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.
Try as they might, they couldn't figure it out. A distribution center in Florida was experiencing an unacceptably high rate of forklift-related product damage. The lift truck fleet had installed iWarehouse, a telematics solution from The Raymond Corp., and the fleet manager had asked the forklift maker for help in using the system to learn why there was so much damage. But the traditional observations—the time of day, where impacts were happening, and who was driving—didn't turn up any obvious reasons for the impacts. Puzzled, the truck manufacturer and its customer decided to look beyond the forklift operation for possible causes, recalls John Rosenberger, product manager for iWarehouse Gateway, the system's reporting user interface. Among the things they looked at was the general environment inside the building.
Where the DC is located in Florida, high humidity levels are common, so the facility monitors humidity levels and has dehumidifiers in place. That gave the team an idea: compare the relative humidity readings with the forklift impact records in the telematics system.
"Sure enough, they aligned, and we found the root cause of the impacts," Rosenberger says. On days when thunderstorms were rolling through, the humidity rose so quickly the dehumidifiers couldn't keep up. The concrete floors became wet, and for just an hour or two, the floor would be slippery. During those times, the drivers—who are paid on piecework, which motivated them to drive fast—were prone to sliding, which led to impacts and product damage.
With that information in hand, Raymond and its customer found a way to prevent sliding accidents. Now, when relative humidity exceeds a certain threshold, the DC manager uses the iControl function in iWarehouse to reduce the maximum speed of the trucks and then to raise it after the danger has passed. For lift trucks that do not have iControl, the system alerts drivers to slow down or speed up via a message on the iWarehouse monitor display on the truck. According to Rosenberger, accidents and product damage quickly declined, and the DC still meets its throughput goals despite the periodic speed reductions.
THE WMS/LMS CONNECTION
"The Case of the Slippery Floors" is a good example of how a "big data" approach can be applied to lift truck fleet management. "Big data" refers to the analysis of data from multiple sources, often unrelated and unstructured, to find hidden correlations and unseen cause-and-effect relationships. While a true big data analysis involves sifting through huge amounts of information, the big data concept can also be applied to analyses of much smaller amounts of information. On a small scale, this is more likely to involve a comparison of two data sets, which can help companies to start down the path of using data analysis to solve problems. "This is not about gathering new data," explains Roger Tenney, senior vice president, client services, for I.D. Systems Inc., a provider of wireless vehicle management systems. "Big data is about new ways of combining, integrating, and analyzing existing information from disconnected or apparently divergent data sources."
This type of analysis requires help from technology. Although spreadsheets and basic databases are useful in collecting and sorting fleet operating and maintenance data, it can be a cumbersome, slow process to enter data from different sources, sort it, visually identify patterns, and then figure out the correlations. Fleet and battery management, maintenance tracking, and asset tracking software—not just those mentioned in this article but also the many other programs that are on the market—are designed to gather, compare, and analyze data from multiple sources. A big data analysis requires a certain degree of technological sophistication, so fleet managers shouldn't be reluctant to ask for help. The lift truck manufacturer, the software provider, and in some cases, an outside data management consultant or an in-house systems analyst can assist with identifying which data are relevant, determining how best to "harvest" it, and then conducting an analysis.
A big data analysis might look at information sources that are related but traditionally are examined independently. For example, lift truck, battery, and charger performance usually are reviewed separately. But a big data analysis that treats them as "a holistic system" will allow fleet managers to see patterns that would not be apparent otherwise, says Harold Vanasse, vice president of sales and marketing for Philadelphia Scientific, a provider of battery management technologies. Some of his customers match their battery usage and handling data with lift truck manufacturers' data collection and analysis systems, such as InfoLink from Crown Equipment and iWarehouse from Raymond, Vanasse says. "They may look at changes in run times and utilization of batteries with our system, then look at the fleet's performance. They can then match up the activity of a truck [powered by] a particular battery with that battery's performance" to find out whether one is affecting the other, he explains.
Or, like the humidity example above, it may involve analyzing data sources that appear to be unrelated. Another example: An analysis of a Raymond customer's maintenance and repair data showed that some trucks were suffering damage to drive wheels and tires, while others were not. A look at the damaged trucks' daily activities found that they all had been driving over a malfunctioning dock plate. The DC's managers were aware of the faulty plate and had planned to replace it when the next year's facility-maintenance budget was released. But because building maintenance and fleet maintenance had separate budgets, nobody knew until it was revealed by the analysis that driving over the dock plate was directly responsible for some $1,000 a month in truck repairs, Rosenberger says. Immediately replacing the dock plate would be more cost-effective than waiting for the following year's budget to kick in.
In that particular case, the customer was able to track down the problem because it assigned drivers and trucks to specific dock areas. But a company that does not follow that approach could use information from its warehouse management system (WMS) to see which jobs directed operators through a particular dock or other section of a warehouse, Rosenberger notes.
A WMS can be an invaluable source of information for this type of analysis. One of Philadelphia Scientific's customers, for instance, was experiencing a reduction in the number of picks per hour. Around the same time, managers noticed that drivers were changing batteries more frequently than would have been expected. Using its WMS, the company saw a correlation between the frequency of battery changes and reduction in hourly picks. The problem, it turned out, was that operators, who were paid by the piece, wanted to make the quickest possible change and get back out on the floor. As a result, some would grab the closest battery rather than ones that were fully charged and fully cooled down. The batteries did not last a full shift, and drivers lost time in the changing room. After getting rid of the older batteries and putting in a battery-tracking system, the DC achieved a 35-percent reduction in battery changes while order picks per hour quickly rose, Vanasse relates.
Tenney says some of I.D. Systems' customers have analyzed fleet telematics and maintenance data in concert with information from their labor management systems (LMS) and timekeeping modules like a payroll log to track down productivity-busters. One grocery distributor used that approach to identify the source of performance variances among lift truck drivers. "Big data can be used very effectively to identify who's falling behind, including looking at what are the four or five attributes that define an operator. Then you can break that down into what he or she is good or bad at," he says. The point is not to punish, but to "be able to look at productivity from all viewpoints and angles within how a job is done." That analysis allowed the customer to identify training program enhancements that helped operators become more effective. Before long, the grocery distributor increased throughput by 15 percent with the same operators and vehicles, according to Tenney.
PREVENTIVE ACTION
Big data analysis and correlation is not always about solving problems. It can also be an effective tool for improving current practices. For example, previously established time standards may suggest that a certain number of order pickers are needed for a particular shift. But correlating WMS data (what needed to be accomplished) with lift truck telematics (how long it actually took) over time may show that the standards in a labor management system (LMS) are no longer accurate, Tenney says.
Integrating data from different data sources can be useful for predicting the future, too. One I.D. Systems customer, a large consumer products supplier to a Fortune 10 company, worked backward from significant repair events to identify patterns in the types of activities that occurred prior to those repairs. "It allows you to say, for example, that when these four things happen, three months later, this problem happens," Tenney explains. Because the customer was able to identify the common thread among unrelated events, it is now able take action before a major failure occurs.
Applying big data analysis to lift truck fleet management is neither easy nor simple. It also takes time, since any analysis must consider large quantities of data over a lengthy period to find and validate patterns. But as the examples in this article show, the payoff in terms of problem solving or prevention could make it well worth the effort.
The supply chain risk management firm Overhaul has landed $55 million in backing, saying the financing will fuel its advancements in artificial intelligence and support its strategic acquisition roadmap.
The equity funding round comes from the private equity firm Springcoast Partners, with follow-on participation from existing investors Edison Partners and Americo. As part of the investment, Springcoast’s Chris Dederick and Holger Staude will join Overhaul’s board of directors.
According to Austin, Texas-based Overhaul, the money comes as macroeconomic and global trade dynamics are driving consequential transformations in supply chains. That makes cargo visibility and proactive risk management essential tools as shippers manage new routes and suppliers.
“The supply chain technology space will see significant consolidation over the next 12 to 24 months,” Barry Conlon, CEO of Overhaul, said in a release. “Overhaul is well-positioned to establish itself as the ultimate integrated solution, delivering a comprehensive suite of tools for supply chain risk management, efficiency, and visibility under a single trusted platform.”
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).
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.