We stand at the precipice of a gap of our own collective making, a gap that deepens and widens with every failure to address the root causes of our talent shortfall.
Art van Bodegraven was, among other roles, chief design officer for the DES Leadership Academy. He passed away on June 18, 2017. He will be greatly missed.
I've been increasingly dismayed by the much-heralded and little-resolved skills and experience shortfalls in The Great Supply Chain Management Race—the so-called talent gap.
The "gap" terminology obscures the depth and severity of the challenge. It's a chasm, a gaping crack in the infrastructure. We don't have enough warm bodies to perform the simplest execution tasks, with a further dropoff in adequate numbers when basic arithmetic and/or communication abilities are added to organizational expectations—and needs.
When higher skill levels are requirements for analysis, planning, coding, data management, and other such esoterica, the situation becomes downright embarrassing—and dangerously vulnerable in global competition. In this more demanding arena, we do a most commendable job of education and preparation, but we can scarcely hope to produce enough working talent to meet needs (especially when manufacturing and other sectors would poach our best and brightest without the merest twinge of conscience).
Of course, our managers at various levels are oblivious to factors of time and change, and what it takes to be effective in the 21st century, wedded as they are to discredited models of yesteryear. That old practices and shopworn tactics serve to drive off otherwise enthusiastic and engaged staff only makes things worse.
And our greatest deficiency remains, imho, the yawning abyss of the authentic leadership we crave and have little chance of finding. That shortfall creates a domino cascade of talent shortage throughout an organization.
HOOVERVILLE REDUX
Meanwhile, unemployment is pervasive enough that accounting trickeration is necessary to disguise that a pleasingly plump image is actually morbidly obese. The almost-always-ballyhooed unemployment rate is a pleasant fiction that has little genuine meaning or utility. It, for example, does not recognize the underemployed or the discouraged who no longer bother seeking employment. The portion of the population able to work that is actually working is a frail 62.7 percent and continues to drop.
Politicians, unable to restrain themselves, are what we might politely call nonspecific about creating new jobs, "well-paying jobs," that will restore American prosperity. What they don't talk about, and most likely are clueless about, is the reality that jobs have changed, in numbers to produce given quantities, in content, and in basic skills requirements. Steelmaking, for instance, now requires a few hundred people to make the same steel that took several thousand a generation or two ago.
TECHNOLOGY TO THE RESCUE?
We have all kinds of mobile, wearable, multicapable technologies to help us do our jobs better—faster, more accurately, and more transparently. In a somewhat static environment, this must translate to reduced, or more slowly growing, work forces.
The march of robotics is under way. Can some robotics applications actually add jobs, or a least avoid cutbacks? Sure. In healthy organizations with open needs, growth potential, and an appetite for investment in retraining. But in the larger case, I suspect, the Bean Counter Brigade is looking for, and rewarded for finding, ways to reduce costs, a code phrase for reducing headcount.
This desperate clinging to last-century paradigms is a refuge for those unable to innovate and motivate at a new-century pace. I fear that the dinosaurs are not going to wade into La Brea willingly and are likely to be with us, in uncomfortable numbers, for another generation (one hopes not two).
What will almost surely make this worse is the move to elevate minimum wages. Here's my not-always-popular position: Every adult working at a full-time job should be receiving a living wage. Part-time jobs should pay an hourly rate equivalent to a full-time living wage. Full-time is neither permanent nor year-round. Lower-wage "job lite" options should be available as learner positions for younger employees.
However, we define these things, the minimum wage is trending—fast—toward $15 per hour. Time to get real. A capable lift truck operator or a speedy, versatile order selector is worth more—lots more—than someone asking "Would you like fries with that?" But the industry has been paying execution staff at fast-food levels for a long time, with increases coming in response to competition for a diminished labor pool. The result? Rapidly rising wages in supply chain execution will make it even more attractive to pursue robotic and automated material handling solutions, pushing more experienced employees out on the street.
A GLIMPSE INTO A BRIEFLY ILLUMINATED DARK FUTURE
So, where does all this lead us? So few leaders that they can't spare themselves to lead the country for a while. Managers who have yet to master managing but are persuaded that they are leaders, to the detriment of people and enterprises. Highly rewarded and prized technogeek employees. Well-compensated staff, who have developed and maintain relevant skills. A few functionaries who excite their leaders by seeking, adopting, embracing, and even creating change as (or before) environments and requirements evolve—or erupt.
And then, the rest. An army, easy to stir to mindless action with time on their hands, limited skills, less knowledge of what it takes to be a part of a functioning society—and no money to do much with, save stock up on Kools or cannabis, try to keep up with Anheuser-Busch's production, and some vague notion that their plight is all the fault of Carlos Slim or an Ethiopian cab driver working two jobs to feed his family.
We stand at the precipice of a gap of our own collective making, a gap that deepens and widens with every failure to address root causes of our talent woes. A merit-based class system is nearing open class warfare, made increasingly more possible as the divide between haves, have nots, don't wants, and can't dos grows without much serious effort to realign those who might be salvageable, re-educate those without the most basic tools, and retrain those who have a usable foundation.
Those robots are going to be needing programming, maintenance, and repair. We all have a lot at stake in restoring balance within the economic ecosystem of the nation.
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."