James Cooke is a principal analyst with Nucleus Research in Boston, covering supply chain planning software. He was previously the editor of CSCMP?s Supply Chain Quarterly and a staff writer for DC Velocity.
Even by the standards of the supply chain software world, transportation management systems (TMS) have proved to have exceptional legs. After nearly two decades on the market, these solutions continue to sell briskly. Last year, revenues generated through TMS sales and software support grew 11 percent, according to the research firm Gartner Inc. In fact, Chad Eschinger, an analyst at Gartner, estimates that in 2010, the global TMS market reached $625 million despite the sputtering economy.
That will come as little surprise to those in the business. These solutions have earned widespread renown for their ability to streamline time-consuming tasks like carrier selection, routing, and rating as well as their capacity to save users money—no small consideration in an era of skyrocketing fuel prices and tight capacity.
What's less well known is that today's models can do much more than handle basic shipment planning tasks. In addition to managing freight movements and expenditures, the newer, full-featured packages offer capabilities like electronic load tendering, freight analytics, shipment visibility, and freight-bill audit and payment.
If you're in the market for a TMS, what should you look for? We asked several industry experts for their advice. What follows are their recommendations for "must have" features:
• Support for parcel shipping. Early versions of TMS were geared toward truckload and less-than-truckload (LTL) moves, the predominant modes of shipping at the time. But patterns have changed over the years. As the "inventory is evil" mentality has taken hold, a lot of customers have begun demanding smaller, more frequent shipments from their suppliers. The result has been a shift toward parcel shipping.
For that reason, industry experts recommend choosing a TMS that can handle parcel rating and routing along with the traditional truckload and LTL comparisons. "The TMS should be able to evaluate piece vs. hundredweight ratings as well as compare LTL to parcel," says Monica Wooden, chief executive officer of TMS developer MercuryGate International Inc. "All too often, these decisions are based on a fixed weight and they should take into account distance, packaging, etc.," she adds.
• Support for international movements. The first transportation systems on the market concentrated on domestic moves. But in today's global economy, most companies will need a program that can also select air or ocean carriers and manage international shipments. Gartner analyst Dwight Klappich recommends choosing a solution that can "support all modes in a common platform" and make rate and service comparisons among those modes.
Wooden advises shippers to look for a TMS that can provide multi-language interface screens and supports the use of foreign currencies. On top of that, the solution should be able to calculate any cross-border fees, value-added taxes, and freight forwarding charges involved in an international shipment.
• The ability to track and manage carrier contracts. Part of what makes carrier selection and rate comparison so complex is the wide variation in carrier contract terms—particularly when it comes to accessorial charges (for example, fees for the use of lift gates or "lumpers," temporary workers who assist with freight loading or unloading). "A single customer will have many multimodal carrier relationships, with each carrier having different methods of charging for accessorials and specific lane treatments," says Les Hamashima, chief operating officer at TMS developer Transite Technology Inc.
For that reason, Hamashima and other experts urge shippers to look for a TMS that can track all of their various carrier agreements and the individual terms of each contract. Among other benefits, knowing precisely what a particular carrier would charge for a given shipment takes the guesswork out of carrier selection.
• The ability to handle freight settlement. The logistics manager's job doesn't end once the freight has been loaded onto the vehicle. There are still invoices to be reconciled and bills to be paid at the end of the cycle. To streamline the process, Wooden of MercuryGate recommends choosing a TMS that can audit and pay freight invoices.
Essentially, the software takes invoices as they come in and matches them to loads in the system, she explains. It then compares the rated amounts to invoiced amounts based on established rules. Once the invoices are approved, the software applies the necessary general ledger codes to the trucking charges to ensure proper accounting.
• The ability to provide item visibility. When it comes to the whereabouts of their goods, today's customers are no longer satisfied with assurances that the shipment is en route. They expect their suppliers to be able to pinpoint the exact location of their orders at any given moment. That's why Wooden advises selecting a TMS that can provide shipment visibility down to the item level.
"A user should have the ability to key in an item and find out what shipment [contains] that item," she says. "What box the item is in. What pallet the box is on." That kind of information will prove invaluable if the customer needs to reroute its freight, she adds.
• The ability to provide benchmark data. Up until recently, shippers had no good way of knowing how the rates and service they got from their carriers stacked up against what their peers were getting. But shippers no longer have to operate in the dark. A number of TMS developers—particularly those who offer their solutions on a software-as-a-service or on-demand basis—are starting to collect carrier rate and service information from all of the shippers in their network, which they then use to develop benchmark data for specific shipping lanes. This allows logistics transportation managers "to determine if they are getting good or bad rates compared to the norm," Klappich explains.
Klappich notes, however, that this capability is still in the early stages of development and that it may be some time before it becomes widely available.
• The ability to provide business intelligence. In addition to handling routine shipping tasks, more and more TMSs these days have the capability to analyze the user's shipping practices and identify opportunities for improvement. They do this by capturing data and using it to develop key performance indicators (KPIs)—metrics showing how an operation is performing in areas like on-time delivery or damage in transit.
"Today's best transportation solutions are smart," says Chris Timmer, chief operating officer at LeanLogistics, which offers on-demand transportation management systems. "They tell you where your process is optimized and where it is not. They also identify available options in lanes, carriers, rates, and performance."
Klappich notes that these kinds of embedded analytics can provide valuable information for tasks like carrier selection. For instance, a shipper could use the KPIs to create a carrier scorecard, which it then might use to handicap the carriers. If the scorecard showed that a particular carrier offered the lowest rates but had a poor record of on-time delivery, the shipper would automatically know to divert a particularly time-sensitive shipment to a slightly higher-cost carrier with a better service record.
Competition driving down prices
So what has all this meant for the price of transportation management software? The good news for shippers is that the emergence of these premium features hasn't necessarily led to premium pricing. If anything, market competition has forced TMS prices down in recent years.
That's partly due to the advent of TMS delivered on a software-as-a-service (SaaS) or on-demand basis for a modest monthly fee. "SaaS is having an impact as the subscriptions keep near-term costs down [for TMS purchases]," says Klappich.
But intensifying marketplace rivalry plays a role as well. "Competition is tough everywhere which says that vendors cannot charge a steep premium for their TMS," says Klappich. "Deals are heavily negotiated today."
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."