×

Loading...

文章写的真不错,观察,归纳和总结很有启发

1 Target 决策层战略失误是主要原因

2 加拿大整体水平相对低,从业人员素质待提高应该是加快了问题的激化和进程。

3 涉及零售,仓储,咨询,软件项目管理,技术人员培训和储备,很多很多方面。

就我们IT从业人员的角度,有几点很有启发。

1 加拿大的IT行业整体水平可以用低下来总结,说明我们未来还有的混,求个发展也是可能。
2 各行业技术实施整合消化的能力也是很一般,说明我们老家伙们,未来还能继续吃饭,年轻人小精英们看来
都跑南边跑光了。

几个熟悉的面孔反复出现, 仓储的JDS,SAP,零售的NCR/RETALIX,咨询的ACCENTURE,外包 的 india,
小感慨啊。
Sign in and Reply Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 工作学习 / 事业工作 / 只有30%的数据库数据是准确的,到底是谁导致了Target Canada的失败,SAP,Accenture,公英制转换,外包的印度合同工,JDA软件公司,以色列的Retalix POS系统,还是Target自己? +1
    本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛THE LAST DAYS OF TARGET
    The untold tale of Target Canada’s difficult birth, tough life and brutal death
    By Joe Castaldo

    http://www.canadianbusiness.com/the-last-days-of-target-canada/

    (节选)
    Finding an answer was tricky. By using Target’s existing technology, employees in Canada could draw on the large amount of expertise in the U.S. That plan had shortcomings as well. The technology was not set up to deal with a foreign country, and it would have to be customized to take into account the Canadian dollar and even French-language characters. Those changes would take time—which Target did not have. A ready-made solution could be implemented faster, even if the company had little expertise in actually using it.

    The team responsible for the decision went with a system known as SAP, made by the German enterprise software company of the same name. Considered the gold standard in retail, SAP is used by many companies around the world, from Indigo in Canada to Denmark’s Dansk supermarket chain. It essentially serves as a retailer’s brain, storing huge amounts of data related to every single product in stores. That data would be fed by SAP into Target’s other crucial systems: software to forecast demand for products and replenish stocks, and a separate program for managing the distribution centres. After implementing SAP in Canada, Target wanted to eventually switch the U.S. operations over as well, aligning the two countries and ensuring the entire company benefited from the latest technology.

    While SAP might be considered best in class, it’s an ornery, unforgiving beast. Sobeys introduced a version of SAP in 1996 and abandoned the effort by 2000. (It wasn’t until 2004 that the grocery chain tried again.) Similarly, Loblaws started moving to SAP in 2007 and projected three to five years to get it done. The implementation took two years longer than expected because of unreliable data in the system. Target was again seeking to do the impossible: It was going to set up and run SAP in roughly two years. The company wasn’t doing it alone, however, and hired Accenture (which also worked on Loblaws’ integration) as the lead consultant on the project. Target believed the problems other retailers faced were due to errors in data conversion. Those companies were essentially taking information from their existing systems and translating it for SAP, a messy process in which it’s easy to make mistakes. Target, on the other hand, was starting fresh. There was no data to convert, only new information to input.

    ..
    ..

    It didn’t take long for Target to figure out the underlying cause of the breakdown: The data contained within the company’s supply chain software, which governs the movement of inventory, was riddled with flaws. At the very start, an untold number of mistakes were made, and the company spent months trying to recover from them. In order to stock products, the company had to enter information about each item into SAP. There could be dozens of fields for a single product. For a single product, such as a blender, there might be fields for the manufacturer, the model, the UPC, the dimensions, the weight, how many can fit into a case for shipping and so on. Typically, this information is retrieved from vendors before Target employees put it into SAP. The system requires correct data to function properly and ensure products move as anticipated.

    A team assigned to investigate the problem discovered an astounding number of errors. Product dimensions would be in inches, not centimetres or entered in the wrong order: width by height by length, instead of, say, length by width by height. Sometimes the wrong currency was used. Item descriptions were vague. Important information was missing. There were myriad typos. “You name it, it was wrong,” says a former employee. “It was a disaster.”

