Can Your TMS Handle Strategies?

Recently, I was struck by how many companies under utilize their TMS software only to execute day to day freight management activities as opposed to implementing, managing and measuring results of transportation strategies.

Order processing, route creation, carrier selection, tendering, settlement etc. are all base functions of most TMS. However, does your TMS allow you to quickly implement, manage and measure results of transpotation management strategies? An example would be senior management wanting to implement an inbound freight management program that would reduce landed cost by 15%.

Can your TMS handle these kinds of requests without consuming a large part of your time and requiring the use of Excel Spreadsheets? If it can, maybe you never implemented "Phase II" of your TMS Project. If it cannot, you should evaluate the ROI of upgrading to a TMS that can!

Best of Breed TMS vs All in One ERP Suites

Over the last several months, I have noticed many white papers and blogs detailing the advantages of licensing a single enterprise software suite that will solve all your supply chain needs from a single source.

Although many of the large corporate software companies have "beefed up" specific offerings thru a flurry of acquisitions, there are many legitimate arguments for building best of breed modules around a solid ERP software package instead of the "all in one" approach. Here are just a couple.

First, most best of breed TMS or WMS software modules have their foundation deep in a specific supply chain decipline (domain expertise) that their founders and developers are known experts. This domain expertise is eventually lost via acquisition as the visionaries "cash out" move on to other opportunities.

Secondly, with the current cross platform computer technologies, interfaces to legacy and other ERP software can be very cost effective and developed extremely radipdly. Yet we see that enterprise corporate environments still buy into the old integration scare tactics.

Thirdly, how many times have you heared "small organizations cannot compete with the big guys"? Again this old argument is no longer valid. Small organizations are not burdened by paying for the "goodwill" of their acquisitions and have virtually unlimited access to capital. Further, as a percentage of sales, entreprenuers invest a much higher level in R&D for their niche product. The result many times is that you will get a better product for less money.

There are good reasons for pursuing a solid base ERP system such as Microsoft's Dynamics ERP suite. A one size fits all approach, even with detailed configuration, is not always the best approach for an organization. It certainly does not guarantee the best functionality at a reasonable cost.