Why are you
counting?
The first thing you need to determine is why you are counting. Specifically, what is it that you expect to
achieve through your count program? If
you are setting up a program just to fulfill a corporate requirement of counting
inventory X times per year or to achieve some subjective accuracy number thrown
at you, you will likely not end up with a highly effective count program. You should be counting to optimize your
business operations and achieve high levels of customer service. If your business has been operating for some
time you probably have some idea of the areas that have had ongoing problems
related to inaccurate inventories. This
is a good place to start, however, you should also weigh the effects created by
these inaccuracies to determine which areas are more critical than others. Small variances in some types of raw
materials may have little or no effect on operations while inaccuracies on
others may shut down an operation.
Inaccuracies in finished goods tend to have the most obvious direct
effect on customer service and generally get a high priority in count
programs.
Frequency of
Counts.
Count frequency should be calculated to meet your previously stated
objectives. Factors such as the effects
on customer service and manufacturing operations, and the potential for
inaccuracy within the specific product group will affect the frequency of your
counts. Even factors such as manufacturing and supplier lead times should be
considered in prioritizing counts.
Certain key raw materials critical to your operation that are highly
prone to variances due to high scrap factors or variation in manufacturing
processes may need to be counted every week (or day) while some very slow moving
finished goods may only need to be counted once a year. As your count program evolves, the frequency
of counts will change based upon the accuracy levels achieved.
Accuracy
Tracking.
Your count program should be considered part of a continuous improvement
process. Tracking accuracy is necessary
to determine where improvement is needed.
The more detail you can provide, the better you will be able to pinpoint
specific areas requiring attention.
Breaking down accuracy by product groups, physical area, and operational
groups, will provide the information needed to improve processes and determine
priorities for future counts. Dont get
hung up on Benchmarking. There are so
many variables in the ways accuracy is tracked from one organization to another
that these comparisons tend to be a waste of time. What you should get hung up on is
consistency. Spend the time to develop
your methods for tracking accuracy to meet current and future needs. Long term data is invaluable provided the
method used to compile it has not changed.
I primarily use two methods for tracking inventory variances, which I
will refer to as Transactional and
On-hand methods. On-hand tracking is the most commonly
used method where variance amounts are divided into on-hand amounts to give you
a variance percentage. The On-hand
method gives you a snapshot of what your inventory accuracy is at that specific
point in time. It is helpful in
projecting the impact your variances might have on subsequent operations and is
the only method accountants use. The
problem with the on-hand method is that it may not give you enough information
to pinpoint process problems and, at a detail level, it fluctuates too much
based upon current on-hand balances. For
example, if on Monday you count part #XYZ and find you are short 20 units out of
an on-hand balance of 100, this results in an accuracy rate of 80%. However, if you did not count this item until
Tuesday and a receipt of 2000 units was received Monday afternoon, your accuracy
rate would now be 99% even though you are still missing those 20 units.
Transactional tracking
compares the variance amount to the amount consumed during the count period,
showing the accuracy of your operation.
This type of tracking is far more useful in determining process problems.
Unfortunately, it is also much more difficult to implement this method. In the
same example where you are short the 20 units and you determined that you have
consumed 1000 units during the count period, you now have an operational
accuracy of 98%. If this item is a raw
material used in manufacturing and you determine that your finished goods is
accurate then you may have a 2% variance either in your bill of material or
scrap reporting. Transactional tracking
assumes that your receipt quantities are accurate.
There is another method widely used in cycle counting I will refer to as
Good Count Bad Count. In this method you compare the number of good
counts to the number of bad counts. Tolerances are often put in place to allow a
count to be considered "good" if it is within a certain percentage. I personally find very little value to this
method. Regardless of the methods used
it is important to summarize variances in both net and gross amounts. For example, if you had variances on three
items, one being short $50, another short $5, and another over $40, you would
have a net variance amount of -$15 and a gross variance of $95.
