Connect with us

Non classé

Modern Cost Engineering Evolution: Rewiring the Human Element for Supply Chain Resilience

Published

2 mois ago

on

Modern Cost Engineering Evolution: Rewiring The Human Element For Supply Chain Resilience

In my previous blog outlining the adoption of cost engineering, I explored the dynamics behind the market move away from sole reliance on traditional, backward-looking cost estimating to one that also incorporates modern “should-cost” methods. The reasons are many, of course, but it is clear that industrial organizations are keen to use AI-driven methods and other digital tools to build much stronger layers of resilience and competitive advantage necessary to compete in today’s hyperconnected economies.

Although digitally enabled results can sometimes be achieved in an operational vacuum, digital maturity cannot. The former can demonstrate benefits like efficiency, cost reduction, safety, etc., but it will rarely scale. The latter delivers market success via competitive excellence, providing a means for better organizing the business and orchestrating the ecosystem to anticipate and meet modern market signals.

Modernizing the supply chain is, at its core, a human-centered endeavor. The successful integration of cost engineering demands significant realignment and reskilling of people. As I began discussing almost a decade ago, the workforce transformation required to modernize is certainly the most difficult endeavor a business will face.

In this blog, I’ll dive into the human element of cost engineering. I’ll touch on how roles and attendant knowledge, skills, and abilities (KSAs) across the supply chain are evolving, discuss the cultural hurdles organizations must navigate, and outline how companies can transform traditional estimators into strategic consultants.

Tribal Knowledge: I Feel Like I’ve Been Here Before

Leadership must address the workforce crisis currently confronting industrial manufacturing. Look at any credible information resource and the numbers are basically the same. Whole industries are facing rapid workforce retirements, with approximately 25 percent of the total manufacturing workforce already over the age of 55. Within small and medium-sized enterprises, which form the bedrock of the industrial manufacturing supply base, particularly in North America, between 30 and 40 percent of business owners and skilled operational workers are nearing retirement age. Ouch.

And yet we’ve known this has been underway for quite some time, but here we are. Historically, the reaction to tribal knowledge was wariness. I recall many conversations with leadership and frontline workers as technologies such as machine learning were initially deployed. Tribal knowledge, expertise, and the workforce that owned it were often treated as a nut to be cracked and the insides taken. Initially, the shell was perceived to be obstinately hard, with workers guarding their critical expertise, including core intellectual property (IP), as a means of fending off obsolescence. It didn’t lend itself to, shall we say, everyone pulling in the same direction.

Supply chain was no exception to this pattern. Cost estimating relied heavily on the undocumented tribal knowledge and personal experience of veteran employees. As these experts exit the workforce, they take decades of specialized intuition with them, leaving organizations highly vulnerable.

As a result, a new discipline has taken hold, as tribal knowledge is likely to be unretrievable in many instances or, in situations where leaders show a lack of humility, downsized too quickly. Modern cost engineering takes aim squarely at the reliance on human memory with standardized, process-based cost models and empirical data. Yet, an overwhelming 90 percent of supply chain leaders report a severe lack of the digital talent required to operate these new systems. Here we are, again, back to the ever-important human element at the center of a technology endeavor.

Redefining Supply Chain Personas

Rather than taking the same, lose-lose historical approach to cracking tribal knowledge, leading organizations are pivoting workers away from the manual, unsafe, and repetitive. What they are doing differently, though, is concertedly moving subject matter experts toward higher-level orchestration and critical oversight. It won’t pan out with every worker, certainly, but it will ensure that the expertise is retained and applied to creating more strategic value. On the surface, that presents much more opportunity for a win-win scenario. Here is how some specific roles are evolving:

Estimator

Historically, manufacturing estimators spent most of their time immersed in manual, backward-looking work. They pored over static 2D PDFs, visually interpreted complex 3D CAD models, and stitched together cost assumptions from disconnected spreadsheets. Much of their value came from patience and pattern recognition rather than insight, and the process was slow, reactive, and highly dependent on individual experience. For leading companies that are aggressively implementing cost engineering processes, that is radically changing.

In the world of cost engineering, this role is now that of a strategic advisor. Leveraging AI to automate much of the data extraction that once consumed their time, this role develops models to identify cost drivers based on real manufacturing constraints and material behavior. As a result, this role now focuses more on guiding internal teams on design-for-manufacturability decisions and outlining strategic trade-offs that can include a mix of potential metrics, such as cost, lead time, and, increasingly, carbon impact.

