Integrating new equipment into an existing operation can be a challenging and frustrating endeavor. Here are seven tips for keeping your project from turning into a nightmare.
Susan Lacefield has been working for supply chain publications since 1999. Before joining DC VELOCITY, she was an associate editor for Supply Chain Management Review and wrote for Logistics Management magazine. She holds a master's degree in English.
If you've been around the industry for a while, you've probably heard (or perhaps lived through) a retrofit horror story or two. Maybe a legacy warehouse management system (WMS) had trouble "talking" to a new piece of equipment. Or maybe existing equipment was damaged during the process of "cutting in" to make room for the new. Or maybe no one paid enough attention to how all the pieces of automated equipment would work together as a single system.
How can you avoid having your own retrofit project end up like a bad dream? We asked several industry experts for their advice. What follows are their tips on how to make your systems integration project run smoothly.
1. Start with a deep dive into your own operations. Before you even begin to think about the solution, be clear about the specific business problem you're trying to solve. It's not unusual for companies to go about things backward, according to Jay Moris, chief marketing officer at systems integrator Invata. "I think some people get very enamored with the bright and shiny automation that looks cool and high-tech," he says. "Then they try to find ways to fit their business into that shiny, pretty box, and it just doesn't work."
It's also important to collect good order and inventory data and develop solid growth projections, according to Mark Steinkamp, director of solutions development for the systems integrator Intelligrated. This will help ensure you select equipment that's able to keep up with both current and future demand.
In addition to collecting the necessary order data, be sure you provide your integrator with up-to-date information on your current material handling systems, advises Steve Brandt, vice president of business development and customer service for systems integrator Dematic. That's particularly true if you've made modifications to your systems after the original install, he says. Otherwise, your integrator is going to end up drafting a plan for connecting the old and new equipment based on outdated information, and costly rework will be needed later on.
2. Beware of having "too many cooks." If you're connecting equipment from two or more vendors, make sure that all of the teams are working together and that someone is in charge of the overall project. Otherwise, you risk having a situation where each vendor is focusing only on its own "island of automation," with no one paying attention to the whole archipelago, so to speak.
For example, if you're creating a new packaging line using equipment that produces boxes on demand, someone has to decide how the conveyors will feed into the equipment and make sure the scanner's programmable logic controller (PLC) can communicate directly with the WMS. These details might not occur to someone who's focused solely on one part of the installation.
3. Consider the "ripple effects." It's not enough to simply select a new piece of equipment; you also have to consider where it should be physically located and how it will fit into the overall flow of the operation, says Jason Denmon, apparel and specialty retail industry leader at the distribution consulting and design engineering firm Fortna. "When I think about logical flow, I first of all ask, does it fit without being too jammed in?" he says. "Does it cause congestion? Does it cause too much travel time for employees as they move to and from their work area? Does it logically fit into the flow of operations, as it goes from step one to step two to step three?"
Thinking about the logical flow also means considering the "ripple effect" on equipment and processes both upstream and downstream, Denmon says. Even if it appears that a new piece of equipment will fit into the operation nicely, further investigation might reveal that, say, the added volume from the new area will quickly overwhelm capacity downstream. To avoid this type of problem, Denmon recommends mapping out the new operation in detail before proceeding with any installation.
4. Don't ignore the software. A key part of that mapping exercise should be determining how the different software and controls will communicate with one another. It is this piece of an integration project that often turns out to be the most complex and expensive, says Bob Babel, vice president, engineering and implementation, for Forté Industries, a planning, design, and integration firm owned by Swisslog. "If a WMS is talking to one WCS (warehouse control system) for a pick-to-light system and another for a sortation conveyor, and now another for print-and-apply [equipment], it gets very complicated," he observes.
According to Moris, the work involved in making sure the various pieces are talking to one another can cost as much as the rest of the project put together. He recalls one proposed project where the numbers were all falling into place—that is, it appeared that the labor, material, and space savings would easily offset the cost of the new equipment—until the cost of integrating the system with the company's WMS was factored in. "And then the financial justification just went right out the window," he says.
Babel also notes that companies may be able to simplify communications among multiple pieces of equipment by "elevating the WCS or warehouse execution system" into an integration layer between the different equipment's controllers and the WMS.
5. Prepare to be disrupted. Consider yourself forewarned: In most cases, it's impossible to integrate a new piece of equipment without disrupting existing operations to some degree, says Greg Meyne, design manager for the systems integrator and consulting firm enVista. "As early as possible, the integrator and the end user should go through a step-by-step scheduling process that covers when and where a particular disruption is going to happen and what needs to be done to adjust to it," he advises.
One area that's particularly prone to disruption is a facility's storage area, Meyne says. Many times, the new equipment will be placed in a section of the DC that previously was used for storage. In such cases, the customer should have a plan for where to house those stored goods during the project as well as how to access them during that period.
Disruption is also likely to occur when the new equipment is connected to the old equipment. To reduce the impact of that disruption, the connection can be scheduled for off-shift hours, such as on a weekend or a holiday, Meyne says.
Disruptions and delays may also arise if an installer accidentally damages equipment during the "cut-in," or insertion, process. For this reason, Brandt recommends having spare parts on hand for both the old and new equipment.
6. Beware of the vague test plan. Drafting a comprehensive test plan that lays out specific steps, defines metrics for success, and identifies a fallback solution in case the new equipment doesn't run to specification can lead to a smoother implementation. According to Meyne, it is wise to first run a virtual test of the software. "Have the WCS and WMS communicate to a virtual server to make sure all communication protocols are working prior to going on-site," he suggests.
Next, Meyne recommends running a site test of just the mechanical equipment to make sure that items are being inducted, merged, sorted, and stored correctly. Only then should you marry the two pieces together.
Brandt suggests running at least one test shift that simulates conditions at full volume with all, or close to all, personnel present. This will reveal any flaws and give you a chance to correct them before the system goes live.
7. Don't send your integrator home too early. Finally, just because you've had several successful test runs, don't assume that you can go live without a hitch. According to Brandt, some quirks may not show up until after a system starts to run at full volume. For this reason, it's important for your integrator to stick around after the implementation. For less complex jobs, the integration staff may only need to be there for a shift or two. More complex integrations may require the team to remain on the site for a couple of weeks.
Brandt has one other piece of advice: "An additional thing to consider if you're a retailer and doing a mid-summer implementation is to bring back your integrator on Black Friday when volumes peak."
While it may seem wasteful to pay the integrator for a couple of extra days or weeks, Brandt says there can be value in doing so, even if the implementation turns out to be flawless. Instead of troubleshooting, the integration team could be put to work training your staff on the system's new functionalities and offering tips that can help them make better, smarter use of the new equipment.
Most of the apparel sold in North America is manufactured in Asia, meaning the finished goods travel long distances to reach end markets, with all the associated greenhouse gas emissions. On top of that, apparel manufacturing itself requires a significant amount of energy, water, and raw materials like cotton. Overall, the production of apparel is responsible for about 2% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report titled
Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zeroby the Apparel Impact Institute. Founded in 2017, the Apparel Impact Institute is an organization dedicated to identifying, funding, and then scaling solutions aimed at reducing the carbon emissions and other environmental impacts of the apparel and textile industries.
The author of this annual study is researcher and consultant Michael Sadowski. He wrote the first report in 2021 as well as the latest edition, which was released earlier this year. Sadowski, who is also executive director of the environmental nonprofit
The Circulate Initiative, recently joined DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney on an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast to discuss the key findings of the research, what companies are doing to reduce emissions, and the progress they’ve made since the first report was issued.
A: While companies in the apparel industry can set their own sustainability targets, we realized there was a need to give them a blueprint for actually reducing emissions. And so, we produced the first report back in 2021, where we laid out the emissions from the sector, based on the best estimates [we could make using] data from various sources. It gives companies and the sector a blueprint for what we collectively need to do to drive toward the ambitious reduction [target] of staying within a 1.5 degrees Celsius pathway. That was the first report, and then we committed to refresh the analysis on an annual basis. The second report was published last year, and the third report came out in May of this year.
Q: What were some of the key findings of your research?
A: We found that about half of the emissions in the sector come from Tier Two, which is essentially textile production. That includes the knitting, weaving, dyeing, and finishing of fabric, which together account for over half of the total emissions. That was a really important finding, and it allows us to focus our attention on the interventions that can drive those emissions down.
Raw material production accounts for another quarter of emissions. That includes cotton farming, extracting gas and oil from the ground to make synthetics, and things like that. So we now have a really keen understanding of the source of our industry’s emissions.
Q: Your report mentions that the apparel industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions. Is that an accurate statistic?
A: That’s our best estimate of the total emissions [generated by] the apparel sector. Some other reports on the industry have apparel at up to 8% of global emissions. And there is a commonly misquoted number in the media that it’s 10%. From my perspective, I think the best estimate is somewhere under 2%.
We know that globally, humankind needs to reduce emissions by roughly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to hit international goals. [Reaching that target will require the involvement of] every facet of the global economy and every aspect of the apparel sector—transportation, material production, manufacturing, cotton farming. Through our work and that of others, I think the apparel sector understands what has to happen. We have highlighted examples of how companies are taking action to reduce emissions in the roadmap reports.
Q: What are some of those actions the industry can take to reduce emissions?
A: I think one of the positive developments since we wrote the first report is that we’re seeing companies really focus on the most impactful areas. We see companies diving deep on thermal energy, for example. With respect to Tier Two, we [focus] a lot of attention on things like ocean freight versus air. There’s a rule of thumb I’ve heard that indicates air freight is about 10 times the cost [of ocean] and also produces 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions.
There is money available to invest in sustainability efforts. It’s really exciting to see the funding that’s coming through for AI [artificial intelligence] and to see that individual companies, such as H&M and Lululemon, are investing in real solutions in their supply chains. I think a lot of concrete actions are being taken.
And yet we know that reducing emissions by half on an absolute basis by 2030 is a monumental undertaking. So I don’t want to be overly optimistic, because I think we have a lot of work to do. But I do think we’ve got some amazing progress happening.
Q: You mentioned several companies that are starting to address their emissions. Is that a result of their being more aware of the emissions they generate? Have you seen progress made since the first report came out in 2021?
A: Yes. When we published the first roadmap back in 2021, our statistics showed that only about 12 companies had met the criteria [for setting] science-based targets. In 2024, the number of apparel, textile, and footwear companies that have set targets or have commitments to set targets is close to 500. It’s an enormous increase. I think they see the urgency more than other sectors do.
We have companies that have been working at sustainability for quite a long time. I think the apparel sector has developed a keen understanding of the impacts of climate change. You can see the impacts of flooding, drought, heat, and other things happening in places like Bangladesh and Pakistan and India. If you’re a brand or a manufacturer and you have operations and supply chains in these places, I think you understand what the future will look like if we don’t significantly reduce emissions.
Q: There are different categories of emission levels, depending on the role within the supply chain. Scope 1 are “direct” emissions under the reporting company’s control. For apparel, this might be the production of raw materials or the manufacturing of the finished product. Scope 2 covers “indirect” emissions from purchased energy, such as electricity used in these processes. Scope 3 emissions are harder to track, as they include emissions from supply chain partners both upstream and downstream.
Now companies are finding there are legislative efforts around the world that could soon require them to track and report on all these emissions, including emissions produced by their partners’ supply chains. Does this mean that companies now need to be more aware of not only what greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but also what their partners produce?
A: That’s right. Just to put this into context, if you’re a brand like an Adidas or a Gap, you still have to consider the Scope 3 emissions. In particular, there are the so-called “purchased goods and services,” which refers to all of the embedded emissions in your products, from farming cotton to knitting yarn to making fabric. Those “purchased goods and services” generally account for well above 80% of the total emissions associated with a product. It’s by far the most significant portion of your emissions.
Leading companies have begun measuring and taking action on Scope 3 emissions because of regulatory developments in Europe and, to some extent now, in California. I do think this is just a further tailwind for the work that the industry is doing.
I also think it will definitely ratchet up the quality requirements of Scope 3 data, which is not yet where we’d all like it to be. Companies are working to improve that data, but I think the regulatory push will make the quality side increasingly important.
Q: Overall, do you think the work being done by the Apparel Impact Institute will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the industry?
A: When we started this back in 2020, we were at a place where companies were setting targets and knew their intended destination, but what they needed was a blueprint for how to get there. And so, the roadmap [provided] this blueprint and identified six key things that the sector needed to do—from using more sustainable materials to deploying renewable electricity in the supply chain.
Decarbonizing any sector, whether it’s transportation, chemicals, or automotive, requires investment. The Apparel Impact Institute is bringing collective investment, which is so critical. I’m really optimistic about what they’re doing. They have taken a data-driven, evidence-based approach, so they know where the emissions are and they know what the needed interventions are. And they’ve got the industry behind them in doing that.
The global air cargo market’s hot summer of double-digit demand growth continued in August with average spot rates showing their largest year-on-year jump with a 24% increase, according to the latest weekly analysis by Xeneta.
Xeneta cited two reasons to explain the increase. First, Global average air cargo spot rates reached $2.68 per kg in August due to continuing supply and demand imbalance. That came as August's global cargo supply grew at its slowest ratio in 2024 to-date at 2% year-on-year, while global cargo demand continued its double-digit growth, rising +11%.
The second reason for higher rates was an ocean-to-air shift in freight volumes due to Red Sea disruptions and e-commerce demand.
Those factors could soon be amplified as e-commerce shows continued strong growth approaching the hotly anticipated winter peak season. E-commerce and low-value goods exports from China in the first seven months of 2024 increased 30% year-on-year, including shipments to Europe and the US rising 38% and 30% growth respectively, Xeneta said.
