Key Metrics for Supply Chain Performance

A place can be well connected on paper and still fail on foot. That is rarely because walking was overlooked altogether. It is because other priorities were given more weight when the scheme was being shaped. A station may sit nearby, but the route to it feels indirect.   A mixed-use scheme may look compact in plan, but key destinations still feel disconnected in practice.   A district may have the right components, but the walking environment between them is exactly where the access strategy starts to come apart. That rarely comes down to one major failure. More often, it is the cumulative effect of smaller decisions, such as: • a crossing placed for traffic flow rather than the desire line   • a route that is technically available, but not obvious at first glance   • active frontage giving way to dead edges at exactly the wrong point   • directness traded away to protect servicing, parking, or vehicular convenience   • comfort and perceived safety treated as secondary to movement efficiency elsewhere In earlier posts in this series, I wrote about mobility being shaped under pressure and resolved through trade-offs. Walkability sits inside both. Because pedestrian environments do not usually fail through lack of infrastructure alone.   They fail when directness, crossings, legibility, and comfort are repeatedly traded away in favour of other priorities. That is what makes walkability more than a public realm question. It is also a question of hierarchy. Who is being given priority in the space?   What kind of movement is being protected?   And at what point does walking stop shaping the scheme and start adjusting to decisions already made? That matters because what happens on foot is not separate from the rest of the mobility strategy. It affects whether interchange feels straightforward or awkward.   Whether short distances remain competitive with being dropped at the door.   Whether access feels integrated, or simply pieced together afterwards. You can improve connectivity.   You can strengthen public transport provision.   You can refine operations. But if walking conditions are weak, the cost shows up elsewhere. Journeys feel longer than they are.   Interchange feels less intuitive than it should.   And the gap between technical connectivity and real usability becomes much harder to close. So the question is not whether walkability matters. It is whether it is being taken seriously early enough to shape the scheme, rather than being left to deal with the consequences of decisions already made. That is often the difference between a place that is connected   and a place that is genuinely easy to access. ⸻ 👉🏻 In your experience, what tends to be traded away first in walkability: directness, crossing priority, legibility, or perceived safety? ⸻ This is the seventh post in Thinking Mobility, a weekly exploration of how mobility shapes cities.

Logistics: Logistics is the management of the flow of goods, services, and information across the supply chain, covering planning, transportation, inventory management, and distribution to ensure timely and efficient delivery to customers. 1. Core Aspects of Logistics: a)Planning: Strategic forecasting and route optimization ensure efficient product flow. b)Management: Coordinating resources, personnel, and technology for seamless operations. c)Packaging: Protecting goods during transit and enhancing customer experience. d)Transportation: Moving products efficiently via road, rail, air, or sea. Inventory Tracking: Real-time monitoring to prevent stockouts and optimize turnover. e)Distribution: Ensuring products are available at the right place and time. 2. Challenges in Logistics: a)Supply Chain Disruptions: Weather, politics, or pandemics can cause delays and interruptions. b)Cost Management: Balancing transportation, warehousing, and inventory costs with efficiency is challenging. c)Complexity of Multichannel Distribution: E-commerce growth requires handling direct-to-consumer, retail, and cross-border shipments. 3. The Role of Technology in Logistics: a)Automation & Robotics: Automation in warehouses and transport hubs accelerates processes, reduces human error, and increases overall efficiency. b)IoT & Real-Time Tracking: Internet of Things (IoT) devices enable real-time tracking of shipments, allowing for better visibility and faster response to potential disruptions. c)Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI optimizes routes, predicts demand fluctuations, and aids in inventory management, helping businesses stay ahead of the competition. d)Blockchain: Provides enhanced security, transparency, and traceability of goods, improving trust across the entire supply chain. 4. Sustainability in Logistics: a)Eco-Friendly Practices: Sustainable packaging, electric vehicles, and reduced carbon emissions in transportation are becoming key priorities. b)Waste Reduction: Minimizing packaging waste and optimizing shipping methods to reduce energy consumption are essential for both financial and environmental impact. 5. The Impact of Logistics on Customer Experience: a)On-Time Delivery: Timely deliveries boost customer satisfaction and loyalty. b)Order Accuracy: Correct deliveries reduce returns and build customer trust. c)Last-Mile Delivery: Drones and autonomous vehicles improve delivery speed and convenience, especially in cities. 6. The Future of Logistics: a)E-Commerce Growth: Increased online shopping drives demand for faster, cost-effective logistics. b)Smart Warehouses: Automation, drones, and AI enhance efficiency and lower labor costs. c)Autonomous Transportation: Self-driving trucks and drones reduce transportation costs and delivery times. #Logistics #SupplyChainManagement #Innovation #CustomerSatisfaction #Sustainability 🚚 🌍 🚛 🗺️ ⌚ 💹

