Mitch Mac Donald has more than 30 years of experience in both the newspaper and magazine businesses. He has covered the logistics and supply chain fields since 1988. Twice named one of the Top 10 Business Journalists in the U.S., he has served in a multitude of editorial and publishing roles. The leading force behind the launch of Supply Chain Management Review, he was that brand's founding publisher and editorial director from 1997 to 2000. Additionally, he has served as news editor, chief editor, publisher and editorial director of Logistics Management, as well as publisher of Modern Materials Handling. Mitch is also the president and CEO of Agile Business Media, LLC, the parent company of DC VELOCITY and CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.
In an industry teeming with specialists, Ken Miesemer stands apart. Unlike his peers in the consulting world, he's never cultivated an expertise in productivity optimization or supply chain strategy fulfillment. Instead, he's done a little bit of everything during his career—from ERP installations to distribution network design to international logistics. And he makes no apologies for that. In fact, he believes his wide-ranging experience will prove to be a big plus in his new consulting gig at St. Onge and Company.
Before joining St. Onge in January, Miesemer spent 14 years at Hershey Foods, most recently as director of distribution operations. In that post, he oversaw approximately 4 million square feet of DC space in the mainland United States, Hawaii and Puerto Rico. Many might consider a position like that to be the capstone of their career. But for Miesemer, DC management was just another waystation along a journey that has included stints in material management, systems implementation, project management, transportation planning, network design and international operations.
A graduate of Millersville University in Millersville, Pa., Miesemer has continued his education through the American Production and Inventory Control Society (APICS) and Penn State's Logistics certificate programs. Today, he is both a speaker and an educator as well as the author of a book, Start Up of a World Class DC. He currently serves on the Warehousing Education and Research Council's board of directors.
Miesemer recently spoke with DC VELOCITY Editorial Director Mitch Mac Donald about his unconventional career path, his secret for keeping his team interested in their work, and what to avoid when designing a DC network.
Q: Share with us a little bit about your career progression. Where did you begin and how did you end up where you are?
A: We are definitely talking about a tossed salad of jobs. I have been fortunate to have had experiences in areas like materials management, production planning, and transportation operations/planning. I spent years putting in MRP [materials requirements planning] and ERP [enterprise resource planning] systems, which were followed by supply chain planning and execution software implementations. I moved into distribution and warehousing and led several U.S. network redesigns. Recently, I had an opportunity to work in international logistics, exports, imports and customs. I guess I would say that having been moved around has really helped me to understand supply chain. It has been very positive for my career.
Q: It has certainly given you a broad view.
A: Absolutely. While I didn't get to focus as much on any one particular area as I might have liked, it certainly helps to understand the big picture. This is especially valuable when you drive change and must understand the impact on the organization. I have been very lucky to work in multiple areas and certainly recommend a broad scope to others.
Q: What prompted your decision to leave Hershey Foods?
A: That's a good question. I had a lot of fun there. It was a good run. But most of the tough work was completed, and I was starting to get a little bored. So now I'm back in the fray again. I can't talk about my clients, but I am involved in two very exciting network redesign projects. It is what I love doing.
Q: What do you see as the skills needed to succeed in the logistics profession?
A: I would say that you've got to be curious and want to continuously learn. You must be able to think strategically and not get caught up in the tactical stuff. If you find you're spending too much time on, let's call it the tactical piece, you try to refocus some energies back into where you need to be in three to five years. I think one of the best ways to do that is with your team. Spend some time doing strategy visioning. Talk about the near-term initiatives, but also talk about what the next big project will be. You can put a lot of energy into the business if you get people excited about where they are going.
Q: It's all about the journey, not the destination.
A: Right. I think people often focus only on what they've got on their plate right now, but you really have to look several projects down the road or several years out.
Q: Essentially, you've got to keep yourself and your people out of the trap of "I don't have any time to think today; I'm too busy doing my job."
A: Absolutely. If you focus solely on day-to-day tactics, you'll definitely fall behind and won't be leading your team.
Q: What do you consider the biggest accomplishment of your supply chain career to date?
A: The most exciting project—the one that really stretched me—was Hershey's Eastern Distribution Center III project. That project entailed building a 1.2 million-squarefoot DC—the largest distribution center Hershey had ever built—from the ground up and on a fast-track schedule.
Q: What made it so special for you personally?
A: Well, it was big. Certainly I had done warehousing and distribution work in the past, but nothing on this scale. I had responsibility for most of the projects to get the building up and running. The project also included selecting both a new WMS [warehouse management system] and a new 3PL [third-party logistics service provider]. On top of that, we were redesigning processes, metrics, and financials to be world class. In the past, every Hershey distribution center had been run independently. They had separate systems and nothing was standardized. The vision was to put up a world-class center that we could use as a model as we added more facilities.
Q: Turning to another topic, I know you have some strong views on the dangers of complacency. You argue that logisticians should aspire to something more than just a smooth-running logistics operation whose workings have become "transparent" or invisible to others.
A: You're absolutely right. I believe that as logisticians, we cannot be satisfied with transparency. Several years ago, one of my [initiatives focused on going beyond simply] delivering to customers' expectations. We implemented a program we called "Distribution Alliance" to actually reach out and build relationships with customers, and to create more of a competitive advantage in the marketplace. We didn't want to [be satisfied with just delivering orders on time]. We wanted sales people to be delighted with the service. As we progressed, the sales force commented that the services we were providing [allowed them to spend more of their time on] sales and less on discussing problems with customers. I think that we were wrong in the past to be satisfied with simply delivering goods on time, damage free, etc., etc.
Q: What is the next big thing in supply chain?
A: I'm going to give you two areas. First of all, we see more and more people jumping into low-cost, offshore sourcing. In my opinion, it's putting a strain on our distribution networks. The old network designs aren't optimal anymore. Everyone seems to be going to the same place, where the ports are. There is a huge strain on labor, carrier capacity, highway congestion, and so forth.
Q: It seems that companies are continuing to cluster around what we all know are bottlenecks.
A: Absolutely. That's really the point. We need to look at ways to spread out that volume. I have talked to some companies that are looking closely at bringing goods in through Mexican ports and then sending them into the United States via rail.
We really need to start looking at the big picture, not short-term issues like how to squeeze another nickel out of our manufacturing costs. The hidden costs of global supply chains are often overlooked. In some of the congested port areas, labor is in short supply. You see companies forced to lower their standards when hiring workers. Turnover is very high and productivity is dropping off rapidly.
Q: It sounds similar to the truck driver shortage, but we
don't hear much about it in terms of DC operations.
A: You're right and that gets me to the next point. I recently attended a large conference that featured a panel discussion on today's transportation issues—fuel costs, highway congestion, problems at ports, and so on. I got the impression the panelists were throwing their hands up and saying, "Fuel is going up, we need to pay drivers more, and there's not much we can do." But I didn't hear anyone talk about things that we can manage, like the amount of driver and equipment time wasted when we make a driver wait six to eight hours to offload. As an industry, we've got to start focusing on keeping the drivers and equipment moving.
The other thing that just amazes me is how much equipment is moving at partial capacity. The fact is, everyone is looking for more frequent replenishments—you know, smaller orders. We've got to work together to maximize this limited capacity.
Q: Who do you think should champion this cause—associations, elected officials, industry professionals, journalists?
A: It should start with industry leaders.
Q: Could the answer be these distribution alliances you keep referencing?
A: Possibly. It's a concept that I developed some years ago as we were rebuilding a U.S. distribution network. I wanted more out of our group than just another transparent back-end function. My feeling was that we had an opportunity to synchronize with customers. The process was started by making simple customer calls. It turned into a much more focused effort over time.
Q: Are you saying it's as simple as opening channels of communication?
A: In some ways, yes. You have to start somewhere. I generally recommend starting with a couple of strategic accounts. When you start meeting with them and sharing tours, you'll quickly learn whether they have any interest in working together to cut down on waste.
Q: As you know, logistics and supply chain professionals have long clamored for a seat at the boardroom table. Are we there yet?
A: I think a lot more companies understand the strategic importance of supply chain. However, a number of companies still are not there. They don't recognize the competitive nature of supply chain. They're just assuming that once it gets to a certain point of excellence, it will sustain itself. Focusing on cost and basic service alone will not drive competitive advantage.
Q: So they set it up the way they want it and then put it on autopilot. They're not asking themselves where they're going to be 18 months from now or what the next project will be.