“Typically, air cargo market performance in August tends to follow the July trend. But another month of double-digit demand growth and the strongest rate growths of the year means there was definitely no summer slack season in 2024,” Niall van de Wouw, Xeneta’s chief airfreight officer, said in a release.
“Rates we saw bottoming out in late July started picking up again in mid-August. This is too short a period to call a season. This has been a busy summer, and now we’re at the threshold of Q4, it will be interesting to see what will happen and if all the anticipation of a red-hot peak season materializes,” van de Wouw said.
The report cites data showing that there are approximately 1.7 million workers missing from the post-pandemic workforce and that 38% of small firms are unable to fill open positions. At the same time, the “skills gap” in the workforce is accelerating as automation and AI create significant shifts in how work is performed.
That information comes from the “2024 Labor Day Report” released by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), the firm’s government relations and public policy arm.
“We continue to see a labor shortage and an urgent need to upskill the current workforce to adapt to the new world of work,” said Michael Lotito, Littler shareholder and co-chair of WPI. “As corporate executives and business leaders look to the future, they are focused on realizing the many benefits of AI to streamline operations and guide strategic decision-making, while cultivating a talent pipeline that can support this growth.”
But while the need is clear, solutions may be complicated by public policy changes such as the upcoming U.S. general election and the proliferation of employment-related legislation at the state and local levels amid Congressional gridlock.
“We are heading into a contentious election that has already proven to be unpredictable and is poised to create even more uncertainty for employers, no matter the outcome,” Shannon Meade, WPI’s executive director, said in a release. “At the same time, the growing patchwork of state and local requirements across the U.S. is exacerbating compliance challenges for companies. That, coupled with looming changes following several Supreme Court decisions that have the potential to upend rulemaking, gives C-suite executives much to contend with in planning their workforce-related strategies.”
Stax Engineering, the venture-backed startup that provides smokestack emissions reduction services for maritime ships, will service all vessels from Toyota Motor North America Inc. visiting the Toyota Berth at the Port of Long Beach, according to a new five-year deal announced today.
Beginning in 2025 to coincide with new California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, STAX will become the first and only emissions control provider to service roll-on/roll-off (ro-ros) vessels in the state of California, the company said.
Stax has rapidly grown since its launch in the first quarter of this year, supported in part by a $40 million funding round from investors, announced in July. It now holds exclusive service agreements at California ports including Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Benicia, Richmond, and Oakland. The firm has also partnered with individual companies like NYK Line, Hyundai GLOVIS, Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US (Shell), and now Toyota.
Stax says it offers an alternative to shore power with land- and barge-based, mobile emissions capture and control technology for shipping terminal and fleet operators without the need for retrofits.
In the case of this latest deal, the Toyota Long Beach Vehicle Distribution Center imports about 200,000 vehicles each year on ro-ro vessels. Stax will keep those ships green with its flexible exhaust capture system, which attaches to all vessel classes without modification to remove 99% of emitted particulate matter (PM) and 95% of emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Over the lifetime of this new agreement with Toyota, Stax estimated the service will account for approximately 3,700 hours and more than 47 tons of emissions controlled.
“We set out to provide an emissions capture and control solution that was reliable, easily accessible, and cost-effective. As we begin to service Toyota, we’re confident that we can meet the needs of the full breadth of the maritime industry, furthering our impact on the local air quality, public health, and environment,” Mike Walker, CEO of Stax, said in a release. “Continuing to establish strong partnerships will help build momentum for and trust in our technology as we expand beyond the state of California.”
That result showed that driver wages across the industry continue to increase post-pandemic, despite a challenging freight market for motor carriers. The data comes from ATA’s “Driver Compensation Study,” which asked 120 fleets, more than 150,000 employee drivers, and 14,000 independent contractors about their wage and benefit information.
Drilling into specific categories, linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earned a median annual amount of $94,525 in 2023, while local LTL drivers earned a median of $80,680. The median annual compensation for drivers at private carriers has risen 12% since 2021, reaching $95,114 in 2023. And leased-on independent contractors for truckload carriers were paid an annual median amount of $186,016 in 2023.
The results also showed how the demographics of the industry are changing, as carriers offered smaller referral and fewer sign-on bonuses for new drivers in 2023 compared to 2021 but more frequently offered tenure bonuses to their current drivers and with a greater median value.
"While our last study, conducted in 2021, illustrated how drivers benefitted from the strongest freight environment in a generation, this latest report shows professional drivers' earnings are still rising—even in a weaker freight economy," ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello said in a release. "By offering greater tenure bonuses to their current driver force, many fleets appear to be shifting their workforce priorities from recruitment to retention."