Connect with us

Non classé

How Avantor and Aera Technology Are Operationalizing Decision Intelligence, Insights from ARC Advisory Group’s 30th Leadership Forum

Published

on

How Avantor And Aera Technology Are Operationalizing Decision Intelligence, Insights From Arc Advisory Group’s 30th Leadership Forum

During the 30th Annual ARC Advisory Forum on February 10th, the session “The New Frontier of Operations and Supply Chain” offered 1.5 hours of valuable learning. It provided a platform for professionals to share their experiences and insights about the future of supply chains. The session delved into real-world end-user case stories, high-level discussions on implementing innovative solutions, and integrating AI into operational processes.

How Avantor Got Started on Its Decision Intelligence Journey

Jared Guckenberger was the end-user presenter during the session, showcasing the results of implementing Aera Technology’s Decision Intelligence solution. Jared is the VP of Global Supply Chains at Avantor. Avantor provides mission-critical materials and tools to life science companies, biopharmaceutical producers, and medical R&D organizations. Avantor has a global reach of 175 countries, 40 distribution centers, plus various college closet storage sites.

Scale:

10,000 supplier/ source combinations
250,000 SKUs sold per year
1.5 SKU-location combinations
10M+ purchase + customer orders per year

Jared shared Avantor’s supply chain challenges, including very high transaction and data volumes. Inventory challenges: too much, too old, and too little at the same time (excess, write-offs, and stockouts). Jared expressed the need to sense, decide, and act faster: integrate better with suppliers (many are low-tech, non-EDI). Many solutions must be “change-ready”, scalable, and usable by many roles, not fully autonomous AI.

Jared played a pivotal role in establishing a working relationship with Aera Technology to address the company’s supply chain challenges by utilizing Aera’s Decision Intelligence solution. It’s not only “Agentic Ai but also classic machine learning, decision logic, which are all orchestrated into repeatable decision processes. The core idea of Decision Intelligence is that it lets the system make thousands of routine decisions humans don’t have time for, rather than “smarter than humans” decisions.

At the start, Avantor focused on three reasonable target skill areas, focusing on decisions and processes that were traditionally inefficient. Avantor focused on stock rebalancing, purchase order cancellation, and purchase order prioritization to address inventory issues and improve customer service.

Stock Rebalancing: In the past, it was largely a manual, monthly exercise with lots of churn, and distribution centers were reluctant to spend days loading trucks; only top items were prioritized. Now: System scans twice a week to find dead or slow-moving stock and target locations with demand. DI produces move recommendations: planners approve or reject. On approval, stock transport orders are created in SAP automatically. The overall impact includes moving from infrequent “chunks to continuous, every other day rebalancing. Captures many “small” opportunities humans previously ignored: reduces write-offs and dead stock.

Purchase Order Cancellation: Traditionally, dynamic demand (orders canceled or changed) had a slow response time of 2-3 weeks. Now, systems scan weekly and propose PO cancellations. They send recommendations to suppliers via email (no EDI required). Suppliers reply by email; the system parses the response and summarizes it. The buyer then decides whether to accept or deny the cancellation. This process has reduced the cycle time from weeks to about a week or less. In the early phase, this approach has already saved $300K in inbound POs within 1-2 weeks using a small group.

Purchase Order Prioritization: Avantor has transitioned from a reactive to a proactive approach to managing stockouts. Now: The new system predicts potential stock shortages based on current demand and supply data. It then automatically emails vendors with requests like, “Can you move this delivery up by C days?” The vendor’s response (yes, no, or partial) is processed by the system and presented to the buyer, who then confirms the changes after considering associated costs. This proactive service enhancement improves the customer experience without relying on Advanced Planning and Scheduling (APS) tools like SAP.

Key Takeaways:

“Don’t wait for perfection; go live, then iterate.” Avantor currently has 62 enhancements still in the backlog. Pick skills with clear, immediate business impact and strong business sponsorship. Simplify processes where possible before or alongside automation. Lastly, have a roadmap ready: successful pilots quickly create demand for more AI/decision-intelligence use cases, which must then be prioritized and funded.

Executive Leadership Q&A Discussion:

After the presentation portion of the session, we moved into a Q&A style format with various industry professionals, including:

Peter Quimby of Aera Technology
Jeremy Hudson of Open Sky Group
Bryan Batchelder of Datex
Jared Guckenberger of Avantor

With over an hour of discussion, here are some of the top-line questions and answers from our panelists.

