• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
2012 03 basics of label and identifier
 

2012 03 basics of label and identifier

on

  • 665 views

This presentation explains what to consider when identifying and labelling own package units for transportation and storage purposes

This presentation explains what to consider when identifying and labelling own package units for transportation and storage purposes

Statistics

Views

Total Views
665
Views on SlideShare
665
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
11
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  •   “”   

2012 03 basics of label and identifier 2012 03 basics of label and identifier Presentation Transcript

  • DHL Express, Global Business ITBasics of Labeling and Identifying Transport UnitsMartin TrederMarch 2012
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 2
  • IntroductionThe starting point for identifiers  Companies in industry and trade increasingly use package identifiers as internal database references. Target: You do not need to have all information on the package  Each party involved may put own barcodes on the package that are of relevance for him only.  In addition, each carrier requires one or more specific piece or shipment identifiers. The carrier cannot just process the senders’ identifiers instead – for obvious ambiguity reasons: Two senders may have accidentally used the same number for their respective packages.  As a result, cross-referencing is required between the sender’s identifier and the carrier’s identifier. This imposes various issues or risks:  Should one of the parties involved not be able to work on single package level (i.e. only on shipment level), a unique cross-referencing is not possible at all.  Cross-referencing requires additional database tables – usually for more than one party. This increases the complexity of data management.  Links often get lost – e.g. through data transmission problems or incomplete data capture. In these cases, a huge part of a piece’s journey is lost to one or more parties  The ideal solution would be a globally standardised package numbering system that is unanimous to all parties involved, without the need for previous bilateral agreements.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 3
  • IntroductionThe starting point for labels and barcodes  Usually, each party involved in handling a package adds further labels, to accommodate for own handling needs.  Sometimes one party even adds several labels, e.g. a carrier with a non-integrated network, or where multi-modal transport chains ask for changing information throughout the chain.  Of course, there are a variety of different label formats, each being designed to meet its users’ information needs.  As a result, it is not clear, who has to search where for the correct information on the package.  Often, labels even cover other labels that are of relevance for the consignee  In addition, there are a variety of barcodes on many packages. How can proper scanning of the correct barcodes be granted – for both manual and automated scanning processes?  What would help? Ideally, a harmonised structure for both labels and barcodes.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 4
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 5
  • Piece identifiersWhat are the needs towards a feasible package identifier?  Standard requirements towards a package identifier from industry and trade:  Each package must be referenced by a unanimous identifier, from packing to unpacking  The structure of the identifier must be flexible, to meet a company‘s individual demands. This includes “speaking” codes (containing codes for location, content etc.) and non-sequential usage of identifiers.  The identifier must be globally unique, to facilitate stable exchange of goods and data with suppliers, customers and potential 3rd party suppliers.  The identifier must be globally accepted, and there must be no competing numbering systems  Coding numbers into barcodes and transponders must be unanimously defined.  Number administration must be stable and secure (like Internet domain administration)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 6
  • Piece IdentifiersThe ISO standard: License Plate  The development  The License Plate standard has been approved in 1996 as a European standard EN 1572.  It became an international ISO/IEC standard 15459 in 1999.  Since then the License Plate standard has been the only system to globally uniquely allocate identifiers to packages. ISO Dun & Bradstreet License Unitrans Plate (DHL) ... NATO GS1 SSCC VGL (DHL) Norsk Odette Edipro Siemens UPU IBM TNT Edifice And many others – 40 organisations (September 2012)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 7
  • Piece identifiersThe ISO standard: License Plate General structure of a License Plate The structure Data Identifier (ASC MH10 standard) or Application Identifier (GS1 standard)  Each License Plate starts with a unanimous Issuing Agency code (IAC) Issuing Agency Code (ASC MH10) or packaging identifier / number  ISO has appointed the Dutch Standardisation extension (GS1 128 code list) Institute (NEN) as Registration Authority One or more Sub-Issuing Agency Codes* (ASC MH10) or Company Prefix (GS1)  Today, only international non-profit organisations can become Issuing Agency. These organisations Serial number Assigned by the can allocate sub-ranges to other organisations or (Sub-)IAC companies. Data IAC Sub-IAC Serial Data IAC Sub-IAC Serial  The ISO License Plate standard consists of two distinct sub-standards: ASC MH10: Alphanumeric License Plates, consisting of up to 35 characters GS1 SSCC: Numeric License Plates, always exactly 18 digits long (including check digit) Example of an ASC MH10 License Plate (issued by DHL Benelux, former VGL)  License Plates are unambiguously marked as * The Sub-IAC number is not mandatory such in bar-coded form, using Data Identifiers or Application Identifiers.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 8
