Development of optimizing application for warehousing management. The case of agro holding vyborgec
Description of the project for optimizing the implementation of warehousing applications, which was launched during its internship at Vyborgets Agricultural Holding. Changes in business processes and assessment of the impact of project implementation.
| Рубрика | Менеджмент и трудовые отношения |
| Вид | дипломная работа |
| Язык | английский |
| Дата добавления | 04.12.2019 |
| Размер файла | 1,3 M |
Отправить свою хорошую работу в базу знаний просто. Используйте форму, расположенную ниже
Студенты, аспиранты, молодые ученые, использующие базу знаний в своей учебе и работе, будут вам очень благодарны.
1
4
3
3
3
2
3
2
4
6
3
3
3
4
5
Q4. Other process stakeholders are satisfied with the process outcomes
2
3
2
2
2
1
2
1
1
3
4
3
2
2
5
Process Enhancement
Q5. You have nothing significant to suggest for current process to enhance it.
2
3
2
3
3
2
3
1
0
2
2
1
4
3
4
Q6. Amount of activities in process is currently optimal
2
3
2
4
3
3
2
2
3
3
2
3
6
3
6
Q7. Your activities create enough value for the company.
4
6
4
5
5
3
7
5
2
3
3
3
4
3
6
Q8. You are currently satisfied with routine you are involved in.
4
3
2
1
1
2
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
3
Table 7.
Respondents' answers before project implementation (2)
|
Category |
Question |
Respondents |
Parameters |
|||||||||||||||||
|
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
Mean |
St. Dev |
|||
|
Process Efficiency |
Q1. Current process is done the best way possible. |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
7 |
2 |
3 |
7 |
7 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3,097 |
1,873 |
|
|
Q2. Your working time distributed efficienly. |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
2,323 |
0,929 |
||
|
Q3. Sunk costs can't be further mitigated easily. |
4 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
7 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
6 |
2 |
3 |
3,452 |
1,411 |
||
|
Q4. Other process stakeholders are satisfied with the process outcomes |
3 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
2,645 |
1,033 |
||
|
Process Enhancement |
Q5. You have nothing significant to suggest for current process to enhance it. |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2,226 |
0,940 |
|
|
Q6. Amount of activities in process is currently optimal |
3 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
3,065 |
1,243 |
||
|
Q7. Your activities create enough value for the company. |
3 |
3 |
6 |
3 |
7 |
2 |
5 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
7 |
4,032 |
1,596 |
||
|
Q8. You are currently satisfied with routine you are involved in. |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
1 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
2 |
4 |
2 |
1 |
3 |
2 |
2,161 |
0,919 |
As it seemed, employees are not generally satisfied with current state of processes in warehousing - both efficiency and process-wise. Main complains are towards uneven working time distribution and stakeholders' dissatisfaction. During private conversation with employees, author found out that main concerns of stakeholders were overall about product shelf life left on the consumer part and speed of operations in logistics department overall. At the same time employees consider their own impact on value creation inside the company as moderate (while other points lied mostly in range from 2 to 3). Results above clearly depict need in actual changes in processes, not even digitalization introduction in warehousing processes.
Second questionnaire iteration was conducted in almost a month after project realization.
Table 8.
Respondents' answers after project implementation (1)
|
Category |
Question |
Respondents |
||||||||||||||||||||
|
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
11 |
12 |
13 |
14 |
15 |
16 |
17 |
18 |
19 |
20 |
|||
|
Process Efficiency |
Q1. Current process is done the best way possible. |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
6 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
6 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
|
|
Q2. Your working time distributed efficiently. |
5 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
||
|
Q3. Sunk costs can't be further mitigated easily. |
4 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
2 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
||
|
Q4. Other process stakeholders are satisfied with the process outcomes |
5 |
3 |
6 |
4 |
1 |
6 |
7 |
2 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
5 |
3 |
||
|
Process enhancement |
Q5. You have nothing significant to suggest for current process to enhance it. |
4 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
2 |
6 |
6 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
1 |
|
|
Q6. Amount of activities in process is currently optimal |
3 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
||
|
Q7. Your activities create enough value for the company. |
5 |
4 |
7 |
6 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
2 |
||
|
Q8. You are currently satisfied with routine you are involved in. |
3 |
3 |
2 |
2 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
4 |
4 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
4 |
2 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
4 |
Table 9.
