Imported oil and its attendant risks. Greenhouse gases and global warming. An economy dependent on a vibrant freight transportation system. Add those up and the result is a growing imperative to find alternatives to traditional fuels.
Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
In 1925, a pair of German scientists applied for a patent for a process they had developed to turn carbon monoxide and hydrogen derived from coal into a liquid fuel. Franz Fischer and Hans Tropsch may not have thought of the process they developed as an alternative fuel in the way we think about that term today. But diesel fuel created through the Fischer-Tropsch process is one of a number of technologies that could transform the way freight carriers fuel their vehicles.
In some ways, the future is already here, with trucks of all sorts running on propane, compressed natural gas (CNG), and liquefied natural gas (LNG). Carriers like UPS and FedEx as well as many utility companies have been using alternative fuels in their fleet vehicles for several years.
What's driving these initiatives is a combination of worrisome issues. To start with, American politicians and the public want to reduce the nation's dependence on imported petroleum—though opinions vary on how to reach that goal. There's also a growing movement to reduce greenhouse gases as more scientists come to a consensus that the earth is warming and carbon emissions are part of the reason. And at $90 a barrel, oil has become an expensive commodity.
That all adds up to growing pressure on carriers and their equipment suppliers to find ways to run clean and lean operations.
"We want to lessen dependence on crude oil," says Robert Hall, director of vehicle engineering for UPS. "The world is using up its crude oil. To sustain our fleet and our business, we need to be prepared long term for the use of multiple fuels. Emissions reduction and quality are another issue." UPS says it has the largest fleet of vehicles operating on alternative fuels in the transportation industry, including 600 vehicles running on propane and 800 running on CNG.
Ready to come clean?
The imperative seems clear enough. But are American trucking fleets ready to make wholesale changes to their operations? In an internal document provided by one large contract fleet company that operates thousands of vehicles, company fleet managers candidly assessed the variety of technologies available to them. (The document was made available to DC VELOCITY with the understanding that its source would not be disclosed.)
Though it acknowledged the potential benefits of shifting to alternative fuels—reduced exhaust emissions, reduced dependence on imported petroleum, cost savings, and burnishing the corporate image—the analysis also carried some caveats. For example, reduction of some types of pollutants can occasionally lead to an increase in other types. It also warned that potential savings in fuel costs have to be balanced against potential higher costs in vehicle operations, including vehicle costs, payload capacity, vehicle range, power and torque, and fuel availability.
But alternative fuels and associated technologies aimed at more efficient operations are almost certainly in the offing for most fleets. The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has established a number of programs in partnership with industry aimed at research into and development of alternative fuels and a variety of technologies aimed at cleaner, more efficient freight operations.
Not surprisingly, much of the impetus for improvement comes from the West Coast, particularly California, where air quality has become a key public health concern. In June, for instance, California's South Coast Air Quality Management District, an air pollution control agency, approved a $2.9 million expenditure for 20 LNG heavy duty vehicles from Westport Innovations Inc., a Vancouver, B.C.-based developer of alternative fuel technology. The trucks will be operated by Total Transportation Services at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
Also active on the West Coast is WestStart-CALSTART, a not-for-profit consortium of some 145 companies focused on reducing transportation-related air pollution. "Our goal … is to see the development of clean transportation technologies," says John Boesel, the group's president and CEO.
Unlike some industry-sponsored organizations, the group does not promote a particular solution; it remains neutral on both fuel and technology. "We try to act as a strategic partner and facilitator to help all the companies succeed," Boesel says. Its efforts include programs focused on commercial traffic. In September, for example, WestStart-CALSTART sponsored the sixth annual National Hybrid Truck Users Forum in Washington state (for a list of upcoming events, visit www. calstart.org).
Big Brown goes green
In fact, hybrid vehicles have been much in the news recently. Last year, for example, UPS conducted a highly publicized hybrid vehicle test with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). For several months, UPS used a fleet of hydraulic hybrid delivery vehicles in the Detroit area, using a technology it developed in a partnership with the EPA as well as the U.S. Army, International Truck and Engine Corp., and Eaton Corp.
