Most logistics innovation is a dashboard.
It reports the problem faster without removing it. You still get the email saying your container was rolled — it just arrives in a nicer interface. This page is about the difference between technology that watches freight and technology that changes what happens to it, and which of the two we have actually bothered with.
Five unglamorous changes that beat every impressive one
None of these would survive a conference keynote. All five removed more failed shipments than anything with a name ending in "-AI" that we have looked at.
Not a system — a rule about sequencing. Preparing the entry while goods are still moving rather than when they arrive removes the single largest cause of avoidable delay, and it costs nothing but discipline.
The value is not the tracking, it is which direction the data flows. When status lands in your system, your support team answers customers without emailing us first. Everyone underestimates how much time that returns.
"Your shipment is delayed" is a notification. "Your shipment is delayed, here are two ways to recover the date and what each costs" is a decision. Most platforms send the first and call it visibility.
Deeply unexciting, and it eliminates a whole class of error. Most wrong addresses and mis-keyed weights come from re-entering the same shipment for the ninth time.
The least technological item on this list and arguably the most effective. Automation routes work efficiently to whoever is free; it also means nobody owns the problem when the routing fails.
What we run, what we are watching, and what we are not sold on
Published with four states rather than the usual two, because "we are exploring it" is how most of this industry describes technology it has read about. If a row below says Watching, we do not have it. If it says Not persuaded, we have looked and decided against — and we will tell you why if you ask.
Milestone tracking and proof of delivery
Status captured at each handover and made available to you and, where you want it, to your customer. Mature, unglamorous, and the baseline everything else is built on.
Customer portal — quote, book, track, documents
One place holding your history, addresses and saved lanes. The measure of a good portal is how rarely you have to phone about something it should have told you.
System integration — API, connectors and file transfer
Orders arriving from your systems rather than being re-typed. Scheduled file transfer is deeply unfashionable and still the right answer at a lot of volumes.
In-house customs systems
Classification, entry preparation and filing handled on our own systems by our own brokers rather than passed to a third party whose queue we do not control.
Predictive ETAs and machine-learning routing
Genuinely useful where there is enough history on a lane, and confidently wrong where there is not. The hard part is not the prediction, it is communicating uncertainty without making the output useless.
Condition monitoring — temperature, shock, humidity
The strongest case of anything on this list, because cold chain cargo fails invisibly and a continuous record is the only defence. The constraint is device cost per shipment, not capability.
Warehouse robotics and automated picking
Real, proven and economically obvious — above a volume threshold. Below it, the capital cost buys a worse operation than people do. The question is never whether it works, only whether you are big enough.
Autonomous vehicles and drone delivery
Progressing steadily in constrained environments — ports, yards, fixed routes. Some way from the general case, and further still from the regulatory approval that would let it carry your freight.
Blockchain and distributed ledger for supply chain
More than a decade of pilots and very few durable deployments. Most problems it is offered for — document sharing, provenance, single source of truth — turn out to be trust and process problems that a shared database solves more cheaply.
Four questions before anything touches your freight
Applied to every tool we have adopted and every one we have turned down. They are not sophisticated. They are just asked honestly, which is the part most procurement processes skip.
Does it remove a failure, or report it faster?
Both have value, but only one is worth what these things cost. A tool that tells you sooner that your container was rolled has not stopped your container being rolled.
Faster news is worth paying for only when it buys you a decision you could not otherwise have made in time.
Does the customer have to change anything?
Technology that requires you to adopt our way of working has moved our problem onto you and called it a feature. The test is whether it fits the systems and processes you already run.
If a tool only works when everybody uses the same platform, it is a network effect for the vendor, not a benefit for you.
What happens when it is wrong?
Every system is wrong sometimes. What matters is whether the failure is visible and recoverable, or silent and discovered later by a customer.
A confident wrong ETA is worse than no ETA, because people plan around it. Anything we adopt has to be able to say it does not know.
Would we still want it if nobody could see we had it?
The uncomfortable one. A surprising amount of logistics technology exists to appear on a slide during a tender rather than to move freight more reliably.
If the honest answer is that we would not bother without the credit, it is marketing, and we would rather spend the money on the operation.
Ask any provider to show you the thing, not the slide.
Us included. If a capability matters to your decision, ask to see it working on a real shipment rather than in a demo environment — and ask what happens when it is wrong. The answers separate the operators from the brochures faster than any tender document.
- Track
-
Start ShippingGet a Quote Ship Now Request a Business AccountDocument & PackageExpress Shipping Retailers / Volume ShippingFreightExplore Freight Services OPS for Your Business
- Customer Service
- Customer Portal Logins
- Check Out What OPS Provides