That's good knowledge.

I've heard this before but not in such detail. It reminds me of the study of traffic that shows that users who zoom ahead in an ending, merging lane help traffic move faster. Interesting stuff.

>> ^lucky760:

I've heard this before but not in such detail. It reminds me of the study of traffic that shows that users who zoom ahead in an ending, merging lane help traffic move faster. Interesting stuff.


Let's see the study. I absolutely refuse to believe that.

>> ^Ryjkyj:

>> ^lucky760:
I've heard this before but not in such detail. It reminds me of the study of traffic that shows that users who zoom ahead in an ending, merging lane help traffic move faster. Interesting stuff.

Let's see the study. I absolutely refuse to believe that.


http://blog.videosift.com/lucky760/Merging-Late-Speeds-Traffic

It sucks that they still don't link to the actual study in the article. I'll have to do some searching for it but I still say I'll never believe it.

These videos are really interesting. It's a shame the music makes me feel like I'm in some wacky goofball comedy directed by a talentless hack who does lines of coke off the chests of dwarves.

>> ^Gallowflak:

These videos are really interesting. It's a shame the music makes me feel like I'm in some wacky goofball comedy directed by a talentless hack who does lines of coke off the chests of dwarves.


Yeah video is gr8 , music is really annoying.

Someone told me recently to always go to the line on the left. That since most people are right handed, they tend to look right. She has been shopping to the left for years, and swears by it.

I have yet to test it.

That is what walmarts express lane is...

" please go 2 "

"please go 4 "

Fry's Electronics is the only store I know of that's put the single-queue-to-many-cashiers scheme into actual use in large-scale form. They have literally dozens of cashiers and a single really long line (surrounded by last minute impulse-buy products, of course), and it definitely always seems to move along quickly.

>> ^lucky760:

Fry's Electronics is the only store I know of that's put the single-queue-to-many-cashiers scheme into actual use in large-scale form. They have literally dozens of cashiers and a single really long line (surrounded by last minute impulse-buy products, of course), and it definitely always seems to move along quickly.


Another store that I can think of that does this, is Best Buy.

@Esoog: Oh right. Good call, but they are much smaller scale by comparison with a max of like 6 or 8 cashiers. At Fry's the line of cashiers is about 100 yards long.

I go to the self-check line and ask for assistance--just to spite them.

The one part I don't get is when he says "They should make a single line feed multiple cashiers; for three cashiers it's about three times faster than having a line for each cashier". It seems like that would not change the AVERAGE wait time at all, but would make the waiting time less variable. There are still the same number of checkers, and each transaction is still going to take the same amount of time.

In other words, having a single line would only ensure that your wait time would be close to the average. But with multiple lines your wait time may be much less or much more than the average. Both systems have the same mean but a different standard deviation.

Am I missing something? Maybe he was talking about maximum wait time rather than average wait time?

I work at target and would be interested to see how the single line que would be useful combined with the ability to dynamically assign cashiers during times of heavy load. If you have ever worked at target, the number 1 annoying part of the job is getting called for additional cashier help from the floor. We are usually stressed enough in getting our job done before the store closes and dropping what we do to service one or two guest because one persons line was to long is annoying. Also if there is a problem at one cashier (needing supervisor overrides, or WiC check items not going through needing overrides can really stop a line), it is hard to pull the next guest or 2 off the belt and into another line.

One thing I didn't like in the video was the que system line was always full. It really didn't give a good sense that the central que system would be faster. as it took a while for one dot to get from the end to the cashier.

Borders books does the single line thing, Big W here in Australia just started doing it during the holiday period and now I see it's for good reason. I never thought about it properly before but it does make perfect sense, as does the mental hurdle people have to get over regarding seeing one long line vs a collection of shorter ones.

People are funny

Oh, and these videos are absolutely awesome, just wonderfully told with no superfluous crud tacked on and enough depth to be interesting. Wonderful stuff.

@entr0py @jmd: I think you're overthinking the basic point. If there are 5 cashiers each with a queue of 1 customer, there exists the possibility that your checkout will be delayed due to the customer in the line you chose. However, if you're in a central queue with those same 5 customers in front of you, your checkout won't be delayed unless every one of those customers causes a delay because if any fewer (than all of them) causes a delay, there will still be at least one cashier not delayed and, thus, you can checkout more quickly.

In other words, in the many queue method, your wait time is directly proportional to the checkout speed of your one cashier (which may be fast or slow), but in the central queue method, your wait time depends on the checkout speed of *all* the cashiers (which are not likely to all be delayed simultaneously).

You have a much better chance at a speedy checkout with a central queue.

JB-HIFI in Australia also does the single line thing. I actually do remember when first visiting that store noticing all the things they did "different" but you get used to it rather quickly.

What I have a hard time getting used to is the plain clothed employees, this just frustrates me, most the time they have their back to you and you can't see the stupid thing they wear. I've had a guy walk up to me without his tag thing and ask if I needed help, confusing.

>> ^lucky760:

In other words, in the many queue method, your wait time is directly proportional to the checkout speed of your one cashier (which may be fast or slow), but in the central queue method, your wait time depends on the checkout speed of all the cashiers (which are not likely to all be delayed simultaneously).
You have a much better chance at a speedy checkout with a central queue.


That is well put, and pretty much what I was trying to say. The risk of delay is distributed among everyone, but also felt by everyone. Personally I'd prefer a nearly certain 4 minute wait to a wait that may take 1 to 8 minutes. It does seem less random and more egalitarian.

Poisson Distribution.

>> ^lucky760:

>> ^Ryjkyj:
>> ^lucky760:
I've heard this before but not in such detail. It reminds me of the study of traffic that shows that users who zoom ahead in an ending, merging lane help traffic move faster. Interesting stuff.

Let's see the study. I absolutely refuse to believe that.

http://blog.videosift.com/lucky760/Merging-Late-Speeds-Traffic


First of all, you misread the blog. It discussed a series of signs which encourage a single merge point and taking turns. Your quote refers to "zooming ahead" being beneficial, which is highly doubtful. See, just by reading that blog (and not the entire study, since it's not cited), I can think of multiple reasons why "merging late" and a system set up with signs to inform drivers of the optimal time to merge are completely different things.

For one, "merging late" only reduces travel time for the people who skip the line, so it might be mathematically better, but it's not better on average, nor is it fair. One of the first replies to the blog also indicates that it's probably having a single merge point rather than multiple is the mechanic which is making traffic smoother. Because face it, if everyone merged at the first available opportunity and took turns, it would be exactly the same as using both lanes up until the merge point and taking turns. It's the uncertainty, randomness, and speed of the merging which requires people to use their brakes a lot, hence slowing traffic.

Just because some headline agrees with whatever stupid thing you're doing doesn't mean you have to latch on to it as justification for whatever. It's like when there's some headline about scientists playing with genes that affect the aging process and every newspaper/nightly news headline is FOUNTAIN OF YOUTH!!!!

Use your brain.

1) Merging late works due to the fact most people have accelerated to a decent merging spentspeed at that point, and people who merge early tend to be going slower and cause traffic to brake to avoid them.

2) My cousin avoids lines while shopping by just walking out the door with his items. He's a fast runner.

@Payback what the hell is a merging spent? speed? Either way, you missed the point.

If I'm standing in a queue and I find there isn't a roller coaster at the end of it, there will be hell to pay.

HELL TO PAY.