Don Jacobson is the president of Optimum Supply Chain Recruiters, a recruiting organization that specializes in the placement of management personnel in the logistics field on a nationwide basis. You can reach him by calling Optimum SCR at (800) 300-7609 or by visiting the firm's Web site, www.OptimumSCR.com.
Shelley Safian is vice president of marketing for Optimum Supply Chain Recruiters, a recruiting organization that specializes in the placement of management personnel in the logistics field on a nationwide basis. You can reach her by calling Optimum SCR at (800) 300-7609 or by visiting the firm's Web site, www.OptimumSCR.com.
You can't ignore it any longer. For some time now, DC performance has been slipping. You've long suspected that the problem lies with your warehouse supervisor, but you haven't been able to bring yourself to let him/her go. It could be a well-liked old-timer who's constantly stumbling on the job ("He's always messing up, but he's such a nice guy. I can't fire him."). Or it could be a technically competent worker with an attitude ("She just doesn't get along with anyone, but she's so good at her job. How can I fire her?"). Either way, the problem has come to a head, and you have to act.
Chances are, this is not an employee who lacks both interpersonal and technical skills. If that were the case, you would have fired him/her long ago. This is a person with some redeeming features, which makes it a much tougher call. Does the good outweigh the bad? Is there a way to balance a person's skill set against his or her personality and fit with the company's culture (admittedly a highly subjective judgment)?
To lend some objectivity to the process, we've developed the Retention Rubric. To use the Rubric, you simply follow the steps outlined below to plot the employee's position on the grid and find the recommended action.
SKILL SET
CULTURE MATCH
1-Very Poor
2-Weak
3-Moderate
4-Good
5-Excellent
1-Very Poor
Fire immediately
Put on notice
Give a warning
Send to a class
Send to an interpersonal behavior seminar
2-Weak
Put on notice
Give a warning
Give a warning
Give a warning
Send to a class
3-Moderate
Give a warning
Put on probation
Assign a mentor
Assign a mentor
Assign a mentor
4-Good
Send back to school
Send to a class
Assign a mentor
Provide continuing praise
Provide continuing praise
5-Excellent
Send to a skills seminar
Send to a class
Assign a mentor
Provide continuing praise
Give a raise immediately
The horizontal axis: Skill set 1. On a scale from 1 to 5 (5 representing excellent and 1 representing very poor), evaluate the individual's ability to handle his/her assigned tasks. Does he or she schedule staff effectively? Are reports completed correctly and submitted on time? Does he or she manage inventory well? Are inventory counts correct? You may want to pull out a copy of the person's job description and run down the list, evaluating how well he/she performs each task using the 1 to 5 scale. Then, average the scores for each item to come up with an overall score.
2. Try to determine the root causes for a less-than-perfect score. Be honest and fair. If you believe that your organization is partially responsible for the person's difficulties—perhaps you've promoted someone from the ranks with no supervisory training—you must take that into account. It's not reasonable to punish a competent person who's effectively been set up to fail. Try to maintain objectivity when evaluating how well the person handles the job's technical aspects, but not at the expense of honesty. If he or she never turns in reports on time or keeps sloppy and inaccurate logs and inventory sheets, be truthful.
3. Evaluate the person's supervisory abilities. In other words, how good is he or she at motivating the staff? Is he or she an effective teacher or manager?
4. Consider the prospects for improvement. Is there any indication that this person could learn the missing skills or improve his/her performance? Do you believe this individual is capable of learning and willing to try?
The vertical axis: Fit with the organizational culture 1. On a scale from 1 to 5 (5 representing excellent, and 1 representing very poor), evaluate this person's ability to work well with others. Does he/she encourage teamwork and cooperation? Don't get sidetracked trying to assess his/her likeability; the real issue is respect. As you know, a person doesn't have to be liked to function well in an organization. Respect must be there; likeability is a bonus.
2. Review the real reasons for a lessthan- perfect score. Does the person try hard to do his/her best in a difficult corporate culture? Is he or she constantly getting the workforce riled up? Could the problem be that this person was trained in a different type of corporate environment (old habits die hard)? Could there be cultural reasons for the clash?
