Innovation Footprints

What if . . . ?

Technology

The World is a Supply Chain

by

Lisa Morales-Hellebo, and Brian Laung Aoaeh. Kicking off #SCIT2019, June 19, 2019 in NYC. Photo Credit: Ray Neutron.

Originally published at www.refashiond.com on Friday, October 18, 2019.

Note: 3,749 Words, 14 Minutes Reading Time

Authors: Brian Laung Aoaeh, CFA, and Lisa Morales-Hellebo

The world is a supply chain. It’s that simple. 

But what does that really mean?  Whether we like it or not, current economic, political, social, and technology trends will compel more people to think about the implications of that statement more consciously each day.

In this blog post we;

  • Share a definition of supply chain,
  • Put the challenges confronting supply chains in context,
  • Discuss why socio-cultural forces will act as the leading catalyst for the innovations that will define supply chains of the future,
  • Explain why the refashioning of supply chains matters,
  • Explain why the technological transformation of supply chains is an economic issue, as well as one driven by evolving consumer preferences,
  • Describe the role that early stage technology venture capital can play in the transformation of supply chains,
  • Describe how individuals, private sources of capital, and governments can play a role in the transformations that will lead us to the supply chains of the future. 

What Is A Supply Chain?

First, let’s answer the question: What is a supply chain? 

A supply chain is a network of organizations that work collaboratively to move products and services from producers to consumers. At a high level, the business of supply chain can be subdivided into: 

  • Supply chain management;  which is about supply chain network design and management; 
  • Supply chain logistics; which is about the storage, transportation, and movement of physical goods from one place to another;
  • Supply chain finance; which is about ensuring that producers, and other supply chain participants and intermediaries get paid for the value they create and deliver to consumers.

Supply chains play two critical functions: 

  • First, they enable the flow of goods and services from producers to consumers. 
  • Second, they facilitate the transfer of information about the movement of goods and services between every entity that is part of the supply chain network.  

The world we’ve become accustomed to will not exist without supply chains.  And further, the world is a mechanism for providing humanity with the resources we need to survive on Earth.  We know this to be true — “when supply chains function, societies thrive”.

The Challenges Confronting Supply Chains

Today, we face an inflection point as our world confronts some big crises. If current trends hold, between 2015 and 2050 the world’s population is expected to increase by about a third, to roughly 10 billion people. According to Our World in Data, the world’s population stood at about 190 million people in the Year 0, and approximately 4 billion in 1975. In other words, the world’s population will jump by about 6 billion people over the 75 years between 1975 and 2050 after having only climbed to 4 billion people over the previous 1,975 years. This is happening, according to Our World in Data, despite the world’s population growth rate peaking at 2.2% per year in 1962 and 1963, and then declining to its current rate of about 1% per year. 

While this rapid increase in the world’s population is occuring, global supply chains face some big challenges: 

  • An ongoing increase in the frequency of severe weather events that cause large-scale disruptions to local and global supply chains. 
  • Trade disputes threaten to dismember the system of world trade established following the end of World War II. 
  • The growing world population has created a critical need for significantly better dynamic resource allocation throughout supply chain networks in every industry around the world. 
  • Changes in consumer behavior are putting the world’s supply chains under increasing strain and business competitiveness is increasingly tied to supply chain mastery.

Socio-cultural Attitudes Will Be The Catalyst For Supply Chain Innovation

Perhaps counterintuitively, innovation in global trade and supply chains will be driven most immediately by changing social attitudes towards climate change. A recent poll of adults and teenagers in the United States conducted between July 9 and August 5, 2019 by The Washington Post and the Kaiser Family Foundation offers some early evidence of the changes taking place. 

When asked if human activity is causing climate change, 79% of the adults polled responded yes, while 86% of teenagers responded yes. When asked if reducing the negative effects of global warming and climate change would require major sacrifices, more than 30% of adults, and more than 40% of the teenagers surveyed said yes. Also, at least 70% of adults and nearly 80% of teenagers said that technological advances will be able to reduce most of the negative effects of climate change. 

There are more conversations than ever about decarbonizing supply chains. At about the same time this poll was published, Quartz reported that two states in India have said they will not build new coal power plants. Earlier this year, governments in Europe called on the fashion industry to tackle its waste and pollution problems more aggressively and some are looking at passing legislation to that end. In Asia, more governments are moving to address issues around plastic waste imported from abroad. Starting in January 2020, the International Maritime Organization will begin adopting new regulations to curb harmful emissions from the container shipping industry. 

Another example of the rapidly evolving social and cultural attitudes that will drive innovation in supply chains and global trade is the growing movement led by young people such as Greta Thunberg, Jamie Marglois and others like them. Political, business, and technological leadership is shifting into the hands of a generation of men and women who do not want to leave a more inhospitable planet as their legacy to their children and grandchildren.

What does this mean? 

In the next half-decade or so we will see political and business leaders facing increasing pressure to adopt policies and business practices that reflect how voters and consumers feel about climate change. Those who do not risk losing political power and market share, respectively, to their opponents and competitors who do. As this social and cultural movement gains strength, it will accelerate the economic drivers of innovation, which in turn will propel the drivers of technological innovation in global trade and supply chain. 

In his August 2011 article, Why Software is Eating The World, Marc Andreessen said: “Companies in every industry need to assume that a software revolution is coming.” The process he described has only accelerated over the intervening 8 years, and that statement is more true now than it was then. As information technologies that were pioneered in the 1950s have reached maturity, technology startups around the world are developing new innovations to solve some of the supply chain problems that seemed intractable in the recent past.

Why The Refashioning Of Supply Chains Matters

However, before we can understand why the confluence of software and hardware engineering is going to be transformative to the supply chains on which the world runs, we must understand why that matters.

Supply chains exist to connect producers and consumers in an ongoing exchange of value. As a result, innovations in supply chain drives innovations in the rest of the economy. Given that supply chains are about the back-and-forth movement of physical goods, services, and information, it is easy to understand why advances in information technology must necessarily precede cycles of innovation in supply chain.

Because innovation in supply chain acts as an accelerant for increases in production and consumption, supply chain innovation acts as an economic multiplier. Every dollar of innovation in supply chain innovation leads to more than a dollar of total economic output. It is not a coincidence that countries ranked highest on the Worldbank’s Logistics Performance Index tend to have the most developed economies, while those ranked lowest tend to have the least developed economies. 

