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.
When Jack Ampuja gives a talk on packaging, he brings along a visual aid: a shipping carton he received that's big enough to hold its contents several times over. His point is one familiar to most logistics professionals: Businesses ship a lot of air, driving up costs in a number of ways.
Ampuja, who is president and CEO of the consultancy Supply Chain Optimizers, says more often than not, the problem is simply lack of awareness. Companies typically select packaging based on marketing or other considerations without giving much thought to the supply chain implications, he says. As a result, they end up using more packaging than they need, creating enormous waste and unnecessary expense. He advocates with some passion that logistics professionals should become more involved in decisions about the packages their companies use to ship freight.
Package selection has taken on added importance in recent years as carriers—particularly parcel carriers—have begun imposing dimensional weight rules. Under those rules, the size of a package that's over three cubic feet can matter more than the weight when it comes to determining the freight charge, especially if the shipment is not very dense. Shippers have learned the hard way—through chargebacks by carriers—that they'd better be as aware of package dimensions as they are of package weight.
But the dimensional weight issue is just part of the reason Ampuja urges logistics professionals to take more control of packaging. Cost enters into it too, he says. Packaging has significant effects on logistics costs well beyond the price of cartons and filler. For instance, it can have a big impact on transportation expenses. The more packages you can fit on a pallet, the more packages you can get in a truck, thereby reducing the number of trucks needed and the amount of fuel used—important issues from both a cost and a sustainability perspective.
Then there's the issue of damage in transit. Randy Neilson, vice president of Quantronix, maker of the Cubiscan line of dimensioning equipment, adds that tighter packaging also means less shifting of goods within cartons, which reduces the potential for product damage.
There may even be regulatory compliance considerations. André Johnson, CEO of FreightScan, a company that makes cargo dimensioning products for carriers and some shippers, tells of customers who have used the dimensional data to back up their dimensional weight shipping costs as part of their companies' Sarbanes-Oxley compliance. "Shippers have told us that their dim weight charges have been questioned by their compliance people," he says. "They want to know how [shipping] knows the charges are accurate, since they are attesting that they are true. This is how they know."
Some companies may even face business pressure to avoid wasteful packaging. Wal-Mart Stores Inc. has launched a "packaging scorecard" for suppliers as part of an initiative to reduce packaging across its global supply chain 5 percent by 2013, based on a 2008 baseline. Shippers are rated on several criteria, among them the ratio of the product to the package, cube utilization, and transportation—all issues directly related to the size of the box. Late last year, Wal-Mart said it will roll out the packaging scorecard across most of its markets worldwide by the end of this year.
Wal-Mart expects the initiative to take some $10 billion in costs out of its supply chain, including transportation savings, with most of that going to its suppliers. That might sound like an ambitious goal, but Ampuja thinks the Wal-Mart targets should actually be relatively easy to achieve. "They should blow through that," he says. "I think for most companies, there is at least a 10-percent opportunity."
Nothing to lose, much to gain
Ampuja's own experiences with packaging optimization attest to the savings potential. He cites one customer (a retailer whose identity he cannot disclose because of a confidentiality agreement) that realized big cost reductions just by revamping its lineup of shipping cartons. Based on the results of an analysis Supply Chain Optimizers conducted over its 16,000 SKUs, the retailer eliminated nine of its 16 box configurations, then added 12 more for a total of 19. Increasing the number of options might sound like a step in the wrong direction, but Ampuja says the move actually reduced the total number of cartons used by 5 percent. In addition, the client expects to see a 5-percent reduction in outbound shipping weight, a 7-percent reduction in dim weight, a 28-percent improvement in outbound-case cube utilization, a 21-percent reduction in corrugate, and a 41-percent reduction in filler material. The net result: a 5-percent reduction in overall freight costs.
That's just one example of the kind of savings that can be achieved through packaging optimization. Ampuja cites another customer, a company that recycles used auto parts, that parlayed a minor packaging change into a rate reduction. By redesigning the packaging for a single part, it was able to take its freight class from 250 to 150, resulting in a 40-percent reduction in rates.
Of course, it's not enough to simply conduct a packaging optimization analysis. Once you have the results in hand, you then have to do something with them. One option is to incorporate tools into the warehouse management system that ensure the right carton is used for each shipment. For example, Nielson of Quantronix suggests programming the system to determine the right carton based on the dimensions of the shipment and then convey those instructions to workers on the line.
Team effort
Ampuja does not argue that packaging should be solely the responsibility of logistics; he acknowledges that there are plenty of marketing, antitheft, and other considerations that factor into packaging decisions. But he believes it is critical that logistics get involved in packaging decisions early on. "I would love companies to see it as a team exercise," he says.
On the overall need for logistics professionals to give more thought to packaging, Ampuja borrows a quote from the famed bank robber Willy Sutton. Logistics managers should focus on packaging "because that's where the money is," he says.
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."