Wa0061

1
EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION TO REDUCE THE REJECTION

RATE IN SAMPLING
A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the award of Degree in
Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)
Submitted By
MRUNAL BANDGAR (BFT/15/132)
Under the guidance of
Ms. Kavita Pathare Assistant Professor
1
2
ABSTRACT
The main aim of the project was to reduce the rejection rate in sampling procedure in women’s wear. Data collection was done to understand the present
status of rejection. After analyzing the data, rejection percentage in the first stage of sampling was found 61%. Major reasons of rejection were identified
with the help of data collection and significant causes were identified with the help of cause and effect diagram. The suggested solutions were implemented
and data has been collected to understand the result after implementation. The designed solutions will help to improve the process, saves time & reduce the
cost.
2
3
CERTIFICATE
3
4
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I am really grateful to NIFT for providing me an opportunity to do my Graduation Project on “EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION TO REDUCE THE REJECTION IN SAMPLING at TRENT LTD”,
MUMBAI . A project report usually falls short of its expectations until and unless guided by the right people at the right time. Hence, I would like to express my deep sense of gratitude
and heartfelt thanks to my college mentor Ms. Kavita Pathare, without whom my graduation project would have been a distant dream. I would also like to acknowledge Ms. Aboli Naik,
Course Coordinator for their tremendous support throughout my project and other faculties of Department of Fashion Technology for their guidance and feedback.
I am indebted to Mrs. Pali Gupta, Senior Buyer (Women’s wear, Zudio) for letting me to pursue/carry out my graduation project with their organisation and for constantly supporting
and motivating me throughout my project’s tenure. I also express my sincere gratitude to her team for providing valuable insights of the company and for mentoring me at each and
every stage, leading to the successful completion of my project.
I am also grateful to all the employees of ‟TRENT LTD”, who left no stone unturned for explaining the details about various processes while I am in the initial phase of the learning and
spent a considerable amount of valuable time with me.
4
5
1. INTRODUCTION
Zudio is a part of Trent ltd. Trent Ltd. is a retail operations organization that claims and deals with various retail chains in India. Zudio is a value retail
chain formed in 2016. Having 40 stand alone stores in all corners of India and being a part of 160 more stores, lined up to open by year 2020. Following
are the categories of women’s wear in Zudio –
Young Women (Active wear, Casual wear)
Modern Women (Casual wear, Formal wear)
My study comprises of these 2 categories.
1.1 Background Study
Zudio is currently working in a very short period of the cycle. They have 2 seasons –
Autumn-Winter
Spring- Summer
Already, they were working with 6 packs in each season which implies 12 packs in a year. In each pack, some new styles & items entered in the market
through their stores and websites. They remodel their entire stores with new styles once in every 2 months.
Since the competition is increasing day by day retailers are doing everything to keep up their image in the market.
To take a competitive edge over other brands, Zudio has launched 2 drops in a pack in each season i.e. 2 new launches in a month, in this way they plan
to reduce their lead-time.
They are working on 3 sampling stages –
1 Blue seal Sample (Fit sample)
2 Silver seal Sample (Pre production sample)
3 Golden seal Sample (QC/ Production sample)
5
6
2. PROBLEM STATEMENT
Working in a short period of cycle with such a large number of styles is truly troublesome. It was found that they are confronting issues in sealer samples.
There is immense rate of rejection gotten by them with the initial stage of sealer samples. It takes 3-4 submissions of similar sample to confirm one style of
the sample which can consume upto a month at times.
Continuation of this issue turns into a state of dialog.
• Huge rejections happen because of fit and measurements issues in the samples.
• Rejection in sealer samples increase their lead-time results in the failure of delivering the stocks on time
3. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT
To reduce the rejection rate in sealer samples in women’s wear.
Sub Objectives:
• To develop an effective communication of technical details between the buyer and the vendor
• To create a pattern library to share across with the vendor
6
7
4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE
1. Reduction in rejection rate of blue seal samples in women’s wear
By: Manish Singh (NIFT Mumbai)

The main aim of the project was to reduce the rejection rate in fit samples in women’s wear. Data collection was done to understand the present status of
rejection. After analyzing the data, rejection percentage in fit samples was found 43%. Major reasons of rejection were identified with the help of data
collection and significant causes were identified with the help of cause and effect diagram. The suggested solutions were implemented and data has been
collected to understand the result after implementation. The designed solutions will help to improve the process, saves time & reduce the cost.
2. Standardizing tech-pack by understanding product lifecycle management
By: Aditi Das (NIFT Bhubaneswar)

In the Project, the author tried to standardize the attributes listed within the company’s tech-pack and categorized the attributes as “MUST HAVE”, “NICE
TO HAVE” AND “PREFER TO HAVE”. From the project the biggest observation made was that a poor tech pack is because of 2 major reasons –
Lack of important information
Error in the flow and representation of the information.
The author referred to several tech-packs of different brands and collected responses from employees of the company and categorized various attributes into
their respective categories. The author also executed a survey with the vendors and categorized the attributes from the vendor’s perspective.
3. Customizing enovia v6 (plm software) for tech pack
By: Sarthak Sharma, VinayDubey&Vrinda Gupta NIFT Mumbai

