Draft Report WMS Selection Guide VERSION 6...The selection of a suitable Warehouse Management Software (WMS) system is a key objective for many companies today. Properly fitting the

20 Park Plaza, Suite 400 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 617.948.2153 • www.commonwealth-sca.com

Page 1 of 29

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/


Page 2 of 29


The selection of a suitable Warehouse Management Software (WMS) system is a key objective for many companies today. Properly fitting the correct software solution to the operation is critical, more so than for many other types of software. Perhaps nowhere else in an organization are business processes more unique to a company than within the four walls of the distribution center.

Warehouses depend on optimized business processes to ship product out on time and with a minimal amount of labor cost.

The right WMS can be the piece of enabling technology that allows companies to achieve these goals and improve profitability. A failed WMS implementation, however, has the potential to put a company out of business in a worst-case scenario. Some companies have also been disappointed to see that their WMS implementation involved more resources than anticipated, and took much more time than budgeted. Additionally, a poorly fitting WMS can cost a significant amount of ongoing money to maintain and upgrade.

Page 2 of 29



Page 3 of 29

20 Park Plaza, Suite 400 • Boston, Massachusetts 02116 617.948.2153 • http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/

Failing to properly select and implement a WMS can have dire consequences – ranging from actual operational shutdown to less severe outcomes.

Generally speaking, there are seven areas where a poorly fitting WMS can negatively impact a company:

Foregoing key items of functionality is one of the most common consequences of

making a poor WMS selection. Companies may define their core functionality fairly well up-front, but fail to define and explore the multitude of “exceptions to the rule” which happen every day. As a result, the WMS fails to accommodate a certain percentage of distribution transactions. The company is forced to develop manual “work-arounds” to process these, and some of the efficiency gains which were projected with the new software fail to materialize.

Loss of Functionality

Page 3 of 29



Page 4 of 29


Companies may do an excellent job of defining their current operational needs and selecting a

warehousing system that will accommodate them. However, in today’s dynamic business climate, companies’ distribution requirements may change significantly over a period of just a few years. Additional sales channels, an increased need for value-added services, and new customer or regulatory compliance requirements can all require significant changes in the day-to-day operation of the distribution center. Companies that fail to take these potential future scenarios into account may find themselves stuck with a WMS system that does not offer the functionality required to meet the new challenges. Custom development of features and functionality can be the expense that keeps on taking – the modifications themselves are expensive, and each time the system is upgraded these custom workflows must often be rebuilt.

In a related scenario, companies may find that although their basic business

processes may remain constant over time, their transaction volumes may greatly increase. While this may be the proverbial “good problem to have,” certain WMS systems are not architected to support ultra-high transaction rates. While this problem can sometimes be rectified by hardware upgrades, these come at a price. An even less attractive scenario would involve the wholesale replacement of the WMS with a system that runs on a completely different software platform (i.e. Windows/Unix/i-series).

An opposite scenario occurs when companies over-buy and pay more for a system that has far more features

than their business will ever need. This can occur when a purchasing company fails to involve a broad enough spectrum of vendors in the selection process. Sometimes, executives may think back to a previous WMS selection they were involved in some years ago, and invite the same basic group of vendors to the table, assuming that their needs can only be met by this group of providers. Despite the consolidation in WMS developers that has occurred over the last decade, a number of newer players have also entered the marketplace with fresh solutions and architectures. Failure to evaluate the right range of providers can cause companies to overpay. Another scenario that can occur is that a company may select a system that is a good

Constrained Growth

Loss of Flexibility

Over Paying

Page 4 of 29




Page 5 of 29


operational fit, but may fail to negotiate well with their solution provider and end up getting the right product, but over-paying for it.

Source-code modification is expensive – both now and later.

Sometimes these modifications, or “mods,” as they are often termed, are inevitable in order to meet the business requirements. However, companies that might have made their peace with the initial cost of such code changes may be dismayed to see that these changes are required every time an upgrade or process change is called for. Failure to understand the business needs is often at the root of this problem. Even if the lack of understanding was on the part of the WMS provider, and the user-company is able to get that provider to cover the cost of the initial code modifications, the user company will almost surely bear the cost of future upgrades.