Supply chains are to human civilization what oxygen is to life; When they work well, no one notices them. It is only when they start to fail that we realize there’s a problem. It is easy to assume that there’s no room for innovation in global supply chains and trade, but this is simply not true. Here are four examples. 

  • As governments and people around the world awaken to the issues posed by climate change, there’s a growing social, regulatory, and economic push for innovations in supply chain logistics that will significantly reduce the amount of pollution created by the transportation industry. Some of these innovations involve the application of machine learning to the analysis of data obtained from connected devices in transportation and supply chain networks in order to make the operation of such networks more efficient and optimized. This needs to be done in a way that ensures that the transportation of people and merchandise does not destroy the environment. 
  • There is an ongoing shift away from linear supply chains in which the materials that remain after consumption has taken place are discarded, and more towards circular and regenerative supply chains that place an emphasis on using post-consumption waste as raw materials for new products. This shift relies on advances in materials science – both in the creation of new materials that did not exist before, and in the processing of materials that we have become accustomed to, but which we now recognize pose a growing threat to the environment as waste accumulates in quantities that the world can no longer sustain. In order to reduce or eliminate waste and pollution, the focus here is on developing supply chains around the repair, renewal, regeneration, and recycling of materials and products.
  • Manufacturing is undergoing a transformation of its own, one which will make the changes happening in transportation and materials that much more impactful. With the recent shift in political attitudes towards global trade, more companies are beginning to consider regionalized and localized manufacturing as a path towards avoiding costly tariffs. Such a transformation will rely on a mix of emerging and mature manufacturing techniques in order to keep costs within a manageable range. These advances in manufacturing will rely heavily on manufacturing goods to fulfill actual demand, rather than manufacturing goods in anticipation of future demand.
  • Invariably, software is being used more than ever to create new methods of collecting, storing, and analyzing data to augment human decision making in every industry. These technologies are being applied in industrial supply chains as distinct as: Pharmaceuticals and industrial chemicals – to simulate new compounds and test them more quickly and inexpensively; They’re also used in agriculture – to manage the production, storage and distribution of food and other agricultural produce in order to minimize food loss and food waste; And in energy – to aid in the production, storage, and distribution of energy from increasingly complex power grids that incorporate renewable and non-renewable sources of electrical power. 

The way we make things, the way we consume things, the way we move things, and the power that is required to make all that possible is changing dramatically thanks to advances in software and hardware technologies. Solving the foundational problems that plague global supply chains is a daunting task. Moreover, global GDP, most recently estimated at about $88 trillion, rests on our ability to solve these problems. 

Technological Transformation of Supply Chains: An Economic Problem, An Economic Opportunity

In our conversations with other people, we are often asked the question; “Wouldn’t this be easier if the transformation of supply chains were driven more by economic forces and consumer needs?”

In The Supply Chain Economy: A New Framework for Understanding Innovation and Services, Mercedes Delgado and Karen Mills state that; “The U.S. supply chain contains 37% of all jobs, employing 44 million people. These jobs have significantly higher than average wages, and account for much of the innovative activity in the economy.” 

Similar conclusions hold true in every other region of the world, and there is ample evidence to support that belief thanks to work by a number of global. Multilateral organizations like the World Economic Forum, The World Bank, The International Monetary Fund, various agencies of the United Nations, and others.

For example;

  • According to Growing Better: Ten Critical Transitions to Transform Food and Land Use, a September 2019 report by the Food and Land Use Coalition;  “The hidden costs of global food and land use systems sum to $12 trillion, compared to a market value of the global food system of $10 trillion.”
  • According to Long-Term Macroeconomic Effects of Climate Change: A Cross-Country Analysis, a July 2019 paper by researchers at the University of Southern California (USA), the University of Cambridge (UK), Trinity College (UK), the International Monetary Fund (Washington DC, USA), and National Tsing Hua University (Taiwan); “Our counterfactual analysis suggests that a persistent increase in average global temperature by 0.04C per year, in the absence of mitigation policies, reduces world real GDP per capita by 7.22 percent by 2100.” Furthermore the authors state; “We also provide supplementary evidence using data on a sample of 48 U.S. states between 1963 and 2016, and show that climate change has a long-lasting adverse impact on real output in various states and economic sectors, and on labour productivity and employment.”
  • According to Impact of the Fourth Industrial Revolution on Supply Chains, an October 2017 report published by the World Economic Forum; “Disruptive technologies are transforming all end-to-end steps in production and business models in most sectors of the economy. The products that consumers demand, factory processes and footprints, and the management of global supply chains are being re-shaped to an unprecedented degree and at unprecedented pace. Industry leaders who were consulted believe that new technological solutions heralded by the Fourth Industrial Revolution – such as advanced robotics, autonomous systems and additive manufacturing – will revolutionize traditional ways of creating value. As the costs of deploying technology continue to fall, international differentials in labour costs will no longer be a decisive factor in choosing the location of production.” 

Other examples are not difficult to find. 

A company’s supply chain is an integral part of that company’s customer experience, and consumers all over the world will continue to become more demanding, not less. The supply chains of the future will become a reality precisely because the refashioning of global and local trade infrastructure is an economic issue that is driven by consumer preferences.

That being said, it is important to recognize why conversations about the transformation of supply chains are less straightforward than one might hope.

In Disaster Mitigation is Cost Effective, a world development background note by Ilan Kelman, he states that it is easier for politicians who tend to seek visibility for themselves to pursue after-the-fact measures rather than pursue prospective and preventative measures related to disaster risk reduction. After-the-fact measures are more visible, while prevention is intangible and difficult to quantify, resulting in less of a boost for the personal ambitions and ego of individual politicians.

We observe a similar pattern of behavior among corporate executives, who tend to pursue highly visible, customer facing, short-term, tactical initiatives at the expense of long-term strategic initiatives that will help their companies develop and gain mastery over their backend supply chain operations. On the other hand, we observe that the companies that have become globally dominant are also those that have developed superior supply chain mastery within their respective markets and industries. We believe that companies with inferior supply chain operations will continue to fall victim to a degraded customer experience. We also believe that companies with inferior supply chains will lose market share to established, and new, competitors with superior supply chain capabilities.

Early-Stage Technology Venture Capital Will Play An Important Role

Surprisingly, the men and women who set out to tackle these problems usually find a lack of sufficient early-stage venture capital to support their efforts at the earliest and riskiest stages of their work – as they take that work out of academic research labs, or small apartments and houses, and start the often arduous process of commercialization. 

That is when there is the greatest need for venture capitalists who understand the nature of the problems, who recognize the potential commercial opportunities, who have a willingness to do the necessary hard work required to help these entrepreneurs succeed, and who have developed relationships with prospective commercial partners willing to investigate new technological innovations for long-standing supply chain problems.

This is changing, but it is not changing fast enough. The world needs much more risk-seeking capital to fund these entrepreneurs – the market opportunity is enormous. As we have already pointed out, global GDP rests on a foundation built entirely on physical and digital supply chains.

For these innovations to succeed, governments and traditional industry must become more open to partnering with venture capitalists and technology startups. Unlike innovations in information technology, the technological innovations that will transform global supply chains and trade interact with the real world. As a result, it is not enough for policies and regulations to lag innovation by years. Instead, regulators and policy makers must work hard to create regulatory frameworks that help to nurture innovation rather than assist in suffocating it. Correspondingly, venture capitalists and entrepreneurs must partner with community organizations, politicians, and regulators to help them keep up with advances in technology and innovation. 

One might ask: “Are there really enough opportunities for early-stage investments in supply chain?” Yet, once one understands what a supply chain is, a few minutes spent thinking about that question illuminates the misconception. 

The recent success of funds like Lux Capital – which announced that it raised a billion dollars distributed across two funds, and DCVC – which announced a $725 million fund, suggests that there are significant financial returns to be harvested by limited partners who have the foresight to invest in the small handful of venture funds that are now choosing to focus on funding early-stage startups solving the sorts of problems we have already described. 

The longevity of Supply Chain Ventures, established in 2001 by Dave Anderson, also suggests that this is a market that is ready for more early-stage venture capital, not less. This is assertion is based on how many advances in computational and information technologies have occurred since 2001, and how much easier it is now for such technologies to be implemented in physical supply chains. That observation is also based on the rising interest, relatively speaking, in issues surrounding supply chains within the general population.

Our conversations with corporate executives responsible for meeting demand from customers suggests that there is a growing appetite for new technology to enable companies to meet the expectations of an ever more impatient and demanding customer base. Also, our conversations with government officials point to a growing desire by public servants to seek new innovations geared at solving the problems that plague large and growing urban communities, and the suburban communities that surround them. 

What Can You Do?

There is a lot that one can do to participate in the coming transformation of supply chains;

  • Individual Consumers: As individual consumers we can all continue to become more active and engaged about understanding how our consumption affects the finite world around us. Social media and information technology makes it easy for attitudes and beliefs about consumption, production, sustainability, the environment, and climate change to spread. In Consumer attitudes towards sustainability and sustainable business: An exploratory study of New Zealand consumers., a 2015 master’s thesis by David Anthony Thompson at Lincoln University in New Zealand, he states; “From a purely pragmatic perspective, this study has indicated that consumers are generally likely to be supportive of not just purchasing sustainably produced goods and services, but that they feel positively towards companies that demonstrate sustainable social and environmental behaviour. This has implications for reputation building for organisations and in turn hints at benefits when it comes to securing supply contracts, recruiting staff and relationships with their physical communities. The study also suggests that understanding and knowledge play a – 56 – contributory role in forming these attitudes, therefore supporting the value in education and information strategies for sustainably run businesses.”
  • Sources of Private Capital: As we have already discussed previously, investing in early-stage innovations in supply chain transformation is an opportunity that remains largely under-resourced in terms of risk-seeking capital relative to the size of the opportunity. It is an area that is ripe for increased allocations of capital within the private equity asset allocation targets of family offices, endowments, foundations, and pension funds.
  • Governments: During #SCIT2019, The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation’s inaugural global summit on supply chain, innovation, and technology held in NYC on June 19 – 20, 2019, Samuel Chan, Regional Vice President, Americas, at the Singapore Economic Development Board provided attendees with a sense of how the Government of Singapore is thinking about the role that supply chain, innovation, and technology can play in Singapore’s economic development. Supply chain occupies a central position in Smart Nation Singapore, and specifically in its Smart Logistics initiative. As we have stated previously; It is not a coincidence that countries ranked highest on the Worldbank’s Logistics Performance Index tend to have the most developed economies, while those ranked lowest tend to have the least developed economies. Increasingly, the countries and regions of the world that will continue to experience the strongest economic growth will be those that are quickest to embrace and deploy the still nascent and emerging engineered systems that reflect a tight integration of computation and physical supply chains, in every area of economic activity.

If by now, the reader is beginning to conclude that the future of supply chains will be driven largely by supply chain enthusiasts, we agree.

We Will All Be Supply Chain Enthusiasts

So who is today’s supply chain enthusiast? A supply chain enthusiast is;

  • Someone who recognizes that the world is a mechanism for providing humanity with the resources it needs to survive. 
  • Someone who recognizes that each of us has a responsibility for ensuring that this supply chain that we are part of is managed in a way that ensures that humans continue to thrive. 
  • Someone who understands that collectively, we must summon the political will to begin the effort of arresting, and then reversing, the harm that we have caused to the environment. 

We will all become supply chain enthusiasts, not because it is the fashionable thing to do, but because with every year that passes it will become an issue of increasing and critical necessity. As more people become aware of, and start to understand that how we produce, store, transport, and consume things has a profound impact on our environment, enthusiasm about supply chain, innovation, and technology will become more socially and culturally mainstream. 

At that point, “The world is a supply chain.” will become a rallying cry everyone innately understands.

Note: “The world is a supply chain.” is a trademark owned by The New York Supply  Chain Meetup.

About The Authors: Brian Laung Aoaeh (@brianlaungaoaeh) and Lisa Morales-Hellebo (@lisahellebo) are co-founders of REFASHIOND Ventures, an early-stage venture capital fund that is being built to invest in startups creating innovations to refashion global supply chain networks. They are also co-founders of The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation, a growing network of grassroots-driven communities focused on supply chain, innovation, and technology.

Can Collaboration and Community Serve as Catalysts For Innovation in Supply Chain?

by

Note: A version of this article was first published on July 31, 2019 at Port Technology.

The innovations required to reinvent global supply chains will not happen without collaboration. This article describes our experience facilitating such collaborations, starting in late 2017.

In late 2016 and early 2017, I spent a lot of time studying trucking and shipping, with a view to understanding the industry dynamics at play, and to see what opportunities might exist for software startups. What I learned about the trucking industry piqued my interest in logistics overall, and ultimately led me to a decision to focus on early stage technology investing in supply chain by building REFASHIOND Ventures to invest in early stage technology startups reinventing supply chains.

