Improving Workflow Efficiency: A Case Study on Target Corporation | Hacker News Reader

Improving Workflow Efficiency: A Case Study on Target Corporation

financialwolves.com

3 pointsjustborn11 comments

They waste even more than that -- almost $7,541,244 and 33 cents -- by having their bathrooms 20 meters down the hall instead of installing urinals in their cubicles.

Seriously, though, my work has a 15-minute sidewalk loop that doesn't even go anywhere, and employees who go on a daily walk are more productive because of that. Besides the cardio, vitamin D, and sleep cycle benefits, people make friendship bonds and solve bugs while walking together. This office setup probably reduces turnover and health insurance costs by more than the stated amount.

The buildings are 4 blocks apart but there aren't many buildings the same height as those two between them (maybe the Radisson and Marriot). Obviously some of the more significant buildings on the Minneapolis skyline. The answer is obvious.

Gondola.

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/a3ye7g/boston-toronto-edm...

https://www.curbed.com/2017/9/21/16340394/urban-gondolas-cab...

http://www.bbc.com/future/gallery/20190103-the-rise-of-the-u...

At work we joke about zip lines between buildings

Would work well in the winter!

Way way too many significant figures in that final number. Where is the 20% number coming from? You're sure there arent any virtual meetings? Or that there arent efficiencies that come from a split headquarters that could be worth more than 5 million bucks? What about the cost of fixing the issue - building a new office headquarters is gonna cost way more than 5 million. And why would a company with billions in income even care about a 5k inefficiency?

Yeah I suppose that's true. The cost to build or consolidate is definitely there, but Target is always gong to need a corporate office. Having separate offices is an annual thing. Seems like they should bite the bullet and just consolidate.

There isn't any way that its going to be worth the return on investment though. Especially considering the 5 million dollar figure is calculated based on the amount of time "wasted" by commuting to meeting. People in corporate headquarters are not producing a quantifiable output per second like someone on an assembly line, so it doesn't even make sense to calculate a cost by counting the time it takes to walk. Basically, this whole thing sounds like it's trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

I wouldn't consider Apple, Facebook, or Google to have a "consolidated work campus". All three are spread across many suburban office buildings, even spread across multiple cities. Maybe some financial firms in New York are consolidated in one building?

Meh. Waiting for the counter-argument that Target has healthier employees and pay out less in health insurance because of it. (Though I just made that up. I wonder if it's true.)

Many assumptions were made in coming up with this number.

Is this some kind of sick joke?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com