Connect with us

Non classé

The State of Transportation Systems: TMS Lessons from 2025

Published

on

The State Of Transportation Systems: Tms Lessons From 2025

Transportation management underwent steady but meaningful change in 2025. While dramatic innovation was limited, organizations made progress in modernization, connectivity, and decision support. The theme of the year was not transformation. It was alignment—aligning TMS capabilities with the realities of volatile markets, cost pressure, emissions requirements, and customer expectations for more reliable service.

As companies look toward 2026, the lessons of 2025 offer a clearer picture of how TMS platforms are evolving, where value is being created, and what operational constraints continue to limit performance.

Modernization Accelerated and Became More Practical

Organizations continued to migrate from legacy, on-premise systems toward cloud-native platforms. But 2025 marked a shift: modernization was not pursued for its own sake. Instead, companies moved strategically, often focusing modernization efforts on the most constrained, high-visibility transportation processes.

The winning modernization projects delivered:

Cleaner API connectivity for rates, tenders, and tracking

Modular configurations that avoided monolithic system redesign

Reduced onboarding time for carriers and brokers

Better data freshness across execution and visibility systems

Instead of implementing everything at once, most enterprises adopted incremental modernization—starting with visibility integration, rate automation, or fleet scheduling—and expanding gradually.

In 2026, modernization efforts will continue to focus on practical outcomes like reducing manual load, accelerating tender cycles, and improving ETA reliability rather than chasing sweeping transformations.

Continuous Insights Replaced Periodic Reporting

One of the most notable changes was the widespread adoption of continuous, event-driven transportation monitoring. Companies moved away from static weekly performance reviews toward ongoing visibility into network conditions.

The shift was driven by:

the rise of real-time visibility platforms

better quality location data

improved ETA prediction

more reliable carrier status updates

API-fed telemetry replacing batch uploads

Rather than planning once and reacting later, transportation teams used near-real-time insights to:

reroute shipments

adjust pickup windows

realign labor at docks

escalate exceptions before they reached the customer

This “continuous planning” model reduced the latency between data, interpretation, and action.

In 2026, continuous insights will become standard. Static reporting will remain important for strategic planning, but day-to-day operations will revolve around dynamic decision cycles supported by live data.

AI Provided Targeted, Not Transformational, Wins

AI added value in transportation, but only in narrow, well-defined workflows. The strongest results came from AI’s ability to help evaluate alternates and reduce manual decision time.

Routing and Contingency Recommendations

AI helped planners identify viable alternates during:

weather disruptions

port congestion

driver shortages

regional bottlenecks

sudden capacity changes

These recommendations did not replace planning expertise. They accelerated it. AI functioned as a scenario generator—offering options that humans could refine.

Load Matching and Asset Utilization

AI improved load matching for private and dedicated fleets by analyzing:

empty miles

driver hours

backhaul opportunities

dock availability

These gains helped companies squeeze more productivity from constrained assets.

Exception Prioritization

AI helped reduce noise in exception handling by:

filtering out low-impact alerts

grouping related exceptions

identifying root causes

recommending the best corrective action

In 2026, AI will integrate more deeply into TMS workflows, but its role will remain decision support—not autonomy.

API Integration Emerged as a Competitive Advantage

EDI still dominates transportation, but it showed clear limitations in 2025. Delays in status updates, inconsistent message quality, and slow onboarding pushed companies toward API-first connectivity.

Carriers with strong APIs gained share in:

live tracking

instant rate shopping

automated tender acceptance

more granular status updates

lane-specific performance scoring

Shippers discovered that API-enabled carriers delivered faster, more accurate insights and fewer manual interventions.

In 2026, the shift will continue. EDI will remain for large carriers and structured freight networks, but APIs will power high-volume, time-sensitive, and cross-border operations.

Carbon-Aware Planning Began Its Move Into Execution

Sustainability efforts shifted from reporting to operational decision-making. Transportation teams began using emissions as a planning variable.

Companies applied emissions scoring to:

mode selection

carrier procurement

consolidation decisions

routing choices

lane prioritization

Some organizations used TMS enhancements to compare emissions intensity between alternates during routing decisions.

