Mark Solomon joined DC VELOCITY as senior editor in August 2008, and was promoted to his current position on January 1, 2015. He has spent more than 30 years in the transportation, logistics and supply chain management fields as a journalist and public relations professional. From 1989 to 1994, he worked in Washington as a reporter for the Journal of Commerce, covering the aviation and trucking industries, the Department of Transportation, Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court. Prior to that, he worked for Traffic World for seven years in a similar role. From 1994 to 2008, Mr. Solomon ran Media-Based Solutions, a public relations firm based in Atlanta. He graduated in 1978 with a B.A. in journalism from The American University in Washington, D.C.
Last year was a busy one for supply chain resiliency. That's unfortunate, because that meant a string of major disasters forced too many supply chains into costly reactive mode. Worldwide, total economic losses in 2017 due to natural and man-made disasters soared 63 percent to $306 billion, according to reinsurance firm Swiss Re. The U.S. was the hardest-hit region, posting $93 billion in losses mostly from a trio of devastating hurricanes during the late summer and fall.
For the supply chain, disasters are a fact of life, and will become a more expensive fact should incidents increase in frequency and severity, as many experts expect. However, as Aaron Parrott, specialist leader in Deloitte Consulting's supply chain and manufacturing operations practice, explains in a recent conversation with Mark B. Solomon, DC Velocity's executive editor-news, there are ways to mitigate the consequences, though not eliminate them.
Q: There were several high-profile disasters during 2017. Did last year's events move the needle in terms of getting businesses to be proactive about hardening their supply chains? Or are businesses still in a reactive mode and view this as a cost of doing business?
A: While 2017 was certainly a notable year for high-profile disasters, we're not seeing business leaders write big checks to overhaul their supply chains. For some companies in highly impacted regions, these disasters may have caused sudden ruptures in their supply chains and revealed unforeseen vulnerabilities. However, when it comes to building supply chain resiliency, we see most companies taking a piecemeal approach over a longer period.
Q: You stress the importance of pushing disaster planning and execution up the supply chain. Given that most large manufacturers have hundreds of suppliers around the world, can such resiliency be consistently achieved without prohibitive cost?
A: For many large manufacturers, 70 to 80 percent of their product value comes from the supply base. An unforeseen issue with just one critical supplier can jeopardize a manufacturer's entire operation and bring production to a standstill. For companies with complex and expansive supply chains, I recommend starting by focusing on the 15 to 20 percent of components and parts that are critical to continuing operations. This more limited focus will avoid incurring high costs while still ensuring continued production through challenging periods.
Securing resiliency can be achieved without prohibitive cost. In the past five years, the cost of implementation has decreased and ease-of-use for digital tools has increased significantly. This allows businesses to integrate cost-effective sensors and software packages to better collaborate with suppliers as well as enable blockchain solutions and data analytics software that can pinpoint and anticipate potential areas of concern.
Q: Beyond the obvious priority of ensuring the safety of employees, what should a company's to-do list be as it is developing a disaster-response plan?
A: A first step is to increase visibility into the supply chain. If your eyes are closed when disaster strikes, you'll end up fumbling in the dark and grasping for solutions.
This visibility requires mapping the supply chain—developing a multi-tier perspective to better understand the overall network. Next, manufacturers must strategically locate any areas where potential supply chain failures might occur. For example, a manufacturer might learn that all its suppliers for one specific component are located in a hurricane-prone area. Can production survive without these suppliers? Are there alternative suppliers that can diversify the components' availability and reduce risk? By answering these questions, manufacturers can more effectively pre-empt disaster-related challenges.
Finally, complex supply networks require advanced digital solutions, including the ability to track material movement, collaborate in real time, and integrate data across multiple systems and locations, along with data analytics to predict supply disruptions and identify current issues. These tools allow for multinodal communication, enabling instantaneous synchronization across the supply chain and providing manufacturers with complete end-to-end transparency. This real-time information, coupled with unfurled supply chain maps, can allow manufacturers to quickly recognize problems, identify solutions, and pursue preventive actions.
