KPIs For Carriers

Key Performance Indicators
for Carriers & Logistics

Service Providers
Copyright 2007 Odette International Limited. All rights reserved
Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Foreword
FOREWORD
This document provides common definitions of standardized key performance indicators to measure logistics
performance of Carriers & Logistics Service Providers (LSPs).
To avoid each party creating their own Logistics Key Performance Indicators, Odettes Logistics Functional
Committee identified the need to develop common KPIs. A Logistics Key Performance Indicators Project Group
was formed for this purpose. The groups mission was to define and promote common indicators and a common
understanding between the parties in line with the Global Carrier and LSP Evaluation recommendation. The
overall objective is to increase performance and decrease costs in the Supply Chain.
This recommendation for Carriers & LSPs complements an already existing recommendation from Odette and
AIAG regarding the use of KPIs between Material Suppliers and OEMs (KPI for GMML), published in December
2006.
Each indicator defined in the KPI for GMML recommendation is applicable for LSPs and only sub criteria on
Delivery documents (Parts delivered without Delivery note or ASN and Specific delivery documents missing)
are applicable for carriers.
Using standard KPIs for logistics performance for all parties will mean a reduction in costs and an increased
understanding of responsibilities.
The KPIs defined in this document are complementary to the Global Carrier and LSP Evaluation Tool, and
measure the effectiveness of the logistics processes between parties.
Each company may use its own unique performance measurement system; however, the standard indicators
specified in this recommendation should form the basis of those performance systems. The parties may require
additional KPIs.
An Agreement between the parties should be in place before this recommendation is deployed, as the KPIs
should be used to measure the compliance of the Agreement.
The scope of this document covers supply chain management processes between Carriers, LSPs, Material
Suppliers and OEMs. The recommendation does not include internal logistics performance at Material Suppliers
and OEMs.
Definitions of terms used in this document can be found in the Odette Glossary and Global Carrier & LSP
Evaluation Tool.
Date of Publication: September 2007
Page 1/15

Acknowledgements
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
All members of the Odette Carriers and LSPs Logistics Key Performance Indicators Project Group
have contributed to the content of this document. Project Group members and the companies they
represent include the following:
Thierry Koscielniak.........................Odette International

National Organisations
Jacky Cousin..................................GALIA (French automotive association)
Jeff Turner .....................................SMMT (UK automotive association)
Werner Mock..................................VDA (German Automotive association)
Klaus Zanker ..................................DSLV (German LSP association)
OEMs
Gerhard Paulinz .............................Volvo Truck
Aurlie Gendrot ..............................Renault
Thomas Vernier .............................Renault
Karen Mauksch ..............................Volkswagen AG
Jean Michel Gry .............................Renault
Franois Lemoine...........................Renault
Material suppliers
Khoa Phung ...................................Arcelor/ Mittal
Jean Yves Caillet ...........................SNOP
Carriers/LSPs
Stefan Andersson...........................Volvo Logistics
Gaxan Castaos Ruesga ...............Grupo CAT
Jean de Valmont ............................Daher
Jean Marc Ors ...............................Gefco
Stphane Brackman.......................Geodis
Antoine Genin ................................Geodis
Roger Van Son...............................DHL
Tomas ONeill.................................DHL
Mark Engelen .................................Ewals Cargo Care
Page 2/15