Respondents' answers after project implementation (2)
|
Category |
Question |
Respondents |
|||||||||||||||
|
21 |
22 |
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28 |
29 |
30 |
31 |
32 |
33 |
Mean |
St. Dev |
|||
|
Process Efficiency |
Q1. Current process is done the best way possible. |
4 |
7 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
4 |
5 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
7 |
5 |
4,606 |
1,229 |
|
|
Q2. Your working time distributed efficiently. |
5 |
4 |
2 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4,424 |
0,818 |
||
|
Q3. Sunk costs can't be further mitigated easily. |
5 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
4,394 |
0,983 |
||
|
Q4. Other process stakeholders are satisfied with the process outcomes |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
4,364 |
1,275 |
||
|
Process enhancement |
Q5. You have nothing significant to suggest for current process to enhance it. |
3 |
4 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
5 |
3 |
7 |
4,121 |
1,572 |
|
|
Q6. Amount of activities in process is currently optimal |
5 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
5 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
3,879 |
0,977 |
||
|
Q7. Your activities create enough value for the company. |
3 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
4 |
5 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
6 |
3 |
4,152 |
1,131 |
||
|
Q8. You are currently satisfied with routine you are involved in. |
2 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
3 |
3 |
2 |
4 |
3 |
1 |
2,424 |
1,155 |
Even if time periods used for sampling were different - second take was done during the time in between holidays, it is not much affected overall results due to two main factors:
· Company establish discipline among rank-and-file employees;
· Amount of working days in both samplings was identical.
From the results of survey conduction, seems obvious that project realization positively affected almost all the aspects in the list of asked questions - from perceived time expenditure to overall process management. But, in overall, direct comparison of means does not give correct answer. Thus, parametrical tests are required to determine the result. For preliminary calculations, which show pattern of answers - mean (1) and standard deviation (2) (sigma) are needed.
(1)
where: xi - parameter value for particular respondent;
n - sample size.
(2)
where: xi - parameter value for particular respondent;
- estimated mean value for particular parameter.
Paired t-test with equal variances is definitely the way to go in the case of questionnaire results precise identification. Accordingly, all 8 hypotheses (3), connected to questions, are almost the same. Main hypothesis (H0) states that there is no significant difference between means of two samples. Alternative hypothesis (Ha) is `there is a significant difference in favor of situation after project realization".
(3)
To check hypothesis properly, there must be acquired two estimates - critical point and statistic (4). In this case of means comparison, critical point is distributed in Student. Degrees of freedom are equal to: df = 33+31-2 = 62 (Schechtman & Sherman, 2007). With 95% confidential interval and df = 62, critical point becomes closer to 1,67 (MIT Mathematics, 2017).
(4)
where: - estimated mean for sample 1;
- estimated mean for sample 2;
- standard deviation for sample 1;
- standard deviation for sample 2;
- sample size for sample 1;
- sample size for sample 2.
Overall results for hypothesis testing shown in the table below.
In almost all the cases, main hypotheses were accepted, except two questions: "Your activities create enough value for the company" and "You are currently satisfied with routine, you are involved in" - results for these statements are negative - project does not significantly change perception of created value by customer and routine. Both cases can be explained even from the point of psychology: employee does not want show that he is not creating enough cash flow, but quite quick to blame routine activities, while "Process enhancement" is proven to have been influenced significantly by project implementation in general, two aspects does not differ enough to achieve same result.
In terms of consistency and overall applicability of equal-means two-sample t-test for the Likert-type categories, quick equal variance F-test was computed:
For particular sample sizes, critical point is equal to 1,83 with 95% probability (SOCR, 2002). Looking up to tables 6 - 10 makes clear that maximum statistics will be 1,61 in comparison of 2nd question between two samples. Therefore, for all pairs, main hypothesis is accepted = there is no significant difference between variances of two sample in any case.
Table 10.
Results of checking hypothesis
|
Category |
Question |
Crit. Alpha |
Criteria |
Hypothesis accepted? |
Crit. Alpha |
Criteria |
Hypothesis accepted? |
|
|
Process Efficiency |
Q1. Current process is done the best way possible. |
2 |
-3,79 |
Yes |
1,67 |
- 4,903 |
Yes |
|
|
Q2. Your working time distributed efficiently. |
2 |
-9,58 |
Yes |
|||||
|
Q3. Sunk costs can't be further mitigated easily. |
2 |
-3,08 |
Yes |
|||||
|
Q4. Other process stakeholders are satisfied with the process outcomes |
2 |
-5,94 |
Yes |
|||||
|
Process enhancement |
Q5. You have nothing significant to suggest for current process to enhance it. |
2 |
-5,89 |
Yes |
1,67 |
-2,17 |
Yes |
|
|
Q6. Amount of activities in process is currently optimal |
2 |
-2,90 |
Yes |
|||||
|
Q7. Your activities create enough value for the company. |
2 |
-0,34 |
No |
|||||
|
Q8. You are currently satisfied with routine you are involved in. |
2 |
-1,01 |
Yes |
In general, implementation of optimizing software for warehousing of Agroholding Vyborgec has overall positive influence on employees' perception of their work routine during participation in processes, directly connected with operations affected by project. Employees report that in terms of sheer efficiency and process quality, warehousing acquired overall improvement with optimizing application introduction after first month of operation.
