Top Labels and a more reliable inventory record
Original publisher:
NIST Manufacturing Extension Partnership
Evidence type: Government-hosted customer implementation
Original report: Read the source
What prompted the change
Top Labels, a Texas label manufacturer, was growing while managing warehouse information without the inventory system the operation needed. Staff faced the kinds of problems that arise when inventory information is not consistently recorded and available.
What was done
Through a Manufacturing Extension Partnership engagement, the company implemented a tailored warehouse inventory system and barcode-location approach. The project was a separate tailored implementation, not a deployment of the RISEC inventory platform.
What the source reports
$10,000 in savings was reported by NIST for the specific implementation.
What the result does and doesn't establish
The result supports the value of organizing inventory information and stock-location records. It does not show that the same saving is typical, that every software installation produces it, or that the RISEC system achieved it.
This is an attributed third-party example. RISEC did not deliver the project described in this case, and the reported results are not a promise for another installation.
How to apply this to your own operation
Compare your actual starting conditions, production requirements, operating hours and cost structure with those described in the source. When the conditions differ, the expected economics may differ materially as well. The most useful next step is identifying which measurements would make your own business case credible.
Compare the mechanism with your own process.
Use the published conditions to identify the measurements and operating constraints your project would need to establish.
View the related solution