In this specific project the main agenda is to assess and customize the features of PLM software to create more informative TechPack. The errors existing
and how they were fixed has been studied and its effect on the final desired report analyzed. A revised format was created and standardized guide was
developed to train the user to work on the feature of the software in minimum time and to achieve optimized results.
The journey from concept to consumer, from mind to market, has many stages. Current market pressures are forcing brand owners, manufacturers, design
and source companies and their suppliers to complete these stages more quickly. At the same time maintaining the quality of the product and matching the
sample as designed/visualized. PLM software is an all-encompassing approach for innovation, new product development and introduction and product
information management from ideation to end of life. PLM solutions streamline product development processes, facilitate global collaboration, bring
visibility to supply chain interactions, and help deliver products that actually match their specifications.
7
8
4. Investigation to Control Fit Issues and Reduce customer returns for Knit Garments in Online Apparel Brand
By: Arvind Kumar Singh

This study talks about various Fit issues comes in finished knit garments and what measures should be undertaken to overcome this problem. Garment
industry quality control is practiced right from the initial stage of sourcing raw materials to the stage of the final finished garment. One of the major issues
related to product quality is measurement variation in fittings in finished knit garments.
The main objective of this study is to control higher measurement variation in finished knit garments and reduce customer returns for the same. To obtain
this objective, data was collected at all stages of production. Analysis of collected data and return orders data shows that 19% of the total return orders
were only due to measurement variation and lack of proper quality inspection methods. Then all measurement issues were listed out and the possible cause
was found for each issue. Data analysis shows production stage wise contribution to measurement variation in finished garments. The quality framework
was prepared to control measurement variation. Guidelines and checklists were established wherever needed. Employees were trained in their relevant area.
After the implementation, 19% return order due to measurement variation is reduced to 7%.
5. Effectiveness of Technical Packages for the Apparel Production Process in the Global Apparel Industry
By: AfrozaAkter Rita, ShakinazMahamud

This journal talks about the importance and effectiveness of technical packages for apparel production in the apparel industry. The technical package, a
series of forms that define a garment's specifications, is critical to ensuring that a particular style is executed correctly and in the most cost and time-
efficient manner possible. Tech pack is the short form of the apparel technical package. It explains all the details of a particular garment need to be
communicated, understood, and discussed. Tech pack is a written guideline for a style that includes all the specific information related to providing a certain
garment.
The study develops an idea of how to make a tech pack and what points should be considered while making a tech pack. It talks about the design process,
Components, Pre-production activities, Apparel production processes and Importance of tech pack etc.
6. Product development in the sampling department and analyses of the business process
By: ShivaniArora
This project is constructed around analyzing the workflow of an export house, focusing especially on the sampling unit (GAP). In this project, the main
emphasis has been on how to reduce the lead-time for particular style numbers that has been worked on. It includes a regular routine of chasing and logging
in the samples in order to get a timely approval from the buyer, this can be achieved by recommending and implementing solutions in order to reduce the
communication gap between the departments that work simultaneously. The focus of the project is to analyze how a sample is prepared for approval from the
buyer and the number of stages it has to go through before being passed to the production unit. The second half of the project is based on analyzing the
business process of the company as a whole, how it functions and what are the areas it should work on in order to improvise in terms of work performance,
cost minimization, streamlining of the work and the reporting system of the firm, with the help of which the organization has a better scope of performing,
satisfying the needs of the customers in time along with the required quality.
8
9
5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
5.1 Data collection:
 Internal survey to understand problems in the sampling procedure.
 Survey for understanding vendor requirements.
5.2 Development of standardized draft of technical details.
5.3 Development of patterns to send to the vendors.
5.4 Implementation.
5.5 Result Analysis
9
10
5.1.1 Data collection to understand the current status of Rejection in Samples

Data was collected from email threads, their excel files and comment sheets sent to vendors. The data was taken from samples made from two
seasons i.e. SS18 and AW18. The data was segregated Month wise as well as vendor wise and all the samples were listed by date, style no and status.
(See table -1 in annexures)
DATA ANALYSIS
The sample details of the past 2 seasons (SS18 & AW18) was collected, total 1584 samples were made for 255 styles of which 765 (48.3%) samples
got approved/ conditionally approved and 819 (51.7%) samples got rejected.
All Samples –
Overall Status Count Percentage
Total Samples Made 1584 100%
Total Samples Approved 765 48.3%
Total Samples Rejected 819 51.7%
TABLE 1 – TOTAL SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DATA

Development Samples -
10
11
Development Status Count Percentage
TABLE 2 – DEVELOPMENT SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DATA
Blue seal Samples-

Blue seal Status Count Percentage

TABLE 3 – BLUE SEAL SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DAT
Silver seal Samples-

Silver seal Status Count Percentage

TABLE 4 – SILVER SEAL SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DATA
11
12
Data indicating information of 100 randomly picked samples to figure out the major reason behind rejection:
Style Name Drop Vendor Status Reason for

rejection
Arnol 3 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Abby 5 Sures Overseas Approved
Aska 8 Rashi Approved
Anto 10 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Measurement
deviation
Bally 2 Tangent Approved
Bersy 3 Tangent Approved
Brandy 3 Rashi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Claudia 4 Childkraft Rejected Workmenship
Caren 4 Galaxy Approved
Cadie 5 Galaxy Rejected Wrong
Construction
Cindi 5 Sures Overseas Rejected Measurement
deviation
Cuppy 1 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Dusky 9 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Derko 8 Rashi Approved
Diana 9 Tangent Rejected Workmenship
12
13
Deb 8 Tangent Rejected Measurement

deviation
Dora 10 Tangent Rejected Measurement
deviation
Dream 11 Childkraft Approved
Fuschia 1 Findoc Rejected Wrong
Construction
Fun 1 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Fern 3 Sures Overseas Approved
Faser 8 Sures Overseas Approved
Fiona 7 Findoc Approved
Gel 4 Galaxy Rejected Workmenship
Gabby 7 Galaxy Rejected Measurement
deviation
Gloria 12 Tangent Rejected Measurement
deviation
Hailey 12 Rashi Rejected Wrong
Construction
Husky 8 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Measurement
deviation
Hennie 9 Childkraft Approved
Icy 1 Rashi Rejected Workmenship
Illana 3 Rashi Rejected Workmenship
13
14
Jade 6 Rashi Approved

