Reflections on Labor Day

Our industry, the logistics and supply chain industry, should reflect more on this great day than just about any other industry.  We are built on the benefits of the work labor does every day.  The number of truck drivers, loaders at rail and air ramps, workers at ports, warehousemen etc. etc. really do drive this industry.  I have not done the analysis however the ratio of labor (stereotypical "blue collar") to "management" or managers has to be one of the largest of any industry.   Think of it, for every truck there is at least one driver!

This industry also is what moves America.  Nothing is built, bought, imported or exported without going through some channel in this industry; and most go through multiple channels in our industry.

So, with that I do reflect on this great industry and the great people who work in it.  I hope they get to spend time with their families - although the nature of the industry is many will not.

Thank you for all you do for your companies, this industry and the United States of America!

Operating Cash Flow (OCF) - Should it Be The "King" Metric?

In deference to the great writing at Supply Chain Digest by David Schneider (David K. Schneider and Company) I will not rewrite the premise of the article he wrote over at SCD titled "The One Best Supply Chain Metric". I will only say I highly encourage you to click on the link above and go to the article and read it if you are even remotely interested in a different metric to follow.

Now, on to my opinion (hopefully you have linked over and read the article):  Operating cash flow is a "king" metric or an "outcome" metric as some may call it.  It is the ultimate scorecard.  Are you truly making real money (i.e., Cash) or are you making "paper money" (through income statement shenanigans) and burning through cash?  Remember, the only thing which allows you to reinvest in your business is the generation of cash.  Measure cash in a big way.

I get very nervous when I hear companies want to "push out payables" not because I think it is just wrong to do but also because of the signal it sends which is their cash from operations is probably going down so they are grabbing a one time cash infusion from suppliers.

Ultimately, cash from operations will determine the success or failure of your business because ultimately you will run out of financing (of which pushing out payables is essentially that - you are financing through your suppliers) and investing options.  When that happens, if you are not generating cash from operations, you will find your "Emperor has no clothes".

The Divergence of the Dow Transports and the Dow

As if on queue from my posting yesterday, Mark Hulbert  (read all his stories here) writes on marketwatch.com about the divergence between the Dow Industrial index and the Dow Transports.  He shows a graph which is very interesting and may help answer the questions I raised yesterday when I asked how the economy (as measured by the stock market) could be so high yet freight growth appears to be crawling along. His graph (reproduced below) shows for some time now the Dow Transports have lagged the overall Dow.  I suspect if you put in the S&P500 you will see this as well.

Dow Transports (in Red) Versus Dow 

So, what does this tell us?  Mark believes it may signify the leading indicator of an overall slowdown in the economy (which of course does not bode well for the transportation industry).  However an interesting point which I had not followed before is his point around the divergence or the relative performance of the Dow Transports to the Dow overall.

He claims (as apparently it is in Dow Theory) that it is precisely this divergence which indicates the slowdown not specifically the fact that that transports are slowing down.

Perhaps it is best to think about it this way, like a good race horse, the Dow is executing one last gasp then it will stop where as the other race horse (i.e., the transports) already crossed the finish line and is stopped.  I don't know if that is a good analogy or not however I will set a favorite to always compare the Dow transports to the Dow overall now and let's see how his analysis plays out.

Where is The Freight? - Cass Reports a Slowdown

The Cass Freight Index report for July 2012 was somewhat anti-climatic for those of us who follow freight and knew we were in the depth of the great slowdown of 2012.  The "phone bank" report (which measures the direction of phone calls from a fictional transportation manager's desk) reported far more incoming calls from carriers looking for freight than outbound calls searching for trucks and this has been true for at least two months now.

OK, I admit that is not a scientific index however if you are close to the business and have a grasp on that general topic it is a highly effective predictor of freight.

Cass Freight Index - July 2012

We see from this index that essentially expenditures have leveled off really since June of 2011 with just a little bump at the beginning of Q2 in 2012.  I attribute both years' early bumps as price / volume "hype" and not reality.  Each of the last two years has begun with a "great hope" of where rates and the economy is going only to become disappointing by summer and a steadying of rates.  A good and experienced transportation manager will see this trend and ensure they do not buy into the early year hype every year.

At the beginning of every year the transportation company sales people will show up with all sorts of data to tell you "this is the year" where we will hit a massive capacity crunch so you better "pay up now" to be taken care of later.  A great story which makes for great industry journalism however the empirical evidence suggests it is, in fact, all hype and those who remain calm in the face of the story will be better off.

A key question though is how can all these companies (shippers) report great earnings, the market is very high ( Dow at 13,175.64 as of this writing) and yet the shipments and movement of goods is stagnant?  I have a few theories (I freely admit these are theories however the data is showing this to be more and more true).

First, the economy is a more services and financial economy than it is a "things" economy.  While we still consume the manufactured goods we generally do not make them.  This means an entire portion of the former economy shipments is gone and that is inbound to manufacturing.  The outbound is still there however the inbound is gone.  The inbound freight is in China and Mexico and other low cost countries.  Those who say they love being in trucking because their jobs cannot move overseas are wrong.  The inbound jobs have moved overseas along with the inbound freight.

This of course follows the manufacturing base so if manufacturing truly does return to the United States (the jury is out on this) then the inbound will follow back.

Second, the great work on sustainability, minimizing packaging, routing efficiencies etc have all led to being able to move the same amount of goods with lesser number of vehicles.  This movement is good for all of us in the world however it does decrease the raw demand for trucks.  Just think of televisions. If the economy sells a million T.V.s this year (a made up number just to illustrate the point) they are all about 1" thick.  10 years ago if 1 million T.V's were sold they all were about 3 feet deep (packaged).  That is a lot of trucks.  

There is not only minimization of the product size but there is also the elimination of the physical product (think e-books. iTunes for CDs etc.).

So, my conclusion is you cannot compare the GDP numbers of today relative to prior year GDP numbers as if there is a straight correlation between the level of GDP and the amount of goods moving in terms of cube size (which is the driver of number of boxes needed). Clearly there is some kind of correlation but it is not as direct as it would have been 10 - 15 years ago.  The economy can grow with less physical product moving.

Finally, the lesson learned of the last two years is clear: "Be Not Afraid"! at the beginning of the year.  Don't buy the hype, be patient, watch the data and let the economy play out.  You get no credit  (regardless of what the sales person tells you) for being an early mover on rate increases.

Looking at Transportation The Way We Look at China's Economy

I have read a lot recently about how you get the real GDP numbers out of China.  Don't bother with the government statistics rather just go look at the piles of coal at the electric power plants.  As China has said their economy is doing fine, observers of coal piles have seen them grow and grow.  Why is this important?  The growth of the coal piles signifies a massive slow down in the demand for electricity which, in turns, means factories are idling.  When factories idle, you have lower GDP.  Voila!  It may not be scientific however doing econometrics with raw data which is flawed is a waste of time.

So, I thought I would use this way to look at transportation and I did not like what I saw.  Driving through Chicago yesterday passing by the big intermodal yards I saw stacks and stacks of 53' containers which clearly had been "mothballed".  They were not at the yard "in transit" rather they were in the yard and parked.  They were stacked high and tight.  This indicates carriers are parking containers which clearly indicates a massive slowdown in freight pretty close to the time where it should be gearing up for the holidays.

All indications are the economy has softened dramatically and this is just another indicator.  I may patent this methodology, go to Chicago every week and take a picture, compare them against previous weeks like you would a bar graph.  My guess is this would be just as good as some of the other "analysis" I have seen.

Natural Gas - A Different View

One of my colleagues sent me a very interesting post which was the opening statement of David L. Greene, Oak Ridge National Laboratory to a committee looking into the uses of Natural Gas.  While I am a big supporter of natural gas in transportation I think it is always good to get a balanced view to any topic.  I have a saying I live by: "Nothing is ever as good as it seems and nothing is ever as bad as it seems".  This is almost always true when there is a "gold rush" into anything.  It was true of the Internet boom in the late '90s, turned out to be true in a devastating way with real estate and now, most likely, it is true in the natural gas boom.  Here are a couple of points:

• Those who think NATGAS will remain wildly below the world price just because it is drilled here in the US may need a lesson in global economics.  Fuel / Oil is a very fungible commodity and because gas can be liquefied it can and will be exported if there is an arbitrage opportunity. 