Often when the WMS is misaligned with business needs,

the configuration and testing period of the implementation can take much longer than initially planned. If the WMS implementation is tied to some critical enterprise event – a new facility opening, or one closing – these software delays can become extremely expensive. Even if this is not the case, a delayed implementation can cause a company to miss out on efficiency gains and cost savings which could have occurred much earlier.

On some occasions, WMS implementations have actually failed,

with catastrophic results to the company. Product may fail to ship on time, or fail to ship at all. Orders can be cancelled, and customers can be lost. The WMS and accounting systems may not be properly integrated, causing clients to be improperly invoiced. Inventory may not be properly updated, wreaking havoc with procurement. Companies in this situation must devote a significant amount of internal and external resources to remediating the problem on an emergency basis, thus impacting profitability on both ends of the equation.

Excessive Upgrade Costs

Delayed Implementation

Failed Implementation




Page 6 of 29

Page 5 of 29

Avoiding Failure & Maximizing Result

As we have seen, the majority of sub-optimal WMS implementations can be traced to a failure to follow a thorough and detailed software selection process - companies fail to properly define their requirements up-front in the race to get a solution implemented. Other times, they fail to consider the full range of options available to them from a variety of types of software providers.

Failure to perform due diligence in the selection process can have operational consequences for many years to come.

Conversely, however, a properly administered process can provide a company with a WMS solution that will improve operational efficiency and be a platform for growth long into the future.Commonwealth Supply Chain Advisors practices a methodology for selecting software that has had proven results in the real world.

This report will outline the major components to this process and should serve as a useful guide to any company seeking to achieve best in class results by implementing Warehouse Management Software.



Page 7 of 29

The steps required to take a WMS project from concept to selection can generally be split into two broad phases: A Distribution Process Optimization component where processes are architected in an objective environment free of vendor influence, followed by WMS Vendor Selection where the right vendor is matched to operational needs.

This whitepaper, the first in a two-part series, will focus on Phase I: Distribution Process Optimization. Part two covers Phase II: WMS Vendor Selection. Prior to beginning the Distribution Process Optimization phase, a company should create a cross-functional Project Steering Committee, with representatives from Operations, IT, Inventory, Sales, Accounting, and other major functions participating. Additionally, one or more Executive Sponsors, who are responsible for providing support and making decisions at major project milestones, should be defined.




Page 8 of 29

There is a saying that “expensive new technology + bad processes = expensive bad processes” – and nowhere is this truer than in the distribution center. A first step in any WMS selection project must be to conduct a Distribution Process Optimization exercise. Companies who take this step sometimes find that they can delay the purchase of an expensive WMS system by months or years, and instead focus on internal process improvements to achieve significant savings.

As noted, the Distribution Process Optimization phase is executed largely free of any vendor participation. Its goal is to define the company’s needs in as much detail as possible and to create a framework within which potential solution providers can be evaluated.

Commonwealth’s process involves six (6) basic steps in this phase:




Page 9 of 29

Perhaps the most important way to ensure a successful WMS project is to begin by thoroughly understanding the operational requirements. This may sound like a self-evident statement, but most failed WMS implementations can be traced back to a team of project leaders who only had a surface-level understanding of the needs of the distribution center, and were either unwilling, or unable to do the hard work of digging into the details of how things really work on the “other side of the wall.”

It is appropriate, therefore, that our first step in the process of selecting a new WMS begins with “Discovery” – or, in some cases, “re-Discovery” of the day-to-day requirements of the distribution center.




Page 10 of 29

An effective discovery process consists of the following tasks: Kickoff Meeting This involves assembling all key stakeholders to review the project tasks, timetable, and roles and responsibilities. Another key component of the project kickoff is a thorough “future visioning session” to document the various changes which could impact the business over the lifecycle of the software system which is being selected.

Detailed Process Observation This task involves taking the detailed descriptions of processes from the interview stage and comparing them to how the processes are observed to work in the distribution center. This task involves actually watching processes like picking and packing, and sometimes following an inbound and outbound order through its lifecycle in the warehouse. This observation often affords an opportunity to talk to workers who may have additional details of how processes work, and exceptions to the rule which must be accommodated by the software.