James 1 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Junky 8 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Kayra 9 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Workmenship
Kivaa 9 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Workmenship
Kesta 10 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Measurement
deviation
Lilly 10 Rashi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Liana 11 Findoc Approved
Lucy 12 Findoc Approved
Miracle 6 Childkraft Approved
Miana 9 Sures Overseas Approved
Mona 12 Tangent Approved
Marie 12 Galaxy Approved
Moshe 1 Rashi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Nana 3 Childkraft Rejected Measurement
deviation
Ness 4 Findoc Approved
Nora 6 Galaxy Approved
Nyasa 5 Tangent Rejected Measurement
14
15
deviation
Nella 8 Rashi Approved
Ora 9 Sures Overseas Rejected Workmenship
Orchid 11 Sures Overseas Approved
Oggy 11 Tangent Rejected Workmenship
Peach 12 Findoc Approved
Pink 10 Tangent Rejected Measurement
deviation
Perry 4 Galaxy Approved
Phoebe 3 Childkraft Rejected Workmenship
Pixie 1 Childkraft Approved
Pumpy 1 Rashi Rejected Workmenship
Posh 10 Findoc Approved
Phill 5 Tangent Approved
Pure 4 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Rush 3 Sures Overseas Rejected Workmenship
Ringie 1 Childkraft Approved
Riana 9 Sures Overseas Approved
Ratty 8 Rashi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Rimmie 7 Galaxy Approved
Ross 7 Tangent Approved
15
16
Sailor 5 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Wrong

Construction
Sana 1 Galaxy Rejected Workmenship
Simail 2 Findoc Approved
Sunny 3 Childkraft Rejected Wrong
Construction
Skoss 5 Childkraft Approved
Saphire 6 Sures Overseas Rejected Measurement
deviation
Sandy 4 Rashi Approved
Sony 8 Tangent Rejected Style Change
Sugar 9 Childkraft Approved
Sam 11 Findoc Approved
Skull 12 Galaxy Approved
Skimmy 12 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Workmenship
Tana 10 Sures Overseas Rejected Measurement
deviation
Tiana 5 Galaxy Approved
Tuffy 8 Rashi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Terra 7 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Topsy 1 Paridhi Apparels Approved
16
17
Tinkey 2 Childkraft Approved

Tara 3 Sures Overseas Rejected Workmenship
Tammy 5 Sures Overseas Rejected Measurement
deviation
Tiara 10 Galaxy Rejected Measurement
deviation
Tessy 2 Findoc Rejected Workmenship
Tom 1 Tangent Rejected Style Change
Teddy 6 Rashi Rejected Style Change
Tipsy 7 Tangent Approved
Tecky 3 Paridhi Apparels Approved
Uvina 4 Childkraft Approved
Viana 9 Rashi Rejected Wrong
Construction
Virgo 10 Findoc Rejected Workmenship
Vex 5 Childkraft Rejected Measurement
deviation
Zenia 7 Sures Overseas Approved
Zen 11 Galaxy Approved
17
18
Total samples Approval &

Rejection Data
Total Approval 46%

Total Rejection 54%
Figure 1: Rejection Data for 100 randomly picked samples
IDENTIFICATION OF REJECTION
AREA
38.8
31.4
18.5
11.1
MEASUREMENT WORKMENSHIP WRONG OTHER
DEVIATION CONSTRUCTION
Figure 2: Area of rejection for above selected samples
In this figure, it was clearly found that the rejections were majorly coming because of “Measurement & fitting issues”. Fitting of the garment plays an
important role, the customer is ready to pay extra if he is getting a proper fitting. So that they can wear it comfortably.
39% of the rejections were coming because of measurement deviations and around 31% of the rejections were because of poor workmanship, if we want
to achieve our goal and reduce the rejection rate then we have to reduce the rejection coming from Fitting issues and measurement deviations first.
18
19
Reason for Measurement Deviation
Cause and effect diagram
Measurements Manpower
Lack of
Lack of precision knowledge
in measurement about the
by the vendor technical
terms
Measurement
Deviation
Communicatio Absence of
n problem tech packs Spec sheet not in
between accordance with
Comm fabric property
buyer and
vendor
Method Material
ISHIKAWA DIAGRAM
1 Manpower –
• Lack of knowledge – Lack of understanding about the technical terms and measuring terminology of the product in vendors. Vendors don’t have clear
understanding about the product and style element.
2 Material -
• Absence of tech packs- Appropriate information about the product and other related things is not communicated efficiently.
• Spec. sheet not in accordance with fabric property – There are chances that some spec. sheet were not co-related with the fabric composition.
3 Measurement -
• Lack of precision in measurements –There are chances that vendors were not precise while measuring the garments before sending samples to buyer
that leads to the rejection in measurement deviation.
4 Method -
• Communication problem between vendors and buyer – There are chances that there were a communication gap between vendors and buyer which
leads to the measurement deviation. Also, there was no clarity about the product.
19
20
5.1.2 Internal survey to find problems in the current sampling program

