EHS Metrics collection and
tracking system
Jim Wood
Occupational Safety and Health Programs Manager
Jan. 8, 2009
Agenda
•
•
•
•
•
•
TCCC overview
M t i system
Metrics
t
(legacy)
(l
)
Drivers for change
M t i system
Metrics
t
(current
(
t state)
t t )
Current Status
Demo
The Coca-Cola Company:
~ 150 plants in 30 countries
~90,500 employees
The Coca-Cola System:
~ 300 Bottlers
~1000 plants
~1,000,000 employees
EHS Organizational Structure
TECHNICAL STEWARDSHIP
Environment
& Water Resources
Occupational
Safety and Health
Scientific
& Regulatory Affairs
Q li
Quality
K EHS M
Key
Metrics
t i ((since
i
~2002)
2002)
• Water Use Ratio (liters water used/ liters
product)
Water Stewardship
• Energy Use Ratio (MJ/liters product)
Climate Protection
• Solid Waste Ratio (g/liters product)
• LTIR
Packaging
• ~125
125 ffacility
ilit or flfleett d
data
t entry
t fifields
ld
Previous State
•
•
•
•
Annual System-wide data collection
project
Excel spreadsheet sent from
Corporate to Groups to Divisions to
sites, manually compiled and returned
Labor intensive validation process
Static annual report, published ~10
months
o s into
o next
e FY
2006 Production
Volume
Facility Name
(Kiloliters)
Unit of
Meas
Municipality
in Unit of Meas
Well
Surface
Collected
Rain
Other
in Unit of Meas in Unit of Meas in Unit of Meas in Unit of Meas
Total Water
Use
in Unit of Meas
Picasso Metrics/ Stewardship Data Warehouse
Why
Increasing need for advanced analysis of up-to-date, integrated Stewardship metrics at
the facility, Division, Bottler and Corporate levels
Obj ti
Objectives
• More timely and accurate data
• Improved integrated analysis
and reporting
D li
Deliverables
bl
B
Benefits
fit
• Data collection management
tool that allows TCCC/TCCS
facilities to submit,, interactivelyy
validate and correct data
• More efficient data collection
• Technical processes to
consolidate and integrate the
information
• System-wide performance
benchmarking
• Timely
y reporting
p
g and analysis
y
capability for all users
• Improved performance
• Standard and analytical
reporting
Timing-Release 1
4/07-7/07
7/07-1/08
1 Q ’08
TBD
Testing
Deployment, initial use
Use for final collection of all 2007 data
All facilities/fleets enrolled
Page 6
PICASSO Metrics / Stewardship Data Warehouse:
Laboratory
Data Sources
3rd Party Lab
Beverage Quality Lab
Manufacturing Lab
Manufacturing,
Customer &
External
Data Sources
Ingredient Quality Lab
Analytical Services Lab
Internet
Call Center
Threats / Trends
Company & 3rd party Mfg Plants
Consumers
Quality Issues
Needs / Desires
Customers
Quality Issues
Needs / Desires
Quality Issues
Stewardship
Data Warehouse
Analytical data
Performance metrics / Quality Issues
Global
Stewardship
D t W
Data
Warehouse
h
Advanced
Analytical
Tools
Business Requirements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Access across all bottlers, all geographies
Respect confidentiality of individual bottlers
Support ALL Stewardship metrics (Quality,
etc)
Compatible with existing company BI systems
Input and plausibility checks at site level
Able to handle bulk uploads from various
existing EHS metrics systems
Able to handle the existing variety of data
collection frequencies and formats
ÎIn-House
ÎI
H
S
Solution
l ti
ÎWeb-based
Process Overview
1
2
3
Data Entry
Data Submission
Analytical
y
Reporting
p
g
(Excel template,
soon to be web-based)
(via web portal or bulk upload)
(via web portal)
Common Facility & Fleet Data
Benchmark
Gain Insight
Draw Conclusions
Take Action
4
SDW Tollgate
Page 9
PICASSO Metrics / Stewardship Data Warehouse
SDW is built on the shared Business Intelligence Microsoft tool
Suite
Several components are re-used:
ƒ SQL Server
Ser er
ƒ SQL Server services for
– Data Submission ((Custom Data Management
g
Modules))
– ETL (SSIS)
– OLAP (SSAS with ZAP)
– Administrative Reporting (SSRS)
Data submission is via standardized input files. Optionally, facilities and
fleets can utilize a MS Excel-based data entry template created and
maintained by the business stewards
PICASSO Metrics / Stewardship Data Warehouse
Data Collection
From
To
Benefit
–Annual
A
lE
Excell spreadsheet
d h t
–Takes ~5+ months to finalize
+Monthly
+M
thl iinputt ((also
l supports
t quarterly
t l
or annual input loaded to a month),
initially through an enhanced Excel
format
*Timely
*Ti
l d
data
t ffor the
th site,
it bottler,
b ttl and
d
corporate
–Content defined at the end of the
year
+Any content changes should come at
the beginning of each year.