Through that work it became painfully clear to me that there is a need for closer collaboration between software startups and established, mature companies. 

This article will explain why there’s a need for such collaboration. I will also discuss the approach our community, The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation, has taken to enable such collaboration. Although it is still early, we will end with a discussion of some early indicators of the results we might expect in general.

Note on prior and recent work: Disruption, supply chain management, supply chain finance, and supply chain logistics are topics I have been studying for some time – from the perspective of an early stage venture capitalist specializing in supply chain; Notes on Strategy; Where Does Disruption Come From? (2015), Industry Study: Freight Trucking (#Startups) (2016), Updates – Industry Study: Freight Trucking (#Startups) (2016), Industry Study: Ocean Freight Shipping (#Startups) (2017), Updates – Industry Study: Ocean Freight Shipping (#Startups) (2017), Where Will Technological Disruption in The Fashion Supply Chain Come From? (2018), Is disruption finally underway in the freight brokerage industry? (2019), and Why digital freight brokers might fail to disrupt the freight brokerage industry (2019).

Identifying The Chasm

A consequence that arose from my decision to publish my articles on trucking and shipping is that it prompted several executives at established companies to reach out to me to talk about my findings. The same happened with startup founders – though, they mostly wanted to meet an early-stage venture capitalist who cared about supply chain logistics.

Those conversations made it painfully clear that: On the one hand, executives at established companies know the business problems in supply chain operations for which they desperately need new innovations. However, they typically do not have sufficient time to meet their daily responsibilities at work and scour the globe seeking out such new innovations. Moreover, their companies might not be plugged into the right communities to find such innovations through tradition RFP processes. Moreover, such executives also tend not to have a very good sense of how much certain emerging technologies have matured, and if such technologies might be applicable to the problems they need to solve. I call such executives BUYERS: these are people and organizations who want to buy new technology innovations for supply chain operations. This is particularly true in a nascent area like cryptocurrencies and blockchain.

On the other hand, founders of software startups that are creating new innovations for supply chain tend to understand the technology well, but they lack a deep and nuanced understanding of the business problems that potential customers face. They lack a sufficiently mature understanding of the value proposition they must offer to the BUYERS if they are to win market adoption. I call such startup founders BUILDERS: these are people and organizations who are building new technological innovations for supply chain operations.

For this conversation to make sense, it is critical that we share a common understanding of what I mean by supply chain. 

The definition I have adopted is from the 4th edition of Martin Christopher’s Logistics & Supply Chain Management: Creating Value-Adding Networks. A supply chain is: “A network of connected and interdependent organisations mutually and cooperatively working together to control, manage and improve the flow of materials and information from suppliers to end users.”

Crossing The Chasm

In order to bridge this chasm between BUYERS & BUILDERSTM, Lisa Morales-Hellebo and I founded The New York Supply Chain Meetup in August 2017. We started with a very simple premise: Once a month, for about 9 out of the 12 months each year, we would bring these two groups of people together to:

  • Network, 
  • Talk to one another about the problems they were trying to solve and the products that they were building, and
  • Participate in curated programming that is based on relevant and topical themes related to supply chain. 

Each event would last about 3 hours. The format of a meetup appealed to us because it is inherently grass-roots driven, and emerges spontaneously based on a shared enthusiasm among a group of like-minded people for a particular topic. 

We ultimately settled on a mission for The New York Supply Chain Meetup: To nurture and grow the world’s foremost open, global, multidisciplinary community of people devoted to building the supply chain networks of the future – starting in NYC.

Even before we held our launch event on November 16, 2017 people in other parts of the United States, and in other countries asked us if we would be live-streaming the event. We took this as a promising sign. As we approach 24 months since we initially started working on this, our tentative first efforts have grown into an initiative to build The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation; A collaborative, and mutually supportive coalition of grassroots communities focused on technology and innovation in the global supply chain industry. The New York Supply Chain Meetup is its founding chapter. 

The initiative is entirely grass-roots driven. Our community includes:

  • Startups,
  • Mature Companies – across all industries,
  • Academics from research institutions,
  • Early-stage technology venture capitalists, and other late-stage investors, and
  • Journalists, regulators, professional services providers, and any other groups of people with interests and skills relevant to innovation in supply chain.

We have 1900+ members in The New York Supply Chain Meetup – the founding chapter, 2700+ members around the world, an active chapter in Charleston, South Carolina, and chapters in the process of being formed in several other cities around the world. 

The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation held its inaugural global summit, #SCIT2019, on June 19 and June 20 in NYC. 

  • We had 1000 people sign up for the event before we closed registration. 
  • During the event we had about 400 people attend on each day of the summit. Attendees came from 15 countries. 
  • We had 31 speakers: With 11 startup showcases, and a presentation by the Singapore Economic Development Board on June 20. Video of the event is available on our YouTube channel. 

Also:

In An Age of Platform Competition, Open Collaboration, Open Communities, and Open Ecosystems Matter A Lot

Why are companies like Amazon, Apple, AirBnB, Microsoft, Alibaba, Google, JD.com, Uber and others, posing a threat to companies in traditional industries? Why are startups that many people have never heard of beginning to attack and threaten companies in mature, established industries that one may have considered immune from such threats as recently as even just half a decade ago?

It is because the companies I have listed, and others I have not, understand the importance of business models that are built on open ecosystems rather than proprietary and linear value chains owned by a single company. 

Using the internet and other maturing software-enabled technologies as the foundation, these companies are launching demand-side and supply-side attacks on industries that have become accustomed to relatively sanguine competition among well established companies. 

That raises the question: What is an ecosystem? A business ecosystem has three main characteristics;

  • First: It is a network of networks.
  • Second: The focus of the ecosystem orchestrator must be on enabling and facilitating the creation and exchange of value, between all participants of the ecosystem.
  • Third: The creation and exchange of value must occur in a way that increases the aggregate well-being of the entire network over time.

When executed well, platforms and ecosystems give rise to powerful network effects. Network effects matter because, in the most extreme cases they can lead to winner-take-all outcomes. At best, they lead to winner-take-most situations. 

What’s are network effects? 

As I explained in my September 2014 article on the topic Revisiting What I Know About Network Effects & Startups: “A network effect occurs when the value of a good or service increases for both new and existing users as more customers use that good or service. The network effect is a virtuous cycle that allows strong companies to become even stronger. Network effects are also known as direct-benefit effects.”

