duhu2000/logistics-brief

UNIVERSAL RULES (apply to every logistics task)

• ALWAYS include specific recommended actions with deadlines in every output -- observations without actions are not acceptable

MANDATORY OUTPUT HEADER

TASK:          [e.g. Carrier Performance Review -- Q1 2024]
CONFIGURATION: [Loaded: supply-chain.local.md / Not configured]
DATA SOURCES:  [TMS / ERP / Carrier APIs / Manual input]

LOGISTICS BRIEF TYPES

Type 1: Carrier Performance Review

Use for: periodic carrier performance assessment, contract negotiation prep, carrier selection, carrier exit decision.

DATA REQUIRED (from TMS or ERP, for defined period):

• Shipment volume by carrier (number of shipments + weight/units shipped)
• On-time delivery rate by carrier (shipments delivered on or before promised date)
• Damage rate and claim value by carrier
• Cost per kg (or per shipment) by carrier
• Track-and-trace reliability (% shipments with real-time tracking events)
• Carrier compliance: invoicing accuracy vs. contracted rates

CARRIER SCORECARD FORMAT:

CARRIER PERFORMANCE SCORECARD -- [Period]
================================================================
                 Shipments  OTD%   Damage%  Cost/kg  Track%  Score
[Carrier A]      [N]        [X]%   [X]%     [X]      [X]%    [X]/5
[Carrier B]      [N]        [X]%   [X]%     [X]      [X]%    [X]/5

SCORING KEY:
OTD >= 95%: 5/5  |  93-95%: 4/5  |  90-93%: 3/5  |  <90%: FLAG
Damage < 0.2%: 5/5  |  0.2-0.5%: 3/5  |  >0.5%: FLAG
Cost: benchmark against market rate (see local config)
Track >= 98%: 5/5  |  95-98%: 3/5  |  <95%: FLAG

FINDINGS:
RED [Carrier underperforming]: [specific metric] -- recommended action
AMBER [Carrier at risk]:       [trend concern] -- monitor; review at [date]
PASS [Carrier outperforming]:  [strength] -- protect relationship

LANE ROUTING RECOMMENDATIONS:
[Lane]: current routing -> optimal routing | saving: [X]/month
================================================================

Type 2: Lane Optimisation Analysis

Use for: specific origin-destination analysis; carrier selection for a new lane; mode of transport optimisation.

INPUT REQUIRED:

• Origin and destination (city/postcode/country)
• Shipment profile: volume (units/kg), frequency, typical parcel dimensions
• Service requirement: transit time; temperature controlled; track-and-trace
• Current arrangement: carrier, mode, cost, SLA
• Available alternatives (if known -- agent will also identify via MCP)

ANALYSIS OUTPUT:

LANE ANALYSIS: [Origin] -> [Destination]
---------------------------------------------------------
Shipment profile:  [Volume, frequency, specification]
Service req:       [Transit time; special requirements]

OPTION COMPARISON:
            Mode      Transit  Cost/kg  OTD%   Carbon   Score
Current:    [Mode]    [X days] [X]      [X]%   [X]g     [X]/5
Option A:   [Mode]    [X days] [X]      [X]%   [X]g     [X]/5
Option B:   [Mode]    [X days] [X]      [X]%   [X]g     [X]/5

RECOMMENDATION: [Option] because [specific rationale]
Annual saving vs. current: [X]
Service trade-off: [Any service level change]
Carbon trade-off: [Any carbon change]
---------------------------------------------------------

Type 3: Expedited Freight Analysis

Use for: investigating high premium freight spend; root cause analysis; upstream problem identification.

OUTPUT:

• Total expedited spend (% of total freight budget)
• Expedited volume by business unit / site / category
• Root cause classification: a) Late supplier delivery (procurement/vendor issue) b) Demand forecast error (planning issue) c) Inventory positioning error (supply chain design issue) d) Customer emergency (valid commercial reason) e) Production planning error (internal operations)
• Recommended intervention by root cause category
• Quantified saving if root cause is addressed

RULE: Expedited freight > 10% of total freight spend indicates an upstream supply chain design or process problem, not a logistics problem. Solving it at the logistics level (buying more premium capacity) masks and perpetuates the underlying issue.

Type 4: Carbon Assessment

Use for: Scope 3 emissions reporting; sustainability target setting; mode-shift analysis; decarbonisation planning.

OUTPUT:

• Total logistics Scope 3 emissions (tCO2e) by carrier and lane
• Emissions intensity (gCO2e per km-tonne shipped)
• Breakdown by transport mode
• Highest-emission routes
• Mode-shift options with cost and service trade-offs
• Estimated reduction from implementing each option

EMISSIONS REFERENCE (approximate; verify with actual carrier data): Air freight: 500-600 gCO2e per tonne-km Road (HGV): 60-80 gCO2e per tonne-km Rail (electric): 20-30 gCO2e per tonne-km Sea (container): 10-15 gCO2e per tonne-km

NEVER DO THESE

• NEVER recommend exiting an underperforming carrier without confirming alternative capacity is available for the affected lanes
• NEVER use cost per shipment as the sole metric -- cost per kg normalises for shipment size differences
• NEVER accept carrier invoice rate creep without audit: compare actual invoiced rate to contracted rate line by line
• NEVER diagnose an expedited freight problem as a logistics problem without first checking whether the root cause is upstream
• NEVER report carbon figures without the source and methodology -- Scope 3 emissions data quality varies significantly by carrier

ALL OUTPUTS REQUIRE REVIEW BY A QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL BEFORE USE IN BUSINESS DECISIONS.