The history of RFID in logistics has been brief but tumultuous. The technology was thrust into the spotlight in 2003, when Wal-Mart and the U.S. Department of Defense issued their now-famous supplier mandates. At the time, RFID was hailed as an innovation that would transform the supply chain world and make out-of-stock problems a thing of the past. Within a few years, however, the hype had died down and some critics had begun to dismiss RFID as an oversold, overpriced version of the bar code.
So how have things really worked out? Has the RFID revolution gotten off the ground? How widely is the technology being used in logistics operations today? These are not easy questions to answer. While there's plenty of anecdotal evidence indicating that shippers and service providers have tried the tags on all manner of products with varying degrees of success, research on the actual implementations has been limited, making it tough to gauge the true extent of RFID adoption.
To get some answers, DC Velocity, Baylor University, and Bryant University surveyed the magazine's readers on their use of RFID in logistics and supply chain operations. The online survey, which was conducted in August and September of 2010, was completed by 175 respondents. One-third (33 percent) of those respondents said they worked in warehousing or distribution, and nearly the same percentage (32 percent) worked for manufacturers. The remainder worked in the third-party logistics services sector (14 percent), merchandising/retail (10 percent), material handling (6 percent), and transportation services (5 percent). Respondents' main areas of responsibility were warehouse operations (39 percent) and logistics management (33 percent).
The survey queried them about their use of RFID—whether they've deployed it and if they have, how they're using it, why they're using it, what barriers they've encountered, and what benefits they've gained (or hope to gain). What follows is a brief look at some of our findings.
Far from dead
Perhaps the most notable finding of our research was the indisputable evidence that reports of RFID's death have been greatly exaggerated. Nearly one-third of the survey respondents are already using, piloting, or in the midst of implementing RFID technologies in their logistics operations. Another 27 percent are considering implementing RFID in the next two years. That leaves a little more than 40 percent who are not using the technology or planning an RFID implementation in the near future.
While it's clear that RFID is far from a failed technology, it has yet to effect the sweeping supply chain transformations envisioned back in 2003. Our study suggests that this may be partly because users are deploying the technology a bit differently than originally expected.
For example, Wal-Mart intended to use RFID to automate inventory replenishment systems by tracking cases and pallets, while the Department of Defense (DOD) sought to track pallets and high-value parts at the unit level. The overarching objective in both cases was to improve overall supply chain performance.
Those goals have not been abandoned, but our study revealed that many users are implementing RFID with other aims in mind. Rather than focusing on streamlining overall supply chain performance, they're primarily using RFID to streamline and improve their **ital{internal} operations. Indeed, 59 percent of the survey respondents who already have some sort of RFID experience are focusing their implementations on internal improvements. Sixteen percent of them said that they view RFID implementation as a tactical move to improve efficiencies of specific processes within the company, and 43 percent see it as a strategic move to improve efficiencies of multiple, connected processes within the company. Meanwhile, only 27 percent consider it to be a strategic move that involves using RFID across the entire supply chain.
The list of tasks respondents are carrying out with the aid of RFID supports the idea that most of these implementations are aimed at internal improvements. They include the following (in descending order based on the extent of implementation):
In some cases, though, implementations were mostly about meeting mandates. Fourteen percent of the respondents who are currently using RFID said their company's management viewed their implementations as "reactive"—that is, driven by a trading partner's request or demand.
Benefits of RFID implementation
What did respondents who have experience with RFID (or plan to implement it soon) see as the main benefits? In terms of general categories, improvements in productivity and customer service were ranked highest, followed by communication and asset management. As far as specific operational benefits, "tracking of supply" came out on top in the rankings, with 85 percent of the respondents indicating they expected to see moderate to strong benefits from the use of RFID for tracking. Also highly ranked: reductions in fulfillment errors, improvements in the efficiency of order delivery/fulfillment, improvements in customer order tracking, and higher levels of customer satisfaction with the delivery fulfillment processes and outcomes. Respondents also said that RFID has enhanced the accuracy and availability of information in the supply chain, resulting in better inventory visibility, better visibility into supply chain processes, improvements in productivity, and reductions in operating costs.
