Articles by CBAssociates

Published, Newspapers and Technology, June 1999

HOW BIG IS TOO BIG?
THE PACKAGING CENTER DILEMMA

It is a truism that one can not build a packaging center too big.

In the last fifteen years it seems that every packaging center built appears quite spacious when the operation moved into the facility. However, it becomes apparent not long after the initial move-in the space is tight.

Several things have occurred that has affected the size of the packaging area. The first, is obviously the continued growth in preprints and particularly the zoned inserts.

Another key influence is the additional work going on in the packaging center. We have been labeling the old mailroom as the packaging center, the packaging and distribution center, or the distribution center. As more and more newspapers are becoming involved with database marketing, we may want to identify this area as the packaging and mailing center.

Commercial work has also added pressure to the packaging center space. Stitcher trimmers, labeling machines, folding machines, stacks of wooden pallets and tops, plastic wrapping machines, not to mention the space required to stage pallets awaiting trucks all contribute to additional square footage.

Automation requires space. We are seeing larger newspapers removing tray distribution or sortation systems and installing cart loaders or pallet loaders. Some are loading the carts manually. The manual aspect will disappear in the future as labor becomes even more difficult to obtain at a reasonable rate.

In the last few years, design of new U.S. larger plants are resembling European operations with the extensive and expensive paper storage systems. As straight runs become more common the justification of these systems will become much easier.

Inserters are getting larger and, even if they were not purchased in a configuration as big as possible, ample room for expansion is typically allotted for in the packaging center.

How big is too big. I believe we have not seen this happen. We have seen case after case where packaging centers have been reduced in size during the design phase. It does not become apparent, at least before the construction is completed, until there is agreement that it should have been larger.

I remember visiting the Fort Lauderdale production facility shortly after it was completed. During the design phase of the project, an executive of the organization decided the operation did not have a need for such a large space and square footage was eliminated in the mailroom. Recently the newspaper completed an expansion project to accommodate cart loading.

Our institutional knowledge and the experience we have are, many times, a handicap in determining the proper size of a facility. So many times a publisher will review the proposed size of the packaging center and based on his/her past experience will think the area is too large. Undoubtedly, the decision is made to scale back the size.

When they have been making due with cramped quarters and have been able to get the newspaper out every day, it is difficult to justify a proposed mailroom three and four times the size of the existing space.

I have also fallen into the trap of thinking in this manner. When visiting the remote facility of the Indianapolis newspapers, I thought the space was enormous. That feeling only lasted as long as it took to install the inserters and automatic palletizers. The feeling the space was too big turned into a feeling that it was adequate and I then wondered how long the space would be sufficient.

When a publisher reduces relativity inexpensive square footage for the packaging center, I am reminded of what a previous coworker was fond of saying: What goes around comes around. This seems to be the case with mailroom design.

The planned long-term solution will often become a short-term solution and the process will begin again.

[HOME]