Reviews

Answer 1 Better control over carrier procurement decisions One of the biggest improvements I saw was in how we managed carrier procurement at the site level. Before the system was implemented, each plant handled carrier selection differently, and in some cases, decisions were based more on familiarity than performance. With the platform in place, we were able to formalize rate comparisons and routing rules, which made procurement more structured. For example, when we reviewed LTL lanes across a few plants, we realized we were using different carriers with overlapping service but very different cost profiles. Standardizing that throughout the system removed a lot of unnecessary variation. Answer 2 Useful analytics for identifying recurring issues I also found the analytics side very helpful from a quality perspective. Instead of reacting to issues case by case, we were able to start identifying patternssuch as certain sites consistently creating shipments late or certain carriers frequently missing delivery commitments. In one case, we identified that a recurring delay was not a carrier issue but due to how one plant was timing shipment release. Without consistent reporting and visibility, that type of root cause would have been difficult to isolate. Answer 3 Visibility into execution gaps, not just shipment status Another thing I valued was being able to see not just where shipments were, but how they moved through the process. I could look at whether tenders were being accepted on time, whether shipments were re-tendered, or whether manual overrides were being used too often. That level of detail helped us identify where process discipline was breaking down, which is more valuable than just knowing a shipment is delayed.

June 6, 2026