Introducing aThingz: A Logistics as a Service (LaaS) Provider that is providing an end to end Total Logistics Management Solution

Over the past three articles we have

  • outlined the importance of logistics management, especially with respect to cost management, supply management, and risk management
  • outlined the major steps in logistics planning and execution
  • outlined the major modules/solutions that are currently used
  • outlined the major problems with using separate systems for each major step

… and come to the conclusion that while this methodology and modular system worked good in its day, it’s no longer good enough for logistics management in the modern world where natural disasters are a regular occurrence, global pandemics are a reality, global instability and globalization chaos is the norm, and the chances of a large company not experiencing at least one major disruption a year is now essentially zero.

The solution a global organization needs to not only survive, but thrive, is a Total Logistics Management Solution (TLMS) that covers the end-to-end process from order planning through final delivery, payment, financial analysis, and, most importantly, closed loop feedback to improve the planning versus actuals over time.

Today we’re going to introduce you to a vendor that is creating this new generation of TLMS solutions: aThingz. Founded in 2015 to solve the global logistics challenges that other vendors were not addressing, aThingz has built a modular, composable microservices-based, total logistics management solution that can bought as an end-to-end management solution, or on a microservice-based activation format, meant to fill in the gaps between existing organizational solutions. Regardless of how little, or how much, is adopted by an organization, the platform will ensure that all of the solutions are properly integrated, data is pushed and pulled automatically as needed upon changes and updates, re-calculations across the platform (be it pure aThingz or an aThingz powered hybrid platform) are done automatically on updates and changes, and the loop closed to allow for learning from, and improvement in, plan vs. actuals over time.

Billing itself as Logistics-as-a-Service [LaaS], aThingz has a composable micro-services stack that allows it to address through software any or all of the following requirements (that the client needs addressed) while also providing services to manage the logistics planning needs required by the client (if the client wants a [strong] managed logistics offering):

Process Governance
it is a process, and you need to get it right, and process governance must address

  • transformation planning (upon implementation, New Product Introduction [NPI], etc.)
  • change management
  • iterative process improvement
  • process & regulatory compliance
  • performance and financial governance
  • operational governance

Network Master Data Management
as good, synched, data is key for process implementation, and this includes

  • classification, standardization, cleansing, rationalization and enrichment
  • ongoing quality management
  • metrics and improvement
  • rules management

Supply Chain Resilience
which encompasses a lot of the impacted functions (Inventory Management, Finance, Risk Management, Procurement, etc.) and includes

  • supply and demand sensing
  • shipment monitoring and traceability
  • risk factor / risk event detection and monitoring

Forward Looking Logistics Planning
(versus traditional in-week logistics management) which includes, and which can be done on a weekly basis up to a year in advance with real-time recalculation on changes in projections, assignments, etc.:

  • order forecasting and management
  • packaging management and optimization
  • carrier volume forecasting
  • quote and rate management for carriers
  • logistics / transportation planning
  • network optimization
  • (what-if) scenario planning
  • plan communication
  • cost savings identification and tracking; i.e. the ability to track forecast vs. plan vs. (initial invoice) vs. actuals by week by carrier by order over time

For clients wanting pre-packaged solutions, they have pre-composed stacks for:

  • Demand Forecasting
  • Logistics Spend Visibility
  • Logistics (Network) Sourcing Intelligence
  • (Autonomous) Logistics Planning
  • Real-Time Transportation Visibility
  • Supply Chain Resilience

But the power of the solution shines in its end-to-end integration of their six, integrated, modules of:

ADQTM

Their primary data management platform that allows an organization to work on a common set of validated and managed data across all stakeholders of each process and manages the rules for error detection and correction and data cleansing and enrichment to ensure that decisions are highly reliable due to higher quality. Manages the key attributes that influence the processes for the higher quality outcomes, namely, the routes, lanes, suppliers, plants, parts, packaging, docks, contracted rates, carrier, and material records and that reviews, corrects, and augments details as needed.

