1. Frederic De Wulf
Black Belt Project July 2016
Carteret Throughput
Improvements

2. 2
Presentation title
Date
Team Member:
Sponsor: Andy Lahy
Black Belt: Frederic De Wulf
Master Black Belt: Joe Toriello
Subject Matter Experts:
- Frederic De Wulf
- Adrian Ojeda
- Monica Ocampo
- Mario Guerra
- David Schutzbank
- Andres Baliero
Process Start/Stop
Start Point: July 1st 2016
Stop Point: September 30th 2016
DEFINE

3. 3
Presentation title
Date
Business Case:
The Carteret operations received and average of 60 complaints per month from customers, mainly in regards to late
and/or partial shipments. In addition to the customers dissatisfaction, these missed shipments directly increased the
expediting cost and loss in revenue for retail and wholesale.
Process Problem:
Since the second quarter of 2016, the Carteret facility had an increase in operating cycle times for the event interval
“checking to put away” on an average of 7 days, and therefore not been able to meet customer expectations of 2 days.
This increase in processing time has increased the personnel expense and decreased the throughput in re-usable floor
space, and therefore Panalpina experienced a loss in direct contribution of about $200K.
Project Goals:
- Potential Benefits for the customer:
- Eliminate late and/or partial deliveries
- Customer complaint reduction by 70%
- Customer delivery improvements
- Potential Benefit of Panalpina:
- Reduction in overtime, shipping and labor cost
- Productivity Improvements
- More productive floor space
- Increase throughput
- Cycle Time reduction from 7 to 2 days
DEFINE

4. 4
Presentation title
Date
IPO
# employees # receivings UP
# equipment Receiving # damages DOWN
3rd party suppliers Time to process DOWN
# employees # wrong checks DOWN
# freight Checking # split outs DOWN
# machines process time UP
# employees # put away items UP
# equipment Put Away space utilization UP
# freight Time to process DOWN
# employees # wrong items picked DOWN
Process Time Picking # items picked UP
# equipment Time to process DOWN
# employees # items packed UP
# equipment Packing cycle time Pick to Pack DOWN
#items/cut off date # wrong marked packages DOWN
# employees cycle time release to ship to deliver DOWN
# routed to ship Shipping # orders shipped UP
# equipment # wrong items loaded DOWN
DEFINE
Focus Area of Project

