David Maloney has been a journalist for more than 35 years and is currently the group editorial director for DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly magazines. In this role, he is responsible for the editorial content of both brands of Agile Business Media. Dave joined DC Velocity in April of 2004. Prior to that, he was a senior editor for Modern Materials Handling magazine. Dave also has extensive experience as a broadcast journalist. Before writing for supply chain publications, he was a journalist, television producer and director in Pittsburgh. Dave combines a background of reporting on logistics with his video production experience to bring new opportunities to DC Velocity readers, including web videos highlighting top distribution and logistics facilities, webcasts and other cross-media projects. He continues to live and work in the Pittsburgh area.
For supply chain professionals everywhere, the year 2021 was one for the books. And not in a good way. Shipping disruptions, port delays, and supply hiccups created shortages of everything from pet food and computer chips to new cars and construction materials, giving the industry something of a black eye in the process.
But 2021 is now in the rear-view mirror. Today, the question on everybody’s mind is, How will 2022 play out? Will the economy stabilize and inflation be reined in? Will the supply chain bottlenecks ease? Can we collectively find solutions to our labor woes?
To get some insight into these and other questions, we turned to someone who’s uniquely qualified to weigh in on such matters. Gary Master, publisher of DC Velocity and COO of Agile Business Media, has an extensive background in business economics and more than 30 years’ experience in supply chain/logistics. As an executive at a supply chain-centered media company, he keeps close tabs on the economy in general and the supply chain/logistics market in particular.
As 2021 drew to a close, Group Editorial Director David Maloney sat down with Gary to get his take on what lies ahead. Here’s what he had to say:
Dave: A year ago at this time, we talked about what might be in store for us in 2021. We were looking at an economy that was quite different from what we have today. Although the nation remains in the grip of a lethal pandemic, we are no longer in a recession—in fact, we’re now struggling with an economy that has come roaring back in a way nobody expected.
Gary: Yes, 2021 was an interesting year. We all saw the front-page stories about supply chain issues in 2021, and most of them were not terribly flattering. We had a fast recovery, for sure, and unfortunately, the supply chain has had a hard time catching up for a variety of reasons. We had Covid outbreaks in Asia, some sourcing issues, and a shortage of key minerals and materials.
Economically, we had inflation. I felt like a voice crying in the wilderness saying that inflation was not going to be temporary. Everyone else was assuring us that inflation and supply chain shortages were short-term challenges, but unfortunately, neither has proved to be temporary. As a matter of fact, inflation is getting even worse, and the supply chain crisis is still with us. They will look different in 2022, but these concerns are still going to be with us throughout the year. [Editor’s note: Two days after this interview was recorded, the Labor Department reported that inflation rose 6.8% on a year-over-year basis in November, the biggest jump in nearly 40 years.]
Dave: What are some of the underlying reasons for why inflation and the supply chain delays will continue to haunt us?
Gary: We had a quick V-shaped recovery at the end of 2020 and through 2021 that drove up demand across various industries. That was number one. Number two was labor, labor, labor. Usually, when we have supply chain challenges and unforeseen spikes in demand, we just throw labor at the problem. We can’t do that now. The nation is struggling with an unprecedented labor shortage—we have a lot of job openings with no one to fill them.
On top of that, every time there’s an outbreak of Covid somewhere in the world, or a new variant emerges, it impacts the supply chain. When you’re already facing problems like backups and labor shortages, and then these new issues crop up, it just creates the perfect storm. And those things unfortunately are still with us.
Dave: Why are we having so much difficulty finding workers to fill supply chain jobs?
Gary: It’s not just the supply chain. It is an issue of worker shortages across the board. It is a problem when you’ve got Target offering $19 an hour to get labor here on the island where I live in Hawaii. We also have the graying of America, right? We knew that was coming, and we knew that was going to mean worker shortages as more people reached retirement age.
We also have a situation in the Covid era where a lot of people have said, “You know what? I don’t need to work the hours I do. I’d like a simpler life. I’d like to stay home. I just don’t want to work anymore.” If you have 2% to 5% of the population leaving the workforce on top of the graying of America—plus people leaving their jobs rather than comply with vaccine mandates—it all leads to a perfect storm. We have a labor shortage, whether it’s in fast food, retail, or the supply chain. It just is what it is.
Dave: Are these challenges of our own making? Are the problems we’re seeing now a result of the “lean” processes we instituted to make supply chains more efficient, only to find that they left us vulnerable to shortages and supply disruptions?
Gary: That is a great question, Dave. I am glad you asked that one. We all know what “lean” is and how it drives cost out of the supply chain through just-in-time deliveries of materials and goods. It reduces inventory, and it puts you in a world where, when all things are going well, your operation can be a lean, mean fighting machine. It is wonderful and beautiful to watch.
