X hits on this document

PDF document

Performance Metrics Used by Freight Transport Providers - page 13 / 35

94 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

13 / 35

W. Cottrell

Cal Poly Pomona

Table 3. Overview of U.S. Freight Transportation Industry

Industry-Wide

Mode

Category(s)

Aviation

Air carriers

Airports

Leading Provider (2002-2006) FedEx Express JFK (international) Memphis (domestic)

Revenue1

Ton-Miles2

$265.0

16,451

City streets Highways

Local messengers Trucks

NA Schneider National Carriers (FTL) United Parcel Service (LTL)

$7.9 $6,235.0

-- 1,314,616

Maritime

Pipelines

Railroads TOTAL

Marine ve Ports

Pipelines

Railroads

ssels

Ingram Barge Company South Louisiana (by weight) Long Beach (by TEUs) El Paso Natural Gas (throughput) Duke Energy Field (gas revenue) Enbridge Energy (oil throughput) Colonial Pipeline (oil revenue) Union Pacific

$89.3

$149.2

$310.9 $8,397.2

621,170

938,013

1,684,461 4,574,711

1 2 Modal totals, in billions of dollars (2002). Air revenue includes truck connections. Modal totals, in millions (2004). SOURCE: BTS (2007).

FREIGHT PERFORMANCE MEASURES: LITERATURE REVIEW

Morash (2000) explained that there are five categories of freight performance measurement: asset management, cost, customer service, productivity, and quality. Further, there are four categories of freight stakeholders: the freight infrastructure provider (e.g., transportation agency, port), the producer of goods (i.e., manufacturer), the shipper, and the customer. Each category of measurement is subject to a different interpretation by each of the stakeholder groups; also, some of the categories may not be applicable to certain stakeholder groups. Thus, it is possible to develop a three-dimensional matrix with up to 20 cells, each containing a set of performance measures related to the given measurement category and stakeholder group. This research concentrates on “freight transport providers;” i.e., the shippers, and the freight infrastructure providers. Hence, the scope of the investigation is limited to a proportion of the potentially 20 cells.

Overview of Literature Findings

The literature on freight performance measurement has become more active in recent years than in years past. For example, a review of several databases revealed as many articles published since 2000 as were published in previous years. The heightened activity is because, in part, of an increasing reliance of economies on the reliable movement of goods. From the pre-2000 references, Boisjoly (1979) reported on 20 motor carrier performance measures, two of which were given special attention: revenue per ton- mile and the ratio of operating expenses to revenue (the operating ratio). Miller (1990) concentrated on customer service, using five measures: request date, first acknowledgement, published interval, last acknowledgement, and last positive acknowledgement. Each measure was associated with a shipping timeline extending from pickup to dropoff, and final acknowledgement of a shipment’s receipt. Mentzer and Konrad (1991) listed a collection of efficiency and effectiveness performance measures in five categories: transportation, warehousing, inventory control, order processing, and logistics administration. Their measures are listed in Table 4. One of the authors’ arguments was that measures needed to address

11

Document info
Document views94
Page views94
Page last viewedMon Dec 05 00:57:29 UTC 2016
Pages35
Paragraphs1276
Words13059

Comments