These interviews are often most effective when conducted in an organized way. Commonwealth suggests that these be held in a conference room as opposed to on the warehouse floor, where notes can be more easily taken and thorough documentation can be created. The following key staff members should generally be interviewed:

Personnel Interviews

• Warehouse manager • Receiving manager • Shipping manager • Transportation/logistics manager

• Inventory control • Manufacturing/production

manager (if applicable) • Procurement/purchasing




Page 11 of 29

Document IT Architecture & Infrastructure This task involves discussing the various software systems in use and their relationships to each other. It is important to document which systems and versions are in use, and what key functionality is handled by each. Interface points should be mapped (what data elements are exchanged between systems, how frequently, and in what format). Preferences that the IT group may have for databases, programming languages, and operating systems should be noted.

Analyze Operational Data This task involves reviewing key operational data and identifying patterns which will help in subsequent steps when improved processes must be designed. Key data reports which are often reviewed at this time include:

• Outbound order volumes, average and peak • Typical order profiles by order type • Typical inbound purchase order profiles



Page 12 of 29

The “Define Current State” step involves documenting the learnings from the Discovery step in a way that allows them to be used in subsequent phases. The detailed descriptions of operational requirements serve as the foundational building blocks which are used in numerous aspects of the project, right through software go-live, including: developing a Request for Proposal (RFP) for software vendors, ensuring functional alignment during implementation, developing and executing test scripts, developing and implementing a training program, and performing mock go-lives and data conversion.

Use Flow Charts Judiciously Many companies choose to use flow-charts to document their business processes. Flow-charts can provide very useful representations of the interrelationship of process steps and decision points at a high level, and Commonwealth often uses them for this purpose. However, it is important to acknowledge that there are also many limitations to flow charts. Flow charts cannot easily represent granular details of how processes work: when too much detail is input into a flow chart, it becomes busy, hard to follow, and requires a very large piece of paper if the flow chart is printed!

Flow charts make very poor living documents. Many of the people who need to review and interact with the flow charts may not be proficient in using the flow charting software, and when process must be added or modified, it can be challenging for multiple users to try to format the various bubbles, shapes, and arrows in a consistent way.

It is fair to point out that a purely text-based narrative of an operational process flow can also have limitations and may be hard to follow. Relationships between steps and logic branches can be hard to describe.

Many companies find that the right balance here lies in creating a general outline of the major processes and logical branches using a flow chart with numbered boxes. Then, a more detailed text-based write-up can be created which references the flow chart and uses a consistent numbering scheme.



Page 13 of 29

Create the Detailed Process Specification, Current State

Because of the need to re-use these process descriptions for so many purposes, Commonwealth believes that they must be documented in a format that lends itself well to editing, evolving, and re-purposing. Commonwealth has had good experience using a spreadsheet format where every detail of each step is assigned to a line on the spreadsheet. Most business workers have some degree of proficiency in using spreadsheet applications, and spreadsheets can be easily supplemented or modified without the need for extensive formatting changes. Spreadsheets can also be more readily adapted for other purposes (such as the creation of test scripts) when compared to flow charts or other types of documents.

Commonwealth recommends that the following tasks be performed when defining the current state:

Create detailed descriptions of current processes using a Detailed Process Specification spreadsheet:

• Standard processes: Define the “normal” ways that the processes work 80% - 90% of the time.

• Exception processes: Define all of the various “exceptions to the rule” which take place. Where most WMS systems end up having functionality gaps is usually in the area of exception handling, so it is vital that these be properly documented.

• Common operator errors and resolution paths: Define the most common mistakes which currently are made in the distribution center, and the paths which are followed to resolve these today.

Review current processes and flag discussion items: • Line-by-line audit: This audit is typically performed offline by process

owners with a high degree of detail. • Approval required by each business process owner: Each process owner

must initial each line item on the Detailed Process Specification spreadsheet, and indicate either their agreement with it, or specify any changes or corrections which must be made.

• Discussion items are flagged: Any areas requiring further discussion are highlighted and flagged.



Page 14 of 29

Review processes and finalize Detailed Process Specification for current state:

• This step takes place in a group setting in a conference room. All discussion points which were flagged in the offline process reviews are discussed in a group, and the group agrees on the final wording of descriptions for each step.

Notice Information Flow

As this process unfolds, it is important to pay special attention to the manner in which information flows to and from users:

Do users have to read data off of a paper document?