One of our most interesting findings regarding benefits can be seen in Exhibit 1, which shows how respondents' perceptions of the potential benefits vary depending upon where they stand on the implementation continuum. Survey participants were asked to indicate, on a scale from "weak" to "strong," the level of benefit their company "may receive" from implementing RFID. Their answers showed that respondents whose companies are piloting the technology have higher expectations of the potential benefits of RFID than those who are in the process of implementing it or have already implemented it. As the chart shows, expectations in all four categories decline once a company gets past the pilot stage and moves into actual implementation.
Barriers to adoption
For all the benefits users have seen from tagging, it's clear that the RFID revolution is still in its early stages. What's holding companies back? According to the survey respondents, the primary barrier is cost (see Exhibit 2). This was no surprise, considering the high initial investment required to implement a comprehensive, cross-functional RFID system and the continuing concerns about return on investment (ROI). Other barriers included a lack of understanding of what RFID is (and is not), followed by technical issues and privacy/security concerns.
Once again, a respondent's implementation status affects his or her perception of the barriers' significance. In general, the more experience companies have with RFID, the less weight they're inclined to give those barriers. The exception is technical and privacy/security concerns in the piloting phase. We surmise that as users begin to work directly with RFID systems, they encounter unexpected technology problems, and data integrity issues become more important.
The good news is that as respondents moved from the piloting stage to completed implementations, their attitude toward the barriers began to change, with the obstacles taking on diminished significance. This indicates that organizations are able to overcome RFID-related problems and resolve any issues that arise during the pilot phase.
Take it slow
Perhaps the main takeaway from the study is that while plenty of barriers remain, companies are still forging ahead with RFID implementations and, perhaps more importantly, are finding these initiatives to be worthwhile. This is a significant change in perception from what we saw in our earlier studies, which found that respondents were unable to determine a business case or an ROI for RFID.
Furthermore, our research indicates that there is significant optimism regarding RFID implementation. Respondents who are already involved in RFID made it clear that the benefits to be gained from implementing this technology outweigh the obstacles and concerns. As an organization gains experience with RFID and moves into the pilot stage, the perception of benefits dramatically rises and the barriers start to seem less significant.
The key to a successful RFID implementation, according to many of our survey respondents, is to be selective about where it's used. While it may be tempting to jump in with both feet and try to implement it across the board, they say, companies would be better off identifying business processes that affect customer satisfaction and starting there.
Advice from the trenches
Thinking about implementing RFID in your own operations? Here's some practical advice from respondents who've been through the process.
"If you don't understand your input and output, you won't get accurate measurements. Be careful not to measure in too much detail. Step back from the problem and reconsider what information you really need."
"The important thing to understand is that RFID is not merely a bar code substitute, but a way to transform your products into wireless, identified objects. The benefits are just becoming known, and like the Internet, we can't predict how it will revolutionize our lives."
"Try to avoid one-off pilot projects and instead select a small-scale initial implementation and characterize it as such. 'Initial implementation' communicates commitment, whereas 'pilot' implies experimentation."
"Determine the greatest business needs that can be addressed by using RFID before recommending it as the solution to every problem. And be sure to consider the entire supply chain when calculating ROI."
"Implement RFID for the purpose of making a process improvement—use it to implement change. Conduct strategic communications and change management both internally and externally. Consider employing a trusted consulting firm that is 'product agnostic' to help you decide what you need and to assist with communications and change management."
"Use an integrator for the first implementation, then bring it in house. Beware of pure-play vendor-led RFID discussions (i.e., only talking to a reader vendor when you need tags, pOréals, PLC interfacing, etc.). ... To do them right, most jobs should be a hybrid of many different technologies (active, passive, LF, HF, UHF, access control, mobile, etc.). The focus should be on the business problem you are trying to solve. Find a partner that knows the 'physics of RFID' and can perform implementations as well as talk about operations and infrastructure."
The Port of Oakland has been awarded $50 million from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Maritime Administration (MARAD) to modernize wharves and terminal infrastructure at its Outer Harbor facility, the port said today.
Those upgrades would enable the Outer Harbor to accommodate Ultra Large Container Vessels (ULCVs), which are now a regular part of the shipping fleet calling on West Coast ports. Each of these ships has a handling capacity of up to 24,000 TEUs (20-foot containers) but are currently restricted at portions of Oakland’s Outer Harbor by aging wharves which were originally designed for smaller ships.
