As 2023 draws to a close, shipping liner companies are looking back on the year as a troubled time, since declining demand for ocean freight combined with increasing capacity to drive maritime container shipping rates down far below their pandemic peaks, according to a report from Xeneta.
Even as they digest that impact, ocean freight firms must continue planning for the future, the Oslo-based firm said in its “2024 Ocean Freight Shipping Outlook.” Business trends in 2024 will be driven by six key issues, the report says: Demand will grow by 2.5%, supply will grow by 6.5%, spot rates will remain volatile throughout the year, carriers will aim to increase spot rates through smart capacity management and General Rate Increases (GRI), long-term rates will be steadier than seen during 2023, and spot rates will hover just below or above long-term rates throughout 2024.
While those predictions play out, rates could have another volatile year, Xeneta CEO Patrik Berglund said in the report. “What we can say is that the current rates are unsustainable. So the question is when they will go up, not if they will go up. From what we know, there’s little room to go further down. What’s most likely is they stay a little longer around this level, maybe go a little bit down, but they will, for sure, go back up.”
But carriers will also have to monitor many other variables, including new environmental regulations being introduced in 2024 that could complicate an already challenging market. “These regulations will prohibit some carriers from utilizing all of their capacity because their vessels are not environmentally-friendly enough and will go out of the market. As a result, we will continue to see slow-steaming and blank sailing,” Berglund said.
While carriers can start planning that strategy right now, other potential changes on the horizon for 2024 will be less predictable. “Think about underlying weak macro-economics; inflation rates, cost of living, interest rates and reduced global consumption. On top of that you have wider political turmoil and wars,” he said. “There are still some heavy dark skies on the horizon and that could change the equation. But I still believe shipping lines will adjust to whatever demand is out there because anything else does not make sense.”
The U.S. manufacturing sector has become an engine of new job creation over the past four years, thanks to a combination of federal incentives and mega-trends like nearshoring and the clean energy boom, according to the industrial real estate firm Savills.
While those manufacturing announcements have softened slightly from their 2022 high point, they remain historically elevated. And the sector’s growth outlook remains strong, regardless of the results of the November U.S. presidential election, the company said in its September “Savills Manufacturing Report.”
From 2021 to 2024, over 995,000 new U.S. manufacturing jobs were announced, with two thirds in advanced sectors like electric vehicles (EVs) and batteries, semiconductors, clean energy, and biomanufacturing. After peaking at 350,000 news jobs in 2022, the growth pace has slowed, with 2024 expected to see just over half that number.
But the ingredients are in place to sustain the hot temperature of American manufacturing expansion in 2025 and beyond, the company said. According to Savills, that’s because the U.S. manufacturing revival is fueled by $910 billion in federal incentives—including the Inflation Reduction Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act—much of which has not yet been spent. Domestic production is also expected to be boosted by new tariffs, including a planned rise in semiconductor tariffs to 50% in 2025 and an increase in tariffs on Chinese EVs from 25% to 100%.
Certain geographical regions will see greater manufacturing growth than others, since just eight states account for 47% of new manufacturing jobs and over 6.3 billion square feet of industrial space, with 197 million more square feet under development. They are: Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, Ohio, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and Tennessee.
Across the border, Mexico’s manufacturing sector has also seen “revolutionary” growth driven by nearshoring strategies targeting U.S. markets and offering lower-cost labor, with a workforce that is now even cheaper than in China. Over the past four years, that country has launched 27 new plants, each creating over 500 jobs. Unlike the U.S. focus on tech manufacturing, Mexico focuses on traditional sectors such as automative parts, appliances, and consumer goods.
Looking at the future, the U.S. manufacturing sector’s growth outlook remains strong, regardless of the results of November’s presidential election, Savills said. That’s because both candidates favor protectionist trade policies, and since significant change to federal incentives would require a single party to control both the legislative and executive branches. Rather than relying on changes in political leadership, future growth of U.S. manufacturing now hinges on finding affordable, reliable power amid increasing competition between manufacturing sites and data centers, Savills said.
The number of container ships waiting outside U.S. East and Gulf Coast ports has swelled from just three vessels on Sunday to 54 on Thursday as a dockworker strike has swiftly halted bustling container traffic at some of the nation’s business facilities, according to analysis by Everstream Analytics.
As of Thursday morning, the two ports with the biggest traffic jams are Savannah (15 ships) and New York (14), followed by single-digit numbers at Mobile, Charleston, Houston, Philadelphia, Norfolk, Baltimore, and Miami, Everstream said.
The impact of that clogged flow of goods will depend on how long the strike lasts, analysts with Moody’s said. The firm’s Moody’s Analytics division estimates the strike will cause a daily hit to the U.S. economy of at least $500 million in the coming days. But that impact will jump to $2 billion per day if the strike persists for several weeks.
The immediate cost of the strike can be seen in rising surcharges and rerouting delays, which can be absorbed by most enterprise-scale companies but hit small and medium-sized businesses particularly hard, a report from Container xChange says.
“The timing of this strike is especially challenging as we are in our traditional peak season. While many pulled forward shipments earlier this year to mitigate risks, stockpiled inventories will only cushion businesses for so long. If the strike continues for an extended period, we could see significant strain on container availability and shipping schedules,” Christian Roeloffs, cofounder and CEO of Container xChange, said in a release.
“For small and medium-sized container traders, this could result in skyrocketing logistics costs and delays, making it harder to secure containers. The longer the disruption lasts, the more difficult it will be for these businesses to keep pace with market demands,” Roeloffs said.
Jason Kra kicked off his presentation at the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) EDGE Conference on Tuesday morning with a question: “How do we use data in assessing what countries we should be investing in for future supply chain decisions?” As president of Li & Fung where he oversees the supply chain solutions company’s wholesale and distribution business in the U.S., Kra understands that many companies are looking for ways to assess risk in their supply chains and diversify their operations beyond China. To properly assess risk, however, you need quality data and a decision model, he said.
In January 2024, in addition to his full-time job, Kra joined American University’s Kogod School of Business as an adjunct professor of the school’s master’s program where he decided to find some answers to his above question about data.
For his research, he created the following situation: “How can data be used to assess the attractiveness of scalable apparel-producing countries for planning based on stability and predictability, and what factors should be considered in the decision-making process to de-risk country diversification decisions?”
Since diversification and resilience have been hot topics in the supply chain space since the U.S.’s 2017 trade war with China, Kra sought to find a way to apply a scientific method to assess supply chain risk. He specifically wanted to answer the following questions:
1.Which methodology is most appropriate to investigate when selecting a country to produce apparel in based on weighted criteria?
2.What criteria should be used to evaluate a production country’s suitability for scalable manufacturing as a future investment?
3.What are the weights (relative importance) of each criterion?
4.How can this methodology be utilized to assess the suitability of production countries for scalable apparel manufacturing and to create a country ranking?
5.Will the criteria and methodology apply to other industries?
After creating a list of criteria and weight rankings based on importance, Kra reached out to 70 senior managers with 20+ years of experience and C-suite executives to get their feedback. What he found was a big difference in criteria/weight rankings between the C-suite and senior managers.
“That huge gap is a good area for future research,” said Kra. “If you don’t have alignment between your C-suite and your senior managers who are doing a lot of the execution, you’re never going to achieve the goals you set as a company.”
With the research results, Kra created a decision model for country selection that can be applied to any industry and customized based on a company’s unique needs. That model includes discussing the data findings, creating a list of diversification countries, and finally, looking at future trends to factor in (like exponential technology, speed, types of supply chains and geopolitics, and sustainability).
After showcasing his research data to the EDGE audience, Kra ended his presentation by sharing some key takeaways from his research:
China diversification strategies alone are not enough. The world will continue to be volatile and disruptive. Country and region diversification is the only protection.
Managers need to balance trade-offs between what is optimal and what is acceptable regarding supply chain decisions. Decision-makers need to find the best country at the lowest price, with the most dependability.