5. 5
Presentation title
Date
Process flow
The yellow
boxes indicate
pain points to
existing
process
DEFINE
CARTERET FASHION WAREHOUSE PROCESS FLOW
SHIPPINGOUTBOUNDVAS / PACKINGPICKINGPUT AWAYRECEIVINGINBOUNDUNLOADING
Phase PRE ADVICE /
CUSTOMER
ORDER
TRUCKER ARRIVAL
AT THE WAREHOUSE
CHECK
DOCUMENTATION
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR
DOES PHISICAL
TRUCK
INSPECTION
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR
UNLOADS THE
TRUCK
INBOUND OF
GOODS
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR CHECKS
IF GOODS ARE
DAMAGED
PHYSICAL CHECK OF
GOODS AGAINST
THE PACKING LIST
VERIFY ASN
NUMBER FOR THE
INBOUND
PRINT RECEIVING
WORKSHEET (ASN)
RECEIVING
SORT PRODUCT PER
STYLE, COLOR AND
CATEGORY
SCAN BARCODE ON
“RECEIVING
WORKSHEET”
SCAN BARCODE OF
EACH PIECE
RECEIVED
PUT AWAY
PRINT “PUT AWAY
REPORT” BY
CATEGORY
FIND AN AVAILABLE
LOCATION WITHIN
THE CATEGORY AND
CUSTOMER
LOCATION
TRANSFER GOODS
TO LOCATION
INDICATED ON THE
“PUT AWAY
REPORT”
TRANSFER GOODS
TO LOCATION
INDICATED ON THE
“PUT AWAY
REPORT”
SCAN asn BARCODE
IN PUT AWAY
REPORT
SCAN asn BARCODE
IN PUT AWAY
REPORT
SCAN ITEM AND
LOCATION
CONFIRM PUT-
AWAY OF
PRODUCTS
ASN CLOSED
PICKING
CUSTOMER SERVICE
DEPOSIT ORDERS IN
WORKLOAD BOARD
TEAM LOAD HANDS
ORDERS TO PICKER
BY PRIORITY
PICK THE ORDERSPICK THE ORDERS
MOVE PRODUCT TO
PACKING STATION
PACKING
SIGN INTO WMS
FOR CUSTOME
ACCOUNT
SCAN PICK ORDER
CREATE SHIPPING
CONTAINER
CREATE SHIPPING
CONTAINER
SCAN EACH PIECE,
DO QUALITY CHECK
AND PLACE ITEM IN
SHIPPING
CONTAINER
SCAN EACH PIECE,
DO QUALITY CHECK
AND PLACE ITEM IN
SHIPPING
CONTAINER
CLOSE CONTAINET
WHEN FULL
CLOSE CONTAINET
WHEN FULL
PRINT SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS AND
LABELS
INSERT SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS INTO
CONTAINER
APPLY LABELS,
CLOSE CONTAINER,
PLACE ON
VONVEYOR
TOWARDS
OUTBOUND
OUTBOUND
WAIVING
OUTBOUND ORDERS
SEND ORDERS TO
OUTBOUND LEAD
REVIEW
COMMUNICATION,
MAKE ADJUSTMENT
AND VERIFY ALL
ORDERS ARE VISIBLE
GROUP THE ORDERS
IN BATCHES AND
WAVE
PRINT PICK ORDERS
BY CATEGORY IN
CUSTOMER
COLORED PAPER
AND MATCH TO
INVOICES
CREATE OUTBOUND
LOAD
ROUTE SHIPMENT
CREATE SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS
SHIPPING
ORDERS COMING
FROM PACK
STATIONS
PICK UP PRODUCT
FROM CONVEYOR
SORT BY PO,
CUSTOMER AND
CARRIER
MOVE PALLET TO
CARRESPONDING
OUTBOUND
STAGING
SCAN ALL SHIPPING
LABELS INTO
SPREADSHEET
LOAD INTO TRUCK

6. 6
Presentation title
Date
Financial statement
DEFINE
On Direct Contribution level, the
Carteret warehouse is losing on
average USD 212,000 per month
(Jan – Jun)
FY
CHF1 '000 2015 Jan Feb Mar Apr May June
Net Forwarding Revenue Total 0 0 116 556 804 753 755
GP before Profit Share 0 451 548 414 540 691 627
Profit Share Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profit Share Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP after Profit Share 0 451 548 414 540 691 627
Other Forwarding Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Other Forwarding Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gross Profit 0 451 548 414 540 691 627
Gross Profit Margin - - 473.9% 74.4% 67.2% 91.8% 83.1%
1. Salaries 0 (183) (130) (120) (115) (144) (160)
2. Bonus 0 (4) (4) (4) (13) 47 (50)
3. Sales Incentive Program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4. Overtime 0 (7) (12) (8) (8) (13) (17)
5. Vacation 0 2 (1) (15) (1) 1 12
6. Salaries 3rd Staff Members 0 (225) (218) (226) (235) (243) (367)
7. Termination / Severance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8. Recruitment / Training 0 (0) (2) 0 0 (2) (0)
9. Medical Cost 0 (45) (44) (45) (43) (45) (45)
10. Payroll Taxes / Others 0 (3) (3) (9) (6) (8) (9)
Personnel Expenses 0 (466) (415) (429) (419) (409) (637)
1. Communications 0 0 (1) (1) (1) (15) (10)
2. IT 0 (0) (9) (12) (0) 0 (18)
3. Rent 0 (241) (168) (162) (176) (169) (167)
4. Maintenance 0 (10) (9) (75) (36) (83) (72)
5. Office 0 (23) (7) (7) (8) (10) (16)
6. Travel 0 (18) (11) (32) (30) (0) (18)
7. Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
8. Sponsorships / Advertising / M&S 0 0 (1) (1) 0 0 0
9. Legal / Consulting / Audit 0 0 0 (5) 0 0 0
10. Outsourcing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11. Loss on Receivables 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
12. Insurance 0 (0) (0) 0 0 (1) 0
13. Claims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14. Withholding Taxes / Others 0 0 (5) (1) 0 6 0
Other Operative Expenses 0 (293) (211) (296) (251) (273) (301)
Total D & A 0 0 (33) (38) (35) (1) (36)
Total Operative Costs 0 (759) (658) (763) (706) (683) (974)
OPEX in % of GP - 168.1% 120.2% 184.3% 130.7% 98.9% 155.2%
Net Result on Sale of Asset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Direct Contribution 0 (308) (111) (349) (166) 8 (347)
DC Margin - 68.1% 20.2% 84.3% 30.7% 1.1% 55.2%
SSC Operation 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1)
SCC Pickup & Delivery 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCC Customs Clearance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCC Transit Warehouse 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
SCC / SSC Charges 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1)
House Allocation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Country Allocation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Non allocatable costs 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Solutions 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Country Allocations 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
Country Contribution 0 (308) (111) (349) (166) 8 (346)
Regional Service Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
Regional Contribution 0 (308) (111) (349) (166) 8 (341)
Corporate Royalty Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Corporate Service Fee 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Corporate Allocation 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Corporate Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
EBIT 0 (308) (111) (349) (166) 8 (341)
EBIT in % of GP - -68.1% -20.2% -84.3% -30.7% 1.1% -54.3%
Q1 '16 Q2 '16
For this project, in the month of May,
there was a financial correction to
were it looked positive, but in reality,
it was another loss making month.
For the month of June, there was
a loss in direct contribution of $347K