  • Piece identifiersThe ISO standard: License Plate  What does the License Plate standard accomplish?  Transport packages can obtain a unique number beyond company borders.  Bilateral agreements or reference numbers are no longer necessary on piece level.  Huge number ranges are available via certain Issuing Agencies  Existing proprietary numbering systems can be embedded in License Plate thus becoming globally unique (perfect migration path)  A License Plate stays with a package for the full logistics chain, without having to be changed once.  As far as carriers support License Plates, they do not have to allocate an additional identifier for the transport process.  Bar-coding of License Plates is precisely and unanimously specified. The same applies to the storage of License Plates in RFID tags.  Usually, License Plate ranges are cheap to obtain.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 9
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 10
  • Main StandardsStandards describing the Multi Industry Transport Label  Several national and international standardization associations have described standards for a label layout.  The definition of the Multi Industry Standard Label took place in three major steps so far: ISO 15394 ANSI MH10.8 EN 1573 released published by ISO in Ongoing released by ANSI in by CEN in 1996 2000. Significantly maintenance... 1993 enhanced in 2010.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 11
  • Main StandardsStandards describing the Multi Industry Transport Label  What are the main differences between ANSI MH10.8, EN1573 and ISO 15394? ANSI did only consider EAN128 and Code 39. Code 128 had not been described. ANSI described Data Identifier and Application Identifier as well as their grade of equivalency. EN was intended as a rough guideline, to be specified by organizations that decided to use it. ISO is relatively restrictive and precise ISO demands the License Plate barcode to be in the bottom section of the label ISO defines the usage of the 2-dimensional barcode types MaxiCode and PDF417 (syntax to be used as described in ISO 15434); it also covers other ADC media.  Outlook Both EN1573 and ISO 15394 are supposed to be reviewed regularly. The next release of EN 1573 will probably be closer to the current ISO standard. However, it has not been modified since 1996 although a review period of 5 years had been initially foreseen. The European Standardisation organisation CEN simply does not see the need to add to the ISO standard.  Recommendation It is recommended to always refer to the ISO standard. It is the newest and most precisely described standard.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 12
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 13
  • MITL short surveyTypical Attributes of the Multi Industry Transport Label (ISO 15394)  Block Structure top-down  fixed label width(s), variable length  Well-defined barcode symbologies (Code 128, GS1-128, MaxiCode, PDF417)  Minimum requirements for a label where EDI is used in parallel  Data in linear barcodes to be coded using ASC MH10 Data Identifiers or GS1 Application Identifiers  Specification of plain text usage  Specification of barcode quality  It is recommended to use Symbology Identifier (ISO 15424) for each barcode on a label, to easily distinguish between different barcode types  The License Plate barcode is always located in the last segment on the label Example: DHL Transport Label The License Plate standard ISO 15459-1 recommends the usage of this label standard (ISO 15394) for License Plate labeling.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 14
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 15
  • Industry Segment StandardsThe ISO 15394 label became the basis for several industry standards An increasing number of barcode standards developed for certain segments or even single companies refer to the MITL definitions  GS1 Logistics Label This type of label keeps close to the ISO standard Issue: only GS1 SSCC and Application Identifier foreseen  HIBCC Supplier Labeling Standard This type of label keeps close to the ISO standard Both ASC MH10 and GS1 identification foreseen Restricted content; License Plate refers to EDI data  Global Transport Label Standard for the Automotive Industry (Odette, AIAG, JAMA, JAPIA) Uses MITL standards as a rough guideline only Bases on Data Identifiers and ASC MH10 License Plate Example: HIBCC Label with Data Identifiers (from “HIBC Supplier Labeling Standard”)  IATA 606 label No explicit reference to MITL, but guidelines have been followed waybill no. barcode mandatory, piece identifier (UPID) still optional piece identifier not yet restricted to License Plate (recommendation only)  and many more (Siemens Norm SN 18630-4, EDIFICE Shipment Label, FIATA label, DHL Express Transport Label v2.6/v3.1...)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 16
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 17
