Backroom Accuracy Indicator (BAI)

[Dysprosed]

It looks like it is live. Our score is 85.5. Anyone see anything different?

 

[BKop16]

It looks like it is live. Our score is 85.5. Anyone see anything different?

That's it. Just one number.

 

[Xanatos]

Does anyone know what the ranges are for green/yellow/red?

 

[Dysprosed]

Does anyone know what the ranges are for green/yellow/red?

>85 is Green. 80-84.99 is yellow. Less than 80 is red.

 

[gsa4lyfe]

No. Think of it like a way to figure out who kept hitting All Items Scanned.

Thats not really it either. It only tracks using it incorrectly or excessive use. If you’re using at as designed it’s fine. BAI is a tool that tracks the people who create the errors and are pulling/backstocking/auditing incorrectly. It’s all about behaviors not the metric.

 

[Xanatos]

Thats not really it either. It only tracks using it incorrectly or excessive use. If you’re using at as designed it’s fine. BAI is a tool that tracks the people who create the errors and are pulling/backstocking/auditing incorrectly. It’s all about behaviors not the metric.

Sorry I thought that's the idea I was trying to convey.

 

[gsa4lyfe]

With the old way, Team Member A would hit All Items Scanned and no one would know that all these items got deleted from the location. Then Team Member B would come into that location and an error would be created with their name attached to it.

With this new reporting, we will see every time TM A hits All Items Scanned (or Cannot Find Item, which I think is the new term) so we can go talk to that person and make sure they're checking every item before hitting that button.

The old way showed who found the mistake. The new reporting shows TMs who are doing things that can lead to mistakes.

You could always see who used AIS and It only ever deleted the items it was looking for. They changed the logic a couple years ago.

 

[Dysprosed]

You could always see who used AIS and It only ever deleted the items it was looking for. They changed the logic a couple years ago.

Yes, it's true that you could see that before. But because of the improvement in system led backroom audit, you have better information about who did it incorrectly or not.

 

[allnew2]

Yes, it's true that you could see that before. But because of the improvement in system led backroom audit, you have better information about who did it incorrectly or not.

Not sure how long you’ve been with Target , but what you keep saying it’s exactly how the system use to be years ago.

 

[Dysprosed]

Not sure how long you’ve been with Target , but what you keep saying it’s exactly how the system use to be years ago.

What aspect of it are you referring to? System led audits and greenfield reporting didn't exist. It was not possible to see who had an incorrect AIS unless you manually went thru the list and checked each location visually.

System led audit finds baffles in about 50% of generated locations and as long as 'cannot find item' or 'incorrect pick to zero' happened in the last 30 days, it is able to attribute it. This type of insight has never existed.

Process adherence reporting also didn't exist, which is great at generating insights into who isn't backstocking to best practice.

The Fill and backstock system isn't fundamentally different, but I'm not sure how it could change in a way that has any profound effect on accuracy.