Sure they're cheaper than you are, capable of working 24/7 and getting smarter all the time. But there's no need to dust off your resume. "Intelligent" software programs still have a long way to go.
David Maloney has been a journalist for more than 35 years and is currently the group editorial director for DC Velocity and Supply Chain Quarterly magazines. In this role, he is responsible for the editorial content of both brands of Agile Business Media. Dave joined DC Velocity in April of 2004. Prior to that, he was a senior editor for Modern Materials Handling magazine. Dave also has extensive experience as a broadcast journalist. Before writing for supply chain publications, he was a journalist, television producer and director in Pittsburgh. Dave combines a background of reporting on logistics with his video production experience to bring new opportunities to DC Velocity readers, including web videos highlighting top distribution and logistics facilities, webcasts and other cross-media projects. He continues to live and work in the Pittsburgh area.
Remember that famous scene from 2001: A Space Odyssey when the supercomputer HAL seizes control of the spacecraft, systematically murdering crew members and engaging in a malicious game of cat and mouse with the sole survivor? That same theme's been explored more recently in the Matrix movies, where "thinking" machines running "intelligent" software wield power over what's left of the world with bone-chilling results. Memorable as those images may be, they're hardly an accurate depiction of the state of intelligent software. In the warehouse environment, at least, the machines are still under the control of their human overseers, and visions of a fully automated, hyper-networked supply chain remain just that—a vision.
That's not to say software developers haven't made significant strides toward creating supply chain software that mimics human intelligence. Systems already exist that monitor conditions within a distribution facility or transportation network and report on any abnormalities, or "exceptions," encountered. Someday, they may be able to provide a list of recommendations for humans to act on ... or even take corrective actions on their own.
"It's a brave new world as far as technology is concerned," says Alison Smith, senior research analyst for AMR Research. "[M]ore and more intelligence is being put into devices. We are seeing more intelligent software being embedded into sensors and controls."
Right now, however, the day when thinking machines will be able to make supply chain decisions and reduce the human workload remains far off. At this point, "intelligence" is still largely limited to sensors and controls that monitor and report two key types of information: an item's location and its status. The advantages are obvious: With access to information on an item's location within a DC (and eventually anywhere in the supply chain), a manager has a good idea of whether the product can be expected to ship on time or will be delayed. Some companies are also using transportation management systems (TMS) that can issue status alerts to a computer, pager or cell phone when an order does not make the truck. Information on an order's status provides similar advantages. If a manager is alerted that some of the components in a shipment have failed to come together at a pack station or that there's not enough inventory in a pick face to complete the next wave of orders, he or she can take steps to solve a minor problem before it escalates into a full-blown and costly crisis.
"Intelligence will help us reduce those things in the supply chain that now have more expensive fixes," says Larry Lapide, research director at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Center for Transportation and Logistics. Most supply chain managers currently don't have enough information to act quickly, he explains. As a form of insurance, they build up buffer inventories. And when faced with delays, they have little choice but to throw money at the problem, scheduling employees to work overtime or air freighting a shipment at considerable added expense. With good intelligence, problems can be detected earlier, and cheaper fixes made.
This type of monitoring capability has already paid off for a lucky few. Procter & Gamble, for example, recently watched its on-time performance climb after installing a TMS from LeanLogistics that's now being rolled out across its enterprise. LeanLogistics says that before the pilot, P&G, which was looking to bolster its 94-percent on-time delivery rate, chose six "events" within its delivery process to monitor for possible corrective action: Did the carrier accept the assignment? Was the trailer available on time? Did loading begin on time? Did loading complete on time? Did the trailer leave the gate on time? Did the carrier report any delays en route?
In the end, Procter & Gamble discovered that about half the delays could be traced to internal problems and the other half to its carriers, and it used what it learned to fix the problems. In short order, the company, which had gone into the pilot hoping to increase its on-time performance by 1 percentage point, actually upped performance by 3 percentage points—to 97 percent.
Is data fact?
But before software developers can get to the next level— that is, creating software that goes beyond simple monitoring—they face an enormous hurdle: gathering, sifting, correlating and analyzing mountains of data that eventually must be distributed to decision makers. As daunting as that task may sound, some experts believe programmers will receive a giant leg up from recent advances in visibility software and radio-frequency identification (RFID) technology.