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: a) Label layout  Label width Choose a fixed label width. If piece size and the amount of data on the labeI allow, decide for the narrow width of 105 mm (A6 width) or 4”, respectively. (This width is supported by most thermo direct / thermo transfer printers.)  Label length Principally, the length can be variable, depending on information to be stored on label. However, a fixed length can save money. Pre-cut label material allows for higher label dispensing speed (no cut-off mechanism); printer hardware / maintenance is cheaper. Anyway, segments should be foreseen to be filled with carrier-specific information. The size A6 (or 4” times 6”, respectively) is the cheapest alternative. It is a standard size for thermo label rolls.Laser printers can use A4 sheets with 4 A6 labels on it In case of varying label content more than one label per piece could be printed, to allow for a fixed label length anyhow.  Print direction The label should be printed in portrait mode, to allow for a smaller print head Barcodes should be printed in picket fence format rather than in ladder format. This allows for faster printing and increases the lifetime of a print head (less changes between “hot” and “cold”)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 18
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: b) Data Identifiers (DI) / Application Identifiers (AI)  If possible, avoid barcode usage without Data/Application Identifier.  Define a precise standard or adopt an existing one.  Take care that official License Plate numbers are available to all participants. Introduction of GS1 SSCC can often go along with the introduction of ILNs ASC MH10 License Plates are available via international industry bodies that have become issuing agents Dun&Bradstreet also issues ASC MH10 License Plates (UN...) DHL Express can also issue License Plate ranges to customers  A combination of ASC MH10 Data Identifiers and GS1 Application Identifiers is no problem unless content is not properly defined.  However, do not forget to implement the operative support for both Identifier types, so that exchange with the “rest of the world” is not restricted Example: Label in computer industry (IBM)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 19
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: b) Data Identifiers (DI) / Application Identifiers (AI) Business partners using both EAN/UCC AIs and ASC MH10 DIs GS1 EAN/UCC AIs GS1 Mapping Tables ASC MH10 DIsSpecific in General innature. Mainly nature. Mainlyused in trade used inorientated manufacturingprocesses. orientated processes. The data exchange between partners of both groups requires a conversion from one identifier system to the other. For this purpose you need mappings. The identifier systems have differing features restricted Number of info-elements large strict Limitations, definitions lenient some Overlap of the info-elements many less Opportunity to differentiate info high = business partner There areare aof EAN/UCC AIs and ASC MH10 DIs which have no direct equivalent in the There a lot lot of GS1 other system or at best one with similar meaning.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 20
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: c) License Plate handling  License Plate re-usage The standard defines the minimum period before re- using a License Plate as “until a sufficient period of time has passed so that the first number has ceased to be of significance [...]”. The ISO standard would obviously allow for shorter cycles, e.g. for cut flowers. This, however, may lead to problems in co-operation with other companies (and their IT systems...) Thus, License Plates should not be reused for different units within 12 months after the old unit has ceased to exist. This has become a common (yet not formal!) business rule. Software that is meant to be able to process 3rd party License Plates should always be prepared to process any License Plate immediately again.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 21
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: c) License Plate handling  Duration of License Plate allocation to an piece This should be strictly defined: Is the License Plate valid for one single transport process only? Does it include possible returns? Can it be used again and again as long as the allocated piece is kept closed? General definition: A transport piece may – yet does not have to – keep its License Plate number as long as it remains closed. To obviate any problem of ambiguity, a clear distinction between a transport process number (Shipment number or Waybill number) and an piece number (License Plate) is necessary. One single License Plate may belong to several shipments - but not at the same time! 5. First transport: identifier known to sender 1234 .. CLOSED CLOSED ?? Return: different identifier? 4567 8. ..Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 22
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: d) Type of License Plate  Decide for GS1 SSCC if... ...you need only a relatively small number range …you do not need to keep your existing identifiers ...you want to process barcodes/identifiers with a fixed length ...you are working with ILNs, or you intend to do so soon ...you often have other barcodes on Pieces and need a “waterproof” distinction tool (unique Symbology Identifier for GS1-128) ...you use standard software that is prepared to process GS1 SSCC as a standard entity ...you want to have a guaranteed maximum barcode width (with given x-dimension) ...the majority of your business partners works with GS1 Application IdentifiersBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 23
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: d) Type of License Plate Decide for ASC MH10 License Plate if... ...you need flexibility in coding strings (digits and characters, different lengths, etc.) ...you want to embed your existing proprietary numbering system in License Plate strings (easy migration) ...you do not want to pay too much fee (check whether you are member of an international industry body that owns an Issuing Agency Code) ...you want to use License Plates in the context of a complete system of Data Identifiers, including full support of in-house processes (several ASC MH10 DIs do not yet have a GS1 counterpart) ...you have to or want to lavishly issue License Plates ...The majority of your business partners works with ASC MH10 Data Identifiers ...you need the same cost conditions for License Plate usage in various countries ...you want to have minimum ambiguity beyond barcoding (Issuing Agency Codes for validation) ...you are a non-profit organization with worldwide presence ( You can apply for your own IAC!) ...you need few numbers AND a very short code ( You can determine the length yourself)Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 24
