Service-parts logistics can be a cash cow for the increasing number of companies that offer this service to their clients. Achieving flawless execution often on just two hours' notice is a challenge for both shipper and provider.
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.
In a world where companies bend over backward to give customers what they want, when they want it, perhaps nobody bends farther or faster than those who manage service logistics, the operations that support after-sales service.
That's because customers, be they consumer, retail, or industrial, expect support after they buy a product. Guarantees of good after-sales service, in fact, may even be required to make the initial sale.
Buyers expect to get excellent support quickly—in some industries, within two to four hours of a customer's call. Making that happen, and satisfying customers, requires nearly seamless and flawless execution.
That often means that the seller must set up stocking locations near its customers, something that is a particular challenge for global companies. It also requires good visibility into stocks that are dispersed among both company-owned and third-party distribution centers. And where stocking and delivery are outsourced—as they often are—it requires reliable partners.
Yet for all that, the benefits of providing after-sales service outweigh the challenges. Chief among them: It can be enormously profitable—more profitable, perhaps, than the margin on the product itself. The automotive and high-tech industries have known that for some time. But now, big industrial companies around the globe have begun to pay more attention to what's often referred to as "service-parts logistics."
Service as cash cow
The growing interest in service logistics was evident in the results of a study conducted last year by the consulting giant CapGemini, which took a close look at the growth of service logistics, particularly in the engineering and manufacturing (E&M) sector. E&M includes companies in the aerospace, heavy manufacturing, non-electronic appliance, and similar industries. Among them are large conglomerates like GE, Tyco, and Emerson.
Roy Lenders, a vice president in CapGemini's logistics and fulfillment practice and the lead author of the study report, A New Industrial Service Age: How Industrial Companies Develop the Service Cash Cow, says he's seeing a lot of traditional manufacturing companies setting up dedicated after-sales service units. "Traditionally these industries have had no competition in the aftermarket. They were the only ones able to deliver spare parts," he observes. "What we have seen in automotive and high tech is what is happening now in this industry. There is competition in the aftermarket space."
Paying closer attention to aftermarket service makes great business sense. Lenders says, "One of the things that makes this area hot for a lot of companies is that for most manufacturers, the profit margin in aftermarket sales is much higher than for the sale of new machines."
The numbers bear this out: CapGemini found that E&M companies garner about 16 percent of their revenues—but about 23 to 27 percent of their profits—from service logistics. For high-tech companies, the figures are 13 percent of revenues and 15 to 20 percent of profits. Those numbers may be on the low end of the scale: Steve Guthrie, senior vice president of global sales and marketing for Flash Global Logistics, a service logistics specialist in Pine Brook, N.J., cites the example of one client that gains 65 percent of its margin from service contracts.
The authors of the study, which was sponsored by DHL Exel Supply Chain, note that in some jurisdictions, regulatory changes are opening the door for companies to offer aftermarket service to each other's customers. That in turn is creating pressure to improve service logistics operations.
"We are also seeing more and more manufacturing companies deliberately selling service for their own and for competitive equipment," Lenders says. "There are two reasons for that. The profit margin is very high, and by doing that, they can get a better hold on competitors' accounts and hope in the long term to convert them to their own equipment."
A few good third parties
The service logistics challenges for large industrial companies are very different from those facing the high-tech and automotive industries. For instance, high-tech service parts tend to be more portable and have a shorter shelf life than those in the E&M sector. E&M manufacturers, on the other hand, often have to make parts available for many years after a sale. Additionally, the high-tech industry, which is considered a front runner in service logistics, is five years behind the E&M industry when it comes to globalization, the report says.
Currently, the high-tech sector sees more "mission-critical" service demands than does E&M: 62 percent of all contracted machinery in high tech must be serviced within 24 hours, but only 54 percent of the equipment in the E&M sector has a 24-hour requirement, the report says.
For many companies, though, 24 hours isn't soon enough. The percentage of service contracts that require a response within two to four hours—now 18 percent for high-tech manufacturers and 14 percent in the E&M industry—will rise over the next five years to 20 percent and 21 percent, respectively. That big jump in demand for immediate service, the authors conclude, will require E&M manufacturers to develop a multitiered distribution network that includes both centralized warehousing and a larger number of outlying warehouses positioned close to customers around the world.
As the study notes, however, companies have greatly consolidated their distribution networks over the last 15 years, leading them to operate fewer warehouses. To achieve the necessary multitiered networks, E&M companies may have to rely on outsourcing more than they do now.
