1. Merchandise Unlimited
UPS Truck Crew Process Evaluation
Final Report
Evaluation Team: Eboni DuBose, Perri Kennedy, and Chester Stevenson
IPT 530 Evaluation Methodology
Boise State University
Spring 2011

2. Table of Contents
Preliminaries ................................................................................................................................... 2
I. Executive Summary .................................................................................................................. 2
II. Preface ..................................................................................................................................... 4
III. Methodology .......................................................................................................................... 5
Foundations .................................................................................................................................... 6
1. Background and Context ......................................................................................................... 6
2. Descriptions and Definitions ................................................................................................... 7
3. Stakeholders .......................................................................................................................... 12
4. Resources .............................................................................................................................. 12
5. Dimensions of Merit and Importance Weighting ................................................................. 14
Sub-Evaluations............................................................................................................................. 15
6. Process Evaluations ............................................................................................................... 15
7. Exportability .......................................................................................................................... 17
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................... 18
8. Overall Significance ............................................................................................................... 18
9. Recommendations ................................................................................................................ 21
Reporting ................................................................................................................................... 23
References .................................................................................................................................... 24
Appendix A: MU UPS Receiving Process Assessment Rubrics with Criteria Highlighting ............. 25
Appendix B: Summary of Ratings with Rationale ......................................................................... 28
Appendix C: Data Sources for Instrument Dimension .................................................................. 29
Appendix D: Data Sources for Workspace Dimension .................................................................. 31
Appendix E: Data Sources for Process Management Dimension ................................................. 34
Appendix F: Sub-dimension Weighting of Importance by Stakeholders ...................................... 38
Appendix G: Scoring Rubrics for MU UPS Receiving Process Evaluation ..................................... 39
1

3. Preliminaries
I. Executive Summary
Introduction
Merchandise Unlimited (MU, pseudonym), a merchandise distribution company based in the
Midwestern region of the United States, had not examined the processes and resources in
place to receive inbound shipments for at least a decade. The Director of Operations and the
Operations Manager requested a formative evaluation to both establish how well the inbound
receiving process (hereinafter referred to as “evaluand.”)should function and discover how well
it actually does function.
In the spring of 2011, three graduate students (hereinafter referred to as “evaluation team”)
from Boise State University’s Instructional & Performance Technology program were asked to
conduct an evaluation of the inbound receiving process. The stakeholders asked for the
evaluation team to look specifically at the 10-person truck crew (hereinafter referred to as “UPS
Truck Crew”) which offloads and sorts inbound shipments of used and returned merchandise
which were delivered via the United Parcel Service (UPS). The evaluation team created
assessment rubrics based on industry best practices and the needs of MU, and then examined
the practices and resources in place.
Methodology
The evaluation team conducted a formative goal-based evaluation structured on Scriven’s
(2007) Key Evaluation Checklist. It was designed to examine the current state of the UPS
receiving process and how it could be improved. After discussions with the stakeholders, the
evaluation team focused on three dimensions:
Instruments
Workspace
Process Management
Each dimension was weighted based on the stakeholders’ consensus determination of its
importance (Important, Very Important, or Extremely Important). The evaluation team created
an assessment rubric based on warehousing best practices, and then compared the current
processes and resources in use by the UPS Truck Crew to the assessment rubric.
Conclusions
Using a 5-point scale (Poor, Mediocre, Acceptable, Very Good, and Excellent), the overall
quality of the UPS receiving process is rated “Acceptable” for current organizational needs.
However, the evaluation team concluded that the current set of processes and resources may
not be sufficient to handle future needs. A major concern is that Process Management,
weighted as Extremely Important by the stakeholders, was rated as “Mediocre” when
2

4. compared to industry best practices. The overall evaluand rating and dimensions with ratings
and weighting are shown in Table 1.
Rating
Overall

Evaluand
Dimension Weighting
Instruments  Important
Very
Workspace 
Important
Process Extremely

Management Important
Poor Mediocre Acceptable Very Good Excellent
Table 1. MU UPS Truck Crew Receiving Process Evaluation Results
Strengths
Based on the evidence gathered, the evaluation team noted the following strengths of the UPS
receiving process:
Equipment in use is well maintained and sufficient to maintain current operation levels.
Space is utilized as well as possible given its limitations.
The supervisor and members of the UPS Truck Crew are capable, experienced, and work
together as a cohesiveness unit.
Opportunities for Improvement
Based on the evidence gathered, the evaluation team made the following recommendations to
the stakeholders:
Develop and document a standardized operating procedure to ensure that tacit
knowledge is not lost and that new hires receive consistent on-the-job training.
Develop performance metrics to drive continual process improvements.
Develop a standardized package labeling system for use by retail and individual
customers.
Examine all options for increasing floor space.
Evaluate existing hardware for possible replacement or upgrades to meet future needs.
Look into a possible redundancy in the initiation process, and consider the options for
having initiation performed at the next stage of the receiving process.
3

5. II. Preface
Background
Merchandise Unlimited, a merchandise distribution company based in the Midwestern region
of the United States, had substantially upgraded and modernized much of its warehouse
operations in recent years. However, the processes and resources in place to receive inbound
shipments had not been updated or even examined for at least a decade.
In January 2011, the Director of Operations and the Operations Manager of Merchandise
Unlimited requested an evaluation of the processes in use by the receiving department, which
handles all inbound shipments delivered to the company’s warehouse. Although other
warehouse processes had been assessed and improved, the receiving functions had not been
evaluated for many years.
The stakeholders asked for the evaluation to look specifically at the receiving process
conducted by the UPS Truck Crew, a 10-person workgroup which handles overstock and used
merchandise shipped back, via UPS, to MU in individual non-palletized packages. The volume of
shipments handled by this crew ranges from 1,500 to 3,500 packages each working day.
The Director of Operations and the Operations Manager stated that they planned to adopt any
recommendations which, in their judgment, will be both feasible and cost-effective to
implement within the next two years.
Evaluation Focus
This evaluation examined the merit of the UPS receiving process. The Director of Operations
and the Operations Manager wanted to assess the intrinsic quality of the UPS receiving process
and see how it compared to industry best practices. The purpose of the evaluation was to
develop the definition of merit for the receiving process, as the company had never established
any benchmarks or ideals of performance.
Evaluation Type
This project was developed as a formative evaluation, as the stakeholders wanted to
understand the current level of performance and what changes to the process or environment
could improve that performance. Formative evaluation is defined as one “typically conducted
during the development or improvement of a program… and it is conducted, often more than
once, for the in-house staff of the program with the intent to improve” (Scriven, 1991, pp. 168-
169).
Audience
This evaluation report was created for the Director of Operations, the Operations Manager, the
Inbound Manager, the UPS Truck Crew Supervisor, and the Vice President of Human Resources.
4