The Results Are Early, But The Signs Look Promising 

As I have pointed out already, our effort is entirely grass-roots driven. We are yet to attract significant outside support to accelerate our efforts. Nevertheless we are showing promising early results in the 24 months during which we have been working on this. Here are just a few highlights.

  • A startup in our community is working with a very large shipping company that is seeking software technologies that enhance its ability to make decisions under uncertainty. Such software can be applied in various aspects of the shipping company’s global operations. The software could also be introduced to the shipping company’s customers who also need to optimize their own supply chain operations. The shipping company gains new technology, while the startup wins a channel partner to aid its go-to-market efforts.
  • A handful of startups in our community are building software to enable established freight forwarders modernize their business operations without bearing the expense of developing software from scratch. Many such efforts are led by people with significant experience in the freight forwarding business who have teamed up with technologists to build the technology. For such startups, a community like ours provides a great, low-pressure opportunity for them to connect with potential customers as well as potential investors.
  • Another startup in our community is building a derivatives exchange for the freight markets, creating a new suite of tools that shippers and carriers can use to manage risk.
  • One startup in our community is building a communication platform to enable communication around the transactions that take place between shipping companies and beneficial cargo owners, freight forwarders, and other parties involved in the shipping of cargo. Currently that communication happens over email, and relies on manual, paper-based processes. The team already has significant experience building software for the maritime shipping industry. The need for the product it is building is confirmed by the explosive rate of growth in adoption by very large shipping companies around the world. Where our community can help is with advice about the startup’s interactions with potential venture capital investors, and providing opportunities for the startup to tell its story to a wider audience. In one instance, after presenting at one of our events, a real estate broker told the startup’s founder that the same problem exists in the real estate industry. He also met an executive from a large shipping company who offered to introduce him to the shipping company’s corporate venture capital arm.   

Collaboration Is Especially Critical in Blockchain + Supply Chain

Like everyone who is enthusiastic about supply chain and technology, we are exploring how blockchain and other distributed ledger technologies will affect the supply chain. Here are some of the things I have learned;

In relation to blockchain, one of the lessons I learned while studying the shipping industry in early 2017 was this: 

“One product that it appears the industry would gravitate towards is a system of record that connects all participants in the supply chain, from end-to-end. This would be a platform into which various shipping industry data could be input, and other data can be obtained as outputs. Probably most input data would come from other platforms and data repositories, while output data would be fed to different counterparties based on their access rights and information requirements.” 

In that blog post, which I published in June 2017, I went on to say that this product seemed to be one ideally suited to be built on a blockchain. The platform would need to allow several independent parties to collaborate with one another while providing each of them with anonymity for certain aspects of their interactions. 

For example: Customs agencies around the world might demand special access rights to enable them monitor international trade transactions happening under various national regulatory jurisdictions. Such agencies could desire anonymity under certain scenarios.

About a week after I published the blog, I discovered that IBM and Maersk were beginning to release more details about their plans for TradeLens to the public.

During our meetup in January 2018, we hosted a discussion featuring speakers from UPS, SAP, Sweetbridge, Blockcience, and MState. The keynote speaker at that event was Dr. Michael Zargham, CEO and Founder of Blockscience, and at the time, also a technical advisor to Sweetbridge. The overarching conclusion I reached by the end of the event was this:

 “Successful implementations of cryptocurrencies and blockchains in supply chain will require more collaboration than the traditional industry is accustomed to.” — Why? The technology combines: digital systems; physical systems; social and political organization; economic structures and incentives; finance; and capital markets. No single organization is expert enough in all those fields to go it alone.

At our meetup in April 2018, we had speakers from: Algorand, Maersk, IBM, TigerTrade, EY, MState, Celsius Networks, and Sweetbridge. Professor Silvio Micali of MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory was the keynote speaker at that event. He described the key ideas behind Algorand, a blockchain he invented expressly to satisfy the demands of businesses. The other speakers discussed what it would take to bring blockchains out of the lab and into the real world of supply chain. Based on the discussions that day, I reached the conclusion that: 

Blockchain applications for supply chain must be interoperable with other blockchain platforms, and they also must be interoperable with the older technologies that businesses have relied on up till now.

TigerTrade started a conversation with IBM as a result of initial informal interactions at our in April 2018. Ultimately, this led them to partner and collaborate on the creation of TRADEFLO, a blockchain-powered platform for global trade facilitation and financing. Tanjila Islam, CEO and founder of both TigerTrade and TRADEFLO presented TRADEFLO at The Worldwide Supply Chain Federation’s inaugural global summit in New York City on June 20, 2019. Tanjila’s experience building TigerTrade directly informed her understanding of the need for a platform with TRADEFLO’s attributes. 

Conclusion

Platforms and ecosystems work well because they allow each participant of the platform to play to its unique strengths, while relying on its ecosystem partners for capabilities that it does not have in-house. This is not an issue that has mattered for shipping companies in the past. But, it is becoming more of an issue now, and it will continue to become a more acute problem in the future as beneficial cargo owners demand more sophisticated services from their supply chain partners. 

Collaboration is difficult because it requires a change in culture. It requires an openness that is not customary in many organizations. Collaboration for the purpose of discovering and nurturing innovative new ideas, products, services, and business models is even more difficult because it requires a commitment from senior leadership. Given how often individuals are shuffled around in organizations, it can be difficult to get anyone to focus appropriately on the long and difficult work that is required to build collaborative partnerships.

However, those companies that do not partner with others to meet their customers’ demands stand the risk of losing those customers to companies that come to grips with platform-and-ecosystem-driven competition more quickly. 

Key Supply Chain Innovation Issues to Consider as the World Becomes More Volatile, Uncertain, Complex, and Ambiguous

by

Note: A version of this story was first published on June 11, 2019, at FreightWaves.

For a couple of years now, I wake up each morning thinking to myself; “I wonder what insane thing happened while I was asleep.” Initially, it was an enervating experience. Now, I have become accustomed to it, and I do not feel the same sense of dread when I wake up, or of being drained of energy even before my workday has begun.

In the same way that I have adapted to a less serene world, people who buy, build, or operate new technology and innovations for supply chains must adapt and adjust to a world that is characterised by instability and chaos.

This article will briefly touch on 3 approaches for doing so. It is based on observations I made during The National Retail Federation’s Big Show 2019, when my co-founder, Lisa Morales-Hellebo, and I led 9 different groups of visiting executives on tours of the expo hall to learn about innovations in supply chain that they might buy for their respective companies. Being a tour guide gave me a great opportunity to listen to them describe their problems in their own words.

