Trucks at Work Blog

“The new information in this survey also indicates that many drivers are either in denial about their DWD habits or resistant to changing their behavior. This suggests that legislation may not be enough to eliminate distracted driving and highlights the need for a technological solution that can prevent cell phone usage in moving vehicles while still allowing people to stay connected.” –Bill Windsor, chief safety officer, Nationwide Insurance

Efforts are increasing to stop a wide group of behaviors lumped into the catch-all phrase “driving while distracted,” more broadly known as “DWD,” but according to a recent survey, it’s going to be an uphill struggle at best.

Nationwide Insurance noted that in its most recent On Your Side survey – conducted by Harris Interactive via its National Quorum telephone polling service – that 80% of Americans favor a ban on texting while driving, while two thirds favor a ban on cell phone calls and more than half said they would support a ban on cell phone use altogether behind the wheel.

Ah, but the devil is in the details as the old saying goes. The survey – conducted between Aug. 5 and 9 this year, among a nationwide cross section of 1,008 adults aged 18 and over – discovered that those polled say they are witnessing a growth in distracted driving behavior on the roads, with more than half noting they see more drivers using cell phones while driving than they did 12 months ago and nearly three-quarters pointing out that when they drive, they always or often see other drivers using cell phones.

Yet these same folks may be in serious denial about their own cell phone use behind the wheel. Nationwide said nearly half (49%) of drivers polled in the survey said a law restricting use of cell phones would not change their behavior because they don’t currently use cell phones while driving. “But when you compare this statistic to Nationwide’s 2008 DWD survey, which revealed that more than 80% of drivers admit to talking on their cell phone while driving, it may be the case that some drivers are either in denial or too embarrassed to admit their DWD problem,” noted Bill Windsor, Nationwide’s chief safety officer.

Then there’s resistance to new laws governing DWD behavior, as 18% of the survey’s respondents that admit to using their cell phones while driving say they would continue to do so regardless of a change in law, with Generation Y most likely to resist the change (26%).

Despite that push back, though, Nationwide said it remains firm in its support of the concept of a national ban on texting while driving – primarily because such laws could save lives by reducing DWD related crashes and thus lower insurance costs for consumers.

“DWD impacts all of us in one form or another and Nationwide will continue to raise public awareness about this important issue,” said Windsor. “By working closely with legislators, public safety officials and other key stakeholders we can arrive at real-world solutions to this problem and help make the roads a safer place.”

State governors are also paying much closer attention to this issue, with the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) recently enacting a new policy encouraging every state to ban texting behind the wheel for all drivers.

“The action by the GHSA membership is based on the fact that texting while driving is indisputably a distraction and a serious highway safety problem,” noted GHSA Chairman Vernon F. Betkey Jr. “If every state passes a texting ban, it will send a message to the public that this dangerous practice is unacceptable. We can begin to change the culture that has permitted distracted driving.”

Betkey noted that the recent study from the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute that indicated a driver who is texting increases crash or near-crash risk by 23 times influenced the GHSA membership’s action. However, successfully enforcing text messaging bans remains the tricky part, Betkey stressed, and hoped more information on how to do so successfully may come from a National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) DWD enforcement demonstration project later this year.

“In the past, there were challenges enforcing seat belt and drunk driving laws. However, the research and highway safety communities collectively worked together and developed successful enforcement programs like Click It or Ticket,” added GHSA Vice Chairman Lowell Porter. “I am confident that we can do the same thing with texting bans [and] GHSA’s new policy will help move this process along.”

We’ll see how this theory plays out in the months ahead.

“When business or industry terms become overused, people stop paying attention to them. The best communicators use clear and straightforward language that directly illustrates their points.” –Max Messmer, chairman of Accountemps

In a lighthearted vein, as we’ve waded through so much bad news this year, let’s take a look at one firm’s ranking of the most “overused business buzzwords” in use at the moment – the kind of stuff I find peppering press releases from all comers day in and day out. You may have your own pet “buzzword” peeve, too, or funny variation thereof, so please feel free to send them along to me and we’ll add them to the list.

The survey was developed by Accountemps, a big staffing services firm specializing in accounting and finance, and conducted by an independent research firm based on telephone interviews with 150 senior executives from some of the country’s largest companies. These executives were asked, “What is the most annoying or overused phrase or buzzword in the workplace today?” And frankly, their responses should surprise no one:

Leverage: As in, “We intend to leverage our investment in IT infrastructure across multiple business units to drive profits.”

Reach out: As in, “Remember to reach out to customers impacted by the change.”

It is what it is: As in, “The server is down today, and clients are irate. It is what it is.”

Viral: As in, “Our video has gone viral.”

Game changer: As in, “Transitioning from products to solutions was a game changer for our company.”

Disconnect: As in, “There is a disconnect between what the consumer wants and what the product provides.”

Value-add: As in, “We have to evaluate the value-add of this activity before we spend more on it.”

Circle back: As in, “I’m heading out of the office now, but I will circle back with you later.”

Socialize: As in, “We need to socialize this concept with our key stakeholders.”

Interface: As in, “My job requires me to interface with all levels of the organization.”

Cutting edge: As in, “Our cutting-edge technology gives us a competitive advantage.”