KEY MANUFACTURING (PRODUCTION) METRICS: 1. Overall Equipment Effectiveness (OEE) Measures the overall efficiency of equipment by assessing its availability, speed, and product quality. It identifies how well machinery is performing in the production process. 2. Cycle Time The time it takes to complete one production cycle, from start to finish. Reducing cycle time is a key objective for increasing efficiency and throughput. 3. First Pass Yield (FPY) The percentage of products produced correctly the first time without needing rework or corrections. Higher FPY indicates a more efficient and quality-driven production process. 4. Production Downtime The amount of time when production is halted due to equipment failure, maintenance, or other issues. Minimizing downtime is essential for maximizing productivity. 5. Throughput The rate at which products are produced, typically measured as the number of units produced in a given period. It reflects how much a manufacturing system is capable of producing. 6. Scrap Rate The percentage of materials or products that are discarded due to defects or errors in the production process. Reducing scrap is important for cost management and sustainability. 7. Yield The proportion of products that meet quality standards compared to the total number of items produced. A high yield indicates that a manufacturing process is producing a large proportion of acceptable goods. 8. Utilization Rate The extent to which production capacity is being used effectively. A higher utilization rate means that equipment and resources are being used more efficiently. 9. Labor Productivity Measures the efficiency of labor by tracking the amount of output produced relative to the labor hours invested. Higher labor productivity indicates better workforce efficiency. 10. Cost per Unit The cost associated with producing each unit of product. Lowering the cost per unit is a key goal for improving profitability and operational efficiency.

Where is capacity at in the dry van truckload sector, and what impact will the heightened examination of driver qualifications have on capacity? Two charts below inform my answers to these questions. Thoughts: •The top chart answers the capacity question using data from the BLS for payrolls in general freight trucking, long-distance, truckload (NAICS 484121). Payrolls as of April 2025 were 520k, which represents a ~30k decline from the late 2022 peak. Interestingly, 550k has been a threshold for payrolls in this sector for the past 35 years, with peaks in early 2000 and 2007 also corresponding to that number. This suggests capacity is around 2019 levels, and likely slightly higher because of a greater presence of nonemployer firms (e.g., for-hire owner-operators). •The bottom chart is from a forthcoming article in Journal of Business Logistics that used data provided by Kevin Hill from his days running CarrierLists where hundreds of trucking companies with 5 – 100 power units were surveyed each week about whether they had started ELD compliance (confidence bands included to show precision of estimates). We only have 70% compliance right before the ELD mandate hits. •What does the bottom chart have to do with driver licensing enforcement? My answer: it provides a sense of the most recent regulatory supply shock versus effects of licensing enforcement. The ELD mandate was a much greater supply shock because a large share of firms, even those with a good number of power units, hadn’t adopted ELDs prior to the mandate’s enforcement. •In contrast, driver licensing issues are likely most serious at small, young carriers that (i) aren’t concerned about compliance in the first place and (ii) experience a low probability of inspection. As such, to expect all these carriers will suddenly clean up their act is naïve and completely contradicts everything we know about misconduct (see https://lnkd.in/gAH8cHVK). Will heightened enforcement cause some carriers to self-select non-compliant drivers off the road? Absolutely. Will all exit? Absolutely not. Implication: every recent strong expansionary pricing cycle in the dry van truckload sector has been driven primarily by sustained increases in demand. While restrictions in supply can compound this, greater enforcement of driver licensing will, by itself, not be enough to shift the dry van TL sector into the type of expansionary pricing cycle we saw in the 2nd half of 2017. #supplychain #freight #trucking #logistics #transportation