A: Unfortunately, business change is so rapid that unless you have the best people driving and responding to change, you will fall behind. I do see companies failing to devote high-level expertise to their supply chain. The companies that recognize the value and have senior supply chain leadership positions will win.
Q: Any closing thoughts?
A: You hear about so many changes in the supply chain—rapid developments in systems, people and the processes that drive this industry. It is a time when we, as supply chain professionals, had better keep current if we are to stay in the business.
Most of the apparel sold in North America is manufactured in Asia, meaning the finished goods travel long distances to reach end markets, with all the associated greenhouse gas emissions. On top of that, apparel manufacturing itself requires a significant amount of energy, water, and raw materials like cotton. Overall, the production of apparel is responsible for about 2% of the world’s total greenhouse gas emissions, according to a report titled
Taking Stock of Progress Against the Roadmap to Net Zeroby the Apparel Impact Institute. Founded in 2017, the Apparel Impact Institute is an organization dedicated to identifying, funding, and then scaling solutions aimed at reducing the carbon emissions and other environmental impacts of the apparel and textile industries.
The author of this annual study is researcher and consultant Michael Sadowski. He wrote the first report in 2021 as well as the latest edition, which was released earlier this year. Sadowski, who is also executive director of the environmental nonprofit
The Circulate Initiative, recently joined DC Velocity Group Editorial Director David Maloney on an episode of the “Logistics Matters” podcast to discuss the key findings of the research, what companies are doing to reduce emissions, and the progress they’ve made since the first report was issued.
A: While companies in the apparel industry can set their own sustainability targets, we realized there was a need to give them a blueprint for actually reducing emissions. And so, we produced the first report back in 2021, where we laid out the emissions from the sector, based on the best estimates [we could make using] data from various sources. It gives companies and the sector a blueprint for what we collectively need to do to drive toward the ambitious reduction [target] of staying within a 1.5 degrees Celsius pathway. That was the first report, and then we committed to refresh the analysis on an annual basis. The second report was published last year, and the third report came out in May of this year.
Q: What were some of the key findings of your research?
A: We found that about half of the emissions in the sector come from Tier Two, which is essentially textile production. That includes the knitting, weaving, dyeing, and finishing of fabric, which together account for over half of the total emissions. That was a really important finding, and it allows us to focus our attention on the interventions that can drive those emissions down.
Raw material production accounts for another quarter of emissions. That includes cotton farming, extracting gas and oil from the ground to make synthetics, and things like that. So we now have a really keen understanding of the source of our industry’s emissions.
Q: Your report mentions that the apparel industry is responsible for about 2% of global emissions. Is that an accurate statistic?
A: That’s our best estimate of the total emissions [generated by] the apparel sector. Some other reports on the industry have apparel at up to 8% of global emissions. And there is a commonly misquoted number in the media that it’s 10%. From my perspective, I think the best estimate is somewhere under 2%.
We know that globally, humankind needs to reduce emissions by roughly half by 2030 and reach net zero by 2050 to hit international goals. [Reaching that target will require the involvement of] every facet of the global economy and every aspect of the apparel sector—transportation, material production, manufacturing, cotton farming. Through our work and that of others, I think the apparel sector understands what has to happen. We have highlighted examples of how companies are taking action to reduce emissions in the roadmap reports.
Q: What are some of those actions the industry can take to reduce emissions?
A: I think one of the positive developments since we wrote the first report is that we’re seeing companies really focus on the most impactful areas. We see companies diving deep on thermal energy, for example. With respect to Tier Two, we [focus] a lot of attention on things like ocean freight versus air. There’s a rule of thumb I’ve heard that indicates air freight is about 10 times the cost [of ocean] and also produces 10 times more greenhouse gas emissions.
There is money available to invest in sustainability efforts. It’s really exciting to see the funding that’s coming through for AI [artificial intelligence] and to see that individual companies, such as H&M and Lululemon, are investing in real solutions in their supply chains. I think a lot of concrete actions are being taken.
And yet we know that reducing emissions by half on an absolute basis by 2030 is a monumental undertaking. So I don’t want to be overly optimistic, because I think we have a lot of work to do. But I do think we’ve got some amazing progress happening.
Q: You mentioned several companies that are starting to address their emissions. Is that a result of their being more aware of the emissions they generate? Have you seen progress made since the first report came out in 2021?