    It was also something the company should have seen coming. The rush to launch meant merchandisers were under pressure to enter information for roughly 75,000 different products into SAP according to a rigid implementation schedule. Getting the details from suppliers largely fell on the young merchandising assistants. In the industry, information from vendors is notoriously unreliable, but merchandising assistants were often not experienced enough to challenge vendors on the accuracy of the product information they provided. (The staff were also working against the countdown to opening.) “There was never any talk about accuracy,” says a former employee. “You had these people we hired, straight out of school, pressured to do this insane amount of data entry, and nobody told them it had to be right.” Worse, the company hadn’t built a safety net into SAP at this point; the system couldn’t notify users about data entry errors. The investigative team estimated information in the system was accurate about 30% of the time. In the U.S., it’s between 98% and 99%. (Accenture, which Target hired as a consultant on SAP, said in a statement: “Accenture completed a successful SAP implementation for Target in Canada. The project was reviewed independently and such review concluded that there is no Accenture connection with the issues you refer to.”)

    The investigating team went to Fisher and John Morioka, the senior vice-president of merchandising, with a drastic proposal: Shut down the entire merchandising division so everyone could comb through and verify every single piece of data in the system—manually. The team stressed there was simply no other way to get it done. Hiring an external consultant would take too long, and it was impossible to expect the employees to do such a painstaking, arduous task and their regular jobs at the same time. Fisher immediately gave the green light.

    Thus, “data week” was held in the fall of 2012. Merchandisers essentially had to confirm every data point for every product with their vendors. A buyer might have 1,500 products and 50 to 80 fields to check for each one. The more experienced employees had the foresight to keep records of verified information (dubbed “sources of truth”), which made the task a little easier. Others weren’t so lucky. Complicating matters was the dummy information entered into the system when SAP was set up. That dummy data was still there, confusing the system, and it had to be expunged. “We actually sat there and went through every line of data manually,” says a former employee. “It was terrible.” Target anticipated how awful it would be and designed the week to help keep employees sane. To kick it off and rally spirits, a few employees performed a hip-hop song-and-dance routine on the first day. Ice cream and pizza flooded in to keep employees fuelled up, some of whom stayed well past midnight that week, squinting at screens through bleary eyes.

    There was an entirely different process to ensure the correct data actually made it into SAP. The employees in Mississauga couldn’t do so directly. Instead, the information was sent to a Target office in India, where staff would load it into SAP. Extra contractors had to be hired in India, too. “Sometimes even when we had the data correct, it got mixed up by the contractors in Target India,” says a former employee. (Another former employee disputes this: “Sometimes the quality of their work wasn’t so great, but for the most part they did a good job.”) In any event, uploading took longer than expected, and data week stretched into two. Periodic data blitzes in individual departments became common into the following year.

    ..
    ..

    Ironically, even as consumers encountered barely stocked stores, Target’s distribution centres were bursting with products. Target Canada had ordered way more stock than it could actually sell. The company had purchased a sophisticated forecasting and replenishment system made by a firm called JDA Software, but it wasn’t particularly useful at the outset, requiring years of historical data to actually provide meaningful sales forecasts. When the buying team was preparing for store openings, it instead relied on wildly optimistic projections developed at U.S. headquarters. According to someone with knowledge of the forecasting process in Minneapolis, the company treated Canadian locations the same way they did operational stores in the U.S. and not as newcomers that would have to draw competitors away from rival retailers. Even if the stores were in out-of-the-way spots—and some of the locations in the Zellers portfolio certainly were—the company assumed the strength of the Target brand would lure customers. There was another element at play, too. “Once you signed up to do 124 Zellers locations, it felt like there was a point where it’s like we have to assume sales will be good,” says the former employee. “It’s very backwards.”

    In Canada, some buyers also relied on vendors for guidance, but vendors fell under the Target spell like everyone else. “They would say, ‘Because it’s Target, they’ll sell double what Zellers was selling.’ And that would be what we put in that initial forecast,” says a former buyer. In consequence, Target ordered too much product that first year. It all hit the distribution centres at the same time, creating a severe bottleneck.

    The depots were hampered by other factors, caused by lingering data problems and the learning curve associated with the new systems. Manhattan, the company’s warehouse software, and SAP weren’t communicating properly. Sometimes, the issues concerned dimensions and quantities. An employee at headquarters might have ordered 1,000 toothbrushes and mistakenly entered into SAP that the shipment would arrive in a case pack containing 10 boxes of 100 toothbrushes each. But the shipment might actually be configured differently—four larger boxes of 250 toothbrushes, for example. As a result, that shipment wouldn’t exist within the distribution centre’s software and couldn’t be processed. It would get set aside in what was designated as the “problem area.” These sorts of hang-ups happen at any warehouse, but at Target Canada, they happened with alarming frequency. Warehouse workers got so desperate to move shipments they would sometimes slice open a crate that was supposed to contain, say, a dozen boxes of paper towels but only had 10, stuff in two more boxes, tape it shut and send it to a store that way.

    ..
    ..

    To add even more headaches, the point-of-sale system was malfunctioning. The self-checkouts gave incorrect change. The cash terminals took unusually long to boot up and sometimes froze. Items wouldn’t scan, or the POS returned the incorrect price. Sometimes a transaction would appear to complete, and the customer would leave the store—but the payment never actually went through. The POS package was purchased from an Israeli company called Retalix, which worked closely with Target Canada to address the issues. Progress was maddeningly slow. In 2014, a Retalix team flew to Toronto to see first-hand what Target was dealing with. After touring a store, one of the Retalix executives remarked, “I don’t understand how you’re using this,” apparently baffled the retailer managed to keep going with so many bugs. But Target didn’t have time to find a new vendor and deploy another technology. “We were bound to this one bad decision,” says a former employee. (Retalix was purchased in 2012 by NCR Corp., the American global payment transaction firm.) “When entering a new country, it is normal for retail software systems to require updates to tailor the solution to market needs and processes,” NCR said in a statement in response to questions about Target’s experience. “NCR was making progress to customize the solution for the market and Target’s new operations until their decision to exit the country.”

    ..
    ..

    Tony Fisher felt it too. He was open about telling employees that he’d never managed through such a challenging situation before. Former employees say his background—primarily in merchandising—was ill-suited to helping him deal with the severe operational and technological problems Target Canada faced. Those close to Fisher say he took the company’s troubles personally. In the early days, he was a constant sight on the floor of Target Canada’s open-concept office, chatting with employees at all levels. But he and some of his leadership team became less visible as problems mounted. “For leaders who have experience with failure, that would be the last thing you do,” says a former employee. “You would be front and centre, give confidence and reinforce the direction. That didn’t happen.” Others contend Fisher’s schedule didn’t allow him to be as visible. As the situation worsened, he was frequently in meetings, participating in conference calls, visiting stores or flying to Minneapolis. (Fisher declined to comment.)

    In February 2014, Target headquarters released its annual results, revealing a US$941-million loss in Canada. The company attributed the shortfall to growing pains, expansion costs and—because of all that excess inventory sitting in warehouses—significant markdowns. “As we enter 2014 with a much cleaner inventory position, the team’s number one operation focus is on in-stocks—ensuring we have the right quantity of each item in the right place at the right time,” Steinhafel said on the earnings call. It was his last as Target CEO. A month prior, Target had disclosed a massive security breach in which hackers stole the personal information of 70 million customers in the U.S. Combined with the bleeding operations in Target Canada, Steinhafel’s position was untenable, and he stepped down in May. (He walked away with US$61 million in compensation.) Fisher—hand-picked by Steinhafel—left the company two weeks later.

    By the end, Fisher was practically a ghost. “He gave every last ounce of himself. He was just done. He had nothing left,” says a former employee. His departure wasn’t surprising, but it was deeply felt. “I loved Tony. He’s probably one of the smartest people I’ve met,” says someone who worked with him closely. “He absolutely took the fall for Target Canada.” The reality is the odds were stacked against him from the start, given the extremely tight timeline and the thin margin for error. “Everyone was trying to execute Gregg Steinhafel’s deal,” says a former employee, “and once one thing went wrong, it was an impossible achievement.”

    ..
    ..

    A small group of employees also made an alarming discovery that helped explain why certain items appeared to be in stock at headquarters but were actually missing from stores. Within the chain’s replenishment system was a feature that notified the distribution centres to ship more product when a store runs out. Some of the business analysts responsible for this function, however, were turning it off—purposely. Business analysts (who were young and fresh out of school, remember) were judged based on the percentage of their products that were in stock at any given time, and a low percentage would result in a phone call from a vice-president demanding an explanation. But by flipping the auto-replenishment switch off, the system wouldn’t report an item as out of stock, so the analyst’s numbers would look good on paper. “They figured out how to game the system,” says a former employee. “They didn’t want to get in trouble and they didn’t really understand the implications.” Two people involved in the discovery allow that human error may have been a component, too. Like SAP, the replenishment software was brand new to Target, and the company didn’t fully understand how to use it. When Schindele was told of the problem, he ordered the function to be fully activated, which revealed for the first time the company’s pitifully low in-stock percentages. From there, a team built a tool that reported when the system was turned on or off, and determined whether there was a legitimate reason for it to be turned off, such as if the item was seasonal. Access to the controls was taken away from the analysts, depending on the product.