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: e) Types of barcodes  Code 128 This code is the standard symbology for ASC MH10 License Plates  Code 39 This code is also allowed for ASC MH10 License Plates. However, it should not be used in new applications. It has been included for backward compatibility only. Its usage is strictly not recommended.  GS1-128 (former EAN128) This is the only allowed barcode symbology for GS1 SSCCs. It needs to be used in conjunction with GS1 Application Identifiers only.  Further types of barcodes There may be specific advantages to some other barcodes. However, almost all kinds of identifiers can be stored in Code 128 or EAN128 sufficiently. Whenever complex character sets have to be encoded, other barcodes have to be considered, e.g.  for Unicode: barcode symbology 93 i (in WORD mode) or QR Code (2-dimensional)  for full EBCDIC: Data Matrix code (2-dimensional) Sample Data Matrix codeBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 25
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: e) Communication sender/receiver  Transmission of data to partners in logistic chain The flexible structure of the MITL allows for data coding to different addressees (carrier, consignee, warehouse, assembly line, ...) Mutual agreements should always refer to ISO 15394 Information for different addressees should be coded in separate blocks (but do not necessarily have to). Clipping from Label & Identifier  2D barcodes: Different symbologies of DHL Express: The DataMatrix code contains Being a stacked linear code, PDF417 does not require the full transport order expensive camera systems. Its rectangular format fits PDF417 perfectly with the block-structure of MITL. MaxiCode is a proprietary code and should not be used DataMatrix is a very modern and effective symbology  Use Data/Application identifiers in barcodes Agree on communication using well-defined Data-/Application Identifiers. Let ISO 15434 define the format.  Avoid further linear barcode types depending on License Plate type, only Code128 or GS1- MaxiCode 128 should be chosen for bar-coded data transmission.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 26
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: f) Automated sorting of Pieces  When designing barcodes for automated sorting systems, three different strategies can be distinguished. Consider the following pros and cons: Bar-coded target information (e.g. warehouse code or shelf number in barcode)  No additional data is necessary  Identical content of barcode and plain text sorting information  Target information has to be known already when printing the label Sorting via identifier (License Plate) only, taking target information from databases  Flexibility to change routing after label printout  Piece cannot be moved if data is not available Bar-coded “raw data”, preferably together with official Data/Application Identifiers  raw data could be postcode or customer number  This solution provides the flexibility to change routing after label printout  Piece-specific data is not needed to sort piece (only general tables)  Usually, the third alternative is recommended, as it is a good compromise  This is also the choice of major express carriers, including DHL Express.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 27
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: g) Manual sorting of Pieces  When designing barcodes for manual sorting systems, there are basically two different approaches, having the following advantages and disadvantages: Plain text/symbols on the label, indicating the target (and/or the route to this target)  Identical content of barcode and plain text sorting information  Fast to process (if printed in a big font)  When the label is printed by a third party (supplier or customer), he has to know the delivery location  Data may be outdated when sorting. Example of a manual sorting segment in a multi industry transport label (DHL Express) Using bar-coded information only, in conjunction with a mobile scanner.  This works in conjunction with the sorting barcode (see previous page).  Mobile scanners can always store most recent sorting tables.  Depending on the barcode structure, access to tables is required (piece specific or general).  This may slow down the process significantly, especially for small boxes.  No general recommendation. Both methods may be appropriate, depending on environment.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 28
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: h) RFID and Multi Industry Transport Label?  RFID (Transponder) usage has not yet been considered explicitly in ISO’s MITL standard. It is meant, though, where the License Plate standard speaks about “other ADC media”.  However, a combined approach is already possible today: Combined thermo-printers/RFID coding units can print MITL on a label while coding a passive transponder that is incorporated in that label. This shows a migration approach also.  As with 2-dimensional barcodes, the unique piece identifier (License Plate) should in any case be printed on the label in addition in the traditional way both in plain text and as barcode.  RFID does not necessarily have to be used by all partners in a logistic chain. It may be a means of communication between sender and the receiver’s assembly line. All partners in- between (warehouse, forwarders, ...) may simply ignore it and work on the basis of the visible part of the label. Source: EHAG, SwitzerlandBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 29