Accountemps conducted a similar survey in 2004 and found several overused buzzwords and phrases are still in vogue five years later:

At the end of the day

Synergy

Solution

Think outside the box

On the same page

Customer-centric

Hoo boy! So much for the complexity and depth of the English language! With a plethora of terminology at our fingertips, these words and phrases are the ones getting used over and over … and over! … again?? Ouch! It’s enough to make one fall asleep from mental boredom …

“Like any recession, this one will play out in stages and will vary by industry. Regardless of which stage your company fits, or the speed of change, you must move beyond tactical, reactionary moves and make structural changes needed to support growth. To make this shift, companies need to be proactive and prepare now for the new growth environment, whatever it may look like.” –David Brainer, principal, Deloitte Consulting LLP

It seems fitting on this day when an icon of U.S. political history, Sen. Edward “Ted” Kennedy, passes on, that we take stock in where we’re all headed in this country, especially economically.

Whether you loved or loathed Ted Kennedy, one must at the very least admire his doggedness – a truly American trait if there ever was one. For 40 years he fought for universal health coverage for every U.S. citizen – and he never wavered in his attempt to gain it. Right up until his death early this morning at age 77 from brain cancer, he fought for it – and as yet the final chapter in this ongoing political battle over health care is still yet to be written.

That same unshakeable sense of purpose is going to be needed by all of us as this nation continues its long, slow climb back to economic good health, for there are many unpleasant challenges ahead – with the cost of health care just one of them.

Of late, though, it seems that confidence among consumers is brightening – and more robust spirit is one of the key ingredients we’ll need in the days ahead. The Conference Board said its Consumer Confidence Index, which had retreated in July, rebounded in August, with the Index now standing at 54.1, up from 47.4 in July. The group’s “Present Situation Index” increased slightly to 24.9 from 23.3 last month, while its “Expectations Index” improved to 73.5 from 63.4 in July.

Now, these consumer confidence survey’s are based on a representative sample of 5,000 U.S. households – and considering there are over 300 million U.S. citizens out there, this “sample” seems awful small to me when making such huge broad claims about “consumer confidence.” And course such human emotions like “confidence” are always fickle, apt to change at the slightest bit of bad news (such as, say, the appearance of Godzilla on a city street). Then again, though, we’ve had a lot of bad news of late, so for “confidence” to rise in the face of things is somewhat heartening.

“Because the speed and intensity of the recovery will largely be determined by consumer psychology and a willingness to spend, I envision true economic stability won’t take root until the first quarter of 2010,” noted Greg Maloney, CEO and president of Jones Lang LaSalle Retail. “And consumer confidence will play the biggest part in our return-to-normalcy.”

“Consumer confidence, which had posted back-to-back monthly declines, appears to be back on the mend,” noted Lynn Franco, director of The Conference Board’s consumer research center. ”Consumers were more upbeat in their short-term outlook for both the economy and the job market in August, but only slightly more upbeat in their income expectations. As long as earnings continue to weigh heavily on consumers’ minds, spending is likely to remain constrained.”

But one of the things weighing heavily on American minds right now is the continuing climb in health care costs – even as we desperately seek some way to do the exact opposite. According to Aon Consulting, health care costs are expected to increase on average 10.5 percent in the next 12 months. After surveying over 60 leading health care insurers, representing more than 100 million insured individuals, Aon found that health care costs are projected to increase by 10.4 percent for HMOs, 10.4 percent for POS plans, 10.7 percent for PPOs and 10.5 percent for CDH plans.

Aon also found that prescription drug costs are expected to increase 9.3 percent, with the specialty pharmacy trend rate is 13.2 percent. In addition, health care rate increases for retirees over the age of 65 are projected to be 6.6 percent for Medicare Supplement plans and 7.3 percent for Medicare Advantage plans.

Then there are the deficits being racked up at a frightening rate by the federal government. We’re on track to post $1.56 trillion worth of red ink this year ALONE, easily topping last year’s record of $455 billion, with a projected $9 TRILLION hole being dug by current spending outlays over the next decade. That’s on top of the $11 TRILLION in debt already on the U.S. books.

While the U.S. economy is actually projected to start growing again by the White House’s budget office, albeit just 1.6% in the second half of this year, unemployment is going to stay relatively high; it averaged 9.4% in July and should peak at 10.2% next year before falling to 9.1% in 2011.

Needless to say, none of this paints a very rosy picture for the future. Yet it’s how we deal with these challenges that will be critical.

Deloitte Consulting LLP recently released new research that found while most major companies surveyed believe that the U.S. economy will start improving in early 2010, many of those same companies will lag behind the general economy when the rebound occurs. The reason: Too much focus on short-term, tactical actions and little attention to structural changes and strategic investments that are needed to support growth in the new business environment.

Approximately 55 percent of the companies surveyed by Deloitte feel the U.S. economy will start showing signs of recovery in the first or second quarter of 2010; though 25 percent think relief won’t come until the third quarter or beyond. But, when the upturn does commence, Deloitte believes many companies will struggle to deal with the new economy, which will likely be a completely different playing field from what companies have seen in previous recoveries.

“After implementing initial cost cutting measures when the economy first began to tumble, such as reducing salaries, layoffs and plant shutdowns, many companies are now are confused about their next steps,” said Kelly Marchese, a principal at Deloitte. “We believe these businesses should stop focusing on short-term concerns and look at their business in this new reality. Businesses need to focus on areas such as talent, growth and structural change so that their business doesn’t just survive – it thrives.”

Deloitte said its survey – Here Today, Where Tomorrow? Taking Action in Uncertain Times – is the result of hundreds of hours of in-depth meetings and discussions with nearly 100 companies across a wide swath of American businesses, including the healthcare, manufacturing, retail, life sciences, financial services and energy industries.