Bruhas

Their logistics closed-loop planning, scheduling, and management solution that you can use to plan and manage rolling forecasts with detailed requirements. The solution provides flexibility in the planning horizon (e.g. 10, 20, 40 weeks) based on the organization’s needs. (Compare this to many classical solutions that might struggle to do more than few weeks out, or limit the organization to one planning horizon, which was difficult for the platform to manage when a change in week one requires rolling, compounding, changes and recalculations through the progressive weeks.) In addition, carrier forecasts and manifests are created during the planning process and are continuously updated in real time for each period based on product mix changes as well.

This module also has built in analytics and (cost saving) opportunity dashboards, transit time performance insights (to optimize inventory planning), actual truck/container (cube) utilization, and shipment (frequency) analysis dashboards. One of the great things about the planning capability is that it projects down to the container/truck by lane by week and identifies high and low variances to make sure that the buyer contracts a carrier that can increase (and decrease) capacity as needed. Another great thing about the planning capability is that the forecasting component can calculate optimal packing based on packaging options and even show you how to maximize container utilization with a 3-D visualization of the packing plan (boxes onto pallets into containers). Probably the greatest thing about this planning capability is that it walks you through the creation of the forecast to the realization of the operational (logistics) plan in a step by step process and ensures that the plan that is ultimately approved is complete, as accurate as possible, and distributed to the right people at the right time (as it forces the user through the forecast, validation thereof, operational plan draft, and operational plan review by key stakeholders, and only then does it allow approval and distribution).

Cubera

Their spend management and visibility solution allows a buyer to track and compare logistics financial performance — forecasts vs plans vs invoices vs actuals to see how accurate the forecasts end up being, how close the plans end up being, how the costs are tracking, and if performance is improving over time. In addition to highlighting variances to plan and budget, their solution provides diagnostic insights and helps the organization predict future spend.

Daksa

Their supply chain AI platform that ties it all together; that monitors, learns, corrects, and reports on the overall supply chain. On the main screen, a user sees an overall summary of the extent of their global and domestic supply chain — routes, lanes, suppliers, plants, parts, and costs; as well as high level insights into equipment, parts, packaging, plants, ports, and overall data quality – and they can drill into any area in which they need more details.

Veda

Their shipment visibility and supply chain resilience application that allows an organization to query the last reported location of any shipment at any time and all of the details associated with that shipment, track inventory in real time, and any red flags based on levels, criticality, and delays.

Integrations

Simple, fast and powerful integrations that handle a variety of data formats and file types including (rest) APIs, EDI, Excel Spreadsheets, CSV and more. Pre-built integrations and formats are available. The integration capability allows a user to manage the data streams and data files they use to define their network, suppliers, products, demands, etc., especially if they are using an ERP/MRP that doesn’t allow for API/direct integration and only supports integration by way of file exports (and imports).

With these six modules, or an appropriate subset thereof, integrated with any existing logistics modules the organization may already have, the organization will be able to

  • import demand history and initial demand forecasts
  • adjust the demand forecasts to a (rolling) order plan (40+ weeks out)
  • identify the optimal packaging, and palletization scheme
  • determine the viable shipping lanes and required (multi-modal) methods
  • collect the quotes from potential carriers
  • select the carriers
  • optimize the allocations among the appropriate carriers and plan the transport
  • communicate the plan and track the shipments
  • provide accurate costing and required cash flow forecasting

… and do so in an integrated logical, fashion that allows a buyer to holistically manage the end-to-end logistics planning and execution process in a single Total Logistics Management Solution (TLMS). Moreover, they will be able to manage their end-to-end logistics process in a solution that is continuously monitoring, suggesting, correcting, and presenting optimizations in the plans it presents for you, allowing you to go from large double-digit variances in your plan vs. actuals to low single digits over time. Taking 10% – 15% out of logistics costs through an integrated, holistic, methodology is significant, especially if logistics and inventory management collectively represents 30% to 40% of the total cost of goods sold.