The technology combines an efficient diesel engine with a hydraulic propulsion system in place of the conventional drivetrain and transmission. Hydraulic pumps and storage tanks store energy, similar to what is done with electric motors and batteries in hybrid electric vehicles. Fuel economy is increased in three ways, the EPA explains: Vehicle braking energy is recovered, the engine is operated more efficiently, and the engine can be shut off when stopped or decelerating.
In laboratory testing, the technology achieved a 60- to 70-percent improvement in fuel economy compared to conventional UPS package vans, according to the EPA. It also produced a 40-percent-plus reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.
The EPA estimates that when the hybrid components are manufactured in high volume, the added costs could be recovered in less than three years through lower fuel and brake maintenance costs. The trucks may also be eligible to qualify for a tax credit of up to 40 percent of the incremental cost of the vehicle, the EPA says.
A question of cost
Boesel reports that today's research initiatives go well beyond the fuels themselves to include ways to improve aerodynamics, boost fuel economy, and reduce vehicle weight. In fact, today, the drawback to greater deployment of innovative technologies is often not so much the availability of the technology itself, but cost. Batteries for hybrids are heavy and expensive. Conversion costs to make use of new fuels can be high. "The technology manufacturers need to keep working on lowering costs," concedes Boesel. "We are getting to the point on a life-cycle basis where these systems are making sense, but often fleets buy on the purchase cost."
As for how to make the technology more affordable, the answer could be as simple as scaling up production. As demand for a technology picks up, unit costs would likely fall. But that's not quite as easy as it sounds. "We have the chicken and the egg," Boesel says. Producing advanced technology trucks in low volume limits demand, but demand is required for manufacturers to ramp up production. The issue is creating the demand. But if market forces don't do it, regulation and law might.
Take the current and controversial proposal by the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The two ports have proposed to the Federal Maritime Commission a plan to implement what they call their Clean Truck Program. According to an analysis by the National Industrial Transportation League, which is contesting the proposal, this program would require drayage companies to meet an accelerated schedule for implementing state and federal emissions standards.
Additionally, the California legislature late in its session this year adopted a bill aimed at raising smog abatement fees for all vehicles to fund research on alternative fuels. In mid-October, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the bill into law.
In the meantime, fleet managers continue to investigate a range of possibilities. UPS's Hall says, "Over the short term—the next five to 15 years—it appears that hybrid electrics will be the leaders in getting us where we need to be. CNG and propane can play a role as well." He agrees with Boesel's assessment that technological advances and lower prices will spur more widespread adoption.
The road ahead
Right now, additional research is under way under a variety of auspices. The DOE's National Renewable Energy Laboratory, for example, sponsors research under the umbrella of its Advanced Heavy Hybrid Propulsion Systems Project. NREL says on its Web site that it projects that its efforts will "increase the fuel efficiency of heavy trucks and buses by as much as 100 percent, and improve their emissions to meet the Environmental Protection Agency's 2007-2010 emission standards."
Also active on the research front is the 21st Century Truck Partnership, an industry-government collaboration among heavy-duty engine manufacturers, heavy-duty truck and bus manufacturers, heavy hybrid powertrain manufacturers, and four federal government agencies. The consortium, which develops both public and proprietary research projects, supports research, development, and demonstration projects in five areas: engine systems, heavy-duty hybrids, idle reduction, safety, and parasitic losses (factors like aerodynamic drag resistance and rolling resistance).
In the meantime, the switch to alternative fuels and technologies is already under way in both public and private fleets, driven by economic, political, regulatory, and other forces. Given the size of the nation's fleet and the infrastructure challenges, the revolution will likely be slow to ignite. But ignite it will. A warming planet and volatility in oil supplies have put alternative fuels and technologies back in the spotlight for the first time since the energy crisis of the '70s—and this time, it's likely for good.
what are the options?
Any discussion of alternative fuels raises the question of what fuels are available—or might become available in the near future. What follows is an edited version of a list of alternative fuels compiled by the U.S. Department of Energy's Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center and other sources. Not all of the alternatives may be appropriate for freight operations.
Biodiesel is a renewable alternative fuel produced from vegetable oils and animal fats. Although pure biodiesel (or biodiesel blended with petroleum diesel) can be used to fuel diesel vehicles, providing emissions and safety benefits, it may also produce increased NOx emissions. It has physical properties similar to those of petroleum diesel. A blend of 5 percent biodiesel and 95 percent petroleum diesel is currently accepted by all diesel engine manufacturers.