7. 7
Presentation title
Date
Gage R&R
I have reviewed my Gage R&R output to confirm that the cycle times are accurately represented in the system.
Gage Name:
Date of Study:
Performed By:
Notes:
Process Tolerance
USL: 2 4 3 3
LSL: 0
StDev Multiplier: 2.15
Customer DVF Date Date Date Date Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10
Receiving 6/13/2016 6/14/2016 6/15/2016 6/16/2016
Put away 6/25/2016 6/27/2017 7/1/2016 7/5/2016
Cycle Time in days 12 10 13 13
85092 85458 85101 85106 0 0 0 0 0 0
Customer Rag & Bone Date Date Date Date Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10
Receiving 6/13/2016 6/14/2016 6/15/2016 6/16/2016
Put away 6/20/2016 6/22/2016 6/27/2016 6/29/2016
Cycle Time in days 6 7 9 10
85081 85085 85093 85097 0 0 0 0 0 0
Customer SMCP Date Date Date Date Part 5 Part 6 Part 7 Part 8 Part 9 Part 10
Receiving 6/13/2016 6/14/2016 6/15/2016 6/16/2016
Put away 7/6/2016 7/6/2016 7/8/2016 7/11/2016
Cycle Time in days 17 16 17 17
85108 85108 85112 85116 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gage R&R Metrics
Variance
Component
% Contribution
of Variance
Component StDev
StDev *
Multiplier
% Total
Variation
(TV) % Tolerance
Gage R&R: 603405455.2 100.00 24564.31263 52813.27217 100.00 2640663.61
Operator (AV Appraiser Variation): 3.336420006 0.00 1.826586983 3.927162013 0.01 196.36
Operator * Part (INT Interaction): 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00
Reproducibility (SQRT(AV^2 + INT^2)): 3.336420006 0.00 1.826586983 3.927162013 0.01 196.36
Repeatability (EV Equipment Variation): 603405451.9 100.00 24564.31257 52813.27202 100.00 2640663.60
Part Variation (PV): 0 0.00 0 0 0.00 0.00
Total Variation (TV): 603405455.2 100.00 24564.31263 52813.27217 100.00 2640663.61
Cycle Time Receiving - Put away
06/13/2016 - 06/16/2016
Frederic De Wulf
Create Stacked Column Format
for "Analyze Gage R&R" >>
MEASURE

8. 8
Presentation title
Date
Average Cycle Time in Days (Stage 1 – Before Stage)
MEASURE
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Week #
Cycletime(Days)
Week Average of Cycle Time Rec - Put Away Z score
18 2.35
19 5.90
20 6.38
21 7.05
22 6.81
23 6.21
24 9.50
25 9.55
26 7.85
Grand Total 6.82 0.695