So if you do not have a TLMS managing your global logistics network, we recommend that you check out aThingz at your first opportunity. The capability may impress you but, more importantly, they may be able to take 10% off your logistics spend and 3% to 5% off of your total organizational spend in a relatively short time-frame, and that’s worth it.

Stepwise Logistics Management is Problem Plagued (LMI Part 3)

In our last article, we noted that Logistics Management, in addition to being costly and risky, is not an easy ordeal. You have a lot of steps to execute in an ordered fashion, which today typically requires at least five different loosely integrated (mostly standalone) modules in a big enterprise Operations Planning solution or, more typically, a number of standalone solutions which only support, at most, endpoint data integration where the outputs of one phase can be fed into another.

While this works, there are a number of issues with using separate systems for each step, including, but not limited to:

  • Inefficiency: entering and leaving multiple systems is timely, especially if 3 or 4 steps in you realize you made a mistake and have to go back to the beginning
  • Opaqueness: you only have visibility into the output of the previous step at any time; e.g. when a carrier asks if you can use a different truck size or pallet size, and you have no details on why you calculated a certain pallet and truck size as optimal, you have no idea and have to go back to the packaging system and do the calculations all over again;
  • Cost Bloat: due to limited visibility into data and models of other systems, each step has to introduce a safety margin, leading to ever increasing safety margins; e.g. the order adds a few extra units; the packaging adds a few extra boxes of units to create some give in the packing calculations; the quote adds an extra pallet or two to make sure enough space is quoted; the contract keeps this extra space; and so on … especially since there are usually different team members, each an expert in the different systems, doing each step
  • Hidden Risks: neither of these systems are good at identifying and tracking risks, and if not propagated to the TMS or a separate risk management system, they will stay buried until they materialize (with no mitigations ready to address them)
  • No Closed Loop Feedback: tracking, learning from, and adjusting future plans and predictions vs. actuals is the only way to improve transportation planning / logistics management

Not to mention the major issues present in most of the current piece-meal solutions being used.

  • Order Management solutions tend to be dependent on the MRP and very limited in terms of how far out they can accurately plan, then defaulting to (often) decades old forecasting models; they also can’t provide any insight into the packaging requirements
  • Package Management solutions depend on accurate inputs from the order management solution and the ERP/MRP, and can only compute packaging sizes, packages per standard pallet, and standard pallets per standard containers; no real issues here, but because they don’t connect to freight (quote) management systems, the users don’t often know the best package options to choose and the best configurations to consider
  • Quote Management solutions collect the quotes, allow comparisons, and allow some to be marked as contract (for a timeframe); no real issues here either, except the fact that because they aren’t a TMS, a buyer can’t understand the full cost associated with selecting a carrier or a lane for a particular shipment, and may make suboptimal decisions
  • Transportation Management Systems plan the transportation needs a few months out (at most; most traditional systems are very limited in how far ahead they can plan due to architecture, calculation requirements, constantly changing requirements as demand shifts and issues arise, and the need to regularly start the entire planning chain over again), create the orders, distribute them, collect the shipment notifications and estimated delivery dates, and maybe track updates; not bad, but not enough anymore
  • Financial Planning Systems are usually either modules of larger operational cash-flow planning solutions and limited in transportation specific cost planning, or sub-modules of TMS, and limited in overall financial planning and cost analysis capability

In other words, the logistics solutions created in the age of logistics (when logistics was also more predictable when natural disasters were few and far between, global pandemics were more theory than reality, global political stability was greater, and so on), while great at the time, are no longer sufficient for optimal supply chain management in the modern world.

What we need is a Total Logistics Management Solution.

A Brief Introduction to the Components of Logistics Management (LMI Part 2)

In our last article we noted that Logistics Management is something that many procurement professionals overlook because most larger organizations have a separate logistics department, but it’s something that they shouldn’t because they won’t understand the true cost, the true delivery times, or the true risk of their sourcing decisions, which may, because of this, turn out to be more costly, more risky, and considerably less efficient than they expect.