Electricity can be used to power electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles directly from the power grid. Vehicles that run on electricity produce no tailpipe emissions. The only emissions that can be attributed to electricity are those generated in the production process at the power plant. Electricity is easily accessible for short-range driving.
Ethanol, also known as ethyl alcohol or grain alcohol, is a renewable fuel primarily made from starch crops, like corn. E85—a blend of 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline—can be used in light-, medium-, and heavy-duty vehicles. Its usage results in a 20-percent reduction in miles per gallon over conventional gasoline. Nearly one-third of U.S. gasoline contains ethanol in a low-level blend to reduce air pollution.
Hydrogen, the simplest and most abundant element in the universe, can be produced from fossil fuels and biomass and by electrolyzing water. Producing hydrogen with renewable energy and using it in fuel-cell vehicles holds the promise of virtually pollution-free transportation. Because hydrogen has a small amount of energy by volume compared with other fuels, storing sufficient quantities on a vehicle using currently available technology would require a tank larger than a typical car's trunk. Other primary problems at this time include the high cost of both the vehicles and the fuel.
Methanol, also known as wood alcohol, can be used as an alternative fuel. The use of methanol has declined significantly since the early 1990s, and auto makers are no longer manufacturing vehicles that run on it. It is used in some heavy truck and bus applications, but is not widely available.
Natural gas, a mixture of hydrocarbons, predominantly methane, is a domestically produced alternative fuel that can produce significantly fewer harmful emissions than gasoline or diesel when used in natural gas vehicles. It has a high octane rating and excellent properties for spark-ignited internal combustion engines. Although natural gas accounts for approximately one-quarter of the energy used in the United States, only about one-tenth of 1 percent is currently used for transportation fuel. It must be stored onboard a vehicle in either a compressed or liquefied state.
Propane is the most commonly used alternative transportation fuel. Also known as liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), it has a high energy density, giving propane vehicles good driving range. Propane has a high octane rating and excellent properties for spark-ignited internal combustion engines. Produced as a by-product of natural gas processing and crude oil refining, propane is non-toxic and presents no threat to soil, surface water, or groundwater.
Several other vehicle fuels are in the early stages of development, according to the Alternative Fuels and Advanced Vehicles Data Center. They include:
Biobutanol, an alcohol that can be produced through processing of domestically grown crops, like corn and sugar beets. Like ethanol, it can be used in gasoline-powered internal combustion engines.
Biogas, sometimes called swamp gas, landfill gas, or digester gas. Biogas is produced from the anaerobic digestion of organic matter such as animal manure, sewage, and municipal solid waste. After processing, it becomes a renewable substitute for natural gas and can be used to fuel natural gas vehicles. DOE says a 2007 report estimated that 12,000 vehicles are being fueled with upgraded biogas worldwide, with 70,000 biogas-fueled vehicles predicted by 2010.
Biomass-to-liquids fuels, which are produced through the conversion of diverse biomass feedstocks into a range of liquid fuels. One major benefit of these fuels is their compatibility with existing vehicle technologies and fuel distribution systems: Biomass-derived gasoline and diesel could be transported through existing pipelines, dispensed at existing fueling stations, and used to fuel today's gasoline- and diesel-powered vehicles.
Fischer-Tropsch diesel, which is made by converting gaseous hydrocarbons, like natural gas and gasified coal or biomass, into liquid fuel. Fischer-Tropsch diesel can be substituted directly for petroleum diesel to fuel diesel-powered vehicles without modification to the vehicle engine or fueling infrastructure.
When it comes to logistics technology, the pace of innovation has never been faster. In recent years, the market has been inundated by waves of cool new tech tools, all promising to help users enhance their operations and cope with today’s myriad supply chain challenges.
But that ever-expanding array of offerings can make it difficult to separate the wheat from the chaff—technology that’s the real deal versus technology that’s just “vaporware,” meaning products that don’t live up to their hype and may even still be in the conceptual stage.