9. 9
Presentation title
Date
In stage 1, the receiving and put away was done on a customer bases by individual teams. Each teams had
approx. 2 employees per account to handle receiving and put away volumes. Customers Rag & Bone and SMCP
had large volumes that exceeded their capacity. Therefore the materials were left on the floor, and remained there
till the picking process started.
MEASURE
12108642
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mean 6.821
StDev 2.336
N 46
Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Frequency
Histogram of Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Normal

10. 10
Presentation title
Date
Cause and Effect Diagram
Long cycle time to process
RECEIVING AND PUT AWAY
Manpower
Measurements
Methods
Mother NatureMachine
Materials
Not enough staff
during peak times
Language barrier between
SV and team
No dedicated
Supervisor
No dedicated crew
Not right mix in the team
Boxes come in unmarked
Pack against shipment cut off
Versus cycle time
Various packing jobs in multiple
stages of completion
Working on newer jobs first &
Letting older jobs slip
Lack of communication between
Office and warehouse
Not enough recources
Against workload
No team KPI’s available
Scanning everything slows
down the put away
There are not enough scanners
To handle the volume
Workstations don’t have all WMS installed
To be able to handle multiple customers
Orders are not prioritized
Customer service does not
communicate enough
with team leads
Merchandise comes in damaged
Freight comes in mixed
Put away is done thru scanning,
picking is done manually
Picking from receiving area vs inventory location
Cyclecount team to small
To cover all inventory
GOH comes in at European sizes
High manpower turnover
No one owns the process
Scanners are not set up to
Connect to the different WMS systems
No dedicated pallet jacks per area
ANALYZE

11. 11
Presentation title
Date
Brainstorming
• Improve the cycle Times by creating 1 dedicated team to work on all customers daily priorities
• Mark off a dedicated area for inbound and receiving per customer
• Put color coded cones (different color every day) to identify the inbound
• Create workstations away from the inbound area to verify the quantities against the receiving reports
• No materials are being counted that this point
• Set up and verify the scanners to be set up for all accounts
• Daily operations and priority meetings with a dedicated supervisor
• Create FIFO in receiving and put away process
• A visual board to keep track of the work in progress (pieces received vs. pieces put away)
• In the put away stage, scan the first item and count the number of pieces to be put away, and verify against the
receiving report for accuracy.
• Create new SOP to indicate process change
• Continue to take operation measurements
• Eliminate non reimbursable overtime on a 5 day work schedule.
ANALYZE

12. 12
Presentation title
Date
SIMPLIFIED FMEA
ANALYZE
Cause Effect Priority Ranking
Not all ASN numbers are known upon arrival Delay put away process 16
Accuracy of received items Delay in receiving/put away process 16
High volumes in peek seasons Delay put away process 20
Not enough manpower to handle volumes Delay put away, picking and packing 16
Too much double handling of goods Delay put away process 16
Many pieces can't be found due to inventory inacuracy Delay in picking 15
Slow process to gather all items for consolidation Delay in packing 12
Poor communication between CS and operations Delay in picking, packing, put away 12
Packing orders are not being prioritized by cut off Delay in packing 12
Legacy WMS had unfriendly reports to measure overall WIP Management of overall process 9
Not meeting customer expectation Management of overall process 25
Pack against shipment cut off versus cycle time Delay in packing 20
FMEA Simplified
Rating Scale 1 2 3 4 5
No
Impact
Minor
Impact
Medium
Impact
Major
Impact
Excessive
Impact
1 Will not happen 1 2 3 4 5
2
Unlikely to
happen
2 4 6 8 10
3
Several events
needed to
cause this to
happen
3 6 9 12 15
4
Some events
can cause this
to happen
4 8 12 16 20
5 Definitely will
happen
5 10 15 20 25
likelihood(L)
Severity Impact (S)

