Cargo 2000 Case Study

Transcription

1 Kyle Betterton Vice President, United Cargo Cargo 2000 Case Study World Cargo Symposium 2010 March 10, 2010

2 Why Did United Join Cargo 2000? 1. To improve the quality of our processes and customer service 2. To participate in an industry group that established common quality standards d 3. To join with other industry stakeholders to address common issues that drive improved quality 4. To reduce the number of processes required to move shipments door-to-door 5. To develop a method to measure the door-to-door forwarder-carrier-forwarder process (Standard route map developed)

3 Milestones on a Completed Phase 1 (Airline) Route Map Flight Dep. Flight Arr. DLV Phase 1 (Dep time minus offset) (Arr time plus offset) (Arr time plus offset) Delivery Cut-off Time Freight Departure Shipment On Hand Freight & Docs ready for Delivery FWB When a forwarder makes a booking, pre-defined offsets are used to create a six-point route map

4 UA Implementation History 1. United Cargo was present at the birth of Cargo Attended a series of design and implementation meetings 3. Began station rollout in ORD-LHR-NRT in Expanded to additional international widebody stations (single-leg routings) in Began measuring all international shipments with C2K forwarders (including multi-leg leg shipments) in Began measuring all international shipments in 2008

5 UA Implementation Costs 1. Annual membership dues 2. Unisys CDMP platform: initial costs and share of ongoing enhancements with six other Unisys clients 3. Training development and delivery 4. Additional messaging to record movement of shipment along the route map 5 St ti t l ith C Station manpower to comply with Cargo 2000 processes

6 Challenges of Implementation 1. Developing and generating standard messages between UA, forwarders and our data vendors (Multiple systems had to talk to each other to capture shipment movement data) 2. Initial inconsistent performance of CDMP (for UA, Unisys) systems and monitoring 3. Firewall issues between UA, Unisys and our cargo vendor s systems 4. Training UA/vendor staff to use new web-based system of quality measurement 5. Managing differences between internal UA and Cargo 2000 metrics

7 UA Internal Metrics & C2K Milestones UA Equivalents FWB Check-in Boarded as booked Wheels down RFP Ready for Pickup OTD Ontime Delivery RAFD TERM

8 How Did Cargo 2000 Impact United Cargo? 1. Improved our messaging capabilities through compliance with industry & Cargo 2000 standards 2. Gave station staff the ability to analyze and respond to Cargo 2000 milestone exceptions (when shipment did not go as planned) 3. Cargo 2000 global shipment views gave station and headquarters a real-time assessment of the performance of our system 4. Cargo 2000 reports gave station and headquarters staff another way to determine root cause of failures leading to continuous improvement

9 Unisys Traffic Light Shipment View AWB 016 Partner All Delivery Date > 10FEB10 Routing ORD LHR Status Delivered Top Next Back 64 Records AWB Partner ORIG DEST Delivery Date Pcs Weight FWB RCS DEP RCF DEP RCF AWD NFD DLV C2K MSG 016- UNK ORD LHR 15FEB P : KAN ORD LHR 15FEB Y : UNK ORD LHR 15FEB P : AGI ORD LHR 15FEB Y : UNK ORD LHR 15FEB P : SCH ORD LHR 15FEB Y : AGI ORD LHR 15FEB Y :54

10 Additional Benefits of Cargo Carriers and forwarders are looking at the same numbers when they discuss performance 2. Carriers and forwarders use a common language and agree on what constitutes t success 3. Carriers and forwarders look at the same data to determine failure points in a shipment s movement 4. All stakeholders now have multiple forums to solve common problems and find ways to improve 5. Membership in Cargo 2000 demonstrates UA s commitment to quality supported by data

11 Ongoing Challenges and Solutions While there are many benefits to Cargo 2000, there are a number of ongoing challenges that the membership works together to solve: Challenge 1: Carrier and forwarder data vendor conflicts over what constitutes a valid route map and a successful shipment Solution 1: Technical Working Group has met since 1999 to address route map and milestone issues Challenge 2: Gaining agreement on lane segments to be measured was cumbersome and time-consuming Solution 2: Cargo 2000 developed BRAVO on line lane Solution 2: Cargo 2000 developed BRAVO on-line lane solicitation and agreement tool.

12 BRAVO Standard Carrier/Forwarder Agreement

13 Ongoing Challenges and Solutions Challenge 3: Some discrepancies remain between carrier and forwarder monthly operational and messaging reports Solution 3: Carriers and forwarders meet in reconciliation sessions to review and validate report data Challenge 4: Carrier/forwarder vendor data systems have different limitations (e.g., opened/closed hours, day of week operations) resulting in mismatched route maps Solution 4: Cargo 2000 is developing BRAVO Version 3 to specifically identify these factors

14 Cargo 2000 Health Report: 2009 vs. 2008

15 Total Cargo 2000 Shipments Measured by g p y Participating Airlines

16 The Future Program Perspective 1. Future of Cargo 2000 depends d on expanding membership beyond current 8 active forwarder members and 17 active carrier members 2. Must simplify the system for easier implementation by smaller forwarders and carriers 3. Must provide a solution for those who cannot afford to upgrade or re-design their current system 4. Must increase awareness of the benefits of Cargo 2000 s common cargo quality measurement and improvement system

17 The Future Alignment with IATA Initiatives 1. Message Improvement Program (MIP) Complete and accurate message data is crucial to meeting Cargo 2000 s quality goals Message improvement is critical to carrier s ability to meet commitment to the customer Message quality continues to be measured by Cargo e-freight Improvements generated by Cargo 2000 and MIP are essential to the success of e-freight

18 The Future UA Perspective 1. Replacement of our legacy system will allow UA to: View and integrate FWB data into our freight records Utilize scanning capabilities to auto-generate Cargo 2000 milestone updates (and s if requested) Add additional quality measures above Cargo 2000 while maintaining industry standards 2. UA must ttake better advantage of ftwo largest thandling vendors (SP, WFS) being Cargo 2000 members 3 UA must along with the rest of the current members 3. UA must, along with the rest of the current members, better promote growth in Cargo 2000 participation

19