Financial modelling of application implementation
Open-source and inside financial data was used to create financial model of given application implementation project realization within logistics department of Agroholding Vyborgec. Due to the fact of future cash flow unavoidable uncertainty, there are several assumptions, which are required to complete model with actual state of available information:
1. Unit of production is considered to be on of the following: a kilogram of weighted product; a pack of a product (600-1 000 gram); a 5-pack of green (from 50 to 200 gram in each pack);
2. Production plan is taken from operation department and include given 10% yearly growth in production, distributed on each month, which is justified by ongoing investment projects of Vyborgec, and seasonal drops and peaks in vegetables consumption month by month (for example, in average 40% drop in sales is expected during winter in comparison with summer);
3. As it is calculated during first month of optimization application implementation, there are four significant sources of economy: conveyor transferring time save (about 3 minutes in average); time save in staying inside warehouse (2 hours in average); shipment packaging time save (10 min in average); lesser spoilage (about 9,5% of average inventory instead of 10,5% marked before).
4. Cash flow is projected on a monthly basis.
5. Project cash flow is projected on three-year time horizon (same approach as in Vyborgec).
Also, one of the preliminary steps was to calculate discount rate. Similar to Vyborgec's standards, ROE, adjusted on inflation ratio can be used as a discount rate. ROE was calculated based on financial statement and P&L. Inflation rate was taken from Vedomosty (Vedomosty, 2018) as corrected forecast of Russian Ministry of Economic Development.
Table 11.
Discount rate calculation based on stated assumptions
|
Parameter |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y3 |
|
|
Discount rate (Yearly) |
14,06% |
13,52% |
13,74% |
|
|
Inflation expectations |
4,30% |
3,80% |
4,00% |
|
|
Avg ROE (3y) |
9,36% |
9,36% |
9,36% |
Table 12.
Financial model of released project in Agroholding Vyborgec (1). First 10 months, savings amount calculated
|
Month # |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
|
|
Approx. stock amount at warehouse |
683 499 |
688 949 |
729 165 |
790 978 |
846 675 |
867 650 |
788 546 |
758 705 |
691 921 |
624 024 |
518 000 |
|
|
Units transferred to warehouse (production amount) |
- |
1 931 835 |
2 043 264 |
2 215 025 |
2 369 445 |
2 426 556 |
2 203 881 |
2 119 092 |
1 931 298 |
1 740 643 |
1 443 956 |
|
|
Units shipped from warehouse |
- |
1 926 385 |
2 003 048 |
2 153 212 |
2 313 748 |
2 405 580 |
2 282 986 |
2 148 933 |
1 998 082 |
1 808 540 |
1 549 980 |
|
|
Incremental time save from transferring procedures per unit (hours/unit) |
- |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
0,0500 |
|
|
Incremental time save of being in storage for particular pallete (hours/unit) |
- |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
2,0000 |
|
|
Incremental time save of acquring proper pallete for shipping (hours/shipping) |
- |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
0,1670 |
|
|
Average costs of transferring to warehouse per unit/hour |
- |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
0,0028 |
|
|
Average costs of storaging per unit/hour |
- |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
0,0009 |
|
|
Average costs of shipping preparation per hour |
- |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
0,0042 |
|
|
Spoilage percentage decrease |
- |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
0,0100 |
|
|
Average operation margin per unit shipped - unit salvage value |
- |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
0,2810 |
|
|
Savings from transferring |
- |
271 |
287 |
311 |
333 |
341 |
310 |
298 |
271 |
245 |
203 |
|
|
Savings from warehousing |
- |
3 146 |
3 329 |
3 612 |
3 866 |
3 962 |
3 601 |
3 464 |
3 159 |
2 849 |
2 365 |
|
|
Savings from shipment preparation |
- |
1 356 |
1 410 |
1 516 |
1 629 |
1 693 |
1 607 |
1 513 |
1 406 |
1 273 |
1 091 |
As it is clear, main source of savings is a combination of warehousing processes and spoilage economy. (up to 70%). Economical effect of optimization application is calculated as incremental difference between parameters mean before and after project release. Spreadsheets of average time save in all the cases are not available for publishing. All the calculations were done by author with help of quality control systems by assessing time stamps on each checkpoint for particular pallet.
