I conducted a time and motion study at a retail store in Gauteng to analyse the activities of Smollan merchandisers and field marketers, in order to improve the workers’ productivity. Data was captured with a Samsung tablet and analysed on Microsoft Excel. These are my findings.

1. Smollan
Time and Motion Study
YASH PATEL – 15 SEPTEMBER 2016
1

2. Company background
Project background
Findings of study :
First level activities
Third level activities
Merchandising Unpack Stock
Lunch and tea times
Recommendations
Conclusion
CONTENTS:
2

3. Company background
Retail solutions
FMCG and retail
Brand
3

4. Project background
Purpose: Improve productivity
Methodology: Time and Motion study
What was done
Data captured
Limitations
4

5. Findings of the study
5

6. Average time taken for Level 1 Activities, per
day
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Timeinminutes
1st level element description
19 Level 1 Activities
Merchandising Unpack
Stock and Inter-Day
Activities make up 50% of
average total time per day
6

7. Percentage distribution of Top 5 Level 1
Activities
37%
32%
12%
11%
9% Merchandising Unpack
Stock
Inter Day Activities
Administration
Merchandising Drawing
Stock
Disruption
The top 5 level 1
activities constitute 72%
of time spent on all
Level 1 Activities
 Merchandising Unpack
Stock constitutes 27 %
of average time spent
per day
7

8. N=Non Value
Adding
R = Required
non-value
adding
V=Value adding
Majority of
activities are
value adding
and unavoidable
NRV and Delay
1% 2%
1%
5%
29%
63%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
N R V
Timein(%)
NRV with Delay
Avoidable
Unavoidable
8

9. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Inter Day Activities,
Lunch, Lunch Time
Merchandising Unpack
Stock, Face Up And Pack
Shelf
Inter Day Activities, Tea
Time, Tea Time
Merchandising Unpack
Stock, Faceup Shelf
Disruption, Chat To
Colleague
Time(inminutes)
3rd level activities
Average time taken per day
Top 5 Level 3 Activities
9

10. 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Face Up
And Pack Shelf
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Faceup
Shelf
Disruption, Chat To Colleague Merchandising Drawing Stock, Draw
Stock
Merchandising Unpack Stock,
Rearrange Packed Shelves
Time(inminutes)
3rd Level activities
Top 5 work-focused Level 3 Activities
10
 Update Merchandiser
Count skewed the
data

11. 36%
20%
11%
6%
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Face Up And Pack Shelf
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Faceup Shelf
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Walk To Aisles
Merchandising Unpack Stock, Rearrange Packed Shelves
Top 4 merchandising
unpack activities
constitute 74% of all
merchandising unpack
activities
All 4 Level 3 Activities
are VU activities
Faceup and Pack Shelf
contributes to just under
10 % of average total
time of day
Percentage distribution of time for
Merchandising Unpack Stock Activities
11

12. 12
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
packoutrate(units/min)
Type of packaging
Packout rate for different types of packaging
Aerosol Cans /
Bags
Bottles and
boxes
Bucket/ Bowls/
cans
Jar/ Jumble
Peg/ Sachet
Tray/ Tub/ Tube

13. 13
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
Time(inminutes)
Brands
Time spent per brand whilst Facing up and Packing
Shelf
Kelloggs Martin & Martin Revlon Ina Paarman
Usabco Padkos Joekels Twinsaver
Adcock Consumer Packco Famous Brands Steers Herbex
Pringles Sally Williams illovo Godrej
Adcock OTC Stafford Brothers Acdoco Condoms Acdoco Dr Beckmann
adcock kellogs laager Baxters
Pantry's Choice Wings Group Kees Beyers Supermax
buffalo steers famous foods
0
50
100
150
200
250
Time(inminutes)
Brands
Total time spent on brands
Kelloggs Martin & Martin Ina Paarman
Joekels Revlon Twinsaver
Supermax Stafford Brothers Padkos
Usabco Pringles Acdoco Condoms
Adcock Consumer Packco Kees Beyers
Famous Brands Steers Godrej illovo
Herbex Sally Williams Wings Group
Adcock OTC kellogs Acdoco Dr Beckmann
Pantry's Choice adcock Famous Brands Mugg & Bean
laager Baxters Cape Olives
Brand times

14. 14
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Time(inminutes)
Study
Lunch time Tea Time lunchtime benchmark tea time benchmark
Lunch and Tea times across all studies
Constitute 23 % of total
average time per day
Lunchtime average =68.87
min Tea time average =38.36
min
Lunch time exceeded = 15%
Tea time exceeded = 28%

15. Recommendations
15
Problem Recommendation
Availability of stock on shelves Pusher and andon light technology
Extended breaks Clocking in and out
Sale of brand products Time spent on merchandising activities
Administration time PI labels and printing time
Disruption Take into account in planning
Data collection method Standardisation

16. Conclusion
Summary of findings
Thank you
16