Early adopters discovered that carbon efficiency often aligned with cost and reliability. Efficient lanes tended to be:

better utilized

more predictable

more consistent in transit times

In 2026, carbon-aware routing will expand as regulators tighten expectations and customer requirements evolve.

Planning Cycles Compressed Under Persistent Volatility

Transportation volatility—capacity swings, geopolitical shifts, weather disruptions, and rising energy costs—forced companies to shorten planning cycles.

Teams moved from:

quarterly → monthly carrier scorecards

weekly → daily lane performance checks

static → rolling forecasts

annual → quarterly bid refreshes for variable lanes

This shift required better tools, better data, and better coordination across planning, procurement, and execution.

In 2026, planning cadence will continue to compress as continuous planning becomes the norm.

Visibility Data Became More Actionable

Visibility tools matured in 2025. The strongest improvements included:

more accurate ETAs

simplified exception categories

more reliable location data

better integrations with telematics providers

higher consistency in stop-level information

Companies used this improved data to:

reduce detention

schedule labor more accurately

improve dock turn times

respond earlier to late pickups or missed connections

In 2026, visibility platforms will integrate deeper with TMS systems so planners can adjust execution directly from the exception screen.

Key Constraints That Persisted

Despite progress, several structural issues remained unresolved:

carrier fragmentation

inconsistent small-carrier data quality

limited multimodal synchronization

slow customs processes in certain regions

capacity uncertainty tied to extreme weather

energy price volatility

Technology softened these constraints but did not eliminate them.

What 2026 Will Require

Companies that want to improve transportation performance in 2026 will need to:

strengthen integration discipline

adopt real-time carrier connectivity

incorporate emissions and energy variables

improve scenario modeling

refine carrier scorecards

build continuous planning behaviors

embed AI into exception and routing workflows

The organizations that succeed will treat the TMS as an active operations platform, not a passive system of record.

Final Takeaway

TMS evolution in 2025 was steady and practical. The systems that delivered the most value improved connectivity, reduced latency, and made planning more responsive. In 2026, transportation management will center on real-time coordination, AI-assisted decisions, and cleaner integration across the entire planning-to-execution spectrum. The companies that modernize incrementally, rather than overhaul everything at once, will see the strongest and most reliable gains.

The post The State of Transportation Systems: TMS Lessons from 2025 appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Securing the Chain: The Executive Roadmap to Cyber Resilience

Published

on

By

Securing The Chain: The Executive Roadmap To Cyber Resilience

Call to Action: Download the full guide to gain in-depth insights and practical frameworks that will help you lead the transformation towards a resilient supply chain.

Part 10

Over the past nine sections, we have explored the threats, architectures, governance models, data protections, human factors, response strategies, and partnerships required to secure today’s global supply chains.

But executives don’t just need analysis. They need a roadmap, a structured, actionable framework for building resilience step by step.

This final section offers that roadmap. It is designed for boards, CEOs, CSCOs, and CISOs who must align strategy, investment, and execution to ensure their organizations not only withstand cyber shocks but turn resilience into a competitive differentiator.

1. Principles of the Roadmap

The roadmap is built on five guiding principles:

Resilience, not just security. Assume breaches will happen, plan for rapid recovery.
Ecosystem mindset. Protect not just your company, but the partners who form your chain.
Continuous adaptation. Threats evolve; resilience must be a living system.
Shared responsibility. Cyber resilience spans IT, OT, procurement, logistics, legal, HR, and the C-suite.
Value creation. Resilience isn’t a cost center; it drives trust, revenue protection, and investor confidence.

2. The Five Phases of the Executive Roadmap

Phase 1: Assess

Risk Mapping: Identify critical assets (ERP, WMS, TMS, OT systems) and map interdependencies.
Threat Assessment: Analyze the most relevant attack vectors for your sector.
Gap Analysis: Benchmark against frameworks (NIST, ISO 27001, CMMC).
Supplier Review: Audit third- and fourth-party cyber practices.
Board Engagement: Ensure cyber risks are regularly reviewed in board meetings.

Deliverable: Enterprise-wide cyber risk baseline.

