Council Post: Your Logistics Software Describes The Plan. Not What Happened
tags:Philip Ellis is a founding frontend engineer at chrt, where he builds software for time-critical logistics operations.
getty
In my experience developing software for time-critical logistics operations, I saw records quickly drift from the actual work done. Many platforms are organized around the sequence of shipment booking, carrier assignment, delivery reporting and invoicing. That model works when a shipment follows the plan, but it becomes unreliable when delays, failed delivery attempts and last-minute decisions reshape the operation. The software may still display a clean final state while omitting the events that created it.
Consider this composite example based on recurring patterns I have observed in logistics operations. A routine air shipment from Calgary to Toronto was delayed by two hours. Dispatch had assigned a courier to pick up the cargo and deliver it to three locations. By the time the plane landed, the third location had closed. The dispatcher revised the plan, notified the affected parties and directed the courier to complete the first two deliveries. The courier kept the cargo overnight, which resulted in an extra storage fee.
In a system that retained only the latest status, the original plan could disappear from view. A two‑hour flight delay led to major changes: longer custody times, additional customer messages, an overnight hold and a final invoice that didn’t match the estimate. The operation itself may have recovered successfully, yet the system record could still present an incomplete account of what happened and why.
A Test You Can Run This Week
Select a representative sample of recent shipments in which the original plan changed, including both minor and serious disruptions. Ask each operating team to replay the events using only information available within the system. Then ask:
• Can you determine how fast the team resolved it?
• Can you piece together the timing and content of customer conversations?
• Can you identify each discrepancy between the estimate and the final invoice?
All operating teams should receive the same complete information. The system has failed if anyone must search messages, contact others or access information in a spreadsheet. Your organization is spending time and money working around software, not with it.
Why Changing The Record Creates Gaps
One common cause is a model that changes values directly rather than maintaining a history of changes. Updating a shipment date can obscure the original plan and the reason for the change. Replacing a failed delivery status can remove the cause of the failure and the cost it created. The system does not show the sequence of events that caused it. Or the work-around involves creating a completely new order, which does not represent the true status of delays and/or issues with the original.
Operators spend time moving data between systems, maintaining separate records and reconstructing events during billing. Finding a discrepancy may require searching old messages and notes for something the system never captured.
The Calgary-Toronto example illustrates the impact. Two delivery attempts succeeded, one was postponed, and the overnight hold added cost. Each change required an operational decision and customer communication. If the system preserved only the updated arrival and delivery times, finance could struggle to verify the additional charge, operations could struggle to confirm who made each decision, and the customer might be unable to reconcile the service history with the invoice. What appeared to be a successful operational recovery would expose a serious weakness in the record-keeping system.
What A Good Operational Record Requires
An effective operational record should preserve each change, identify who made the decision and connect downstream effects to their cause. Operators can then see what changed and what remains outstanding. Customer service can review the timing and substance of communications. Finance creates invoice line items from events. Without audit trails, your business has no rear-view mirror and no way to trace accountability.
The product must capture the decisions, communications and financial impact of each deviation.
Finally, the system must capture and document the effects of all deviations from planned operations. Adequate management of disruptions requires sound operational judgment. The computer should record this judgment and extend its effects throughout the operational process, rather than attempt to replace every deviation with a predetermined sequence of actions. Building a custom workflow for every type of disruption is costly and inflexible, and unexpected cases will still require human intervention. Especially in the field of logistics, where things can, they usually do, go wrong.
How To Evaluate Your System
Evaluating logistics software should go beyond a quick demo. Illustrate a failed shipment, not a successful one, and review decisions from disruption to the invoice without leaving the system.
The test is not whether your system can describe the plan. It is whether it can explain what happened after the plan changed. Many systems still make that difficult, and the gap becomes expensive when the operation is under pressure. This directly affects your bottom line in an industry with tight margins and intense competition.
Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?