Wide range of consulting services related to RFID and automated materials handling including analysis of 33 of the Library’s 37 outlets, recommendations for AMH configurations at each location as well as identification of impediments to using AMH or RFID, cost-benefit analyses, market analysis of RFID and AMH vendors, case studies demonstrating best practices, and presentation of findings from study and recommendations.
You are here
Lori Ayre worked with Alameda County Libraries to evaluate the materials handling operations and workflows including staffing, procedures, use of spaces and technology and interlibrary delivery. After the initial consultation, it was clear that there were numerous issues beyond the topic of materials handling that needed to be addressed. Therefore, The Galecia Group recommended the Library form a Materials Handling Task Force to further tease out these other issues in order to put the materials handling challenges in perspective and to identify suitable solutions for the Library while developing staff engagement in the solutions. This approach was accepted and Ayre worked with the team to further evaluate the issues. Engagement was concluded with the Task Force submitting materials handling recommendations to Executive Team.
Compared costs and benefits of materials handling operations between two library branches that differed only in how they used automated systems to get the work done. Demonstrated a significant savings for library using automated materials return system.
Conducted materials handling analysis. Provided recommendations and projected payback periods for implementing automated materials handling and RFID technologies.
Presentation at PLA 2010 in Portland Oregon with Gretchen Freeman (Associate Director for Technology, Salt Lake County Library) and Kathleen Smith (Projects Librarian, Fresno County Public Library)
Attached is the result of a study I did for King County Library System comparing materials handling operations at two very similar libraries: one with automated self check-in and library sorter, and the other using manual materials handling. The report (PDF) demonstrates significant savings at the library with automated check-in. It's short and sweet. Give it a read!
I recently undertook an analysis of the cost savings (if any) of a client's use of automated checkin. This was an interesting project for me because I wasn't sure how it would turn out. Although I'm a big fan of automated checkin for many reasons, I wasn't sure that it would result in clear cost savings for this particular client because they were already using automation in their central sort operation. The automated central sort system included a tote checkin feature -- this means the receiving library only had to scan a tote (or bin) to checkin all the items in the tote.