Question 1: As a system integrator, what best practices should customers follow when integrating new solutions, especially around data and AI?

Jeremy Hudson responded that many prospects want to attack the “gnarliest” use cases or copy flash keynotes (digital twins, robots, etc). Jeremy suggests you start with the simple, high-impact problems (where not everyone sends ASNs/EDI) rather than trying to boil the ocean. Focus on supporting decision makers, accept that data won’t be perfect, and choose tools that can work with and around bad data.

Question 2: How do you handle a go-live when the system isn’t perfect yet? Did you run a parallel (head-to-head) system, and how did you manage the risks?

Jared responded that there was no parallel legacy system because they had zero systems to begin with, so they could not do a clean head-to-head comparison. He also added that there was a “steering team” which was set up to communicate extensively with their distribution network. Citing an example of having to explain that spending $15 on UPS to avoid losing $1,000 in inventory.

Peter Quimby added that this is about Decision Intelligence, explicitly designing, evaluating, and learning from decisions. You “bring some eggs to make the omelet”: accept early friction to start capturing learning signals.

Question 3: Bryan, your role at Datex is part back-end developer and front-end product manager. What capabilities have you been recently working on, and how have your customers responded?

Bryan spoke in great detail about how the Datex platform is built on a low-code app platform that enables professional services teams to implement customizations faster and more cost-effectively. Additionally, some capabilities that Bryan is working on include embedding AI and agentic coding tools to help users define data sources (essentially queries over the data), which enables those data sources to be wrapped into reports. Lastly, they are striving towards building their own multi-agent orchestration and execution environment. Which would essentially mean that their customers would have their own agent that is loaded with all available context from sales prospectability to post-implementation debriefs.

Final Thoughts:

The session highlighted the current thinking and actions of leading companies in the supply chain market. A paradoxical trend is emerging: a significant rise in disruptions is occurring alongside the achievement of new levels of operational efficiency. Both end-users and providers are navigating distinct challenges, yet they share the common goals of increasing resilience and efficiency, and maintaining a competitive edge through digital transformation.

The post How Avantor and Aera Technology Are Operationalizing Decision Intelligence, Insights from ARC Advisory Group’s 30th Leadership Forum appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

What A2A Really Means in a Supply Chain Context

Published

on

By

What A2a Really Means In A Supply Chain Context

The Coordination Gap in Modern Supply Chains

Agent-to-agent communication, or A2A, is beginning to appear in supply chain technology discussions. It is sometimes described as a feature of autonomous systems or as an extension of API integration. That description is incomplete. A2A represents a change in how coordination occurs across the supply chain. It is architectural in nature and affects how decisions move between functions.

Most supply chains today operate across multiple systems and organizational boundaries. Transportation, planning, procurement, warehousing, and customer service each rely on specialized platforms. These systems exchange data efficiently, but coordination between functions is still largely mediated by people. When a disruption occurs, information flows quickly, yet decisions often move more slowly because they require cross functional alignment and manual approval.

As networks expand and volatility increases, this coordination gap becomes more visible. Data may be real time, but decision making is not.

What A2A Actually Does

A2A addresses this coordination gap directly. It allows defined software agents, each responsible for a specific domain, to communicate with one another, evaluate constraints, and act within established policy boundaries. The emphasis is not simply on exchanging data, but on aligning actions across functions.

An agent in this context is a bounded decision entity. It monitors defined inputs, evaluates conditions against models or rules, and selects from approved actions. It also communicates its state and its intended actions to other agents. In a supply chain environment, agents may govern forecasting adjustments, inventory balancing, carrier selection, procurement allocation, or exception handling.

Each agent operates within a limited scope of authority. The value emerges when these agents coordinate across domains in a structured and observable way.

A2A Is Not Traditional Integration

It is important to distinguish A2A from traditional system integration. APIs allow systems to pass data between one another. They improve visibility and reduce manual data entry. However, integration alone does not resolve cross functional tradeoffs.

A2A focuses on decision alignment rather than data transfer. Integration answers the question, “What happened?” A2A addresses the question, “What should we do next, and who needs to adjust?”

That difference defines the architectural shift.

A Practical Example: Managing a Shipment Delay

Consider a delayed shipment in a conventional operating model. Transportation identifies the delay and informs planning. Planning reassesses inventory exposure. Procurement evaluates alternative sourcing. Customer service updates delivery commitments. Each step may be efficient within its function, but the process depends on sequential handoffs and internal coordination.

