doing what's right: interview with Vice Admiral Al Thompson
He has P&L responsibility for an operation roughly the size of a Sunoco or Lockheed Martin. But Vice Admiral Alan Thompson says his top priority is making sure the Defense Logistics Agency does what's right for America's armed forces.
Steve Geary is adjunct faculty at the University of Tennessee's Haaslam College of Business and is a lecturer at The Gordon Institute at Tufts University. He is the President of the Supply Chain Visions family of companies, consultancies that work across the government sector. Steve is a contributing editor at DC Velocity, and editor-at-large for CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly.
Perhaps the best way to convey the scale of the operation Vice Admiral Alan Thompson oversees is to put it this way: If it were a company in the private sector, it would rank 57th in the Fortune 500.
The operation in question is the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA)—a logistics combat support agency that provides virtually everything America's military forces eat, wear, drive, shoot, or burn as fuel. The DLA operates like a business, selling goods and services to the military (with a congressional mandate to break even). In fiscal 2008, it reported more than $42 billion in sales.
As you might expect, it's an organization with a lot of moving parts. According to the DLA's Web site, the agency has 23,000 military and civilian employees, operates 25 distribution depots, and manages the flow of 6.4 million items across eight supply chains.
But ask Vice Adm. Thompson, who serves as the DLA's director, about his agency's complex responsibilities and he doesn't cite statistics. Instead, he boils its mission down to this simple goal: "Doing what's right for the armed forces and the Department of Defense."
The vice admiral came to his current assignment in November 2008 after more than 30 years in the military. He received his commission in 1976, after graduating from the University of California, Los Angeles, where he had participated in the Navy ROTC program. In the years that followed, he served in a variety of positions in the Navy and earned a number of awards, including the Distinguished Service Medal. Since he achieved flag rank, his assignments have included duty as commander of the DLA's Defense Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio; director of the supply, ordnance, and logistics operations division (N41), Office of the Chief of Naval Operations; and as commander, Naval supply systems command and chief of supply corps. He met recently with DC VELOCITY Editor at Large Steve Geary to talk about the agency's current activities as well as its future.
Q: Many of our readers are unfamiliar with the DLA, so let's begin there. Would it be fair to describe you as sort of a Wal-Mart Super Center for the military?
A: I did a tour as the center commander in Columbus [DLA's Defense Supply Center in Columbus, Ohio], and I remember being asked, "Well, aren't you just Wal-Mart?" The reality is, that might describe a thin slice of what DLA does, but DLA is a full-spectrum logistics service provider and so, its activities are a lot broader.
Q: Can you provide an example of how the DLA does more than simply serve as a mega-supply center?
A: A little story from Iraq: We visited the Taji national maintenance staff in the region north of Baghdad. It essentially is the sole depot [for maintaining, repairing, and overhauling ground vehicles] that the Iraqi army has for ground combat. We have a DLA team there that is assisting the Iraqi army in bringing its maintenance activity on line.
What they are primarily focused on right now is overhauling Humvees that came from U.S. stocks, and they are doing a full overhaul. DLA's role has a couple of dimensions. One is providing much of the material support to do the depot maintenance work. The other is helping them establish a distribution center capability so that they [the Iraqi army] can in fact bring their own supply system up on line.
It is just overwhelming the enthusiasm these guys have for what they're doing. They have actually only been there about six months, but you can tell what a huge impact they've had in that time in helping the Iraqi security forces essentially develop their own sustainment capability. As you travel around, it is quite striking how engaged we are now at the forward end of the supply chain, largely providing the types of commodities that DLA is responsible for, but in some ways, also helping with technical expertise to bring on line some of their own DLA-like capabilities.
Q: DLA started out as a wholesale provider of items required by the military. What you are describing seems to be more of a customer-facing, demand-driven organization.
