After 32 years in private industry, J. Paul Dittmann made the leap to academia. Now the former supply chain executive is working to strengthen the bonds between the two worlds.
Mitch Mac Donald has more than 30 years of experience in both the newspaper and magazine businesses. He has covered the logistics and supply chain fields since 1988. Twice named one of the Top 10 Business Journalists in the U.S., he has served in a multitude of editorial and publishing roles. The leading force behind the launch of Supply Chain Management Review, he was that brand's founding publisher and editorial director from 1997 to 2000. Additionally, he has served as news editor, chief editor, publisher and editorial director of Logistics Management, as well as publisher of Modern Materials Handling. Mitch is also the president and CEO of Agile Business Media, LLC, the parent company of DC VELOCITY and CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.
Although he's now ensconced in academia, J. Paul Dittmann has no interest in ivory towers. Instead, the former Whirlpool Corp. supply chain VP prefers to stay grounded in the business arena, even as he becomes more involved in academic programs.
Dittmann's real-world experience makes him ideally suited for his responsibilities in the Department of Marketing and Logistics at the University of Tennessee in Knoxville. As director of corporate partnerships, he oversees town-gown collaborations with businesses that want to improve their performance by conducting supply chain assessments. And as managing director of the department's Integrated Value Chain Forums, he directs semiannual "think tank" events involving more than 50 companies. But Dittmann isn't all about business; he also lectures on logistics and supply chain topics to undergraduate and grad students as well as to attendees of UT's executive education programs.
Dittmann only recently entered into this marriage of mortarboard and business suit. For 32 years, he worked for Whirlpool Corp., where his career path touched on most aspects of supply chain management. Among the titles he held at the appliance maker were vice president, supply chain strategy and systems; vice president, global supply chain systems; vice president, logistics; director, manufacturing technology; corporate director, manufacturing planning; corporate director, strategic planning; director, logistics; and director, marketing services. With credentials like that, it's easy to see why companies of all stripes have benefited from Dittmann's involvement in supply chain audits and educational programs at UT.
In Dittmann's view, supply chain education should be a two-way street. In today's fast-changing global business environment, he believes, academics and practitioners must keep each other current by matching real-world needs with cutting-edge research.
DC VELOCITY Group Editorial Director Mitch Mac Donald recently spoke to Dittmann about the interplay of business and academia, and why it's important to those both on and off campus.
Q: You had a successful three-decade career in the private sector. Could you tell us a little bit about that and how you found yourself migrating to an academic role?
A: Basically, I spent 32 years in industry. All of that was with the Whirlpool Corp., running logistics, supply chain, and manufacturing operations. It was a long career with one company, but there was an unbelievably wide range of interaction there.
After 32 years, I wanted to do something different. I was in a position where I could do whatever I wanted to do, and I decided that it was time to try something new. I am loving every day of it.
But I wanted to stay involved in business organizations because it had been so rewarding. Some people talk about giving back, and I think there's something to that. Those of us who spent a lot of time in the business world have something to say to students.
Q: Could you describe for us what you do at the University of Tennessee?
A: I manage two business forums: the Supply Chain Strategy and Management Forum and the Sales Forecasting Management Forum. The supply chain forum has 35 sponsoring companies that meet on campus for a couple of days twice a year—generally in April and November—to really talk about the leading issues of supply chain and integrative management. The other program, the sales forecasting forum, really gets into the heart of supply and demand integration. We have 20 or so sponsoring companies for that program.
My role as director of corporate partnerships comes into play when companies come to UT to take advantage of a highly ranked logistics program. Oftentimes, companies come to us with questions with respect to the partnerships they want to establish. Sometimes it evolves into supply chain consulting.
When it does, I am at their disposal as well. We have done supply chain assessments in a wide range of companies. And I also do some teaching.
Q: How has your experience as a supply chain executive influenced the approach you take in directing those programs?
A: Having been in the same seat as industry people, facing the pressures they deal with every day, I understand that they don't have tolerance for anything that doesn't add value. When they pay the sponsor fee, they don't look at it as a contribution—they're looking for a return on their investment.
Knowing what challenges business people are facing helps you design a program with a value proposition that responds best to what their needs are. And there is mutual benefit. We help them, of course, but they help us as well. Just from their being here we have a better understanding of what their needs are.
Q: Are there particular concerns that companies want you to address in these forums?