While table 12 provides insight on income part of cash flow, table 13 shows costs of project incurred at the preparation stage and afterwards.
Table 13.
Financial model of released project in Agroholding Vyborgec (2). First 10 months, costs
|
Month # |
0 |
1 |
2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
7 |
8 |
9 |
10 |
|
|
Investments amount |
75 000 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
Licence for basic software |
20 000 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
Customization costs |
25 000 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
Equipment purchase |
30 000 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
|
|
Maintenance costs |
0 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
1 051 |
|
|
Education costs |
- |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
26 |
|
|
Training hours |
- |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
8 |
|
|
Cost of 1 hour |
- |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
3 |
|
|
Troubleshooting costs |
- |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
525 |
|
|
Amortization costs |
- |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
500 |
|
|
Corporate tax 20% |
0 |
744 |
795 |
877 |
955 |
989 |
893 |
845 |
757 |
663 |
522 |
Project has three main sources of costs: beginning investments, maintenance and tax deduction, which will affect overall financial result, if Vyborgec will continue to generate profit. Cash-flow and other key parts of a model will be presented on yearly basis for full length of 3 years.
Maintenance costs include wage of support specialist, costs of external experts who will conduct some trainings in average 1-2 times a week. Amortization costs is calculated with assumption of same linear calculation model applies to the equipment purchase.
Table 14.
Short version of financial model
|
Year # |
Y1 |
Y2 |
Y3 |
|
|
Amount at warehouse |
714 256 |
785 682 |
821 039 |
|
|
Units transferred to warehouse |
24 179 621 |
26 389 467 |
28 801 276 |
|
|
Units shipped from warehouse |
24 148 864 |
26 318 041 |
28 765 920 |
|
|
Transferring savings |
3 397 |
3 708 |
4 047 |
|
|
Warehousing savings |
39 509 |
43 460 |
47 609 |
|
|
Shipment preparation savings |
16 999 |
18 525 |
20 248 |
|
|
Investments |
75 000 |
0 |
0 |
|
|
Maintenance costs |
12 615 |
12 458 |
12 458 |
|
|
Corporate tax |
9 458 |
10 647 |
11 889 |
|
|
CF |
-37 168 |
42 588 |
47 557 |
|
|
DCF |
-39 624 |
35 029 |
47 557 |
While company suffers stable amount of losses every period, savings are overcoming losses and give positive cash-flow to the company.
Table 15.
Efficiency indicators of project assessment
|
Indicator |
Amount |
|
|
NPV |
29 818 |
|
|
PI |
0,40 |
|
|
PP |
23 months |
|
|
DPP |
26 months |
|
|
IRR |
26,80% |
NPV was calculated as a sum of positive cashflows along the planning horizon of a project and investment amount. Indicator shows positive score, which tells that project is profitable and economically justified. But, due to the necessity of using units instead of actual currency - rubles, this absolute amount cannot be interpreted, which leaves us with other four indicators. PI is 40%, which shows great case of gain 40% of extra profit over paying cost of capital. Payback periods are varying from 2 to 2,2 years, which is a great result for business, operating mostly on fixed assets and does not achieving fast turnover over time.
Internal rate of return shows considerably good performance, surpassing discount rates more than on 12%, giving opportunity to earn 12% annually over the cost of capital.
3.2 Process state after improvements and recommendations
In terms of process enhancement, optimization application drove several changes in preciously described algorithm (Figure 7):
Figure 7. State of Agroholding Vyborgec process after project implementation3
1. Information lists were changed for bar-code lists to create "stamp" for scanners all over the distribution center to read and write data about any particular bulk which got into distribution center;
2. While guidance inside distribution center is still manual, number of mistakes will decrease due to unambiguous information bar-code keeping inside about route set for the bulk;
3. Storing process of particular bulk is dependent on particular product shelf time and determine actual place, closer to shipping terminals;
4. Employee, armed with scanner, is able to identify needed bulks for particular shipment faster and without mistakes, previously lead to spoilage and losses.
