Going Postal on Reform? - Premedia Trends - Blog on Graphic Arts Online

Premedia Trends

Blog

Premedia Trends

« Camera Raw File Format Updated... | Main | Flight-checking the blogsphere... »

Link This | Email this | Blog This | Comments (1)

Brian Lawler

Going Postal on Reform?
July 18, 2007

Despite having two extra months to brace and prepare, periodicals printers are still struggling to figure out the more than 50 new USPS rules and rates, which are based on container types, entry points and sortation levels. Already facing losses, many smaller publishers are grumbling about this week’s price increases, while their larger counterparts, including Time Warner, contend the efficiency incentives are long overdue.

Performance Enhancement
While it’s not a black-and-white issue, who knows better than printers the importance of enhancing performance efficiencies? (Sorry, Barry Bonds.) A spokesperson for the Postal Regulatory Commission stated her case quite simply: “Some magazines roll their magazine and put a rubber band around it. Somebody has to unroll it,” she told BusinessWeek on Monday.

Who’s Right & Who’s Wrong?
On one side of the fence are publications like The Nation (a left-wing weekly; circulation, 186,000), which expects mailing expenses to increase by 17% or $500,000 annually, more than one-third higher than the industry average.

And What’s Fair?
On the other side are the mega publishers who believe the changes help to correct a system where they pay for small publishers’ inefficiencies. As the largest U.S. publisher, with 130 titles, Time Warner expects the $250 million a year it spends on mailing costs to rise over 11%, yet the media giant was a strong impetus behind the new rates.

Free Speech(less)?
So, the debate rages on … and the question posed by BW reporter John Tozzi is worth contemplating: Should the Postal Service be a market instrument benefitting only the most efficient players, or should it be a distribution system that levels the playinig field to create a free flow of ideas? What should be the USPS’s mission?

What’s Your Take?
Whether you print periodicals for small or large customers, GAM wants to know how different printers feel about the recent postal rate changes. It’s easy to do: Simply post a comment to this Web blog (below) …

Posted by Brian Lawler on July 18, 2007 | Comments (1)

Industries: New Products, Premedia

July 19, 2007
In response to: Going Postal on Reform?
Tom Southworth commented:

From an (ex) printer’s perspective:

While it is true that “somebody has to unroll” the rubber band from magazines whose printers use this old, but still effective, means of bundling, someone else must tear off the shrinkwrap from bundles from the larger publishers that are presorted by carrier route. Both methods have waste, both in the Lean definition (non-value added motion and processing) and in the traditional, physical definition of waste (a rubber band and plastic shrinkwrapping). Hopefully both the rubber band and shrinkwrap are reused or recycled.

The solution must come from a combined effort between the smaller publisher and their printer. No one’s saying that they have to buy the same equipment that the big printers have but they need to figure out a way to provide what the USPS wants: the challenge is how to add this without significantly adding to costs.

Taiichi Ohno taught that “there is a correct sequence to” continuous improvement:
1) manual work,
2) equipment,
3) process.

Buying (or leasing) new equipment should NOT be the first thing that a smaller printer tries. We need to work on eliminating all wastes in the existing work process first before exploring new equipment. Using Chihiro Nakao’s 3P (Production Preparation Process) model we need to challenge ourselves to come up with 7 ways to accomplish this. After we’re sure we’ve done everything with the existing work process we can then look at the equipment to see what’s preventing us from making even more improvements and look to improve equipment capabilities. Once installed, we work on new processes to drive efficiencies with the new equipment.

This is a crisis but it doesn’t have to be a threat - it is an opportunity for improvement of the entire value stream.