Procurement

Procurement has primarily been about transactional efficiency and negotiation. Success was generally determined by price, often with significant visibility limitations into how the price was constructed. Framed within cost engineering, procurement is driven by collaboration and risk management. Using precise cost models, sourcing conversations begin with a clear understanding of cost, informed by specifics on materials, labor, processes, and capacity constraints. If a supplier’s quote exceeds cost expectations, conversations can then be had specifically about how to target specific constraints, such as inefficiencies in process or materials. The objective is to provide transparency that allows for a win-win relationship in terms of performance, profitability, and reliability.

Frontline

Despite the best of intentions to change the reactive nature of the role, frontline work has been dominated by manual execution and post-problem decision-making. Operators were tasked with keeping machines running, responding to breakdowns as they occurred, and relying heavily on tribal knowledge passed down informally and gained over time. Cost engineering shifts the dynamic for frontline workers. Upstream processes and systems provide precision that is communicated to these workers in terms of production expectations. Operators are tasked with supervising processes, identifying deviations, and capturing machine-level issues as they occur. As these workers become more connected and augmented via technology, faults and anomalies are logged digitally, with automated routing to maintenance or engineering as needed. With effective cost engineering, the frontline workforce ensures production aligns with cost and performance expectations.

Chief Supply Chain Officer (CSCO)

In the past, supply chain leadership was back-office oriented, using historical information to attempt to optimize logistics execution, inventory control, and cost. Their influence was significant but fairly tactical. That orientation shifts significantly with cost engineering as the CSCO becomes the central orchestrator of enterprise performance, based on the organization’s ability to align with market demand. Supply chain data increasingly impacts revenue and margin stability, based on market responsiveness. As a result, the CSCO sits at the intersection of strategy, technology, and execution, with an increased mandate that expands beyond moving goods to shaping how the organization makes decisions. In an organization using cost engineering, CSCOs are redesigning roles, workflows, and governance models, based on AI-driven insights that orchestrate decision-making across the enterprise and ecosystem.

Aversion to Change: You Can’t Take the Human Out of, Well, the Human

So, implementing cost engineering seems like an obvious win. Despite the obvious operational benefits, integrating cost engineering introduces complex modernization challenges. Of course, these challenges are mostly rooted in aversion to change. It’s a pretty understandable problem, with generations of workers having been trained on historically based methods and having spent entire careers honing a requisite expertise. To them, AI and automated decision-making are met with deep suspicion, rightfully grounded in the fear that technology will replace jobs and render their expertise irrelevant. They are not wrong. This challenge has been exacerbated by leadership deploying complex new software without context. In reaction to these poorly orchestrated, technology-centric changes, operators bypass the systems and revert to familiar methods and tools, neutralizing investment and anticipated benefits. Pilot purgatory, anyone?

To counter this within the organization, leadership must employ empathy, transparency of intent, continuous learning, and AI explainability that enables humans to trust machines and the logic behind their decisions. From an external perspective, organizations also need to understand that they are only as strong as their weakest supplier. Leading companies gain their status by subsidizing the digital and cybersecurity capabilities of their ecosystem. It becomes a case of a rising tide lifting all boats.

Return of Value

Deploying cost engineering cannot be about eliminating the human workforce through automation. It relies on a human-on-the-loop model, but it defers to technology to manage massive data complexity. The role of expert workers is to apply contextual judgment and engage in continual collaboration. The transition to this approach requires transparency and significant digital upskilling that will likely feel uncomfortable initially. Due to the step change required in this shift, organizations need to define and align with a return of value rather than shorter-term return on investment. By empowering the workforce and supply chain ecosystem to employ data-driven precision, the organization transitions from a guesswork culture to one of definable competitive differentiation.

In blog three of this series, I’ll explore the process component of the equation. I’ll focus on departmental silos, cross-functional teams, and supply chain orchestration. You can read the first blog in this four-part series here.

The post Modern Cost Engineering Evolution: Rewiring the Human Element for Supply Chain Resilience appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Related Topics:
Continue Reading

Non classé

Last Chance: Join the Webinar on AI, Component Sourcing, and the Future of Procurement

Published

2 jours ago

on

22 juin 2026

By

Electronic component sourcing is becoming one of the most important cost and risk challenges facing manufacturers.

Pricing remains opaque. Supplier quotes do not always reflect true market pricing. Internal purchase history may show what a company paid, but not whether that price was competitive.

At the same time, chips and components are increasingly tied to geopolitics, tariffs, AI infrastructure, defense demand, electrification, industrial automation, and supply chain resilience.

The webinar is tomorrow at 11 AM ET. Register now to join ARC Advisory Group’s discussion, The Hidden Cost of Component Sourcing — and How AI Is Fixing It, featuring Jim Frazer in conversation with Lytica CEO Martin Sendyk.