In an A2A model, the shipment agent detects a deviation in arrival time and notifies the inventory agent. The inventory agent recalculates stockout probability and communicates with procurement. Procurement evaluates alternate supply or expediting options within defined cost thresholds. Order promising adjusts commitments based on updated constraints. Customer notification is triggered if impact thresholds are exceeded.

These steps occur through coordinated system level decisions rather than manual escalation.

Decision Centric Architecture

A2A introduces what can be described as decision centric architecture. Traditional enterprise systems are workflow centric. They execute predefined sequences and rely on human oversight to resolve conflicts between domains.

In a decision centric model, agents continuously evaluate changing conditions and coordinate with other agents in real time. Transportation decisions can reflect inventory exposure. Procurement decisions can incorporate service commitments. Planning decisions can account for execution constraints.

Optimization shifts from local improvement within a single system to alignment across the network.

Governance and Control

Autonomous coordination does not remove the need for governance. Agents must operate within clearly defined authority limits, escalation thresholds, and audit requirements. Enterprises remain accountable for outcomes.

Policies determine which decisions agents can execute independently and which require human review. Logging and traceability ensure that decisions can be audited. Boundaries must be explicit.

Without governance, autonomy introduces risk. With governance, it introduces consistency and speed.

Operational Implications

As supply chains become more volatile and exception driven, the volume of cross functional decisions increases. Manual coordination does not scale efficiently under these conditions. Delays in alignment can translate into higher costs, lower service levels, and increased operational stress.

A2A reduces decision latency by enabling system level coordination. Exception handling becomes more consistent. Actions across planning, procurement, and execution are aligned more quickly. The supply chain becomes more responsive because coordination occurs continuously rather than episodically.

What A2A Ultimately Means

In practical terms, A2A means that the supply chain can coordinate its own decisions within established boundaries. It shifts the operating model from sequential workflow management to distributed decision coordination.

As complexity and variability increase, the ability to coordinate quickly and consistently across domains becomes an operational advantage. A2A is not a cosmetic enhancement to existing systems. It is a structural change in how supply chain decisions are aligned across the enterprise.

Download the Full Architecture Framework

A2A is only one component of a broader intelligent supply chain architecture. For a structured analysis of how A2A integrates with context-aware systems, retrieval frameworks, graph-based reasoning, and data harmonization requirements, download the full white paper:

AI in the Supply Chain: Architecting the Future of Logistics with A2A, MCP, and Graph-Enhanced Reasoning

The paper outlines the architectural model, governance considerations, and practical implementation path for enterprises building connected intelligence across their supply networks.

Download the white paper to explore the complete framework.

The post What A2A Really Means in a Supply Chain Context appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Uncertainty surges again as SCOTUS decides and Trump responds – February 24, 2026 Update

Published

on

By

Uncertainty surges again as SCOTUS decides and Trump responds – February 24, 2026 Update

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Published: February 24, 2026

Blog

Weekly highlights

Ocean rates – Freightos Baltic Index

Asia-US West Coast prices (FBX01 Weekly) decreased 3%.

Asia-US East Coast prices (FBX03 Weekly) decreased 1%.

Asia-N. Europe prices (FBX11 Weekly) decreased 1%.

Asia-Mediterranean prices(FBX13 Weekly) increased 2%.

Air rates – Freightos Air Index

China – N. America weekly prices decreased 15%.

China – N. Europe weekly prices decreased 9%.

N. Europe – N. America weekly prices stayed level.

Analysis

The much-anticipated US Supreme Court decision arrived on Friday, striking down the Trump administration’s use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to enact tariffs. The president relied on IEEPA for most of last year’s tariffs, including all the country-specific tariffs and the fentanyl-related duties imposed on China, Mexico and Canada.

The move triggered a rapid response from the White House, making good on promises to reinstate IEEPA tariffs by other means in the event of a loss. Trump signed an executive order later that day introducing a 10% global tariff based on Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, reframing the duty as addressing a balance of payments problem. The president said on social media that he will raise the tariff to 15%, and the administration is reportedly working on an amended order, but the law went into effect Tuesday at 10%, and is valid until late July.