A: In our Sales Forecasting Management Forum, a huge issue is how best to implement sales and operations planning, or S&OP. It's cross-functional, and companies find it difficult. At nearly every company where we do [supply chain] audits, we find the functional silo problem. That is a fundamental problem in business: How do we manage that horizontal process when we're all organized vertically? Certainly, forecasting approaches, accuracy, metrics, and all those things are still on the agenda, but it's morphing into "How is the forecast going to be used?"
In the Supply Chain Strategy and Management Forum, there's concern about the cost of transportation. We are finding some companies now are reassessing their networks—for warehouses, in particular—because of the tremendous increase in the price of transportation. Companies are asking: Do we have our warehouses in the right place? Are they sized right? Are they in the right relationship to our source of supply and to our customers? [People are saying,] if we can't cut rates anymore, maybe we ought to skin this cat another way.
Q: What's the value of participating in the forums and the corporate partnership programs?
A: We aim to put on very relevant programs. Before each forum, we let sponsors set the agenda. Once we determine what the hot topics are, we recruit the best speakers from academia and business. That's what keeps the relationship so tight: We're designing forums to respond to specific needs that have been expressed. We look at sponsors as our customers, and they come away with ideas they can implement and that will help them save money.
Other benefits are that they have closer associations with the faculty, including access to research before it is published. That helps them stay current. Another big reason to participate is that when they're on campus, they have plenty of opportunities to interface with undergrads and MBAs. Many are competing for the very best logistics graduates, and I think it assists in their recruiting. Nothing is more important than building a talent base for the future.
Q: Is there enough new talent coming into the system to support the logistics and supply chain management needs of business?
A: Probably not, given the tremendous needs of business. Having said that, though, I think the opportunity to hire young, qualified people for their first positions in supply chain management is better than ever. As a matter of fact, when we work with many companies, we find that most people in logistics and supply chain have never had any real academic training in those areas. It is because programs are still relatively new. We graduate hundreds of students every year now who have a very firm, solid education in supply chain, and that is obviously going to help them. The bottom line is it's getting dramatically better, but there still is a shortage.
Q: Some academics have voiced concern about a gulf between academia and practitioners in the supply chain field. Can programs like the ones you run at UT help to bridge that gap?
A: I think there is the potential for that divide to exist between the business and the academic worlds, or for that matter, any part of society. We're all driven by performance measures, but academics have different types of performance measures than you find in business.
I've been extremely pleased at UT with the way the professors in this department look at the business community as their laboratory. As fast as the world is moving, unless you are out there interfacing with companies all the time, you will get out of date quickly. You'll also do a disservice to teaching and to your students if you don't keep up.
The mindset here is that the only way I can stay current within teaching and research is to keep up with what is happening in business. With that mindset, we can begin to bridge the gulf that might inherently exist out there. Still, we may not be typical of all universities. It takes a certain mindset from the administration and the leadership to realize that the university needs the business community for more than just money. We need them to help us make teaching and research relevant.
Q: How did you first get involved with UT's forums?
A: When I was at Whirlpool, I used to have a nagging concern that something we didn't know about was happening out there that would put us at a disadvantage. So I joined the supply chain forum—that's how I ended up where I am now. I wanted to make sure we weren't missing something or any new ideas that were emerging at other companies. By doing that, I'd always bring home two or three or four things. Some were small, but some were pretty big and helped us save lots of money.
Because of that experience, I do see it from the industry side. People are moving at such a fast pace! When do you ever have time to stop and get off the treadmill? There's no time to sharpen your ax, so to speak. But you have to at least do some executive education, go off to CSCMP's annual conference, or spend a couple of days on campus in a program like ours. You have to do that a couple of times a year, or the world will leave you behind pretty fast.
Q: Any closing thoughts?
A: I think one thing would be to urge people to take advantage of the professional development and educational opportunities available to them. That might seem obvious, but when we do supply chain assessments, I'm always amazed that so many companies do not have professional development programs in place. There ought to be a professional development plan for every person, and they ought to be held accountable for meeting those objectives. There are many opportunities for getting that education, and people need to take advantage of them.
When I think back to when I started in the industry over 30 years ago, there are so many things that were totally different from today. Unless you follow, the world leaves you behind very, very quickly. I've seen business executives retire, and within a couple of years, you could tell just by the way they talked that they never kept up.
A lifelong program of professional development and education is most important. In fact, I tell the students I teach that their career should be a lifelong learning exercise.
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."