stifling Innovation?

 SCDigest Editorial Staff

There is no question that leading vendors of Warehouse Management Systems (WMS) have dramatically improved out-of-the-box capabilities, substantially reducing and sometimes even eliminating the need for modifications to the vendor's core offering.

This is a big deal, because of all supply chain software applications, Warehouse Management Systems have historically been among the most heavily modified, for several reasons. The most prominent factor is just that a WMS must model a given distribution center's physical product flows, which can vary dramatically. This is especially true in the integrated process of order release to the floor, order picking across different selection areas, and then order consolidation.

SCDigest Says: Barnes does notes that while there has been a great reduction in modifications around core DC functionality, there are still often a lot of mods relative to integration with ERP, order management systems, and material handling automation. What Do You Say? Click Here to Send Us Your Comments Click Here to Post or See Reader Feedback

Add to that the fact that any or all of those picking areas could use material handling automation, of numerous types and strategies, and the potential need for modifications to the base just in this area of functionality alone should be clear.

But there is also a distinct movement, led in some cases by the WMS vendors themselves, to not just reduce the number of modifications, but to eliminate them completely for new implementations. And many potential WMS customers seem to be jumping on that same bandwagon, deciding to conform their processes to what the WMS can do out-of-the-box rather than having modifications made to accommodate their perceived requirements.

Why? There are several reasons. Modifications cost money, not only up front but also down the road, as WMS providers usually charge maintenance on those modification dollars each year. Perhaps more importantly, modifications to the WMS base code, as with virtual any enterprise software, can be barriers to making system upgrades, or add a lot more to the cost of those upgrades. Modifications can also be a source of operational problems when the WMS is deployed, since they have not really been field tested.

Many vendors and in some cases customers also pitch the idea that "best practices" are built into the WMS, and question why a user would want to deviate from those practices.

There is no question that in the past, WMS modifications were often made to "pave over cow paths," meaning to make changes just to fit the way a company is used to doing things, not to add any real economic or customer value.

So what is really going on? Has the pendulum perhaps swung a bit too far in terms of dismissing opportunities to drive value? Are most new WMS deployments going in with no mods, or is that a myth? What are the pros and cons of modifications to meet unique business needs? Should companies really push to have a WMS deployment that has no mods?

We'll explore all those topics and more in a series of two articles, featuring observations from some of the industry's leading WMS consultants who have real insight on this issue, and including in part 2 a new "WMS Modification ROI Calculator."

"The trend is obviously towards reduce the number of customizations, and that's a good thing," says Mark Fralick, president of GetUsROI and one of the WMS industry pioneers in the late 1980s and early 1990s. "The question is whether having no modifications should always be the real goal."

Fralick added that "I worry about stifling innovation. I also wonder if the out-of-the-box system gets you 95% of the way there but you could get that other 5% of benefit through some customization if that still isn't the smart thing to do."

(Distribution/Materials Handling Story Continues Below )