  • Guidelines for the usage of the MITLMITL guidelines: h) RFID and Multi Industry Transport Label?  RFID offers principally the same applications as a 2D barcode: It could serve as a backup for (or even a replacement of) EDI, it ensures that data and piece cannot go different ways.  Beyond that, it allows for a more flexible way of reading, it can often be updated.  On the other hand side it is still more expensive (transponders, [de-]coding devices and know-how), which prevents it from being used in cheap mass transport business (such as ordinary letter or parcel business).  Misuse of tags (accidentally or on purpose) has to be addressed. Examples are Re-usage of boxes with old but readable transponders (mixing up with current) Copying or faking of transponders (where connected to payment, “ticketing applications”) Decoding through unauthorized personnel (e.g. through a lorry plane) Unsuccessful writing (can only be detected reliably by systematic “read after write”) Manipulation of content during usage  Active transponder may play an important role in high-value transport business, but (for the time being) cannot be attached to Pieces from outside (or even incorporated in labels) due to their size and/or costs.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 30
  • Agenda  Current Situation: Labels and identifiers for transport Pieces  Piece identifiers: Requirements and the Standard  Transport labels: Standards, differences and the development  The Multi Industry Transport Label (MITL) – a brief survey  Existing solutions within the industry on the basis of the MITL  Guidelines for an introduction of the MITL in a company  The Label & Identifier Solution from DHL ExpressBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 31
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL ExpressWhat do transport companies offer you today? (1) Basic: Usage of Customer Reference Codes  Disadvantages:  Link must be created with a certain effort: Either through combined scanning of carrier barcode and sender barcode (error-prone) or through data transfer from sender to carrier (error-prone, as well)  Carrier databases often archive the own identifiers only; reference codes are discarded. (2) Next step: Some carriers support only some License Plates (often GS1 SSCC)  Disadvantages:  No full support of ISO 15459  Where ASC MH10-LP are used by sender, they have to be added (or replaced!) by GS1 SSCC. This violates the ISO standard and keeps out full industry segments (3) The approach of DHL Express is a comprehensive one  Full support of ISO 15459: All ASC MH10 and GS1 License Plates are accepted  All customers’ ISO License Plates can be used with all DHL Express products  No additional DHL-specific identifier is required any more! (Customers’ reference codes remain possible, of course)  Label layout follows ISO standard, including sufficient space for customer information  DHL Express offers a plug-in to customers called Global Label Service (GLS). This tool renders DHL labels automatically, including the determination of handling codes required by DHL. Even joint customer/DHL labels are possible.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 32
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL Express The two purposes of the DHL Express Transport label What is the Global Label NOT? The Global Label is Identification • NO legal document “Who am I” • no waybill • no Bill of Lading • no proforma invoice • no customs info etc • no marketing tool Use instead: Handling Support“How to get me from A to B” • Multiply Waybill (to be migrated to eCom!) • EDI transmission • Separate pouch with customs docs • Separate marketing stickers Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 33
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL Express Task 1: IdentificationKey Innovation in Piece-Level Identification What were our targets for the introduction of piece identification?  Catch up with competition: Allow customers to track on package level (not only on shipment level)  Offer more than our competitors: Process customers’ own piece identifiers. But how to ensure unambiguous piece identification…?  Choose a worldwide unique and accepted identifier, based on global standards!SOLUTION: DHL has decided to use ISO License Plate as piece identifiers  Those identifiers are globally unique (like IP addresses)  Trade and industry have been using License Plates as piece identifiers internally for several years  Packages can retain their identity, even in multi-modal transport chains  The License Plates specifies the package – not the transport process. (Consequence: If the package is sent twice within a week, the same identifier appears in two different shipments!) Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 34
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL Express Task 1: IdentificationWe support all ISO License Plates. This has an impact on working with customers Where a customer uses his own License Plate, DHL needs to know, as we must not add a DHL License Plate. This would result in two different LPs on the same package. This is not supported by the ISO standard and leads to ambiguity. Checkpoints would be missing. Auto sorters would reject such pieces as they don’t know which of the two LPs to takeHow do we work with our customers? We ask our customers whether they already use ISO License Plates. Sometimes they don’t know so DHL may ask the customer for a check. The example on the right side shows such a valid LP. DHL will scan it when it enters the network – and use it! The customer should send own LP in the EDI message as well. No other scannable LP barcode should be on a package. This is in the interest of both DHL and the customerBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 35