3. Decide whether he or she is a candidate for an attitude adjustment. If properly motivated, can he or she make himself/herself more agreeable and thus, more compatible with the company's culture?
Once you've plotted the scores on the Rubric, you'll have a better idea of what you're dealing with. You'll also have some ideas for the next step to take. That's no guarantee that this job can be saved, of course. The fact remains that not everyone will be able to improve or succeed. But you just might end up turning a so-so performer into a superstar.
Artificial intelligence (AI) and data science were hot business topics in 2024 and will remain on the front burner in 2025, according to recent research published in AI in Action, a series of technology-focused columns in the MIT Sloan Management Review.
In Five Trends in AI and Data Science for 2025, researchers Tom Davenport and Randy Bean outline ways in which AI and our data-driven culture will continue to shape the business landscape in the coming year. The information comes from a range of recent AI-focused research projects, including the 2025 AI & Data Leadership Executive Benchmark Survey, an annual survey of data, analytics, and AI executives conducted by Bean’s educational firm, Data & AI Leadership Exchange.
The five trends range from the promise of agentic AI to the struggle over which C-suite role should oversee data and AI responsibilities. At a glance, they reveal that:
Leaders will grapple with both the promise and hype around agentic AI. Agentic AI—which handles tasks independently—is on the rise, in the form of generative AI bots that can perform some content-creation tasks. But the authors say it will be a while before such tools can handle major tasks—like make a travel reservation or conduct a banking transaction.
The time has come to measure results from generative AI experiments. The authors say very few companies are carefully measuring productivity gains from AI projects—particularly when it comes to figuring out what their knowledge-based workers are doing with the freed-up time those projects provide. Doing so is vital to profiting from AI investments.
The reality about data-driven culture sets in. The authors found that 92% of survey respondents feel that cultural and change management challenges are the primary barriers to becoming data- and AI-driven—indicating that the shift to AI is about much more than just the technology.
Unstructured data is important again. The ability to apply Generative AI tools to manage unstructured data—such as text, images, and video—is putting a renewed focus on getting all that data into shape, which takes a whole lot of human effort. As the authors explain “organizations need to pick the best examples of each document type, tag or graph the content, and get it loaded into the system.” And many companies simply aren’t there yet.
Who should run data and AI? Expect continued struggle. Should these roles be concentrated on the business or tech side of the organization? Opinions differ, and as the roles themselves continue to evolve, the authors say companies should expect to continue to wrestle with responsibilities and reporting structures.
Shippers today are praising an 11th-hour contract agreement that has averted the threat of a strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf coast ports that could have frozen container imports and exports as soon as January 16.
The agreement came late last night between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) representing some 45,000 workers and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) that includes the operators of port facilities up and down the coast.
Details of the new agreement on those issues have not yet been made public, but in the meantime, retailers and manufacturers are heaving sighs of relief that trade flows will continue.
“Providing certainty with a new contract and avoiding further disruptions is paramount to ensure retail goods arrive in a timely manner for consumers. The agreement will also pave the way for much-needed modernization efforts, which are essential for future growth at these ports and the overall resiliency of our nation’s supply chain,” Gold said.
The next step in the process is for both sides to ratify the tentative agreement, so negotiators have agreed to keep those details private in the meantime, according to identical statements released by the ILA and the USMX. In their joint statement, the groups called the six-year deal a “win-win,” saying: “This agreement protects current ILA jobs and establishes a framework for implementing technologies that will create more jobs while modernizing East and Gulf coasts ports – making them safer and more efficient, and creating the capacity they need to keep our supply chains strong. This is a win-win agreement that creates ILA jobs, supports American consumers and businesses, and keeps the American economy the key hub of the global marketplace.”
The breakthrough hints at broader supply chain trends, which will focus on the tension between operational efficiency and workforce job protection, not just at ports but across other sectors as well, according to a statement from Judah Levine, head of research at Freightos, a freight booking and payment platform. Port automation was the major sticking point leading up to this agreement, as the USMX pushed for technologies to make ports more efficient, while the ILA opposed automation or semi-automation that could threaten jobs.
"This is a six-year détente in the tech-versus-labor tug-of-war at U.S. ports," Levine said. “Automation remains a lightning rod—and likely one we’ll see in other industries—but this deal suggests a cautious path forward."