What are the origins of the acronym VUCA, and what are its implications?

The term VUCA first appeared in the US Army War College’s curriculum in 1987. Subsequent attempts to trace its origins in the curriculum suggest that it may have resulted from a synthesis of ideas in the book “Leaders: The Strategies for Taking Charge” by Warren G. Bennis and Burt Nanus.

VUCA is an abbreviated description of a world that is simultaneously

  • Volatile — change happens more often than usual and the accompanying swings become more extreme with the passage of time,
  • Uncertain — our ability to make predictions of any meaningful nature deteriorates dramatically,
  • Complex — the number of variables we have to track, analyze, and interpret increases beyond our ability to synthesize the accompanying deluge of data and information for decision-making, and
  • Ambiguous — even when we can synthesise data and information, it can appear to lead us towards meaningless and even contradictory conclusions.

It is debatable if the world in general is more VUCA now than it has been at any time in the past. What is not open to debate, however, is that due to the evolution of information technologies, we now become more quickly aware of events around the world. The speed with which news of unexpected and destabilizing events travels contributes to our sense that the world we live in now is more unstable than it was in the past.

Observation #1: Supply chains are becoming less centralized, more distributed, and more integrated.

The days of centralised distribution appear to be well behind us. The trend now is towards more decentralized and localized distribution, and less reliance on centralized and massive distribution centers. This is happening because companies want to increase their responsiveness to changes and disruptions within their supply chain. To accomplish this companies seek to more tightly integrate local stores with one another, as well as to more tightly integrate existing centralized distribution centers with local stores. To accomplish this companies are looking for;

  • Increased automation — freeing human experts to focus on complex cases and issues that arise in the supply chain,
  • More sophisticated forecasting and network optimization capabilities, and
  • The potential to eliminate central distribution centers altogether, so that suppliers ship product directly to local stores.

Observation #2: Supply chain visibility is becoming a more pressing concern.

Supply chain visibility enables customers, producers, and other participants in the supply chain, to track and trace goods as the goods travel through the supply chain from a producer to a customer. Supply chain visibility is a problem of information creation, storage, transmission, retrieval, and delivery. Supply chain visibility is also an issue of information security. It depends on data standardization between organizations. This is something that has been rather difficult to accomplish in the past. However, the push for supply chain visibility will only increase as former arch-rivals and competitors move towards integrating certain aspects of their supply chain operations in order to collaborate more closely with one another.

Observation #3: Simplicity is a virtue to the users of supply chain software.

This thought occurred to me as I listened to the executives ask questions at each of the stops on the tour; The consumerization of enterprise software is now affecting people’s expectations of how supply chain technology should function.

What does this mean?

  • First, people now expect supply chain software to be as intuitive to use as the software they rely on at home. They expect unnecessary complexity to be abstracted away.
  • Second, people expect supply chain software to be always available, and ubiquitous. That is, it must be seamlessly available across computing platforms, with no degradation in experience or efficacy.
  • Third, customization and personalization are key. In this context, customization means that the software is easily configured to match an organization’s unique business operations and structure. Personalization means that within that customized organizational configuration, each user has an experience that is further configured to that individual user’s role and responsibilities within the company, in a way that maximizes the individual users on-the-job effectiveness.
  • Fourth, more so now than in the past, buyers of supply chain software expect speed, responsiveness, and redundancy.

It is clear the trends I have described create an opportunity for early-stage startups building new software-enabled innovations to help businesses simplify and streamline supply chain operations. What remains unclear is the degree to which switching costs will hinder the adoption of new software products from young startups in a world in which VUCA is the norm.

Our Trash Is Creating A Coming Supply Chain Crisis

by

Note: A version of this story was first published on May 22, 2019, at FreightWaves.

News reports about the 2019 Copenhagen Fashion Summit (May 15 — May 16, 2019) highlighted current efforts by the French government to encourage fashion companies to establish sustainability goals for the industry. French President, Emmanuel Macron, has appointed Francois-Henri Pinault, CEO of Kering SA to lead the charge. This is part of increasing concern around the world on the issue of waste, and waste management. Initiatives like the one in France, and others around the world, are also shifting focus from our past of linear supply chains to a future of circular supply chains.

Putting things in context

According to the World Bank Group’s “What A Waste 2.0: A Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050”;

  • In 2016, 2.01 billion metric tonnes (4,431.3 billion pounds) of municipal solid waste was generated globally. If nothing changes, this is expected to increase to 3.4 billion metric tonnes (7,495.7 billion pounds) by 2050.
  • Food and green waste make up about 50% of waste in low-income and middle-income countries. In high-income countries, this proportion is 32%.
  • Recyclables — paper, cardboard, plastic, metal, and glass, makes up about 16% of the waste stream in low-income countries, and up to as much as 50% in high income countries.

Assuming that a full garbage truck weighs 23 metric tonnes or 50,000 pounds, this means that global waste produced in 2016 was the equivalent of about 87,391,304 garbage trucks a year, or 239,428 garbage trucks per day. If nothing changes, in 2050, global waste will be the equivalent of 147,826,087 trucks, or 405,003 garbage trucks per day.

What are the biggest culprits in post-consumer waste?

Fashion, apparel, & textiles is attracting a lot of attention. The following data and information in Figure 1 — Figure 6 below, from The Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s “A New Textiles Economy: Redesigning Fashion’s Future” report proves instructive. In summary, the problem is growing and solving it will require a new way of thinking, and concerted collaboration to create systemic solutions rather than isolated solutions.

Figure 1

Figure 2

Figure 3

Figure 4

Figure 5

Figure 6

Plastic waste has also been attracting a lot of attention. Here too, The Ellen MacArthur Foundation’s New Plastics Economy initiative is uniting companies, governments, and multilateral organizations in an effort to curtail and reverse the adverse impact plastic pollution is having on the world. To properly understand the problem posed by plastics, consider that reports suggest that popular everyday items made from plastic can take anywhere from 10 to 5,000 years to decompose through biodegradation. Figure 7 and Figure 8 below put things in further context.