6. III. Methodology
Evaluation Approach
When the evaluation project was proposed, the stakeholders had a general goal of improving
efficiency in the UPS receiving process; they defined efficiency as the speed, accuracy, and cost-
effectiveness of the overall process. However, no performance targets or ideals for the
receiving department had ever been defined nor was any system in place to measure speed,
accuracy or cost-effectiveness. Without any existing metrics against which to compare current
performance, it was impossible to determine efficiency based on the stakeholders’ definition.
After discussing this with the stakeholders, the evaluation team agreed to instead develop an
assessment rubric based on industry best practices and then evaluate how the UPS receiving
process compared to those best practices.
The evaluation framework was based on Scriven’s (2007) Key Evaluation Checklist (KEC), which
outlined a systemic examination of both processes and outcomes. Due to the lack of existing
metrics, this evaluation was conducted strictly as a process evaluation which would examine
the procedures and resources currently in use by the UPS Truck Crew. The methodology used
was a goal-based dimensional evaluation of the evaluand’s absolute merit, in that the
evaluation team identified dimensions of merit for the evaluand and then examined how the
procedures and resources utilized in each dimension compared to the best practices defined in
the assessment rubric.
To develop the assessment rubric, the evaluation team researched best practices for
warehouse receiving departments to determine ideal processes and identify key issues to
examine. The evaluation team also documented the current procedures and environment in
place to look for strengths and weaknesses in actual practice. The evaluation team developed
its assessment rubric based on industry best practices compiled by Supply Chain Visions and
sponsored by the Warehousing Education and Research Council (WERC). The evaluation team
then hosted a focus group with the Operations Manager, Inbound Manager, and the UPS Truck
Crew Supervisor to discuss the key elements of warehousing best practices. Some proposed
dimensions were eliminated as not relevant or not of sufficient importance. The remaining
dimensions were then shaped into a set of assessment rubrics which the evaluation team used
to identify the areas of greatest opportunity for improvement. The process assessment rubrics
are included as Appendix A.
Data Collection Methods
The evaluation team used a combination of data collection methods including interviews,
extant data, and observation. Specific methods used for each dimension of merit are identified
in Appendix C (Instruments), Appendix D (Workspace), and Appendix E (Process Management).
5

7. Foundations
1. Background and Context
Merchandise Unlimited (MU) is a merchandise distribution company based in the Midwestern
region of the United States. MU has been in business in different incarnations for about a
century, and has existed in its current form for nearly four decades. Its primary objective is to
collect and distribute new and used products and ship them to its customers at the lowest cost
possible. MU’s single warehouse is in operation 24 hours a day, five days a week to receive,
sort, and distribute more than 20 million pieces of merchandise each year to both individual
consumers and the company’s 2,500+ retail clients. For many years, the primary concern of
warehouse management has been how fast products are shipped to the company’s customers,
so almost all efforts at efficiency and modernization have been focused on this area. The
current sorting and distribution areas of the warehouse make extensive use of modern
technology, including robotics and 3-D scanning, to ensure that products are shipped accurately
and rapidly.
Management has recently turned its focus on how fast products are brought into the building, a
process that has not been re-evaluated in over a decade. Out of all the products received in the
warehouse, approximately 75% are delivered by a single carrier, UPS. The operations
department would like to evaluate the existing UPS receiving process to improve inefficiencies
and reduce costs.
The stakeholders asked the evaluation team to conduct the first evaluation by focusing on the
10-person workgroup (the UPS Truck Crew) which handles offloading, sorting, and initiating
individual packages of overstock and used merchandise shipped to the warehouse via UPS; this
crew does not handle packages sent through other carriers, nor does it handle palletized loads.
This merchandise includes both retail store overstock and returns from individual customers.
The packages are classified by the UPS Truck Crew as large or small.
Large packages: Shipments from retail customers
Small packages: Shipments from individual customers, or internal mail
Constraints
Seasonal Fluctuations
Due to the nature of its business, MU experiences predictable and significant seasonal
fluctuations in both shipping and receiving merchandise through its warehouse. During normal
6

8. times, the UPS Truck Crew may offload and sort 1,000-1,500 packages daily, most of which are
picked up by the receiving departments that same day. During seasonal peak times, the crew
may process as many as 3,500 packages daily; since the receiving departments cannot handle
this inbound volume immediately, the UPS Truck Crew must store the packages for later pickup.
Warehouse Space
The UPS Truck Crew’s assigned space was sufficient a decade ago, when the average daily
volume was approximately 800 packages. However, the average daily volume of packages has
nearly doubled since that time. No additional floor space is available for the crew’s use. The
storage area’s shelves are permanent fixtures which cannot be reconfigured or removed.
2. Descriptions and Definitions
Evaluand Description
The receiving department is broken into four sections:
Truck crews, including the UPS Truck Crew, which unload the inbound shipments
Receiving, which receives large packages from the truck crews
Direct Receiving, which receives small packages from the truck crews
Internal Mail, which receives small packages from the truck crews
The UPS receiving process begins when the UPS truck driver unloads packages from his or her
trailer onto a mechanical roller, which rolls the packages into the building. As each package
comes down the roller, a member of the UPS Truck Crew removes it from the roller and
examines its label. Large packages which are part of a shipment of three or more boxes are
sorted directly onto pallets and then initiated. One- or two-box shipments of large packages are
put on the express belts, initiated, and then sorted onto pallets. All small packages are put on
the express belts, initiated, and then sorted into bins. Large package pallets are picked up by
Receiving, and small package bins are picked up by Direct Receiving or Internal Mail.
During the initiation process, a crew member enters a package’s shipping information into the
warehouse inventory software using a laptop computer. Most package labels include UPS
barcodes, which are scanned using a USB device that feeds a limited amount of package
information into the warehouse inventory software; the crew member must initiate the rest of
the information into the system. During times of normal inbound volume, the pallets and bins
are picked up promptly by the destination department.
7

9. When inbound volume is very high, the UPS Truck Crew moves the pallets into the storage area,
where they may remain for up to two weeks awaiting pickup. A visual representation of this
process is shown in Figure 1.
Packages unloaded by UPS employee from trailer onto mechanical roller
Packages removed from mechanical roller by UPS Truck Crew
Packages sorted by type and placed on wooden pallets (Receiving)
or onto express belts (Direct Receiving and Internal Mail)
Packages initiated into inventory system using laptop computer and handheld scanner
Normal receiving volume: Peak receiving volume:
Pallets (Receiving) and bins (Direct Pallets and bins stored on shelving for
Receiving and Internal Mail) prepared for later pickup
immediate pickup
Pallets and bins picked up by Receiving, Direct Receiving, and Internal Mail employees
Figure 1. MU UPS Truck Crew Receiving Process.
8