The survey method used was Delphi technique, in which overview was taken in 2 levels. The Sample measure taken was 10 and included organization
authorities who were the immediate members in the sampling program.
The respondents who participated in both the levels of the overview involved:
Respondent Composition
Technology
4 4
Buying & Planning
Sourcing
Techpack Team
4 4
Others
FIGURE 3 - RESPONDENT COMPOSITION OF SURVEY

(See annexures for response sheet and survey forms)
Level 1 Questionnaire, contained inquiries regarding the present sampling program and the goal was to discover the issue in the present sampling
program. Level 2 Questionnaire was outlined in light of the after effects of level 1.
From the after effects of level 1-

No clear understanding of product & style element by vendor
Absence of Tech- pack failed in providing enough information of the product to vendor
These were the major causes for delay in the sample development process where as spec. sheet was not in accordance with the fabric properties and
Incompetent Vendors were set up as minor reason for delay.
Level 2 survey contained inquiries related with the development of Tech-pack and how we can enhance and give better clarity to the vendor’s for a specific
style.
20
21
In Ques. 1 of the questionnaire as the most severe cause for high rejection rate in sample development and approval process was “No clear understanding of
the Product, style element & specifications by the vendor”.
1. Around 40% respondents (4 out of 10) selected the option “a - No clear understanding
of the Product, style element & specifications by the vendor” in their 1st preference and about 53% respondents (4 out of 7) selected the option “a” in
their 2nd preference.
2. 20% of the respondents (2 out of 10) thought that “Option b – Measurement deviation” is the major cause for the high rejection rate.
3. 15% respondents (2 out of 10) thought that the “Option d – No proper assessment of Vendors” could also be the major factor while getting the
rejections.
4. 10% respondents (1 out of 10) thought that “Option C – Incorrect fabric or trim” could be the reason for the issue and the percentage increase in the 2nd
preference where 28% respondents think the same.
The frequency distribution for all 9 options of question 1 is given in figure which clearly shows that the major cause for high rejection rate in sample
development process is “a. - No clear understanding of the Product, style element & specifications by the vendor “.
As well as the need for tech pack is also noticed, so that it can give a better clarity and understanding about the product.
In Question 2, although there were several suggestions given by respondents but most of the respondents suggested that “A sample/ pattern should be
provided with the Tech pack to the vendor to give better clarity about the product”
So that vendors can easily understand about the product detail.
While in Survey 2, when asked about the factors responsible for No clear understanding of the Product, style element & specifications by the vendor, a.
Absence of tech pack/other technical details & d. Lack of pictorial representation were found to be the major responses.
CONCLUSION OF THE SURVEY
The survey conducted in 2 levels clearly shows that the idea – providing the patterns with the tech pack is pretty good and appreciated by the concerned
authorities. By doing this there are less chances of getting Measurement deviations and Fitting issues and it can reduce the rejection rate.
Also, there is an urgent need to look into the technical pack for each product which could make the vendor understand the product more clearly.
21
22
5.2 Development of Tech packs & Fit clinic platform
The company didn't have their sampling department. So, they won’t be able to send samples along with the newly developed tech packs but they can send
patterns, so that, it can help vendors to see effortlessly, and they can specifically utilize those patterns while development of the sample and saves time which
was utilized in pattern development, thus reduced the time required in sampling procedure. Additionally, then there are less odds of getting a rejection in
sealer samples.
Fit Clinic - Fit clinic is a platform which gives every last insight about the styles–brand andpatterns of similar styles in Lectra. It's a database with actual
pic/garment/line diagram; actual/tweaked measurements will be kept up for the reference in future.
The Main purpose is to give the organization a Pattern library of the specific style of women’s wear with full description and a detailed reference chart that is
crisp, exact and aligned according to the standards. By doing this it will be easier for them to utilize those patterns, do some minor changes if required and
send to the vendors along with Tech pack and thusly, reducing the rejection happens in sealer sample.
22
23
Patterns for the Fit Clinic
23
24
5.2.1 Development of Tech packs
TECHPACK ID 001SS19
VENDOR PARIDHI APPARELS
STYLE NAME AMANDA
CATEGORY WOMEN’S WESTERNWEAR
BRAND ZUDIO WOMEN’S WEAR
PRODUCT DRESS
FIT NA
STYLE DESCRIPTION YARNDYED CHECK DRESS WITH DRAWSTRINGS
SEASON SS19
PACK 5
DEVELOPMENT DATE
REQUIREMENT DATE
STYLE STATUS IN DEVELOPMENT
SAMPLE SIZE S
PO No. DC1
PO No. DC2
SIZE RANGE XS:S:M:L:XL:XXL
SHIPMENT DATE
DESIGNER BUYER TECHNOLOGIST SOURCING
- PALI, PRAGATI JC ONKAR, ROHINI
24
25
Front and Back Sketch

001SS19
TECHPACK ID FIT TYPE NA DESIGNER - SOURCING ONKAR, ROHINI
STYLE AMANDA FABRIC REFER COMBO DETAILS BUYER PALI, PRAGATI STATUS IN DEVELOPMENT
YARNDYED CHECK DRESS ZUDIO WOMEN’S
DESCRIPTION SIZE RANGE XS:S:M:L:XL:XXL TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND WEAR
WITH DRAWSTRINGS
Specific comments related to

design,styling, fit and other details
by Designer/Buyer/Technologist
Confidential information belongs exclusively to Trent limited
25
26
Product and Combo Details