Must they look it up in a fixed computer terminal?

Is it available on a wireless mobile device?

Do users confirm tasks visually?

Do they make written notes?

Be sure to capture the work behind the scenes if administrative staff have to key data into software systems after the warehouse work is done. Once the Detailed Process Specification spreadsheet is complete, revisit the exceptions again! Circulate the document to key staff members and ensure that no exception, no matter how small, has been left off.



Page 15 of 29

Designing the processes which will be used in the future state of the distribution center is one of the most critical areas of the entire Distribution Process Optimization phase, and both an art and a science.

Data Analysis The solution to certain process issues may seem obvious; in other cases, further research must be done to identify the best way to rectify problems. A review of summary operational data is usually warranted at this stage. For example, in order to determine if a company should implement high-performance distribution processes like cluster picking or batch picking, the company must thoroughly analyze key order metrics such as average lines per order, line item commonality, and pick-to-put ratios. Only then can complex solutions be properly evaluated.

Benchmarking

Conducting a basic benchmarking assessment early on is a good way to determine the level of improvement which may be attained, and the degree to which processes should be re-designed. Companies that are already best-in-class in many categories may decide to only make minor modifications to their processes rather than the riskier wholesale re-engineering that laggard companies may need to do. Companies should list the important metrics which define success in their distribution center, and then research how their performance compares to that of other companies.

The Value of Outsider Perspective It can be immensely helpful at this stage to gain some outside perspective into what best-in-class companies are doing to address similar situations. Supply chain consulting firms such as Commonwealth Supply Chain




Page 16 of 29

Advisors, and others, have a tremendous breadth of experience from seeing hundreds or thousands of other distribution operations.

Experienced advisors can help with the all-important task of separating what is possible from what is practical. There are numerous sources where lists of industry “best practices” can be found. However, not all companies need to implement best practices in all areas of their operations. To do so may be prohibitively expensive, and may not be cost justifiable in all situations. Experienced advisors can help sort out the changes which make the most sense for a given operation.

Perform Future Visioning As important as it is to properly define and re-engineer the current business processes, failing to take into account future changes can hamstring an organization for years to come. To properly assess the potential impact of these changes, it is important to conduct an Future Visioning Session. Attending this session should be the entire Project Steering Committee, the Executive Sponsor(s), and C-level executives from various functional areas who are involved in long-term business planning. Some of the key questions which should be asked during the Future Visioning Session are:

What levels of organic growth are projected?

What will be the nature of this growth? Will it involve greater sales of the same SKUs to the same clients? Greater sales of the same SKUs to new clients? Greater sales of new SKUs to new clients?

Are there other sales channels the company is exploring? Will the company begin to sell to larger retailers with vendor compliance mandates? Is the company planning to begin or ramp-up a direct-to-consumer channel?

What is the trend with regards to order profiles? Are customers placing smaller, more frequent orders?

To what extent does SKU proliferation affect the enterprise?

Is the company contemplating any mergers or acquisitions that will have a material impact on the operation?

Is the company planning to target new geographic markets?

Is the company planning to source product differently?



Page 17 of 29

What pending regulatory changes will affect the operation?

The operations group must then consider the potential impact of any of these changes on the distribution center processes. The key changes anticipated in the Future Visioning Session should then be incorporated into the Detailed Process Specification, Future State.

Create the Business Process Review Committee Once the data analysis, benchmarking and future visioning have been performed, and outside perspective has been obtained, it is time to start the work of designing the new processes. A vital first step here is to create the Business Process Review Committee.

This group should be made up of executives, managers and supervisors, and at least some of the rank-and-file workers who will be responsible for actually using the new processes. Executives can often bring vital perspective to the table: rather than thinking in terms of “this is how we’ve always done it,” some executives or even managers and supervisors may have experience with best practices at other companies and can help the group understand other ways of doing things.

It is also vital that the workers themselves feel vested in the process. It will not be possible to please everyone with every process design, but if workers are genuinely listened to and made a part of the process, then they will tend to be more supportive of the changes, even if some of the new processes are not designed exactly as they would have chosen.

Create the Detailed Process Specification, Future State Using the same spreadsheet format as for the current state documentation, re-create the business processes as they will occur in the future state.