10. Process Logic Model
The MU UPS Truck Crew Process Logic Model (see Figure 2) describes the factors and crew
activities involved in the UPS receiving process, what activities the evaluation team performed
in examining the process, and the intended results of the evaluation and subsequent changes
to the process.
Figure 2. MU UPS Truck Crew Receiving Process Logic Model
9

11. Definitions
Table 2 defines terminology used in this report, including evaluation concepts and terms used
by MU for elements involved in the receiving departments.
Absolute Merit The quality or value of something in absolute
terms measured against a defined standard.
Assessment Rubric A tool which provides an evaluative
description of what performance looks like
at each of two or more defined levels.
Dimension of Merit Criteria of merit. These are aspects of an
evaluand that define whether it is good or
bad and whether it is valuable or not.
Dimensional Evaluation An analytical evaluation in which the quality
of the evaluand is determined by looking at
its performance on multiple dimensions
(criteria) of merit.
Direct Receiving The division of the receiving department
which opens small packages and sorts their
contents for processing.
Downstream Impactees Impactees that are not directly affected by
the evaluand.
Evaluand That which is being evaluated (e.g., program,
policy, project, product, service,
organization).
Express Belt A 10-ft long mechanical roller with a
computer and scanner at the end, used to
initiate individual packages.
Formative Evaluation An evaluation conducted for the purpose of
improving a currently operational evaluand
for the purpose of making improvements.
Goal-based Evaluation A type of evaluation based on the goals of
the evaluand.
Inbound Shipments coming into the warehouse from
outside vendors or customers.
Initiating MU terminology for the process of entering
package data into the warehouse inventory
software.
Internal Mail Packages received which are not return
merchandise. These packages are given to
the company’s internal mail facility, which
delivers them to the appropriate recipients.
10

12. Mechanical Roller A non-electrical device consisting of a series
of rollers which is used to transport boxes
from one area to another.
Merit Intrinsic value, quality or significance of the
evaluand.
Overstock Excess merchandise in a store’s inventory,
which may be returned to the vendor.
Package Refers to a box, carton, or other shipping
container received. They are typically
referred to at MU as small or large
depending on their actual size.
Palletize To load packages onto wooden pallets for
transportation or storage.
Primary Consumers Actual or potential users of the evaluand.
Program Logic Model A diagram that illustrates the cause-and-
effect relationships between resources and
activities, and the outcomes and impacts of
the program.
Truck Crew A crew of MU employees which sorts
merchandise as it is unloaded from a truck
into the warehouse.
UPS Receiving Process Refers to the operations involved in
unloading, sorting, and initiating inbound
packages.
UPS Truck Crew The 10-person truck crew which processes
shipments of overstocks and used
merchandise delivered by UPS to the
warehouse. The UPS Truck Crew is the
primary consumer of this evaluand.
Upstream Stakeholders Stakeholders who are involved in the
development, implementation, or
management of the evaluand.
Weight The determination of which evaluation
criteria are the most important.
Table 2. Definitions of Evaluation and MU Terminology
11

13. 3. Stakeholders
This evaluation was concerned with three sets of stakeholders: upstream stakeholders, primary
consumers, and downstream impactees. The stakeholders are listed in Table 3.
Upstream Stakeholders Primary Consumers Downstream Impactees
Director of Operations UPS Truck Crew (n = 10) Immediate Impact
Direct Receiving staff
Operations Manager Receiving staff
Internal Mail staff
Inbound Manager
Secondary Impact
UPS Truck Crew Supervisor Product stockers
Product shippers
Distant Impact
External customers
Clients of external customers
Table 3. MU Stakeholders for the UPS Truck Crew Evaluation.
4. Resources
Financial Resources
The UPS Truck Crew is funded by the organization as part of its Operations division. They
receive whatever funding necessary to perform their required tasks. The upstream stakeholders
stated that they are willing to spend money on changes which they deem likely to increase
efficiency and/or decrease operating costs. The stakeholders will not reduce costs through staff
reductions; if increased efficiency allows for a smaller UPS Truck Crew, extra crew members will
be moved to other parts of Operations rather than be dismissed.
Physical Resources
See Figure 3 for a simplified illustration of the physical layout. The storage area assigned to the
UPS Truck Crew is capable of holding between 65,000 and 75,000 packages on its shelving units.
The storage shelves are permanent fixtures which cannot be removed or reconfigured.
12

14. Figure 3. Layout of MU UPS Truck Crew Receiving Space
Knowledge Resources
The supervisor of the UPS Truck Crew has held this position for 15 years, and five of the ten
crew members have worked there for five or more years. Turnover is modest and not
considered by management to be an issue; morale within the crew appeared to be excellent.
New hires receive on-the-job training in sorting and initiating packages.
Technological Resources
The UPS Truck Crew inputs data from each package label into a laptop computer running
proprietary inventory management software. The software has a command-line interface. It
takes an experienced crew member approximately one minute to type in the data for each
individual package. The laptops in use are old and slow. The shipping labels on some packages
include barcodes, which are scanned using devices which connect to the laptops via a USB
cable. Data incorporated into the barcode is automatically entered into the inventory
management software, but additional data must still be entered manually.
13

15. 5. Dimensions of Merit and Importance Weighting
The evaluation team met several times with the Operations Manager, Inbound Manager, and
UPS Truck Crew Supervisor to refine the focus of the evaluation. When the final dimensions of
merit were selected, the evaluation team conducted a group interview with these three
upstream stakeholders so they could weigh the importance of each dimension using a 3-level
scale (extremely important, very important and important).
The evaluation team then divided each dimension into sub-dimensions, around which it created
an assessment rubric. The dimensions, weighting, and sub-dimensions are shown in Table 4.
Dimension of Merit Dimension Weighting Sub-dimension
Hardware (computerized)
Instruments Important Hardware (non-electronic)
Software
Pallet Layout
Workspace Very Important Utilization of Floor Space
Space Available
Dock Management
Package Labeling
Process Management Extremely Important
Documented Standard Operating Procedures
Metrics
Table 4. MU UPS Truck Crew Evaluation Dimensions, Importance Weighting, and Sub-dimensions
All the dimensions evaluated were process dimensions. The stakeholders had initially requested
an evaluation of outcomes such as speed and accuracy, but it was determined that since no
performance standards had ever been developed or measurement methods implemented,
there was no criteria against which to rate the UPS Truck Crew’s current level of performance.
The stakeholders’ schedules did not allow for a second group interview, so they submitted their
sub-dimension weighting as individuals. The different professional priorities and viewpoints of
the stakeholders were reflected in how differently they weighted some of the sub-dimensions.
As the evaluation team was unable to obtain a consensus on the importance of the sub-
dimensions, only the weighting for the dimensions was used to calculate the final ratings. The
sub-dimension weighting is included as Appendix F for reference.
14