Deloitte believes there are three key economic phases to this downturn that businesses need to recognize so businesses can better focus their revitalization efforts:

• Phase 1: Over the Edge: companies were focused on shuttering their business, generating cash, and looking at tactical cost reduction. Survival was priority number one.

• Phase 2: Lumpy and Bumpy: the current phase of the economic downturn where companies need to place the focus on structural changes, strategic investments and a resetting the profit model.

• Phase 3: Growing into a New Reality: this is what companies need to prepare for; where the new economics, market realities and competitors emerge.

“Every organization grows at its own pace, determined by factors as large as the global economy and as personal as its current balance sheet. But, every business must grow – the only question is how,” noted David Brainer, a principal with Deloitte. “[Yet] that’s just the beginning. It’s not just about strategy; it’s also about practical execution.”

It’ll require a lot of gumption and faith in ourselves to successfully cross all these hurdles ahead, no doubt. But if we can stick to our guns like Ted Kennedy did over his life – despite personal successes and grievous failings, political mistakes and triumphs alike – then there’s no economic challenge we cannot overcome.

“Pickups have a lot of utility … [and] they tend to be used in support of other criminal activity. It has long been a common practice for criminals to use a stolen vehicle while conducting other criminal activity: alien smuggling, dope transportation, etc. That’s why you see pickup thefts in the border states much more than elsewhere.” –Frank Scafidi, spokesman, National Insurance Crime Bureau

Vehicle thefts may be down according to the numbers (dropping for the fifth year in a row, actually), but if you own a pickup truck – especially an older model Ford F-150 or a newer Dodge Ram – you still better keep a watchful eye on it.

That’s because pickups still remain one of the top vehicle types coveted by auto thieves, according to the annual Hot Wheels study compiled by the National Insurance Crime Bureau (NICB), based on data reported to the National Crime Information Center (NCIC).

According to the NICB’s latest vehicle theft study released this week, in 2008, the most stolen vehicles in the U.S. nation were:

1. 1994 Honda Accord

2. 1995 Honda Civic

3. 1989 Toyota Camry

4. 1997 Ford F-150 Pickup

5. 2004 Dodge Ram Pickup

6. 2000 Dodge Caravan

7. 1996 Jeep Cherokee/Grand Cherokee

8. 1994 Acura Integra

9. 1999 Ford Taurus

10. 2002 Ford Explorer

Certain models of older cars and trucks are popular with thieves because of the value of their parts, the group noted – and, frequently, parts can be stripped from a stolen car or truck at a chop shop and sold for at least twice as much as the value of the vehicle on the used car market.

That being said, though, there’s been a significant decline in vehicle thefts over the last five years – due in part to more aggressive law enforcement tactics, more diligent prosecution, and a proliferation of anti-theft technology.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation’s (FBI) preliminary 2008 Uniform Crime Report (UCR) shows that vehicle theft is on pace to record a decrease of 13.1 percent from 2007, making 2008 the fifth consecutive year of declining vehicle thefts. Moreover, if the preliminary figures hold total thefts for 2008 would be below 1 million vehicles – the lowest annual total in over 20 years, said Joe Wehrle, NICB’s president and CEO.

“This is great news for … it takes years of sustained effort to deliver the kinds of reductions that we are enjoying today,” Wehrle said.

Yet the unpleasant fact remains that pickups are still one of the top models being pinched by thieves – and while thefts are down, vehicle recoveries from theft are down, too; and indication, perhaps, that chop shop activity is alive and well and remaining very busy.

“The drop in thefts is due to a confluence of several factors delivering a great result: enforcement, legislation, prosecution, technology, and public awareness,” Frank Scafidi, NCIB’s spokesman, told me by email. “But to address your observation about chop shop activities, it could be that there is actually an increase in that activity as the national percentage of recovered vehicles slipped below 60% in 2006 and 2007—first time in ages—and we may see that for a third consecutive year when the final numbers come out from the FBI in the fall.”

That’s why the NCIB is urging the adopting of not just anti-theft devices by vehicle owners of all strops but vehicle recovery technology as well – devices that allow law enforcement to track down stolen cars and trucks quickly before they get sliced and diced for parts.

“These devices are not deterrent devices but recovery devices,” Scafidi told me. “The point is that the faster you can recover a vehicle once it is stolen, the less likely that it will be chopped or severely damaged as a result of that theft. You get your car back with little to no damage and you are spared from any of the hassle of dealing with insurance issues as well as having to secure a replacement vehicle.”

Such tracking technology is part of what NICB calls a “layered approach” to auto theft prevention, using four tactics to make vehicles less attractive to thieves and to help recover them quickly if stolen:

Common Sense: Lock your car and take your keys. It’s simple enough but many thefts occur because owners make it easy for thieves to steal their cars.

Warning Device: Having and using a visible or audible warning device is another item that can ensure that your car remains where you left it.

Immobilizing Device: Generally speaking, if your car won’t start, it won’t get stolen. “Kill” switches, fuel cut-offs and smart keys are among such devices proven to be extremely effective.

Tracking Device: A tracking device emits a signal to the police or to a monitoring station when the vehicle is stolen; thus are very effective in helping authorities recover stolen vehicles. Some systems employ telematics, combining GPS and wireless technologies to allow remote monitoring of a vehicle. If the vehicle is moved, the system alerts the owner so the vehicle can be tracked via computer.