In addition to being costly and risky, Logistics Management is not an easy ordeal. In order to manage logistics effectively, you need to:

  1. determine what you need and when you need it
  2. determine how to package it and how much room the packaging takes, and this requires the organization to calculate
    1. how many packages you can get on a pallet
    2. how many pallets you can get in a truck / container / rail car
    3. how many trucks / containers / rail cars you need
  3. determine the viable lanes for shipping from the suppliers to your warehouses and get quotes
  4. select the providers and plan the transport
  5. accurately cost the orders, shipments, and tariffs to make sure you have enough cash on hand to meet your obligations when your invoices come due

This typically requires five different systems, and/or modules. Namely a(n):

OM/FS: Order Management/Forecasting System
This integrates with your MRP system, looks at the production plan, looks at the inventory level, and determines the order quantities needed by week for the next X weeks based on how far out the production plan goes (which, in most systems, typically isn’t that far out, maybe a few months) and then uses the forecasting capabilities to project out a few months ahead of the average transportation time. It will also allow a user to override plans and projections, override default suppliers and carriers if there are options, and calculate any ramifications. And any related functions the organization needs around order management and forecasting. (We’re not going to go deep on any particular capability in this article.)

PMS: Package Management System
Logistics management is not as simple as calculating an order and contracting a carrier. You have to know how much space you will need for the shipment, which will dictate how many trucks, rail cars, or containers. That will depend on how many packaged units you can fit in the space, and that’s often more than a simple volume calculation, as you have to fit parts to boxes, boxes to pallets, and pallets to containers/cars. This requires more sophisticated volume and weight calculations than one would expect, which are not easy to do in a spreadsheet. Plus, if you have multiple options, you have to figure out which is best to minimize your shipping requirements.

FQMS: Freight Quote Management System
Once you know what you need, where it’s coming from, where it’s going to, how it’s going to be packaged, what kind of transport you need, and how many units (trucks, rail cars, containers, etc.), you need to find, and contract, a carrier. But the first step is to get inclusive quotes (costs per mile, fuel surcharges, handling charges, etc.) from carriers, compare and analyze them, contract one or more carriers, and then mark their quotes as contract rates, and others as quotes, but not guarantees.

TMS: Transportation Management System
Once you’ve determined your shipping needs, selected a carrier, and contracted a quote, you need to manage the transportation. You need to provide all the appropriate information to the carrier, get the pickup dates and expected delivery dates, receive and track updates, manage any issues that arise or reroutings that need to be done, identify any delays that will cause production or customer delivery risks and determine resolutions, and so on.

FPS: Financial Planning System (Cash Flow Planning)
Finally, you need to track all of the current and projected costs, and changes, so that you can manage your cash-flow and have the necessary cash when the invoices come in.

In other words, Logistics Planning and Management is currently quite an involved process that requires quite a few modules and process steps to do (reasonably) well.

A Brief Introduction to the Importance of Logistics Management (LMI Part 1)

Logistics Management is something that many procurement professionals overlook because most larger organizations have a separate logistics department. Logistics should not be separated from the whole of supply chain operations management because not only can you not compute a total cost of acquisition (which is the minimum calculation you should do during sourcing) without a solid understanding of the true logistics cost, but underperforming logistics teams costs an organization much more than Procurement thinks (and way more than the Logistic Division’s estimate of getting a product from point A to point B).

Logistics represents a significant part of Cost of Goods Sold (COGS). It’s more than just the transportation costs quoted by the carriers in each multi-modal leg in the journey. (Truck to the outbound port, ocean freight to the inbound port, rail to the regional distribution center, truck to your warehouse.) For an average shipment, costs also include:

  • (special) packaging (sur)charges
  • fuel surcharges
  • surcharges
  • loading/unloading/cross-docking fees
  • interim storage/inventory fees
  • insurance
  • loss (damage or theft)
  • tariffs (dictated by route)
  • losses from unplanned delays
    (loss of sales due to stock-outs; losses from production downtime due to missing parts)
  • inventory fees due to overstock

And all of these costs are variable depending on:

  • the route
    determines legs, length of legs, costs for the leg, tariffs, etc.
  • the carrier
    determines rates, surcharges, risk/OTD expectation, etc.
  • the transportation timings
    determines intermediate inventory needs, risk of delay, risk of loss, etc.

And that’s just the cost considerations. You also have to consider delivery times, inaccurate estimates, improper performance measurements and lack of end-to-end visibility here can lead to:

  • part shortages
    which can cause production line slowdowns/shutdowns
  • stockouts
    which can lead to lost sales
  • inventory build-up
    if too many shipments come in too fast, and this drives up costs and can cause space constraints for other orders
  • unexpected cost increases
    if you have to expedite

And then there’s the risk factors. Depending on the route, and the carrier, you could have increased risk of:

  • natural disaster
  • geopolitical disruption
  • port slowdown or shutdown
  • provider bankruptcy
  • cost increase due to currency exchange fluctuations, new regulations coming into effect, etc.

In other words, you should not overlook the implications of logistics cost to serve and service levels when sourcing. You don’t necessarily have to lock in the contracts, but if you already have contracts locked in, only have a few options, or need to use certain routes or carriers to keep costs down, you will need to ensure that the suppliers, and locations, you select are congruent with any options you may be restricted to. And if you are unrestricted, then you should know the assumptions you are making when sourcing, capture them, and pass them on to the logistics team at order/fulfillment time to make sure that the logistics team is planning and contracting appropriately.

Per Year, How Much Should You Outlay for a Multi-National Enterprise Source to Pay? Good Question! Poor Answer. 500K+

Whereas we were willing and able to put a real, actual, number, or a very tight range, for mid-markets, the situation gets more tricky for a multi-national enterprise with 1 Billion + in Revenue.

Why? Aren’t they using the same advanced tech as a large mid-market, except using advanced capabilities across the board? And, because of this, shouldn’t it max out at 500K? Well, yes, but there are additional considerations you don’t have in the mid-market.

[01] If you are using a lot of decision optimization, semantic analysis, network modelling, etc., then you are using a lot of computing power — that’s driving up the vendors’ hosting costs well beyond the mid-market. Now, at some point, it maxes out at costs on a dedicated machine basis, but it’s still higher.

[02] As a true multi-national enterprise, you are going to need a vendor that has extensive multi-lingual and multi-currency support in the product AND at the help desk when suppliers and third parties have difficulties using the solution to bid, provide information, submit invoices, etc. And while it’s only a one-time cost for a a suite built for true internationalization to add another language pack and currency, an enterprise that offers support in those languages usually has to add more headcount to support that language, and that adds cost.

[03] You’re not only going to have a larger Procurement team using it, but you’re going to have a decentralized global team with a lot more differentiation in capability, with a lot less people capable of being full DIY. They’re going to need more support on a regular basis, and you’re going to need to contract for this up front.

[04] You’re going to need a lot more data. You’re going to be subject to a lot more regulations and you’re going to need to collect, and verify, a lot of data on your partners and suppliers. A LOT of data. You’re going to need a number of data subscriptions on business identifiers, (beneficial) owners, and credit scores for verification that they aren’t on any embargo lists, involved in any legal suits, and acceptable to your insurance provider. Then you need data on their human/workers’ rights practices, compliance, and third party assessments for those countries with laws enforcing compliance and putting you responsible for your supply chain actions. Then you need Carbon/GHG data for countries with reporting requirements or limits. Then you need other ESG/Risk data for your own internal risk assessments. And so on. These subscriptions add up.

So even though the suite itself should still be within that 250K to 500K per year range, when you add up the additional support needs, additional data needs, and dedicated computing power needs, you’re going to double or triple that cost. That being said, before you sign on the dotted line, especially if the quote gets close to 7 figures (one million), you need to do your expected ROI calculation. If you’re not going to see at least a 5X ROI a year on a conservative estimate, with an expected ROI of 7X to 10X a year by years 2 and 3, you need to step back and decide if you need all the functionality, all of the support, and all of the data subscriptions you’re asking for / being quoted, and if so, if you’ve included the right vendors in your RFX for (a) technology solution(s). The reality is that you should NOT be paying a million plus annually for an extended S2P suite unless you’re getting the ROI.