This is a practical conversation for procurement, supply chain, engineering, operations, and executive leaders who are trying to understand how component sourcing is changing.

Manufacturers need to control cost, protect supply, support product launches, and manage risk in a market where visibility is often limited. Overpayment can remain hidden. Component risk can appear too late. Engineering and procurement decisions can become locked in before teams have enough market intelligence to make the best sourcing choices.

Tomorrow’s webinar will examine why traditional approaches to component sourcing are under pressure and how manufacturers can use better intelligence to identify hidden cost, improve benchmarking, and manage sourcing risk more effectively.

Attendees will learn:

Why electronic component pricing remains difficult to benchmark

How hidden overpayment can persist inside normal procurement activity

Why supplier quotes, list prices, and internal history are not enough

How real transactional data can improve pricing visibility

Why geopolitics, AI demand, tariffs, electrification, and defense demand are changing the sourcing risk equation

How AI and sourcing intelligence can help procurement teams make better cost and risk decisions

The issue is no longer only whether a company can secure supply.

The issue is whether it can secure the right components, at the right price, with the right risk profile, early enough to influence the business outcome.

For many manufacturers, that requires a more transparent, data-driven, and intelligence-led sourcing model.

Register now for the ARC Advisory Group webinar with Jim Frazer and Lytica CEO Martin Sendyk before the session begins tomorrow at 11 AM ET.

Register for the Webinar

The Hidden Cost of Component Sourcing — and How AI Is Fixing It
Date: June 23, 2026
Time: 11:00 AM ET
Location: Online
Speakers: Jim Frazer, Vice President, ARC Advisory Group, and Martin Sendyk, CEO, Lytica

If your organization manages a significant electronic component spend, this webinar will help you understand how AI and transactional market data can expose hidden sourcing costs and turn procurement into a more proactive system of intelligence.

Register now to reserve your spot.

The post Last Chance: Join the Webinar on AI, Component Sourcing, and the Future of Procurement appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Weekly Supply Chain and Logsitics News Round Up (June 15th-18th 2026)

Published

5 jours ago

on

19 juin 2026

By

Weekly Supply Chain And Logsitics News Round Up (june 15th 18th 2026)

This week in logistics, the industry faces a pivotal shift as Transportation Management Systems evolve into ‘decision intelligence’ hubs, moving beyond basic routing to become the core operating brain of the supply chain. Meanwhile, operational complexity reaches new heights with the massive logistical undertaking of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, even as trade tensions show signs of cooling following the European Parliament’s approval of a landmark EU-US tariff relief deal. From record-breaking automation at Nestlé’s new California hub to the fluctuating volatility of global air freight rates, these developments underscore a sector increasingly defined by high-tech integration and rapid adaptation to global market forces.

The Leading Supply Chain and Logistics Stories of the Week:

TMS Is Becoming Less of a Routing Tool and More of a Decision Intelligence Layer Beyond Execution

The role of the Transportation Management System (TMS) is undergoing a major paradigm shift. While traditional evaluations still focus heavily on execution-level metrics—like route optimization, automated tendering, and freight audit capabilities—these features have essentially become table stakes. Moving forward, the true strategic value of a TMS lies in its evolution from execution software to “transportation decision infrastructure.” Rather than just completing transactions, next-generation platforms serve as the continuous decision-making layer of the supply chain. By drawing data from across the entire network, integrating external market signals, and resolving multi-functional bottlenecks, modern TMS solutions are transitioning into the core operating brain that synchronizes movement, cost, and service levels in real time.

The Logistics Issue: The Supply Chains Behind the World Cup

While most fans focus entirely on the action on the pitch, supply chain professionals are watching what might be the most complex logistical undertaking in sporting history: the 2026 FIFA World Cup. Spanning three host nations—the United States, Canada, and Mexico—the sheer scale of the tournament requires moving more than twenty million pounds of equipment, coordinated across 5,000 vehicles and millions of square feet of warehouse space. The challenge isn’t just massive volume; it’s the absolute lack of tolerance for delay or error across highly regulated international borders. Industry experts point out that success hinges on establishing a unified ecosystem in which freight forwarders, customs officials, and vendors collaborate in real time. Crucial to this effort are standardized product identification and cloud-based labeling networks, which ensure that every critical piece of equipment, food shipment, and medical supply is fully traceable and compliant with differing regional mandates—proving that at this scale, elite collaboration is the only way to avoid catastrophic bottlenecks.

