02/05/16 by Egor Korneev.
Route Tracking – best approach to automatic arrival?
LoadTrek has recently expanded the automated route stop arrival and departure tracking to include both the location radius and the geofence of the location. Why retain both options? Which one is better for you? Let’s begin with a discussion of each methodology and the primary working principles behind each.
Location radius is a circle, typically 0.4 miles, around the location geocode. The on-board computer registers the arrival event when the vehicle enters the location radius and stops for a period of a few seconds.
The dispatching software automatically creates a default radius for a location with a valid address. This is a big advantage in a busy dispatching office. It saves time. The disadvantage of the location radius is the lack of precision in describing the actual boundaries of the facility.
Geofences are multi-vector polygons which users can precisely shape to a customer’s facility. An arrival to a route stop is recorded as soon as the vehicle crosses the boundary of the geofence. Unlike the location radius, the vehicle does not have to stop for the arrival to occur.
A dispatcher must build the geofence with clicks on the map, placing points around the boundaries of a location. Then, the geofence is sent to the devices in vehicles. The process to replace the default radius with a geofence is simple and takes only an extra minute. Yet, even that amount of extra time can be a significant disadvantage in a busy dispatching office.
What approach to use?
On the surface, each approach accomplishes the same task, creating an automatic arrival record when a vehicle enters a facility. Location radius is generated by the software. Geofences require extra setup by the user. When is the extra work justified? Let’s consider a case.
A large facility is located in an urban area. The location radius must remain relatively large to include the entire facility. As a result, the radius extends outside the boundaries of the facility and includes neighboring roads. A vehicle approaches a facility on a road that wraps the perimeter of the facility. The vehicle stops at a traffic signal and the arrival event is recorded, but the vehicle has another few minutes of driving remaining, and there is a line at the security gate. The vehicle enters the facility fifteen minutes after the arrival time was first recorded.
If the precision of the arrival times is important to your operation, then this is a good case for creating a geofence. We advocate using geofences for arrivals in all cases. They offer additional reporting capabilities that location radius lack, such as geofence-specific speed limits, inclusion or exclusion zone indicators, alerts on arrivals. However, If you run a very busy dispatch operation with multiple new pickup and delivery locations each day, then the simplicity of the location radius could be a good choice.
A company can use both approaches simultaneously, for different locations. If one location has a defined geofence, then the on-board computer will use it for arrivals and departures. If another location does not have a geofence, then the system will automatically fall back on the location radius for the route progress tracking.
In the later posts, we will discuss the Vicinity Arrival Reports that compare arrivals into location radiuses and location geofences. These reports can help you troubleshoot locations that require extended time to enter and cause non-compliance with the shippers’ schedules. Stay tuned.
Check out LoadTrek webinar calendar. We regularly hold webinars on new features and software functionality.
Webinar Calendar
Written by: Egor Korneev
Edited by: Dushan Yovovich
To Comment: http://www.loadtrek.net/route-tracking-radius-geofence/
Source: Safety Profiles No Easy Fix – Article – TruckingInfo.com
My father, Austin D. Farrell was a NATMI (North American Transportation Management Institute) instructor back when the organization was known by its former name: The National Committee for Fleet Supervisory Training (I think I got that right). Every autumn, my family would pack up and head to State College, PA for a couple of days. My dad would teach his fleet safety and fleet maintenance management classes while my mother would take me and my siblings for a walk around the Penn State campus. We’d meet up with dad for dinner and stroll along “College Ave” to soak up the excitement of campus life.
My father was one of the few professionals to hold all of the National Committee certifications and I will always be proud of him for his willingness to “give back” by volunteering his time to teach those courses each fall.
When I graduated from Penn State many years later, I wound up working as a safety professional for Reliance Insurance Company in Philadelphia. Don Smith, then Executive Director of the National Committee, invited me to participate in several classes at University of Delaware in 1990-91 including Motor Fleet Safety Basics and the Basic/Advanced Accident Investigation workshops (with Tim Mowery).
Although I had taken the necessary classes to pursue certification, I put off the CSS/CDS test and professional exhibit notebook. At the time I felt that I was too busy with work and with home life (getting married, raising a family). However, certification always seemed like something “I’d get around to doing eventually”.
