Transportation Management

  • David Frederick Ross

Abstract

When asked to provide a definition of distribution, both the public and professionals alike will most likely structure their response around two functions: warehousing and transportation. As was discussed in the previous chapter, warehousing is concerned with the storage and handling of inventories. Warehousing provides value by satisfying marketplace time and place utilities. Transportation, on the other hand, is associated with the movement of product from one node in the supply channel network to another. This ability to provide purposeful movement of goods in the supply chain is fundamental in assisting companies achieve time and place utilities. No matter how sophisticated the warehouse system, if a product is not available at the specific time and place it is wanted, the firm risks lost sales, faltering customer satisfaction, and increased costs resulting from order expediting. Transportation attempts to solve this problem by ensuring that product is moved as efficiently and cost-effectively as is possible from the point of origin to the point of consumption. Basically, transportation creates value by changing the location of inventory. In this sense, to conceive of a “world-class” supply chain without an efficient transportation system to support it is clearly an impossibility. Transportation’s ability to create place utility by ensuring that product is available at the time the customer wants it defines a fundamental pillar in the search for competitive advantage.

References

  1. 1.
    All references to the APICS Dictionary are from the 14th edition (2013).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wilson, Rosalyn. 2014. The 25th annual state of logistics report: Is this the new normal? Oakbrook: Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, Visual 2.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    These international figures are found in Goldsby, Thomas J., Deepak Iyengar, and Shashank Rao. 2014. The definitive guide to transportation: Principles, strategies, and decisions for the effective flow of goods and services, 7–10. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    These statistics were taken from U.S. Department of Transportation, National Transportation Statistics – 2013, Bureau of Transportation Statistics.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    See the comments of Bowersox, Donald J., and David J. Closs. 1996. Logistical management: The integrated supply chain process, 314. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bowersox, Donald J., David J. Closs, M. Bixby Cooper, and John C. Bowersox. 2013. Supply chain logistics management, 4th ed, 188–190. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    These values are from Wilson, The 25th Annual State of Logistics Report. Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schultz, John D. 2014. Transportation Best Practices: Private Fleet Management – Tailored for Success. Logistics Management, May 2014.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
  10. 10.
    Schultz, John D. 2004. Top 50 Trucking Companies: Anticipating needs; exceeding Expectations. Logistics Management, April 2004.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    ATRI. 2013. Critical issues in the trucking industry – 2013, 1–14. Arlington: The American Transportation Research Institute.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    These statistics were taken from U.S. Department of Transportation, National Transportation Statistics – 2013. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    These values are from Wilson, The 25th Annual State of Logistics Report. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Of the seven Class I rail companies, BNSF Railway, CSX Transportation, Norfolk Southern Railway, and Union Pacific Railroad have evolved as the dominant carriers in the U.S. None of these rail carriers services the entire country by itself; they work closely together via interline agreements to provide coast-to-coast rail service.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    These statistics were taken from U.S. Department of Transportation, National Transportation Statistics – 2013. Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    These statistics were taken from U.S. Department of Transportation, National Transportation Statistics – 2013 and U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration, 2011 U.S. Water Transportation Statistical Snapshot (November 2013).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    See the analysis in Coyle, John J., C. John Langley, Brian J. Gibson, Robert A. Novack, and Edward J. Bardi. 2009. Supply chain management: A logistics perspective, 8th ed, 417–419. Mason: South-Western Centage Learning; and Coyle, John J., Robert A. Novack, Brian J. Gibson, and Edward J. Bardi. 2011. Transportation: A supply chain perspective, 7th ed, 359–364. Mason: South-Western Centage Learning.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pitt Ohio Express. 2014. Controlling Surface Transportation Costs. Pitt Ohio White Paper.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    These three elements are discussed in greater detail in Ballou, Ronald H. 1999. Business logistics management, 4th ed, 157–161. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    This table is adapted from Coyle, et al., 345.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    This exercise is adapted from Ballou, Ronald H. 1992. Business logistics management, 4th ed, 190. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    This exercise is adapted from Chopra, Sunil, and Peter Meindl. 2010. Supply chain management: Strategy, planning, and operation, 4th ed, 376–377. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall – Pearson.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    The full report card can be found at American Society of Civil Engineers, http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org
  24. 24.
    For a summary of HOS regulations see Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/hours-service/summary-hours-service-regulations
  25. 25.
    See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990–2011,” 2013, www.epa.gov/climatechange/Downloads/ghgemissions/US-GHG-Inventory-2013-Main-Text.pdf; Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. “Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change,” 2014, http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/publications_and_data.shtml. World Energy Outlook 2008, International Energy Agency, www.iea.org/media/weowebsite/208-1994/WEO2008.pdf
  26. 26.
    These points were adapted from Olson, Eric, and Ryan Schuchard. Transitioning to low-carbon fuel – working paper, 6–7. Business for Social Responsibility – BSR, April 2014.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Editorial Staff. 2013. It takes a Commitment. Supply & Demand Chain Executive 14(5): 8–16.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    For a concise review of surcharges see Abramson, Molly, Ajit Sawant, and Kevin McCarthy. 2013. Truckload Fuel Surcharges: How they Work and What They Cost. C.H. Robinson White Paper.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    See the comments in Gonzalez, Adrian. 2009. The economy as a catalyst for change: The role of TMS and managed services. ARC Brief, 1–12. Dedham: ARC Advisory Group.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    See Manhattan Associates. 2010. Transportation Lifecycle Management. Manhattan Associates White Paper (2010).Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    ARC Advisory Group. 2013. 20122017 TMS Global Market Research Study. ARC White Paper (July 2013).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    These capabilities have been taken from the YMS offered by logistics software vendor Manhattan Associates and are fairly typical of packaged YMS systems available on the marketplace.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Wulfratt, Marc, and Gegory Braun. 2012. Yard Management Systems. Creative Collaborating Component Solutions C3 Inc. Whitepaper (September 2012).Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    These figures are found in Goldsby, et al., Definitive Guide to Transportation, 128.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Murphy, Jean V. 2002. Seeing inventory in real time lets you have and have not. Global Logistics and Supply Chain Strategies 6(5): 34–40.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    These driver technologies were obtained from Motorola. 2013. Next Generation Pickup and Delivery Puts the Customer in the Driver’s Seat. Motorola White Paper (2013).Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Langley, C. John, and Capgemini. 2014. 2014 Third-Party Logistics Study, 12. Capgemini White Paper (2014).Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    This distinction is made by Coyle, et al., Transportation, 399403.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Ibid, 403–407.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Langley and Capgemini, 2014 Third-Party Logistics Study, 10.Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    O’Reilly, Joseph. 2013. 2013 3PL perspectives. Inbound Logistics 33(7): 100.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    These figures are adapted from Langley and Capgemini, 2014 Third-Party Logistics Study, 12.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Frederick Ross
    • 1
  1. 1.APICSChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations