| | Total # Responses | % of Responses |
| The current compensation practice by most Shippers/Carriers on Fuel Surcharge is to use a peg point of $1.20-$1.25 per gallon however $3.00 per gallon or greater is much more realistic. Are you currently thinking about reevaluating your fuel program | | |
| Yes | 12 | 34% |
| No | 23 | 66% |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| If you answered yes do you then expect your carriers do respond with a corresponding increase in base mileage costs? | | |
| Yes | 9 | 69% |
| No | 4 | 31% |
| Total | 13 | 100% |
| Do you require carriers to work off your own Fuel Surcharge table? | | |
| Yes | 31 | 89% |
| No | 4 | 11% |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| What is the primary method you use to secure your logistics pricing? | | |
| a. Bid process | 16 | 47% |
| b. Spot pricing | 2 | 6% |
| c. Contract pricing | 14 | 41% |
| d. Bracket pricing | 1 | 3% |
| e. Other _______________________________________________ | 1 | 3% |
| Total | 34 | 100% |
| How important is it that you tender your freight to an asset based carrier | | |
| a. Very important | 16 | 46% |
| b. Important | 14 | 40% |
| c. Not important | 5 | 14% |
| d. Not a consideration | 0 | |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| What is your greatest frustration in interacting with carriers? | | |
| a. Lack of proactive communication | 21 | 68% |
| b. Lack of equipment availability when required | 3 | 10% |
| c. Rate fluctuations | 0 | |
| d. Internal communication strife within carrier’s operations | 6 | 19% |
| e. Contract requirement | 1 | 3% |
| f. Other ____________________________________________ | 0 | |
| Total | 31 | 100% |
| What is your estimated annual spend for securing your transportation needs? | | |
| a. Less then 10 million | 1 | 3% |
| b. 10 million to 50 million | 12 | 34% |
| c. 50 to 100 million | 6 | 17% |
| d. 100 million to 250 million | 9 | 26% |
| e. Over 250 million | 7 | 20% |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| How important is it in your carrier acquisition decision process that they have an interactive website, automatic email detention notifications, provide daily trace reports accepts email dispatches etc.? | | |
| a. Crucial | 8 | 24% |
| b. Mandatory | 7 | 21% |
| c. Very important | 13 | 38% |
| d. Not important | 5 | 15% |
| e. Not considered | 1 | 3% |
| Total | 34 | 100% |
| With the current “Go Green” initiative is your company? | | |
| A member of Smartway | | |
| Yes | 9 | 50% |
| No | 9 | 50% |
| Total | 18 | 100% |
| Involved in Climateleaders | | |
| Yes | 2 | 14% |
| No | 12 | 86% |
| Total | 14 | 100% |
| Completed a Carbon footprint | | |
| Yes | 9 | 45% |
| No | 11 | 55% |
| Total | 20 | 100% |
| Aware of Environmental Sustainability Plan | | |
| Yes | 21 | 78% |
| No | 6 | 22% |
| Total | 27 | 100% |
| Not Concerned at this time | | |
| Yes | 4 | 36% |
| No | 7 | 64% |
| Total | 11 | 100% |
| Does you company require carrier participation in programs like Smartway? | | |
| Yes | 3 | 10% |
| No | 28 | 90% |
| Total | 31 | 100% |
| Have you had to adjust on time service requirement parameters given increased road congestion? | | |
| Yes | 5 | 16% |
| No | 26 | 84% |
| Total | 31 | 100% |
| If part of that adjustment has been to change expected miles per day transit please indicate what mileage bracket you adjusted to | | |
| a. 500 miles + | 4 | 33% |
| b. 475-499 miles | 2 | 17% |
| c. 450-474 miles | 4 | 33% |
| d. 425-449 miles | 2 | 17% |
| Total | 12 | 100% |
| To better assist carriers dealing with increased congestion have you adjusted Hours of Operation beyond Normal 9-5 shipping and receiving? | | |
| Yes | 26 | 74% |
| No | 9 | 26% |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| Have you increased the number of dropped trailer programs with carriers? | | |
| Yes | 27 | 77% |
| No | 8 | 23% |
| Total | 35 | 100% |
| Did you find that carrier availability during 3rd quarter 2007 versus 3rd quarter 2006 was? | | |
| a. Better | 26 | 76% |
| b. Same | 7 | 21% |
| c. Worse | 1 | 3% |
| Total | 34 | 100% |
| How often do you utilize truckload capacity on a shipment that normally LTL routing would be used due to pricing? | | |
| a. Often | 5 | 16% |
| b. Occasionally | 20 | 63% |
| c. Never | 3 | 9% |
| d. Not applicable | 4 | 13% |
| Total | 32 | 100% |
| Would you like FSA to consider having a Technical Fair (vendors available with load planning software, TSM programs, shipping securement options, emission controls etc) as part of future conferences? | | |
| Yes | 19 | 61% |
| No | 12 | 39% |
| Total | 31 | 100% |
| What does the shipping community think about the effectiveness of collaborative shipping initatives (where multiple shippers overlay their respective networks in search of synergies) to improve transportation efficency (reduce empty miles etc)? | | |
| a. Too difficult to coordinate savings with other shippers | 4 | 15% |
| b. Interesting concept but not realistic | 8 | 31% |
| c. Already have successfully implemented | 1 | 4% |
| d. Would be interested in pursuing with the right shipper partners | 12 | 46% |
| e. Too difficult to allocate savings that are developed | 1 | 4% |
| f. Other _______________________________________________ | 0 | |
| Total | 26 | 100% |
| Has your company outsourced part or all of your transportation services? | | |
| Yes | 13 | 41% |
| No | 19 | 59% |
| Total | 32 | 100% |
| If yes, is your selected provider meeting the efficiency gains, cost savings and service levels that you expected? | | |
| Yes | 7 | 50% |
| Somewhat | 6 | 43% |
| No | 1 | 7% |
| Total | 14 | 100% |
| If no, what was the major factor for this decision? | | |
| a. To costly to implement | 3 | 17% |
| b. Didn’t want to relinquish control of transportation services | 8 | 44% |
| c. Already utilize TMS software | 6 | 33% |
| d. Did not align with corporate strategies or objectives | 1 | 6% |
| e. Other ________________________________________________ | 0 | |
| Total | 18 | 100% |
| What are the 2 primary reasons you chose to attend this year’s conference? | | |
| a. Location – city | 2 | 3% |
| b. Location – resort | 1 | 2% |
| c. Networking Opportunities | 22 | 35% |
| d. Golf Tournament | 0 | 0% |
| e. Conference agenda | 11 | 18% |
| f. Job requirement | 3 | 5% |
| g. Value compared to other conferences | 12 | 19% |
| h. Spouse program | 1 | 2% |
| i. Opportunity to meet numerous carriers/3PL’s/Railroad in 1 location | 10 | 16% |
| Total | 62 | 100% |
| FSA is considering allowing corporate sponsorship of conference speakers, Do you agree with this? | | |
| Yes | 22 | 85% |
| No | 4 | 15% |
| Total | 26 | 100% |
| Would your company be willing to participate | | |
| Yes | 4 | 25% |
| No | 12 | 75% |
| Total | 16 | 100% |
| | | |
| What can shippers; receivers and carriers do to work collaboratively to provide adequate capacity and service economics that provide a fair return to the carriers and a reasonable expense to shippers? |
| Commit to strategic approach solution bases |
| Talk discuss lanes that fit, work together on efficiency practices, drop trailer options, meet face to face |
| Longer form contracts and commitments |
| Receiver drop yard capabilities, collaborative shipping |
| Better on time loading, better communication to customers |
| Open honest communication by all parties |
| Work collaboratively to address both parties needs |
| Work with receivers on making appts easier and speeding unloading, reduce fines and fees |
| better on time loading and delivery, open book P&L, collarbative forecasting |
| Share lane/equipment availability |
| Need large receivers like Sysco to do better at inbound scheduling, unloading honoring appt times and reducing detention |
| Except for the Executive Direct, FSA is managed by member volunteers. How do you think we can generate more interest in our organization to sustain & grow the membership? |
| involve other groups and events |
| publication in trade magazines |
| Represented through flyers and at job fairs |
| advertise to Traffic Managers |
| greater awareness of need |
| advertizing to Traffic Managers, ask members to sign up other members |
| Some shippers not aware of organization, advertize in food mfg magazines |
| possibly a shippers networking session or dinner or breakfast |
| encourage member referrals with incentive |
| word of mouth, receivers will have largest list of vendors/shippers, more shipper/receiver participation needed |
| vendor fair, invite media |
| Please recommend 3 topics you would like to see addressed at a future conference? |
| Fines and fees, faster unloading, proactive communication by carriers |
| Fuel, Transportation infrastructure, big ideas in logistics |
| Address drug & Convenience, channel shipping challenges |
| more on collaboration, interaction opportunity between carrier and vendor, rail information, reducing fuel opportunity |
| breakout discussion w/members only to discuss industry challenges, more intimate group |
| dinner or breakfast specifically for shippers, more shipper interaction, fuel management trends |
| railroad presentation similar to that of the ATA |
| collaboration, Green supply chain, NAFTA discussion |
| sustainability |
| Outsourcing, trends, industry viewpoints, hear from companies like Wal-Mart Sysco and US Foodservice on what they are doing to collaborating detention, freight refusal, lumper fees, receiving time restrictions, would like to hear from LTL carriers on improve |