• Re-design inefficient process • Leave good process intact

If the exceptions to the rules have been thoroughly accounted for when defining the current state, then they can serve as a useful guide to ensure that nothing has been overlooked when designing the future state. When the documentation is complete, each step should be reviewed, discussed, and approved, line-by-line, by the Business Process Review Committee.



Page 18 of 29

Determine Integration Strategy Thus far, this phase has primarily involved operational resources. However, once the operational requirements have been defined, it is important to involve the IT group to begin to map out the more technical characteristics of the solution which is pursued. The IT group will be responsible for integrating the new software with the company’s existing software systems, as well as maintaining and supporting the solution internally. WMS systems must often interface with a number of different host systems, including ERP, MRP, POS, TMS, and accounting software, as well as any material handling control systems like Warehouse Control Software (WCS) and Warehouse Execution Software (WES) systems.

Related Content: WMS vs WCS – Sorting out the Truth from the Hype

Some of the key questions for the IT group to consider at this phase of the project are:

• What operating system is preferred? (Windows, Unix, I-series, etc.) • What deployment architecture is desired? (Client-server, Web-based,

Software-as-a-Service, etc.) • What database is preferred? (Oracle, DB2, SQL, etc.) • Does the IT group desire a solution with open source code to allow them

to make extensive modifications? (many WMS companies do not allow this)

• Is the IT group ready to take on the task of creating a series of interfaces between their host systems and a 3rd-party WMS? How much effort do they feel this might entail?

• What other IT projects are scheduled for the next 24 months which may divert resources from this project?

• Does the IT group prefer to implement a WMS which is a module of their ERP system in order to minimize the amount of interface work that is required?

• How will the system ultimately be supported? Will the IT group take responsibility for creating new workflows as these are needed, and making code changes when required? Or will they depend on the WMS provider or third-party integrator to perform these tasks?

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resources/wms-vs-wes-vs-wcs-sorting-out-the-truth-from-the-hype/



Page 19 of 29

Building Bridges Early Many companies experience a significant disconnect between the IT and Operations department, and this disconnect can create problems during a complex software implementation. Bridging some of these gaps early in the process can be vital for the future success of the project. Involving the IT groups up-front in this phase is a good way to achieve this internal cohesiveness.



Page 20 of 29

Before any new processes can be advocated, a company must first know the business implications associated with adopting them. This involves identifying and dollarizing the key areas where financial savings can be achieved.

Labor Savings A key area where most companies cost-justify a WMS purchase is in direct labor savings. To this end, it is important to properly allocate labor, or, determine the amount of labor required to perform each task in the distribution center. There are many methods to do this. Perfect precision is usually not required here, so companies will generally not need to resort to engineered time studies at this stage. The goal is to determine in a typical day the number of man-hours required to execute each major type of transaction, based first on the current state processes.

Then, in the same manner that labor was allocated to current processes, labor also needs to be projected for the future processes. The same spreadsheet approach is often sufficient here as well. Estimate the amount of future labor which is required to execute each task. Sometimes it can be helpful to model pick travel paths and assess the amount of labor required in a typical day with the new processes compared to the old. Some third-party pick-path modeling tools are available that can construct a rudimentary model of this data that is less precise than a true time-study, but more than sufficient for these purposes.

Estimated labor savings can often be “sanity checked” by looking at industry benchmarks in areas which lend themselves well to comparison across companies, such as “lines picked per hour per worker.” Projected savings from process re-engineering can be compared to typical productivity rates which other companies have realized, and a realistic estimate of labor savings can be achieved.




Page 21 of 29

Accuracy Savings It is also important at this stage to try to quantify the savings which can be achieved from improved customer service. What is the true cost to rectify a miss-shipment? How often do these errors lead to lost business? If a company ships to major retailers, how much do they spend annually on charge-backs due to non-compliant shipments?

Space Savings A less common area where WMS systems can lead to operational savings is in the area of space utilization. WMS systems can help companies improve their slotting and “right-size” bins in the warehouse. This can often lead to compressed storage footprints and more efficient use of space. Under some circumstances, it makes sense to include space savings in the financial justification for a new WMS. In Commonwealth’s opinion, however, these savings should only be included if (a) they are directly attributable to the new WMS, and not some other technology, and (b) the space which is saved can be directly monetized, i.e. by reducing the need to pay for outside storage space or delaying a facility expansion.