You now enter the world that we’re in today, where we have a supply chain crisis because not one thing, not two things, not three things, but almost everything that could go wrong with the supply chain has gone wrong—from increased demand that wasn’t foreseen to a labor shortage to Covid outbreaks that result in plant or port closures. The leanness of today’s supply chains has really caused some fundamental problems with respect to shortages.
So, who does lean manufacturing well? The automotive industry is usually great at lean. But what do we have right now? On the island where I live, used-car and used-truck prices are up 46% from last year. The demand for used vehicles is driven by a shortage of chips for new cars. And chip shortages start with the raw materials. It starts with plants that have been intermittently shut down because of Covid outbreaks. But if you had built up more inventory of those chips and had invested more money into it, it could have eased that crisis somewhat.
Dave: Of course, few saw the huge spikes in demand coming in time to adjust their supply. So here we sit in 2022. What do you think will happen this year, and will it get any better for our supply chains?
Gary: I think it will get better for supply chains. I tell everybody that supply chain is like a pendulum, right? We go from driving cost from the operation and going lean to “Wait a minute, maybe we’ve overshot the mark,” where we’ve got to go back, invest in the supply chain, and ramp up operations so we can meet the demand for higher throughput.
We now have a situation where inflation is close to being out of control, and we are going to see that throughout 2022. Dealing with inflation means you’ve got to start looking at cost controls.
I think the supply chain is going to start swinging back, like the pendulum. I heard a gentleman speak at the CSCMP [Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals] Edge conference in September who said he was already worried about overcapacity. And what is the supply chain going to do with the capacity we built to handle the deluge of business we’re seeing right now? What are we going to do to rectify overcapacity when it comes? Because it will come.
I think we’ll start to see some normalization of supply chain operations midyear, maybe in the third quarter, when everybody starts to say, “What the heck? Look at our balance sheet and look at how it is being impacted by what we’ve had to do with Covid restrictions and all the associated expenses.” I think we’re going to be talking a lot about expense reductions in supply chains—and how we can do things more efficiently—at the end of 2022.
Dave: Despite all the headlines about today’s stressed supply chains, consumers haven’t eased up on their demands. How do we manage their sometimes-unrealistic expectations?
Gary: That is another great question. I think if you’ve done an open and honest risk assessment of your global supply chain and you understand where your risks lie, you have a better indication of what you can and can’t do as far as the “leaning” of your supply chain, the sourcing options you have, and the flexibility you have within your supply chain. I think global risk analysis right now is really key.
The second thing is real-time data. More than in the past, making business decisions based on real-time data is going to be critical because you have to turn on a dime in today’s supply chains. There is more pressure to be agile and able to pivot quickly.
Dave: How important is it for us to just get back to basics in running our supply chains?
Gary: We’ve got to get back to some kind of balance with respect to our supply chains—to a place where we have adequate inventories but we’re also as lean and efficient as we can be. That is really hard to achieve, but we need to get back to that because I think the pendulum will begin to swing back by, say, the third or fourth quarter of this year.
Dave: So, a lot of our efforts should be focused on just blocking and tackling and simply getting through the challenges we face right now?
Gary: We need to focus on the blocking and tackling to solve our current challenges but also avoid building out too much supply chain capacity. We don’t want to build supply chains that are so big we end up having to shut down all those new DCs and lay off workers when things finally settle down. It is a delicate balance.
Dave: So as the old saying goes, we can’t build the church for Easter Sunday. The current conditions will not last forever.
Gary: Yes. Or to put it another way, you can’t build the raceway for that one race each year. The same applies to our supply chains.
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.
Global trade will see a moderate rebound in 2025, likely growing by 3.6% in volume terms, helped by companies restocking and households renewing purchases of durable goods while reducing spending on services, according to a forecast from trade credit insurer Allianz Trade.
The end of the year for 2024 will also likely be supported by companies rushing to ship goods in anticipation of the higher tariffs likely to be imposed by the coming Trump administration, and other potential disruptions in the coming quarters, the report said.
However, that tailwind for global trade will likely shift to a headwind once the effects of a renewed but contained trade war are felt from the second half of 2025 and in full in 2026. As a result, Allianz Trade has throttled back its predictions, saying that global trade in volume will grow by 2.8% in 2025 (reduced by 0.2 percentage points vs. its previous forecast) and 2.3% in 2026 (reduced by 0.5 percentage points).
The same logic applies to Allianz Trade’s forecast for export prices in U.S. dollars, which the firm has now revised downward to predict growth reaching 2.3% in 2025 (reduced by 1.7 percentage points) and 4.1% in 2026 (reduced by 0.8 percentage points).
In the meantime, the rush to frontload imports into the U.S. is giving freight carriers an early Christmas present. According to Allianz Trade, data released last week showed Chinese exports rising by a robust 6.7% y/y in November. And imports of some consumer goods that have been threatened with a likely 25% tariff under the new Trump administration have outperformed even more, growing by nearly 20% y/y on average between July and September.