Transatlantic Trade Relief: European Parliament Greenlights EU-US Tariff

In a major relief to transatlantic supply chain operators, the European Parliament has officially voted to implement the long-awaited trade agreement with the United States. Under the newly approved legislation, the EU will eliminate tariffs on all American industrial goods and grant preferential market access to key U.S. agricultural and seafood shipments. In return, the U.S. has agreed to cap import tariffs on European products at 15%—effectively averting threatened 25% tariff hikes on European-built vehicles. Importantly for logistics planners, the deal incorporates a “defensive toolbox” to mitigate long-term trade volatility, including a sunset clause set for late 2029, a safeguard mechanism to protect EU markets from disruptive import surges, and strict conditions that allow the EU to suspend tariff preferences by the end of 2026 if the U.S. fails to lower existing duties on European steel and aluminum derivatives.

Nestlé Opens Its Largest and Most Technologically Advanced Distribution Center in the U.S.

Nestlé USA has officially unveiled its new 700,000-square-foot distribution hub in Arvin, California. Equipped with a $330 million price tag, the state-of-the-art facility represents a critical step in the company’s broader $25 billion U.S. infrastructure upgrade, emphasizing a pivot toward leaner, automation-first supply chain workflows. The Arvin facility houses the largest Automated Storage and Retrieval System (ASRS) in Nestlé’s global network, operating alongside laser-guided vehicles, automated crane systems, and layer-picking robotics. This build marks a major shift from retrofitting existing spaces to intentionally designing high-tech capabilities directly into greenfield logistics layouts from day one. Designed to mitigate peak-season labor bottlenecks, upskill the frontline workforce, and run on 100% renewable electricity as a zero-waste site, the facility showcases how global leaders are leveraging heavy automation to establish flexible, resilient distribution networks that protect margins against ongoing labor and capacity constraints.

Air Freight Spot Rates Spike 41% YoY in May, but Relief Is Expected Soon

Global air cargo spot rates surged by 41% year-over-year in May, averaging $3.40 per kilogram, driven by persistent geopolitical disruptions, carrier fuel surcharges, and localized demand booms like semiconductor and data center equipment shipments. According to Xeneta data, spot rates from Northeast and Southeast Asia to North America jumped nearly 40% compared to earlier this year. However, the pricing pressure isn’t uniform; transatlantic lanes from Europe to North America actually saw a 26% decline over the same period. For procurement teams battling these elevated costs, there is a glimmer of light on the horizon. Long-term contract rates appear to have peaked in April, and as carriers restore capacity and the market enters its traditional summer lull, analysts predict that year-over-year spot rate comparisons will finally begin to cool down, offering much-needed breathing room for shippers who have been relying on short-term contract extensions.

Song of the week:

The post Weekly Supply Chain and Logsitics News Round Up (June 15th-18th 2026) appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Why Octave’s Austin Event Matters: From Asset Lifecycle Software to Intelligence at Scale

Published

1 semaine ago

on

17 juin 2026

By

Octave Live OnTour Austin takes place at a consequential point in the evolution of the industrial software market. Asset-intensive organizations are under sustained pressure to improve capital project execution, asset reliability, operational resilience, safety, quality, cybersecurity, and workforce productivity. At the same time, they are being asked to make better use of data and apply AI in ways that are practical, governed, and operationally relevant.

This is the context in which Octave’s Austin event should be evaluated.

Octave, the software spin-off from Hexagon AB, brings together software assets across engineering, construction, geospatial intelligence, asset operations, quality, public safety, physical security, and industrial cybersecurity. Its Design, Build, Operate, and Protect framework provides a clear structure for organizing those capabilities around the industrial asset lifecycle.

However, the strategic significance of the event is not limited to Octave’s portfolio structure. The more important issue is what Octave’s positioning indicates about the broader direction of industrial software.

The market is shifting from digitized workflows toward intelligence at scale.

Industrial Software Is Moving Beyond Functional Digitization

For much of the past two decades, industrial software investment has centered on functional digitization. Engineering teams adopted design, modeling, analysis, and engineering information management tools. Construction teams deployed project controls and field execution systems. Operations teams invested in EAM, APM, optimization, and reliability applications. Quality, safety, physical security, and cybersecurity functions developed their own specialized technology environments.

These investments created meaningful value within individual domains. But they also reinforced a long-standing structural problem: industrial work is highly interconnected, while the supporting software environment often remains fragmented.

A design change can alter construction cost and schedule. Construction execution quality can affect commissioning performance. Poor handoff from construction to operations can increase maintenance burden. Maintenance backlog can elevate safety and compliance risk. A cybersecurity incident can become an operational disruption. A public safety event may require geospatial, security, asset, and operational context at the same time.

This is the gap that lifecycle intelligence seeks to address.

Lifecycle Intelligence Requires Context Across the Asset Lifecycle

Octave’s Design, Build, Operate, and Protect framework is meaningful because it reflects how industrial assets are planned, built, used, maintained, protected, and improved over time.

In the Design domain, Octave can address engineering, modeling, analysis, information management, and geospatial intelligence. In Build, the portfolio extends into construction, supply chain management, and project performance. In Operate, the focus expands to operations optimization, asset performance, enterprise asset management, quality, compliance, and risk. In Protect, Octave’s positioning includes public safety, physical security, and industrial cybersecurity.

Individually, these are established industrial software categories. Collectively, they suggest a broader strategic direction: the use of software to preserve, connect, and operationalize context across the asset lifecycle.

That is where the Austin event becomes important. Customers and partners should look for evidence that Octave is moving beyond portfolio aggregation toward a more integrated model of lifecycle intelligence.

Intelligence at Scale Depends on Integration, Data, and Workflow Relevance

The phrase “intelligence at scale” should be interpreted operationally, not rhetorically. In industrial environments, intelligence at scale means that software can connect relevant data, apply domain context, and support better decisions across complex workflows.

This requires more than analytics dashboards. It requires software that can help users understand the implications of decisions across functions. It also requires a data foundation that connects engineering data, project execution status, asset histories, maintenance records, geospatial information, quality events, safety incidents, and cybersecurity signals.

AI increases the importance of this foundation. AI capabilities will have limited enterprise value if they are disconnected from operational systems and industrial context. The more material opportunity is AI that is embedded in real workflows and supported by trusted domain data.

For Octave, the strategic question is whether its portfolio can support AI-enabled decision-making across the asset lifecycle, rather than isolated AI features within individual applications.

The Event Should Be Assessed as a Roadmap Signal

Buyers should treat Octave Live OnTour Austin as a roadmap signal.

The first area to assess is integration. Octave’s portfolio breadth creates potential value, but customers will need clarity on how the company intends to connect products and workflows over time. Important indicators include shared data models, workflow orchestration, user experience consistency, API strategy, and cross-domain analytics.

The second area is AI. Customers should listen for specific use cases, not general AI messaging. Relevant examples could include project risk identification, asset performance optimization, maintenance prioritization, quality exception management, safety response, cyber risk monitoring, or engineering decision support. The key issue is whether AI is being tied to operational outcomes.

The third area is ecosystem fit. Industrial organizations rarely standardize on a single vendor across the full technology landscape. Octave will need to clarify how its offerings interact with ERP, EAM, APM, MES, PLM, project controls, cybersecurity, and analytics environments. The value proposition must be additive without increasing architectural complexity.

The fourth area is sequencing. Broad portfolios require disciplined execution. A credible roadmap should identify where Octave will focus first, what integration steps matter most, and how customers should think about value realization over time.

Broader Market Implications

Octave’s Austin event matters because it reflects a larger shift in industrial software.

The next stage of the market will not be defined solely by applications that digitize individual workflows. It will be defined by platforms and architectures that connect operational context across functions. This does not mean every customer will consolidate around a single software suite. Industrial technology environments will remain heterogeneous. But the strategic requirement for connected data, workflow continuity, and decision support will continue to intensify.

AI will accelerate this trend. Effective AI depends on relevant context. If industrial data remains trapped in disconnected systems, AI will be limited to narrow productivity assistance. If data and workflows are connected, AI can support higher-value decisions involving risk, reliability, performance, safety, and resilience.

That is why lifecycle intelligence is becoming an important industrial software concept. It reflects the need to move from systems that record activity to systems that help organizations understand and act on operational complexity.

ARC Advisory Group Perspective

Octave has a credible opportunity to participate in this market transition. The company has meaningful software assets across multiple industrial domains, and its Design, Build, Operate, and Protect framework provides a practical way to organize the portfolio.

The central question is execution. Octave will need to demonstrate that its portfolio can become more than a set of adjacent capabilities. Customers will expect integration clarity, practical AI use cases, ecosystem openness, and a roadmap that connects near-term value to a longer-term lifecycle intelligence strategy.

For buyers, the Austin event should be used to evaluate roadmap direction and strategic fit. For partners, it should clarify Octave’s intended role in the industrial software ecosystem. For the broader market, it is another indication that industrial software is moving toward connected intelligence at scale.

The companies that define this next phase will not simply digitize industrial work. They will connect context across the asset lifecycle and convert that context into better decisions.

The post Why Octave’s Austin Event Matters: From Asset Lifecycle Software to Intelligence at Scale appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending