Contributing Editor Toby Gooley is a writer and editor specializing in supply chain, logistics, and material handling, and a lecturer at MIT's Center for Transportation & Logistics. She previously was Senior Editor at DC VELOCITY and Editor of DCV's sister publication, CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly. Prior to joining AGiLE Business Media in 2007, she spent 20 years at Logistics Management magazine as Managing Editor and Senior Editor covering international trade and transportation. Prior to that she was an export traffic manager for 10 years. She holds a B.A. in Asian Studies from Cornell University.
Suppose you're importing containers of machine parts from, say, Japan. Every week, the containers are loaded on a ship operated by the same carrier you've used for years. The ship casts off and your cargo heads out on what looks to be another routine voyage across the Pacific. What could go wrong?
An earthquake and tsunami, followed by a nuclear disaster, for one thing. Or the steering could fail and cause the ship to run aground, the engine could catch fire, or a collision could leave the ship with a hole punched through its hull—to name just a few of the more common possibilities.
When disaster strikes, many people assume the ocean carrier will absorb the cost of recovery and repairs. But that's generally not the case. Under a doctrine of maritime law known as "general average," cargo owners are required to pay a share of those costs.
General average allows carriers to charge beneficial cargo owners for costs that meet criteria established by international maritime law. Examples include the costs of towing the ship to safety, repairs, unloading and reloading cargo, rescuing the crew, and compensating customers for jettisoned cargo.
This legal principle, enshrined in international maritime treaties, contracts, and insurance policies, dates back to ancient times. Yet many importers and exporters are taken by surprise when a carrier declares that general average is in effect and the bills start rolling in. It's a complex matter best addressed by transportation lawyers and cargo insurance professionals, but the following overview will explain how general average works and what you can do to make sure you're prepared for the worst.
ANCIENT PRACTICE IN A MODERN AGE
The concept of general average dates back nearly 3,000 years. In centuries-old maritime parlance, "average" refers to loss, and "general" means that something is spread among all parties, according to Richard W. Bridges, a vice president with Roanoke Trade Insurance Inc., which specializes in international insurance solutions. Thus, general average is a pooling of a financial loss by all parties involved in an ocean voyage. (A variation is "particular average," or partial loss, which applies only to directly affected parties.)
More specifically, general average acts as a mechanism for reimbursing the carrier for the extraordinary expenditures or sacrifices it makes for the common good and safety of a voyage, says Laura Otenti, a lawyer with the firm Posternak Blankstein & Lund LLP. "In other words, losses incurred for the common benefit of the participants in a maritime voyage are paid proportionately by all who participate in the voyage," she says.
When would an ocean carrier declare general average? Historically, it typically happened when a ship was in imminent danger and the crew had to jettison cargo to lighten the vessel, Otenti says. That still applies, but today a ship's owner or master (captain) may also declare general average for other reasons, such as when a ship is not in imminent danger but cannot complete the voyage, she explains. Some examples include damage to the vessel caused by bad weather, running aground due to navigational errors, or a mechanical breakdown such as the loss of steering.
These scenarios are uncommon. But they are not rare. According to a report issued by the insurance company Allianz Global Corporate & Specialty, 25 cargo ships were lost in 2014, and hundreds more suffered damage of some type. Most incidents involve bulk vessels, but containerships are also at risk; from 2005 through 2014, a total of 36 sank or suffered serious damage. The largest loss in 2013 was the MOL Comfort, a containership that broke in half and sank off the coast of Yemen, the report said.
PAY YOUR PERCENTAGE
When general average has been declared, the carrier, the vessel owner, or more likely a third party called an "average adjuster" will notify cargo owners and shippers of record. In Otenti's experience, that initial communication usually explains the circumstances that caused the carrier to declare general average and may also include instructions for providing a bond, guaranty, or cash payment. The vessel owner must also prepare a general average statement that allocates the expenses to be paid by each cargo owner, Otenti explains.