13. 13
Presentation title
Date
Green boxes
indicate
improved
process steps
to the new model
IMPROVE
CARTERET FASHION WAREHOUSE PROCESS FLOW
SHIPPINGOUTBOUNDVAS / PACKINGPICKINGPUT AWAYRECEIVINGINBOUNDUNLOADING
Phase
PRE ADVICE /
CUSTOMER
ORDER
TRUCKER ARRIVAL
AT THE WAREHOUSE
CHECK
DOCUMENTATION
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR
DOES PHISICAL
TRUCK
INSPECTION
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR
UNLOADS THE
TRUCK
INBOUND OF
GOODS
WAREHOUSE
OPERATOR CHECKS
IF GOODS ARE
DAMAGED
PHYSICAL CHECK OF
GOODS AGAINST
THE PACKING LIST
VERIFY ASN
NUMBER FOR THE
INBOUND
PRINT RECEIVING
WORKSHEET (ASN)
RECEIVING
SEPARATE THE
PALLETS PER
CUSTOMER AND
VERIFY THE
PRODUCT BY
COLOR, STYLE AND
SIZE
SCAN BARCODE ON
“RECEIVING
WORKSHEET”TO
VERIFY THE
NUMBER OF PIECES
TO BE RECEIVED
NO MORE
SCANNING OF EACH
ITEM. ONLY VERIFY
THE QUANTITIES
MARKED ON THE
OUTSIDE OF THE
BOX
PUT AWAY
PRINT “PUT AWAY
REPORT” BY
CATEGORY
THE SCANNER WILL
INDICATE WHICH
LOCATION TO USE
TRANSFER GOODS
TO LOCATION
INDICATED ON THE
“PUT AWAY
REPORT”
TRANSFER GOODS
TO LOCATION
INDICATED ON THE
“PUT AWAY
REPORT”
SCAN asn BARCODE
IN PUT AWAY
REPORT
SCAN asn BARCODE
IN PUT AWAY
REPORT
SCAN ONLY ONE
ITEM AND COUNT
THE REMAINING
PIECES AND
MANUALLY ADJUST
THE TOTAL
QUANTITY RECEIVED
CONFIRM PUT-
AWAY OF
PRODUCTS
ASN CLOSED
PICKING
CUSTOMER SERVICE
DEPOSIT ORDERS IN
WORKLOAD BOARD
TEAM LOAD HANDS
ORDERS TO PICKER
BY PRIORITY
PICK THE ORDERSPICK THE ORDERS
MOVE PRODUCT TO
PACKING STATION
PACKING
SIGN INTO WMS
FOR CUSTOME
ACCOUNT
SCAN PICK ORDER
CREATE SHIPPING
CONTAINER
CREATE SHIPPING
CONTAINER
SCAN EACH PIECE,
DO QUALITY CHECK
AND PLACE ITEM IN
SHIPPING
CONTAINER
SCAN EACH PIECE,
DO QUALITY CHECK
AND PLACE ITEM IN
SHIPPING
CONTAINER
CLOSE CONTAINET
WHEN FULL
CLOSE CONTAINET
WHEN FULL
PRINT SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS AND
LABELS
INSERT SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS INTO
CONTAINER
APPLY LABELS,
CLOSE CONTAINER,
PLACE ON
VONVEYOR
TOWARDS
OUTBOUND
OUTBOUND
WAIVING
OUTBOUND ORDERS
SEND ORDERS TO
OUTBOUND LEAD
REVIEW
COMMUNICATION,
MAKE ADJUSTMENT
AND VERIFY ALL
ORDERS ARE VISIBLE
GROUP THE ORDERS
IN BATCHES AND
WAVE
PRINT PICK ORDERS
BY CATEGORY IN
CUSTOMER
COLORED PAPER
AND MATCH TO
INVOICES
CREATE OUTBOUND
LOAD
ROUTE SHIPMENT
CREATE SHIPPING
DOCUMENTS
SHIPPING
ORDERS COMING
FROM PACK
STATIONS
PICK UP PRODUCT
FROM CONVEYOR
SORT BY PO,
CUSTOMER AND
CARRIER
MOVE PALLET TO
CARRESPONDING
OUTBOUND
STAGING
SCAN ALL SHIPPING
LABELS INTO
SPREADSHEET
LOAD INTO TRUCK
Material is being
placed in a desicated
area seperated per
customer.
A color coded cone
is place on top of
the last pallet. Every
day is a different
color.
The number of
pieces received is
updated on the
white board and the
paperwork is
handed over to the
receiving supervisor
A NEW
BREAKDOWN AREA
WAS CREATED
A DEDICATED
TRAINED TEAM
WORKS ON ALL
CUSTOMERS
DEPENDING ON THE
PRIORITY