There is a disconnect or misalignment between C-suite executives and senior managers who execute the strategy. So further education and alignment is critical.
Data-driven decision-making for your company/industry: This can be done for any industry—the data is customizable, and there are many “free” sources you can access to put together regional and country data. Utilizing data helps eliminate path dependency (for example, relying on a lean or just-in-time inventory) and keeps executives and managers aligned.
“Look at the business you envision in the future,” said Kra, “and make that your model for today.”
Keep ReadingShow less
J.B. Hunt President and CEO Shelley Simpson answers a question from the audience at the Tuesday afternoon keynote session at CSCMP's EDGE Conference. CSCMP President and CEO Mark Baxa listens attentively to her response.
Most of the time when CEOs present at an industry conference, they like to talk about their companies’ success stories. Not J.B. Hunt’s Shelley Simpson. Speaking today at the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals’ (CSCMP) annual EDGE Conference, the trucking company’s president and CEO led with a story about a time that the company lost a major customer.
According to Simpson, the company had a customer of their dedicated contract business in 2001 that was consistently making late shipments with no lead time. “We were working like crazy to try to satisfy them, and lost their business,” Simpson said.
When the team at J.B. Hunt later met with the customer’s chief supply chain officer, they related all they had been doing for the company. “We told him that we were literally sitting our drivers and our trucks just for you, just to cover your shipments,” Simpson said. “And he said to us, ‘You never shared everything you were doing for us.’”
Out of that experience, came J.B. Hunt’s Customer Value Delivery framework. This framework, according to Simpson, provides a roadmap for creating value and anticipating customer needs.
Framework for Excellence
J.B. Hunt created the above framework to help them formulate better relationships with customers.
The framework consists of five steps:
Understand customer needs: It all starts, according to Simpson, with building a strong relationship with the customer and then using the information gained from those discussions to build a custom plan for the customer.
Deliver expectations: This step involves delivering on the promises made in that custom plan.
Measure results: J.B. Hunt believes that they are not done when freight makes it to the destination. They also need to measure how successful they were versus what the customer expected from them.
Communicate performance: This step involves a two-way exchange, where J.B. Hunt walks the customer through their performance and gets verbal agreement on whether or not they have met the customer’s needs.
Anticipate new value: Here J.B. Hunt looks at what they are hearing from their customer today and then uses that information to derive what the customer may be looking for in the future.
Simpson said the most important part of the process is the fourth step, communicating performance (perhaps reflecting the piece that went wrong in that initial failed customer relationship).
Not only can this framework be used to drive excellence in a company, but it can also be adapted as a model for driving personal excellence, Simpson said. Instead of understanding the customer needs, the process starts with understanding yourself: what your strengths and interests are. This understanding helps drive a personal development plan and personal goals for the year, which can be measured and assessed. For example, each year, Simpson gives herself a letter grade on each of her personal goals and communicates her assessment back to her boss. She has also found it helpful to anticipate where opportunities lie beyond what she is personally doing.
Turning around a failing warehouse operation demands a similar methodology to how emergency room doctors triage troubled patients at the hospital, a speaker said today in a session at the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP)’s EDGE Conference in Nashville.
There are many reasons that a warehouse might start to miss its targets, such as a sudden volume increase or a new IT system implementation gone wrong, said Adri McCaskill, general manager for iPlan’s Warehouse Management business unit. But whatever the cause, the basic rescue strategy is the same: “Just like medicine, you do triage,” she said. “The most life-threatening problem we try to solve first. And only then, once we’ve stopped the bleeding, we can move on.”
In McCaskill’s comparison, just as a doctor might have to break some ribs through energetic CPR to get a patient’s heart beating again, a failing warehouse might need to recover by “breaking some ribs” in a business sense, such as making management changes or stock write-downs.
Once the business has made some stopgap solutions to “stop the bleeding,” it can proceed to a disciplined recovery, she said. And to reach their final goal, managers can use the classic tools of people, process, and technology to improve what she called the three most important key performance indicators (KPIs): on time in full (OTIF), inventory accuracy, and staff turnover.