While overall success of changed processes inside distribution center is supported by financial indicators calculation and overall employee perception, there is still a plenty room for improvement:
1. Packing lists and shipment registers are still printed to complete relationships with client in terms of product and payment acceptance and liabilities clearance;
2. Manual bulk steering inside the distribution center still exists and seemed to be unoptimized from the point of additional personnel costs;
3. Production volumes are not responding demand fluctuations inside the month, which still creates space for products spoilage;
As overall positively continuing project, introduction of optimizing application for Agroholding Vyborgec warehousing and logistics needs several improvements to be implemented, based on revelations from previous paragraphs:
· Introduction of storing space with functions of increasing shelf life or product diversification (i.e. introduction of freezed vegetables) according to the fact that current spoilage ratio is still depleting about 9,5% of company's revenue;
· Continue business process optimization with help of "spaghetti diagram" or other instrument to determine most efficient way of moving goods inside distribution center in addition to full automatization of transferring process inside the distribution center;
· Enhancement of application itself is also mandatory: interface is slightly more user-friendly than in MS Excel, analytical reports are not included, other paperwork is not omitted - introduction of digital systems of document exchange with clients and other departments is a clear next step for Agroholding Vyborgec to improve warehousing and logistics operations.
Conclusion
Looking at the big picture of Russian economy current state will reveal strong need in acquiring additional competitive advantages not only inside the market, but also in international operations. Digitalization may support traditional methods of obtaining competitive advantage or company overall sustainability: fixed assets renovation, operation shrinking and simple cost-cutting. Holistic effect of warehousing application usage can not only decrease unit costs, improve quality control state or optimize assets capacity utilization, but also provide company with corporate culture establishing by showing employees that assuring process effectiveness it one of the company values. That fact alone may construct the foundation of internal projects execution, driven mainly by employees, not managers.
For Agroholding Vyborgec, one of the main benefits of research competition is the knowledge about project effectiveness on various levels, from plain financial numbers to the feeling of actual warehousing employees who will embrace changes in their everyday routine. Level of that embracement will be depicted by qualitative data analysis. Multicriterial estimation will give edge for Vyborgec to tune future digitalization implementation activities or perform better change management processes in other fields of management.
Possible future research options for the topic may lie in the field of studying effects of digitalization in yearly time perspective (2-3 years after implementation) or in implementing consimilar approach in other Agroholding Vyborgec operations like HR or Marketing to find additional way to improve company financial performance.
From the point of research objectives - all of them were accomplished by this paper:
· Current state of warehousing optimization topic is given through prism of internet-of-things and overall digitalization;
· State-of-art of Agroholding Vyborgec thoroughly described, analyzed and used to create framework for measuring project effectiveness;
· Data collected, processed; relevant methods used and indicators calculated to provide overall conclusion on the optimization application solution effectiveness;
· Business processes compared, various recommendation, based on the previous analysis are provided.
Answering research problem: with help of literature review, author came to conclusion that under given data and circumstances, project financial effectiveness and qualitative assessment of state by process participants are sufficient to determine project effectiveness. While project pays back investments made during approximately two-year time period, positive NPV, which creates additional 40% income over three years above required rate of return, clearly states that from financial point of view, project is profitable and will have overall positive take on company warehousing and logistics operations. In the same time, employees responded with assertive perception of being a part of warehousing processes after project implementation.
References
1. Comodity.ru. (2012). Duration of storage of fresh vegetables and potatoes. Retrieved from http://www.comodity.ru/ispolzrasten/vegetablestoring/15.html;
2. Dцrnhцfer, M., Schrцder, F., & Gьnthner, W. (2016). Logistics performance measurement system for the automotive industry. Logistics Research, 9(1);
3. EazyStock. EazyStock - Inventory Optimization Software. Retrieved from: https://www.eazystock.com/;
4. Ereshko, F., Kulba, V., & Medennikov, V. (2018). Integration of the digital platform of agrarian and industrial complex into digital platforms of allied industries. Aic: economics, management, (10), 34-45;
5. Garcнa-Arca, J., Gonzбlez-Portela Garrido, A., & Prado-Prado, J. (2016). "Packaging Logistics" for improving performance in supply chains: the role of meta-standards implementation. Production, 26(2), 261-272;
6. Gartner IT Glossary. What Is Big Data? - Gartner IT Glossary - Big Data. Retrieved from: https://www.gartner.com/it-glossary/big-data/;
