Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
If you're looking for a skyrocketing growth industry, you need look no further than the third-party logistics service business. Over the course of a decade, the third-party contract logistics business has exploded from a not insignificant $30.8 billion industry to one that pulled in $85 billion last year. Put another way, the industry that once took in about 4 percent of every logistics dollar spent in the United States now rakes in about 8 percent.
That galloping growth was confirmed last month, when the results of the 10th annual third-party logistics study were released during the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals' annual meeting. The study, conducted by John Langley of the Georgia Institute of Technology* and co-sponsored by Capgemini, SAP, and DHL, showed widespread use of 3PL services in North America, Western Europe, Asia-Pacific, Latin America, South Africa, South Africa and the Middle East. In North America, for instance, fully 80 percent of the companies that responded to the survey said they made use of 3PL services (see Figure 1).
But perhaps more importantly, survey respondents report that the overall level of service from 3PLs is improving. Still, there appeared to be a significant shift in the way customers judge their 3PLs: while most say that collaboration between the customer and the 3PL is the key to improving the 3PL's performance, the responses also indicate that pricing has become the most important attribute in selecting a provider. And, interestingly, in a complete reversal of past survey findings, the respondents, who come from industries ranging from automotive and retail to food/beverage and high tech, now say they consider a 3PL's proficiency in delivering core services—like warehousing, transportation and forwardingservices—more important than its ability to deliver value-added services.
FIGURE 1
world domination
(percentage of respondents using 3PLs, by region*)
Percentage
North America
90
Western Europe
77
Asia-Pacific
83
Latin America
72
South Africa
74
*The researchers caution that while percentages are comparable year to year, 3PL users are more likely to respond to the survey than non-users and that this may be particularly true in the Asia-Pacific region.
SOURCE: 2005 THIRD-PARTY LOGISTICS, RESULTS AND FINDINGS OF THE 10TH ANNUAL STUDY, GEORGIA TECH, CAPGEMINI, SAP, DHL
AN OUTSOURCING EPIDEMIC: NO CONTINENT HAS BEEN LEFT UNTOUCHED BY THE OUTSOURCING TREND.
The core of the matter
That emphasis on core services took the researchers by surprise. "[I]n past surveys, a 3PL provider's delivery of core services was considered a 'given,'" the report says, noting that in prior years, respondents were more focused on the value-added services.
But for some, that news wasn't totally unexpected. Herb Shear, CEO and chairman of Genco, a third-party logistics provider, believes that shippers' growing reliance on 3PLs to provide the most basic of services may well reflect chronic and long-term understaffing of logistics departments. In his 35 years in the industry, Shear says, he's seen in-house logistics staffs trimmed through several waves of layoffs, leaving them no choice but to outsource.
Another reason may be the growing complexity of supply chains. Even the most sophisticated logistics and distribution operation cannot be everywhere, maintain DCs in every corner of its market, or keep up to date on trade rules for every country on the globe. The obvious solution? Hire a 3PL.
But that's not to say 3PL customers are solely focusing on the basics. Despite the emphasis on core services, shippers also report that they're asking their 3PLs to take over a variety of other tasks. They're asking them to handle reverse logistics and waste disposal, product assembly, rate negotiations, fleet and materials management, and freight bill auditing, to name a few. Some even want their partners to assist with product repairs and trade financing.
The newest study also reveals a nascent trend among companies to outsource more strategic services, such as inventory planning, says Gary Allen, who led the study for Capgemini in recent years. (Since September, Allen has been a vice president for Exel, a big international 3PL.) "There are still some companies using outsourcing for labor augmentation or asset shifting, but it's becoming much more strategic," he says. He notes, for example, that the latest survey of 3PL users shows that supply chain planning has risen to near the top of the list of what buyers are looking for from providers. "There are customers who say they would never do that," he says, "but we see that changing."
Tough customers
As for how well the 3PLs are meeting those varied demands, the news is generally good (see Figure 2). Across most regions, survey respondents reported that handing off tasks to a 3PL had led to a 10- to 11-percent reduction in logistics costs, as order fill rates improved, and order cycle and cash-to-cash cycle times shrank. Inventory turns increased for North American and Asia-Pacific users as well.
Yet 3PL-customer relationships are not without strain. For example, while customers are generally pleased with the immediate savings they realize when they contract with a 3PL, a large proportion report that they're bothered by what they see as a lack of continuous improvement. "The bar has been raised in terms of customer expectations," says Scott McWilliams, CEO of Ozburn-Hessey Logistics. "Their focus is on execution, the pressure to reduce inventories ... on [wringing out] that last 1 or 2 percent of costs [and productivity]."
Another source of dissatisfaction appears to be information technology. Customers consider a 3PL's information technology capabilities to be crucial to the relationship, yet less than half are satisfied with their providers' capabilities.
FIGURE 2
satisfied customers
(3PL customers who rate their relationship with 3PL providers as "very successful" or "extremely successful," by region)
Percentage
North America
90
Western Europe
88
Asia-Pacific
89
Latin America
77
South Africa
93
*The researchers caution that while percentages are comparable year to year, 3PL users are more likely to respond to the survey than non-users and that this may be particularly true in the Asia-Pacific region.
SOURCE: 2005 THIRD-PARTY LOGISTICS, RESULTS AND FINDINGS OF THE 10TH ANNUAL STUDY, GEORGIA TECH, CAPGEMINI, SAP, DHL
NOT QUITE SO HOT, HOT, HOT: LATIN AMERICA LAGS BEHIND OTHER REGIONS WHEN IT COMES TO CUSTOMERS' SATISFACTION WITH THEIR 3PLS.
That pressure has led many of the 3PLs that once relied on homegrown IT systems to consider some outsourcing of their own—that is, they're subcontracting some or all of their IT needs to supply chain software specialists. Tom Kozenski, a marketing executive for supply chain software provider RedPrairie, notes that his company's 3PL customers tend to have much more complex IT requirements than its shipper customers. What makes the 3PLs' job all the more challenging, he says, is that their requirements are constantly in a state of flux. Every time they add a new customer or expand their services, their systems are likely to need tweaking. "Their work is never done," Kozenski says. "And because they work with so many customers, [they have] a lot more integration to do."
That growing customer demand for IT expertise, strategic services or broader geographic coverage has altered the face of the industry. "There has been a convergence of companies," Allen says. Warehousing or transportation companies remain the dominant players, but others are jumping into the game. Today traditional consultancies or even contract manufacturing companies like Solectron are offering their customers logistics services. Allen reports that it's not unusual to see different types of players team up to offer the specialized mix of financial, IT and logistics services requested by their ever-more-demanding clients.
Keeping up with the customer
As they scramble to meet these customer demands, some 3PLs are overhauling their own operations. For example, Warehouse Specialists Inc., a Wisconsin-based third-party logistics provider with 13 million square feet of warehouse space in 40 locations around the country, has traded in its largely manual, labor-intensive inventory management system for a much more sophisticated process (it's using Microsoft's CE.NET, vehicle-mounted terminals from LXE, and wireless printers from Zebra)—in an attempt to boost both productivity and customer service.
But investing in technology isn't always enough. "What we've had to do is broaden and deepen our knowledge in each functional area," says Ozburn-Hessey's McWilliams. "The challenge is to come up with client solutions that we can replicate across industries or across the same verticals. It takes a lot of customization to wring out that last bit [of productivity]. It used to be that you could implement a solution that could run for a while. But if you're not out there constantly evaluating ways to improve, you're not going to keep the customer happy."
As Gary Kowalski, COO of Menlo Worldwide, sees it, the job will only become more challenging as foreign trade explodes. "As customers go more global, it's clearly a challenge to manage their supply chains. Take the data alone: As supply becomes more global, it becomes more complex and more difficult to manage." He says today's customers are putting more emphasis on integrated, cross-functional management of their supply chains than in the past. That means 3PLs must do the same.
If they hope to succeed, Kowalski says, 3PLs must become expert at designing supply chains, implementing supply chains and managing those supply chains on an ongoing basis. "Today," he says, "the pressure to do all three is greater than ever."
Shear would agree. "If you can do only one thing," he warns, "you might be left out in the cold."
the more you ask, the more you risk
Labor savings, lower truck or ocean rates, higher inventory turns, shorter order cycles ... it's easy to see the appeal of outsourcing to senior management. But in their zeal to slash logistics costs, senior managers sometimes are blind to the risks, warns David Bovet of Mercer Management.
Bovet, who advises clients on outsourcing strategy, worries that the trend toward outsourcing even the most strategic of tasks is leaving more and more shippers vulnerable to the following four types of risks:
Strategic risks. The main strategic risk companies face when outsourcing key logistics tasks is the potential loss of control, says Bovet. At the top management level, he says, there's sometimes a great temptation to put the outsourcing plan in motion and then walk away. But even heavy users of 3PL services still need in-house logistics expertise, he warns. "If you need to change providers or strategy—which is almost inevitable today—it's difficult to do [without professional guidance]." As a cautionary tale, Bovet cites the case of a manufacturer that set up a third-party logistics service contract written around specific transport lanes. "Shortly afterward, they had a major change in the manufacturing footprint," he says, "which made the whole deal worthless."
Bovet also points out that logistics expertise is essential to managing the third-party arrangements. "Strategic supplier management isn't something a lot of companies spend a lot of time on," he says. "But they should. Supplier performance can have a direct impact on both costs and customer satisfaction." For instance, someone knowledgeable about supply chain matters should be on hand when the 3PL agreement is drafted to make sure it includes clear rules on governance, on performance measures, and on details such as the frequency of meetings and incentives. Bovet, by the way, believes penalties have little value in a contract. "Once you're into the fine print," he says, "the relationship is over."
Operational risks. Ideally, outsourcing will result in service that's the same as—or better than—the service the company previously enjoyed. But that's not always the case. Bovet tells of one company that hired a third party to manage its transportation operations in hopes of cutting costs. Sure enough, its costs dropped. The problem was, service deteriorated. The financial arrangements made it hard for the third party to find carriers when a capacity shortage developed.
Financial risks. The most obvious financial risk, of course, is the potential for a third-party business failure (a risk that can be mitigated by a thorough investigation of a prospective partner's financials). But there are less obvious financial risks as well, such as unexpected transition costs or the 3PL's failure to pick up on cost-saving opportunities. "Most 3PLs focus on what the contract says," Bovet notes. Because they have little incentive to devote a lot of time to the shipper's problems, they just do what they're hired to do.
Hazard risks. The hazards a 3PL may confront—natural disasters, political instability, IT security breaches—are no different from the hazards a shipper might face on its own. What's important, Bovet says, is to make sure that a 3PL has policies and practices in place to protect against those risks.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."