Priority order considered by system on FOLs when calculating Net OTIF


What FOL data does SCOT prioritise when calculating the Net OTIF?


1. Exclusion flags (Late Delivered Exclusion Flag and Non Delivered Exclusion Flag - provided that at least any one of RCA1 or Approved RCA2 or RCA3 is on FOL)


2. RCA3 (Admin)


3. Approved RCA2 (Supplier RCA approved by Admin)


4. RCA1 (System assigned RCA)


If NO exclusion flag or RCA code is assigned, the system considers by default the FOL as supplier's fault.



Case study 1 - Incorrect use of exclusion flags


Reported problem:
Supplier X does not have OTIF 100% for December 2024 even if all RCs are on Metro side.
FOLs have been commented before Net OTIF calculation.


Steps to check:

In RCA section, filter by PDD December 2024 for supplier X, then extract FOLReport Excel file.



In this Excel, the columns to check are the ones below:


For convenience, we have hidden the other columns so we have only the columns which interest us.


In the example above, we have Late Deliveries. PDD was not respected, but the entire ordered quantity was delivered at later dates.


The Admin wants to exempt supplier from OTIF penalization. Supplier Net OTIF should be 100%.

How can Admin do this?


First, we notice that supplier has provided RCA2. More precisely, RC = 30 and 33. Both fall under Metro's responsibility.

RC 30 is Consideration Type 5. RC 33 is Consideration Type 2. In both cases, Late Deliveries are considered on time. OTIF is not impacted.

If Admin approves supplier's RCA2, then OTIF will not be impacted.


Secondly, we notice that Admin entered RCA3. The entered RCA3 are identical to the supplier's RCA2. Even if not the best practice, the effect is still the same: Late Deliveries are considered on time and OTIF is not impacted.


Cause of problem:

Thirdly, Admin also used the Exclusion Flags. But instead of enabling the Late Exclusion Flag, Admin enabled the Non Delivery Exclusion Flag. This is a mistake which results in the supplier's OTIF being affected (GR quantity is considered zero by the system). And this is the cause of the reported problem.


Solution:

Admin can:

- either disable Non Delivery Exclusion Flag and enable Late Exclusion Flag

- or disable Non Delivery Exclusion Flag and then RCA3 will be taken into consideration


Conclusion:

It is important to understand how the system considers the information entered for an FOL. This way, we know how to use the FOL commenting options available in SCOT under Root Cause Analysis.

In the example above, even if the assigned Root Causes would exempt supplier from penalties, by enabling the incorrect exclusion flag, the root causes have been demoted and the exclusion flag is taken into consideration when calculating the Net OTIF. Because Exclusion Flags bear the most weight, have the utmost priority in system logic.


IMPORTANT

In RCA, Admins can check the FOLs directly in the grid and can export an FOLReport Excel in order to check the FOLs in more detail (deliveries, RCs, comments, approvals, exclusion flags, etc.).


However, once Net OTIF is calculated, where can Admins check the applied OTIF calculation logic for each FOL? And the final GR quantity considered by the system?

(Because there is a real-life GR qty and a final GR qty as considered by system after FOL analysis.)


The most detailed FOL information at article level is available under Penalty Results.

Net OTIF need to be calculated first, then penalties need to be run.

After that, export CSV Supplier/Article Penalty Results. This will include all suppliers and all articles for the defined period, so you need to filter down to the needed supplier. And then check the gr_qty column for the GRs considered as delivered on time and in full by the system.





Case study 2 - Correct uses of exclusion flags



You see in column final_gr_qty two types of data:

  1. orange cells - which have quantities
  2. blue cells - with value 0

Orange cells: 

a) we had late deliveries + late delivery exclusion flag enabled --> qty is considered as delivered on time, OTIF not affected --> final_gr_qty reflects the delivered qty (ex: rows 2-7, 9 and 13)

b) we had non-delivery + non-delivery exclusion flag enabled --> qty is considered as delivered on time, OTIF not affected --> final_gr_qty reflects the delivered qty (ex: rows 8, 11-12 and 14)

c) we had late + non-delivery combined + both exclusion flags enabled for late and non-delivery --> qty is considered on time, OTIF not affected --> final_gr_qty reflects the delivered qty (ex: row 10)

Conclusion: correct behaviour in orange cells.

 

Blue cells:

Here's the issue because we had late deliveries but Admin enabled non-delivery exclusion flag instead of late delivery exclusion flag. The systems will then consider final_gr_qty = 0. Late deliveries are penalised, they affect the OTIF even if RCA 3 = 30, 33 and 21. Why? Because exclusion flag has the biggest priority in the system interpretation!

 

So Admin needs to correct the exclusion flag in the blue cells for OTIF to be 100% for the supplier.