The ruling keeps de minimis suspended, and leaves Section 232 sectoral tariffs, and Section 301 tariffs on specific trading partners – used in 2018 for duties specific to China – intact too, but along with the long list of previous exemptions to the IEEPA tariffs. The president and other officials stated this week that they will use other means – like 232 and 301 – to restore tariffs before Section 122 expires, though these channels typically take months as they require federal agency investigations before the president can introduce duties.

The White House already has several Section 232 probes underway and is now reportedly considering opening more. And in addition to reviewing China’s compliance to the terms of its deal with the US during Trump’s first administration, it may also have opened additional China-focused 301 investigations.

The US based the many trade agreements it negotiated in the past year largely on IEEPA tariffs, raising questions as to the deals’ validity and how various trade partners will react. The administration says the US intends to honor these agreements and Trump has threatened counterparts who do otherwise. And while some countries have so far said they will stick to the deals, some high profile partners like the European Union see a 15% blanket duty as a breach of agreed tariff levels for some goods, and have paused steps to implement the agreement until they can receive clarity.

All-in-all the shift to a global 15% tariff mostly preserves the IEEPA trade barriers: Yale’s Budget Lab estimates the change reduces the overall effective US tariff rate by only two percentage points, with impacts varying by country – a five percentage point reduction for China and Vietnam, no change for the EU baseline, a five-point increase for the UK, and the most significant reduction for Brazil (down from 40%). Overall effective tariffs on China remain around 40% due to pre-existing Section 301 duties.

So while in terms of tariff levels not too much has changed for the near term – and as of now the US appears intent on restoring and maintaining tariffs after Section 122 expires too – the more significant implication may be geopolitical.

Trump relied on IEEPA during this administration because of its speed — it allowed him to credibly threaten immediate tariffs across a wide range of, often non-trade-related, issues, including the recent Greenland drama. With that leverage gone, though we’re still likely to see Trump threaten tariffs that could ultimately materialize, the pace of US trade policy changes, and the frequency of disruptions Trump has caused for freight markets over the past year, could slow significantly.

For US shippers, the immediate question – in addition to the many questions around potential refunds – is whether or not these developments justify frontloading before the July deadline.

Where the 15% rate represents a meaningful reduction — like for Brazil — we may see a quick increase in volumes. And a five-percentage point reduction for tariffs on goods out of China and Vietnam may be enough to spur frontloading by some shippers, meaning we may see some signs of increased demand as soon as manufacturing restarts post-Lunar New Year in a week or so.

But, for many shippers, the relatively modest tariff reduction for most countries including China and Vietnam may not be enough to trigger a significant pull forward. And with the White House under cost of living political pressure; facing some open Republican opposition to tariffs; and considering expanding its list of tariff exceptions – some importers may suspect that Trump will hesitate to extend tariffs at the end of July as midterm elections loom. These factors could also keep many importers from frontloading in hopes that the tariff landscape shifts in their favor.

So, we’ll probably see somewhat stronger US import volumes in the coming months, and possibly an earlier start to peak season, than we otherwise would have, but we may not see the levels of frontloading that tariff threats spurred last year.

As container rates won’t reflect any, or even a surge of, potential frontloading until after the LNY period, transpacific rates – along with Asia – Europe prices for the same reason – were about stable last week and down from their pre-LNY highs. As rates are likely to rebound on the typical post-LNY backlog bump for all these lanes, it may initially not be possible to attribute rate increases solely to trade war developments.

Carriers have prevented rates from sliding too far over the past weeks by increasing blanked sailings on these lanes, though they will restore capacity if demand materializes post the holiday. With the current demand lull, the stop and start weather disruptions in N. Europe and the resulting congestion has not pushed rates up. This week’s major blizzard in the northeastern US also shut ports, roads and airports temporarily, but may likewise not be felt in rate levels despite likely delays and congestion.

In other ocean news, some ZIM vessels in Israel are facing port labor disruptions from union workers opposed to the planned sale to Hapag-Lloyd. And Maersk and MSC have officially taken over operations at the Panama Canal ports previously run by HK Hutchinson, despite Hutchinson’s opposition.

Finally, for air cargo, the tariff turmoil could, like for ocean freight, be reflected in some increase in US bound volumes in the coming months. But with de minimis still suspended, we’re unlikely to see a big or sudden volume surge for air cargo either. As ex-Asia freight is in its LNY lull, China – US rates dipped by 15% and prices to Europe eased almost 10% last week.

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 Uncertainty surges again as SCOTUS decides and Trump responds – February 24, 2026 Update appeared first on Freightos.

Continue Reading

Non classé

The Technology Gap: Why Supply Chain Execution Still Isn’t Fully Connected Yet

Published

on

By

The Technology Gap: Why Supply Chain Execution Still Isn’t Fully Connected Yet

Supply chain leaders aren’t debating whether to modernize. They are debating whether their current architecture can support modernization without breaking everything around it.

That’s the real technology gap.

It’s not ambition. It’s not budget. It’s architecture.

Execution systems were built to optimize within domains. Order management. Warehouse management. Transportation management. Each performs well inside its own boundaries. But none were designed to coordinate decisions across systems as conditions change in real time.

In today’s environment, that limitation is costly.

The architecture problem no one designed for

When a disruption hits, each system responds locally.

When a truck runs late, the TMS flags a delay and suggests a new ETA. But the warehouse labor plan doesn’t automatically adjust. Dock schedules aren’t rebalanced. Order promises aren’t re-evaluated. Each system responds correctly within its domain, yet by the time the impact is understood end-to-end, the organization is already in exception mode: calls, spreadsheets, workarounds, and expedited decisions.

That’s not an execution failure. It’s an integration and architecture failure.

Connected execution enables coordinated workflows and synchronized decisions across order, warehouse and transportation operations, so execution can coordinate across systems when disruptions occur or conditions change.

Connected execution is more than just visibility. It is the difference between seeing a disruption and coordinating the response across systems, not after the fact, but as the disruption unfolds.

What the data reveals

According to the recently released Supply Chain Execution Readiness Report, U.S. supply chain leaders revealed the two biggest barriers to adopting advanced, modern supply chain execution technology are:

(69%) data quality and integration complexity.
(63%) legacy systems and technical debt.

That’s why investment intent is strong. The top strategic priorities influencing where organizations make technology investments are operational efficiency (72%), cost reduction (54%) and business growth (47%). And 59% plan to increase spending on supply chain execution solutions over the next 12 months. The constraint is not willingness to invest. It’s whether existing architectures can support connected execution.

The buying criteria has changed

When asked what they require when sourcing supply chain execution solutions, supply chain leaders prioritized these technology features equally:

Real-time visibility (89%)
Scalability (88%)
Pricing and Total Cost of Ownership (88%)
Ease of implementation and deployment (87%)
Interoperability and integration between systems (86%)

This signals a clear preference for execution environments that reflect real-time data, deliver quick time to value and connect across functions, rather than isolated point solutions optimized for individual domains.

How to get connected without rip-and-replace

Connected execution does not require replacing every core system. It requires modernizing the seams where handoffs or decisions are made. Three practical steps can guide the transition:

Map the hand-offs that drive firefighting. Where do decisions get stuck, duplicated or delayed? Which hand-offs create recurring disruption management and manual escalation? This pinpoints where connected execution will deliver the biggest and fastest impact.
Prioritize modular, interoperable architecture. Look for solutions that can integrate within your existing environments and scale incrementally. This keeps costs predictable, reduces deployment risk and allows you to modernize without replacing every core system at once.
Choose solutions that enable coordination, not just reporting. Prioritize shared workflows and cross-system decision support that helps teams act consistently across systems, rather than tools that only surface insights and alerts.

Closing the technology gap

The next competitive divide in supply chain performance will not be visibility. It will be coordination. Execution advantage now depends on how quickly organizations can sense change, align decisions across systems, and act without manual reconciliation.

Connected execution is the foundation for speed and resilience because it builds an execution environment where data, workflows and decisions can move across OMS, WMS and TMS with minimal friction.

Start where the friction is highest: the hand-offs that create recurring firefighting. Then modernize intentionally, prioritizing modular interoperability, fast time to value, and solutions that coordinate decisions across systems, not just report on them. As those seams close, execution becomes easier to manage, disruptions become easier to contain, and teams regain capacity to focus on high-impact exceptions instead of routine reconciliation.

CTA

Download the Supply Chain Execution Readiness Report, a survey of U.S.-based supply chain senior leaders conducted by an independent, third-party research firm. Learn more about the benefits of Connected Execution here.

By Richard Stewart, Executive Vice President, Product and Industry Strategy, Infios

The post The Technology Gap: Why Supply Chain Execution Still Isn’t Fully Connected Yet appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending