| So, let’s talk about Nordstrom’s |
|
|
|
| Written by Marlow Atticus | |
| Monday, 04 August 2008 | |
|
You’ll recall that I have shared my disappointment with the way that retailer’s sends EDI data for Direct Store Delivery or Cross Dock orders; I mentioned it in March and again last month. Well, I was working with one of Nordstrom's suppliers last week and learned about yet another unorthodox way of supporting these business scenarios. In the Nordstrom’s 850, if the order contains only an SDQ and no N1 at the item level, then the shipment needs to go to the Nordstrom DC location indicated in their DC to Store list of the Routing Guide Master document. However, there will be times where they will over-ride the list with a different location. This over-ride is done in an N1 loop at the item level. What’s unfortunate about this practice is that the suppliers can’t just program for a given DC, as it changes from PO to PO. I thought I’d also share with my readers that Cabela’s has introduced a new twist with they way that they will be creating cross dock orders that I learned about a couple of weeks ago. This is not a technology change but a change in a business practice. Where most companies will assign a given store to a DC, for Cabela’s any store can be requested to be shipped to any DC. Again, like Nordstrom’s suppliers should be aware of this and be prepared to program accordingly. Cabela’s, your suppliers would have preferred that you would have shared that you’re considering this and get a consensus on the probability of your trading partners being able to support this. Suppliers, you’ll need to make a program change and not assume that a given Cabela’s Store will always be associated to a DC. There is no relationship between DC and Store If you’re keeping track; below is my ranking of the hardest retailers to support Cross Docking –
I have got to believe that these retailers are getting shipments for the wrong DC all of the time. At U-Connect there was a theme of “Partnering” between Retailers and suppliers and working together to satisfy business requirements. Retailers when are you going to help out your “partners” and actually tell them where you want these shipments need to go instead of setting them up for failure by requiring them to keep track of these locations themselves. What’s also unfortunate is that; with many of these retailers, that list of Stores to DC, is a moving target, again, setting the suppliers up for failure. Perhaps if these changes often, you retailers should really consider an 816. Do well, Marlow | |
|
|