Suffice to say, though, we’re on a good trend line where vehicle thefts are concerned – but that doesn’t mean vehicle owners, especially of pickups, can rest easy quite yet.

“The challenge today, however, is that our societies are infused with technologies that are at once complex and ubiquitous. That makes the dialogue about science and technology much more difficult, but also immensely more important to get right.” –Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., director of the National Science Foundation

One of the things that’s been so frustrating about the ongoing effort to lower emissions from commercial trucks over the last decade is an almost total lack of either appreciation or understanding of the science – and price tag – by the general public.

We’re on the verge here of adding another $12,000 or so to the base cost of a single Class 8 tractor – after a roughly $7,000 to $9,000 per unit hit three years ago – and the impact of that surcharge is going to be felt far and wide in this industry … but elicit maybe at most a yawn from anyone outside it. That ignorance is but one reason why truckers haven’t been able to get any sort of price break for these emission system mandates; and why the public at large still views trucks as “dirty” despite all the advances in science and technology at work here.

This is part and parcel of the strange dichotomy affecting our society today, I think. So much technology surrounds us and makes our day-to-day life so easy that we take it all for granted. It’s long been noted that the public looks down on trucks and trucking, yet relies heavily on that very same industry for its high quality of life. By extension, we demand clean energy and less pollution, yet won’t make the lifestyle changes necessary to achieve those twin goals.

Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr. (at right), director of the National Science Foundation (NSF), took note of this worrisome trend in a speech a while back – and for a scientist, this guy makes some very compelling and straightforward arguments as to why everyone, truckers included, needs to be more aware of what’s going on in scientific circles and how that science can eventually impact all of our lives.

“Democratic ideals and values can be at risk in an increasingly technological society when we do not educate and fully engage citizens in dialogue on critical issues,” he said in a speech entitled Science, Policy and the Public at the Royal Academy Symposium in Washington, D.C., in July.

“At a minimum, we need a clear statement of the science. Although this seems obvious, science that is accessible to policy makers and the broader public is in short supply,” Bement stressed. “Communicating science is a complex endeavor, but one we must work to achieve. We also need an analysis of possible policy options, and a transparent decision making process … [because] engaging citizens in genuine dialogue is the essential final ingredient – yet one that presents enormous challenges.”

Bement pointed to a recent public opinion survey on energy issues conducted by Public Agenda as an example of the disconnect between science and society today. That survey revealed that 51 percent of those surveyed could not name a renewable energy source; 39 percent could not name a fossil fuel. Yet what struck him as most significant about the survey was that, despite a lack of knowledge about energy sources, three quarters of those surveyed believe that the U.S. should move toward increased use of alternative energy even if oil prices go down.

“These strong attitudes appear to be based on a very slim base of knowledge,” Bement warned. “Crude as this snapshot may be, it points to a pervasive and serious problem – and one that lies at the heart of broader dialogue on emerging technologies. We need an informed public to arrive at informed decisions. It is a fundamental responsibility of everyone to promote and support science, technology, engineering and mathematics education at all levels. Without this goal, our decisions will be made ‘exclusive-ly,’ not inclusively.”

He noted that in the case of emerging technologies that are very complex – and emission control systems for trucks, along with biofuels, certainly fit that category – we as a nation require sophisticated and subtle solutions, the very best we can devise.

“The nexus between science and engineering and policy is not a new subject, but more urgent today as technology penetrates every aspect of our lives,” Bement said. “This is the arena in which science and policy should work hand in glove – but very often don’t!”

As for the broader societal dimensions of scientific advances, he shared an approach voiced by the famous seventeenth century Japanese swordsman, Miyamoto Musashi: In strategy it is important to see distant things as if they were close, and to take a distanced view of close things.

“This advice applies to the intersection of science, technology and policy no less than it does in considering strategy,” Bement continued. “Although this perspective may sound at first like a contradiction, the deeper reality is that we must see emerging technologies from ‘without,’ which is the citizen’s standpoint, and we must find a way to help citizens see it from ‘within’ as researchers do.”

In the end, he said, that puts us all together in the same boat – steering for the future, with all its uncertainties and its promises, but with a shared understanding of where we’re heading and why.

“It is not a threat of the future. It is an actuality.” –Janet Napolitano, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security, from a speech at the Global Cyber Security Conference held in Washington D.C.

I think we all know that “cyber security” is big deal – but especially in trucking, More and more these days, basic information such as bills of lading, customs paperwork, and other data is being converted into electronic formats and delivered via the pathways of the Internet.

Many times, this conversion to electronic formats is demanded, almost mandated, in business today – which is why the huge growth in cyber crime should be worrisome to truckers.

The sheer scale of cyber crime these days should raise a lot of hackles as well – for both corporations and individuals alike. Janet Napolitano, secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), detailed one such cyber crime that occurred in 2008 during a recent speech at a cyber security conference here in Washington D.C.; one that required the U.S. Secret Service to crack.

“Indeed, it was just about a year ago today that criminal charges came from a Secret Service investigation into the theft and sale of 40 million credit card numbers by an international group of cyber criminals – and that case, I believe, was just the tip of the iceberg in terms of the damage that cyber crime can entail,” she explained in her remarks.