TECHPACK ID 001SS19 FIT TYPE NA DESIGNER - SOURCING ONKAR, ROHINI
WITH DRAWSTRINGS
Combo 1
VISCOSE DOBBY
Main Fabric
WHITE
Color
Placement
Trim Fab1
NA
Color Trim1
Placement
Trim Fab2
NA
Color Trim2
Placement
Trim Fab3
NA
Color Trim3
Placement
Trim Fab4
NA
Color Trim4
Placement
Confidential information belongs exclusively to Trent limit
26
27
Combo 1
Trim Fab5
NA
Color Trim5
Placement
GOLD METAL
Buttons
Zipper
GOLD RIVETS
Rivets
Snaps
GOLD AGLETS
Other Trims
Wash
Packaging
Embroidery
PRINTED STRIPES
Printing Details
ZUDIO WOMEN’S WEAR

GOLD TAB AT BACK
Branding
Comments
Fabric Code
27
28
Technical Sketch
WITH DRAWSTRINGS
Specific comments related to design,
styling, fit and other details by
Designer/Buyer/Technologist
28
29
How to Measure Sketch

STYLE ANGEL FABRIC REFER COMBO DETAILS BUYER PALI, PRAGATI STATUS IN DEVELOPMENT
CHECK FULL LENGTH MAXI
ZUDIO WOMEN’S
DESCRIPTION DRESS WITH HANDKERCHEIF SIZE RANGE XS:S:M:L:XL:XXL TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND WEAR
HEM

29
30

ZUDIO WOMEN’S
HEM

30
31

ZUDIO WOMEN’S
HEM

31
32

ZUDIO WOMEN’S
HEM

32
33
STYLE JANET FABRIC REFER COMBO DETAILS BUYER PALI, PRAGATI STATUS IN DEVELOPMENT
ZUDIO WOMEN’S
DESCRIPTION HIGH WAISTED JEGGING SIZE RANGE 26:28:30:32:34:36 TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND WEAR

33
34

ZUDIO WOMEN’S
DESCRIPTION HIGH WAISTED JEGGING SIZE RANGE 26:28:30:32:34:36 TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND WEAR

34
35

DESCRIPTION HIGH WAISTED JEGGING SIZE RANGE 26:28:30:32:34:36 TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND ZUDIO WOMEN’S WEAR

35
36
POINT OF MEASUREMENTS POM – Code

ACROSS BACK WIDTH ARMHOLE FROM HPS AB
ACROSS BACK WIDTH AT MID OF ARMHOLE AB1
ACROSS FRONT WIDTH AT MID OF ARMHOLE AF
ARMHOLE MEASURED STRAIGHT AHS
ACROSS SHOULDER SEAM TO SEAM AS
1/2 BOTTOM WIDTH STRAIGHT BW
BACK LENGTH FROM HPS BL
1/2 BICEP 1" BELOW ARMHOLE BC
BOTTOM HEM HEIGHT BH
1/2 CHEST WIDTH 1” BELOW ARMHOLE CW
CUFF WIDTH CUW
CUFF HEIGHT CUH
FRONT NECK DROP - HPS TO SEAM FN
FRONT LENGTH FROM HPS FL
BACK NECK DROP - HPS TO SEAM BN
NECK WIDTH - SEAM TO SEAM NW
CENTRE FRONT PLACKET WIDTH CP
SLEEVE LENGTH FROM LSP ( FULL ) SL
1/2 SLEEVE OPENING - RELAXED ( FULL ) SO
SLEEVE SLIT LENGTH SSL
1/2 WAIST WIDTH WW
WAIST POSITION FROM HPS WP
ARMHOLE MEASURED CURVED AHC
LAST BUTTON PLACEMENT FROM HEM BPH
DISTANCE B/W 2 BUTTONS DB
POCKET FLAP HEIGHT @ CENTRE PFC
POCKET FLAP HEIGHT @ SIDE PFS
POCKET LENGTH @ CENTER PLC
POCKET LENGTH @ SIDE PLS
POCKET WIDTH @ TOP PWT
SHOULDER FORWARD SF
SHOULDER SLOPE SS
SIDESEAM LENGTH SSL
DART LENGTH DL
36
37
Graded Specifications
YARNDYED CHECK DRESS
DESCRIPTION SIZE RANGE XS:S:M:L:XL:XXL TECHNOLOGIST JC BRAND ZUDIO WOMEN’S WEAR
WITH DRAWSTRINGS
S Pom Code Pom Name Tol +/- XS S(base) M L XL XXL
1 F3 FRONT LENGTH FROM HPS 1 94.0 96.0 96.0 98.0 98.0 100.0
2 BO BACK LENGTH FROM HPS 1 94.0 96.0 96.0 98.0 98.0 100.0
3 C1 1/2 CHEST WIDTH 1" BELOW ARMHOLE 1 47.5 50.0 52.5 55.0 57.5 60.0
4 WP WAIST POSITION FROM HPS 0 44.0 45.0 45.0 46.0 46.0 47.0
5 W 1/2 WAIST WIDTH 1 43.5 46.0 48.5 51.0 53.5 56.0
6 HP HIP POSITION FROM HPS 0 59.0 60.0 60.0 61.0 61.0 62.0
7 H1 1/2 HIP WIDTH MEASURED STRAIGHT @2 POINT 1 51.5 54.0 56.5 59.0 61.5 64.0
8 B 1/2 BOTTOM WIDTH 1 53.5 56.0 58.5 61.0 63.5 66.0
9 SS SHOULDER SLOPE 0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
10 AS ACROSS SHOULDER SEAM TO SEAM 0 38.5 40.0 41.5 43.0 44.5 46.0
11 SF FORWARD SHOULDER 1 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
12 AF2 ACROSS FRONT WIDTH AT MID OF ARMHOLE 0.5 34.5 36.0 37.5 39.0 40.5 42.0
13 AB2 ACROSS BACK WIDTH AT MID OF ARMHOLE 0.5 36.5 38.0 39.5 41.0 42.5 44.0
14 AH1 ARMHOLE MEASURED STRAIGHT 0.5 20.0 21.0 22.0 23.0 24.0 25.0
15 BC1 1/2 BICEP 1" BELOW ARMHOLE 0.5 16.0 17.0 18.0 19.0 20.0 21.0
37
38
All measurements are in cms
16 SO1 1/2 SLEEVE OPENING - RELAXED ( FULL ) 0.25 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5
17 CH CUFF HEIGHT 0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
18 SL1 SLEEVE LENGTH FROM LSP ( FULL ) 0.25 58.0 59.0 60.0 61.0 62.0 63.0
19 SSL SLEEVE SLIT LENGTH 0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
20 N1 NECK WIDTH - SEAM TO SEAM 0.25 17.5 18.0 18.5 19.0 19.5 20.0
21 F1 FRONT NECK DROP - HPS TO SEAM 0.25 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0
22 FN2 BACK NECK DROP - HPS TO SEAM 0.25 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
23 NH NECK BAND HEIGHT 0 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5
24 CO4 COLLAR POINT 0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
25 CO5 COLLAR HEIGHT @ CENTER BACK 0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
26 PW CENTRE FRONT PLACKET WIDTH 0 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5
27 Y1 YOKE HEIGHT AT CENTRE BACK 0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0 8.0
28 RP SLEEVE ROLL UP TAB PLACEMENT FROM LSP 0 31.5 32.0 32.5 33.0 33.5 34.0
29 RL SLEEVE ROLL UP TAB LENGTH 0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0 15.0
30 RW SLEEVE ROLL UP TAB WIDTH 0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0
38
39
All measurements are in cms