16. Sub-Evaluations
6. Process Evaluations
The entire evaluation was conducted as a process evaluation, and examined three dimensions
of merit:
Instruments
Workspace
Process Management
Instruments
Dimension Evaluation Question: How do the instruments in use by the UPS Truck Crew rate
when compared to industry best practices?
Data Sources: Interviews, observation, extant data
Overall Rating: Acceptable
The instruments dimension examined the tools in use by the UPS Truck Crew in the course of its
operations, and was divided into three sub-dimensions:
1. Hardware (Computerized) – laptop computers, handheld barcode scanners
2. Hardware (Non-Electronic) – forklifts, pallet jacks, conveyors, bins, and other equipment
3. Software – proprietary warehouse inventory system which runs on the laptops and
accepts data from the barcode scanner
An assessment rubric was created to compare the current state of the three sub-dimensions to
industry best practices. See Appendix A for the Instruments Assessment Rubric; the highlighted
text indicates the criteria which best describe the current state of Instruments used by the UPS
Truck Crew.
Workspace
Dimension Evaluation Question: How does the physical workspace in use by the UPS Truck
Crew rate when compared to industry best practices?
Data Sources: Interviews, observation, extant data
Overall Rating: Acceptable
The workplace dimension examined the physical workspace in use by the UPS Truck Crew in the
course of its operations, and was divided into three sub-dimensions:
15

17. 1. Pallet Layout – how pallets are placed on the floor space for efficient sorting
2. Utilization of Floor Space
3. Space Available
An assessment rubric was created to compare the current state of the three sub-dimensions to
industry best practices. See Appendix A for the Workspace Assessment Rubric; the highlighted
text indicates the criteria which best describe the current state of the Workspace as used by the
UPS Truck Crew. Although Workspace is considered “Acceptable” under current conditions,
there is no room for expansion under the current configuration should the volume of inbound
packages continue to increase.
Process Management
Dimension Evaluation Question: How does the process management in use by the UPS Truck
Crew rate when compared to industry best practices?
Data Sources: Interviews, observation, extant data
Overall Rating: Mediocre
The process management dimension examined the management of operating processes in use
by the UPS Truck Crew in the course of its operations, and was divided into four sub-
dimensions:
1. Dock Management – scheduling of deliveries and commitment to unload times
2. Package Labeling – external labeling on packages to indicate shipment type, package
contents, and quantity of individual packages in shipment
3. Documentation of Standard Operating Procedures (DSOP)
4. Metrics – defined standards of performance against which actual performance can be
measured
An assessment rubric was created to compare the current state of the four sub-dimensions to
industry best practices. See Appendix A for the Process Management Assessment Rubric; the
highlighted text indicates the criteria which best describe the current state of the Process
Management in use by the UPS Truck Crew.
Of the four sub-dimensions, Dock Management and Package Labeling were rated as “Standard
Practices”. The other sub-dimensions, DSOP and Metrics, were rated as “Poor Practices” as no
standard operating procedure or performance metrics exist for this workgroup.
See Appendix B for a summary of the sub-dimension ratings and the rationale for each.
16

18. 7. Exportability
The processes in the evaluand are specific to the workgroup. There are no innovative methods
in place which could be adapted for other MU departments. The processes in the evaluand are
specific to the workgroup, and the following aspects of the UPS Truck Crew and the evaluation
are valuable to other similar context.
The greatest strengths of the UPS Truck Crew are the camaraderie and cooperation among the
crew members and their loyalty to their long-time supervisor. This positive environment has
contributed to the low turnover in this unskilled position, thus maintaining a high level of
experience among the crew. Although the team chemistry encouraged by the UPS Truck Crew
Supervisor cannot itself be exported, the supervisor’s interactions with his team could be
studied to determine what elements of his supervisory style could help departments
experiencing high personnel turnover rates.
The evaluation team developed performance rubrics for the UPS Truck Crew based on
documented industry best practices. According to the Inbound Manager, no performance
rubrics or productivity standards are in place elsewhere in the receiving department.
Productivity is a major concern of not only MU but the warehousing industry in general. MU
must develop performance standards and measure performance outcomes to ensure that all
parts of the receiving operation function at optimal levels, which should lead to improved
warehouse productivity and continued revenue growth. To develop those standards, the
operations management at MU should consult industry associations such as WERC, the
Association for Operations Management, and the Council for Supply Chain Management
Professionals for information on benchmarking and best practices.
17

19. Conclusions
8. Overall Significance
The purpose of this evaluation was to understand the receiving process’s current level of merit
and to identify what changes to the process or resources could improve its performance. The
results obtained from each dimension were calculated and summarized in Appendix G. The
overall results (shown in Table 5) of the evaluation revealed the receiving process’s current
overall level of merit as “Acceptable” when measured on a 5-level scale (Poor - Mediocre -
Acceptable - Very Good - Excellent).
Rating
Overall

Evaluand
Dimension Weighting
Instruments  Important
Very
Workspace 
Important
Process Extremely

Management Important
Poor Mediocre Acceptable Very Good Excellent
Table 5. Ratings for Overall Evaluand and Dimensions
The Instruments dimension was rated as "Acceptable" overall because the hardware and
software in use meet current needs, are properly maintained, and function correctly. All three
Instrument sub-dimensions were rated as “Standard Practices”; none are in critical need of
improvement to meet current needs, nor do any exceed industry standards.
The Workspace dimension was rated as “Acceptable” overall because under normal conditions
the floor space and layout is sufficient for the crew members to navigate easily between
locations. All three Workspace sub-dimensions were rated as “Standard Practices”; none are in
critical need of improvement to meet current needs, nor do any exceed industry standards.
18

20. The Process Management dimension was rated as “Mediocre” overall. The Dock Management
and Package Labeling sub-dimensions were both rated as “Standard Practices”. The DSOP and
Metrics sub-dimensions were rated as “Poor Practices”; neither standard operating procedures
nor any performance metrics or measurements exist for this workgroup. Although current
needs are being met by the processes in place, future needs will be negatively impacted by the
lack of documentation and metrics.
The dimensions’ strengths and weaknesses are shown in Table 6, in order of importance within
each dimension based on their potential level of impact on the evaluand.
Dimension Strengths Weaknesses
Instruments 1. Enough hardware to meet 1. Not enough equipment to
(Important) current needs. meet future demands.
2. Have the right tools to do 2. Pallet jacks are past or near
the job. the end of their life
3. Hardware is easy to use and expectancy.
in good repair.
4. Software integrates with
next step in receiving
process.
Workspace 1. Equipment is laid out to 1. No space to grow.
(Very maximize available floor 2. Lack of space causes choke-
Important) space. points.
2. Enough space to meet 3. Lack of space makes it
current needs during periods difficult to walk during busy
of normal inbound volume. periods.
4. During busy periods floor
space is very limited at best,
non-existent at times.
Process 1. A package labeling system 1. No metrics exist to measure
Management exists and is used (although performance of the truck
(Extremely not always followed) crew or their suppliers.
Important) 2. UPS truck driver scheduled 2. No SOP exists to verify
to arrive early enough for Standards, train new
unloading to be completed employees, or pass on tacit
in a timely manner. knowledge.
3. Truck Crew is at work before 3. UPS truck driver may be late,
UPS Truck Driver shows up. with no negative
consequences, impacting
schedule of UPS Truck Crew
and other receiving areas.
19

21. Table 6. Strengths and Weaknesses of Evaluand Dimensions
20

22. 9. Recommendations
Of the three dimensions evaluated in this project, Process Management was considered the
most important by the stakeholders (see Table 5 on page 17), but earned only a “Mediocre”
rating from the evaluation team. This dimension has the most opportunities for improvement in
the shortest amount of time, and at the lowest cost. Specific recommendations to improve this
dimension include:
1. Develop a standardized product labeling system. Technology exists to develop a barcode
that stores all shipment information and could update the system once scanned.
Customers could be required to print this barcode and attach it to the box or invoice
before shipment. The evaluation team understands that this step is already under
consideration by MU, and recommends that it be implemented if feasible.
2. Gather metrics to improve and manage the receiving process. By tracking metrics, the
receiving department can take appropriate actions to drive continual process
improvements. It is also good practice to report metrics to upper management and post
results where they are accessible to the UPS Truck Crew.
3. Document operating procedures as a way to standardize processes and terminology.
This will ensure that tacit knowledge is not lost as part of a succession management
plan, and will help provide consistent on-the-job training for new hires.
Workspace and Instruments both received an “Acceptable” rating. Although these dimensions
are less important than the process management dimension, both offer areas of opportunity
which can significantly improve the receiving process. These recommendations will require a
greater investment in monetary and time resources.
1. Within the Workspace dimension, the floor space should be of critical interest. The
Truck Crew is currently using its workspace to its full capacity. Because of the size and
amount of equipment required to perform the job, workspace is limited. The limited
workspace reduces the possible maximization of pallet and floor space usage due to a
lack of space to place needed pallets, and creates choke points between an Express Belt
and the Mechanical Roller. MU must seriously consider increasing floor space in
preparation for future demand or face decreased productivity and bottlenecks.
21

23. 2. Within the Instruments dimension, the organization would need to update its
computerized and non-electronic equipment as well as its software to meet increasing
demands.
Some hardware in use is near end-of-life, and will need to be replaced soon. All
hardware should be inspected and evaluated for possible replacement or
upgrades.
MU should consider using hand-held computers with scanners rather than bulky
laptops.
Small packages are initiated by the UPS Truck Crew, and then the same data is
entered again by Direct Receiving. It would be more efficient to have Direct
Receiving initiate small packages so that the UPS Truck Crew can focus on large
packages.
22

24. Reporting
This evaluation report was created for the benefit of the evaluand stakeholders at MU:
Director of Operations
Operations Manager
Inbound Manager
UPS Truck Crew Supervisor
Evaluation team member Chester Stevenson will e-mail a brief summary of the evaluation
team’s conclusions and recommendations, plus a copy of the full report, to the four
stakeholders and to the Vice President of Human Resources at MU. The stakeholders may
share the information with other MU personnel as desired.
Any questions about the evaluation may be directed to team member Chester Stevenson.
23

25. References
Brinkerhoff, R. O. (2006). Telling training’s story: Evaluation made simple, credible, and
effective. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler.
Davidson, E. J. (2005). Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.
Scriven, M. (2007). Key evaluation checklist. Retrieved from
http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/kec_feb07.pdf
Vitasek, K., Harrity, C., O'Donoghue, K., & Symmes, S. (2007). Warehousing & fulfillment process
benchmark & best practices guide. Retrieved from
http://www.werc.org/assets/1/workflow_staging/Publications/701.PDF
24

26. Appendix A: MU UPS Receiving Process Assessment Rubrics with Criteria Highlighting
Dimension of Sub-
Poor Practices Standard Practices Best Practices
Merit Dimension
Hardware is out of date and limited in Available hardware meets current needs. Available hardware meets current and future
INSTRUMENTS quantity or not in an adequate quantity. needs.
Hardware Hardware is properly maintained and
(Non-Electronic) - Available hardware does not meet current functional. Backup equipment is available to replace out
WEIGHTING: includes forklifts, needs. of service equipment.
pallets, shelving,
Important conveyors, bins Hardware is out of repair or requires Hardware is efficient and does not add
excessive service. additional steps to work processes.
Hardware is not mobile. Hardware is mobile. Hardware is highly mobile and compatible
with the latest software.
Hardware is out of date and not Hardware is compatible with newer
compatible with newer software. software. Available hardware meets current and future
needs.
Hardware is out of date and limited in Available hardware meets current needs.
Hardware
quantity or not in an adequate quantity. Backup equipment is available to replace out
(Computerized)
Hardware is properly maintained and of service equipment.
Available hardware does not meet current functional.
needs. Hardware is efficient and does not add
additional steps to work processes.
Hardware is out of repair or requires
excessive service.
Software is slow, not easy to understand, Software can be learned within an Software is easily understandable and easy to
and not efficient. acceptable time period. use.
Software does not interface with the next Software interfaces with - and can be Software is easily upgradeable and easily
area in the receiving process. retrieved by other parts of the receiving integrates with other company software.
Software process.
Software provides metrics that can be
Software can be upgraded when provided to customers.
requirements change.
Software is updated regularly to support best
practices.
25

27. Dimension of Sub-
Poor Practices Standard Practices Best Practices
Merit Dimension
Pallet placement is not formalized Pallets are laid out so that they do not hinder Product placement is clearly defined.
WORKSPACE
movement.
Package placement is not clearly defined Sorting area is arranged to support demand
Package placement is clearly defined. issues meeting current and future volume.
WEIGHTING: Sorting area is not arranged to support
Pallet Layout
Very Important demand Issues meeting current volume. Pallets are laid out to optimize movement,
and restrict fatigue or injury.
Mobility around pallet area is difficult.
Floor space is poorly laid out and mobility Fixtures are placed so that they do not Floor space is well laid out to support current
is difficult. hinder movement of product. and future demand.
Utilization of
Floor Space
Poor layout in high traffic areas. Poor Areas are laid out well to support current Area is kept clean and clear of debris.
housekeeping demand.
Floor space does not meet current needs. Floor and storage space meets current Floor and storage space is adequate to
needs. accommodate current and future demand.
There is not enough room to unload an
entire truck during peak times. There is adequate space to unload a truck
Space Available
and still allow for mobility.
Storage space is not adequate to hold
overstock during peak times. Storage space is adequate to hold overstock
during peak times.
26

28. Dimension of
Sub-Dimension Poor Practices Standard Practices Best Practices
Merit
Trailer deliveries not scheduled Shipper given specified delivery window Doc appointments are made and a
Process
commitment to unload every vehicle within
Dock Management
Management Trailers not unloaded in a timely way Timely unloading to avoid two hours when the appointment is kept,
detention/demurrage labor and dock space utilization is optimized
No package labeling OR package Not all packages labeled by suppliers, but is Package is labeled by supplier, to
Weighting: inconsistently or incorrectly labeled labeled upon receipt specification receipt so check-in can be
Package Labeling made with bar-code scan into the system
Extremely
Important Documented Standard No process documentation exists OR Receiving processes are documented and Receiving processes documented, made
Operating Procedure processes are written but not consistently available but tacit knowledge is not made readily available, and consistently followed
(DSOP) followed or made available explicit
Customer shipping errors are not tracked Ad hoc process to track inbound receiving Basic receiving requirements are outlined
(e.g. % of packages errors or track internal functional metrics and shared with all customers
received without a invoice or % of
packages received mislabeled) Customer receiving errors are not shared Formal process to collect inbound receiving
with customers metrics and data is shared with customers
No established
performance Basic receiving requirements are outlined and Internal performance metrics are collected
metrics or SLAs shared with all customers and posted or shared with employees
(service level
Metrics
agreements) Formal process to collect Inbound receiving
established with metrics, but data is not shared with
suppliers customers
Internal performance
indicators
(e.g. dock to
stock time) are
not tracked
27

29. Appendix B: Summary of Ratings with Rationale
Dimension of
Sub-Dimension Rating Rationale
Merit
The criteria for non-electronic hardware all fall under the Standard Practices rating.
Hardware (Non-Electronic) Standard Practices According to one stakeholder, some of the existing hardware will require replacement in
the near future but all equipment is currently adequate.
The criteria for computer hardware all fall under the Standard Practices rating. The
Instruments Hardware (Computerized) Standard Practices laptops are not modern, but have sufficient capacity to run the necessary software.
The criteria for software all fall under the Standard Practices rating. The software was
Software Standard Practices created in-house and continues to meet the organization’s needs.
The criteria for pallet layout all fall under the Standard Practices rating. There is no
Pallet Layout Standard Practices consistent layout plan for pallets, but the crew members are successfully able to create
the layout for daily conditions.
The criteria for utilization of floor space all fall under the Standard Practices rating. Space
Workspace Utilization of Floor Space Standard Practices is limited, but the crew reports no significant problems in navigating the space under
normal volume conditions.
The criteria for space available all fall under the Standard Practices rating. The space does
Space Available Standard Practices accommodate current normal volume, but is less able to accommodate peak volume.
There is no room for future expansion.
The criteria for dock management all fall under the Standard Practices rating. The main
Dock Management Standard Practices issue with shipment delivery is related to the reliability of UPS delivery employees, which
MU cannot control.
The criteria for package labeling all fall under the Standard Practices rating. Current
Package Labeling Standard Practices package labeling is adequate, but MU is looking at ways to improve it.
Process
Management The criteria for DSOP fall under the Poor Practices rating. There is no documentation of
Documented Standard Operating
Poor Practices standard operating procedures. All knowledge is tacit and communicated verbally to new
Procedure (DSOP)
employees.
The criteria for metrics all fall under the Poor Practices rating. No performance metrics
Metrics Poor Practices exist, nor do any methods of measuring aspects of performance.
28

30. Appendix C: Data Sources for Instrument Dimension
Interviews
Sub-Dimension Data Sources Observation Extant Data
Truck Crew Supervisors
(1) Extant Data – Q11: Can you think of one thing that you use now Q: How long do the Pallet Equipment Inventory
Review equipment (like a piece of equipment or a procedure) that Jacks typically last before includes:
inventory. prevents you from working faster or more they need to be replaced?
Review maintenance accurately? Forklift (n=2)
records a. No -TC #1 With the amount of use they Pallet Jack (n=4)
get during our receiving Express Belt
Hardware (non- (2) Interviews – b. Not really offhand. Space is the biggest hindrance. process, they typically have a w/computer (n=4)
Management (n=3) TC #2 lifecycle of 3 – 4 years. Two Roller (n=1)
electronic)
and Crew (n=4). of the Pallet Jacks have been Pallets
c. Some of the belts aren’t that good for rolling boxes. in use for 3 years, and two Bins (n=2)
When these belts are extended, the rollers are too far have been in use for 6 – 7
apart and don’t roll boxes easily. TC #3 years. Truck Crew
d. Nothing that gets in my way. The other guys get in Supervisor
my way because of the limited space. TC #4
(1) Extant Data – Q13: How would you improve the layout of your Computerized
Review equipment work area? Inventory includes:
inventory. d. The racks are not very sturdy. TC #4
Review available Computer with
Hardware hardware scanner (n=3)
specifications.
(Computerized)
(2) Interviews –
Management (n=3)
and Crew (n=4).
(1) Interviews - Q7: How long does it take you to do the data entry Q1: How long have you
Management (n=3), for each package? How easy is it to use the software been using the current
Crew (n=4), to do the data entry? How easy is it to make software?
Programmers (n=1). corrections if you type something wrong?
The software has been
Software a. 15 sec - 1.5 min (depending on how many unchanged for the last 15
packages) Labels without bar codes = does not add years.
significant extra time to initiation To edit data entry,
search by invoice # and edit, very simple. Receiving
cannot access this software - if they find an error, they
bring it to the truck crew’s attention so the truck crew
29

31. can make the correction. Can track which truck crew
member made the error, but not known if accuracy
problems are tracked and taken into account for
performance reviews -TC #1
b. 3-4 minutes at the longest. Very repetitive once
you learn the process should be quick (his time is
longer because he is new). Easy up to a point until
you get to the 2nd to last screen. Once it gets to that
point it would have to be corrected by supervisor -TC
#2
c. Not long, I just scan the barcode and UPS code
(these packages have standard UPS labels, I assume). I
have to open the packages occasionally to get a
packing list, but in most cases I just scan it. It’s easy to
make corrections. TC #3
d. Maybe 10 seconds, 20 seconds - I’ve been here 10
years so I can fly through it. The software is really easy
to use, and I can barely send an e-mail! Software is
not complex. Everybody has their own log-in, but not
everybody has editing permission. Supervisor and
unofficial assistant supervisor can make changes if
errors are found at the end of entry TC #4
30

32. Appendix D: Data Sources for Workspace Dimension
Interviews
Sub-Dimension Data Sources Observation Extant Data
Truck Crew Supervisors
(1) Interviews - Q6: How easy is it to sort the large packages so that Pallets are laid out in
Management (n=3) all the packages from one sender are together? Are rows but package layout
and Crew (n=4). the labels consistent or do you run into problems is not standardized.
with labels having different names for one sender?
(2) Observation -
Observe receiving b. It’s fairly simple, my biggest problem was spending
process to determine too much time trying to remember where I had put
product placement things down, this became easier with practice.
trends. Sometimes pallets are organized by #, other times by
return/guide/etc - it depends on who sets up the
pallets. TC#2
Q13: How would you improve the layout of your
work area?
a. The racks used to run the opposite way, but that
reduced the loading area so we changed the rack
Pallet Layout orientation to give us more space. Racks are almost to
the ceiling now, at max height for forklifts -TC#1
b. A branching conveyor belt - pull off different
categories-guides, returns, and others This would
probably take up a lot of space, but would make it
easier to sort and pallet. TC #2
c. More space. Not sure offhand what would help the
layout. (moving student returns to another part of the
building - would require a different address and would
only eliminate one roller) TC#3 d. Just expand,
honestly. TC #4
31

33. (1) Interviews - Q12: Is there anything about the physical layout of There is a choke point
Management (n=3) your warehouse area that gets in the way during between the third
and Crew (n=4). normal weeks? What about during high-volume Express Belt and the
weeks? Roller.
(2) Observation - a. High volumes SKUs that have no invoice (labeling),
Observe receiving having to wade through many packets -TC#1 Every open space is
process to determine used, with narrow paths
Utilization of product placement b. The track area coming from the belt to the student to walk though.
trends and floor space returns is a high-traffic area and is pretty tight for
Floor Space
usage. space. (area around the first computer - the rack is
close to the conveyor, causes a bottleneck). Takes
more time because you have to detour with the
forklift. TC #2
c. In a normal week no, but yes during a busy week. TC
#3
(1) Interviews - Q6: How easy is it to sort the large packages so that Every space is used.
Management (n=3) all the packages from one sender are together? Are
and Crew (n=4). the labels consistent or do you run into problems
with labels having different names for one sender?
(2) Observation - a. The larger the load the harder it is. Space makes it
Observe receiving area hard (after you get so much you forget where you put
to determine space it). Senders sometimes put the wrong information
availability. (like name of individual rather than name of school) or
no information (they don’t understand they are NOT
the only vendor) -TC#1
Q8: During normal times, is it easy to move the
Space Available packages around to where they need to go?
a. Pretty easy but space is limiting -TC#1
b. Yes - TC#2
c. Pretty Easy TC # 3
d. Normal times yes but space is also an issue during
busy times. Freight (pallets) is bumping into other
shipments.
Q9: How does your work routine change during those
weeks when the number of inbound packages is
twice the usual volume?
a. It’s a lot more fast pace. Where we’re rushed we
are out of space quickly and it can be backed up for 5-
32

34. 6 weeks. When outbound is busy, inbound personnel
are diverted there to help, which slows down the
inbound processes. -TC#1
b. Between freight coming off and coming in, space
becomes very tight, hard to move around with the
forklift because there’s stuff everywhere.-TC #2
c. Space (paraphrase) TC #3
Q10: Can you think of one thing that could be added
to your work area that would make your job easier?
a. Space -TC#1
b. More space, definitely more space TC#2
c. When I scan, wondering why it can’t be done about
the people that are checking it in. Seems like
initiation is redundant - why not just put student
returns in the bins and have the direct receiving group
do the check-in? Jerry and the rest of the crew are in
favor of this. This would both remove duplication of
effort and free up space that the student return rollers
currently take up. TC#3
33

35. Appendix E: Data Sources for Process Management Dimension
Sub-dimension Data Sources Observation Extant Data
Truck Crew Supervisors
(1) Interviews - Q4: How much time is there between the time you The UPS Truck is
Management (n=3) start work and the time the first UPS truck arrives? available before the
and Crew (n=4). a. Anywhere from an hour to 1.5 hours, depending on truck crew arrives.
if we have the usual UPS driver. We come in at 7, the However, it cannot be
(2) Observation - drivers don’t come in until 8:30 -TC#1 unloaded until the
Observe unloading driver is ready.
process and record b. When they have the normal driver, he’s usually
times to completion. here about 8:30-9. When he was changing his job, the
communication over at UPS was off - the driver would
show up late, we would have to call UPS to find out
Dock where the truck was. -TC #2
Management
c. Depends on driver (8:15-10am)..
Sometimes there is packages left in receiving from
the day before that they can unpack until the driver is
there TC#3 The truck trailer gets there before we do
(it’s driven over and left - the truck cab goes off on
another job).
d. The truck trailer gets there before we do (it’s
driven over and left - the truck cab goes off on
another job). TC#4.
(1) Observation Q6: How easy is it to sort the large packages so that Weaknesses in receiving Labels are colored, No package labeling
all the packages from one sender are together? Are process depending on the type documentation exists.
(2) Interviews - the labels consistent or do you run into problems There are 7 to 9 different of delivery.
Management (n=3), with labels having different names for one sender? variations for any given ISBN No documentation exists
Crew (n=4), and a. Senders sometimes put the wrong information (book sorted by type of Customers do not to inform customers of
Package Programmers (n=2). (like name of individual rather than name of school) edition and physical always properly label how to properly label a
or no information (they don’t understand they are condition). Returns may not packages. package.
Labeling NOT the only vendor) -TC#1 be classified correctly by the
store/buyback, or returns Sometimes customers
c. The count can sometimes be off but as long as the received may not have forget to put labels on
labels are there. On the majority, the labels are there originated at MBS in the packages.
-TC #3 first place. Returns come in
from stores, buyback When customers ship
34