Table of Contents
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS......................................................................................................................................... 3
1 GENERAL FEATURES....................................................................................................................................... 4
1.1 OBJECTIVES.................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.2 GOAL AND BENEFITS ....................................................................................................................................... 4
1.3 SCOPE ........................................................................................................................................................... 4
1.4 THE ROLE OF KPIS FOR CARRIERS & LSPS IN RELATION TO OTHER GLOBAL RECOMMENDATIONS ....................... 5
1.5 WHERE TO MEASURE THE KPIS ....................................................................................................................... 5
2 APPLICATION CONDITIONS............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 AGREEMENT ................................................................................................................................................... 6
2.2 COMMUNICATION BETWEEN THE PARTIES.......................................................................................................... 6
3 INDICATORS ...................................................................................................................................................... 8
3.1 ARRIVAL PRECISION ........................................................................................................................................ 9
3.2 ALERT OF PICK UP DISCREPANCY ALERT: PHYSICAL CHECK OF BOOKED QUANTITY AGAINST ACTUAL LOADED ...... 10
3.3 NO. OF INCIDENTS (E.G. DAMAGED, MISSING).................................................................................................. 10
3.4 LATE DELIVERY ALERT ................................................................................................................................... 12
3.5 FILLING RATE IN TRANSPORT EQUIPMENT ........................................................................................................ 13
3.6 STOCK ACCURACY ........................................................................................................................................ 13
4 USE OF KPIS FOR KPI FOR CARRIERS & LSPS SUMMARY.................................................................... 15
Page 3/15

Chap 1
General Features
1 GENERAL FEATURES
1.1 Objectives
This recommendation defines standard key performance indicators for Carriers & LSPs. Common
indicators will facilitate understanding between business partners, and align with the Global Carrier
and LSP Evaluation.
1.2 Goal and Benefits

Using standard indicators for logistics performance will for all parties mean:
less cost for measurement since focus will be on the most important KPIs identified
common understanding of the KPIs which means

o less cost for developing KPIs
o less cost for measuring KPIs
o less cost for interpretation of KPIs
increased understanding of each ones role/responsibility in the supply chain
less cost due to that improvement areas are more easily identified
The objective of the recommendation is not to standardize performance systems within the industry
but to harmonize the indicators used for Carriers & LSPs.
Using this recommendation, a party can fulfil internal objectives while using indicators common to the
industry that are better understood by all parties.
1.3 Scope
The following defines the scope of this project.
In scope:
To define and promote common indicators with common understanding

between Suppliers, Carriers, LSPs and OEMs with reference to the future
Global Carriers & LSPs Evaluation Tool regarding inbound logistics (F3
questions).
Note: The KPIs can be used at any point in the supply chain (e.g. between different carriers, between
carriers and LSPs, between tier N and tier N+1)
Out of scope:
Internal logistics performance at Material Suppliers and OEMs.

outbound logistics (finished vehicles and spare parts to dealers)
Page 4/15

Chap 1
General Features
1.4 The role of KPIs for Carriers & LSPs in relation to other global
Recommendations
KPIs for Carriers & LSPs is the basis for measuring logistics performance in accordance with an
Agreement between the parties.
These measurements are complementary to Global Carrier and LSP Evaluation Tool, which supports
a partys self-evaluation of its logistics capability. KPIs for Carriers & LSPs measure the effectiveness
of the logistics processes between parties. The KPIs are also a complement to the recommendation
from Odette and AIAG regarding KPIs between Material Suppliers and OEMs.
A mapping exercise has been undertaken that relates the contents of the KPI for Carriers & LSPs to
the Global Carrier and LSP Evaluation.
1.5 Where to measure the KPIs

Where should a company measure KPIs for Carriers & LSPs?
Location
Process
Activities
Collect at
suppliers
Arrival
Precision
Pick up
discrepancy
Alert
Receiving
Despatch
Receiving
Number
of
incidents
Late
delivery
Alert
Filling
rate
Stock
Accuracy
X
X
X Dock
Logistics
Centre/HUB
X
X
Storage
Despatch
Delivery at
the customer
X
X
Page 5/15

Chap 2
Application Conditions
2 APPLICATION CONDITIONS
2.1 Agreement
An Agreement should be in place before this recommendation is used because the KPI for Carriers &
LSPs should be used to measure the compliance of the Agreement. Therefore, the aspects measured
by the KPIs for Carriers & LSPs must be defined within the Agreement.
2.2 Communication between the parties