31 FIRST BUTTON POSITION FROM NECK SEAM 0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
32 LAST BUTTON POSITION FROM BOTTOM HEM 0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0
33 WAIST TIE LENGTH – EXPOSED 0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0 160.0
34 POCKET PLACEMENT FROM HPS 0 20.5 21.0 21.5 22.0 22.5 23.0
35 POCKET PLACEMENT FROM CENTER FRONT 0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
36 POCKET WIDTH 0 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5 10.5
37 POCKET FLAP WIDTH 0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
38 POCKET FLAP HEIGHT 0 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5 4.5
39 POCKET HEIGHT 0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0 11.0
40 WAIST BAND HEIGHT 0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
39
40
Testing Parameter and Wash Care

WITH DRAWSTRINGS

40
41

WITH DRAWSTRINGS

41
42

WITH DRAWSTRINGS

42
43

WITH DRAWSTRINGS

ASK PREV. SILVER

SEALED SAMPLE
FROM BUYER.
43
44
Label Position Guideline Sketch

WITH DRAWSTRINGS

44
45
5.2.2 Data indicating information of 50 new samples, which were provided with structured tech packs and patterns
The final pattern with updated tech pack was sent to vendors for sample making. The lead-time and Rejection rate was noted after the sample came just to see
the results of our experiment.
Live Fittings and evaluations were done on the newly received samples between the period 25th March to 12th April. The Fit trials on live models or dress form
are again conducted just to check the required fittings, measurements, drape, and fall and comfort ability of the garment etc. If the garment doesn’t have any
problem then the particular style is approved otherwise the sample is rejected and need sudden changes in pattern and specification and do the process again.
After that records were created and maintained on the status and reason for rejection/approval of the same.
Vendor wise sorting was also done to understand the difference in rejection rate, vendor wise.
Style name Product Type Vendor Status Reason for

Rejection
Amanda Dress Paridhi Approved
Angel Dress Paridhi Approved
Angelica Dress Paridhi Approved
Angie Denim Jeans Galaxy Approved
Anja Dress Findoc Approved
April Top Findoc Approved
Ava Dress Paridhi Approved
Avi Dress Findoc Approved
Bella Maxi Dress Paridhi Rejected Measurement
deviation
Bianca Tshirt Rashi Approved
Bria Dress Findoc Rejected Measurement
deviation
Charlene Dress Paridhi Rejected Workmanship
Crysta Tunic Findoc Approved
Diara Top Findoc Rejected Style Change
Divo Top Paridhi Rejected Workmanship
Dylan Dress Paridhi Rejected Measurement
Deviation
Freya Skirt Findoc Approved
Ivo Jumpsuit Paridhi Approved
Janet Jegging Galaxy Approved
Jets Jumpsuit Childkraft Rejected Measurement
46
deviation
Jina Denim Bottom Galaxy Approved
Kiki Tunic Paridhi Approved
Legend Hoodie Rashi Approved
Lenard Top Paridhi Rejected Wrong
Construction
Lucas Top Paridhi Approved
Magma Tshirt Rashi Approved
Marty Denim Bottom Galaxy Approved
Maxa Jumpsuit Paridhi Approved
Maxine Maxi Dress Findoc Rejected Style Change
Meccha Hoodie Rashi Approved

Mexa Track Pants Thangamann Approved
Miami Tshirt Rashi Approved
Molten Tshirt Rashi Rejected Measurement
Deviation
More Tshirt Rashi Approved
Narita Jumpsuit Childkraft Rejected Workmanship
Nina Top Findoc Approved
Nixie Tshirt Rashi Rejected Measurement
Deviation
Noah Dress Paridhi Approved
Petal Top Paridhi Approved
Player Jacket Thangamman Approved
Power tee Tshirt Rashi Approved
Ray Top Findoc Approved
Rig Top Paridhi Approved
Robin Tshirt Rashi Approved
Rusty Track Pants Thangamman Rejected Workmanship
Sam Tshirt Rashi Approved
Sharp Track Pants Thangamman Approved
Staller Jacket Thangamman Approved
Storm Dress Thangamman Approved
Thorn Track Pants Thangamman Approved
47
6. RESULT ANALYSIS
After implementation the data analyzed were mentioned below:
Out of sample size - 50 styles, 37 styles were approved without doing any changes in the measurements and around 13 styles were rejected due to measurement
deviations, poor
workmanship and wrong construction etc.
Vendors Paridhi Findoc Rashi Thangamman Childkraft Galaxy Total

Approved 11 7 9 6 0 3 37
Rejected 5 3 2 1 2 0 13
Total 16 10 11 7 2 3 50
Table 5: Vendor wise sample status after implementation
It was observed that by sending patterns with the updated tech-pack, the rejection rate was 26% and around 74% of the sample size was approved in one
go.
VENDOR WISE REJECTION RATE BEFORE

AND AFTER IMPLEMENTATION -IN
PERCENTAGE
Before After
100
66.6
38.4
42
33.3
34
31
30
18
PARIDHI RASHI CHILDKRAFT GALAXY FINDOC

48
Figure 4: Vendor wise rejection rate Before & After implementation.
Rejection Rate (area wise) after

implementation - In Percentage
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Measurement Workmanship Wrong Other
Deviation Construction
Figure 5: Frequency distribution showing Rejected area of sample size.

49
Product Category wise Rejection - In Number

of Samples
16
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
0
Dresses & Denim Tops Tshirts Jackets & Tracks & Jumpsuits
Skirts Bottoms Tunics Hoodies Jeggings
Approved Rejected
Figure 6: Product Category wise rejection
Comparison between previous rejection rate and current rejection rate after implementing:
50
Rejection Rate Comparison

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Previous 54% Current 26%
Figure 7: Comparison of Rejection rate before & after implementation.
After implementation, rejected sample percentage decreased from 54% to 26% in sealer samples (1st submission)
51
Analysis of rejection area after implementation :
Previous Current
21
17
12
10
8
4
MEASUREMENT WORKMANSHIP WRONG 2 OTHER
DEVIATION CONSTRUCTION
Figure 8: Rejection area analysis – before & after implementation.
After implementation rejection rate decreases in all parameters including measurement deviation, measurement revision, workmanship & wrong
construction.
One of the major factor responsible for rejection was measurement deviation, which is reduced from 21% to 12% after implementation.
52
7 BENEFITS OF THE PROJECT
• By implementing fit clinic activity, there are less chances of rejections occurring in initial stages of sealer samples.
• Reduction in the lead-time which leads to deliver required stocks on time in their stores.
• Reduction in the re-work which saves time as well as cost.
• By doing this exercise, They have standardized their fits, blocks and product types. Now, They have consistency in their fits of a particular brand. The
buyer also came to know that what kinds of fits they have in their brands and also, they have better clarity and control on this.
• By making patterns on their own, they can also approach to new vendors anytime by providing a pattern with the tech-pack. It will be easy for the new
vendor also, to understand the style in one go which helps in maintaining the rejection rate and lead-time.
53
8. LIMITATIONS OF THE STUDY
The study was based upon 100 sealer samples (1st submission) which was the sample size taken to proceed with this experiment. On the basis of
these samples, the results were concluded.
The study majorly focuses on rejection due to measurement deviation, fitting issues and workmanship issues which were just few of the major factors
affecting rejection rate.
The Survey which was conducted to find out the problem in the process was taken only from concerned authorities of Fiora services and Trent
limited.
This study was conducted merely from the buyer’s perspectives, not taking into account the vendor’s viewpoint
54
9. SCOPE FOR FURTHER STUDY
Reduction in Rejection Rate of sealer samples is a topic in which a lot more can be done. There exists a lot of untapped potential in IT systems
and Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) Software to overcome the given problem.
There is a need for further study in future, of factors affecting rejection, apart from measurement deviation, fitting issues and workmanship
issues.
As vendors are the ones who manufacture the product, there is also a need to study the vendor’s perspective and take into account the vendor’s
viewpoint to get more insights into reduction of rejection.
This is important, not only for buyers, but also for vendors, to come up on a platform and improve communication between them - not only in the sampling
program but in production as well. So, use of Mobile application can further help in improving thecommunication between buyer and supplier. Features like
mail box, in which the vendor and buyer can chat instantly and exchange pictures of products can help enhance this required communication. The application
can further be used by the buyer, as a tool for vendor evaluation by using back-end algorithms to evaluate the vendors from time to time.
55
10 CONCLUSION
During the course of the project, the efforts were taken to make a fit clinic and standardised the tech-pack in order to reduce the rejection.
The Past data was analysed and it was observed that the rejection rate of samples (Blue/Silver-seal) was quite high and even in that the rejections coming
in Blue seal sample particularly was very high.
One of the major issue of rejection was measurement deviation which can be solved with the help of fit clinic platform.
The main aim of this exercise is to reduce the rejections coming in sealer samples especially in measurements, poor workmanship and wrong construction
by providing 100% accurate patterns with the updated tech-pack to the vendors.
It was concluded that by providing correct patterns to the vendors with updated tech-pack can reduce the sample rejection rate in sealer samples
by 28%, it will save a lot of time for both the vendor and buyer. Also, it leads to reduction in re-work which can save time as well cost.
56
APPENDIX
ABOUT THE COMPANY
ZUDIO is a part of Trent ltd. which deals with sourcing, technology and Quality. Trent Ltd. is a retail operations company that owns and manages a
number of retail chains in India.
Tata Trent’s value clothing chain Zudio has 41 stand alone stores across India and soon to appear in e commerce at UAE. The company hopes to expand
rapidly with similar format stores that offer a fine balance between style and price retailing. The Westside stores have several departments to meet the
varied shopping needs of customers. These include Men‘s Wear, Women‘s Wear, Kid‘s Wear, Footwear, Household Accessories, and Lingerie.
57
Internal Survey – Questionnaire 1