African exporters don't need more "capacity building." We need shared cold storage, regional quality labs, and trade finance cooperatives. Here's the blueprint. I've sat through enough donor-funded workshops on "building export capacity." I stopped attending. They always focus on training farmers—beekeeping techniques, organic practices, cooperative management. Please don't DM/invite me to these events. That's fine. But it's not the bottleneck. Accelerators fund useless programs without writing cheques. NGOs fund outdated trainings. Donors fund studies that no one is reading. Governments fund conferences for the elites and cameras. But nobody's funding the boring, essential infrastructure that would 10x African export capacity. Here's what actually limits African superfoods exports: 1. No Shared Cold Storage Honey, moringa, hibiscus—these products need temperature-controlled storage to maintain quality. Most cooperatives can't afford private cold storage facilities ($50,000-$150,000 investment). So products degrade. Quality drops. Buyers reject shipments. Solution: Regional cold storage hubs shared by multiple cooperatives—managed by aggregators or trade associations, accessible at per-kg rates. 2. No Accessible Quality Labs Western buyers need lab reports. But ISO-accredited labs are concentrated in Nairobi, Addis Ababa, Accra—urban centers far from production regions. Farmers in rural Tanzania or DRC can't easily access testing. Solution: Mobile lab units or regional satellite facilities offering affordable batch testing ($200-500 instead of $2,000-5,000). Fund through trade development programs. 3. No Trade Finance for SMEs Exporters face brutal cash flow: farmers need payment at harvest, but buyers pay Net 30-90 days after delivery. Banks won't lend without collateral. Microfinance charges 18-30% interest. Solution: Trade finance cooperatives or guarantee funds specifically for agricultural exports—offering 6-8% interest with receivables as collateral. 4. No Aggregation Coordination Platforms Buyers need 5 tons of moringa. No single cooperative can supply that. But if 15 cooperatives coordinated through a digital platform, they could collectively fulfill orders. Solution: Digital aggregation platforms (think Uber for agricultural supply)—matching buyer demand with distributed producer capacity in real-time. 5. No Shared Compliance Infrastructure Organic certifications cost $12,000 per cooperative. But if 10 cooperatives pool resources and certify through a regional body, per-cooperative cost drops to $3,000-4,000. Solution: Certification consortiums where cooperatives share audit costs, documentation systems, and renewal fees. At Lubembo Co., we're building some of this privately—shared storage in Bandundu (DRC), lab relationships for affordable testing in Nairobi, aggregation coordination across cooperatives. But we're one company. This needs systemic investment. #TradeInfrastructure #AfricanExports #Lubembo #Invest

I built an open source tool that detects cargo traffic on any highway on Earth using free satellite data. Here's the idea: Sentinel-2 captures its red, green, and blue bands about 1 second apart. Everything stationary looks normal. But a truck moving at 80km/h shifts position between those captures, creating a spectral smear across a few pixels. DrishX finds those smears, counts them, logs speed and heading, and tracks how volume changes over months. Draw a box on any area on the planet. Get back a freight activity timeline built entirely from free Copernicus imagery. No sensors on the ground. No subscriptions. No permissions needed. What this has been useful for so far: Monitoring port corridor activity during the Hormuz crisis. Watching trade rerouting at border crossings after tariff changes. Comparing freight volume across parallel routes to spot diversions. Built on peer-reviewed science (Fisser et al. 2022, Remote Sensing of Environment) and implemented as a self-contained web application that runs locally. Being honest about limits because that matters: 10m resolution means large vehicles only, not cars. Cannot identify vehicle types. Cannot see through clouds. This is a volume trend tool, not a surveillance system. The value is in patterns over time, not individual snapshots. Open source on GitHub: https://lnkd.in/gHjJS3Dn Would love to hear from anyone working in supply chain, trade analysis, economic research, or infrastructure planning who sees a use for this. Always looking for interesting corridors to test. #OpenSource #OSINT #SatelliteImagery #RemoteSensing #FreightIntelligence #SupplyChain #Sentinel2 #Copernicus #TradeIntelligence #EconomicIntelligence #GeospatialAnalysis #Python #FastAPI #InfrastructureMonitoring #TradeMonitoring #SanctionsCompliance #LogisticsTech

📈HR is evolving — and so should our metrics!! Gone are the days when HR was just about hiring and payroll. Today, HR drives business value — but only when we track what really matters. 💡 Whether you’re building a high-performing team or improving culture, your data should tell the story. 👉Here are key HR KPIs that matter across every stage of the employee lifecycle: 🔍 1. Recruitment & Talent Acquisition • Time to Hire – Average time from job posting to offer acceptance. • Cost per Hire – Total recruitment cost divided by number of hires. • Offer Acceptance Rate – % of candidates who accept the offer. • Source of Hire – Performance of different hiring channels (LinkedIn, job portals, referrals). • Quality of Hire – Performance and retention rate of new hires (after 3 or 6 months). ⸻ 👋 2. Onboarding • Time to Productivity – Time it takes for new hires to reach expected performance levels. • New Hire Retention Rate (30/60/90 days) – How many new hires stay. • Onboarding Satisfaction Score – Feedback from new hires on onboarding experience. • Completion Rate of Onboarding Tasks – % of employees completing orientation, document submission, etc. ⸻ 💼 3. Employee Engagement & Experience • Employee Engagement Score – From surveys (e.g., eNPS or pulse surveys). • Participation in Engagement Activities – Attendance/feedback from events, programs. • Internal Mobility Rate – % of employees moving to new roles internally. • Manager Feedback Score – Employee feedback on direct supervisors. ⸻ 🧾 4. HR Operations & Compliance • HR-to-Employee Ratio – Number of HR staff per total employees. • Policy Compliance Rate – % adherence to HR policies/processes. • HR Request Resolution Time – Average time to resolve employee queries. ⸻ 📈 5. Performance Management • Completion Rate of Performance Reviews – % of employees reviewed on time. • Goal Achievement Rate – % of employee goals/KPIs met. • Performance Distribution – Breakdown of rating levels (e.g., top, meets, needs improvement). ⸻ 📚 6. Learning & Development • Training Participation Rate – % of employees attending programs. • Training Effectiveness Score – Feedback scores post-training. • Learning Hours per Employee – Average hours spent in development activities. • Skill Acquisition Rate – % of employees acquiring new skills/certifications. ⸻ 🚪 7. Retention & Offboarding • Employee Turnover Rate – Monthly/annual % of employees leaving. • Voluntary vs. Involuntary Turnover – Who left by choice vs. termination. • Regrettable Loss Rate – % of high-performing employees who left. Which of the following HR metric do you track most closely? #HRStrategy #PeopleAnalytics #HRKPIs #EmployeeExperience #PerformanceManagement #Recruitment #LearningAndDevelopment #HRLeadership