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL ExpressTask 2: Handling SupportThe Global Label needs to support manual handling and automated sorting How does the DHL Transport Label support  automated sorting (parcels / flyers)?  manual sorting (pallets, in small facilities)? Realisation: The label has to contain both kinds of information:  human-readable information  for manual sorting  Allows DHL to sort depending on origin, destination and product  bar-coded information  The routing code contains all sorting relevant information: destination country/postcode and product information  Transport data is often not required earlier than in delivery facility  Less problems caused by missing data in hubs and gateways  Faster scanning and sorting possible (no database access)  Linehaul plans can change at any time, without impact on automated sorting Target: No need to re-print the label during the transportBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 36
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL ExpressOur solution for customers: A shared service that does it!How can a customer print a DHL Label? Our Global Label Service (GLS) takes care!GLS consists of a Data Lookup Service (GLSdata) and a Label Creation Service (GLSprint)  GLSdata has been available as GLS 1.0 since 2009. This service already allows a customer to print fully compliant Transport Labels, as it determines all mandatory fields on the label.  GLSprint was added in GLS v.2.0, released in 2011. It creates ready-to-print labels. This takes further effort away from our customers.  This Data Lookup Service has been implemented as "Global Label Service v1".  It determines required Handling and Sort Codes based on DHL’s official, centrally GLSdata maintained Reference Data  The online version directly works with a reference database in the DHL backend. The offline version uses a locally replicated copy of the relevant data  The Label Creation Service was added with "Global Label Service v2". GLSprint  Different label types and native printer support were added  GLS v2 has become the solution of choice particularly for eCom solutions, 3rd party solutions and self-programming customers.Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 37
  • The Label & Identifier solution from DHL ExpressOur solution for customers: A shared service that does it!What is new in GLS 3.0, coming in Q3/2012?• GLS 2 already supports online rendering of standard labels and limited offline data lookup. This solution has already enabled several customers and DHL tools to print valid Transport Labels.• GLS 3.0 will allow ALL customers and DHL applications to print valid labels, by providing:  An enhanced offline service for full label rendering without a permanent online connection • The local database is updated once per day, usually while shipment data is transmitted  An enhanced rendering solution, flexible enough to support all customers label needs. • This solution covers all Global SOP labels, but also non-standard domestic labels as well as any other documents. Only a template is required, to tell GLS what to print where on a page.  Facility Lookup based on Postal Location and Product. • This capability is required to print the correct destination codes on labels.  Rendering Flexibility • It will be possible to print non-Latin characters such as Chinese and Cyrillic. Images and barcodes are supported as well. This includes customer-owned informationWhy are we doing GLS 3.0?• Our primary driver is to simplify and accelerate customer onboarding.• Correct customer labeling is a precondition to reduce relabeling at our facilities. GLS 3 allows us to achieve this as it allows our customers to print the final label.• Many of our customers want to add own information to the DHL label, to avoid the need for a second label. DHL encourages customers to do so, GLS 3.0 supports all label variantsBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 38
  • The Label & Identifier solutionGlobal Label Service What’s in it for our customer? GLS The three Dimensions of GLS Let the service do the work! COSTS QUALITY SPEED Initial implementation: Less Errors Fast Implementation • GLS is easily installed under • Label content is error-prone • Need to print labels? You only Windows and Linux, offering • We don’t want the customer to need the GLS interface an installation Wizard. understand DHL’s coding logic • No printing and barcode • Installation routines for any just to be able to print labels knowledge is required other platform that supports • With GLS, we get customer • Less testing for customers Java will be supported on labels error-free request Quick future changes Complete Labels • Data changes: Configuration! Future changes • GLS labels don’t need • Layout changes: Just templates • When the label needs to relabeling in DHL Facilities change, only GLS has to be • The original customer label Faster Transport replaced – in most cases even remains visible and can be used • Impreoved DHL handling only a template for customer information as well • No time lost to relabelingBonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 39
  • The Label & Identifier solution Some Interesting Examples of Global Labels .A) Label with customer-owned B) In preparation: Label C) Labels from otherinformation and License Plate with 2-dimensional code DP DHL Business Units – (as an alternative to EDI) following the same standard! Bonn, Germany | November 2008 – October 2011 Page 40