Well, when I joined Nationwide in February (25 years after taking my first NATMI course), I asked our department leadership team to give me the flexibility to pursue certification in the midst of an overwhelming work load and fleet insurance profitability crisis. They could have easily said; “Not right now, come back to it later” but thankfully they encouraged me to “get it done”.
Why now?
For me it was simple –
As our leadership team noted, as professionals, we need to be constantly working to improve our skills, network of contacts, and fostering of innovation (instead of putting things off forever)
I felt that my credibility, while built from the school of hard knocks and thousands of fleet surveys, was incomplete or hollow without the professional certification as a capstone or hallmark showing that I wasn’t merely professional in my duties, but that I am a “professional” among peers (as evaluated against a standard “yardstick”)
I was leading a team of regional fleet specialists, and I knew I would eventually ask them to consider becoming certified. However, it would be uncomfortable to ask them to step up when I hadn’t done so myself. It’s critical (IMHO) for a leader to walk the walk and not just talk the talk.
Further, NATMI provides excellent speaking points on the value of certification at their own web site:
- Training and certification help fleets reduce collision rates, injury rates, recruit and retain qualified drivers, avoid fines and penalties and present a favorable public image by pursuing a higher standard than is required.
- For the employer who invests in their supervisors, managers and directors, it brings an effectiveness boost to the bottom line and shows that top management is willing to invest to be successful over the long term.
I love the way NATMI summarizes the benefits to the applicant:
Certification is a formal means of establishing a professional reputation, a process for improving your work performance and advancing your career. Certification measures your professionalism against objective standards respected industry-wide. Certification means you have been tested against a standard and have succeeded. The process of certification is designed not only to measure your current level of competence but improve your performance and take you to a new level of ability.
So, after reading about 1200 pages of pre-classroom material, spending four days in the classroom with safety teams from various fleets, passing a 100 question exam and submitting a two inch thick notebook binder to “defend” why I ought to be called CDS, it finally was approved.
I have to admit that I learned a lot through the process (despite my many years of experience!) I met great contacts who I regularly communicate with on various “real world issues”, and I’m thinking about other designations that I would like to pursue. I find myself encouraging my peers to pursue additional education, especially leading to a certification, if at all possible. It’s a big commitment, but a greater reward when it’s all done.
Lastly, some final benefit thoughts from NATMI’s site (if you or your employer isn’t already convinced):
From a survey of Certified Directors of Safety, recipients stated that NATMI training and certification directly enhanced their ability to:
- Lower the company’s accident rate (86%)
- Achieve a lower occupational injury rate (83%)
- Control costs associated with accident litigation (100%)
- Comply with regulatory requirements (87%)
Paul Farrell, CDS
New Milford, NJ
eaglescoutpaul@yahoo.com
Everyone wants to succeed and almost everyone, if not everyone, has a personal agenda to accomplish those goals. In the workplace, this is certainly true.
Bolander (2011) states that “There is not an organization on earth (or space for that matter) that does not have to deal with politics… all organizations have some internal political struggle that can rip it apart” (Daily MBA, para. 1). Greenberg (2011) defines organizational politics as “actions by individuals that are directed toward the goal of furthering their own self-interest without regard for the well-being of others or their organization” (p. 435).
Perhaps if we asked most people outside of the trucking industry if they believed organizational politics only exists in large corporate settings, the answers would invariably be yes. What about trucking companies — do you believe those organizations deal with politics? What would the answer be? If you’re on the inside of trucking, hands-down, it is a thunderous YES! So, how do we identify this social ill and what’s the basis for it?
Mayes and Allen have a similar definition that “Organizational politics is the management of influence to obtain ends not sanctioned by the organization or to obtain sanctioned ends through non-sanctioned influence means” (p. 675). So it can be said once again, there is a lot of organizational politics when it comes to one’s self-gain. Is this right? Wrong? Is it ok if someone in authority does it, but not the employees below them? No doubt that if someone in authority is taking part in organizational politics, it will affect the entire organization.
Andrews and Kacmar (2001) state that organizational politics “are often enacted behind the scenes and typically occur in organizations in which there are few rules and regulations to guide decision-making” (p. 348). However, according to Harrell-Cook, Ferris and Dulebohn “Perceptions of organizational politics involves the individual’s subjective evaluation of observed situations or behaviors as political” (p.1095).