Phase 2: Build

Zero Trust Implementation: Segmentation, IAM, MFA, privileged access controls.
Secure-by-Design Systems: Embed cyber requirements into procurement contracts.
Data Safeguards: Encryption, immutable backups, data provenance protocols.
Governance Models: Establish a cyber risk committee reporting to the board.
Training Programs: Launch cyber awareness across all roles, from forklift drivers to executives.

Deliverable: Core cyber resilience infrastructure.

Phase 3: Pilot

Incident Playbooks: Develop and distribute role-specific response protocols.
Tabletop Exercises: Rehearse ransomware, insider threats, and third-party breaches.
Red Team/Blue Team Drills: Test defenses and refine response.
Supplier Pilots: Run joint simulations with top-tier vendors.
Executive War Games: Pressure-test leadership decision-making in crisis.

Deliverable: Validated, tested resilience processes.

Phase 4: Scale

Supplier Scorecards: Implement cyber rating systems across the supplier base.
Ecosystem Platforms: Deploy secure data exchange and federated identity systems.
Industry Participation: Join ISACs/ISAOs for real-time threat intelligence.
Collaborative Defense: Explore joint SOCs, mutual aid agreements, and sector-wide initiatives.
Global Alignment: Standardize resilience practices across regions.

Deliverable: Resilient, interconnected ecosystem defense posture.

Phase 5: Sustain

Continuous Monitoring: AI-driven threat detection across IT and OT.
Board-Level Dashboards: Track cyber resilience metrics alongside financial KPIs.
Regulatory Compliance: Stay ahead of evolving rules (SEC, NIS2, CMMC).
Cultural Reinforcement: Keep cyber resilience visible in strategy, values, and incentives.
Post-Incident Evolution: Use every incident (internal or external) as a learning cycle.

Deliverable: Enduring resilience as an organizational capability.

3. Metrics That Matter

Executives need quantifiable indicators to measure progress. Suggested metrics include:

Mean Time to Detect (MTTD)
Mean Time to Respond (MTTR).
% of suppliers with validated cyber programs.
% of workforce trained in cyber hygiene.
Backup success rate and recovery time alignment with RTO/RPO.
Board meeting frequency with cyber on the agenda.
Number of red team simulations conducted annually.

4. Embedding Resilience into Strategy

Cyber resilience should not be siloed. It must align with corporate goals:

Growth: Customers prefer resilient partners who won’t fail them in crisis.
Innovation: New technologies (AI, IoT, blockchain) must be secured from inception.
Sustainability: ESG frameworks increasingly include digital risk disclosure.
M&A: Cyber due diligence is now as important as financial due diligence.

Executives must position resilience as a strategic enabler, not a defensive drag.

5. Case Study: Retailer Ecosystem Roadmap

A global retailer implemented the roadmap in five phases:

Assess: Mapped digital dependencies across 1,200 suppliers.
Build: Deployed Zero Trust and encryption across warehouses.
Pilot: Conducted ransomware tabletop exercise with top logistics partner.
Scale: Rolled out supplier cyber scorecards to 400 vendors.
Sustain: Embedded cyber metrics into board dashboards.

Outcome: Faster detection, reduced downtime risk, and improved investor confidence.

6. The Board’s Role

Boards must:

Set tone at the top by prioritizing cyber as strategic.
Allocate capital for resilience initiatives.
Hold management accountable for resilience metrics.
Engage external experts to validate programs.

Cyber resilience is now a governance obligation.

7. The Executive Mandate

For CEOs, CSCOs, and CISOs, the roadmap crystallizes into three imperatives:

Lead visibly. Cyber resilience requires executive sponsorship.
Invest smartly. Prioritize resilience initiatives with highest impact.
Collaborate broadly. Partner with suppliers, customers, regulators, and even competitors.

The message to the organization must be clear: cyber resilience is business resilience.

8. Turning Resilience into Advantage

Resilient companies do more than survive, they thrive:

Customer loyalty: Buyers stick with reliable suppliers.
Investor appeal: Stronger governance attracts capital.
Competitive edge: Cyber maturity becomes a differentiator in bids and partnerships.
Market credibility: Companies seen as resilient can set industry standards.

