Subscribe to our free, weekly email newsletter!



Cost savings trump “green” concerns for logistics managers

By Patrick Burnson, Executive Editor
August 12, 2013

When AlixPartners asked 150 C-level & senior executives at U.S. and European companies about the importance of incorporating “green” practices in their company’s supply chain, they received some surprising – and revealing answers.

Overall, the global business-advisory firm’s survey found that while most executives recognize the importance of sustainability, cost is still a major factor and trumps environmental impact as a driver of behavior.

“Major shippers still focus on speed-to-market and eliminating waste in the supply chain,” said Foster Finley, managing director at AlixPartners and head of its Logistics & Distribution Practice. “If they can achieve this – and at the same time – become more sustainable, that’s great. But being green is not the overriding principle or goal.”

Operational efficiency, added Finley, might be achieved by simply focusing on fuel savings and expenditure of energy.

“Reefer shippers may examine how much thermal waste is being spent in warehouses,” he said. “Truckers may be scrutinized for how much idle time they post.”

Ethical sourcing was a major part of the firm’s recent 2013 Executive Survey on Supply Chain Sustainability.

Sustainable supply chain opportunities are seen as having greater potential for financial return than others are, with freight consolidation and network optimization—both of them cited by 53% of executives surveyed—topping the list. Similarly, third-party logistics and trucking (49% each) are seen by executives as the segments in which the most-cost-competitive sustainable innovations can be found.

“Companies that can implement cost-effective supply chain sustainability improvement strategies and market them to customers will have a competitive advantage,” said Finley.

“For companies willing to spend on sustainable technologies, nearly 60% require a cost payback within 18 months or less,” he said. “Just 17% are willing to wait longer to see a return on their investment. That lack of return on investment is the largest obstacle to achieving greater supply chain sustainability, cited by 65% of executives we asked.”

Lack of return on investment is followed by implementation costs, which was cited by 59% of respondents. For all of those reasons, active investment in sustainable supply chain projects remains a question mark for many company executives.

While retailers are looking to sourcing to drive more differentiation on the shelf and to defend market share, margin and brand reputation, the jury seems to be out on how much sacrifice can be made.

“Twenty-nine percent do plan to actively invest in these types of projects, and 13% said they have a plan, although it will not be implemented in the next year. Nearly half—43%—are undecided,” said Finley.

About the Author

image
Patrick Burnson
Executive Editor

Patrick Burnson is executive editor for Logistics Management and Supply Chain Management Review magazines and web sites. Patrick is a widely-published writer and editor who has spent most of his career covering international trade, global logistics, and supply chain management. He lives and works in San Francisco, providing readers with a Pacific Rim perspective on industry trends and forecasts. You can reach him directly at .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).


Subscribe to Logistics Management magazine

Subscribe today. It's FREE!
Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage your
entire logistics operation.
Start your FREE subscription today!

Recent Entries

Seasonally-adjusted (SA) for-hire truck tonnage in July headed up 1.3 percent on the heels of a 0.8 percent increase in June. The ATA’s not seasonally-adjusted (NSA) index, which represents the change in tonnage actually hauled by fleets before any seasonal adjustment, was 133.3 in July, which outpaced June’s 132.3 by 0.8 percent, and was up 2.8 percent annually.

Volumes for the month of July at the Port of Long Beach (POLB) and the Port of Los Angeles (POLA) were mixed, according to data recently issued by the ports. Unlike May and June, which saw higher than usual seasonal volumes, due to the West Coast port labor situation, July was down as retailers had completed filling inventories for back-to-school shopping.

With a 0.8 cent decrease, this week’s average price per gallon is $3.835 and stands as the lowest price since hitting $3.844 the week of November 25, 2013.

LTL carriers are rapidly investing in expensive, on-dock, three-dimensional size measurement capturing machinery, and they are hoping one day of being able to more accurately charge shippers rates based on the actual dimensions of their shipments, rather than the traditional weight-and-distance-based formula that has been in effect since the 1930s or even earlier.

The Department of Transportation’s Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) recently reported that its Freight Transportation Services Index (TSI) dipped 0.9 percent from May to June.

Article Topics

Blogs · Supply Chain · Green · Logistics · All topics

Comments

Post a comment
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.


© Copyright 2013 Peerless Media LLC, a division of EH Publishing, Inc • 111 Speen Street, Ste 200, Framingham, MA 01701 USA