More worrisome to her is that the “white hats” in government – the good guys – are often way, way behind the “black hats” in terms of understanding and using technology effectively. “We have to acknowledge amongst ourselves that in terms of cyber security we’ve been living in a cyber 1.0 world and we need to be cyber 3.0 and beyond,” Napolitano stressed. “Because the minute we start talking about a particular methodology of cyber the cyber bad guys are already moving ahead. This is a very, very rapidly evolving environment in which real crime and real damage can occur.”

That’s one reason why much of the fight against cyber crime is now being directed by the Secret Service, she said. “The reason the Secret Service is in there evolves from their historical jurisdiction; protecting the security of our currency and our banking institutions—and, of course, financial institutions are one of the prime targets of cyber threats,” Napolitano noted. “So, from that historical antecedent—which goes back to the 18th century—we now have the Secret Service being the lead agency on cyber crime throughout the federal government and in DHS.”

But cyber crime is a global problem which is one reason the U.S. government is involved with the International Watch and Warning Network [IWWN], which includes 15 countries. “Cyber [crime] knows no national boundaries. It knows no nation or state organization. More importantly, it is not organized the way we are organized,” Napolitano pointed out. “We are organized in nice categories, and even in an international environment we are organized in these kind of international organizations—none of which fits the cyber world.”

That’s why, to her mind, it is so important to recognize why cyber crime can be so dangerous – because, like terrorism (albeit without its visceral blood and horror) there is no international structure where cyber crime and especially where cyber security is concerned.

“That is part of where we need to go,” Napolitano stressed. “We need to confront how we really engage our partners. How are we going to share intelligence from the government to the private sector and back in real time, so that it’s useful? How will we work together on a day-to-day basis? How are we going to grow, recruit and retain cyber experts and cyber cops? In other words, where are the personnel going to come from who are going to help us in this effort—and that’s particularly important, because in the cyber world, there is such an easy flow within the private sector.”

This all goes to the heart of the battle against cyber crime, she noted: How do we, as a nation, build a reservoir of the top minds required to keep ahead of the bad guys? To get creative and think not just of what they’ve done, but what they’re going to do next and next and next?

“How do we share those ideas so that we are not chronically playing catch-up where the cyber field is concerned” she asked. “How do we stay aware and share information about developing threats in the cyber world? How can we continually be more innovative than our enemies would have us be? For those of you who are in academia—how can we fully involve the research and development efforts that you are undertaking in the cyber security efforts that we are making?”

All the different strata of government that touches on cyber security – from the military to transportation, banking, energy, etc. – complicates the effort to effectively focus on cyber crime at times. Even more critical, in Napolitano’s view, is how to engage not just the private sector in the cyber battle but the American people – building an understanding of just how serious the cyber threat is.

“The critical issue here is not just for the big players – the entire private sector – but every business in the U.S., large or small, and every home that has a computer in it – which is, as you know, an increasing number of our homes,” Napolitano said in her remarks. “They are now part and parcel of who could be attacked; and our challenge is how we protect ourselves before such an attack occurs.”

Definitely not an easy problem to get one’s arms around, but considering how extensively trucking relies on the cyber world to conduct even basic business transactions, it’s a threat that must be more and more closely watched in the days ahead.

“The man who succeeds above his fellows is the one who, early in life, clearly discerns his object and towards that object habitually directs his powers. Even genius itself is but fine observation strengthened by fixity of purpose. Every man who observes vigilantly and resolves steadfastly grows unconsciously into genius.” –Edward George Bulwer-Lytton

“Directed attention” is one of many definitions of the word “focus” as compiled by the Merriam-Webster dictionary – and it’s something that I’ve been pondering lately in relation to the trucking business.

“Focus” came to mind in a recent story I wrote about Con-way Freight’s effort to group until-now disparate less-than-truckload (LTL) offerings into a single “Global LTL” division. From my perspective, at least, the move seemed to unnecessary – I mean, heck, Con-way Freight’s “LCL” or “less than container load” service for ocean container shipments coming from Asia to the U.S. in partnership with APL Logistics as well as its expedited LTL in partnership with TNT for air freight service to the U.S. from Europe seemed to pretty well as is. Why complicate things by grouping them together in one division?

“We’ve already been providing a lot of LTL to global shippers, but it’s an effort that’s been screaming for some organization for some time,” Bill Wynne, Con-way Freight’s vice president of marketing, told me. John Labrie, Con-way Freight’s president, added that the purpose behind forming the “Global LTL” division is to bring all of the carrier’s worldwide LTL solutions under one umbrella. That would make it more convenient than ever for shippers to quickly and intuitively locate the LTL service that best meets their needs, he explained.

In effect, grouping these different serviced together – LCL and expedited LTL – is going to help Con-way Freight sharpen its focus and maybe use those established services to find other business they may have overlooked when the two offerings functioned separately.

My journalistic compatriot Tim Brady mentioned in a recent post on his blog that this type of “focus” is how even small motor carriers can still make a profit in the trucking business – focus sharpened with planning, forethought, and the use correct business principles. “If you’re a small motor carrier, you should be looking for a specific niche in which to specialize,” he wrote.

“If you want to compete in the truckload side of the business, you have to provide something no one else is willing to do, and then do it better than anyone else could,” Brady (at left) explained. “There’s always a need for any size company which provides excellent customer service. So yes, you can be successful in trucking, as long as you make a plan, know your costs, and be sure your rates reflect those costs. Find and fill your niche and become the best in the lane you service.”