Results of Indicator Measurements
The party responsible for measuring must communicate the results to the other parties.
The frequency and method of communication must be defined for each indicator in the Agreement.
Recommended frequency: Monthly (except for KPI No. 6)
Recommended communication method: A Web-based portal application
A detailed examination of the results is required in the following cases:
Disagreement between parties regarding performance results
Performance below the target defined in the Agreement
Complementary actions taken over a given period in order to
Identify the causes for the discrepancy and/or

Implement continuous improvement action plans.
Incidents/Non-conformity
In the case of a repetitive or major non-conformity, communication must be escalated between the
parties and include the following steps:
The party having negative impact sends an incident/non-conformity report with
description and consequences to the party causing the negative impact as soon as the
non-conformity or incident occurs.
The party causing the negative impact establishes an immediate action plan to resolve
the consequences of the incident /non-conformity.
The party causing the negative impact and possibly the party having the negative impact
identify the root cause.
The party causing the negative impact and possibly the party having the negative impact
define an action plan to permanently resolve the problem.
The party causing the negative impact confirms the effectiveness of the definitive action
plan and updates procedures and work instructions.
The party having the negative impact approves the resolution and closes the
incident/non-conformity.
Page 6/15

Chap 2
Application Conditions
All communications must be carried out within the lead-time specified in the Agreement.
In order to communicate incident and non-conformity information effectively, the parties agree upon a
standard format for defining problem resolution (e.g. Problem Resolution Report (PRR), 8D, etc.).
Each step can be adapted to individual company requirements.
Page 7/15

Chap 3
Indicators
3 INDICATORS
All described measures the fulfilment of the mutual agreements made between the Material Supplier,
OEM and Carrier/LSP, but do not different service levels. For example, if an agreed time slot for
arrival is 15 minutes or 2 hours, it will not be reflected in the KPI for arrival precision. These two
service levels can have 100% precision although it probably is more difficult to deliver within the
shorter time slot if the transport is long distance. It is therefore sometimes difficult to compare the
performance of two companies.
The KPIs can also be used between different Carriers/LSPs involved in the supply chain and between
1st tier and 2nd tier Material Suppliers, and between 2nd tier and 3rd tier Material Suppliers and so on.
All KPIs should be broken down, e.g. per Carrier/LSP, OEM, Material Supplier, flow, market, transport
mode in order to identify improvement areas.
The general assumption is that a good result in KPIs means an efficient supply chain which reduces
the total cost, even if the KPIs as such are not measuring the cost.
The recommendation is that reason codes for deviations are used in alignment with the Agreement.
(E.g. status list according to UN recommendation No. 24).
In order to reduce measurement costs it is recommended that IS/IT tools are used.
The following table lists all the indicators and a brief explanation of the criteria and sub-criteria that
are described in this document.
No.
1
2
3
4
5
Indicator
Arrival Precision
Pick up
discrepancy Alert
No. of incidents
Late delivery Alert
Filling rate in
transport
equipment
Stock accuracy
Main Criteria
Time
Alert
Security
Alert
Efficiency
Sub Criteria
Carrier arrives within agreed time window
Carrier / LSP alerts (addresses pick up
discrepancies)
Carrier / LSP handles goods properly
Carrier alerts (addresses late delivery)
Transport equipment is efficiently used
Security
LSP handles goods properly
Page 8/15

Chap 3
Indicators
3.1 Arrival Precision

Purpose:
To secure the receiving/loading process
Definition:
Total No. of shipment arrivals within agreed time windows in relation to

total No. of shipment arrivals
Target:
According to agreement
Calculation:
Total No. of shipment arrivals within agreed time windows

----------------------------------------------------------X 100
Total No. of shipment arrivals
Frequency:
Monthly
Reporting date:
Within 2 weeks after closing of reported month
Applicable:
If agreement exists regarding service level
Measurement by:
Consignee, unless otherwise agreed
Link to F3 Question:
1.2.2.1
Comments:
Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment with the

Agreement between the parties
Example:
Agreed time window: 11-12 a.m. Wednesday

Agreed target: minimum 99,9%
No. of shipment arrivals within agreed time window during May: 990
No. of shipment arrivals during May: 1000
Rate: 990
-------- X 100 = 99%
1000
Page 9/15