*Improved efficiency, reduced frustration
–Heavy Division involvement in
collection and validation
+Input at the individual facility/fleet
level (also supports upload of standard
input files created by field operations to
submit data from single or multiple
facilities/fleets). Plan is to ensure
means of Bottler verification of data
prior to submittal if desired.
+Plausibility checks built into the
p ocess
process
*Increased accuracy
*Timely data
*Improved efficiency
+Creation and maintenance of
facility/fleet profiles performed by Data
Steward via on-line/ interactive
maintenance tool
*Improved efficiency
–Limited
Li it d fl
flexibility—handling
ibilit
h dli
different collection formats requires
much manual data entry
–Annual goal, historical, facility
profile, and current performance all
collected in 1 file
–Double entry of profile for E and
OSH
Page 11
PICASSO Metrics / Stewardship Data Warehouse
Reporting and Benchmarking
From
To
Benefit
–Annual external reports
generated ~5
5 months after year
end; ~8-10 months for internal
reports
+User-generated or pre-defined
reports available on demand for
individual facilities/fleets, or all
operations within the user’s
security level for periods of month,
year, YTD, 12MMT, and 3MMT.
I l d comparisons
Includes
i
vs. goals
l or
historical data.
*Timely reporting for all users
Improved analysis capability for all
*Improved
users
–Only high level, static analysis
available
+Interactive analysis for all
Facility/Fleet characteristics and
reporting hierarchies within the
user’s security level.
*Improved analysis capability for all
users
–Benchmarking at Division level
only
+System wide comparative
benchmarking (including Best/
average/ worst performance)
against like operations. Facility
identification is masked except at
Division level and above.
*Enhanced ability to identify best
practice reapplication opportunities
opportunities,
understand relative progress
Page 12
Data Entry
SDW Tollgate
SDW Tollgate
SDW Web Portal (accessible via internet)
Page 13
Data Input Tool; Electronic bulk transfer also
SDW Tollgate
SDW Tollgate
supported
Page 14
Reporting Example:
WUR Benchmarking for a site with 50% water
production, and no ice production on site
Select Facility
y EOSHPM Benchmark and its corresponding
p
g cube
•Benchmark ‘cubes’ allow masked comparison across the system. (used
for comparing performance with similar sites, identifying potential sources
for best practices)
•Facility and Fleet EOSHPM ‘cubes’ only show data within the user’s
security access (e.g. within a bottler). Used for standard performance
reporting (trends, performance vs. goals, etc.)
Page 15
System finds all Facilities which meet
your criteria – No on-site ice prod; at
least 50% water production – and
shows you to requested water use
and WUR
You have total control over the
selections to choose those
operations
ti
th
thatt are lik
like yours, or
different
Note this is the benchmark view where everyone
sees all performance data. The facility name,
geography, etc. is hidden. Alternative reference
Ids are used instead
Page 16
Much capability is available to further dissect or
utilize the data. An example is average by
selecting
Format > Summary Options > Columns >
Average
Page 17
Multiple charting options
are available. Data and
charts can be easily
exported
d into
i
Excel.
E
l
Page 18
Current Status
•
•
•
•
Reporting and analytics are excellent
Data validation time significantly
g
y reduced
Data entry is still painful—can’t wait for webbased!
Facility level access issues are much greater
than expected (depending on geography/
bottler))
•
•
•
•
•
No computers
No internet access
Firewall settings
All changes are IT dependent—long lead
time
User-defined metrics not yet available
Demo