2. In Search Of Excellence
Leading Paper-less Cargo Handling
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to let us know our
comprehensively e-AWB handling, I split e-AWB
performance in three parts - yearly, month daily part,
and agent part. They will tell you the performance
from different aspects. It will also tell you the story of
our great efforts in e-Cargo handling. Hope it will
impress you and encourage you in improving our
e-AWB performance.
3. Monthly Trend
Accept Count dip, Accept Percentage Up, Two indexs develop in opposite direction in Y2016
e-AWB Accept Count Vs Trend Line e-AWB Accept Percentage Vs e-AWB Accept count Vs
Trend Line Percentage
Accept Count Trend Accpet Percentage Trend Accept Percentage Accept Count
*Source:e-AWB Performance Report
Cathay Pacific Cargo Shanghai Y2015-Y2016 e-AWB Accept Trend Vs Accept Percentage Trend
0
2
4
6
8
Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16
83%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
0
2
4
6
8
Jan-15 Jul-15 Jan-16
thousand
3977
thousand
Yearly Part:
Since we formally started e-AWB handling, the e-AWB accepted count and accepted percentage have gone up much. Especially accepted percentage,
which figure was consecutively up over past 14 months. It exceeded 80% threshold in first month of 2016 (See Fig.1 Monthly Trend), and in February
we reached 83.22% that slightly rose 0.49% compared with January. However, our e-AWB accepted count’s upturn stopped in the beginning of 2016.
In last month ezy-freight recorded total 3977 accepted e-AWBs which dipped 26% compared with January (See Fig.2 Volume Contrast). This situation
obviously is influenced by Chinese Spring Festival, during which the daily record dropped sharply (See Fig 3. e-AWB Daily Trend) as we will see in next
part.
Fig.1 Fig.2
4. e-AWB Daily Trend
Cathay Pacific Cargo Shanghai Y2016 Feb e-AWB accept ccount & Pecentage
trend
Accept Percentage Target
Ac c ept Count
*source:e-AWB Performance Report
70%
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
1-Feb 8-Feb 15-Feb 22-Feb 29-Feb
0
1
2
3
4
1-Feb 8-Feb 15-Feb 22-Feb 29-Feb
Chinese Spring Festival
Chinese Spring Festival
Target
thousand
e-AWB Proportion
Cathay Pacific Cargo Shanghai e-AWB accept, rejec,error
eyeball, unattended, exclude proportion in Y2016 FEB
※ each figure has been round up
*Source: e-AWB Performance Report
Unatten
ed 10%
Ac cept 72%
Ey eball 1%
Ex clude 6%
Error 9%
Reject
2%
Month daily Part:
In February, our accept percentage is almost above target line 80%, only 7 out of 29 days is below the line. Also average of daily accepted count is
about 137. As we see, during Chinese festival the accepted count dropped sharply. (See Fig. 3)
Our February e-AWB proportion is 72 percent in all bills flown. Further more, 10 percent bills is unattended in e-AWB handling. 6% is exclude, 1% is
eyeball, 9% is accepted error, and 2% is reject. (See Fig. 4)
Fig.4
Fig.3
5. Cut-off Vs Non Cut-off
Cathay Pacific Cargo Shanghai Y2016 Feb Cut-Off Agent and Non Cut-off Proportion
In final total e-AWB accept contains cut-off agent and non cut-off agent
Feb Ac c ept Count Cut-O ff Agent Non Cut-O ff Agent
※ Cut-off Agent MET data missing
*Source: Ezy-freight and e-AWB Performance Report
0
1
2
3
4
1-Feb 8-Feb 15-Feb 22-Feb 29-Feb
hundred
Four days
no non-cut-
off agent e-
AWB accept
Top Five Daily Perfomance
Cathay Pacific Cargo Shanghai top five cut-off agent daily e-AWB accept
count in Y2016 Feb. Five agents are DZF, KSF, TAE, SFS and ALL
※ Five columns from left to right is from top of sum to bottom, the x-axis is indicated by days unit, which will not show repeatly in each column
*Source: Ezy-freight and e-AWB Performance Report
DZF KSF TAE SFS ALL
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1 8 15 22 29
Agent Part:
Up to the end of last month, we have 26 cut-off agents who
switch to e-AWB handling model. Among them, Agent DZF , KSF,
TAE, SFS and ALL are the top five agents who have the most
e-AWB accepted in our system. The accepted figure is 1312,
1104, 694, 622, 478 respectively. Their daily accepted trend as
we see in fig 5.
Also we found some AWBs belong to agents exclude from cut-off
list were accepted in every day. Which means the difference
exists between actual accepted count and accepted count which
should be accepted. (See Fig.6)
Fig.5
Fig.6