Another business expert I regularly follow, Professor Jerry Osteryoung (below on the right) from the college of business at Florida State University, also believes “focus” is a critical attribute to have in business today. In a recent column, he related an interesting story illustrating why a lack of focus could morph into a big problem for any company today, large or small, trucking or non-trucking:

“We’ve been helping an entrepreneur who has been in business for over 15 years, but whose revenues have lately been on a free fall. I asked him to develop a marketing plan, but he had so many problems doing so. It just baffled me that this intelligent, bright man was having so much difficulty writing a marketing plan.

Given [his] difficulty with the marketing plan, I went back to ground zero and asked him what his mission and vision statements were. Both turned out to be so general that they were of no value. During these conversations, he showed me the company brochure, which listed ten different, unrelated services that his company provided. I then understood why the marketing plan and other core statements were impossible for him to complete: There was no hope of having a focused message or a focused business while providing so many different services.

I asked him how he managed to get involved in all of these different areas, and he said that his clients had asked him to do additional work outside of his core strengths. In response, he went ahead and did these things and developed an expertise. He just thought the more services he offered his clients, the more business he would generate. Unfortunately, he just neglected to consider how trying to do too many things for too many different types of clients would dilute his efforts.

We spent one meeting just discussing which of the areas he was passionate about and which there was a market for. He decided to focus on business coaching. From this, it was easy for him to develop succinct vision and mission statements as well as a very good marketing plan. Once he was able to focus, the rest was simple. Without this focus, everything was just too scattered.

Now, there is nothing wrong with having multiple product lines, but having too many will cause you to lose focus – and the more you lose focus, the less control you have on your business. You need to understand that every new market thrust leaves less time to manage and run existing product or service lines. So instead of asking what the returns from the expansion are, the question should ask what the returns from the expansion are less the losses brought about by reduced effort on existing products or services.”

“Awesome stomach-churning jumps frequently hide bends over the crests, so accuracy and delivery of pace notes must be exact and selecting the correct line before ‘take-off’ ensures maximum pace through the following curves.” –From Auto Racing Daily about the challenges facing World Rally Championship drivers and navigators.

To me, World Rally Championship (WRC) racing looks very much like insanity distilled and packed into a very small and very fast place.

The types of roads these drivers and navigators go barreling around at warp speed are rarely paved and hide all kinds of dangers, such as trees, boulders, wicked curves, even buildings; dangers much more common and familiar to everyday motorists like me when compared to the smooth high-speed ovals piloted by NASCAR’s finest.

And if you’ve gotten this far, you’re probably wondering what the heck WRC racing is doing in a trucking blog anyways. That’s easy, though – for if you really want a vivid, in-living-color definition as to why speeding is dangerous, look no farther than the WRC for your answer.

Just watch the video below [and many props to AdamYYZ for putting together this awesome show – set to the music of one of my all-time favorite bands, Rush] and you’ll see what I mean. You’ll get the traditional exterior view of crashes along with the unique “gun camera” view of the type of racing that WRC offers up – truly frightening shots with people, trees, walls, and even houses flying by in a frenzy.

Fort me, it’s heart-stopping to watch these rally car crashes happening from inside the vehicle – and I’ll admit to breaking out in a cold sweat at times, being a silent witness to the drivers and navigators being banged about inside these compact car frames. Because rally cars race on “normal” roads, the view from the glass is far more real and meaningful compared to what one typically sees during a NASCAR event.

I’m sharing all of this simply because there’s no better way to illustrate the gut-wrenching horror of a high speed crash. One minute you’re flying along, and the very next … WHAM! The car is violently corkscrewing through the air, pitching into a ditch or trees, or nose-diving off a badly-navigated crest in the roadway.

The night shots gives one a clear idea just how dangerous it is to overdrive one’s headlights – with the breakneck speed WRC drivers attain, there is simply no margin for error. Sometimes, there’s literally not even a split-second for the driver to react.

[Here’s a longer video that shows some of the worst rally car crashes ever – again, with a lot of “gun camera” footage. In this one, you’ll get the driver’s view of a head-on crash with a farmer’s tractor, as well as a heart-stopping near miss as an elderly spectator tries to cross the roadway.]

Spectators are all over the course, too – usually WAY too close for comfort. In the video above there are a ton of (thankfully) close calls, showing how just mere inches can spell the difference between life and death for a pedestrian inadvertently put in the crosshairs of a motor vehicle.

According to the WRC, rally cars are based on production-level two-liter four-cylinder vehicles, but while they look similar to the ones you might see in a dealership, just about everything about them is different – especially the price. A WRC car will set you back around $1 million, the group says – and that doesn’t include spares. A set of competition tires will last only about 100 kilometers – which is just a hair over 62 miles – and you’re going to have to budget for several engine and gearbox rebuilds during a season, too.

A WRC season, by the by, is made up of 12 races in 12 different countries – plowing through the snowy forest roads of Finland in the frigid winter, then winding along the boulder-strewn hills of Greece in the blistering hot summer – with each race split into anywhere from 15 to 25 stages. Each race also takes about four days to complete in total – two days for the driver and navigator to ‘map’ the course, with the navigator recording precise roadway details so the driver can hit the road at high speed, with a ‘shakedown’ day followed by race day.

Rally cars are stripped to the bare metal and then completely rebuilt – a process usually taking 700 hours, start to finish – with unnecessary brackets and mounting plates removed to save weight, largely to offset the added pounds from a welded-in tubular steel roll-cage. Strangely enough, this rebuilding process doesn’t make them weaker, as the safety cage and other modifications enable WRC rally cars to support the weight of 10 regular road cars of the same size and shape.

