Does counting inventory in backroom fix ghosts/baffles in the location their scanning?

[TargetMcFly]

Title.

 

[Hardlinesmaster]

i use the audit function to fix counts at locations.

 

[SigningLady]

If you mean while the backroom is being scanned during inventory, yes it does. It may take a few days to be accurate though.

 

[Dream Baby]

Hopefully you didn't hire the same company that I did our inventory.

They totally screwed up the counts in our WACO.

Our TLs even marked full cases with the quantity because otherwise the inventory team would only count it as one!

 

[balthrop]

In theory over the years we have found the company that does ours doing coke, slamming vodka and other assorted activities so in the end ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

this time around team members did the counts in the backroom and after the counts have never been worse.

ASANTS as always.

 

[Dream Baby]

In theory over the years we have found the company that does ours doing coke, slamming vodka and other assorted activities so in the end ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

this time around team members did the counts in the backroom and after the counts have never been worse.

ASANTS as always.

My TL and ETL redid some of the counts before inventory and made them even worse too!

After our terrible inventory I told my TL that they should have me audit some of the WACOs.

He said there wasn't hours but we ended up doing a lot of them anyway as we pulled.

 

[MrT]

My TL and ETL redid some of the counts before inventory and made them even worse too!

After our terrible inventory I told my TL that they should have me audit some of the WACOs.

He said there wasn't hours but we ended up doing a lot of them anyway as we pulled.

Back when I was a TM I'd purge one Waco every day I worked. Takes little time and is surprisingly effective overall. That and checking expirations as a snack dbo made my backroom and pulls much more manageable.

 

[Dream Baby]

Back when I was a TM I'd purge one Waco every day I worked. Takes little time and is surprisingly effective overall. That and checking expirations as a snack dbo made my backroom and pulls much more manageable.

That makes lots of sense.

We don't do enough audits of WACO audits (or audits in general) IMHO.

Statistically you can figure out exactly how many WACOs to do depending on how many you have.

I used to use 2^(n-1) to calculate sample size.

For if I had 100 WACOs I would audit 8 of them

2^(n-1) where n=8, 2^(8-1) = 2^(7) = 128

 

[MrT]

That makes lots of sense.

We don't do enough audits of WACO audits (or audits in general) IMHO.

Statistically you can figure out exactly how many WACOs to do depending on how many you have.

I used to use 2^(n-1) to calculate sample size.

For if I had 100 WACOs I would audit 8 of them

2^(n-1) where n=8, 2^(8-1) = 2^(7) = 128

Tbh even statistically you could probably get away with less. You probably don't need to calculate all wackos as many probably are not a problem or empty. Unless your aisle is already a disaster that is.

 

[Dream Baby]

Tbh even statistically you could probably get away with less. You probably don't need to calculate all wackos as many probably are not a problem or empty. Unless your aisle is already a disaster that is.

Ours is already a disaster but my TL doesn't seem to care.

I think part of that is arrogance because he has been a TL for over ten years and thinks he is untouchable.

However I am sure he is a very expensive TL in pay and benefits and needs to realize he could be replaced in a minute.

 

[Mikuhl]

If you're looking at the greenfield list of ghosts and baffles, auditing doesn't make them "go away", because the list is of ghosts and baffles that were created since the last time the list was updated. They only look like they go away because new data was uploaded after you fixed them or not.

If you are talking about the "some" counts, then yeah auditing will make them go away, unless the item is specifically set up to be a non counted item like bullseye playground.

 

[Dream Baby]

If you're looking at the greenfield list of ghosts and baffles, auditing doesn't make them "go away", because the list is of ghosts and baffles that were created since the last time the list was updated. They only look like they go away because new data was uploaded after you fixed them or not.

If you are talking about the "some" counts, then yeah auditing will make them go away, unless the item is specifically set up to be a non counted item like bullseye playground.

We still have backroom locations where the count is "some".

I was told once that used to be that items that vendors stock but no anymore.

 

[Dysprosed]

We still have backroom locations where the count is "some".

I was told once that used to be that items that vendors stock but no anymore.

There is a small list of items coded as NQQ. Or "No Quantity Qualifier." Mostly this is Bullseye, and some miniscule elements of Office Supplies, Video Games, Mobile electronics, and perhaps a few others.

Everything else coded as "some" is more than likely from a previous baffle scan.

 

[BackupTL]

I think part of that is arrogance because he has been a TL for over ten years and thinks he is untouchable.

However I am sure he is a very expensive TL in pay and benefits and needs to realize he could be replaced in a minute.

That's not how TL headcount/payroll works at Target. Expensive or not, the process for firing permanent TMs is very, very long. The process isn't faster just because they're eating up more payroll dollars.

 

[Dream Baby]

That's not how TL headcount/payroll works at Target. Expensive or not, the process for firing permanent TMs is very, very long. The process isn't faster just because they're eating up more payroll dollars.

Explain this a little further.

The process isn't faster just because they're eating up more payroll dollars.

 

[Dysprosed]

Explain this a little further.

The process isn't faster just because they're eating up more payroll dollars.

It's not any easier to fire someone just because they make more money.

 

[BackupTL]

It's not any easier to fire someone just because they make more money.

Yeah, basically. The process for "replacing" them by firing them is just as long as a TL at base pay. Them being "expensive" doesn't change the fact that the process is extremely long.

 

[happygoth]

It's not any easier to fire someone just because they make more money.

Yeah, basically. The process for "replacing" them by firing them is just as long as a TL at base pay. Them being "expensive" doesn't change the fact that the process is extremely long.

I think what @Dream Baby meant (and please correct me if I'm wrong) was that we are all replaceable, even leaders, and that this particular leader is likely highly paid and it would be beneficial to replace him with a lower-paid newbie.

 

[Dream Baby]

Yeah, basically. The process for "replacing" them by firing them is just as long as a TL at base pay. Them being "expensive" doesn't change the fact that the process is extremely long.

I have noticed at my store they tend to fire an TL/ETL then realize they need to replace them!

 

[happygoth]

I have noticed at my store they tend to fire an TL/ETL then realize they need to replace them!

Yeah, they've definitely fired TLs and ETLs at my store without immediately replacing them. Even the store manager. We just operate down a leader, happened many times over in my years in retail. It's foolish for a leader, or anyone really, to think they are untouchable.

The company operated for decades before we came aboard and they will soldier on just fine without us after we are gone. No one is irreplaceable.