    The company had also been learning more about using SAP correctly. Former employees describe decoding SAP as like peeling an onion—it had multiple layers and made you want to cry. One initiative in particular greatly improved Target’s data quality. A technology team was finally able to install an automatic verification feature to catch bad data before it could enter SAP and wreak havoc. If an employee entered a UPC that was short one digit, for example, the system wouldn’t allow that purchase order to proceed until the code was correct. The technology Target used in the U.S. has these checks and balances, as do other retailers who use SAP. Target Canada finally implemented a verification tool in 2014, according to a former employee who was involved, owing to time constraints. “This happened very late in the game.”

    There was yet another basic error Target Canada didn’t discover until 2014. According to one former employee, there was a misunderstanding about shipping dates. What Target thought was the “in-DC date,” meaning the date on which product would arrive at a distribution centre, was interpreted by some of its larger vendor partners as the day on which they would actually ship the product to Target. As a result, stock was constantly arriving late from Target’s perspective but on time according to vendors. “It was like, ‘Holy crap, how did we possibly not know this?’” says the former employee. (Others dispute this characterization and say the impact of the mix-up was limited.)

    ..
    ..

    The news on Jan. 15 was much worse: Target Canada was filing for bankruptcy protection. It had spent $7 billion on the expansion so far, and it didn’t project turning a profit until at least 2021. Early that morning, Schindele’s direct reports broke the news to their teams, who then informed their own departments. One of these leaders recalls moving through a fog and hyperventilating while struggling to remember how to dial in to a conference call. After running through the prepared script he was given, he broke down, crying. “These were people I’d hired. I’d impacted their lives. I’d become friends with them. So that was horrible,” says the former employee. A press release went out at 8 a.m. By then, the entire company knew.

    ..
    ..

    All 133 stores closed by April. Schindele soon returned to Target in Minneapolis, where he’s now senior vice-president of Target properties. Fisher later resurfaced as a senior vice-president at a consumer health-care company also in Minneapolis. Steinhafel, the one who put the entire operation in motion and set it on a path toward self-destruction, has kept his head down. His LinkedIn profile simply lists him as a “retail professional.” (He did not respond to requests for comment.)