A: Yes. When we published the first roadmap back in 2021, our statistics showed that only about 12 companies had met the criteria [for setting] science-based targets. In 2024, the number of apparel, textile, and footwear companies that have set targets or have commitments to set targets is close to 500. It’s an enormous increase. I think they see the urgency more than other sectors do.
We have companies that have been working at sustainability for quite a long time. I think the apparel sector has developed a keen understanding of the impacts of climate change. You can see the impacts of flooding, drought, heat, and other things happening in places like Bangladesh and Pakistan and India. If you’re a brand or a manufacturer and you have operations and supply chains in these places, I think you understand what the future will look like if we don’t significantly reduce emissions.
Q: There are different categories of emission levels, depending on the role within the supply chain. Scope 1 are “direct” emissions under the reporting company’s control. For apparel, this might be the production of raw materials or the manufacturing of the finished product. Scope 2 covers “indirect” emissions from purchased energy, such as electricity used in these processes. Scope 3 emissions are harder to track, as they include emissions from supply chain partners both upstream and downstream.
Now companies are finding there are legislative efforts around the world that could soon require them to track and report on all these emissions, including emissions produced by their partners’ supply chains. Does this mean that companies now need to be more aware of not only what greenhouse gas emissions they produce, but also what their partners produce?
A: That’s right. Just to put this into context, if you’re a brand like an Adidas or a Gap, you still have to consider the Scope 3 emissions. In particular, there are the so-called “purchased goods and services,” which refers to all of the embedded emissions in your products, from farming cotton to knitting yarn to making fabric. Those “purchased goods and services” generally account for well above 80% of the total emissions associated with a product. It’s by far the most significant portion of your emissions.
Leading companies have begun measuring and taking action on Scope 3 emissions because of regulatory developments in Europe and, to some extent now, in California. I do think this is just a further tailwind for the work that the industry is doing.
I also think it will definitely ratchet up the quality requirements of Scope 3 data, which is not yet where we’d all like it to be. Companies are working to improve that data, but I think the regulatory push will make the quality side increasingly important.
Q: Overall, do you think the work being done by the Apparel Impact Institute will help reduce greenhouse gas emissions within the industry?
A: When we started this back in 2020, we were at a place where companies were setting targets and knew their intended destination, but what they needed was a blueprint for how to get there. And so, the roadmap [provided] this blueprint and identified six key things that the sector needed to do—from using more sustainable materials to deploying renewable electricity in the supply chain.
Decarbonizing any sector, whether it’s transportation, chemicals, or automotive, requires investment. The Apparel Impact Institute is bringing collective investment, which is so critical. I’m really optimistic about what they’re doing. They have taken a data-driven, evidence-based approach, so they know where the emissions are and they know what the needed interventions are. And they’ve got the industry behind them in doing that.
The global air cargo market’s hot summer of double-digit demand growth continued in August with average spot rates showing their largest year-on-year jump with a 24% increase, according to the latest weekly analysis by Xeneta.
Xeneta cited two reasons to explain the increase. First, Global average air cargo spot rates reached $2.68 per kg in August due to continuing supply and demand imbalance. That came as August's global cargo supply grew at its slowest ratio in 2024 to-date at 2% year-on-year, while global cargo demand continued its double-digit growth, rising +11%.
The second reason for higher rates was an ocean-to-air shift in freight volumes due to Red Sea disruptions and e-commerce demand.
Those factors could soon be amplified as e-commerce shows continued strong growth approaching the hotly anticipated winter peak season. E-commerce and low-value goods exports from China in the first seven months of 2024 increased 30% year-on-year, including shipments to Europe and the US rising 38% and 30% growth respectively, Xeneta said.
“Typically, air cargo market performance in August tends to follow the July trend. But another month of double-digit demand growth and the strongest rate growths of the year means there was definitely no summer slack season in 2024,” Niall van de Wouw, Xeneta’s chief airfreight officer, said in a release.
“Rates we saw bottoming out in late July started picking up again in mid-August. This is too short a period to call a season. This has been a busy summer, and now we’re at the threshold of Q4, it will be interesting to see what will happen and if all the anticipation of a red-hot peak season materializes,” van de Wouw said.
The report cites data showing that there are approximately 1.7 million workers missing from the post-pandemic workforce and that 38% of small firms are unable to fill open positions. At the same time, the “skills gap” in the workforce is accelerating as automation and AI create significant shifts in how work is performed.