Name:
Designation:
1. What do you think is the major reason for the rejection of samples? In the case of selecting multiple options, write in the given space in descending order
of severity of cause.
a. No clear understanding of vendor about the Product & style element
b. Measurement deviation
c. Incorrect fabric/ trims
d. No proper pre-assessment of the vendor before allotting product for sample

e. Insufficient infrastructure or workforce than required for handling and approving samples from buyer
f. Frequent changes in styles & specs. in sample development phase
g. Poor coordination among team members (Technology, Buyer & sourcing Team)
h. Buyer unaware of the deadlines and timeline for the process
i. Vendor unaware of the deadlines and timeline for the process
j. If others, please specify.....………………………………………………………………............................
2. How do you think can these errors be avoided?

58
Internal Survey – Questionnaire 2

Name:
Designation:
1. What do you think are the factors responsible for “No clear understanding of the Product, style element & specifications by the vendor”?
a. Absence of techpack/other technical details
b. Needs other sources of information
sharing.
c. Linguistics/ language problem
d. Lack of pictorial representation
e. Ambiguity in comments
f. If others, please specify………………………………………………………………………………….
2. To what extent you think by providing patterns to the vendors of that particular style can reduce the measurement rejections & fit issues in the product
lifecycle?
a. Very Great Extent
b. Great Extent
c. Some Extent
d. Little Extent
e. Very Little Extent
59
Vendor Survey Questionnaire

Name:
Designation:
1. What do you think is the major reason for rejection of samples?

a. Incorrect or incomplete style information received
b. Frequent style change
c. Labor/Raw material issues
d. Linguistics/ language problem
e. Lack of pictorial representation
2. What steps/improvements should be done by the buyer to avoid this situation?
3. Do you think that the samples you provide can be improved if you get patterns from the buyer?
60
Vendor Feedback Form

Name:
1. How helpful do you think are the newly introduced Techpacks?
2. What other data do you think should be included in the Techpacks?
3. To what extent did the provided patterns solve the issue of measurement and fit issues leading to rejection of samples?
a. Very Great Extent
b. Great Extent
c. Some Extent
d. Little Extent
e. Very Little Extent
61

Wa0061

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Wa0061

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Wa0061

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION TO REDUCE THE REJECTION

Bachelor of Fashion Technology (Apparel Production)

MRUNAL BANDGAR (BFT/15/132)

Under the guidance of

Ms. Kavita Pathare Assistant Professor

My study comprises of these 2 categories.

1.1 Background Study

Continuation of this issue turns into a state of dialog.

3. OBJECTIVE OF THE PROJECT

To reduce the rejection rate in sealer samples in women’s wear.

• To create a pattern library to share across with the vendor

By: Manish Singh (NIFT Mumbai)

2. Standardizing tech-pack by understanding product lifecycle management

By: Aditi Das (NIFT Bhubaneswar)

3. Customizing enovia v6 (plm software) for tech pack

By: Sarthak Sharma, VinayDubey&Vrinda Gupta NIFT Mumbai

By: Arvind Kumar Singh

By: AfrozaAkter Rita, ShakinazMahamud

5.1.1 Data collection to understand the current status of Rejection in Samples

Total Samples Made 1584 100%

Total Samples Approved 765 48.3%

Total Samples Rejected 819 51.7%

TABLE 1 – TOTAL SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DATA

Development Status Count Percentage

Total Samples Made 666 100%

Total Samples Approved 255 38.3%

Total Samples Rejected 411 61.7%

TABLE 2 – DEVELOPMENT SAMPLES APPROVAL & REJECTION DATA

Blue seal Samples-

Total Samples Made 553 100%

Total Samples Approved 255 46.12%

Silver seal Samples-

Total Samples Made 365 100%

Total Samples Approved 255 69.87%

Style Name Drop Vendor Status Reason for

Deb 8 Tangent Rejected Measurement

Jade 6 Rashi Approved

Sailor 5 Paridhi Apparels Rejected Wrong

Tinkey 2 Childkraft Approved

Total samples Approval &

Total Approval 46%

Figure 1: Rejection Data for 100 randomly picked samples

Figure 2: Area of rejection for above selected samples

Reason for Measurement Deviation

Cause and effect diagram

5.1.2 Internal survey to find problems in the current sampling program

FIGURE 3 - RESPONDENT COMPOSITION OF SURVEY

From the after effects of level 1-

So that vendors can easily understand about the product detail.

CONCLUSION OF THE SURVEY

5.2 Development of Tech packs & Fit clinic platform

Patterns for the Fit Clinic

5.2.1 Development of Tech packs

VENDOR PARIDHI APPARELS

STYLE NAME AMANDA

CATEGORY WOMEN’S WESTERNWEAR

BRAND ZUDIO WOMEN’S WEAR