Though Latin America is still playing catch-up when it comes to supply chain technology, it will progress quickly over the next few years if vendors can avoid some potential roadblocks.
Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
Ask someone in Latin America about the state of supply chain technology, and he or she will probably tell you that the region is a decade behind the United States.
Why the 10-year lag? It's not because of Latin America's vine-filled jungles, mile-wide rivers, or forbidding mountain ranges—although these topographical features have made it tough to build reliable infrastructure. Rather, it's a result of decades of instability in this diverse region, which stretches more than 7,000 miles from the United States-Mexico border to the islands of Tierra del Fuego at South America's southern tip. Given the region's long history of economic volatility, governments and the private sector have had little incentive to invest in costly new technologies.
But that situation is quickly changing. As Latin America's economies stabilize, the region is becoming a competitive exporter. Consumer demand is rising, and that has drawn retailers and manufacturers from North America, Europe, and Asia to its fast-growing cities and industrial centers. Multinationals like Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, and Sony have forced competition on these markets. They've also brought along some high expectations: They want the same data quality and supply chain visibility they enjoy in more developed parts of the world. All of these factors make for an upbeat forecast for supply chain technology south of the border, though vendors will still find there are hurdles to clear.
Different priorities
In at least one respect, the supply chain technology market in Latin America is similar to that in North America: Warehouse management systems (WMS) and transportation management systems (TMS) are the most frequently used types of software, says Francisco Giral, CEO of NetLogistik, a Mexico City-based consulting firm and systems integrator that represents several U.S. technology providers, including RedPrairie and Vocollect. Other types of software, automated material handling systems, and voice-directed solutions are less common, but sales are nonetheless growing, Giral says.
Despite that similarity, the factors driving demand for supply chain technologies in Latin America are quite different than in the United States, says John Price, president of InfoAmericas, a Miami-based business intelligence firm with offices in Mexico and Brazil. In the U.S. market, he says, the most important drivers are the costs of labor, space, real estate, and financing inventory, in that order. In Latin America, labor, space, and real estate costs generally are not major considerations. Instead, the top priorities are minimizing both security risks and financing costs.
InfoAmericas classifies Latin American countries in four tiers relative to their usage of supply chain technologies:
Tier 1: Mexico's export economy, dominated by large exporters, multinationals, and their suppliers. Assembly operations that moved to northern Mexico in search of cheaper labor adopted sophisticated logistics practices and technologies to compensate for higher transportation costs and greater distances from suppliers and customers.
Tier 2: Mexico's domestic economy, Brazil, Puerto Rico, and Panama. Multinational retailers and third-party logistics service companies (3PLs) are leaders in implementing supply chain technologies here.
Tier 3: Chile, Argentina, Colombia, Uruguay, Costa Rica, and Venezuela, which Price calls "the next frontier" for logistics. These countries need world-class logistics capabilities to help them compete internationally.
Tier 4: The rest of Latin America, where multinationals have a minimal presence and technology investments focus on cargo security.
Top priority: security
Who are the technology leaders in the region? Price says companies that handle high-value, high-volume products like pharmaceuticals and electronics—where security and integrity of product handling are top priorities—"spend pretty lavishly on logistics technology."
In Mexico, adds Giral, retailers and grocery chains are leading the way—in part because of competitive pressures from multinationals like Wal-Mart. When it comes to material handling systems, however, the pharmaceutical industry, with its specialized handling requirements, is in the vanguard. Still, it's a small universe: Probably fewer than twodozen companies in Mexico have such sophisticated systems as pick-to-light and automated storage and retrieval, he says.
Large exporters also have incentives to invest in technology. For instance, Chile's produce and seafood exporters, which compete in North America, Europe, and Asia, want software that will help them understand their lead times, optimize inventories, and reduce costs, says Michael Schetman, director of international business development for the Americas for technology provider Savi Networks.
When you look at businesses in general, however, the number-one reason for investing in technology remains security—and in Latin America, "security" means preventing cargo theft and drug smuggling, not terrorism. "Cargo insurance costs are astronomical, as are the claims for theft and other losses, so [companies] have to make every effort to mitigate those costs," says Price. "If a technology can do that, customers will buy it."
The traditional approach has been to hire guards to ride shotgun with trucks and containers, notes Neil Smith, acting CEO of Savi Networks. But companies in fast-growing economies like Colombia and Brazil have been receptive to the use of RFID, global positioning system (GPS) devices, and cell-phone-based systems to track and monitor assets.
In Colombia, Savi has teamed up with the technology firm Emprevi Ltda. This locally owned company has more than 20 years of experience managing logistics risks for clients like Johnson & Johnson, Pfizer, and Gillette. The two partners operate an RFID-based system that tracks the location and security status of shipments between Colombian factories and seaports. A network of readers captures data that has been transmitted from electronic container seals and routes the information to transportation security software, Schetman explains. In addition to reporting location and security status, the software also sends alerts about security breaches and other exceptions to users' e-mail accounts, cell phones, or personal digital assistants (PDAs).
But wait a minute—RFID and cell phones in the jungle? It's true. Although many rural areas have no access to telecom networks, basic services are now available in most population centers. In regions where utilities and telecom infrastructure are unreliable, satellite-based solutions are popular. Savi and Emprevi are a little more creative: They're successfully using solar-powered RFID readers in some parts of Colombia.