7. GasBuddy. Never pay full price at the pump. Retrieved from: https://www.gasbuddy.com/;
8. Graeml, A., & Peinado, J. (2011). Measuring Logistics Performance: the Effectiveness of Mmog/Le as Perceived by Suppliers in the Automotive Industry. Journal Of Operations And Supply Chain Management, 4(1), 1;
9. Hammond, S., Brown, J., Burger, J., Flanagan, T., Fristoe, T., & Mercado-Silva, N. et al. (2015). Food Spoilage, Storage, and Transport: Implications for a Sustainable Future. Bioscience, 65(8), 758-768;
10. Hawkeyelogs.com. Hawk Eye - Home. Retrieved from: https://www.hawkeyelogs.com/;
11. Hanebeck, H. & Tracey, B. (2003). The role of location in supply chain management: how mobile communication enables supply chain best practice and allows companies to move to the next level. International Journal of Mobile Communications, 1(1/2), 148. Retrieved from: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.206.42&rep=rep1&type=pdf;
12. Hector, T., & Ruthven, G. (2012). The development of a performance measurement system for the South African container shipping industry. Journal Of Transport And Supply Chain Management, 6(1);
13. Interfax. (2015). In Russia, the law on personal data came into force.Retrieved from https://www.interfax.ru/business/463850;
14. ISSEK HSE (2017). HSE completed S&T Foresight Study for the Agricultural Sector 2030. Retrieved from https://issek.hse.ru/en/news/201482469.html;
15. Keller, S. & Keller, B. (2014). The definitive guide to warehousing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, 1-13. Retrieved from: http://ptgmedia.pearsoncmg.com/images/9780133448900/samplepages/0133448908.pdf;
16. Kurt, O., Kalem, G., Vayvay, O. & Kalender, Z. (2016). The Role of Mobile Devices and Applications in Supply Chains. International Journal of Economics and Management Systems, 1(1), 94-103. Retrieved from: https://www.iaras.org/iaras/filedownloads/ijems/2016/007-0013.pdf;
17. Mimouni-Chaabane, A., & Volle, P. (2010). Perceived benefits of loyalty programs: Scale development and implications for relational strategies. Journal Of Business Research, 63(1), 32-37;
18. MIT Mathematics (2017). t-Distribution Table. Retrieved from: http://math.mit.edu/~vebrunel/Additional%20lecture%20notes/t%20(Student%27s)%20table.pdf;
19. Moskalev S. (2015). Assessment of the construction of the regional market of meat products and marketing activity of the economic entities on items (on the example of the pskov region). Journal "economics, accounting and land resources", udc 338, 137-143;
20. Mudda, S., Giddi, C., & PVGK, M. (2017). A study on the digitization of supply chains in agriculture - an Indian experience. Journal Of Agricultural Informatics, 8(1), 45-55.;
21. Probation Journal (1997). Measuring Effectiveness, 44(2), 80-85;
22. Russia Today. Russia's agriculture sector booming despite or thanks to international sanctions. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.rt.com/business/385285-russia-agriculture-flourishes-sanctions/;
23. Schechtman, E., & Sherman, M. (2007). The two-sample -test with a known ratio of variances. Statistical Methodology, 4(4), 508-514;
24. Servicemax.com. Work Order Software, Tracking & Management Systems. Retrieved from: https://www.servicemax.com/products/work-order-management;
25. Stank, T., Goldsby, T., Vickery, S., & Savitskie, K. (2003). Logistics service performance: estimating its influence on market share. Journal of business logistics, 24(1), 27-55.;
26. Statistics Online Computational Resource. (2002). F-Distribution Tables. Retrieved from: http://socr.ucla.edu/Applets.dir/F_Table.html#FTable0.05;
27. Trukhachev, V., Sklyarov, I., & Sklyarova, Y. (2018). The influence of rouble devaluation on sustainable development of the agrarian sector of russian economy in the conditions of the international sanctions. Russian Agrarian Economy Journal, (5), 65-70. doi: 10.32651/2070-0288-2018-5-65-70
28. VAN DER VORST, J. (2006). Performance measurement in agri-food supply-chain networks. Quantifying The Agri-Food Supply Chain, 15-26;
29. Vartanova, М., & Drobot Е. (2018). Prospects for the digitalization of agriculture as a priority direction for import substitution. Journal Of International Economic Affairs, 8(1), 1;
30. Vedomosti. Ministry of Economic Development has worsened the forecast for 2018-2019. (2018). Retrieved from: https://www.vedomosti.ru/economics/articles/2018/09/05/780064-minekonomrazvitiya;
31. Vorotnikov I., Kolotyrin K., Vlasova O., Petrov K. (2017). Optimization of agricultural products storage and marketing on the basis of logistics. Revista Espacios. Vol. 38;
32. Yuqiang, C., Jianlan, G. & Xuanzi, H. (2010). The Research of Internet of Things' Supporting Technologies Which Face the Logistics Industry. 2010 International Conference on Computational Intelligence and Security;
33. Wen L. (2005). The role of transportation in logistics chain. Proceedings of the Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 1657 - 1672, 2005;
34. Business Petersburg (2017). Vyborzhets will invest 3 billion rubles in the production of mushrooms. Retrieved from https://www.dp.ru/a/2017/03/31/Viborzhec_vlozhit_3_mlrd;
35. Business Petersburg. (2017). "Agrofirm Vyborzhets" will invest 8 billion rubles to increase capacity. Retrieved from https://www.dp.ru/a/2017/11/14/Agrofirma_Viborzhec_vlozh;
36. Ministry of mass-communication and digital development of Russian Federation (2015). Processing and storage of personal data in the Russian Federation. Changes from September 1, 2015. Retrieved from: https://digital.gov.ru/ru/personaldata/;
The Federal State Statistics Service (2018). Home: Federal State Statistics Service. Retrieved from http://www.gks.ru/
Appendices
Appendix 1.