Figure 7

Figure 8

The gravity of the problem posed by plastics especially is captured by media reports that;

  • May 2019 — The National Geographic reported that “more than 180 nations agreed in Geneva to add mixed plastic scrap to the Basel Convention, the treaty that controls the international movement of hazardous waste.” This has become an issue of growing international concern ever since China stopped buying non-industrial plastic waste in 2018 — China is the biggest importer in the $200 billion global market for non-industrial plastic waste. It is becoming increasingly difficult for wealthy countries to export their trash to poor countries.
  • May 2019 — National Geographic and CNN reported that plastic debris was discovered at the bottom of the Mariana Trench, at a reported depth of 35,849 feet (6.79 miles) or 10,927 meters (10.93 kilometers).
  • March 2019 — The New York Times and The Washington Post reported that a dead whale was found on a beach in the Philippines with 88 pounds (39.92 kilograms) of plastic in its stomach.

News media reporting, and statistics, on other categories of waste paint an equally damning picture: For example, according to the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization, about one third of the food produced in the world goes to waste every year.

So, what’s being done about this problem?

Companies, national governments, and multilateral organizations are teaming up to try to tackle the problems posed by increasing amounts of waste. For example: News reports about the 2019 Copenhagen Fashion Summit (May 15 — May 16, 2019) also highlighted Nike’s creation of an open source design guide aimed at nudging the fashion industry towards a future of circular and sustainable supply chains.

There are a few difficult problems in relation to the creation of circular and sustainable supply chains;

  • First: There is a dearth of voices from supply chain logistics in the discussions so far. How we move post-consumer waste to sorting and recycling centers will be a key component of creating circular supply chains.
  • Second: A clean and sustainable environment fits the definition of a public good. So efforts to build circular supply chains could very easily be susceptible to the free-rider problem unless political and economic structures are put in place to prevent that from happening.
  • Third: The success of circular and sustainable supply chains will rest on big behavioral changes for people all over the world — from a linear culture that glorifies consumption and generates a lot of waste, to a cyclical culture that minimizes unnecessary consumption, minimizes waste and maximizes sustainability and the reuse of products.

On the bright side, there are several startups creating innovations to tackle the problem of waste, in different industries. Social movements like #FridaysForFuture could potentially gain strength, and drive the tougher political action that may be required to spur private industry into taking more concrete steps to bring circular supply chains out of the lab and into the real world, at scale.

Why You Should Be Rooting for Startups Like Uber

by

Note: A version of this story was first published on May 13, 2019, at FreightWaves.

Disclaimer: The author is not an investor in Uber, or any of its competitors. Steve Case’s Rise of the Rest is an investor in FreightWaves.

On May 9 — just one day before Uber’s I.P.O., The New York Times published; Why You Should Root for the Uber I.P.O. to Fail, an OpEd by Mihir A. Desai — a professor at Harvard Business School and Harvard Law School. He is also the author of “How Finance Works.”

I couldn’t disagree more. We should all be rooting for startups like Uber to succeed. Our future depends on it.

This article is not an exhaustive examination of Uber’s business model, corporate governance, or how it treats its employees and drivers. That is beyond the scope of this article given that Mr. Desai does not critique Uber on those issues specifically.

What is the case for rooting against Uber?

In his article, Mr. Desai argues that Uber’s pre-I.P.O. investors have thrown an unprecedented amount of capital at Uber — $24.7 billion over 23 funding rounds, to be exact, according to Crunchbase. That capital helped Uber sustain more than $10 billion in operating losses in the 3 years preceding its I.P.O. Mr. Desai urges us to pray for a comeuppance for those investors. Here’s a summary of his reasons;

  • First; The era of bloated venture capital funds, like Softbank, distorts the allocation of capital, talent, and entrepreneurial energy toward unviable business models.
  • Second; The success of a company like Uber can lead young people and investors astray. Young people can view their jobs as lottery tickets. Investors of all kinds can be seduced into imitating these giant venture funds.
  • Finally; The venture capital world will become even more clubby. Startups will compete on funding rather than on the merits of their products.

He makes a seductively compelling case, and I understand his complaints. That being said, his argument fails because it takes a rather narrow view of the issue. Let me explain.

We are entering a new era

In his book, “The Third Wave: An Entrepreneur’s Vision of The Future”, Steve Case — former CEO and chairman of AOL makes the argument that we are entering a Third Wave of the internet. Briefly;

  • The First Wave extended from 1985 to about 1999. This was the era during which technologists and entrepreneurs laid the foundation for the online world. It was driven by people, products, platforms, partnerships, policy, and perseverance.
  • The Second Wave extended from 2000 to about 2015. This was the era of the mobile revolution and the app economy, characterized by search, social networking, and ecommerce. This era was driven by people, products, and platforms.
  • The Third Wave extends from 2016. This is the era of ubiquitous connectivity and pervasive computing, enabling entrepreneurs to use digital technologies to transform real-world sectors of the global economy. This is the era during which software — made up of bits, and physical products — made up of atoms, intersect and collide. This era is driven by people, products, platforms, partnerships, policy, and perseverance.

Though Uber was founded in 2009, and Lyft’s predecessor company, Zimride, was founded in 2007, it is not difficult to see that they fit squarely in The Third Wave. Together with other startups that were also founded before 2016 you may not know yet, they represent the canaries in the coal mine of Third Wave Startups.

So, what’s the problem?

The problem is that, with only a few exceptions, in general, Third Wave startups have not been very popular with venture capitalists. Indeed, this is the impetus behind Steve Case’s Rise of the Rest® initiative. Third Wave startups are unlikely to be founded by entrepreneurs who grew up or live in San Francisco, New York, or Boston. Third Wave startups are likely to be building innovations to reinvent supply chains in industries like manufacturing, agriculture, energy, transportation, healthcare, fashion and apparel, consumer packaged goods, real estate — huge, global industries in which the opportunity to exploit the latest advances in software technology to increase efficiencies in the conventional economy has not yet been fully realized, if at all.

Some of the reasons Third Wave startups have been unpopular with VCs are;

  • First, generally speaking, they require significantly more capital than the Second Wave, or even First Wave startups.
  • Second, initially, it can appear that they are operating unviable business models and that they may require more time to mature and experience a liquidity event than VCs can stomach — in fact it can often seem as if they will never become profitable businesses.
  • Third, at the outset it can seem as if such startups will never be able to overcome entrenched norms in legacy industries, overcome existing anti competitive barriers, or work in partnership with regulators and industry incumbents to achieve mutually beneficial outcomes.

The long-term success of Uber, Lyft, and other startups like them can help start to change that narrative.