Also, be sure to build that model in-house or engage a third party that is not a reseller or implementer of the suite you’re considering. First of all, their savings averages are not guaranteed to be applicable to your situation. Secondly, their manpower requirements, and reduction, averages might not be appropriate for your business either. Thirdly, because they often build their savings model as a rollup of savings models across the different modules / functions, many of these suite models often end-up double-counting resource time or savings numbers by way of their design.

(Please note our choice of wording here — “end up“. Usually the provider or consulting organization is not trying to deceive you, and they often don’t realize that their roll-up model is double counting. What we’ve seen happen is they take the best calculators they have access to (through consultant or analyst relationships) in each area they are selling in the suite — sourcing, SXM, CLM, etc. — and then roll them up. But they fail to understand that the attributions of a savings percentage in each model always favours the solution/module being sold, which may also assume some baseline functionality of another module. As a result, especially since the savings opportunity often changes based on what technologies are available and applied together, all the estimates will be “Best Case” for the selected modules, and when you add those up across five/six modules, you will sometimes get a total “Best Case” that is as much as double what is actually reasonable. For example, you can have a category where if you just applied spend analysis on the RFX you could identify 6% savings, if you just applied supplier risk profiling to the RFX and eliminated the high risk suppliers and then took the low bids you could identify 4% savings, and if you just applied strategic sourcing decision optimization you could get 10%, but if you applied all three you only achieved 9% (since optimization finds everything spend analysis finds, but the risk assessment resulted in the manual elimination of a high risk supplier that optimization didn’t catch, lowering the initially identified savings opportunity). Rolling up 3 separate models, it would produce a 20% savings opportunity when it was in fact 9%. Now, in other situations, the rollup could be worse than the actual of combining all three technologies, i.e. the RFX is projected to only identify 3% on it’s own and the negotiation module to save 3% on overheads, but the application of both to a targeted subset of suppliers which are deemed to be most willing to negotiate based on volume could allow for an 8% reduction. But overall, these rollups don’t average out and usually over-count.)

[Also, most vendors feel they have to do it this way since most buyers don’t buy all the modules and they don’t have enough average savings data across the application of all advanced modules to all categories to have reliable numbers. So you really need to do your own models based on your own situation and come up with realistic estimates.]

Depending on your current state of affairs, current market conditions, and technologies available that your organization is actually capable of utilizing, that could be an overall, estimated, cost reduction of 3% against all spend expected to be put through the platform in the first year, or it could be 5% (or more, or less). Even 3% is good if you’re spending 1 Billion a year, 500 Million is addressable, and you think you can address 20% of that, or 100 Million, the first year. That’s an estimated savings of 3 Million, and if your year 1 cost was 750K, that’s reasonable with an ROI of 4X, especially if you think increased efficiency will come in year 2 with familiarity, that you will address 200 Million in year 2, and increases the estimated savings percentage to 4%, which would be 8 Million savings in year 2, and an 8X multiple even if you needed to add more data subscriptions and support, bringing the total solution cost up to One Million.

Probably not the answer you wanted, since the mid-market looks to be getting off cheap, but they are also spending less as an organization, addressing less of that spend, dealing with fewer volume or consolidation opportunities, fewer resources to tackle the mid-size categories, and losing on the tail since they can’t effectively manage it beyond catalogs, budgets, and hoping the 3-bids and a buy are fair (and not rigged through collusion). They might pay less for their S2P solution suite, but their total savings potential is also (considerably) less and, thus, their typical ROI is limited compared to yours.

But, well chosen, at least you’ll get an open, modern, usable solution for One Million dollars per annum — not something you can say in all areas of enterprise software.