Now, an individual saying that someone’s motives are political is not necessarily going to be considered right or wrong. One would have to look at the big picture to see if the motives are political or not. If they are found to be political, Andrews and Kacmar (2001) go on to say that “Those who perceive politics occurring within their organization experience reduced job satisfaction and organizational commitment, increased job stress, and are more likely to leave the organization” (p. 349). One cannot blame someone for leaving an organization where organizational politics is going on, especially if they are not benefiting from it.
Bradshaw-Camball and Murray talk about organizational politics and state that three questions must be asked when it comes to the topic:
- Structure – Who are the parties involved and what are their interests? How much power do they have? What are the bases of power?
- Process – How is power used in pursuit of each party’s interests?
- Outcomes – When the process is over, who gets what? What is the impact on the ongoing relationship of the parties and on the others who comprise the organization and its stakeholders?” (p. 380).
All three areas covered by Bradshaw-Camball and Murray go along with Andrews and Kacmar’s thoughts, and that is how it ultimately will influence the employees willingness to continue working at their place of employment.
Now that it’s been covered as to what organizational politics are, what sort of forms do they take? Greenberg (2011) talks about various forms of organizational politics such as gaining control over – and selectively using – information, cultivating favorable impressions, and having a scapegoat (p.436). All of these items focus on one thing, and that is making sure the individual looks good and that it brings them success.
These methods can be considered highly immoral but to an extent, that is what organizational politics are about. One of the most common terms heard however, is the term “scapegoat.” Greenberg (2011) defines a scapegoat as “a person who is made to take the blame for someone else’s failure or wrongdoing” (p. 436). Most of the time this type of organizational politics is common amongst management trying to save their position and job. This is certainly not ethical, and taking actions such as having scapegoats will cause employee morale to drop.
Overall, an organization or even an individual will not completely escape the world that is organizational politics. Everyone will, in some way, shape, or form, experience it firsthand. It could be something that the individual does, or organizational politics affecting the way the individual does their job in the workplace. The main thing to look at is how the individual is going to handle it when they experience it. Will they try to stop it so it does not affect someone else or will they take part in it to gain something for themselves in the end?
Dr. David W. Guess
Executive VP | Safety & Human Resources, Usher Transport, Inc.
NATMI Academic Advisory Board Chairman
http://www.linkedin.com/pub/david-guess-cds/39/722/b9a
References
Andrews, M., & Kacmar, K. (2001). Discriminating among organizational politics, justice, and support. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 22(4), 347-366. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3649544
Bolander, J. (2011, February 28). How to Deal with Organizational Politics. Retrieved from http://www.thedailymba.com/2011/02/28/how-to-deal-with-organizational-politics/
Bradshaw-Camball, P., & Murray, V. (1991). Illusions and Other Games: A Trifocal View of Organizational Politics. Organization Science, 2(4), 379-398. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2635171
Greenberg, J. (2011). Behavior in Organizations (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Education
Harrell-Cook, G., Ferris, G., & Dulebohn, J. (1999). Political behaviors as moderators of the perceptions of organizational politics—work outcomes relationships. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20(7), 1093-1105. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/3100348
Mayes, B., & Allen, R. (1977). Toward a Definition of Organizational Politics. The Academy of Management Review, 2(4), 672-678. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/257520
I want to draw a few parallels or similarities between running a safety program and, well, running. I’ve been a runner for a significant part of my life – since high school days, in fact, and trust me, that was a while ago! That doesn’t mean that I’m in perfect shape or that I’m extremely thin. It also doesn’t mean that there have not been setbacks (injuries).
Specifically, I want to talk about training for and running a marathon. Yes, I’ve run them and, in fact, I’m training for one now that will go off on January 3rd of next year in Jacksonville, Florida. The distance, 26.2 miles, is a long way and requires some thought before you actually undertake the training and the race itself. Here is where the word commitment comes in. Add to that the backing of your loved ones, as it is going to take you out of the house to run several days each week for various amounts of time.
Next, you are going to have to pay attention to the method(s) you are using to get your body in shape to accomplish such a task. What kind of shoes should I get? What kind of running shorts and tops are best? How about nutrition? Should I get a coach, or trainer to learn a little more? Each person is unique; it will never be “one size fits all”. Most of us are only competing against ourselves, seeking to improve on the last time out.
Lastly, you have to remember that it’s a marathon, not a sprint! The training usually takes from 10 to 20 weeks and that’s if you are already a runner. While you are actually running the race, you must also remember to pace yourself; you have a long way to go. When I am asked what my favorite part of a marathon is, I always say “the finish line”!
Now, what could all this possibly have to do with safety or a safety program? The short answer is plenty. Much has been said about CSA or the SMS scores, both good and bad. Yes, I will agree that if you are a very small carrier you may seem to be unfairly targeted. However, I’ve spent almost all of my working life in the trucking industry going from the loading docks, to driving, to training and finally into safety management. I find CSA to be a great resource for safety professionals, a tool to be used to improve upon the scores those insurance companies, shippers, and enforcement personnel all view.
Remember the first thing you must realize before undertaking a marathon? It’s going to take commitment and time. Let’s say you have a couple of BASIC scores in alert status, or maybe they are just a bit too high for your liking. The executives or owners of the company want the scores lowered — understandable. My first question would be, what kind of commitment exists here? Is the support “top down”? Is there backing from the very top to get this done? Does everyone realize that it’s going to take time? If the answer to all of this is in the affirmative, let’s look at the next step.
We need to look at what the violations are and who is committing them when they are driver based, and exactly what is causing them on the maintenance side. You have a fantastic asset available to you in your drivers. Most will always want to be able to improve. Show them where the problems are and what they can do to help improve the scores.
Also keep them abreast of the progress being made; trust me, they will be interested. Maybe additional driver training will be required. Maybe additional training will be required for the safety professional. NATMI has much to offer for the safety supervisor and safety director as well as similar training on the maintenance side.
I’ll end with this; remember, it’s a marathon, not a sprint! Escalating scores are not going to go down in a couple of months. In fact, it may take up to 2 years to get some of the BASICs where you would like them. A good safety program is an endurance race against the past.
With proper support and time, with proper training and commitment, you will improve your safety performance! Nothing beats the feeling of success, whether it’s crossing the finish line in a road race or seeing your company’s safety scores show marked improvement!
Steven P Norbeck CDS, CDT (retired)
spnorbeck@gmail.com
With the driver shortage continuing to climb to the top of motor carrier concerns, ATRI has released a new report that highlights a challenging future for the trucking industry based on demographic data and a dramatic shift in the age of the industry’s driver workforce.
ATRI’s analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data found that the trucking industry is disproportionately dependent on employees 45 years of age or older, many of whom will retire in the next 10-20 years. Complicating this is a sharp decrease over the past 20 years in the number of younger drivers that make up the industry, particularly those under 35.
Distribution of Employees 20 Years of Age and Older
One of the challenges highlighted by the study is the lack of vocational education offering for high school students to introduce them to a career in trucking. Based on data from the U.S. Department of Education, less than 30 percent of high schools nationwide offer any type of trade and industry transportation vocational courses. Further exacerbating the issue is the gap between high school graduation and CDL eligibility.
The results of this research prompted ATRI’s Research Advisory Committee (RAC) to rank two companion studies on younger driver issues as part of its 2015 top research priorities list. The first, Getting Younger Drivers in the Driver’s Seat, will focus on increasing the trucking industry’s vocational presence and examine the potential for a Graduated Commercial Driver’s License (GCDL).
The second, Younger Driver Assessment Tool, is designed to develop a screening tool to assess younger drivers that possess the cognitive decision-making attributes of mature, safe drivers. Once the tool is developed and validated, it then could be used to identify a pool of younger drivers for a GCDL pilot test involving commercial drivers 18-20 years old.
While finding ways to safely bring younger drivers into the industry is one potential solution to the growing driver shortage, the industry must also address a number of other challenges that make it difficult to retain the current driver population and recruit additional new entrant drivers.
Visit ATRI at www.atri-online.org.
ATRI is the trucking industry’s 501 (c) (3) not-for profit research organization. The Institute’s primary mission is to conduct transportation research with an emphasis on the trucking industry’s essential role in a safe, efficient, and viable transportation system.
