LensReading which lens this session carries.

End-to-end outcomes · Concept to shelf

Concept to shelf

How a change to a product reaches a factory. Development, marketing and manufacturing each own a segment and the group owns the date.

All outcomes
Starts when
A formula change is proposed
Ends when
The first production order is released against it
Accountable for the whole chain
Yasmin Chaudhry
Head of innovation delivery · Research & Development
Crosses
R&DMarketingSupply ChainC2LM2D

Health

What the chain measures

Cycle time, wait and cost are computed on complete chains only. Everything else is computed on every assembled chain and says so.

Chains assembled
155
5 stages · 2 crossed more than one tower
Complete end to end
1.3%
2 chains found every stage — a thin base for any average
Median cycle
6.7 d
p25 6.7 d · p75 6.8 d · p90 6.8 d
Waiting
70%
4.7 d waiting against 2.0 d of work
Cost to serve
$7.60
$15 across the complete chains · 0 stages needed a person
Matching confidence
0.56
Across the 127 chains that were joined. 28 never found a second stage.

The chain, stage by stage

5 stages · the wait column is the gap before that stage began, measured on the chains that reached it

StageDocumentFunctionTowerSystemReachedWait beforeStage cycleConfidenceJoined by
1Formula proposedformula-changeR&DC2Leln155 · 100%2.4 d
Origin 155
2Pack specifiedpackaging-specR&DC2Lplm127 · 82%28.1 h2.0 d0.56
Cohort 127
3Artwork approvedartwork-approvalMarketingC2Lplm78 · 50%25.9 h39.8 h1.00
Keyed 78
4Launch gatedlaunch-gateR&DC2Lplm28 · 18%23.3 h3.2 d1.00
Keyed 28
5First build releasedvalueproduction-orderSupply ChainM2Derp-mm2 · 1%29.1 h1.3 h0.61
Cohort 2

Three consecutive stages live in the product lifecycle system and are held together by its own reference. The entry from the laboratory notebook and the exit into manufacturing both cross a boundary, and product documents name no trading party, so those two steps rest on place and timing.

Chain state — an exhaustive partition of all 155 chains in this service into 4 states
Closed2 · 1.3%
Stalled12 · 7.7%
Open138 · 89.0%
Failed3 · 1.9%
How each chain was joined — a second exhaustive partition of the same 155 chains into 2 regimes
Cohort127 · 81.9%
Single stage28 · 18.1%

The distribution, not the average

Cycle time across the 2 complete chains, in ten equal bands

160–160 h
1
160–161 h
0
161–161 h
0
161–161 h
0
161–162 h
0
162–162 h
0
162–163 h
0
163–163 h
0
163–163 h
0
163–164 h
1

Fastest 6.7 d, slowest 6.8 d, median 6.7 d, mean 6.7 d. The mean sits at or below the median, so quoting the average alone would understate what a typical chain of this service takes.

What the chain costs and carries

Cost is modeled from recorded touches. Value is the amount on the designated value stage only.

Cost, all chains
$3,708
Across all 155 assembled chains, complete or not
Value carried
$24k
Taken from stage 5, First build released, and never summed across stages
Cost per $1,000 carried
$151.41
Modeled cost to serve against the value the chain moved
Carried an exception
40
Separately, 22 chains had work recorded twice

The commitment against this outcome

Concept to shelf inside 42 days · owned by Yasmin Chaudhry

Target
1,008 hours
Committed to The group operating committee
Observed
163.8 hours
Median on the chains that could be judged
Attainment
0 breaches recorded
Status
Not measurable
Reviewed by Yasmin Chaudhry

Not measurable from this extract. The commitment runs to 42 days and the extract covers seven, so no chain in the week had the whole commitment available and none could have been seen to miss it. 2 chains did close inside the window, at a median of 163.8 hours, which describes the fast chains and says nothing about the slow ones.

This commitment sits alongside the function level service levels the estate already publishes, not instead of them. Every function inside this chain can hold its own commitment while this one misses.

Who owns the delay

1 boundary disputes touch this service · 1 undecided

Artwork approval sits between two functions and belongs to neitherScheduled

Development specifies the pack. Marketing approves the artwork. The launch gate is held by development again. The middle stage is the longest in the chain and the only one whose owner has no launch date in their objectives.

Research and development against Marketing · arbiter Yasmin Chaudhry · 41.2 h claimed by neither side, with no dollar figure against it

Trace one chain end to end

The 2 complete chains carrying the largest amounts. Open one to see every document, the wait before each stage and the moments a person intervened.

ChainCounterpartyMarketCycleWaitingCostPeopleJoined by
OI-ITS-0003Not namedFrance6.8 d5.3 d$7.600Cohort 0.52Trace
OI-ITS-0005Not namedUnited States6.7 d4.1 d$7.600Cohort 0.60Trace
What this page is, and what it is not

Every week this chain runs long is a week of shelf presence the group does not have, and it is the only outcome where the cost of the delay lands outside the functions that caused it.

An outcome is assembled, not recorded. No source system in this estate stamps a single reference across a purchase requisition, the order raised against it and the receipt that closes it, so the chains on these pages were stitched together after the fact. Where both documents sit in the same source system the chain is keyed and the join is exact. Where it crosses a system boundary the chain is matched on the party, the market, the region and whether the timing is plausible, and it is labeled inferred with its confidence shown. Where the two sides name no party in common the only evidence left is place and timing, and the chain is labeled cohort and confidence is capped low on purpose. A cohort chain is a hypothesis about which documents belong together. Read it as one.

The ledger behind these chains is one week, 10 to 16 August 2026, which is 168 hours. A chain that had not finished when the week ended is open, not late: the week simply stopped watching it. A chain whose commitment falls after the end of the week could never have been seen to miss, so its service level reads not measurable rather than holding. Nothing on these pages should be read as a monthly or annual attainment.

Cost to serve is modeled from the touches the ledger recorded, not billed from a timesheet. Every touch is priced at 11 minutes of a person at a loaded 58 dollars an hour, and every stage carries 1.10 dollars of system cost and 0.42 dollars of inference. Handoff cost is priced separately: waiting is held at 0.90 dollars an item an hour, rework at 34 minutes, and duplicated data entry at the re-keying minutes recorded against that handoff. Change any of those six rates and every dollar on these pages moves.