14. 14
Presentation title
Date
Implemented Change
1. Inbound materials are placed in a dedicated area separated per customer.
2. Color code cones are used every day and placed on the last pallet, to identify the workload.
3. The white board is being updated and the paperwork handed over to the receiving supervisor.
4. A dedicated team of receivers and put away was selected and trained on all accounts
5. Identification of new warehouse receiving and put away team supervisor
6. Daily meeting with the team and split up to focus on the priority of the day
7. A receiving process area was created to easier break down the pallets to verify the quantities received before put
away. In this stage, the product is only verified against the receiving report.
8. In put away, the first item is scanned, and the remaining counted while putting away. If there is a difference, the
customer is being notified.
9. Management reports analyzed daily for throughput figures.
10.As of the month of July there is no more overtime in receiving and put away.
IMPROVE

15. 15
Presentation title
Date
Average Cycle Time in Days (Stage 2 – Improvement Stage)
Week #
CycleTimes(Days)
IMPROVE
Week Average of Cycle Time Receiving - Put away Z score
27 6.88
28 6.30
29 5.30
30 5.70
31 5.05
32 4.25
33 3.00
34 2.45
35 1.63
Grand Total 4.66 -0.089

16. 16
Presentation title
DateIMPROVE
7.56.04.53.01.5
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Mean 4.494
StDev 1 .738
N 43
Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Frequency
Histogram of Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Normal
Bi-modal distribution because of the implementing changes
and the processing of some back log.

17. 17
Presentation title
Date
Improved Process Results
From week 18 till 26, shows a backlog of product to be put away.
As of week 27, a dedicated trained team worked simultaneously
on “receiving and put away”, to optimize the cycle throughput.
IMPROVE
0
10000
20000
30000
40000
50000
60000
70000
80000
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
Sum of receiving
Sum of put away
#piecesreceivedandputaway
Week #
Processing some back log

18. 18
Presentation title
Date
Average Cycle Time in Days (Stage 3 – Improved Stage)
IMPROVE
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1.40
1.60
36 37 38 39
Week #
CycleTime(Days)
Week Average of Cycle Time receiving - put away z score
36 1.00
37 1.00
38 1.35
39 1.40
Grand Total 1.20 -1.345

19. 19
Presentation title
DateIMPROVE
1.81.61.41.21.00.80.6
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Mean 1 .1 97
StDev 0.2836
N 1 9
Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Frequency
Histogram of Cycle Time Rec - Put Away
Normal

20. 20
Presentation title
Date
Improved process results (Run Chart)
Control
0.0
2.0
4.0
6.0
8.0
10.0
12.0
18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39
Optimizing work force
to 12 employees due to
dedicated team working
on all accounts
Optimizing work force
to 10 employees due to
Dedicated team working
On all accounts
Identifying new supervisor
Start with the daily priority
meetings
Focus on
reducing
cycle times
Eliminating overtime
Concentrate on FIFO
Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3
Project Implementation
start week 27
Project Implementation
end week 39
Week #
CycleTime(Days)
Week
Av Cycle Time
Rec - Put Away
18 2.4
19 5.9
20 6.4
21 7.1
22 6.8
23 6.2
24 9.5
25 9.6
26 7.9
27 6.9
28 6.3
29 5.3
30 5.7
31 5.1
32 4.3
33 3.0
34 2.5
35 1.4
36 1.0
37 1.0
38 1.4
39 1.4
Grand
Total 4.9

21. 21
Presentation title
DateControl
Cycle Time Stage 3Cycle Time Stage 1
10
8
6
4
2
0
Data
Boxplot of Cycle Time Stage 1, Cycle Time Stage 3

22. 22
Presentation title
DateControl
With a P-value of 0.00, this rejects the Null Hypothesis.
There is a 100% confidence interval that the likelihood of
M1 and M2 being unequal is 100%
Two-Sample T-Test and CI
Sample N Mean StDev SE Mean
1 46 6.82 2.33 0.34
2 19 1.200 0.284 0.065
Difference = μ (1) - μ (2)
Estimate for difference: 5.620
95% CI for difference: (4.917, 6.323)
T-Test of difference = 0 (vs ≠): T-Value = 16.07 P-Value = 0.000 DF = 48