Every Third Wave innovation is about refashioning supply chains

A supply chain is a network of interdependent organizations that cooperate and collaborate with one another to manage the movement of goods, services, and information between producers and consumers. The world as we know it would not exist without supply chains. Every Third Wave startup reflects an effort to rethink and reinvent the way the world’s supply chains function and operate. These innovations are critical if we are to have any hope of reversing climate change and creating a more sustainable future for our planet.

I am not suggesting that Uber is without blame or blemish. I am not suggesting that it is the very best example of a Third Wave startup. It is not yet clear that Uber or Lyft, or any of their competitors is good for the environment — I rarely use Uber or Lyft, preferring mass transit whenever I have the choice. I do not seek to dissuade, Mr. Desai, and others like him who would critique venture capitalists in general, and Uber’s investors in particular. However, while we critique Uber and its investors, let’s also demand that regulators and government fix the problems that are best fixed through policy as Third Wave Startups grow, mature, and implement new business models. Merely praying for Uber’s comeuppance doesn’t fix the very real shortcomings of regulatory authorities.

There is much to critique about Uber. Others have done so ably elsewhere. However, many of the issues that Uber, Lyft and some of their early Third Wave counterparts are facing may be emblematic of the same sorts of issues and obstacles that successive generations of Third Wave startups will face. Reinventing the way the world produces, transports, and consumes the goods and services that characterize life as we know it is a difficult and complex task that will take time and require many trade-offs and compromises.

Third Wave startups are the startups that excite me most. I believe that supply chain innovation is the foundation for all other sustainable innovation, and that supply chain innovation functions as a powerful economic multiplier. We should celebrate the era in which venture capitalists become more willing to fund startups taking on problems in unsexy but important industries — industries in which entrenched interests profit off inefficiencies that harm consumers and damage our environment. We should encourage, celebrate, and champion entrepreneurs of the Third Wave, even while we hold them accountable for their personal shortcomings. We should all be rooting for startups like Uber to succeed.

Is disruption finally underway in the freight brokerage industry?

by

Note: A version of this story was first published on May 10, 2019, at FreightWaves.

On April 25, Amazon announced that it was making an investment of $800 million to reduce delivery times, from two days to one, for members of Amazon Prime. The next day FreightWaves was first to report that, without any fanfare, Amazon had also launched a digital freight brokerage website at freight.amazon.com. Before that, on February 5, Convoy, a startup in Seattle that operates a digital freight marketplace, announced that it can now automatically match 100% of loads to carriers, without human intervention.

These announcements have pushed us farther along a curve tracing the evolution of the freight brokerage market, one that has historically operated on the basis of personal relationships, trust, and phone calls.

What is a market disruption?

A market disruption occurs when new entrants into a market supplant incumbent companies within that market in terms of market share and market power, leading to financial distress for some incumbents.

In his book, The Disruption Dilemma, author Joshua Gans distils what we know about disruption into two major categories;

  • The Demand-Side Theory of Disruption (Demand-Side Disruption) is the more popular and widely known version of disruption because it is the process described and explained in Clayton Christensen’s book The Innovator’s Dilemma. A Demand-Side Disruption is driven by changing customer demands and expectations.
  • The Supply-Side Theory of Disruption (Supply-Side Disruption) is much less well known, and results from research by Rebecca Henderson and Kim Clark. A Supply-Side Disruption is driven by a change in the architectural knowledge that forms the basis by which suppliers satisfy market demand for a service or product.

The freight brokerage market is being attacked on two fronts

Amazon’s entry into the freight brokerage business threatens to shift the basis on which the services of a freight broker are delivered to the market from one reliant on personal relationships, trust, and telephone calls to one that relies on a combination of software, cloud computing, connected devices, stochastic optimization, and automation. These platforms will automatically match carriers to only the most profitable loads, and they will minimize operating costs by automatically optimizing delivery routes. A relatively small number of people trained and licensed as freight brokers would be required to handle complex, unusual, and exceptional situations on an ongoing basis. Such a platform would be tightly integrated through application programming interfaces with all the other supply chain management software that customers rely on, as well as other external sources of relevant data. These platforms will eventually surpass the performance thresholds achievable by the best human freight brokers, and they are already being tested by some of the world’s largest companies. If they pass the preliminary tests and become widely adopted by shippers and carriers, they will represent a supply-side disruption.

Simultaneously, there is already a sizeable population of startups building on-demand digital freight marketplaces with the goal of cutting freight brokers out of the picture. For now, these marketplaces mainly fulfill the function of automatically matching loads to carriers, and they typically target the 10% of the carrier market that is made up of owner-operators. Given the razor-thin profit margins that characterize the trucking market, and the reality that brokers can command fees as high as 40% or more of each transaction, it is not difficult to understand why such marketplaces could potentially win market share from some incumbent freight brokerage businesses as time progresses. These marketplaces also compete directly with load boards. If these digital freight marketplaces succeed, they will represent a demand-side disruption.

There are two wildcards

There are two conditions that have to be met before freight brokerage confronts disruption;

  • First, new entrants have to solve the trust problem. Shippers interests are aligned with those of their freight brokers, and freight brokers act as arbiters of trust between shippers and carriers. Conventional wisdom among industry professionals is that this trust relationship cannot be replicated with software.
  • Second, new entrants have to overcome the cognitive and psychological switching costs that keep carriers and shippers firmly locked into the old way of doing things.

Even just a few years ago it might have been difficult to see how these problems could be solved systematically and satisfactorily with a software-centric approach. Conventional wisdom among industry professionals is that the trust relationship between shippers, carriers, and brokers cannot be replicated through software. I am not so certain. Carriers and shippers have the fundamental need to increase throughput, increase efficiency, and improve profit margins. The new entrants can gain market share by proving that they can satisfy those fundamental needs better than their incumbent counterparts on an ongoing basis.

To be clear, none of the innovations I am describing is a perfect replacement for the best freight brokers. Not yet. That said, venture capitalists have already invested $1.6 billion in FreightTech during the first quarter of 2019. This exceeds the $1.3 billion that was deployed in 2017 and is already 55% of the $2.9 billion invested over the course of 2018. Moreover, REFASHIOND Ventures’ analysis showed that Amazon had $31 billion of cash and marketable securities on its balance sheet as of August 26, 2018. That is more than enough capital to fund a sustained push to redefine the basis of competition in freight brokerage — the $800 million investment it announced is just a beginning.

No industry can escape turmoil if a supply-side disruption occurs within the same period as a demand-side disruption. Fasten your seat belts. We’re embarking on a long and bumpy ride.