Category Archives: Service Management

Quote

SAE International forms microbility data standards consortium

SAE is the former Society of Automotive Engineers, and has been a leader in standard setting for many years.  There is clearly a need for standards around data for shared bike and scooter services, for instance.  The main cooperators are Miami-Dade County, Jump, Spin, and Populus (a data platform).

A similar effort by Los Angeles called the Mobility Data Specification (MDS) led to major complaints from Uber and Lyft, the ride-hailing service operators.   They don’t want to be bound by the rules.  Other cities have been following the MDS as well.

Perhaps such a consortium effort could help resolve these problems. I’m surprised there isn’t communication between the Los Angeles group and the SAE.

screenshot-Smart Cities Dive 2019-05-23   AUTHOR  via SAE International to form microbility data standards consortium | Smart Cities Dive

Quote

Driving Risk Out of S&OP Forecasts

MIT’s Supply Chain blog presented a nice research study by Minhaaj Khan and Srideepti Kidambi and supervised by Dr. Tugba Efendigil.  Their study is a good example of using less data rather than more to design a simple readily explainable approach that increases profits while reducing errors in ordering.  It’s an easy win.  Will it work in all scenarios? No, probably not.  But it also doesn’t take long to try and implement.  Occam’s Razor in action. It’s interesting they did not even need to know about promotions to achieve their gains. In many businesses the promotions can wreck plans. But in this consumer product it turns out they don’t disrupt.

Big data can sometimes confuse us rather than enlighten.

scamit-logo  via Driving Risk Out of S&OP Forecasts

 

Quote

New paper published on Standards and carrier differentiation

My colleagues Chris Clott, Rob Cannizzaro and I just published a paper in the Journal of Shipping and Trade.  In it we propose a new standard called ServiceTerms for classifying container cargo on six ACTION dimensions which are relevant to downstream supply chain service and performance (and to some extent upstream actions).  The six dimensions are

  • Accessorial
  • Customer Service
  • Transport
  • Inventory
  • Orders and paperwork
  • None of the above.

ServiceTerms would function something like INCOTERMS in supply chain contracts. They would provide a standard which every participant in the supply chain– ocean, rail and truck carriers, port terminals, warehousing, drayage, distribution, and so on– would know about in advance and determine how they were going to handle the goods to meet the standard.   The standard includes a specification of limits on the time spent in each step of the journey, based on the total length in time committed to.  These time standards would allow each of the actors to plan their operations to meet their time requirement.  Aiming  for the standard would coordinate the supply chain actors with only limited need for them to work together except on the handoffs. (And these are typically between just two adjacent players in the network.)  The actors in the chain would be enabled to innovate their own individual  techniques to meet their goals.

Like INCOTERMS there would be no specific penalties for failure.  However, there would be measurement and reporting of performance (time in service) at each stage of the end-to-end delivery.  Individual contracts could provide penalties, negotiated by the participants;  everyone involved could keep track of whether a participant was doing his or her bit to meet the standard; or whether some were agreeing to a standard with less than total commitment to making it happen for individual cargoes.

Alliances have been touted as supply chain improvements because they coordinate a few ocean carriers on legs of a journey. But supply chain thinking tells us what matters is the overall source to destination performance, and that requires more involvement, particularly from downstream players such as rail, barge, truck, warehouse, and “last mile”.  To improve their abysmal service performance, alliances have to find ways of coordinating the entire delivery process.  A standard for the process that shippers, handlers,  and carriers can agree and coordinate on is a central element.

We see alliances as entities capable of incubating the ServiceTerms standards, much as the International Chamber of Commerce does for INCOTERMS.   ServiceTerms could then be included in a standard contract for delivery. The specifics of the ServiceTerms  standard should be negotiated during the incubation process; and the process should allow for individual variations by contract, much as INCOTERMS do.

If the majority of cargo went according to the standard, all the supply chain players would work together to make sure the overall term was met.  That should improve everyone’s focus on the goal of making customer service a standard rather than an exception in the container business.

 

 

   via Standard setting and carrier differentiation at seaports | SpringerLink

Cite this article as:

Clott, C.B., Hartman, B.C. & Cannizzaro, R. J. shipp. trd. (2018) 3: 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41072-018-0035-0

A pdf of the article is available here.