← All case studies
FOOD INDUSTRY · ORDER PICKING & SORTING

Separating People Problems From Process Problems

Eye-tracking and cognitive-operational diagnostics across a food-industry picking team

12
Individual pickers diagnosed
0.15–0.20
Team attention score (low)
75%
Worst-case idle time, one operator
5
Cognitive dimensions measured

The Client

Food-industry producer and distributor of bakery products, with an internal warehouse operation responsible for sorting and picking store orders for daily delivery.

Confidential case study — anonymized. Full details available under NDA upon request.

The Situation

The Intersect Approach

01

Team-Wide Eye-Tracking

12 individual operators observed during live picking shifts — attention, engagement, awareness, alertness, search efficiency.

02

Individual & Team Synthesis

Each profile analyzed on its own terms, separating upstream production delay from genuine attention/search issues.

03

Low/No-Cost Action Plan

Integrated team diagnosis translated into prioritized process and standardization recommendations.

What We Measured — Evidence, Not Opinions

Team-wide cognitive-operational profile across all 12 picking operators, five measured dimensions.
Objective FindingMeasured Value
Team-wide attention level (0–1 scale)≈ 0.15–0.20 — low
Team-wide alertness level (0–1 scale)≈ 0.29–0.30 — low
Team-wide engagement and awareness (0–1 scale)≈ 0.55–0.63 — moderate
Team-wide search efficiency (0–1 scale)≈ 0.54 average, uneven across operators
Time lost to monitor checks, most-affected operator≈ 8–10% of task time (up to 25 sec/check cycle)
Idle time waiting for production, worst-case operator≈ 15 of ≈ 20 minutes observed (≈ 75%)
Time lost to a separate monitor check-in step, second operator≈ 10% of cycle time
← scroll to see the full table →

Recommendations — Prioritized by Measured Impact

RecommendationRationale / Expected Impact
Process mapping, RACI matrix, and a standardized picking methodology with defined normsDirectly addresses the non-standardized process behind the team’s attention/alertness variance
Replace the fixed wall monitor with a handheld/tablet scannerRemoves the walking/context-switching measured at 8–10% of task time
Color coding, floor markings, and pre-labeled traysReduces reliance on memory — the identified source of tray mix-ups
Synchronize upstream production flow with the picking scheduleTargets idle time measured at up to 75% of one operator’s cycle
Shift-level KPIs (picks/hour, cart cycle time, error rate, labor cost/order)Provides the operational visibility that was missing pre-diagnostic
← scroll to see the full table →

Why This Approach Works

The data showed that what looked like “twelve operators with inconsistent performance” was, in most cases, one shared root cause — process variability and dependency on upstream production timing — not an individual skills problem. Distinguishing system-caused inefficiency from operator-caused inefficiency meant recommendations could target the process itself, not the people running it, and could be implemented at low or no cost.

Want results like these for your operations?

Book a Pilot Audit →