    Curiously, the U.S. retailer has not abandoned the country entirely. In October, Target launched a small pilot project to ship goods ordered online to Canadians. The company that lost billions, suffered a humiliating defeat here and endured an ordeal that left its employees drained, exhausted and ultimately jobless, titled the website for Canuck shoppers “Target loves Canada.”更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 好文章!关键问题出在Target的战略层面,包括进入加拿大市场的方式,规模和时机,数据,技术和外包的问题只是战略失误的症状。
      • 毫无疑问,问题出在target的管理层,其他都是借口。明明就是一个walmart,非要把自己打扮成高大上,搞得我们加拿大农民没有在美国进过target似的 +4
        • 一个不实诚的企业, 装大尾巴狼的企业, 注定会被市场抛弃。The customers are never wrong. +1
          • TARGET 在美国是个很实诚的企业,从不装大尾巴狼,从不玩猫腻。FYI。我喜欢的 STORE 有两个:一个是 TARGET 另一个是 BED BATH AND BEYOND。 +1
            • +1 +1
            • 对。在加拿大就装起来, 不知何故? +1
              • 我不相信企业文化因为跨国界,就发生巨大的变化。这两个商店的文化是 RETAILER 里,最实诚最人性化最肯 SHARE PROFITS 的,STAPLES 也算很不错。当然事实我也不知道。
                • 不同的管理层, 有不同的管理行为, 是非常普遍的现象。有的公司不同的division, 文化都不一样。Target在美国是非常成功的, 我每次去美国必去。但在加拿大它失败了, 而且失败得很彻底, 它失败的重要原因是忽悠消费者。淮南为橘, 淮北为枳。
                  • BESTBUY 在中国也灰溜溜地撤了,咱天朝山寨很牛的说。
                    算是平行比较?
                    • Uber去年在中国烧掉了十亿美元
                    • 如果是败给山寨, 也还算死得光荣。在美国那么好个target, 到了加拿大就用一种自欺欺人的傲慢经营, 真是想不通, 管理层的脑袋是怎么进的水。当初加拿大人民对他们可是翘首以盼的。 +1
                      • 当初加拿大人翘首以待希望target的价格能match 沃尔玛的,target 管理者应该不会不知道吧?
          • 看来不只是我觉得加拿大这边Target 不诚实,哈哈 +1
        • 看来你真的是不了解target啊。它在美國,是比walmart, k-mart高端很多的超市。且不说它每年都会请知名服装设计师给它设计物美价廉的产品,它的品味比walmart的东西高出一大截。 +1
          • 比沃尔玛是高级,但也谈不上高出一大截吧。价格贵点,店面漂亮点,和JCPenny差不多吧
          • 去过美国的target, 第一印象就是:另一个walmart.. 真没觉得它比walmart好到那里。 +1
            • 看来我们的观感很一致 :) +1
          • 价位上和 WALMART 差不多。但是 STYLE 是迥然不同的。TARGET 还算是讲究 LIFESTYLE,WALMART 根本不存在 LIFESTYLE 这个概念,WALMART 胜在全和 24 小时营业。
            • 个人感觉,靶子店即使在美国也有定位模糊问题。随着电商的崛起,传统零售业都不好做,靶子店没有多少客户粘度会很难。
    • LoL, 外包的印度合同工 +2
    • "Target Canada would eventually learn what happens when inexperienced employees working under a tight timeline are expected to launch a retailer using technology that nobody—not even at the U.S. headquarters—really understood."
    • 没的怪了,只好怪IT了。 +1
    • 外包的错,SAP的错,阿三的错!(●˘◡˘●) +1
    • 查查用的啥数据库,sql server还是甲骨文?只有30%正确,太烂了
      • 大哥,是数据输入错了。
        • 从印度找来的临时工干的
        • 这也太神奇了,随便找两个人来输也不会错吧?
          • 大家都没读原文吗?很多原因,有BA的理解错误,有供货商的数据问题,有录入员的问题,也有印度临时工的问题。。。其实,做过数据项目的话就会知道,如果没有几轮数据清理和校验,一开始能有30%正确算很好了。
            • 原文太长了,所以我只摘录了和IT相关的部分,估计还是太长,多数人 不会看内容的
              • 然后都被你标题党误导了。:)
            • 随便找两个人来就会校验了。没想到来一堆捣乱的。
              • 出问题之前都这么想,出问题以后就觉得项目里所有的人都是来捣乱的。上面文章里就是这个情况,只是作者多少以为是特例,其实是普遍现象。
      • 没用过SAP,据说有自己的数据库?听说他们家的数据库里的表很多是用数字命名的,极难维护,不知是真是假。
    • 就加拿大这点小市场,还想搞高端,没出路的。
    • 原来我以为靶子店有一套成熟的体系(软硬件供应链都齐全),而且加拿大跟美国语言文化都接近一致,居然可以搞到这么被动。光是一个英制公制或者标准差异不一,不可能导致这样的混乱。看来加拿大有严重的弊端,雇员能力!
      • 业内有很多骗子
    • 文章写的真不错,观察,归纳和总结很有启发
      1 Target 决策层战略失误是主要原因

      2 加拿大整体水平相对低,从业人员素质待提高应该是加快了问题的激化和进程。

      3 涉及零售,仓储,咨询,软件项目管理,技术人员培训和储备,很多很多方面。

      就我们IT从业人员的角度,有几点很有启发。

      1 加拿大的IT行业整体水平可以用低下来总结,说明我们未来还有的混,求个发展也是可能。
      2 各行业技术实施整合消化的能力也是很一般,说明我们老家伙们,未来还能继续吃饭,年轻人小精英们看来
      都跑南边跑光了。

      几个熟悉的面孔反复出现, 仓储的JDS,SAP,零售的NCR/RETALIX,咨询的ACCENTURE,外包 的 india,
      小感慨啊。
    • 好文!
      数据是企业的重要资产。
    • 人家美国店可是一分钱都没有赔。都是这边的损失。总经理还拿千万走人的。就是一群穿西装的坏蛋,