23. 23
Presentation title
Date
Performance Analysis
• A significant improvement from Receiving to Put Away has remained relatively consistent with an
average of under 2 calendar days.
• This part of the Panalpina controlled process was identified in the FMEA
• - Scanning only once of all items received
• - Setting up a dedicated trained team under the lead of a direct supervisor
• - Set up a new process flow to work FIFO
• - Eliminate non reimbursable overtime
Control

24. 24
Presentation title
Date
Control Plan
• Maintain a team of one team supervisor and dedicated team members.
• Daily communication between the team supervisor his team in the inbound lead to make sure we are
aligned on the daily priorities, and to understand what new items to expect.
• All team members need to maintain FIFO processing and work on it on a daily bases.
• Mario Guerra will monitor on a daily bases the receivings and put away dates in the WMS system to
ensure we stay within the control limits, and adjust labor where necessary.
• Daily Management follow up:
• Project Hand-off : Mario Guerra Receiving and Put Away Supervisor
• Carllee Clark Warehouse Manager
• Jennifer Makroulakis CSR Manager
• Christopher Cruz Team lead member (SMCP)
• Elin Perez Team lead member (RBI)
Control

25. 25
Presentation title
Date
Labor and Overtime Improvement
Control
Cycle Time Throughput Before After
May June July August August September
wk 18-22 wk 23-26 wk 27-30 wk 31 wk 32-35 wk 36-39
# FTE 14 14 12 12 10 10
Rate 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8 16.8
Hours 568 687 456 101 216 91
Total in USD 133594 161582 91930 20362 36288 15288
Total before/after in USD 295176 163867
Total savings in USD 131309
In the before stage, individual teams of approx. 2 employees per account (14 total employees) were handling large volumes,
which translated in an excessive amount of overtime.
In the after (improved) stage, a dedicate trained team was formed to work on the daily priorities. Therefore we were able
to optimize the labor force from 12 to 10 and eliminate the overtime.

26. 26
Presentation title
Date
Space Usage Improvement
Control
Space Usage Throughput Before After
Receiving area in Sq/Ft 6153 6926
Put away area in Sq/Ft 1456 1456
Rate per Sq/Ft 1.42 1.42
# days occupied 22 11
Cost per Sq/Ft used per month 237705 130927
Savings per month in USD 106778
In the before stage, individual teams of approx. 2 employees were handling high volumes exceeding customer
capacities. Therefore the receiving area was full all month long (22 days).
In the after (improved) stage, a separate handling area was created to break down the pallets, and the dedicated
receiving area was divided per customer. The trained team would concentrate on the daily priorities and
improved the throughput processing time by half (11 days). Although more space is used, the financial benefit
is noticeable as the dedicate receiving floor space can now be re-used for new arrivals.

27. 27
Presentation title
Date
Put Away Improvements
Control
Before After
May June July Aug Sep
# of Receiving 196343 181313 220834 185281 167325
# of Put away 126098 150354 223270 192323 162541
Difference -70245 -30959 2436 7042 -4784
Rate per put away $0.85
Revenue in USD ($59,708) ($26,315) $2,071 $5,986 ($4,066)
Avg revenue
(before/after)
($86,023) $3,991
In the before stage, individual teams were not able to put away the freight in time due to high volumes and
exceeding customer’s capacities. With appr. 2 employees per team, almost all the freight would remain in
the receiving area untill the picking process would start.
In the after (improved) stage, a dedicated trained team works on the daily priorities with the entire team.
Receiving and Put Away are done simultaneously.
The financial gain is that Panalpina can invoice per put away item. As it was not put away in time before, Panalpina
missed out on that. In the improved stage, we are able to receive and put away simultaneously and invoice accordingly.