Chap 3
Indicators
3.2 Alert of pick up discrepancy Alert: physical check of booked quantity

against actual loaded
Purpose:
To address emergency actions and thereby minimize production

disturbances
Definition:
Total No. of alerts (addressed pick up discrepancies) within agreed time

in relation to total No. of pick up discrepancies
Target:
Calculation:
Total No. of alerts within agreed time

------------------------------------------------------------------------ X 100
Total No. of pick up discrepancies
Frequency:
Monthly
Reporting date:
Applicable:
Measurement by:
Customer unless otherwise agreed
2.3.3.1, 4.1.3.1, 4.1.3.2, 4.3.2.2, 6.2.1.1, 6.3.1.2
Comments:
Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment with the

Agreement between the parties
Example:
Total No. of alerts within agreed time: 135

Total No. of pick up discrepancies: 150
Alert of pick up discrepancies: 135/150 = 90,0%
3.3 No. of Incidents (e.g. damaged, missing)

Purpose:
To ensure that the goods are properly handled and thereby

minimize production disturbances
Definition:
Total No. of orders with anomaly in relation to total No. of orders
Target:
Page 10/15

Chap 3
Indicators
Calculation:
Total No. of orders with anomaly

------------------------------------------------------------------------ X 100
Total No. of orders
Frequency:
Monthly
Reporting date:
Applicable:
Measurement by:
6.2.1.1
Comments:
- Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment

with the Agreement between the parties and the following codes
are recommended as a base (status codes according to UN
recommendation No. 24):
- code 87: despatched via wrong route
- code 117: missing
- code 120 unacceptable condition
- code 218: damaged
- code 309: packaging opened
- Order could be transport order or THU (transport handling unit)
passing the X-dock
Example:
For the month of May, the situation is as follows:

- 250 incidents incurred
- No. of orders: 1000
Normal rating:
Total No. of orders with anomaly
---------------------------------------- X 100
Total No. of orders
250
------ X 100 = 25%
1000
Page 11/15

Chap 3
Indicators
3.4 Late delivery Alert

Purpose:
To address emergency actions and thereby minimize production

disturbances
Definition:
Total No. of shipment alerts (addressed late deliveries) within

agreed time in relation to total No. of late shipment deliveries
Target:
Calculation:
Total No. of shipment alerts within agreed time

------------------------------------------------------------------------ X 100
Total No. of late shipment deliveries
Frequency:
Monthly
Reporting date:
Applicable:
Measurement by:
2.3.3.1, 4.1.3.1, 4.1.3.2, 6.2.1.1, 6.3.1.2
Comments:
Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment

with the Agreement between the parties.
Example:
A: count the No. of shipments that arrived late during the month
(arrival time > 60 agreed time) = 157
B: Count the No. of alerts (announcements), whatever the
reason for the delay (announcement to be sent before agreed
time for truck arrival) = 94
Rate: B
-A
Rate: 94
---- X 100 = 60%
157
Target: 100%
Page 12/15

Chap 3
Indicators
3.5 Filling rate in transport equipment

Purpose:
To measure the efficiency in loading and thereby reduce the cost and
environmental impact
Definition:
Total volume (e.g. m3) loaded on transport equipment in relation to total

volume (e.g. m3) available on transport equipment
Target:
Calculation:
Total volume (e.g. m3) loaded on transport equipment

------------------------------------------------------------------------ X 100
Total volume (e.g. m3) available on transport equipment
Frequency:
Monthly
Reporting date:
Applicable:
Measurement by:
As agreed but either Carrier or Customer, unless otherwise agreed
1.2.2.2
Comments:
Weight restriction has to be considered
Example:
Total m3 loaded on transport equipment during the month of May =

6.000 m3
Total m3 available on transport equipment during the month of May =
8.000 m3
Rate: 6.000
-------- X 100 = 75%
8.000
Target: 85%
3.6 Stock Accuracy