According to the port, those changes will let it handle newer, larger vessels, which are more efficient, cost effective, and environmentally cleaner to operate than older ships. Specific investments for the project will include: wharf strengthening, structural repairs, replacing container crane rails, adding support piles, strengthening support beams, and replacing electrical bus bar system to accommodate larger ship-to-shore cranes.
Commercial fleet operators are steadily increasing their use of GPS fleet tracking, in-cab video solutions, and predictive analytics, driven by rising costs, evolving regulations, and competitive pressures, according to an industry report from Verizon Connect.
Those conclusions come from the company’s fifth annual “Fleet Technology Trends Report,” conducted in partnership with Bobit Business Media, and based on responses from 543 fleet management professionals.
The study showed that for five consecutive years, at least four out of five respondents have reported using at least one form of fleet technology, said Atlanta-based Verizon Connect, which provides fleet and mobile workforce management software platforms, embedded OEM hardware, and a connected vehicle device called Hum by Verizon.
The most commonly used of those technologies is GPS fleet tracking, with 69% of fleets across industries reporting its use, the survey showed. Of those users, 72% find it extremely or very beneficial, citing improved efficiency (62%) and a reduction in harsh driving/speeding events (49%).
Respondents also reported a focus on safety, with 57% of respondents citing improved driver safety as a key benefit of GPS fleet tracking. And 68% of users said in-cab video solutions are extremely or very beneficial. Together, those technologies help reduce distracted driving incidents, improve coaching sessions, and help reduce accident and insurance costs, Verizon Connect said.
Looking at the future, fleet management software is evolving to meet emerging challenges, including sustainability and electrification, the company said. "The findings from this year's Fleet Technology Trends Report highlight a strong commitment across industries to embracing fleet technology, with GPS tracking and in-cab video solutions consistently delivering measurable results,” Peter Mitchell, General Manager, Verizon Connect, said in a release. “As fleets face rising costs and increased regulatory pressures, these technologies are proving to be indispensable in helping organizations optimize their operations, reduce expenses, and navigate the path toward a more sustainable future.”
Businesses engaged in international trade face three major supply chain hurdles as they head into 2025: the disruptions caused by Chinese New Year (CNY), the looming threat of potential tariffs on foreign-made products that could be imposed by the incoming Trump Administration, and the unresolved contract negotiations between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the U.S. Maritime Alliance (USMX), according to an analysis from trucking and logistics provider Averitt.
Each of those factors could lead to significant shipping delays, production slowdowns, and increased costs, Averitt said.
First, Chinese New Year 2025 begins on January 29, prompting factories across China and other regions to shut down for weeks, typically causing production to halt and freight demand to skyrocket. The ripple effects can range from increased shipping costs to extended lead times, disrupting even the most well-planned operations. To prepare for that event, shippers should place orders early, build inventory buffers, secure freight space in advance, diversify shipping modes, and communicate with logistics providers, Averitt said.
Second, new or increased tariffs on foreign-made goods could drive up the cost of imports, disrupt established supply chains, and create uncertainty in the marketplace. In turn, shippers may face freight rate volatility and capacity constraints as businesses rush to stockpile inventory ahead of tariff deadlines. To navigate these challenges, shippers should prepare advance shipments and inventory stockpiling, diversity sourcing, negotiate supplier agreements, explore domestic production, and leverage financial strategies.
Third, unresolved contract negotiations between the ILA and the USMX will come to a head by January 15, when the current contract expires. Labor action or strikes could cause severe disruptions at East and Gulf Coast ports, triggering widespread delays and bottlenecks across the supply chain. To prepare for the worst, shippers should adopt a similar strategy to the other potential January threats: collaborate early, secure freight, diversify supply chains, and monitor policy changes.
According to Averitt, companies can cushion the impact of all three challenges by deploying a seamless, end-to-end solution covering the entire path from customs clearance to final-mile delivery. That strategy can help businesses to store inventory closer to their customers, mitigate delays, and reduce costs associated with supply chain disruptions. And combined with proactive communication and real-time visibility tools, the approach allows companies to maintain control and keep their supply chains resilient in the face of global uncertainties, Averitt said.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.