An order comes in, a pick list needs to be created, and that list needs to reach the right warehouse employee. Can AI take this over? For the vast majority of companies with a properly set up wms, the answer is yes, and it happens in practice today already. This is one of the tasks where automation does not wait for the future.
Three axes are decisive here: structure, volume and error costs.
The task is almost entirely structured. An order has a fixed form: article numbers, quantities, a delivery date. Compiling a pick list is essentially applying fixed rules to that data: which location, which route through the warehouse, which employee is available. There is no need to interpret what the customer "actually" meant, no need to assess context. Hence the score of 5 on structure.
The volume is high, and that is precisely where automation pays off. A warehouse that processes a hundred orders a day generates a hundred pick lists, all created according to the same logic. Work that repeats itself at a high pace, with little variation between cases, is the work where rules render more than they do for work that only occurs occasionally.
The error costs are relatively low, with a 4. An incorrectly assigned pick is annoying and costs time to fix, but rarely leads to irreversible damage. That is different from, for instance, an incorrectly sent freight document, where an error can have consequences for customs or liability. With a pick list, the error can usually be corrected within the process itself, which lowers the threshold for automation.
Creativity scores a 1, and that is exactly the point. There is nothing creative about compiling a pick list, and that is not a shortcoming of the task but a sign that it lends itself excellently to fixed logic. Customer contact is almost entirely absent: the pick list is an internal document, intended for the warehouse floor, not for a customer who needs to understand or accept something.
Compliance scores highly favorable, with a 5, because no legal approval is needed to assign a pick to an employee. Physical scores a 4: although it concerns a physical action further along in the process, the generating and assigning itself is a digital step, not a physical one.
Judgment scope gets a 4, not a 5, because sometimes a trade-off is still needed: an employee has just started another order, a location no longer matches reality, an urgent order must take priority. That is exactly where rpa runs into trouble today: the system can apply the standard logic, but in case of deviations a correction by a human is needed.
A wholesaler with a hundred and fifty orders a day has the wms automatically generate pick lists based on order lines, and the assignment to employees runs via fixed rules: who is available, who has the shortest route, who is staffing the right zone. That works as long as the stock locations in the system are up to date. As soon as they are not correct, a pick list is created that points to an empty spot, and then an employee is needed to flag and fix that. The technology does the bulk of the work; the exceptions remain human work.
At a company without a wms, or with a wms without picking logic, this task cannot simply be taken over. The precondition is sharp: a system that already supports picking, and stock locations that are up to date. If the stock registration is unreliable, automatic generation mostly produces incorrect lists, and the time savings disappear into correction work. This touches on a task that lies close by: assigning warehouse locations must be in order before pick lists can meaningfully build on it.
Also with very small order volumes, with a lot of variation and little repetition, the gain is limited. Rules render with repetition; with one-off or strongly deviating orders, setting up the logic is sometimes more work than the manual action itself.
Generating pick lists does not stand apart from the rest of the warehouse process. Receipt, registration and issuing are linked to each other: likewise, registering a receipt note in the system is a task with comparable structure and volume. Those working in manufacturing who want to look beyond a single task will find an overview in what AI can take over in manufacturing, and those wondering how this relates to floor registration can read further on keeping production records on the floor.
This is not personnel advice, nor a basis for a decision about positions or staffing levels. Whether and how an organization draws personnel consequences from freed-up hours falls under its own legal requirements and its own judgment. Here, the only question at hand is which part of this work can technically be taken over by AI today, and under what conditions.
Whether this task in your organization already lends itself to being taken over depends on your wms, the reliability of your stock locations and the order volume. A good first step is the free quickscan: twelve questions, no account needed, with an indication of what part of the hours in this type of role can be taken over by AI today. The full work scan, which breaks down your company's work task by task and expresses it in fte capacity, is still under construction.
Vraag maar. Ik ken de kennisbank van deze site; wat ik niet weet, zeg ik erbij.
Answers come from this site’s knowledge base. Not tailored advice, and not a scan of your company.