A: Being focused and having a forward presence is an important part of where DLA is going in the future— particularly in the Middle East. We need to have a very robust physical presence of DLA personnel where our major customers are. We have DLA support teams that are embedded with our major customers, and in effect, they are a forward touch point to removing barriers that may exist in the integrated supply chain. We now have pretty robust staffing forward that covers the full spectrum of DLA support, and frankly, we have gotten very positive reviews from that.
Q: Can you provide some examples of how that plays out in practice?
A: We're putting a lot of the emphasis right now on logistics support for the arriving forces in Afghanistan. As you know, it is a very austere area from the standpoint of infrastructure. A lot of effort right now is just moving what is needed in place to build the operating bases. It is everything from lodging to you-name-it.
Of course, most everything there has to be taken in on a truck over a 500-plus mile dirt road through mountains. As it comes up from Karachi in Pakistan through a couple of points of entry into Afghanistan, there have been considerable concerns with not only volume of flow but also with security of those routes, so we are working very intensively with U.S. Central Command and U.S. Transportation Command to open what is called the Northern Distribution Network—lines of communication or supply from the north through the Central Asian states. It is a very complex issue with lots of host-nation dimensions from the standpoint of flow of material, but we have been very successful moving it all forward.
I think that our forward presence and close connection to the combatant commanders has been a huge enabler for their mission effectiveness. Whether you look at DLA people deployed in Afghanistan or Iraq or back home at some of our major field commands, there is very tight connectivity. The more of that we have, the more effective we are going to be.
Q: Can you talk a little bit about crossover between commercial best practices and DLA's operations?
A: DLA is a huge global enterprise, but our top priority is effectiveness. Having said that, another very important responsibility is stewardship of the taxpayer's dollar. We are true believers that we need to be on a never-ending quest to be as efficient as we can possibly be because the taxpayers shouldn't pay a penny more for the product that we provide than is absolutely necessary.
In my Director's Guidance for 2009 [a document similar to a corporation's strategic plan], we established four strategic focus areas: warfighter support, work-force development, stewardship improvements, and business process enhancements. The top one, of course, is warfighter support enhancements, which is really about effectiveness. The work-force development area is focused on retaining and recruiting the work force of the future and doing the necessary core development work to be as relevant to America's armed forces in the future as we are today. Stewardship improvements and business process enhancements are related to continuously improving the business at DLA. There is a lot of crossover to industry best practices when you look at our supply chain management and distribution roles.
Q: Can you expand on how you have approached the challenge of adopting commercial best practices?
A: A critical enabler to importing commercial best practices into DLA has been our information technology investments over the last decade. We have our enterprise business system that began as an ERP implementation but now is broader. We are continuing to build on that with a couple of big additions. There is a module called e-procurement, where we are in effect the Defense Department's leader in bringing this contracting capability into the DOD in place of a legacy system that was government-unique. We are also expanding the enterprise business system to cover the energy segment, replacing a lot of different legacy systems.
There are also other things that have occurred over the last few years: the focus on performance-based contracts and prime vendor arrangements, particularly in the area of troop support. But we also have several now in the hardware area, which allows us to manage suppliers instead of supplies. We are always looking for opportunities to rapidly import commercial best practices, recognizing that when the day is over, we are about effectiveness and we have to get the balance right between effectiveness and efficiency.
Q: Is there anything we haven't talked about yet that you might like to add?
A: Just being back in the agency for a few months, I am struck by several things. We have a world-class human capital organization, very well postured to refresh our work force over the next decade. We will see increasing attrition over the next 10 to 15 years, but I feel very comfortable that we've got all the right programs in place to replenish the DLA work force in the future with one that is even more capable than what we have today.
I know the term "transformation" is probably overused, but I believe that any large, complex global logistics organization like DLA needs to constantly be transforming itself. A lot of the experience that we're gaining from this close association with the forces in the field will help us continue to transform DLA to be as relevant in the future as we are today and to continue to enhance the level of support that we are providing.
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."