Financial Statement of Agroholding Vyborgec for 2016 - 2017 (1)
|
Наименование |
Величина |
|
|
ОКПО |
23377011 |
|
|
ИНН |
4703006839 |
|
|
Код единицы измерения (384 - тыс.руб, 385 - млн.руб) |
384 |
|
|
11103 Нематериальные активы на конец отчетного года |
312 |
|
|
11104 Нематериальные активы на конец предыдущего года |
448 |
|
|
11503 Основные средства на конец отчетного года |
4956783 |
|
|
11504 Основные средства на конец предыдущего года |
3204816 |
|
|
11903 Прочие внеоборотные активы на конец отчетного года |
2745 |
|
|
11904 Прочие внеоборотные активы на конец предыдущего года |
1688 |
|
|
11003 Итого внеоборотных активов на конец отчетного года |
4959840 |
|
|
11004 Итого внеоборотных активов на конец предыдущего года |
3206952 |
|
|
12103 Запасы на конец отчетного года |
440967 |
|
|
12104 Запасы на конец предыдущего года |
276856 |
|
|
12203 Налог на добавленную стоимость по приобретенным ценностям на конец отчетного года |
5030 |
|
|
12204 Налог на добавленную стоимость по приобретенным ценностям на конец предыдущего года |
23037 |
|
|
12303 Дебиторская задолженность на конец отчетного года |
706091 |
|
|
12304 Дебиторская задолженность на конец предыдущего года |
505877 |
|
|
12403 Финансовые вложения (за исключением денежных эквивалентов) на конец отчетного года |
174944 |
|
|
12503 Денежные средства и денежные эквиваленты на конец отчетного года |
247239 |
|
|
12504 Денежные средства и денежные эквиваленты на конец предыдущего года |
11423 |
|
|
12603 Прочие оборотные активы на конец отчетного года |
6883 |
|
|
12604 Прочие оборотные активы на конец предыдущего года |
5672 |
|
|
12003 Итого оборотных активов на конец отчетного года |
1581154 |
|
|
12004 Итого оборотных активов на конец предыдущего года |
822865 |
|
|
16003 БАЛАНС (актив) на конец отчетного года |
6540994 |
|
|
16004 БАЛАНС (актив) на конец предыдущего года |
4029817 |
|
|
13103 Уставный капитал (складочный капитал, уставный фонд, вклады товарищей) на конец отчетного года |
51 |
|
|
13104 Уставный капитал (складочный капитал, уставный фонд, вклады товарищей) на конец предыдущего года |
51 |
|
|
13403 Переоценка внеоборотных активов на конец отчетного года |
115196 |
|
|
13404 Переоценка внеоборотных активов на конец предыдущего года |
123421 |
|
|
13703 Нераспределенная прибыль (непокрытый убыток) на конец отчетного года |
632130 |
|
|
13704 Нераспределенная прибыль (непокрытый убыток) на конец предыдущего года |
584877 |
|
|
13003 ИТОГО капитал на конец отчетного года |
747385 |
|
|
13004 ИТОГО капитал на конец предыдущего года |
708357 |
|
|
14103 Долгосрочные заемные средства на конец отчетного года |
4489790 |
|
|
14104 Долгосрочные заемные средства на конец предыдущего года |
2465769 |
Financial Statement of Agroholding Vyborgec for 2016 - 2017 (2)
|
Наименование |
Величина |
|
|
14503 Прочие долгосрочные обязательства на конец отчетного года |
61 |
|
|
14504 Прочие долгосрочные обязательства на конец предыдущего года |
261 |
|
|
14003 ИТОГО долгосрочных обязательств на конец отчетного года |
4489851 |
|
|
14004 ИТОГО долгосрочных обязательств на конец предыдущего года |
2466030 |
|
|
15103 Краткосрочные заемные обязательства на конец отчетного года |
|
Подобные документы
Types of the software for project management. The reasonability for usage of outsourcing in the implementation of information systems. The efficiency of outsourcing during the process of creating basic project plan of information system implementation.