One way to cut through the confusion is to check out the entries for the “3 V’s of Supply Chain Innovation Awards,” an annual competition held by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP). This competition, which is hosted by DC Velocity’s sister publication, Supply Chain Xchange, and supply chain visionary and 3 V’s framework creator Art Mesher, recognizes companies that have parlayed the 3 V’s—“embracing variability, harnessing visibility, and competing with velocity”—into business success and advanced the practice of supply chain management. Awards are presented in two categories: the “Business Innovation Award,” which recognizes more established businesses, and the “Best Overall Innovative Startup/Early Stage Award,” which recognizes newer companies.
The judging for this year’s competition—the second annual contest—took place at CSCMP’s EDGE Supply Chain Conference & Exhibition in September, where the three finalists for each award presented their innovations via a fast-paced “elevator pitch.” (To watch a video of the presentations, visit the Supply Chain Xchange website.)
What follows is a brief look at the six companies that made the competition’s final round and the latest updates on their achievements:
Arkestro: This San Francisco-based firm offers a predictive procurement orchestration solution that uses machine learning (ML) and behavioral science to revolutionize sourcing, eliminating the need for outdated manual tools like pivot tables and for labor-intensive negotiations. Instead, procurement teams can process quotes and secure optimal supplier agreements at a speed and accuracy that would be impossible to achieve manually, the firm says.
The company recently joined the Amazon Web Services (AWS) Partner Network (APN), which it says will help it reach its goal of elevating procurement from a cost center to a strategic growth engine.
AutoScheduler.AI: This Austin, Texas-based company offers a predictive warehouse optimization platform that integrates with a user’s existing warehouse management system (WMS) and “accelerates” its ability to resolve problems like dock schedule conflicts, inefficient workforce allocation, poor on-time/in-full (OTIF) performance, and excessive intra-campus moves.
“We’re here to make the warehouse sexy,” the firm says on its website. “With our deep background in building machine learning solutions, everything delivered by the AutoScheduler team is designed to provide value by learning your challenges, environment, and best practices.” Privately funded up until this summer, the company recently secured venture capital funding that it will use to accelerate its growth and enhance its technologies.
Davinci Micro Fulfillment: Located in Bound Brook, New Jersey, Davinci operates a “microfulfillment as a service” platform that helps users expedite inventory turnover while reducing operating expenses by leveraging what it calls the “4 Ps of global distribution”—product, placement, price, and promotion. The firm operates a network of microfulfillment centers across the U.S., offering services that include front-end merchandising and network optimization.
Within the past year, the company raised seed funding to help enhance its technology capabilities.
Flying Ship: Headquartered in Leesburg, Virginia, Flying Ship has designed an unmanned, low-flying “ground-effect maritime craft” that moves freight over the ocean in coastal regions. Although the Flying Ship looks like a small aircraft or large drone, it is classified as a maritime vessel because it does not leave the air cushion over the waves, similar to a hovercraft.
The first-generation models are 30 feet long, electrically powered, and semi-autonomous. They can dock at existing marinas, beaches, and boat ramps to deliver goods, providing service that the company describes as faster than boats and cheaper than air. The firm says the next-generation models will be fully autonomous.
Flying Ship, which was honored with the Best Overall Startup Award in this year’s 3 V’s competition, is currently preparing to fly demo missions with the Air Force Research Laboratory (AFRL).
Perfect Planner: Based in Alpharetta, Georgia, Perfect Planner operates a cloud-based platform that’s designed to streamline the material planning and replenishment process. The technology collects, organizes, and analyzes data from a business’s material requirements planning (MRP) system to create daily “to-do lists” for material planners/buyers, with the “to-dos” ranked in order of criticality. The solution also uses advanced analytics to “understand” and address inventory shortages and surpluses.
Perfect Planner was honored with the Business Innovation Award in this year’s 3 V’s competition.
ProvisionAi: Located in Franklin, Tennessee, ProvisionAi has developed load optimization software that helps consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies move their freight with fewer trucks, thereby cutting their transportation costs. The firm says its flagship offering is an automatic order optimization (AutoO2) system that bolts onto a company’s existing enterprise resource planning (ERP) or WMS platform and guides larger orders through execution, ensuring that what is planned is actually loaded on the truck. The firm’s CEO and founder, Tom Moore, was recognized as a 2024 Rainmaker by this magazine.
Global forklift sales have slumped in 2024, falling short of initial forecasts as a result of the struggling economy in Europe and the slow release of project funding in the U.S., a report from market analyst firm Interact Analysis says.
In response, the London-based firm has reduced its shipment forecast for the year to rise just 0.3%, although it still predicts consistent growth of around 4-5% out to 2034.
The “bleak” figures come as the European economy has stagnated during the second half of 2024, with two of the leading industry sectors for forklifts - automotive and logistics – struggling. In addition, order backlogs from the pandemic have now been absorbed, so order volumes for the global forklift market will be slightly lower than shipment volumes over the next few years, Interact Analysis said.
On a more positive note, 3 million forklifts are forecast to be shipped per year by 2031 as enterprises are forced to reduce their dependence on manual labor. Interact Analysis has observed that major forklift OEMs are continuing with their long-term expansion plans, while other manufacturers that are affected by demand fluctuations are much more cautious with spending on automation projects.
At the same time, the forklift market is seeing a fundamental shift in power sources, with demand for Li-ion battery-powered forklifts showing a growth rate of over 10% while internal combustion engine (ICE) demand shrank by 1% and lead-acid battery-powered forklift fell 7%.
And according to Interact Analysis, those trends will continue, with the report predicting that ICE annual market demand will shrink over 20% from 670,000 units in 2024 to a projected 500,000 units by 2034. And by 2034, Interact Analysis predicts 81% of fully electric forklifts will be powered by li-ion batteries.
The reasons driving that shift include a move in Europe to cleaner alternatives to comply with environmental policies, and a swing in the primary customer base for forklifts from manufacturing to logistics and warehousing, due to the rise of e-commerce. Electric forklift demand is also growing in emerging markets, but for different reasons—labor costs are creating a growing need for automation in factories, especially in China, India, and Eastern Europe. And since lithium-ion battery production is primarily based in Asia, the average cost of equipping forklifts with li-ion batteries is much lower than the rest of the world.
Companies in every sector are converting assets from fossil fuel to electric power in their push to reach net-zero energy targets and to reduce costs along the way, but to truly accelerate those efforts, they also need to improve electric energy efficiency, according to a study from technology consulting firm ABI Research.
In fact, boosting that efficiency could contribute fully 25% of the emissions reductions needed to reach net zero. And the pursuit of that goal will drive aggregated global investments in energy efficiency technologies to grow from $106 Billion in 2024 to $153 Billion in 2030, ABI said today in a report titled “The Role of Energy Efficiency in Reaching Net Zero Targets for Enterprises and Industries.”
ABI’s report divided the range of energy-efficiency-enhancing technologies and equipment into three industrial categories:
Commercial Buildings – Network Lighting Control (NLC) and occupancy sensing for automated lighting and heating; Artificial Intelligence (AI)-based energy management; heat-pumps and energy-efficient HVAC equipment; insulation technologies
Manufacturing Plants – Energy digital twins, factory automation, manufacturing process design and optimization software (PLM, MES, simulation); Electric Arc Furnaces (EAFs); energy efficient electric motors (compressors, fans, pumps)
“Both the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP) continue to insist on the importance of energy efficiency,” Dominique Bonte, VP of End Markets and Verticals at ABI Research, said in a release. “At COP 29 in Dubai, it was agreed to commit to collectively double the global average annual rate of energy efficiency improvements from around 2% to over 4% every year until 2030, following recommendations from the IEA. This complements the EU’s Energy Efficiency First (EE1) Framework and the U.S. 2022 Inflation Reduction Act in which US$86 billion was earmarked for energy efficiency actions.”
Many AI deployments are getting stuck in the planning stages due to a lack of AI skills, governance issues, and insufficient resources, leading 61% of global businesses to scale back their AI investments, according to a study from the analytics and AI provider Qlik.
Philadelphia-based Qlik found a disconnect in the market where 88% of senior decision makers say they feel AI is absolutely essential or very important to achieving success. Despite that support, multiple factors are slowing down or totally blocking those AI projects: a lack of skills to develop AI [23%] or to roll out AI once it’s developed [22%], data governance challenges [23%], budget constraints [21%], and a lack of trusted data for AI to work with [21%].
The numbers come from a survey of 4,200 C-Suite executives and AI decision makers, revealing what is hindering AI progress globally and how to overcome these barriers.
Respondents also said that many stakeholders lack trust in AI technology generally, which holds those projects back. Over a third [37%] of AI decision makers say their senior managers lack trust in AI, 42% feel less senior employees don’t trust the technology., and a fifth [21%] believe their customers don’t trust AI either.
“Business leaders know the value of AI, but they face a multitude of barriers that prevent them from moving from proof of concept to value creating deployment of the technology,” James Fisher, Chief Strategy Officer at Qlik, said in a release. “The first step to creating an AI strategy is to identify a clear use case, with defined goals and measures of success, and use this to identify the skills, resources and data needed to support it at scale. In doing so you start to build trust and win management buy-in to help you succeed.”
Many chief supply chain officers (CSCOs) are focused on reorganizing their supply chains in today’s business climate—but as they do so, they should be careful to avoid common pitfalls that can derail their efforts.
That’s according to recent research from Gartner that identifies critical organizational design mistakes that will prevent supply chain leaders from delivering on business goals.
“Supply chain reorganization is high up on CSCOs’ agendas, yet many are unclear about how organization design outcomes link to business goals,” according to Alan O'Keeffe, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice.
The research revealed that the most successful projects radically redesign supply chain structure based on distinct organizational needs “while prioritizing balance, strength, and speed as key business objectives.”
“Our findings reveal that the leaders who achieved success took a more radical approach to redesigning their supply chain organizations, resulting in the ability to deliver on new and transformational operating models,” O’Keefe said in a statement announcing the findings.
The research was based on a series of interviews with supply chain leaders as well as data gathered from Gartner clients. It revealed that successful organizations assigned responsibilities to reporting lines in radically diverse ways, and that they focused on the unique characteristics of their business to design supply chain organizations that were tailored to meet their needs.
“The commonality between successful organizations is that their leaders intentionally prioritized the organizational goals of balance, strength and speed into their design process,” said O’Keeffe. “In doing so, they sidestepped the most common pitfalls in supply chain reorganization design.”
The three most common errors, according to Gartner, are:
Mistake 1: The “either/or” approach
Unbalanced organizational structures result in delays, gaps in performance, and confusion about responsibility. This often stems from a binary choice between centralized and decentralized models. Such an approach limits design possibilities and can lead to organizational power struggles, with teams feeling overwhelmed and misaligned.
Successful CSCOs recognize balance as a critical outcome. They employ both integration (combining activities under one team structure) and differentiation (empowering multiple units to conduct activities in unique ways). This granular approach ensures that decisions, expertise, and resources are allocated optimally to serve diverse customer needs while maintaining internally coherent operating models.
Mistake 2: Debilitating headcount reduction
Reducing headcount as a primary goal of reorganization can undermine long-term organizational capability. This approach often leads to a focus on short-term cost savings at the expense of losing critical talent and expertise, which are essential for driving future success.
Instead, CSCOs should focus on understanding what capabilities will make the organization strong in the short, medium, and long term. They should also prioritize the development and leveraging of people capabilities, social networks, and autonomy. This approach not only enhances organizational effectiveness but also ensures that the organization is ready to meet future challenges.
Mistake 3: The copy/paste approach
Copying organizational designs from other companies without considering enterprise-specific variations can slow decision-making and hinder organizational effectiveness. Each organization has unique characteristics that must be factored into its design.
CSCOs who successfully redesign their organizations make speed an explicit outcome by assigning and clarifying authority and expertise to remove elements that slow decision-making speed. This involves:
Designing structures that enable rapid response to customer needs;
Streamlining internal decision-making processes;
And differentiating between operational execution and transformation efforts.
The research for the report was based in part on qualitative interviews conducted between February and June 2024 with supply chain leaders from organizations that had undergone organizational redesign, according to Gartner. Insights were drawn from those who had successfully completed a radical reorganization, defined as a shift that enabled organizations to deliver on new activities and operating models that better met the needs of the business. The researchers also drew on more than 1,200 inquiries with clients conducted between July 2022 and June 2024 for the report.