That information comes from the “2024 Labor Day Report” released by Littler’s Workplace Policy Institute (WPI), the firm’s government relations and public policy arm.
“We continue to see a labor shortage and an urgent need to upskill the current workforce to adapt to the new world of work,” said Michael Lotito, Littler shareholder and co-chair of WPI. “As corporate executives and business leaders look to the future, they are focused on realizing the many benefits of AI to streamline operations and guide strategic decision-making, while cultivating a talent pipeline that can support this growth.”
But while the need is clear, solutions may be complicated by public policy changes such as the upcoming U.S. general election and the proliferation of employment-related legislation at the state and local levels amid Congressional gridlock.
“We are heading into a contentious election that has already proven to be unpredictable and is poised to create even more uncertainty for employers, no matter the outcome,” Shannon Meade, WPI’s executive director, said in a release. “At the same time, the growing patchwork of state and local requirements across the U.S. is exacerbating compliance challenges for companies. That, coupled with looming changes following several Supreme Court decisions that have the potential to upend rulemaking, gives C-suite executives much to contend with in planning their workforce-related strategies.”
Stax Engineering, the venture-backed startup that provides smokestack emissions reduction services for maritime ships, will service all vessels from Toyota Motor North America Inc. visiting the Toyota Berth at the Port of Long Beach, according to a new five-year deal announced today.
Beginning in 2025 to coincide with new California Air Resources Board (CARB) standards, STAX will become the first and only emissions control provider to service roll-on/roll-off (ro-ros) vessels in the state of California, the company said.
Stax has rapidly grown since its launch in the first quarter of this year, supported in part by a $40 million funding round from investors, announced in July. It now holds exclusive service agreements at California ports including Los Angeles, Long Beach, Hueneme, Benicia, Richmond, and Oakland. The firm has also partnered with individual companies like NYK Line, Hyundai GLOVIS, Equilon Enterprises LLC d/b/a Shell Oil Products US (Shell), and now Toyota.
Stax says it offers an alternative to shore power with land- and barge-based, mobile emissions capture and control technology for shipping terminal and fleet operators without the need for retrofits.
In the case of this latest deal, the Toyota Long Beach Vehicle Distribution Center imports about 200,000 vehicles each year on ro-ro vessels. Stax will keep those ships green with its flexible exhaust capture system, which attaches to all vessel classes without modification to remove 99% of emitted particulate matter (PM) and 95% of emitted oxides of nitrogen (NOx). Over the lifetime of this new agreement with Toyota, Stax estimated the service will account for approximately 3,700 hours and more than 47 tons of emissions controlled.
“We set out to provide an emissions capture and control solution that was reliable, easily accessible, and cost-effective. As we begin to service Toyota, we’re confident that we can meet the needs of the full breadth of the maritime industry, furthering our impact on the local air quality, public health, and environment,” Mike Walker, CEO of Stax, said in a release. “Continuing to establish strong partnerships will help build momentum for and trust in our technology as we expand beyond the state of California.”
That result showed that driver wages across the industry continue to increase post-pandemic, despite a challenging freight market for motor carriers. The data comes from ATA’s “Driver Compensation Study,” which asked 120 fleets, more than 150,000 employee drivers, and 14,000 independent contractors about their wage and benefit information.
Drilling into specific categories, linehaul less-than-truckload (LTL) drivers earned a median annual amount of $94,525 in 2023, while local LTL drivers earned a median of $80,680. The median annual compensation for drivers at private carriers has risen 12% since 2021, reaching $95,114 in 2023. And leased-on independent contractors for truckload carriers were paid an annual median amount of $186,016 in 2023.
The results also showed how the demographics of the industry are changing, as carriers offered smaller referral and fewer sign-on bonuses for new drivers in 2023 compared to 2021 but more frequently offered tenure bonuses to their current drivers and with a greater median value.
"While our last study, conducted in 2021, illustrated how drivers benefitted from the strongest freight environment in a generation, this latest report shows professional drivers' earnings are still rising—even in a weaker freight economy," ATA Chief Economist Bob Costello said in a release. "By offering greater tenure bonuses to their current driver force, many fleets appear to be shifting their workforce priorities from recruitment to retention."