реферат [566,4 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Analysis of the peculiarities of the mobile applications market. The specifics of the process of mobile application development. Systematization of the main project management methodologies. Decision of the problems of use of the classical methodologies.
контрольная работа [1,4 M], добавлен 14.02.2016Company’s representative of small business. Development a project management system in the small business, considering its specifics and promoting its development. Specifics of project management. Problems and structure of the enterprises of business.
реферат [120,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Relevance of electronic document flow implementation. Description of selected companies. Pattern of ownership. Sectorial branch. Company size. Resources used. Current document flow. Major advantage of the information system implementation in the work.
курсовая работа [128,1 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Improving the business processes of customer relationship management through automation. Solutions the problem of the absence of automation of customer related business processes. Develop templates to support ongoing processes of customer relationships.
реферат [173,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Составление проекта по методологии Oracle (комплекс методологий "Oracle Method") и по стандарту PMBOK (Project Management Body of Knowledge). Сравнение проектов, выявление их достоинств и недостатков, преимущественные сферы использования каждого.
контрольная работа [2,8 M], добавлен 28.05.2014Milestones and direction of historical development in Germany, its current status and value in the world. The main rules and principles of business negotiations. Etiquette in management of German companies. The approaches to the formation of management.
презентация [7,8 M], добавлен 26.05.2015The essence, structure, оbjectives and functions of business plan. The process’s essence of the bank’s business plan realization. Sequential decision and early implementation stages of projects. Widely spread mistakes and ways for their improvement.
курсовая работа [67,0 K], добавлен 18.12.2011Organizational structure of the company. Analysis of the external and internal environment. Assessment of the company's competitive strength. Company strategy proposal. Structure of implementation and creation of organizational structure of management.
дипломная работа [2,7 M], добавлен 19.01.2023Программный комплекс Project Expert, оценка его возможностей и функциональные особенности, структура и основные элементы. Microsoft Project как наиболее популярный в среде менеджеров малых и средних проектов. Программный комплекс Primavera, его функции.
курсовая работа [262,4 K], добавлен 06.01.2011Цели, задачи и методы управления строительным проектом. Методология управления проектом посредством пакета Rillsoft Project 5.3. Создание работы в таблице Гантта. Краткий обзор использования основных команд и инструментов системы Rillsoft Project 5.3.
курсовая работа [1,7 M], добавлен 24.05.2015Searching for investor and interaction with him. Various problems in the project organization and their solutions: design, page-proof, programming, the choice of the performers. Features of the project and the results of its creation, monetization.
реферат [22,0 K], добавлен 14.02.2016The impact of management and leadership styles on strategic decisions. Creating a leadership strategy that supports organizational direction. Appropriate methods to review current leadership requirements. Plan for the development of future situations.
курсовая работа [36,2 K], добавлен 20.05.2015Отработка приемов создания и моделирования экономической части стратегических планов организаций в системе Project Expert 6. Анализ влияния финансовых рисков на эффективность инвестиционных проектов. Составление отчета сформированного программой.
контрольная работа [27,5 K], добавлен 25.12.2015Создание и моделирование экономической части стратегических планов организаций в системе Project Expert 6. Построение финансовой модели предприятия и определение потребности в финансировании. Анализ финансовых результатов. Формирование и печать отчета.
курсовая работа [92,4 K], добавлен 16.12.2015Investigation of the subjective approach in optimization of real business process. Software development of subject-oriented business process management systems, their modeling and perfection. Implementing subject approach, analysis of practical results.
контрольная работа [18,6 K], добавлен 14.02.2016Formation of intercultural business communication, behavior management and communication style in multicultural companies in the internationalization and globalization of business. The study of the branch of the Swedish-Chinese company, based in Shanghai.
статья [16,2 K], добавлен 20.03.2013Понятие проекта и общие принципы управления при сетевом планировании. Анализ деятельности менеджера компании, построение сетевой модели и расчёт показателей календарного плана, оптимизация модели. Создание проекта для АРМ менеджера в среде MS Project.
курсовая работа [565,4 K], добавлен 17.06.2012Свойства и цели проекта. Особенности инновационных проектов. Эффективное управление проектом с использованием информационно-коммуникационных технологий. Программный комплекс Microsoft Project, его популярность в среде менеджеров и методика использования.
лекция [140,4 K], добавлен 12.12.2011Общая характеристика и особенности работы в программе Microsoft Project, ее назначение и выполняемые функции. Оценка преимуществ и недостатков данной системы, исполняемые ею операции и правила их реализации. Управление финансами и рисками проекта.
контрольная работа [1,6 M], добавлен 04.08.2010