Just 20% of procurement teams are recognised for cost avoidance I think that sucks Here's why your business should care: ➟ Stops price creep from silently draining margins ➟ It's harder to grow top line, easier to stop avoidable costs ➟ Cost avoidance is proactive risk management disguised as finance In this post 👇 1. How procurement should be tracking cost avoidance in 2025 2. How to align the metric with finance 3. The cost avoidance calculation 4. How to track and report it Let's start with the basics: 1️⃣ Define a Clear, Approved Baseline The baseline is what you would have paid if no action was taken. Possible baselines: ↳ Should-cost models ↳ Budgeted increase assumptions ↳ Supplier proposed price increases ↳ Historical price escalations (CPI-linked contracts) ↳ Market index increases (commodities, logistics rates) Example: Supplier proposed £10 → Negotiated to £9 = £1/unit avoided or Market forecast shows +5%, procurement holds price flat 2️⃣ Align with Finance on Recognition Rules ↳ How and when it gets recognised (if at all) ↳ What qualifies as legitimate cost avoidance ↳ What evidence is required (quotes, emails, market data) ↳ I like to track it separately from hard savings but report both. 3️⃣ Cost Avoidance Calculation Formula Avoided Cost = (Avoided Price Increase × Actual or Forecast Volume) Example: Avoided £1 increase × 50,000 units = £50,000 cost avoidance For demand avoidance (avoiding unnecessary spend): Avoided Spend = (Planned Volume – Actual Volume) × Price 4️⃣ Documentation and Audit Trail Because it’s hypothetical by nature: ↳ Validate with finance for major items ↳ Keep date-stamped records of negotiations ↳ Document supplier proposals or market forecasts ↳ Use external benchmarks when supplier quotes are unavailable Track and report separately from cost savings ↳ Separate hard savings and cost avoidance ↳ Break down by category, supplier, geography, and initiative type via (i) Monthly operational updates (ii) Quarterly procurement leadership reviews (ii) Annual CFO dashboard (ideally blended with total value impact: savings + avoidance + risk reduction) Finally, some pro tips: ➟ Standardise what counts as cost avoidance across procurement, finance, and business units. Make it a commonly agreed and recognised metric. ➟ Use external market indices (commodity prices, CPI, shipping rates) for credibility ➟ Link avoidance initiatives to business KPIs like margin protection, price stability, ESG compliance ➟ Bundle avoidance metrics into total value delivered reports for CPO dashboards _________ If after doing this, your CFO or CEO still doesn't value cost avoidance 🤷 The problem is THEM not YOU I promise! Repost ♻️ if this helped.

Is your vessel data scattered across multiple platforms, leading to inconsistent reporting and inefficiencies? Managing emissions, vessel performance, fuel optimisation, emissions and compliance should not be this complex. Imagine if one single vessel reporting system with good data quality could streamline everything—no data silos, no redundant reporting, just real time insights. ➡️One System, Infinite Insights - With a unified reporting platform, you get: ✅ A Single Source of Truth – All performance and compliance data fields in one place. ✅ Automated Optimisation – AI driven analytics adjust speed, routes, and fuel consumption. ✅ Seamless Integration – Standardised data flows into all your downstream requirements such as Claims, Route Optimisation and tc. effortlessly. ✅ Reduced Operational Workload – Ship’s crew spends less time on manual reporting. ✅ Regulatory Compliance – Automatically generate reports for CII, EU ETS, and ESG reporting. This is the future of maritime efficiency, which requires change🤔 #shipsandshipping #energyefficiency #maritimeindustry #performancemanagement