Some shippers operate under the misconception that once the bid awards have been made, the RFP process has been completed. This is not the case. There is another critical step that can “make or break” the bid process. It is absolutely essential, particularly in multi-plant companies, to have a process in place, immediately upon implementation, to monitor routing guide compliance.

There is an old adage in business that you cannot manage what you cannot measure. This fully applies to the implementation of freight bids.

Never underestimate the power of human relationships. Tickets to sporting events, golf outings, annual fishing trips or vacations at a carrier’s summer or winter residence can do wonders to dismantle the work of a freight bid. In our work we have seen companies use low ranked carriers, or even carriers not listed in the routing guide, to move their freight. To maintain certain long standing carrier relationships, some shippers can and will find reasons to make a switch back to the incumbents.

We would recommend that you not conduct a freight bid until your company is able to put in place some form of reliable compliance tracking. Even a weekly spreadsheet that displays by lane, the carriers moving the freight that week and the reasons for replacing a carrier in the routing guide, would be a helpful tool.

If your company provides hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars in revenue to certain carriers, they are a critical part of your success, or failure and vice versa. While a rate quote may be a suitable form of agreement between shipper and carrier, for low volume service providers, it is not adequate for larger bid awards. There are several reasons for this.

First, a written agreement between the parties can spell out the nature of the business relationship (e.g. parties to the agreement, governing law of which country, state or province, services expected, etc.). Second, in this era of tight capacity, there is a requirement to obtain written commitments from transport providers on various elements of service performance (e.g. on-time pick-up, transit times, billing accuracy etc.).  These can be detailed in a set of SLAs or Service Level Agreements that can be attached to the core agreement.

Third, the full set of rates, accessorial charges and terms and conditions should be attached so there is no disputing the costs the shipper will incur over the agreed contract period.  Fourth, there should be a written understanding concerning the length of the bid award and a mechanism or formula (e.g. CPI increase) for rate increases in subsequent years. Fifth, there should be a written understanding as to what measures can be taken in the event of non-performance.

The intent is not to create legalistic, adversarial relationships with a company’s core carriers; rather signing written agreements will establish a framework for service performance and communication that can promote understanding and co-operation. In other words, the document will provide clarity with respect to expectations, performance and costs that can be quite beneficial to both parties.  

As the freight bid process comes to conclusion, there is an urgency to award the business so the shipper can begin enjoying  the cost savings that were achieved. While this is understandable, it is important to keep several things in mind.

First, if business is being awarded to new carriers, they need to come up a learning curve before they are as experienced as the incumbents. Second, some new carriers may have over committed during the bid process and are not able to perform at the expected level. For example, they may only serve certain lanes on particular days of the week or they may not have enough head haul or back haul traffic to bring their equipment back as quickly as expected.

Sometimes the shipper is at fault by not identifying the full scope of their requirements during the bid process. The company may have forgotten to disclose or incorrectly assumed that every carrier can make an 8:00 AM pickup or delivery every day. When informed, the carrier may determine that the best they can do, with their network, is effect a 10:00 AM or 11:00 AM delivery but no earlier. This may not be satisfactory for the shipper since they may need the freight early in the morning so they can dispatch their delivery vans at 8:00 AM to provide the service demanded by their clients.

We suggest that you test market at least some of the new carriers while keeping the existing carriers in place on those blocks of business. In other words, share the freight until such time that the new carriers have demonstrated that they can meet the service requirements. Guide the new carriers through the transition in order to increase their odds of success. Remember that this will create a win/win situation. This is also a good test of the professionalism of your incumbents.

We live in an ever-changing world. Trucking companies come and go. They are being bought, sold, merged, downsized and resized every day. Under new management, a company may flourish or deteriorate. In this era of driver shortages, carriers are being very deliberate about how they allocate their capacity. As they focus on yield management, this precious capacity is being supplied to the carriers' most profitable customers.

In addition, trucking companies are constantly adding and losing business. A trucking firm may add a new account tomorrow at a higher margin than they are receiving from your business. This may cause them to make their capacity more readily available to another client. The bottom line is that it is always prudent to prepare for a “rainy day.” In other words, there is value in having backup carriers for most of your business.

This means that it is critical during the rounds of bidding, to smooth out the variances in rates between your “low bidders” and the others who were on the short list. By doing this, it reduces the cost differential in making a switch for any of a variety of reasons (e.g. poor service, carrier goes out of business, de-markets certain lanes etc.).

It should also be kept in mind that a carrier will not be too motivated to serve your company if they are a backup carrier in name but receive no freight. To achieve success with freight bids, carefully determine your primary and secondary carriers. This should include both asset and non-asset based providers.  While the temptation is there to give all your freight to the low bidder, to maximize savings, this can be a risky strategy. Where possible, select primary and secondary carriers. Give your backup carriers a reasonable volume of freight so as to keep the primary carriers “honest” and to keep all of your transportation providers engaged in serving your company.

We live in an era of impersonal communication. E mails, text messages, tweets and GoToMeetings have replaced face to face communication in many instances.

The decision to award millions or tens of millions of dollars in freight transportation to a set of carriers is a very important one. You don’t want to entrust your company’s business and reputation to poor service providers that say they will meet your needs and don’t deliver. You don’t want to commit your business to carriers that offer low pricing to secure the contract and then come back a few weeks later with a rate increase, claiming they misunderstood the bid. These situations happen all too often and they can be very disruptive and financially punitive to shippers.

It is our view that the bid evaluation and award process cannot be done effectively through automated computer programs. There is a requirement to meet “eyeball to eyeball” with companies that may be your future business partners. These meetings should have a formal agenda. In addition to pricing issues, there is value in reviewing the carriers’ operations in detail. This includes:

a) fleet size and age