Editor's note: This story was revised on January 9 to include additional input from the ILA, USMX, and Freightos.
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
The overall national industrial real estate vacancy rate edged higher in the fourth quarter, although it still remains well below pre-pandemic levels, according to an analysis by Cushman & Wakefield.
Vacancy rates shrunk during the pandemic to historically low levels as e-commerce sales—and demand for warehouse space—boomed in response to massive numbers of people working and living from home. That frantic pace is now cooling off but real estate demand remains elevated from a long-term perspective.
“We've witnessed an uptick among firms looking to lease larger buildings to support their omnichannel fulfillment strategies and maintain inventory for their e-commerce, wholesale, and retail stock. This trend is not just about space, but about efficiency and customer satisfaction,” Jason Tolliver, President, Logistics & Industrial Services, said in a release. “Meanwhile, we're also seeing a flurry of activity to support forward-deployed stock models, a strategy that keeps products closer to the market they serve and where customers order them, promising quicker deliveries and happier customers.“
The latest figures show that industrial vacancy is likely nearing its peak for this cooling cycle in the coming quarters, Cushman & Wakefield analysts said.
Compared to the third quarter, the vacancy rate climbed 20 basis points to 6.7%, but that level was still 30 basis points below the 10-year, pre-pandemic average. Likewise, overall net absorption in the fourth quarter—a term for the amount of newly developed property leased by clients—measured 36.8 million square feet, up from the 33.3 million square feet recorded in the third quarter, but down 20% on a year-over-year basis.
In step with those statistics, real estate developers slowed their plans to erect more buildings. New construction deliveries continued to decelerate for the second straight quarter. Just 85.3 million square feet of new industrial product was completed in the fourth quarter, down 8% quarter-over-quarter and 48% versus one year ago.
Likewise, only four geographic markets saw more than 20 million square feet of completions year-to-date, compared to 10 markets in 2023. Meanwhile, as construction starts remained tempered overall, the under-development pipeline has continued to thin out, dropping by 36% annually to its lowest level (290.5 million square feet) since the third quarter of 2018.
Despite the dip in demand last quarter, the market for industrial space remains relatively healthy, Cushman & Wakefield said.
“After a year of hesitancy, logistics is entering a new, sustained growth phase,” Tolliver said. “Corporate capital is being deployed to optimize supply chains, diversify networks, and minimize potential risks. What's particularly encouraging is the proactive approach of retailers, wholesalers, and 3PLs, who are not just reacting to the market, but shaping it. 2025 will be a year characterized by this bias for action.”
Under terms of the deal, Sick and Endress+Hauser will each hold 50% of a joint venture called "Endress+Hauser SICK GmbH+Co. KG," which will strengthen the development and production of analyzer and gas flow meter technologies. According to Sick, its gas flow meters make it possible to switch to low-emission and non-fossil energy sources, for example, and the process analyzers allow reliable monitoring of emissions.
As part of the partnership, the product solutions manufactured together will now be marketed by Endress+Hauser, allowing customers to use a broader product portfolio distributed from a single source via that company’s global sales centers.
Under terms of the contract between the two companies—which was signed in the summer of 2024— around 800 Sick employees located in 42 countries will transfer to Endress+Hauser, including workers in the global sales and service units of Sick’s “Cleaner Industries” division.
“This partnership is a perfect match,” Peter Selders, CEO of the Endress+Hauser Group, said in a release. “It creates new opportunities for growth and development, particularly in the sustainable transformation of the process industry. By joining forces, we offer added value to our customers. Our combined efforts will make us faster and ultimately more successful than if we acted alone. In this case, one and one equals more than two.”
According to Sick, the move means that its current customers will continue to find familiar Sick contacts available at Endress+Hauser for consulting, sales, and service of process automation solutions. The company says this approach allows it to focus on its core business of factory and logistics automation to meet global demand for automation and digitalization.
Sick says its core business has always been in factory and logistics automation, which accounts for more than 80% of sales, and this area remains unaffected by the new joint venture. In Sick’s view, automation is crucial for industrial companies to secure their productivity despite limited resources. And Sick’s sensor solutions are a critical part of industrial automation, which increases productivity through artificial intelligence and the digital networking of production and supply chains.