Q: What are the challenges in trying to build disaster plans across very long distances and many different cultures?
A: In today's business world, distance and cultural differences no longer tend to pose significant barriers. In fact, the global nature of business often provides significant value for companies that efficiently source through the most cost-effective supply chain networks. As previously mentioned, digital solutions are vital to securing supply chains, enabling manufacturers to maintain always-on agility. These capabilities are essential—not only for global supply chains, but also for national and regional supply chains.
However, companies that fail to maintain clear visibility into their supply chains may be unaware of supply chain issues occurring on the other side of the globe. End manufacturers may not learn of an issue for three or four weeks after a disaster takes place. Without up-to-the-minute information, companies lose the ability to respond effectively to real-time situations. By translating the physical world into the digital world, manufacturers can more accurately capture and analyze data, building resiliency against otherwise unpredictable situations.
Q: All the planning in the world may not help in the event of a sudden disaster and emergency, or if a storm changes its original course. Is there any way for companies to plan for the unforeseen, and if they can't cover all bases, what should they focus on?
A: Securing the 15 to 20 percent of your supply chain containing the most critical components to your products should be the first priority. But planning for the unforeseen requires building a comprehensive infrastructure around your supply chain. Digital technologies are crucial to gaining real-time insights. If components suddenly stop in transit, sensors and trackers can signal a manufacturer immediately and trigger an appropriate response.
Gaining visibility should also be a priority—not only for disaster planning, but also to maintain a competitive edge. Know where your components come from; learn who supplies your suppliers and establish a deep understanding of how your products come together. Building this bank of knowledge and enhancing it with digital insights enables a manufacturer to become more agile and proactive. This agility will not only prove invaluable in terms of disaster response, but also in allowing manufacturers to efficiently source components and boost revenues. Disasters and supply chain interruptions are going to happen, and they are impossible to avoid. Enabling these capabilities will allow companies to respond more quickly, make better decisions, and get their supply chain back up and running faster.
Q: How much traction has the control tower concept received as a proactive strategy?
A: As digital technologies continue driving supply chain resiliency, the most advanced control tower concepts allow for end-to-end transparency and enable a fully integrated network. This degree of visibility and connected information within the supply chain allows for proactive event management in disaster situations and even automated decision-making.
Establishing an advanced control tower to monitor the entire supply chain is the most holistic solution for building resiliency, but it's not necessary for every company. This concept is scalable and can be shaped to meet a range of companies' needs. Again, the control tower concept should not be understood as a one-time solution, but rather a foundation to build on. Start with the basics—increasing supply chain visibility—and scale up capabilities as needed to secure supply chain value.
Q: Can you briefly provide an example of a company that, in your view, does disaster planning right?
A: When the topic of supply chains enters mainstream conversation, it's usually because a company has failed to foresee potential vulnerabilities in the event of a disaster. Some companies were devastated by the previous natural disasters, like the 2011 earthquake in Japan, but have since become models of building progressive supply chain resiliency. Some have effectively navigated multiple earthquake tremors—relying on real-time data, predeveloped contingency plans, and strategic relationships with alternative suppliers.
In extreme disasters, it's virtually impossible to keep operations running at 100 percent, but with proper planning, business leaders can protect supply chain value as well as ensure the safety of their employees.
Q: What role does your organization play in supporting businesses in this area?
A: The tasks of mapping supply chains, identifying the proper digital tools, and developing strategic know-how can be daunting—especially for the world's biggest and most complex businesses. As a leader in building supply chain resiliency, Deloitte quickly bridges the gap between concept and implementation. From developing a strategy to initiating execution, Deloitte's capabilities can help businesses adopt scalable solutions that best meet their needs.
Building awareness of possible disruptions is half the battle. If one supplier is hit with disaster, do you have a backup supplier to fill the void? Do you maintain enough buffer inventory to cushion production during a supply shortage? How can you synchronize your internal and external data to derive real-time solutions? These are just a handful of the many questions companies must ask when building supply chain resiliency.
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."