All WRC cars have four wheel drive and six-speed semi-automatic gearboxes, notes the WRC, with electronically controlled shifting systems allowing the driver to make clutchless gear changes in around four hundredths of a second – as fast as on a Formula One car. Most cars also use a launch control system to help them get away from a standing start as quickly as possible and though the cars have a clutch, the driver tends to only use it to move off from a standing start.

The engine in this little monsters produce a massive amount of torque – 600 newton meters (nM) worth, which I believe equals 442.5 ft-lbs., if I’ve done the math right – allowing it to accelerate to 100 kilometers per hour (kph) or just over 62 miles per hour (mph) on all surface types, be it gravel, dirt, pavement, whatever. It’s not unusual though, to see drivers reach 220 kph in some of these events; that’s up near NASCAR speed, around 140 mph, on roads where driving 20 mph would scare the you-know-what out of me.

Those speeds are just one reason you see all kinds of spoilers and other aerodynamic devices on rally cars – not just to help direct airflow to help cool brakes and engine components but also keep these little rockets firmly planted on the ground, or at least level while flying through the air.

Special mention, though, must be given to the mechanics that keep these puppies up and running during the race. The WRC says that because the conditions are so varied and unforgiving, cars visit a ’service park’ at pre-determined times during each event.

Besides gleaning data from the on-board data systems, changing tires and making running adjustments, the WRC says the four-man “pit crews” only get a small window of time to perform mechanical work on each car – either 10, 30 or 45 minutes depending on the itinerary. As a result, these guys can twist a suspension upright, swap hub and brake units in around five minutes, and change a gear box in about 10 minutes – skills that no doubt would translate well to the trucking community on this side of the pond.

It’s a crazy world these rally car drivers navigate – one where high speed and instant destruction are separated by the thinnest of margins. And they provide an awesome reminder why taking the “slow and steady” approach to everyday driving is the right course to follow.

“Cargo theft should be a major worry for truckers because it is most often perpetrated by organized crime since it is low risk, high reward form of theft. We know that distribution over the Internet makes it possible to sell most any product, virtually undetected. So, no one is safe from cargo theft.” –Robert Furtado, CEO, LoJack Supply Chain Integrity.

Cargo theft is one of the 900 pound elephants sitting not-so-silently in trucking’s corner of the world – an elephant many carriers (and shippers for that matter) try to ignore as best as they possibly can. That’s not to suggest they try to deny the existence of cargo theft altogether; it’s just that the collateral damage from cargo theft, such as higher insurance premiums and loss of reputation, is almost as bad if not worse than the financial hit from the theft itself.

As a result, the size and scope of the cargo theft problem in trucking – and across global supply chains, for that matter – is hazy at best. Three years ago, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) hazarded a guess, stating that cargo theft cost the U.S. $15 billion to $30 billion annually – yet in the same breath cautioned that the true measure of those losses may be even higher, since many businesses are reluctant to report thefts out of concern for their reputations or insurance premiums.

Now comes word from a recent study of cargo theft trends – at least from those companies willing to report them – that cargo thieves are getting more organized. According to LoJack Supply Chain Integrity in its second quarter “cargo theft bulletin” this year, an increasing number of thefts (34 incidents) occurred at carrier facilities, including secured drop yards – an increase of more than 300% percent compared to the first quarter of 2009.

“The fact that thieves are stealing goods increasingly from secured areas is further proof that ‘cargo at rest is cargo at risk,’ even if the cargo is located in an area with some measures of physical security,” said Robert Furtado, CEO of LoJack SCI.

The company’s second quarter bulletin – based on a total of 221 incidents reported to date from the 650 members of LoJack SCI’s Supply Chain-Information Sharing and Analysis Center (SC-ISAC) – also revealed that vehicles and their cargoes are at rest for a shorter period of time before they are stolen. For example, in the second quarter this year, LoJack SCI identified 19 incidents that occurred in less than four hours time – eight of which had been parked for less than one hour.

“This theft trend tells us that these loads were under surveillance and had been targeted from their point of origin, implying that these criminal acts were the results of very specific planning at the hands of organized thieves,” Furtado added.

Does this mean trucking – and the freight community as a whole – is starting to lose ground in the battle against cargo thieves? Actually, no; and in fact, the heat is getting tuned up on cargo thieves significantly, in part due to more attention from law enforcement and the willingness of the trucking industry to not only share data but become active participants in the cargo theft conflict.

For starters, the FBI is gearing up to track cargo theft as a specific type of crime – following the passage in 2005 of a law by Congress that mandates the development and addition of a cargo theft category to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) system. Though this category will not be fully operational for a year or two, the quantitative numbers gleaned from UCR reporting – identifying cargo thefts by product category, location, and estimated loss – should help fill in the “big picture” details we’ve been lacking for many years.

This is going to substantially help ongoing efforts to battle cargo crime – a battle that’s going on for a long time now. For example, the Los Angeles county Sherriff’s department created Cargo Criminal Apprehension Team – known by the moniker “Cargo CATs” – back in 1990. But in recent years, the freight industry – both carriers and shippers alike – have been providing crucial “fire support” for law enforcement’s efforts, and that’s getting results.

I talked recently to Walt Fountain, director of enterprise security at TL carrier Schneider National, about this hand-in-glove effort by the truckers and badges to jointly knock the wind out of cargo thieves and he related some good stories revealing how such partnerships work.

