Answering a “hirer” calling: interview with Charlie Saffro
To kick off our three-part series of interviews focusing on today’s labor challenges, we talked to Charlie Saffro of CS Recruiting about hiring and retention—specifically, what works and what’s a waste of time and money. Here’s what she told us.
Diane Rand is Associate Editor and has several years of magazine editing and production experience. She previously worked as a production editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review. She joined the editorial staff in 2015. She is responsible for managing digital, editorial, and production projects for DC Velocity and its sister magazine, Supply Chain Quarterly.
Finding and maintaining adequate staffing is arguably the biggest challenge supply chains face today. Warehouse managers struggle to find enough workers to keep their facilities running. Trucking companies are chronically short of drivers. And technology companies and service providers can’t find the talent they need to move their operations forward.
As the labor crisis worsens, DC Velocity is offering three perspectives on finding and retaining a first-class workforce. The interviews in this series, which will continuein our March and April issues, were conducted for “Supply Chain in the Fast Lane,” the podcast coproduced by our sister publication, Supply Chain Quarterly, and the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
In this first installment, Supply Chain Quarterly Managing Editor Diane Rand speaks with Charlie Saffro, president and founder of CS Recruiting. Saffro has more than 14 years of direct recruiting experience within the logistics, transportation, and supply chain industries.
Q: Your firm specializes in supply chain and logistics recruiting. What positions are companies having the most trouble filling, and what skills are most in demand?
A: It is probably one of the most unique markets I’ve seen since I began recruiting in this space. Sales talent across the board is very much in demand right now. We generally see a need for sales talent all 12 months of the year, but a lot of companies build up their operational teams in Q1 and Q2, and then are ready to bring in the [recruiters] to sell for the second half of the year.
Beyond that, I would say that we’re seeing some really unique niche positions, particularly on the shipper side of the business. These positions could be within manufacturing, procurement, distribution, or the transportation function, but they are generally specific to either a mode or a commodity where employers want to invest in a game-changing hire that can come in and help them build out their area of expertise. We are seeing roles like that at all levels, though I would say manager and up is what’s trending right now.
Q: You presented a session at last fall’s CSCMP Edge Conference with the intriguing title “You can’t recruit if you can’t retain.” Can you explain what you mean by that?
A: Yes. We see ourselves as different types of recruiters in the sense that we really focus on matching the right person with the right company, and we are very focused on the human as part of the process.
I truly believe that in order to recruit well, you have to start with a solid retention strategy. Assuming a business is established, it already has at least one employee, and that is where the recruiting process begins. Having a culture and a certain vibe in the way a company treats its employees internally is what it’s all about right now. Employers need to start by looking internally and figuring out what they offer to their current team members. Where do they fall short? Because at the end of the day, that all translates right back into their recruiting strategy and tactics.
Not only are you creating “culture champions” and word-of-mouth referrals, but you are also fostering a positive perception of your talent brand when you can retain well. Then, as you transition into that recruiting step, you are able to sell an exciting opportunity to candidates. You can use examples of team members who have had successes and examples of how your culture works and how your employees feel because those are really what candidates are looking for right now. I truly believe that it starts with retention, and then you leverage that culture and that retention piece that you’ve built to recruit new talent for your team.
Q: On the other side of the coin, what are the most common reasons that supply chain managers leave a company? Is it all about the money or is it something else?
A: It is not all about the money anymore. Definitely money is a factor—I can’t deny that everybody works to support themselves and achieve financial security. I put money into the same bucket as benefits and maybe some additional incentives.
However, since the onset of Covid, I think the mentality in the candidate market has changed dramatically. Maybe money was the number-one reason people looked elsewhere before the pandemic, but now it is probably the fourth or fifth reason.
When it comes to why people leave a company, I’d say the number-one reason is workplace toxicity—companies that have toxic environments. That is really what we hear most often from candidates that are either actively or passivelylooking for a new opportunity. A toxic environment can stem from a number of things. It can be poor leadership, poor management, lack of recognition, or burning people out by not recognizing or understanding their capacity limits.
There is also a [whole population] out there that feels they are approaching the ceiling in their company, meaning that they won’t be going anywhere unless their boss goes somewhere, and their boss won’t be going anywhere unless their boss goes somewhere.
Candidates want to feel challenged. They want responsibility, and they want to do more. So when they hit that ceiling—that is, they feel they’re ready for the next step but the company isn’t there to support them—they’ll go out and look externally to grow their career vertically.
Those are really the two things that are coming up before money right now in terms of why people are leaving. What I call “culture” is the first reason, and opportunity is the second.
Q: What are some retention practices you’ve seen that truly work?
A: I can speak from experience here. When I started my firm, I was a one-woman show for the first year, and then I slowly built a team. Today, we have 40 employees, so I really try to practice what I preach. I use my team as an opportunity to beta-test and experiment—to take ideas and see how our team responds to them. What I’ve found is that it comes down to employees wanting to be seen and heard.
There are a number of tactics and policies that companies can implement in this regard, but it starts on day one with the interview process. Candidates want companies that communicate with them, that are transparent with them, and that want to get to know who they are beyond their résumé.
Then once that candidate has joined the company, employers really need to pay attention to the onboarding and development process to ensure the new-hire feels connected to the team from day one. Introduce them to various team members, and maybe let them shadow [their new colleagues] and get to know the people they’re going to be working with.
Then as they start to notch up some wins, you need to have a really solid recognition and appreciation program in place. Recognition and appreciation don’t always have to cost money. They certainly can, but it can also be public and private shout-outs, handwritten notes, or announcing internal promotions on a public platform like LinkedIn. What all of these retention tactics come down to is one-on-one attention from leadership. Employees want to be seen and heard.
Q: What are some retention practices you’ve seen that are not effective?
A: We joke about it now, but putting in a pingpong table or hosting a happy hour at five o’clock every Thursday doesn’t work anymore. I personally worked at a really great company in my second job out of college. It was in marketing, and the company’s “retention tactics” included some amazing perks. We had an in-house chef who would make us three meals a day. We had an in-house masseuse, and believe it or not, we were required to get a massage once a week.
While it was great and it really appealed to me at that point in my career, now I look back and I kind of chuckle because those were just strategies to keep me at the office and keep me working. And, yes, it made my job a pleasure, and I enjoyed it more because of those perks. But that is the stuff that is just not working anymore. You have to think beyond providing a keg or a foosball table.
What is working is flexibility. When employees have flexibility, they feel trusted, and when employees feel trusted, they are happy and they’re going to be more productive and more passionate about the work they’re doing.
Q: Those remind me of the perks universities used to offer to attract new students. It is not really important anymore, right?
A: Exactly. We are not in first grade, and we’re not going to be incentivized by a pizza party or pajama day anymore. It is going to have to go beyond that. Whether your employees come to the office or work remotely, there are different ways to keep them excited about the job and the company. Again, it really comes down to treating them like humans. That’s the easiest way to summarize it.
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."