How much you'll pay is based on the value of your cargo as a percentage of the total value of the voyage: the value of the ship itself plus the value of the cargo on board, says Bridges. If the value of your cargo is equal to 5 percent of the total value of the voyage, then you'll be required to pay 5 percent of the costs that meet the general average criteria.
The cargo owner's actual outlay over the course of a general average event can be significant. "When I started in the business 20 years ago, a typical general average payment was equivalent to 3 to 5 percent of the value of the cargo, but now we are seeing 7 to 10 percent as the norm," mostly because today's larger ships cost more to tow, unload, and repair, says Bridges. (See the sidebar for a hypothetical example of how a cargo owner's share is calculated and some very costly real-life examples.)
To ensure that cargo owners pony up, the carrier places a lien on all shipments aboard the stricken vessel. The cargo cannot be picked up until whoever owns the risk at that point—the exporter or the importer, depending on the terms of sale—or that party's insurer pays an estimated share of the expenses that are already known. Early on, that's usually the cost of towing the ship, and possibly crew rescue and cargo handling expenses.
But there's more to come, Bridges cautions. Cargo owners or their insurers must also post a bond to guarantee payment of additional charges that may be calculated after the cargo has been released. Examples might include ongoing costs like debris removal and environmental remediation. It can take a long time for the carrier to complete those activities and determine its final expenses, according to Bridges. Then it has to correctly apportion those costs among potentially hundreds of cargo owners—a monumental task he compares with handling a class-action lawsuit. "Some general average claims take up to seven years to complete, and three years is the norm," he observes.
BE PREPARED
Although many aspects of general average are out of the cargo owner's control, there are steps you can take to manage your costs and make sure your rights are protected.
One that may seem obvious but is often overlooked is to become thoroughly familiar with the terms of the carrier's bill of lading, says Suzanne Richer, director, trade advisory practice at Amber Road, a provider of global trade management software and advisory services. "People forget that the bill of lading is a contract of carriage. The back of the bill of lading is loaded with restrictions favoring the carrier, yet few people read it," she says. As a result, some shippers and consignees are not fully aware of their contractual obligations and may be unprepared for what's coming.
Surprisingly, another often-overlooked protective measure is to educate yourself about what your insurance policy does and does not cover, Richer says. That's because people frequently "set it and forget it" when it comes to cargo insurance.
Most policies, including "all risk" and less-inclusive ones, provide coverage for expenses incurred as a result of a general average declaration. But even with coverage, shippers can still get into trouble. For instance, if you purchase insurance through a broker who knows little about cargo, your general average claim may not be handled with urgency. And an importer that buys on sales terms where the seller bears the risk of loss may find that the exporter is in no hurry to pay a general average claim. "In some cases, the exporter may even decide to abandon the freight, leaving the importer stuck," Bridges says.
Be aware that there's more at stake than just covering the cost of general average assessments. There's also the physical loss or damage to the goods, and business costs associated with the delayed delivery and loss of the use of the cargo. Such unpredictable matters are excluded by most policies, but it's possible to purchase additional coverage, Richer says.
Richer recommends carefully considering the legal liabilities and contractual obligations that may apply and quantifying the financial impact in light of the value of the cargo and business impacts. "With that information, you can make a decision about the best option: to pay this or reject the freight, and if I do that, what will be the repercussions?" She also suggests working with your insurance carrier to find out how often such incidents occur in the trade lanes your shipments frequently traverse, and whether it's more economically advantageous to absorb a certain amount of loss.
Regardless of how well informed and prepared you might be, if you export or import a large volume of cargo on a regular basis, sooner or later a notice of general average is likely to arrive in the mail (or your inbox). Don't let the notice sit around, advises Otenti. Alert your insurance carrier and transportation lawyer that you've received the notice and consult them right away about what to expect and the best way to proceed, she says.
I have to pay how much?
When a carrier declares general average, the amount of money you'll be required to pay will be based on the value of your cargo as a percentage of the total value of the voyage—in other words, the value of the ship itself plus the value of the cargo on board.
To illustrate how the losses might be apportioned, Richard W. Bridges, a vice president with Roanoke Trade Insurance, offers a hypothetical example of a ship valued at $50 million that carried cargo valued at $50 million, which combined would yield a $100 million voyage value. If you were a cargo owner with $1 million worth of goods on board, you would be a 1-percent participant. Now suppose that the ship ran aground, and that subsequently, $5 million worth of cargo (not yours) was jettisoned to float the vessel off a sandbar and a salvage tug charged the ship owner another $5 million to tow the vessel to safety. You would be responsible for paying 1 percent of $10 million, or $100,000, though additional payment might be required once the final costs have been determined.
The actual amount to be paid, though, depends on the carrier's total cost and how much cargo is on board the ship. Although typical costs run around 7 to 10 percent of the value of the freight, that figure can go much higher, Bridges says. He cites the example of a 2006 fire on board the Hyundai Fortune, which was caused by undeclared flammable liquids loaded near the engine room and which destroyed over 500 containers. About $160 million in cargo was ruined and the vessel, worth $70 million, was a total loss. The demand on cargo owners was about 40 percent of the value of their freight.
Another large general average loss arose from the 2012 fire on board the MSC Flaminia, which resulted in an initial general average contribution (demand) of all the cargo owners for 110 percent of the value of their cargo. No definitive cause has been found, but most experts agree the ignition source was misdeclared hazardous cargo.
That changing landscape is forcing companies to adapt or replace their traditional approaches to product design and production. Specifically, many are changing the way they run factories by optimizing supply chains, increasing sustainability, and integrating after-sales services into their business models.
“North American manufacturers have embraced the factory of the future. Working with service providers, many companies are using AI and the cloud to make production systems more efficient and resilient,” Bob Krohn, partner at ISG, said in the “2024 ISG Provider Lens Manufacturing Industry Services and Solutions report for North America.”
To get there, companies in the region are aggressively investing in digital technologies, especially AI and ML, for product design and production, ISG says. Under pressure to bring new products to market faster, manufacturers are using AI-enabled tools for more efficient design and rapid prototyping. And generative AI platforms are already in use at some companies, streamlining product design and engineering.
At the same time, North American manufacturers are seeking to increase both revenue and customer satisfaction by introducing services alongside or instead of traditional products, the report says. That includes implementing business models that may include offering subscription, pay-per-use, and asset-as-a-service options. And they hope to extend product life cycles through an increasing focus on after-sales servicing, repairs. and condition monitoring.
Additional benefits of manufacturers’ increased focus on tech include better handling of cybersecurity threats and data privacy regulations. It also helps build improved resilience to cope with supply chain disruptions by adopting cloud-based supply chain management, advanced analytics, real-time IoT tracking, and AI-enabled optimization.
“The changes of the past several years have spurred manufacturers into action,” Jan Erik Aase, partner and global leader, ISG Provider Lens Research, said in a release. “Digital transformation and a culture of continuous improvement can position them for long-term success.”
Women are significantly underrepresented in the global transport sector workforce, comprising only 12% of transportation and storage workers worldwide as they face hurdles such as unfavorable workplace policies and significant gender gaps in operational, technical and leadership roles, a study from the World Bank Group shows.
This underrepresentation limits diverse perspectives in service design and decision-making, negatively affects businesses and undermines economic growth, according to the report, “Addressing Barriers to Women’s Participation in Transport.” The paper—which covers global trends and provides in-depth analysis of the women’s role in the transport sector in Europe and Central Asia (ECA) and Middle East and North Africa (MENA)—was prepared jointly by the World Bank Group, the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the German Agency for International Cooperation (GIZ), the European Investment Bank (EIB), and the International Transport Forum (ITF).
The slim proportion of women in the sector comes at a cost, since increasing female participation and leadership can drive innovation, enhance team performance, and improve service delivery for diverse users, while boosting GDP and addressing critical labor shortages, researchers said.
To drive solutions, the researchers today unveiled the Women in Transport (WiT) Network, which is designed to bring together transport stakeholders dedicated to empowering women across all facets and levels of the transport sector, and to serve as a forum for networking, recruitment, information exchange, training, and mentorship opportunities for women.
Initially, the WiT network will cover only the Europe and Central Asia and the Middle East and North Africa regions, but it is expected to gradually expand into a global initiative.
“When transport services are inclusive, economies thrive. Yet, as this joint report and our work at the EIB reveal, few transport companies fully leverage policies to better attract, retain and promote women,” Laura Piovesan, the European Investment Bank (EIB)’s Director General of the Projects Directorate, said in a release. “The Women in Transport Network enables us to unite efforts and scale impactful solutions - benefiting women, employers, communities and the climate.”
Oh, you work in logistics, too? Then you’ve probably met my friends Truedi, Lumi, and Roger.
No, you haven’t swapped business cards with those guys or eaten appetizers together at a trade-show social hour. But the chances are good that you’ve had conversations with them. That’s because they’re the online chatbots “employed” by three companies operating in the supply chain arena—TrueCommerce,Blue Yonder, and Truckstop. And there’s more where they came from. A number of other logistics-focused companies—like ChargePoint,Packsize,FedEx, and Inspectorio—have also jumped in the game.
While chatbots are actually highly technical applications, most of us know them as the small text boxes that pop up whenever you visit a company’s home page, eagerly asking questions like:
“I’m Truedi, the virtual assistant for TrueCommerce. Can I help you find what you need?”
“Hey! Want to connect with a rep from our team now?”
“Hi there. Can I ask you a quick question?”
Chatbots have proved particularly popular among retailers—an October survey by artificial intelligence (AI) specialist NLX found that a full 92% of U.S. merchants planned to have generative AI (GenAI) chatbots in place for the holiday shopping season. The companies said they planned to use those bots for both consumer-facing applications—like conversation-based product recommendations and customer service automation—and for employee-facing applications like automating business processes in buying and merchandising.
But how smart are these chatbots really? It varies. At the high end of the scale, there’s “Rufus,” Amazon’s GenAI-powered shopping assistant. Amazon says millions of consumers have used Rufus over the past year, asking it questions either by typing or speaking. The tool then searches Amazon’s product listings, customer reviews, and community Q&A forums to come up with answers. The bot can also compare different products, make product recommendations based on the weather where a consumer lives, and provide info on the latest fashion trends, according to the retailer.
Another top-shelf chatbot is “Manhattan Active Maven,” a GenAI-powered tool from supply chain software developer Manhattan Associates that was recently adopted by the Army and Air Force Exchange Service. The Exchange Service, which is the 54th-largest retailer in the U.S., is using Maven to answer inquiries from customers—largely U.S. soldiers, airmen, and their families—including requests for information related to order status, order changes, shipping, and returns.
However, not all chatbots are that sophisticated, and not all are equipped with AI, according to IBM. The earliest generation—known as “FAQ chatbots”—are only clever enough to recognize certain keywords in a list of known questions and then respond with preprogrammed answers. In contrast, modern chatbots increasingly use conversational AI techniques such as natural language processing to “understand” users’ questions, IBM said. It added that the next generation of chatbots with GenAI capabilities will be able to grasp and respond to increasingly complex queries and even adapt to a user’s style of conversation.
Given their wide range of capabilities, it’s not always easy to know just how “smart” the chatbot you’re talking to is. But come to think of it, maybe that’s also true of the live workers we come in contact with each day. Depending on who picks up the phone, you might find yourself speaking with an intern who’s still learning the ropes or a seasoned professional who can handle most any challenge. Either way, the best way to interact with our new chatbot colleagues is probably to take the same approach you would with their human counterparts: Start out simple, and be respectful; you never know what you’ll learn.
With the hourglass dwindling before steep tariffs threatened by the new Trump Administration will impose new taxes on U.S. companies importing goods from abroad, organizations need to deploy strategies to handle those spiraling costs.
American companies with far-flung supply chains have been hanging for weeks in a “wait-and-see” situation to learn if they will have to pay increased fees to U.S. Customs and Border Enforcement agents for every container they import from certain nations. After paying those levies, companies face the stark choice of either cutting their own profit margins or passing the increased cost on to U.S. consumers in the form of higher prices.