36. d. It’s pretty simple after doing it for so long. Store contractors, and individuals multiple packages, UPS
numbers are written on the packages, so we get used - labeling not consistent, does not always deliver
to looking for store numbers to match up shipments. may not be accurate. them in the same
Labels are mostly consistent, but I have seen Guaranteed buybacks pre- shipment.
packages with label but no information or that have labeled for accuracy.
just the sender’s first name and not the last, or boxes Department would like to Barcodes on the
with no labels (it’s a sticky tag that may accidentally look into more bar code package label only
get peeled off during shipment) -TC #4 information. Right now the include the UPS
receiving crew has to input Shipping number.
much information manually.
Inconsistency in how No customer education
bookstores label returns, so process exists at any
receiving crew won’t have level of the company
accurate information (so to inform shippers of
billing for returns may be proper procedures.
inaccurate because returns
from a given store may not
be processed as a group).-
Operations Manager
Problem with Invoicing of
shipments, improper
labeling, and improper
counts - weaknesses are on
the sender side. If sender
information is correct,
receiving goes like
clockwork. Biggest problem
is that improper
identification. Truck Crew
Supervisor
(1) Extant Data - Q3: When you first started, was there any part of New hires should be None Available
Review receiving and the unloading and check-in process that took a little comfortable within a 2-3
Document shipping process more time to learn? How long did it take for you to week time frame, by then
documentation. feel pretty comfortable doing your job? we’ll know if they can cut it.
Standard a. Took about a week to get comfortable with the They receive OJT. Just the
Operating (2) Interviews - entire process (including the computer). TC #1 hands-on responsibility. Go
Management (n=3) b. It was all kind of new to me, so I learned one thing through proper lifting
Procedure and Crew (n=4). at a time - there’s a lot to learn at once, so I had to methods (safety training, I
(DSOP) break it down. Had to learn the difference between assume) . This (receiving
what’s a return and what’s a guide. I’m used to having process) is a new beast even
written directions/ guidelines, but all instruction here if you have dock experience.
35

37. was verbal and each person had his own way of doing Can be overwhelming even
things. It would have helped if I had something to with experience. The
read that was standardized. Without that, I wasn’t sorting is the hardest part of
able to learn something until I actually needed to do the learning curve. (labeling,
it. I didn’t think any particular process was more categorizing). The guys
difficult to learn than another. I started at the already do categorization on
beginning of a buyback rush so I was thrown into it - floor. Ebb and flow of
learned the motions, wasn’t able to get more in- volume would not really
depth until rush was over. -TC# 2 make a color coded floor
c. Took about a week to get comfortable with the labeling system feasible --
entire process (including the computer). TC#3 Truck Crew Supervisor
d. The unloading part. I’m not really computer savvy,
but it’s easy to pick up. With unloading, had to learn
the different shipment types. Took about two weeks
tops to feel comfortable. TC #4
Q14: If you were in charge, how would you improve
the efficiency of the receiving process?
a. I don’t know if there’s really any way to improve
(the people). Nothing I can think of offhand. TC #1 b.
When bringing someone in - I can pick up things
quickly because of my training but it might be hard
for others. I see it as a weeding out process to see
who they want to keep, but it would help to have a
truck crew-specific training manual and job aid.
Documented SOP - there’s isn’t one now. For
example, a standardized way of setting up the pallets.
TC #2
c. Current method is good as long as team works
together. TC#3
d. The number one thing is space, then the timing for
UPS arrival - we get here at 7 but he doesn’t get here
until later. TC #4
(1) Extant Data - Setting benchmarks for None Available
Review receiving and future evaluations;
shipping metric establishing regular re-
documentation. assessments of receiving
Metrics processes; defining ideal
(2) Interviews - performance for individuals;
Management (n=3) defining ideal performance
and Crew (n=4). for the receiving team;
exporting elements of the
36

38. receiving processes to other
parts of the organization;
and/or developing
evaluation processes for
other parts of the
organization. -Operations
Manager
Would like to see more
metrics [in receiving
process} such as copies
checked per hour, book
shelved per hour no formal
written documentation -
Inbound Manager
37

39. Appendix F: Sub-dimension Weighting of Importance by Stakeholders
Sub-Dimensions Inbound Manager Operations Manager Truck Crew Manager
Hardware
Extremely Important Important Extremely Important
(non-electronic)
Hardware (Computerized) Extremely Important Important Extremely Important
Software Very Important Very Important Very Important
Pallet Layout Important Important Extremely Important
Utilization of
Extremely Important Extremely Important Extremely Important
Floor Space
Space Available Extremely Important Very Important Extremely Important
Dock Management Extremely Important Important Extremely Important
Package Labeling Extremely Important Very Important Extremely Important
Documented Standard Operating
Important Important Important
Procedure (DSOP)
Metrics Extremely Important Very Important Important
38

40. Appendix G: Scoring Rubrics for MU UPS Receiving Process Evaluation
Rubric for Ranking Importance Rubric for Ranking Sub-Dimensions
Standard
Important Very Important Extremely Important Poor Practices Best Practices
Practices
1 2 3 1 2 3
Sum of Weighted Dimensions
Weighting Value Sub-Dimension
Dimension Weighting Sub-Dimension SDR Value (R) IxR
(I) Rating (SDR)
1 Hardware (non- Standard Practices 2 2
electronic)
INSTRUMENTS Important Hardware (Computerized) Standard Practices 2 2
1
1 Software Standard Practices 2 2
Sum of Importance and Rating 6
2 Pallet Layout Standard Practices 2 4
Utilization of
WORKSPACE Very Important 2 Floor Space
Standard Practices 2 4
2 Space Available Standard Practices 2 4
Sum of Importance and Rating 12
3 Dock Management Standard Practices 2 6
3 Package Labeling Standard Practices 2 6
Extremely
PROCESS MANAGEMENT
Important Documented Standard
3 Operating Procedure (DSOP)
Poor Practices 1 3
3 Metrics Poor Practices 1 3
39
Sum of Importance and Rating 18
Total Sum of Weighted Dimensions 36

41. Score Combinations for Dimension Rating
Dimension
Lower (L)
Sub-Dimension Weighting Poor (P) Mediocre (M) Acceptable (A) Very Good (V) Excellent (E)
Boundary
(W)
Most sub-dimensions Most sub-dimensions Most sub-dimensions Most sub-dimensions
receive a 1, and one receive a 2, and one receive a 2, and one receive a 3, and one
All sub-dimensions All sub-dimensions
sub-dimension sub-dimension sub-dimension sub-dimension
received a 1 receive a 3
receives a 2 for each receives a 1 for each receives a 3 for each receives a 2 for each
Dimension Dimension Dimension Dimension
Hardware (non-
1 1 1 1 2 2 3
electronic)
Hardware
1 1 1 2 2 3 3
(Computerized)
Software 1 1 2 2 3 3 3
Pallet Layout 2 2 1 1 2 2 3
Utilization of Floor
2 2 1 2 2 3 3
Space
Space Available 2 2 2 2 3 3 3
Dock Management 3 3 1 1 2 2 3
Package Labeling 3 3 1 2 2 3 3
DSOP 3 3 1 2 2 3 3
Metrics 3 3 2 2 3 3 3
40