Most high-tech companies already outsource most of their transportation activities, and the majority use third parties for at least some warehousing operations. E&M companies also outsource most of their transportation needs, but fewer than half of those who took part in the CapGemini study outsource any warehousing. In both sectors, those that do outsource tend to use only a handful of third-party providers. Of the companies surveyed, 95 percent of the high-tech respondents and 70 percent of the E&M companies use no more than three third parties for warehousing.
Shippers come back for more
Companies that want to farm out more of their service-parts logistics shouldn't have to look too far for help. In addition to UPS, FedEx, and DHL, which include service-parts logistics in their portfolios, a number of other carriers and third parties— including several that specialize in this field—offer aftermarket services.
Their growth reflects the greater focus businesses are placing on service logistics as both a competitive necessity and a profit center. For example, Flash Global Logistics has enjoyed doubledigit growth for the past 15 years, says Guthrie. The company owns seven multi-client DCs and has 570 stocking locations around the world that are operated through partnerships.
Guthrie says his company's customers, which include Cisco Systems, Motorola, and Roche Diagnostics, increasingly believe service logistics is a competitive necessity that may equal or outweigh customer-oriented technology. "They are searching for sustainable competitive advantage and a technological advantage can be fleeting," he notes. In some cases, he adds, good service logistics is "the table stakes to get into the game."
Gary Weiss, executive vice president of global operations for New York City-based Choice Logistics, another specialist in service logistics, says he has seen an evolution in the business as customers have come to rely more on companies like his. Choice operates seven (soon to be eight) DCs in key locations in the United States and around the world, and has 340 stocking locations in 80 countries.
"Ten or 12 years ago, one of the last things a company wanted to do was relinquish control of its assets," Weiss says. Now, he says, Choice and its partners manage the customers' physical inventory at stocking locations. And that's what keeps shippers coming back for more: visibility into inventory and to the execution of orders.
Technology that enables inventory visibility and instant order management is a key ingredient of service-parts success, and Weiss points to proprietary software as one reason why companies turn to third parties for service-parts management." We are as effective as a company could be with its own resources, if not more so," he asserts. "It pays for Choice to develop specialized software," he adds. "In a big company with a large IT department, in-house logistics does not get a high priority."
No downturn in demand
The case for outsourcing service-parts logistics is a strong one, and continued demand for those services seems assured—so much so that some shippers have actually been pushing their logistics providers into that business. Pilot Freight Services (formerly Pilot Air Freight) is a case in point. Pilot, whose roots are in airfreight forwarding, has a client list that includes industry heavyweights like GE, Philips, Merck, and United Technologies. John Hagi, vice president of national accounts, tells of a warehousing customer that asked his company to extend its services to include service-parts logistics. That time-critical service was a natural outgrowth of the company's airfreight business, he says.
What Pilot experienced is not just a domestic phenomenon; globalization has also been a boon for those who offer service-parts logistics. "We're just now opening in Pakistan," says Guthrie of Flash Global Logistics. "Our clients are pushing us into areas that [service logistics] companies have not normally wanted to go into." To meet customers' needs, his company has also launched operations in other parts of Asia, including China, Korea, and the Philippines.
Guthrie argues that the economic downturn won't reduce demand for service logistics. It could even be good for business, he suggests."When things are down a bit,companies find ways to sell more service contracts," he says. "[Customers] buy less hardware, and the need for critical parts goes up."
Even when demand for their services is running high, service logistics providers will still have to work hard to meet their clients' expectations. Weiss, for one, says that his customers' customers keep raising the service bar. For instance, shippers that used to be satisfied with four-hour or even 24-hour service now often demand two-hour delivery of repair parts.
Service providers that can meet such exacting standards stand to win big. Pilot, for instance, was asked by a medical supply company (whose name Hagi was not at liberty to share) to help the company handle critical-parts service at major hospitals and regional clinics. The client needed parts to be available around the clock. Hagi explains: "This is equipment used 24 hours a day, due to its cost and diagnostic nature. The challenge is that equipment does not always fail Monday through Friday from nine to five." Pilot was able to offer the customer two-hour delivery from the origin of an order until the time a technician arrived on site. That was significantly faster than the previous provider's four- to seven-hour guarantee. The result: Pilot now operates 26 stocking centers around the country for the customer.
As you might imagine, performing flawlessly on two hours' notice day in and day out requires every company that provides this type of service to thoroughly master every aspect of logistics operations, no matter how small. In service-parts logistics, Hagi says, transportation is the easy part, whether for a local delivery or one across the country. "The plane is vanilla," he explains. "What is most challenging is what happens on the front end and what happens on the back and the communication that ties it all together."
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."