The impact could be particularly harsh for American manufacturers, according to Kerrie Jordan, Group Vice President, Product Management at supply chain software vendor Epicor. “If higher tariffs go into effect, imported goods will cost more,” Jordan said in a statement. “Companies must assess the impact of higher prices and create resilient strategies to absorb, offset, or reduce the impact of higher costs. For companies that import foreign goods, they will have to find alternatives or pay the tariffs and somehow offset the cost to the business. This can take the form of building up inventory before tariffs go into effect or finding an equivalent domestic alternative if they don’t want to pay the tariff.”
Tariffs could be particularly painful for U.S. manufacturers that import raw materials—such as steel, aluminum, or rare earth minerals—since the impact would have a domino effect throughout their operations, according to a statement from Matt Lekstutis, Director at consulting firm Efficio. “Based on the industry, there could be a large detrimental impact on a company's operations. If there is an increase in raw materials or a delay in those shipments, as being the first step in materials / supply chain process, there is the possibility of a ripple down effect into the rest of the supply chain operations,” Lekstutis said.
New tariffs could also hurt consumer packaged goods (CPG) retailers, which are already being hit by the mere threat of tariffs in the form of inventory fluctuations seen as companies have rushed many imports into the country before the new administration began, according to a report from Iowa-based third party logistics provider (3PL) JT Logistics. That jump in imported goods has quickly led to escalating demands for expanded warehousing, since CPG companies need a place to store all that material, Jamie Cord, president and CEO of JT Logistics, said in a release
Immediate strategies to cope with that disruption include adopting strategies that prioritize agility, including capacity planning and risk diversification by leveraging multiple fulfillment partners, and strategic inventory positioning across regional warehouses to bypass bottlenecks caused by trade restrictions, JT Logistics said. And long-term resilience recommendations include scenario-based planning, expanded supplier networks, inventory buffering, multimodal transportation solutions, and investment in automation and AI for insights and smarter operations, the firm said.
“Navigating the complexities of tariff-driven disruptions requires forward-thinking strategies,” Cord said. “By leveraging predictive modeling, diversifying warehouse networks, and strategically positioning inventory, JT Logistics is empowering CPG brands to remain adaptive, minimize risks, and remain competitive in the current dynamic market."
With so many variables at play, no company can predict the final impact of the potential Trump tariffs, so American companies should start planning for all potential outcomes at once, according to a statement from Nari Viswanathan, senior director of supply chain strategy at Coupa Software. Faced with layers of disruption—with the possible tariffs coming on top of pre-existing geopolitical conflicts and security risks—logistics hubs and businesses must prepare for any what-if scenario. In fact, the strongest companies will have scenarios planned as far out as the next three to five years, Viswanathan said.
Grocery shoppers at select IGA, Price Less, and Food Giant stores will soon be able to use an upgraded in-store digital commerce experience, since store chain operator Houchens Food Group said it would deploy technology from eGrowcery, provider of a retail food industry white-label digital commerce platform.
Kentucky-based Houchens Food Group, which owns and operates more than 400 grocery, convenience, hardware/DIY, and foodservice locations in 15 states, said the move would empower retailers to rethink how and when to engage their shoppers best.
“At HFG we are focused on technology vendors that allow for highly targeted and personalized customer experiences, data-driven decision making, and e-commerce capabilities that do not interrupt day to day customer service at store level. We are thrilled to partner with eGrowcery to assist us in targeting the right audience with the right message at the right time,” Craig Knies, Chief Marketing Officer of Houchens Food Group, said in a release.
Michigan-based eGrowcery, which operates both in the United States and abroad, says it gives retail groups like Houchens Food Group the ability to provide a white-label e-commerce platform to the retailers it supplies, and integrate the program into the company’s overall technology offering. “Houchens Food Group is a great example of an organization that is working hard to simultaneously enhance its technology offering, engage shoppers through more channels and alleviate some of the administrative burden for its staff,” Patrick Hughes, CEO of eGrowcery, said.