Purpose:
To secure proper process for handling units within a

Warehouse/Logistic Centre and thereby minimize production
disturbances
Page 13/15

Chap 3
Indicators
Definition:
Total stock units discrepancy in inventory (e.g. cells, part number) in

relation to total stock units estimated
Target:
Calculation:
Total stock units discrepancy in inventory

------------------------------------------------------------------------ X 100
Total stock units estimated
Frequency:
Reporting date:
Applicable:
Measurement by:
LSP, unless otherwise agreed
5.1.1.3, 5.1.1.4, 5.2.4.1
Comments:
- Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment with

the Agreement between the parties.
- All descrepancies in units have to be addressed immediately when
recognized (missing, found, damaged)
- Both positive and negative discrepancies are measured as positive
(absolute value)
Example:
Cycle accounting carried out at May 31st.
Inventory by Slot
Cell 1
Cell 2
Cell 3
Cell n
Total inventory Slot (A)
Inventory by Part number
Part number 1
Part number 2
Part number 3
Part number n
Total inventory by part number (B)
Total (A+B)
Rate (E/C)
Estimated
Actual
Difference
500
2000
3500
0
6000
Estimated
500
1600
3700
0
5800
Actual
0
400
200
0
600
Difference
800
1200
4000
0
6000
800
800
4200
0
5800
0
400
200
0
600
12000
11600
( C)
(D)
1200 (E)
10,0000%
The difference is always a positive quantity
Page 14/15

Chap 4
Use of KPI for Carriers & LSPs - Summary
USE OF KPIs for KPI FOR CARRIERS & LSPS SUMMARY
Table below shows where KPIs are measured.
Where should a company measure KPIs for Carriers & LSPs?

Location
Process
Activities
Collect at
suppliers
Arrival
Precision
Pick up
discrepancy
Alert
Receiving
Despatch
Receiving
Number
of
incidents
Late
delivery
Alert
Filling
rate
Stock
Accuracy
X Dock
Logistics
Centre/HUB
X
X
Storage
Despatch
Delivery at
the customer
X
X
X
X
Page 15/15

KPIs For Carriers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KPIs For Carriers

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KPIs For Carriers

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Key Performance Indicators

for Carriers & Logistics

Copyright 2007 Odette International Limited. All rights reserved

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Thierry Koscielniak.........................Odette International

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

1.2 Goal and Benefits

common understanding of the KPIs which means

increased understanding of each ones role/responsibility in the supply chain

To define and promote common indicators with common understanding

Internal logistics performance at Material Suppliers and OEMs.

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

1.5 Where to measure the KPIs

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

2.2 Communication between the parties

Identify the causes for the discrepancy and/or

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

LSP handles goods properly

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

3.1 Arrival Precision

To secure the receiving/loading process

Total No. of shipment arrivals within agreed time windows in relation to

Total No. of shipment arrivals within agreed time windows

Within 2 weeks after closing of reported month

If agreement exists regarding service level

Consignee, unless otherwise agreed

Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment with the

Agreed time window: 11-12 a.m. Wednesday

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

3.2 Alert of pick up discrepancy Alert: physical check of booked quantity

To address emergency actions and thereby minimize production

Total No. of alerts (addressed pick up discrepancies) within agreed time

Total No. of alerts within agreed time

Within 2 weeks after closing of reported month

If agreement exists regarding service level

Customer unless otherwise agreed

2.3.3.1, 4.1.3.1, 4.1.3.2, 4.3.2.2, 6.2.1.1, 6.3.1.2

Reason code for deviations should be established in alignment with the

Total No. of alerts within agreed time: 135

3.3 No. of Incidents (e.g. damaged, missing)

To ensure that the goods are properly handled and thereby

Total No. of orders with anomaly in relation to total No. of orders

Date of Publication: September 2007

Key Performance Indicators for Carriers & Logistics Service Providers

Total No. of orders with anomaly

Within 2 weeks after closing of reported month

If agreement exists regarding service level

Customer unless otherwise agreed