Inventory Savings A case can also be made that WMS system can help reduce inventory in some instances. Often the additional data that a WMS can collect on handling steps and the number of times a product is touched during its lifecycle in the distribution center can be used to raise awareness of true inventory carrying costs and can help build the case for more efficient inventory management processes.

All of these factors must be taken into account for each area of the warehouse which is being considered. The output of this step is a projected annualized operational savings for each category.



Page 22 of 29

Other Financial Considerations Of course, not all companies deploy new WMS systems with the primary goal of achieving operational savings. Other common reasons for implementing WMS include:

• Scalability: Enabling new processes which will allow the company to grow more quickly than otherwise would be possible.

• Revenue growth: A new WMS system may allow the company to offer new services such as e-commerce distribution which would have been difficult to do without technology.

• Supportability: Many companies may have functioning WMS systems that support the business needs, but which are legacy system that are no longer easily supportable. They may have been internally developed, and the resources who understand the code base and architecture may be growing fewer every year. Implementing a new WMS may be critical to an ongoing risk-mitigation plan.

While these other considerations

may be harder to “dollarize,” they

should be factored into the

financial justification for a new

WMS in some way.



Page 23 of 29

Determine the Solution Budget Now that the company has a sense of the potential savings which are available, they must next determine how much they are willing to invest to achieve those savings. A good starting point is to ask what payback period is acceptable on the investment. Multiplying this payback period by the projected annual savings can establish a rudimentary budgetary figure for the maximum the company wants to spend on a solution. Companies shouldn’t forget ongoing costs as well – most WMS providers charge anywhere from 18% to 22% of the software license fee as a recurring annual support cost to keep the system current and rectify problems.

Solicit Feedback from Potential WMS Vendors The cost of implementing WMS software can vary tremendously based upon factors like operational complexity, degree of customization, and user and site count. Experienced resources who have participated in multiple implementations over many years can often help estimate the general costs associated with the project.

However, in order to get an estimate that is precise enough to satisfy most internal financial review processes, it is usually important to have dialogue on some level with actual WMS vendors. At this stage of the process, it is not usually advisable to embark on a full vendor selection study which can take many months of work. However, conducting an abbreviated “feasibility” analysis process can often be effective at this phase. The major steps to a feasibility analysis include:

Create a Challenging Functionality Matrix In software implementations, the Pareto principle often applies: 80% of the problems are caused by 20% of the process requirements. In order to have any degree of confidence in a vendor’s costing quote, the vendor must be made well aware of “the 20%” and factor this into their pricing estimate.


Page 24 of 29

To facilitate this, list the processes which the company believes will be the most challenging for a new WMS to accommodate. This is not the full Detailed Process Specification, but a small subset of ten or twenty key process at most, which are expected to be most difficult to achieve from a software perspective. These are compiled into a small spreadsheet which lists them in a concise format, called the Challenging Functionality Matrix. Next to each line item of functionality, vendors must indicate whether this feature is available as standard functionality, or whether it requires extensive configuration or customization to achieve.

Identify Vendors The company next identifies five or six potential WMS vendors to share the Challenging Functionality Matrix with. If the company chooses to proceed later with a full WMS vendor selection process, they will not be limited to only use the five or six vendors chosen for the feasibility analysis. These vendors should represent a range of vendor types, from Tier 1 to mid-tier vendors, as well as specialty vendors who may have a focus on the particular industry type in question. It is important to understand the basic pricing and functional capabilities that each vendor can provide.

Vendors Complete the Challenging Functionality Matrix Vendors review the Challenging Functionality Matrix and indicate where their software must be customized to accommodate this functionality. Vendors complete a Budgetary Request for Proposal and indicate approximate cost of their software with implementation. It is important to remember again that this is not a full WMS Vendor Selection Study. Vendors should spend no more than a couple of days completing this information, not the weeks of time which will be required later on.

Don’t Ignore Current Software The same Challenging Functionality Matrix should also be distributed and reviewed with the support team for the existing software platform. If one of the options under consideration is retaining or upgrading this software, then it will be important to have an estimate of the cost and level of effort required to do this.



Page 25 of 29

Once the cost savings and other benefits have been dollarized, and the cost of new software has been estimated, then it is possible to compile a well-rounded business case which examines the various options which are available to a company. In most cases, at least three, possibly four scenarios should be considered:

• Do nothing: Keep the current software and make no changes to it. • Customize current software: Continue to customize the current software

by modifying the source code as required. • Upgrade: Perform a formal upgrade of the current software system to the

current release. • Replace: Implement a WMS system from a new vendor.

There are a variety of criteria to consider when evaluating each of these possible scenarios. Some of the major factors include:

• Operational benefits o Cost savings o Scalability o Supportability

• Capital investment required to implement the software • Level of effort required internally to implement the software • Degree of customization and overall IT complexity required • Degree of risk involved if the implementation does not go as planned

All of these factors must be properly analyzed and compared for each scenario. For some scenarios, there will be a range of potential outcomes. For example, a new WMS from a Tier 1 vendor may be very expensive but not require as much customization as a solution from a mid-tier vendor which could be less expensive but less feature-rich.




Page 26 of 29


The process outlined in Part I of this report is designed to take a team to the point where they can present a coherent business case to executive management to implement a strategy with regards to their Warehouse Management Software.

If the outcome of that endeavor is that the company decides to proceed with replacing their Warehouse Management Software, then a full WMS Vendor Selection Study is required to determine the optimal software partner to work with. Part II of this report will discuss the Solution Selection Phase in detail.

Page 27 of 29




Page 27 of 29

Commonwealth Supply Chain Advisor’s website (http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resource-library) has an extensive library of free whitepapers on supply chain strategy, distribution optimization and design, and transportation optimization. Below are a few on WMS topics.

Whitepaper: The Ultimate WMS Preparation Guidebook

Whitepaper: Selecting the Right WMS

Whitepaper: Six Tips to Avoid a Failed WMS Implementation

Article: A Tier 1 Warehouse Management System – When to Consider…and When to Be Cautious

Article: Task Interleaving: Critical Functionality for Pallet Handling Operations

Article: Do You Really Need to Replace Your WMS? Article: SaaS WMS – A Look under the Hood

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resources/the-ultimate-wms-preparation-guidebook/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resources/selecting-the-right-wms/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resources/6tips-to-avoid-wms-implementation-failure/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/tier-1-warehouse-management-system/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/task-interleaving-critical-functionality-for-pallet-handling-operations/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/do-you-really-need-to-replace-your-wms/

http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/saas_wms_cost_comparison/



http://www.commonwealth-sca.com/resource-library


Page 28 of 29

About the Author

Ian Hobkirk Mr. Hobkirk is the founder and President of Commonwealth Supply Chain Advisors. Over his 24-year career, he has helped hundreds of companies reduce their distribution labor costs, improve space utilization, and meet their customer service objectives. He has formed supply chain

consulting organizations for two different systems integration firms, and managed the supply chain execution practice at The Aberdeen Group, a leading technology analyst firm. His career has provided him with a broad perspective on how to solve supply chain problems without automatically resorting to expensive technology. Mr. Hobkirk has authored dozens of white papers on supply chain topics, and his opinions have been featured in publications such as DC Velocity, Modern Materials Handling, Supply Chain Management Review, The Journal of Commerce and The Wall Street Journal.

About Commonwealth Supply Chain Advisors

Commonwealth is a supply chain consulting firm that provides companies with the technical expertise and objective guidance required to design, implement and operate successful distribution centers. The firm is recognized as one of the “Top 100 Great Supply Chain Partners,” by Supply Chain Brain, for consistently making a significant impact on its clients’ supply chain efficiency, customer service and overall performance. Commonwealth is based in Boston and works with clients across the globe.




Page 29 of 29

Boston Headquarters www.commonwealth-sca.com 20 Park Plaza, Suite 400 Boston, MA 02116 617.948.2153

Cincinnati Office 822 Delta Ave, Suite 3 Cincinnati, OH 45208 513.533.0139




Documents

Draft Report WMS Selection Guide VERSION 6...The selection of a suitable Warehouse Management Software (WMS) system is a key objective for many companies today. Properly fitting the