28. 28
Presentation title
Date
FY
CHF1 '000 2015 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
Net Forwarding Revenue Total 0 0 115 555 802 751 753 758 781 727
GP before Profit Share 0 450 546 413 539 689 626 558 511 640
Profit Share Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Profit Share Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
GP after Profit Share 0 450 546 413 539 689 626 558 511 640
Other Forwarding Income 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 57 (9)
Other Forwarding Expenses 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gross Profit 0 450 546 413 539 689 626 558 568 631
Gross Profit Margin - - 473.9% 74.4% 67.2% 91.8% 83.1% 73.6% 72.7% 86.8%
1. Salaries 0 (182) (129) (120) (115) (144) (160) (133) (159) (145)
2. Bonus 0 (4) (4) (4) (13) 46 (50) (53) (15) 42
3. Sales Incentive Program 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
4. Overtime 0 (7) (12) (8) (8) (13) (17) (12) (7) (6)
5. Vacation 0 2 (1) (15) (1) 1 12 (10) 16 5
6. Salaries 3rd Staff Members 0 (225) (218) (225) (234) (242) (367) (340) (242) (306)
7. Termination / Severance 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (28) 0 0
8. Recruitment / Training 0 (0) (2) 0 0 (2) (0) (0) (14) (0)
9. Medical Cost 0 (45) (44) (45) (43) (45) (45) (42) (44) (36)
10. Payroll Taxes / Others 0 (3) (3) (9) (6) (8) (9) (22) (23) (58)
Personnel Expenses 0 (465) (414) (427) (418) (408) (636) (639) (489) (504)
1. Communications 0 0 (1) (1) (1) (15) (10) (10) (10) (6)
2. IT 0 (0) (9) (12) (0) 0 (18) 11 (9) (4)
3. Rent 0 (241) (167) (161) (176) (168) (167) (189) (156) (139)
4. Maintenance 0 (10) (9) (75) (36) (83) (72) (52) (86) (62)
5. Office 0 (23) (7) (7) (8) (10) (16) (11) (21) (1)
6. Travel 0 (18) (11) (32) (30) (0) (18) (17) (27) (28)
7. Entertainment 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (0) 0
8. Sponsorships / Advertising / M&S 0 0 (1) (1) 0 0 0 0 0 0
9. Legal / Consulting / Audit 0 0 0 (5) 0 0 0 0 0 0
10. Outsourcing 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
11. Loss on Receivables 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (4) 0 4
12. Insurance 0 (0) (0) 0 0 (1) 0 0 0 0
13. Claims 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 (4) 0
14. Withholding Taxes / Others 0 0 (5) (1) 0 6 0 0 3 0
Other Operative Expenses 0 (292) (210) (295) (251) (273) (300) (272) (310) (237)
Total D & A 0 0 (33) (38) (35) (1) (36) (36) (36) (36)
Total Operative Costs 0 (757) (657) (761) (704) (681) (972) (947) (836) (777)
OPEX in % of GP - 168.1% 120.2% 184.3% 130.7% 98.9% 155.2% 169.5% 147.2%
Net Result on Sale of Asset 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Direct Contribution 0 (307) (110) (348) (165) 8 (346) (388) (268) (146)
DC Margin - 68.1% 20.2% 84.3% 30.7% 1.1% 55.2% 69.5% 47.2% 23.1%
SCC / SSC Charges 0 0 0 0 0 0 (1) 1 (0) (0)
Country Allocations 0 0 0 0 0 0 (698) 616 (36) (19)
Country Contribution 0 (307) (110) (348) (165) 8 (1,044) 228 (304) (164)
Regional Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 (3) 1 0
Regional Contribution 0 (307) (110) (348) (165) 8 (1,039) 225 (304) (164)
Corporate Fees 0 0 0 0 0 0 (348) 319 (14) (9)
EBIT 0 (307) (110) (348) (165) 8 (1,388) 544 (318) (173)
Q1 '16 Q2 '16 Q3 '16
Control
At the beginning
Of the project there
was a financial loss
in direct contribution of
$346K in June.
The project improvements
started in July and ended
In September.
Our financial statement
for September states a
loss of $146K in direct
contribution.
This is an improvement
of $200K compared to June.

29. 29
Presentation title
Date
Team Acknowledgement
• A word of gratitude to the champions and all team members for their
support and dedication to make this project happen and to improve our
processes and product throughput.
Control

30. 30
Presentation title
Date
Thank You!