About nine months ago, one of Schneider’s drivers pulled into a California truckstop for a quick break. Locking his truck, he went in for a cup of coffee … and came out to find his entire rig missing, He quickly phone Schneider’s 24/7 security center to report his rig stolen – providing his location, license number and other pertinent information about his vehicle. They in turn called the California Highway Patrol’s (CHP) Cargo Theft Interdiction Program or CTIP and within minutes, CHP patrol officers and related personnel were alerted to the theft.

This information proved vital as it allowed a highway camera operator to spot the Schneider truck in question some four hours after the crime occurred (the day-glo orange color of Schneider’s trucks also proving very helpful here, noted Fountain). CHP closed in on the truck … but waited, allowing the vehicle to reach its final destination – a warehouse stocked with stolen goods and staffed by a slew of expert cargo thieves. The CHP pounced and bagged the whole lot – all due to truck driver’s fast dialing and the transfer of vital information quickly to law enforcement.

This partnership also works in reverse, too, noted Fountain (seen here at right). In another case, a CHP officer on patrol noticed a Schneider truck in his area parked at a warehouse – but he’d never before seen a Schneider truck stay in his area. His sixth sense tripped, the officer phoned it in – could someone find out if it is supposed to be here? Schneider’s security center again got the call and – as it’s plugged directly into the company’s operation center – quickly determined that truck shouldn’t be in that location. Boom! Another cargo theft bust goes down.

“It all comes down to the rapid exchange of information between us and law enforcement; and also among our personnel internally,” Fountain told me. “It’s also about maintaining security discipline on our side – making sure our drivers and other personnel constantly follow the correct procedure to secure cargo in our care. It also means keeping our drivers in the loop, too; it’s up to us to tell them where the ‘hot spots’ are in term of cargo thefts.”

The FBI is also promoting closer ties between the law enforcement community and freight industry in order to make cargo crime a far more difficult enterprise to engage in. I sent some questions to the FBI about what things the trucking community could do to help the agency battle cargo theft and got some suggestions from Ron Koziol, assistant section chief-violent crime section of the FBI’s criminal investigative division:

Timely reporting: “The [trucking] industry should work to ensure that the cargo thefts are reported to the law enforcement as soon as possible,” said Koziol. That means in minutes or hours, not days.

Details and points of contact: “Information such as a complete description of the tractor/trailer, the license plate and vehicle identification numbers (VINs) and a complete description of the lost cargo contents are important,” he added. “Regarding cargo contents, many times identifying numbers, such as bar codes and inventory control numbers are available or even specific identifying characteristics unique to a product or a package would be helpful. Also, a point of contact with the company’s security or loss prevention personnel is important.”

Training personnel: Training regarding different types of thefts, practical and sound investigative techniques, and the methods of operation utilized by the theft groups should be regularly conducted. “A review of security procedures and operations within the whole supply chain is something that many companies now perform regularly to evaluate the risks,” Koziol noted.

Background investigations: These are critical, both for current and future employees within the supply chain, especially where risk of losses is heightened or where the value of the cargo is substantial is a recommended normal operating procedure, he said.

Work together: “Industry and law enforcement must maintain effective communication and liaison,” Koziol stressed. “Even though property crimes may be considered a low priority for law enforcement and prosecutors, it is recognized that the criminal groups involved in these crimes have a great effect on the economic losses to the victim companies and joint efforts amongst the participants is key to our successes.”

Keep learning and sharing: Finally, the trucking industry should continue to promote and support participation in national organizations and regional organizations, working groups, and training sessions which brings together industry partners and law enforcement to understand crime issues, trends and new concepts.

“Through liaison contacts and working groups with the private sector, trends and intelligence are shared to better coordinate activities and understand the crime problem,” noted Koziol. “These steps will help law enforcement and industry in better understanding the crime problem, the trends, and the methods of operation.”

“Government policy such as fuel standards and greenhouse gas emission regulations, as well as support for the development of advanced technologies, plays a key role in supporting our product and technology pathway for a more fuel-efficient future.” –Sue Cischke, group vice president, sustainability, environment and safety engineering at Ford Motor Co.

Sue Cischke at Ford Motor Co., gave an interesting speech the other day – talking about how not just how government energy policy is going to affect vehicle development choices by automakers, but how energy pricing decisions need to be made to guide those choices as well.

“There’s a critical link between energy prices and purchase decisions as a driving force in the need to implement a comprehensive national energy policy,” Cischke said. “It is imperative that government also address the need for lower carbon fuels, consumer incentives and price signals to adopt the technologies that will deliver a more fuel-efficient, greener future. Price signals matter.”

In short you can mandate lower emissions and fuel efficiency improvements all you want, but without pricing incentives – and especially disincentives, such as increasing the cost of fuel – those policy goals will be almost impossible to achieve.

Now, it isn’t easy – and Cischke stressed that very point, especially when it came to reducing emissions.

“That is why we support a comprehensive, economy-wide, upstream national carbon cap and trade program that can slow, stop and reverse the growth of U.S. emissions while expanding the U.S. economy,” she said in her speech. “Ford recognizes the need for a comprehensive approach to the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions to address climate change concerns. While cap and trade for carbon emissions remains a complex challenge, we still need to employ an integrated approach that would include contributions from all of the key stakeholders.”

Yet one more viewpoint to chew on as the U.S. tries to figure out how to reduce emissions and energy use while keeping our economic might in top fighting trim.