RFID tags, in fact, have the potential to automate the entire data-gathering process. Even the simplest tags, the read-only models, can report on the status of products as they make their way through the supply chain—announcing to anyone with a reader when and where the item was manufactured, for example. The more sophisticated tags, those with read/write capabilities, allow users to update their information as they move through the chain, providing such valuable tracking data as where each item has been, who touched it, what value-added services have been performed and when each step in the process occurred.
Initially, the tags' information will be used inside the DC, processed through intelligent modules within warehouse and transportation management software suites. With those data, managers will be able to confirm at a glance that, say, replenishment tasks have been completed, orders picked properly, labor deployed where needed and orders shipped on time. Eventually, data from other parts of the supply chain can also be written to the tags, and then reported back to these software systems. This information will allow managers to determine the exact whereabouts of items in transit and even share the data with trading partners.
But that brings us to the next problem, what do you do with the flood of data that RFID can potentially provide? Work on that question is already under way. "Researchers are now studying ways to employ RFID," says Richard Pibernik, professor of supply chain management at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology-Zaragoza International Logistics Program in Spain. For example, Pibernik and his colleagues are looking at ways in which new technologies can provide real-time visibility into order fulfillment. This will give managers, suppliers and customers continuous access to status information throughout the order cycle. A customer who orders a plasma TV, for example, would automatically be advised at the time he places the order whether the item is in stock and if so, when he can expect it on his doorstep.
Still, even if RFID someday goes mainstream, there's no guarantee that the age of the thinking machine will follow close on its heels. The real problem has never been data gathering—Pibernik notes that the basic infrastructure for gathering location and status data already exists with bar codes. The true challenge is the analysis. "[W]e don't have the technology to process the data and filter the important information to make decisions," he says. "We lack the intelligent modules needed to extract and evaluate the data. Most companies are not ready to spend time and resources on it yet."
AMR's Smith adds that a logical next step is an integration of information gathered from sensors and controls into warehousing management and enterprise resource planning systems. But it won't happen tomorrow. "We are looking to 2008 before we see much integration with those systems," she says. "It's a very new market."
Thinking systems
Will we ever see a true "lights out" facility where machines take total charge of the distribution operation? Most experts don't think so.
First of all, machines simply still have a lot to "learn." "You need a full history to ëpopulate' the learning. Not enough companies have this history yet," says MIT's Lapide.
But even when they've learned all they need to, the machines still must be programmed to respond in a certain way whenever they encounter a situation that can be tied to their history—much the way a so-called self-regulating thermostat is programmed to signal the furnace to kick in once it detects a drop in temperature. That very simple example of a self-regulating response, however, is a far cry from actual machine "thinking," which would require millions of bits of data to be analyzed and compared to its history before determining a precise resolution.
"Once self regulation is proved to work, then we can create adapting systems with learning capabilities, but that's a long way off," says Zaragoza's Pibernik. He says it would mean developing programs that would cover every conceivable situation that could arise in the supply chain.
And it's not at all clear that such an effort would pay off. "You would not get enough value out of the system to replace human intelligence," Pibernik says. There are other obstacles as well, he adds, citing a lack of industry standards, a dearth of corporate resources, and the absence of a clear picture as to what results logisticians want to achieve through intelligence.
For those reasons, most researchers expect breakthroughs in intelligent software to be limited to specific areas and functions. "We will have supply chains that are more automated," says MIT's Lapide. "Computers will [make] some of the routine decisions, but humans will still be handling the exceptions. The software can't know everything. It can support, but not replace."
"With enough time and money, all things are possible," adds AMR's Smith. "But I don't think there will be a financial incentive to have that much automation within the next 10 years."
Ask 10 warehousing experts about the optimal level of inventory visibility, and you'll get a dozen different responses.
Sure, most would agree on the importance of accurate inventory counts—knowing exactly how many items are in every carton, crate, and pallet stored in the facility. But depending on what type of goods the warehouse handles, opinions will vary widely on how much accuracy is good enough and what's the best technique for counting.
Fortunately, we live in an age when there have never been so many tools available to take those counts. Workers can perform cycle counts with paper and clipboards, as they've done for decades. Or a facility can deploy internet of things (IoT) sensors at dock doors, computer-vision cameras mounted on conveyors, handheld RFID (radio-frequency identification) scanners, wearable devices like ring scanners or voice-picking headsets, autonomous mobile robots (AMRs), or even indoor flying drones.