Executive Takeaways from Part 10

Cyber resilience requires a structured, phased roadmap.
Five phases: Assess, Build, Pilot, Scale, Sustain.
Metrics (MTTD, MTTR, supplier compliance, board oversight) drive accountability.
Resilience must be embedded in growth, innovation, and ESG strategy.
Boards have a fiduciary duty to govern resilience.
Executives must champion resilience visibly and collaboratively.
Cyber resilience is a strategic advantage, not just a defense mechanism.

Conclusion

Cyber resilience in supply chains is no longer optional. It is the currency of trust in a digitized, interconnected world.

This roadmap provides executives with a clear path: Assess, Build, Pilot, Scale, Sustain.
By following these steps, organizations will not only protect themselves but strengthen the entire ecosystem.

Resilient supply chains don’t just survive cyber storms. They emerge stronger, and lead the market forward.

The post Securing the Chain: The Executive Roadmap to Cyber Resilience appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

LNY pickup for Asia -Europe; More carriers testing the Red Sea – December 23, 2025 Update

Published

on

By

LNY pickup for Asia -Europe; More carriers testing the Red Sea – December 23, 2025 Update

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Published: December 23, 2025

Updated: December 24, 2025

Blog

Weekly highlights

Ocean rates – Freightos Baltic Index

Asia-US West Coast prices (FBX01 Weekly) increased 8% to $2,127/FEU.

Asia-US East Coast prices (FBX03 Weekly) decreased 3% to $3,069/FEU.

Asia-N. Europe prices (FBX11 Weekly) increased 11% to $2,707/FEU.

Asia-Mediterranean prices(FBX13 Weekly) increased 15% to $3,850/FEU.

Air rates – Freightos Air Index

China – N. America weekly prices decreased 7% to $7.47/kg.

China – N. Europe weekly prices increased 6% to $3.71/kg.

N. Europe – N. America weekly prices fell 1% to $2.51/kg.

Analysis

Transpacific ocean rates continued their Q4 trend of ups and downs last week with West Coast prices climbing 8% and $200 to $2,100/FEU as carriers increase blanked sailings during this low demand period to try and introduce – and hold on to, at least partially – General Rate Increases every two weeks.

East Coast rates dipped 3% last week, but daily rates this week are up $300 to more than $3,350/FEU. As has been the case since mid-October, rates may retreat again somewhat in the near term. But a more sustained increase could be coming as we get closer to Lunar New Year. Even with the rises and falls though, carriers have succeeded in overall residual gains that have kept prices above year lows set in early October.

More disciplined capacity management on the Asia – Europe lanes have kept rates climbing for much of Q4. But reports of increasing demand as Europe’s importers get an early start on pre-LNY orders now has volume strength supporting the latest GRIs too, with some carriers even restoring some announced blankings. Asia – N. Europe prices rose 11% to more than $2,700/FEU last week, and rates to the Mediterranean increased 15% to $3,850/FEU, with daily rates already above $4,000/FEU – both back to levels last seen this past summer.

This early start – also seen last year – is likely due to continued Red Sea diversions that, for shippers who don’t stock up enough inventory before the holiday, will mean a much longer than usual post-LNY wait to receive goods.

But there are more signs that carriers are taking cautious steps toward resuming Red Sea transits. Maersk sent a vessel through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait late last week for the first time in more than two years, and stated that a few more sailings will follow as they test the feasibility of a full scale return. ONE also joined the group of carriers offering some Red Sea services, though through a charter slot agreement with regional carriers. Insurance premiums for Red Sea transits have fallen somewhat, but shipper concerns over exposure to risk and insurance costs are still a barrier to return, even when some carriers, like Hapag-Lloyd, are ready for a Red Sea trial run.

When Red Sea traffic does resume it will cause worse and significant vessel bunching and congestion at European hubs, and likely drive equipment shortages at Far East origin ports as carriers seek to shorten vessel time spent at berth. The shift back will be disruptive and cause delays and rate increases whenever it occurs, though the effect would be weaker if the return is in the low demand, spring months post-LNY and pre-peak season, and stronger if it coincides with peak season demand increases.

Once that congestion unwinds though, the Red Sea return will increase the amount of capacity available in an already oversupplied market. New vessel deliveries will decrease in 2026 compared to 2025, but the impact of the increase in supply on rates – even if Red Sea diversions continue – will likely be significant nonetheless, with higher levels of newbuild deliveries set for 2027 and 2028.

The Freightos Air Index shows China – US rates have started to come down from year highs as peak season comes to end, with prices falling 7% to $7.47/kg last week and daily rates down to about $6.50/kg. South East Asia – N. America rates are also starting to fall after climbing more than 20% to about $6.00/kg since mid-October. Overall transpacific traffic has proved resilient despite significant China-US volume drops following de minimis changes – and shifts of Chinese e-commerce tonnage to alternative markets – as electronics volumes out of SEA, especially Vietnam, and Taiwan have grown due to tariff introductions.

China – Europe daily rates are at $3.86/kg, about level with earlier in the month and well below the $5.00/kg mark seen a year ago, with SEA – Europe prices at a year high of $4.15/kg, with daily rates easing.

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Freightos Terminal: Real-time pricing dashboards to benchmark rates and track market trends.

Procure: Streamlined procurement and cost savings with digital rate management and automated workflows.

Rate, Book, & Manage: Real-time rate comparison, instant booking, and easy tracking at every shipment stage.

Judah Levine

Head of Research, Freightos Group

Judah is an experienced market research manager, using data-driven analytics to deliver market-based insights. Judah produces the Freightos Group’s FBX Weekly Freight Update and other research on what’s happening in the industry from shipper behaviors to the latest in logistics technology and digitization.

Put the Data in Data-Backed Decision Making

Freightos Terminal helps tens of thousands of freight pros stay informed across all their ports and lanes

The post LNY pickup for Asia -Europe; More carriers testing the Red Sea – December 23, 2025 Update appeared first on Freightos.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Securing the Chain: Partnering for Security in an Interconnected World – Supply Chains are Ecosystems, not Islands.

Published

on

By

Securing The Chain: Partnering For Security In An Interconnected World – Supply Chains Are Ecosystems, Not Islands.

Call to Action: Download the full guide to gain in-depth insights and practical frameworks that will help you lead the transformation towards a resilient supply chain.

Part 9

Supply chains are ecosystems, not islands. A manufacturer may secure its own network, but if a supplier is compromised, malware or data manipulation can flow downstream. Conversely, a cyberattack on a retailer or logistics partner can ripple upstream to vendors and producers.

The interconnected nature of global commerce means that resilience must extend beyond the enterprise. This requires deep collaboration with suppliers, customers, carriers, regulators, and even competitors. Executives must recognize that cyber resilience is a shared responsibility, one that no single company can shoulder alone.

1. The Case for Collaborative Cybersecurity

Why partner? Because adversaries already collaborate. Cybercriminals share exploits on dark web marketplaces, leverage Ransomware-as-a-Service (RaaS), and coordinate across borders. If attackers operate as ecosystems, defenders must do the same.

Key drivers of supply chain collaboration:

Shared exposure: A breach at one node threatens the entire chain.
Cost efficiency: Pooled resources reduce duplication.
Regulatory expectation: Many frameworks mandate third-party risk management.
Market trust: Customers expect resilience across the value chain.

2. Supplier and Partner Due Diligence

Resilience begins with knowing who you’re connected to.

Security questionnaires: Assess supplier policies and controls.
On-site audits: Evaluate OT/IT safeguards in factories and warehouses.
Continuous monitoring: Track third-party cyber ratings.
Contractual requirements: Embed security clauses in supplier agreements.

Due diligence is not a one-off exercise; it must be continuous as supplier conditions evolve.

3. Cybersecurity Scorecards and Assurance Models

Leading firms now implement scorecards to benchmark supplier cyber maturity.

Metrics include: Patch cadence, MFA adoption, encryption standards, employee training.
Tiered assurance models: High-risk suppliers (e.g., logistics providers with network access) face deeper scrutiny than low-risk suppliers.
Shared dashboards: Some organizations allow partners to view and improve their scores in real time.

This creates transparency and encourages collaborative improvement.

4. Information Sharing Across Industries

Cyber resilience improves when companies share threat intelligence.

ISACs (Information Sharing and Analysis Centers): Industry-specific hubs for threat data.
ISAOs (Information Sharing and Analysis Organizations): Regional or sectoral collaboration groups.
Government-industry partnerships: DHS, ENISA, and others provide alerts and frameworks.
Peer-to-peer sharing: Direct exchanges between companies facing similar threats.

Information sharing must be timely, actionable, and anonymized when necessary to encourage participation.

5. Joint Defense Initiatives

Some risks are too large for one firm to handle. Collective defense is emerging as a model.

Sector-wide exercises: Ports and carriers simulate coordinated ransomware attacks.
Mutual aid agreements: Competitors provide temporary logistics capacity if one is hit.
Joint SOCs (Security Operations Centers): Shared facilities monitoring cross-company threats.

These approaches turn fragmented defenses into a networked shield.

6. Case Example: Port Authorities and Carriers

A coalition of European port authorities and shipping carriers formed a joint cyber task force after multiple ransomware disruptions.

Developed shared playbooks for incident response.
Created a joint threat intelligence hub.
Standardized vendor cyber requirements.

The result: Faster detection of threats spreading across ports and coordinated recovery actions, preventing multi-week shipping backlogs.

7. The Role of Technology Platforms

Partnership requires secure technology infrastructure.

Blockchain-based tracking: Ensures tamper-proof visibility across partners.
Secure data exchange platforms: Enable controlled sharing of manifests and forecasts.
Federated identity systems: Partners authenticate without overexposing credentials.
Collaborative AI: Joint anomaly detection across partner data streams.

Technology can be the bridge for trusted collaboration.

8. Overcoming Barriers to Collaboration

Despite the benefits, many companies hesitate to partner on cyber issues. Barriers include:

Fear of liability when disclosing incidents.
Competitive sensitivities about sharing information.
Resource disparities between large firms and smaller suppliers.
Lack of trust across regions or sectors.

Executives must address these barriers with:

Legal frameworks for safe information sharing.
Tiered engagement models for different partner sizes.
Trust-building mechanisms (audits, transparency).

9. Regulatory and Industry Pressure

Governments and industry bodies are pushing collaboration.

EU NIS2 Directive: Requires supply chain risk management and information exchange.
U.S. SEC rules: Mandate disclosure of material cyber incidents.
Industry standards (ISO, NIST): Encourage shared defense practices.
Cyber insurance requirements: Increasingly demand partner due diligence.

Executives must view regulation not just as compliance but as a catalyst for better collaboration.

10. The Executive Lens

For executives, partnering on cyber resilience is about protecting the ecosystem that sustains the business.

Boards: Expect assurance that supplier risk is managed.
Customers: Demand secure, transparent supply chains.
Investors: Favor companies that proactively reduce ecosystem vulnerabilities.
Competitors: May become allies in collective defense.

Collaboration is not optional. It is the only realistic path to resilience in an interconnected world.

Executive Takeaways from Part 9

Cyber resilience requires ecosystem-wide collaboration.
Supplier due diligence must be continuous and risk-based.
Cyber scorecards and shared dashboards drive improvement.
Threat intelligence sharing strengthens detection.
Joint defense initiatives (mutual aid, exercises, SOCs) are emerging.
Technology platforms can secure data exchange.
Barriers to collaboration (trust, liability) must be overcome.
Regulatory pressure is accelerating partnerships.
Executives must lead the shift from isolated defense to collective resilience.

Looking Ahead

In Part 10: The Executive Roadmap to Cyber Resilience, we’ll bring together the lessons of the entire series, outlining a phased strategy that boards and senior leaders can adopt to embed resilience into every layer of the supply chain.

Call to Action: Download the full guide to gain in-depth insights and practical frameworks that will help you lead the transformation towards a resilient supply chain.

The post Securing the Chain: Partnering for Security in an Interconnected World – Supply Chains are Ecosystems, not Islands. appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending