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.
A move by federal regulators to reinforce requirements for broker transparency in freight transactions is stirring debate among transportation groups, after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published a “notice of proposed rulemaking” this week.
According to FMCSA, its draft rule would strive to make broker transparency more common, requiring greater sharing of the material information necessary for transportation industry parties to make informed business decisions and to support the efficient resolution of disputes.
The proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” would address what FMCSA calls the lack of access to information among shippers and motor carriers that can impact the fairness and efficiency of the transportation system, and would reframe broker transparency as a regulatory duty imposed on brokers, with the goal of deterring non-compliance. Specifically, the move would require brokers to keep electronic records, and require brokers to provide transaction records to motor carriers and shippers upon request and within 48 hours of that request.
Under federal regulatory processes, public comments on the move are due by January 21, 2025. However, transportation groups are not waiting on the sidelines to voice their opinions.
According to the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), an industry group representing the third-party logistics (3PL) industry, the potential rule is “misguided overreach” that fails to address the more pressing issue of freight fraud. In TIA’s view, broker transparency regulation is “obsolete and un-American,” and has no place in today’s “highly transparent” marketplace. “This proposal represents a misguided focus on outdated and unnecessary regulations rather than tackling issues that genuinely threaten the safety and efficiency of our nation’s supply chains,” TIA said.
But trucker trade group the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) welcomed the proposed rule, which it said would ensure that brokers finally play by the rules. “We appreciate that FMCSA incorporated input from our petition, including a requirement to make records available electronically and emphasizing that brokers have a duty to comply with regulations. As FMCSA noted, broker transparency is necessary for a fair, efficient transportation system, and is especially important to help carriers defend themselves against alleged claims on a shipment,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.
Additional pushback came from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC), a network of transportation professionals in small business, which said the potential rule didn’t go far enough. “This is too little too late and is disappointing. It preserves the status quo, which caters to Big Broker & TIA. There is no question now that FMCSA has been captured by Big Broker. Truckers and carriers must now come out in droves and file comments in full force against this starting tomorrow,” SBTC executive director James Lamb said in a LinkedIn post.
The “series B” funding round was financed by an unnamed “strategic customer” as well as Teradyne Robotics Ventures, Toyota Ventures, Ranpak, Third Kind Venture Capital, One Madison Group, Hyperplane, Catapult Ventures, and others.
The fresh backing comes as Massachusetts-based Pickle reported a spate of third quarter orders, saying that six customers placed orders for over 30 production robots to deploy in the first half of 2025. The new orders include pilot conversions, existing customer expansions, and new customer adoption.
“Pickle is hitting its strides delivering innovation, development, commercial traction, and customer satisfaction. The company is building groundbreaking technology while executing on essential recurring parts of a successful business like field service and manufacturing management,” Omar Asali, Pickle board member and CEO of investor Ranpak, said in a release.
According to Pickle, its truck-unloading robot applies “Physical AI” technology to one of the most labor-intensive, physically demanding, and highest turnover work areas in logistics operations. The platform combines a powerful vision system with generative AI foundation models trained on millions of data points from real logistics and warehouse operations that enable Pickle’s robotic hardware platform to perform physical work at human-scale or better, the company says.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.
Progress in generative AI (GenAI) is poised to impact business procurement processes through advancements in three areas—agentic reasoning, multimodality, and AI agents—according to Gartner Inc.
Those functions will redefine how procurement operates and significantly impact the agendas of chief procurement officers (CPOs). And 72% of procurement leaders are already prioritizing the integration of GenAI into their strategies, thus highlighting the recognition of its potential to drive significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, Gartner found in a survey conducted in July, 2024, with 258 global respondents.
Gartner defined the new functions as follows:
Agentic reasoning in GenAI allows for advanced decision-making processes that mimic human-like cognition. This capability will enable procurement functions to leverage GenAI to analyze complex scenarios and make informed decisions with greater accuracy and speed.
Multimodality refers to the ability of GenAI to process and integrate multiple forms of data, such as text, images, and audio. This will make GenAI more intuitively consumable to users and enhance procurement's ability to gather and analyze diverse information sources, leading to more comprehensive insights and better-informed strategies.
AI agents are autonomous systems that can perform tasks and make decisions on behalf of human operators. In procurement, these agents will automate procurement tasks and activities, freeing up human resources to focus on strategic initiatives, complex problem-solving and edge cases.
As CPOs look to maximize the value of GenAI in procurement, the study recommended three starting points: double down on data governance, develop and incorporate privacy standards into contracts, and increase procurement thresholds.
“These advancements will usher procurement into an era where the distance between ideas, insights, and actions will shorten rapidly,” Ryan Polk, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a release. "Procurement leaders who build their foundation now through a focus on data quality, privacy and risk management have the potential to reap new levels of productivity and strategic value from the technology."