Buy globally, implement locally
Sales channels for software and automated systems in Latin America differ considerably from those in the U.S. market. In a culture where personal relationships still matter, few technology firms sell directly to end users, says Price. Instead, they may partner with logistics service providers, which offer software to clients as a value-add. That system has made third-party logistics companies and freight forwarders "incredibly important" in introducing technology to the mostly family-owned companies in this region, he says.
The Latin American market is not yet lucrative enough for companies to develop technology specifically for that region, so products designed for the United States and Europe dominate the marketplace, says Schetman. In some countries, foreign software has a virtual lock on the market because users can get more mature, proven products for roughly the same price they'd pay for homegrown solutions. One exception is Colombia, where political unrest and security worries have kept most foreign logistics companies and technology vendors away. According to Price, Colombian companies have developed about half a dozen competitive logistics applications.
Foreign products may dominate sales, but when it comes time for implementation, Latin American buyers prefer to work with local firms. Many of the locals started out as developers, Price says, but their inability to invest in second- and third-generation technology, together with the lack of legal protections for intellectual property, pushed most of them to become service companies allied with foreign vendors.
Buyers' preference for local partners is based as much on cost as it is on shared language and culture, says Giral. Similarly, demand for product customization has more to do with corporate customs than with cultural differences. But language can still influence buying decisions. Brazilian companies, for instance, prefer to buy from and work with Portuguese-speakers, and communication problems can arise even in Spanish. For instance, when Mexico-based NetLogistik develops a "dictionary" of templates in a service-oriented architecture application for RedPrairie in Argentina, it must change about 30 percent of the terms to reflect differences in vocabulary.
Filling the knowledge gap
Despite a bright outlook for supply chain technologies in Latin America, one problem threatens to strangle future growth: a severe shortage of technical experts.
"Latin Americans are extremely well educated, but they are untrained," says Price. That is, higher education is very traditional and classical; the university system does not turn out enough scientists, engineers, and technicians, and there is nothing like the technical colleges that fill that role in Europe.What's missing from the labor pool, he says, is the competent, mid-level technician. As a result, companies find that they have to spend a lot more on technical training than they expected.
For Giral's company, the solution to that problem has been to hire young engineers from Mexico's top universities and teach them what they need to know. Similarly, Savi takes a "train the trainer" approach, with the goal of creating a pool of experts who can manage operations and customization in Colombia, says Schetman.
Interestingly, technology itself may help to mitigate the effects of Latin America's knowledge gap, Schetman notes. Hosted on-demand solutions that are now beginning to take hold in the region require comparatively little in the way of implementation time and expense; more important, perhaps, is that they can be upgraded and supported over the Internet by the application service provider.
For now, depending on outsiders to develop and support supply chain technologies may indeed be the most sensible course for a region that is still finding its economic way. Latin America's "watch and wait" approach to technology adoption has served it well in the past, says Giral, who points to Mexico's communication infrastructure as an example. Because conservative Mexican buyers waited for U.S. companies to work out all the bugs, he says, the country was able to leapfrog over intermediate telecom systems and go directly to fiber-optic communications—and do so at a speed unmatched in most of the United States.
success south of the border
Latin American companies may be conservative when it comes to buying technology, but an expanding array of logistics and transportation trade shows offers testament to the region's appetite for supply chain solutions. U.S., European, and Asian vendors of supply chain software and automated material handling systems represent a hefty percentage of exhibitors at events like Expo Logisti-K Argentina, Salon de la Logística Latinoamericana in Chile, Intermodal Brasil, Colombia's Sala Logística de las Américas, Congreso de Logística in Costa Rica, and Mexico's Expologística (the granddaddy of logistics events in the region), to name a few.
They wouldn't exhibit if they didn't see sales opportunities—and a number of these vendors have already struck gold in this market. Here are just a few success stories from the last few months:
INTTRA, a provider of e-commerce solutions to ocean carriers and their customers, experienced more than 200-percent sales growth in Mexico, Peru, and Venezuela in the 12-month period ending in June 2007.
Infor expects to rack up 20-percent sales growth in Argentina for 2007. The company now has some 800 active clients in that country.
FKI Logistex has added several sales executives in Mexico to handle increased demand for automated material handling systems.
JDA Software announced that Colombian grocery chain Almacenes Éxito increased inventory turnover by 10 percent, reduced overstocks by 60 percent, and cut out-of-stocks by 12 percent with JDA's E3 allocation and replenishment solutions.
Epicor Software formed strategic alliances with Technology Coast Partners (TCP) in Chile and Ability Data in Colombia, to offer integrated enterprise resource planning (ERP), customer relationship management (CRM), supply chain management (SCM), and professional services automation (PSA) software.
Editor's note: A useful source of information about the technology capabilities of third-party logistics service companies is Who's Who in Latin American Logistics and Supply Chain Management, published by Armstrong & Associates Inc. in partnership with InfoAmericas. Profiles of 88 global and local companies include details of their services, facilities, information technology capabilities, major customers, and more. For information, go to www.3PLogistics.com.
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."