In fact, many companies are now using those devices to obtain snapshots of the inventory held in various locations throughout their DCs. But assembling those snapshots into a full panoramic view remains an almost mythical pursuit, according to John Santagate, vice president, robotics at Körber Supply Chain Software. "Visibility remains the unicorn in warehouse operations," Santagate says. "No matter how much automation and RFID you have, you need to tie it all together. Visibility for visibility's sake is somewhat useless."
In other words, simply collecting data isn't enough these days. To master the inventory visibility game, a company must be able to analyze the information it collects; compare the results to the records in, say, its warehouse management system (WMS) or order management system (OMS); and quickly act on any discrepancies. Done right, these steps can lead to a number of follow-on benefits, including the ability to track and trace on demand, determine optimal restocking rates, and build the supply chain resilience needed to weather the inevitable supply disruptions.
However, few companies have reached that goal, Santagate says. "You need to know what's in the entire network, where it is, and how to capitalize on it. Most folks are still chasing that and making [only] incremental improvements."
CLOSING THE GAP
Santagate's assessment is backed up by a study conducted last August among 1,000 U.S. supply chain managers by Impinj, a developer of RFID solutions and software. In its "Supply Chain Integrity Outlook 2025" research report, the firm found that the majority (91%) of supply chain managers believe they are equipped to drive accurate supply chain visibility, but only a third (33%) can consistently obtain accurate, real-time inventory data.
According to Impinj's chief revenue officer, Jeff Dossett, that data accuracy gap leaves many struggling to attain the level of insights, visibility, and accuracy required to drive confidence in their supply chain and respond quickly to market changes. "Supply chain managers continue to face data blind spots that prevent them from ensuring secure, reliable, and adaptable supply chains," Dossett said in a release announcing the study's findings. "It's essential that organizations address the data accuracy gap by putting technology in place to surface accurate data that fuels the real-time, actionable insights and visibility needed to ensure supply chain resilience."
HOW SHARP IS YOUR VISION?
That raises a couple of questions for DC managers seeking to bridge that visibility gap: How much detail is good enough, and how can they make the optimal use of the data they collect?
Those are tricky questions to answer, because many warehouse managers probably don't realize what they're missing, says Chris Coote, head of product at Dexory, a London-based company that makes inventory-counting robots.
In fact, enhanced visibility sometimes brings to light underlying problems that managers didn't realize they had. "Visibility reveals what people don't know about their warehouse," Coote says. For example, he says, there could be a corner of the warehouse that's particularly prone to mispicks, but the managers are not aware there's a problem and don't scan for that. "Or the [problem] could be something they do scan for but don't realize they could be [addressing more effectively]."
Most people think their system of record is pretty good, but in reality, those systems can almost always be improved, according to Coote. In many cases, those improvements would bring real benefits, like freeing human workers from the drudgery of case counting so they can take on higher-level tasks, he says.
Dexory's view aligns closely with Körber's perspective on inventory visibility—so closely, in fact, that the two companies last month launched a partnership to integrate the DexoryView advanced visibility platform with Körber's warehouse management software (WMS). The partnership will enable users to swiftly uncover and address issues in the warehouse through data-driven decision-making based on Dexory's daily scans of the facility, the companies said.
Based on these and other market developments, it looks like the warehouse visibility sector is getting its moment in the sun. It's also clear that the technology used for inventory counting is getting "smarter" and faster by the day. Together, those trends could combine to shine a bright light on the darkest corners of the warehouse, illuminating every pallet, case, and carton so DCs can get a sharper view of all the inventory inside.
When a 7.0-magnitude earthquake struck Port-au-Prince, Haiti, in 2010, a fledgling humanitarian group knew its day had come—after months of planning, it would finally be able to take its model live and see how well it worked. Formed a year earlier to support humanitarian relief efforts, that group, Airlink, had established a network of airline partners it could call on to provide free or discounted airlift in times of crisis. As it turned out, the model held up in testing. In the weeks following the earthquake, Airlink successfully coordinated the movement of more than 2,000 doctors and nurses and more than 40 shipments of aid totaling more than 500,000 pounds into the disaster zone.