Gross accuracy calculations are a better method of showing true
accuracy. In the end, the measurement
must be meaningful. If the measurement
is not providing information that will allow you to optimize operations, why are
you doing it?
Blind Counts.
Now I know Ill get a fair amount of disagreement on my views on this
subject, but here goes. First of all, a
blind count occurs when you send your counters out with an item number and
location, but with no quantity information. They count the product and write
down the quantity or enter it directly into a data collection device. The count administrator then compares the
count quantities to on-hand quantities and investigates any variances (usually
conducting recounts of each variance). The
problems with blind counts are that they have lower first-pass accuracy rates
and are more time consuming. Just
the action of writing and/or entering the counts creates an opportunity for
error. Having someone perform a recount
on all variances is necessary on blind counts, this puts greater demands on your
resources. If you do blind counts and
perform recounts of all variances, this is the most accurate method of counting
inventory. However, by giving your
initial counters the quantity information and setting a system to just confirm
correct counts and only enter variances, you will greatly reduce initial count
errors, thus reducing recounts, thus enabling you to count more product with the
same amount of resources.
Now dont get me wrong, there is a downside to giving your counters the
quantities. If you dont keep tight
control you may find some counters cheating on items that are difficult to count
by just confirming it as correct if it looks close. You also risk honest employees unconsciously
making errors just because the quantity is visible. Trust me, when your doing a lot of counting
your mind can play tricks on you, if you see a quantity of 12 on the paper you
might look at a stack of 16 and think 12.
If you closely monitor the count process and thoroughly train your
counters I feel that the benefits of counting more product often outweighs the
risks associated with non-blind counts.
Timing.
Timing is critical in cycle counting.
In a perfect world you should be able to count and resolve discrepancies
with no other processing going on during the count process. If your operation allows you to do this,
great, your job will be a lot easier. If
it is cost prohibitive or impossible to shut down all other operations, it does
not mean you cannot have a successful cycle counting program it just means
your going to have to work a lot harder at it.
You will need a thorough understanding of all operations and must be able
to track any transactions occurring during the counts. Even with this you may have situations where
it is just far too difficult to get an accurate count on an item that day and
may need to skip it and count it again a couple days later. Whether you are shutting down operations or
not, you must have solid procedures and thorough control over inventory
operations making sure that all transactions are performed in a timely
manner.
Staffing.
Only use highly trained accurate employees to count your product. Specialize if possible. Having employees
whose primary responsibility is counting inventory and resolving discrepancies
will greatly increase the level of success of the program. In some operations this may not be
feasible.
Understand the
effects of adjustments.
It is imperative the person responsible for approving and making the
inventory adjustments based on your counts understands the effects of these
adjustments. One of the biggest problems
I see with cycle count programs is that they do not handle lost product
well. If you have a random storage
warehouse and are counting by item, your count program will tell you when youre
missing something but does nothing for locating this lost product. You will need some type of location auditing
process in conjunction with this to find the lost product or change your
program to be based on location rather than item. Meanwhile your count administrator must be
making decisions on variances and determining when to make adjustments. In many operations, an adjustment is made one
day to deduct the missing product and an offsetting adjustment made a few days
later when it is found. The problem with
this is the effect this has had on materials management. When the product was
deducted a new purchase order was probably generated to order more product and
production schedules and manufacturing orders may have been changed due to the
unavailability of this item. Even though
the product turned up just a few days later youve still caused additional work,
disrupted the production schedule, and may now end up with excess inventory on
this item. A good count administrator
should be able to determine if a variance is due to a process issue or is
lost. Adjustments for lost and found inventory should be avoided whenever possible. Creating a variance location to move lost
and found product to and from is a great way to have visibility to the
variances without the havoc created by the adjustments. These variance locations must be closely
monitored and you must have an aggressive program for finding the product. An aggressive location auditing process will
prove to be far more effective than sending someone out to look for the lost
product. Obviously tightening up the
processes to avoid missing product in the first place makes this less of an
issue.