• In order to keep up with emissions requirements and total GHG reductions, the entire infrastructure (if built) for NATGAS would need to be dismantled by 2050.  I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this statement however it is right in line with what I have heard before which is NATGAS is somewhat of a "bridge" fuel.  It does not satisfy our overall objective to get to sustainable fuels and renewable energy.  But, and this is a big but, how long / far will the "bridge" be?  If you assume 2050 as this article does then it probably does not make sense to build it.  However, if you assume longer then it should be built.  This requires forecasting, a crystal ball and a bit of luck.  None of which I can do very well or possess. 

• The differences in energy in NATGAS v. Diesel means a wholesale transition is highly doubtful.

The conclusions of the article are right in line with what I have been advocating all along:  Conversion to alternative fuels, such as NATGAS, are engineering questions and should be dealt with in this fashion.  A shipper needs to identify specific locations, specific applications and then decide type of fuel, truck etc. etc.  

The future is going to be highly complex as there will not be a "one size fits all".  Unfortunately, that takes 10X Thinking and we, as a species, tend to see the future through a rear view mirror.  We want a new fuel source to replicate the structures of oil and that, I can forecast for sure, will not happen. 

The Food Supply Chain - "Not in Season" Goes The Way of The Busy Signal

An area in supply chain where I have never worked yet have always been wildly impressed with is the food supply chain / cold supply chain.  Today for the 4th of July we were shopping in a Meijer store in our local town.  The amount of fresh fruit and vegetables available was just astonishing.  Were it not for innovation in temperature control and other aspects of this supply chain this type of food would not be available so readily.

Remember when you would want some fruit or vegetable and your parents would tell you it was not available because it was "not in season".

"Not in season" is not something you hear much anymore;  It has gone the way of the busy signal.  Everything is in season somewhere in the world and the sophisticated food supply chains now bring it to you, where ever you are, and amazingly at very low cost.

Of course this comes at a cost of sustainability and there is now a big push to buy local.  Buying local means, however, you will not get everything all the time.  I recently read of a cherry farmer who lost his cherries in Michigan due to the crazy early warm weather we had this year.  He was able to secure cherries in Poland!  If it were not for a sophisticated supply chain this would not be possible.  "Buy local" in this case would mean no cherry pie.

So, thanks to all the great individuals and suppliers working in this supply chain.  Your innovation truly has made the world a better place and I really do believe we have "solved world hunger".

The Highway Bill - Is it Re-regulation in Disguise?

For many who have read my postings you know I personally believe there is a quiet re-regulation of the transportation (mostly full truckload) industry going on in the United States.  Interestingly enough, this is mostly being led by the trucking companies themselves both indirectly and directly.  As regulations have increased the profitability of the trucking companies has increased as well.  It is as if they all just decided competing in an unregulated and highly efficient market was just too much to take.  It is easier to publish a unified tariff and move on.

A stark example of this is in the new highway bill.  In an article written in Logistics Week Bill Graves, the ATA President hails this bill for doing the following:

• Requiring electronic on board recorders for hours of service compliance
• Establishing a central clearing house for Drug and Alcohol testing
• Establishment of standards for systems to provide employers notification of moving violations
• Mandatory testing of new carriers coming into the business around safety (Read: Increase the barrier to entry)

There was a day when any transportation executive would be appalled at the above mainly because it increases regulation, decreases competition and creates barriers to entry to the industry.  This will all result in bad news for shippers as the carriers will use these "new regulations" as an excuse to raise rates.  The savvy shippers will remember who actually put these regulations in place in the first place: The trucking industry. 

One thing the new Highway bill does not do:  Fund infrastructure repairs so our roads and highways become less congested and more conducive to transportation. 

Next up I will deal with how this is being paid for and here is a little hint:  If you think you are getting a defined benefit pension plan, you just contributed!

Impact of Mega Trends - Design for Logistics

As transportation rates and capacity go through a major change one trend which is clearly developing is what I have called "Design for Logistics".  This "mega trend" ensures the logisticians are involved in the design of the product at the very early stages of development and the reason for this is mostly cube utilization.

We have known for quite some time a critical way to reduce spend is just to consume less.  Seems very logical to me and really passes for being a truism in our industry.  However, what has not happened until recently (on a large scale) is people thinking about this before the product is actually designed and built.  As we all know, once the tooling is in place to make the product the goal of the manufacturing group is to run the tool to death; at that point a change in design becomes very costly and almost impossible to execute.

The solution therefore is to get the logistician involved on the front end.  Of course, we do not want to build any "Aztecs" here (really ugly products which were made ugly to make manufacturing and logistics more efficient).  First and foremost, the product has to meet customer needs and, in most cases, actually "wow" the customer.  However, once we identify the critical components of the product which create that emotion with the consumer, we then take the rest of it and design the hell out of it for efficiency in logistics. This usually means cube utilization.

I heard a high level executive for a major truck stop firm say his fuelings were down by 15% and he was attributing it to more "stuff in the back of the trucks" and therefore less trucks.  I am not sure he had real data to support it however given my experience I believe he was right.  And this trend will continue.  The logical and ultimate conclusion is to eliminate shipments completely (aka, Nook/Kindle e-books and iTunes stores).  We know not everything can be digitized however things can be made smaller, packed tighter and assembled at the point of use versus at a factory (Think IKEA furniture).

If you have not instituted this process in your company, and transportation costs are meaningful to your business, you should immediately think about this important topic.  It is far more complex than I have written here and there are clearly ways to be successful at this and ways to screw it up however you should start it now.

The EPA May Have Got it Right

For the last 4 - 6 years we have heard many people grumbling about the need to clean up diesel trucks from an environmental  perspective.  All the same arguments heard whenever new goals are set were rolled out:  "It will cost a fortune", "It will never work", "The technology doesn't exist"... etc. etc.  Same comments made by the automotive companies when the initial clean air act was passed and now we hear them again when it comes to Natural Gas. Now, in an article entitled, The Emissions Dividend in Fleet Owner Magazine, we find out the EPA may have been right.  Thank goodness they stuck to their guns.

What is even more fascinating about the data in the article is it seems to suggest now that all these changes may actually end up in reduced costs for the carriers.  Engines are lasting a million miles, drain intervals are being extended  and other operating costs are improving.  Yes, the acquisition costs of the engines may be higher but it appears there is evidence the total cost of ownership (Generally figured by adding: Acquisition costs+ownership cost-residual revenue) may actually be lower.  It is certainly improving and this is verified by a presentation I was at where a very large trucking company confirmed this phenomenon.

As a shipper it has to make you wonder what all this talk is of "increased costs"?  Yes, there are increased acquisition costs but it is TCO I am concerned about.  If TCO is decreasing that is a good thing isn't it.

This reinforces why, as a shipper, you have to understand the costing model of transportation as well or better than anyone in the industry.

Could you imagine what LA would be like from a smog perspective if the EPA had not stuck to its guns all these years?  It would have been a disaster.  Now, it looks like the same success is coming to the actions concerning diesel trucking.  Congratulations EPA... and my future grandchildren thank you.

Sustainability - Why Not?

I had an interesting revelation today as I drove my hybrid to work. Many people will rationalize why they are not living a sustainable life - leaving a better planet to their heirs than they gained from their parents.  They will go through the "personal business case", they will try to deny the science of the changing planet or, some, will hold onto a belief that it is our God given right to do whatever we want to the planet.

Of course, all of those are what we call excuses and rationalizations.  My observation is many who do not care about sustainability are the exact people who can afford it and are benefited by it.

So, next time you rationalize your unsustainable behavior ask yourself, why not?  Why not take the few extra minutes to recycle?  Why not spend an extra $1K to get a sustainable automobile?  Why not buy local so things don't have to be transported so far.. etc. etc.

The key question for all of us:  Why Not?

Leadership in Logistics is As Important as The Technical

I have always believed leadership in the logistics field is as important, and maybe more important, as the technical aspects of the job.  As a logistics and supply chain executive you will be responsible for leading many people and, in fact, what you do will be far more about leadership than about your technical expertise.  The people you lead will have the technical expertise and the question is can you get them to do what needs to be done and have them use their ingenuity and innovation to go beyond anything you may have thought imaginable.  Some of this was discussed in detail in Adrian Gonzales' article:  Putting Leadership Development Back on Your Calendar.. and Your Budget!  He makes a lot of great points showing how important this is to the logistics and supply chain professional.

There are also many great development programs where you can "sharpen your saw" (Stephen Covey) such as the Executive Masters for International Logistics and Supply Chain Strategy (EMIL-SCS) at Georgia Tech.  This will help you gain technical expertise and help you gain leadership expertise.

Having said all of this, I love to listen to Clay Christensen of Harvard University speak.  He is brilliant in business (The Innovator's Dilemma), he is a moral and good man and he is a great leader.  His new book How Will You Measure Your Life is a "Must Read".  Listen to Professor Christensen speak on leadership, a moral compass and a direction to take in life.  As yourself what makes the "measure of a man"?  How will you judge your life? Will it be by money or by status or will it be by the good you do and what you leave to the rest of the world upon your passing?  I ask you, especially if you are starting out, to think deeply about this topic and question. This is the core question to answer.

When answering, don't forget the great words of John Bogle, Founder of Vanguard Group: "Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted".

T. Boone Pickens on Morning Joe

I saw Boone on Morning Joe and I finally have got around to posting it.  A fantastic interview from a man who is actually working like crazy to save America.  Thank goodness for his common sense and I hope Washington will listen.

For those in the logistics industry, come to the CSCMP 2012 meeting in Atlanta and here him keynote!

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Alternative Energy and ACT Expo in Long Beach

A week ago I attended the ACTexpo in Long Beach and I came away more excited about alternative energy solutions than I was before the event.  The lessons learned and the excitement around alternative energy (Mostly CNG and LNG) were fantastic.

The first item I was genuinely excited about was the transition to these fuels will not be government subsidy driven.  Rather, the pure economics of the conversion will take precedent and those who see the value will convert on their own.  We will truly do "Good for the planet while doing Good for our companies"

The second item and the clear overarching lesson is when a company is going to move to alternative fuels it truly is an engineered solution.  By far, the biggest question was: Is it LNG or CNG for the future? Most respondents would make blanket answers as if it was an all or nothing.  I continue to say you have to think of this as akin to a stock portfolio: Some bonds, some cash, some stocks. And you adjust based on the economics and your personal situation.

Alternative fuels are exactly the same: Some LNG, some CNG, a lot of diesel, maybe some hybrid (we will see where this goes - the hybrid discussions were the most disappointing).  A company thinking of an alternative fuels strategy needs to do deep and INDEPENDENT analysis on what their applications are now and anticipated to be, the pros and cons of each application, the economics and then start putting the program together.  My feeling is those who just jump in because it is "cool" and it makes them look like they are doing "something" may find their portfolio all upside down and it will be tough to correct.

I highly encourage this conference.  A great place to learn a lot.  Just keep your thinking cap on and understand a lot of people are there to sell what they have.  The true answer is analyzing what the shipper wants and then finding the right mix.

Cost Cutting or Restructuring?

I heard the silliest argument on CNBC today asking whether a company is engaged in "cost cutting" or "restructuring".  What the heck is the difference you ask?  A person went on to explain a convoluted explanation when, in fact, they are one and the same thing:  Cost Management.

Cost management is to continually look for the most efficient manner in getting products or services to market.  It is that simple.. You get more units of output for every unit of input.  Whether that input be capital or labor it does not matter in the financial equation.

Further, every company should always be doing this.  It is, in fact, why you are in business and why you "add value" and how you gain competitive advantage.

So, let's stop the silly arguments of what we call it, realize it for what it is and move on.  I could have saved CNBC 5 minutes of their silly showtime.

Turning Over Procurement of Carriers to a 3PL?

I have met many companies recently who not only have outsourced their operations to a 3PL but they have also turned over the procurement and carrier relations functions as well.  I think this is a bad idea.

I believe this for at least three reasons.  First, and the most obvious, is you have turned over the entire budget to a company which, most likely, has conflicting interests to your own.  At some level, the 3PL is interested in making money for their company and many times actions which accomplish this do not also help the client company.  Can you develop complex gainshare algorithms which limit this problem?  Yes, but it is very unlikely you will get them to work.

Second, you limit your ability to exit the 3PL relationship if needed.  Everyone goes into 3PL relationships thinking they will never end and this makes sense.  You do not get married and immediately plan on getting a divorce.  However, in business, ensuring you have an exit strategy is a good and prudent thing to do.  When you turn over the procurement portion to the 3PL you have complicated any exit if needed.

Finally, you will lose critical intellectual capital.  When dealing with a 3PL it is important the shipper maintain the intellectual capital needed to fully understand the areas of warehousing and transportation management.

For all these reasons I would highly recommend shippers retain the procurement function.  Just seems to make sense to me.

Are You Truly Dedicated to Sustainability?

This is a question I ponder all the time. While I am thrilled when people do anything to help the planet, regardless of motives, I do wonder what would happen if people really were dedicated to this important initiative.  While we all know the "big things" to do (i.e., alternative fuels, recycle, etc.) I wonder how much impact we could make if we all just did some of the small things.  So here are just a few things you can do starting TODAY to make the planet a better place:

1.  Regardless of the type of vehicle you own, drive the speed limit.  Reduces emissions and saves gas.  Nothing infuriates me more than to see a hybrid drive driving 80 - 90 miles an hour.

2. Recycle, recycle, recycle.. Including composting

3. Buy less stuff.. Everything you buy comes to you on a truck, using fuel and will eventually have to be disposed of.  Less stuff means less of all that.

4.  Go on a diet and eat locally grown items.  This is an amazing task which is great for everyone.  You will be healthier (I know, I am one to talk but I have lost a lot of weight and will continue!), less food will need to be grown, and less trucks needed to drive all that food around if you buy locally.

Here is a small example:  We are spreading mulch to make our garden better and hopefully return oxygen to the environment.  We needed to put down weed blocker and rather than go buy it, we used old newspaper to do this.  It got rid of waste, we saved money and it eliminated the need for the weed blocker which means one less roll needed to be shipped.  If everyone did this and we reduced the need by thousands (Sorry if you are in the weed blocker industry) then we could actually take trucks off the road, reduce emissions and reduce the need for diesel fuel.

Here are some other ideas from The Wall Street Journal.

This is the way we can all contribute on a small level as we all work hard to make big changes as well.

Just a thought...

Happy Earth Day!!

Sustainability - It is About A Complete and Holistic Strategy

I am somewhat fascinated when I discuss sustainable supply chains with people.  I usually either get an "all or nothing" answer, an answer which is tied to a pet project, or the occasional "sustainability does not matter" answer (thankfully those people now are few and far between).

The clear proposal is good sustainable supply chain programs have to encompass a holistic view involving everything from how products are designed and packaged, how they are shipped, the type of fuel used when shipped and how the product is recovered at the end of life.  You cannot have a true sustainability program without looking at at least all the attributes listed above (they are not all inclusive).

So, the next time you address this topic make sure the "all or nothing" group does not rule the conversation.  Break the problem down into small pieces and attack each one.  This is your best solution.

Ryder Launches Military Veteran Site

Great progress from Ryder Corporation.  I guest blogged on Logistics Viewpoints recently about how great companies will leverage the returning veterans as a great base of fantastic employees.  This week Ryder announced (as reported on Logistics Viewpoints) a new employment website targeted at military veterans. Apparently you can put in your MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) and it will filter to the jobs available for your skill.

Congratulations to Ryder for "getting it" and leveraging the skills of our returning veterans.

Driver Wages - Really Going Up or "Signaling"?

An interesting article trying to quantify what driver wages would have to hit to be at the equilibrium point.  However, this data is meaningless unless you determine what the target price is for transportation services?  At what point to shippers move to substitutes to offset transportation increases?

Some may think substitutes are only in the mode of transportation however that is the least efficient way to substitute.  Shippers are always tweaking around the edges with mode transfers etc. however the most efficient and biggest impact areas for shippers to evaluate are activities such as mfg site selection, load ability, inventory trade offs etc.

At what point do transportation rates get so high that the shipper changes their operational methodologies?  Until you know the answer to this question it is hard to determine what wage rate will be the equilibrium / market clearing wage rate.