Fifteen years later, the group is still carrying out that mission—but on a much larger scale. Airlink's network today includes over 200 aid organizations and over 50 commercial and charter airlines. Since its inception, the group has flown 13,500 relief workers and transported 18 million pounds of humanitarian cargo, directly helping 60 million people impacted by natural and man-made disasters.
Airlink plans to celebrate the milestone year through PR campaigns and a web series titled "15 Years in 15 Minutes." An episode will be released on the 15th of each month; all 12 episodes will feature Airlink President and CEO Steve Smith sitting down with an industry partner to discuss innovation in logistical strategy and meeting the demands of an evolving landscape in humanitarian relief. The videos will be available on YouTube.
In a statement marking the group's 15th anniversary, Smith attributed the group's success to corporate partnerships and "established, trusting relationships" with NGOs (nongovernmental organizations); airlines, including United Airlines, American Airlines, and Qatar Airways; and foundations, including the Conrad N. Hilton Foundation, GE Aerospace Foundation, Paul Allen Foundation, Buddhist Tzu Chi Foundation, UPS Foundation, and Flexport.org Fund.
When planning routes for their delivery trucks, fleet managers—or more likely, their route planning software systems—consider factors like mileage, road height and weight restrictions, traffic conditions, and weather. They can now add another variable to the mix, thanks to a new tool that calculates the chances that a load might be stolen along the way.
Developed by New Jersey-based risk assessment firm Verisk Analytics, CargoNet RouteScore API generates a cargo theft "risk score" that provides a relative measure of probability that crime and loss will occur along any given route in the U.S. and Canada. Using a proprietary algorithm, the tool rates routes on a scale from 1 to 100—with 1 representing the lowest likelihood of theft—based on risk factors such as cargo type, value, length of haul, origin, destination, day of the week, and the theft history of specific truck stops.
Companies can also use the tool to protect their cargo proactively, Verisk says. For example, before sending a truck out on a high-risk route, a carrier could implement additional security measures like tracking devices, driver teams, and escorts or even secure parking spots in advance.
Verisk adds that the tool's API format allows for easy integration with both proprietary systems and the third-party transportation management systems (TMS) that many companies use to manage their trucking operations.
Drivers typically choose a specific blend of gasoline based on their car's engine, picking high-octane fuel for a sports car and regular gas for the family sedan. Now a company has launched a similar range of products for diesel fuel, saying the offerings are calibrated for vehicles like commercial trucks.
That company, Nevada-based Advanced Refining Concepts LLC (ARC), will launch two new products, GDiesel Lightning and GDiesel Thunder, by mid-year, the company said in January.
According to the firm, GDiesel Lightning is a lighter, faster-igniting diesel fuel than the classic mix and is designed specifically for urban start-stop operations—think delivery vehicles, light trucks, city buses, and passenger vehicles. GDiesel Thunder is a heavier, higher energy-content fuel made for steadier and more continuous engine operating modes, making it suitable for long-haul trucking or rail and marine applications.
According to the company, choosing the right fuel for a particular application can reduce visible smoke and other regulated emissions, maximize efficiency, and minimize engine wear. And both fuels meet current diesel regulatory standards, it says, obviating the need for modifications to engines, fueling infrastructures, or warranties.
The new fuels' potential is not just limited to petroleum diesel. ARC says the process to make GDiesel Lightning and GDiesel Thunder has been successfully applied to renewable diesel, and both petroleum and bio-based versions of these fuels can be used as next-generation blend stock or to vastly increase biodiesel blend ratios and efficiency.
"Engine manufacturers are at their limits trying to improve efficiency and emissions from standard diesel. It is long past due time to redesign the fuel side," ARC Managing Partner Peter Gunnerman said in a release. "It has never made sense to assume that one diesel fuel option can be efficient for all diesel engine types and operating cycles."
Know someone who is making a difference in the world of logistics? Then consider nominating that person as one of DC Velocity’s “Rainmakers”—professionals from all facets of the business whose achievements set them apart from the crowd. In the past, they have included practitioners, consultants, academics, vendors, and even military commanders.
To identify these achievers, DC Velocity’s editorial directors work with members of the magazine’s Editorial Advisory Board. The nomination process begins in January and concludes in April with a vote to determine which nominees will be invited to become Rainmakers.