Revising the warehouse productivity measurement indicators: ratio-based benchmark

Abstract

Purpose The literature on warehouse performance assessments is mainly focussed on the efficiency and effectiveness of an action or activity due to customer demand and tailored fulfilment, with less attention being given to the performance measurement of each function of the warehouse and its overall productivity. Therefore, this study was aimed at revising the key warehouse performance metrics to a set of productivity measurement indicators that can be adopted internationally for benchmarking productivity performance. Design/methodology/approach A literature review and semi-structured survey questionnaire were used for this study. The importance of warehouse productivity performance was reviewed to revamp the measurement indicators. Through the use of a directed content analysis and descriptive analysis, an extensive study was carried out to analyze existing warehouse productivity indicators. Findings The findings of this study provide comprehensive references for practitioners and academicians for improving the classification of productivity measurements from existing key performance metrics for warehousing. Also, this paper highlights the warehouse resources related to the respective warehouse operation activities. Research limitations/implications The study was limited to productivity performance indicators adapted from Staudt et al. (2015). Furthermore, the samples for this study comprised Malaysian academicians and practitioners in the related field. The findings can be adapted on a global scale as this study implemented general warehouse operation processes. Originality/value Consequently, the contributions of this study are that it provides relevant benchmarks for key productivity performance indicators in the warehousing sector that has worldwide applicability and the developed model provides a conceptual platform from which further theoretical and empirical developments can be carried out.

The significance of warehouse management in supply chain: An ISM approach

“…The 5M (Man, Method, Material, Machine, and Measurement) are the most common sources of errors, and they require continuous maintenance (Hajej et al, 2021). Following the implementation of all remedies, performance metrics such as throughput and turnover should be monitored (Karim et al, 2020). It must have a long-term favourable trend, if not, then there must be some variables causing problems with the warehouse's operation.…”

Linking resource bundling and logistics capability with performance: study on 3PL providers in India

“…The respondents provided data on the indicators using closed-ended questions based on a five-point Likert scale (1: Strongly disagree; 5: Strongly agree) (Karim et al. , 2020).…”

“…The respondents provided data on the indicators using closed-ended questions based on a five-point Likert scale (1: Strongly disagree; 5: Strongly agree) (Karim et al, 2020). This perceptual scale is used so that the respondents can rate their present emphasis and progress in several areas (Kembro and Norrman, 2022).…”

Decision analysis of warehouse productivity performance indicators to enhance logistics operational efficiency

“…As such, Table 1 displays the warehousing productivity efficiency metrics for determining the most significant metric for increasing warehouse productivity. The model illustrated the critical warehouse services, such as labor, machinery, space, information system and warehouse operations, which included both inbound and outbound processes (Karim et al , 2020). Therefore, by extending and exploring the value tree of Karim et al (2020), assisting to answer the research question of this study.…”