Printer Friendly

Utilization of EDI by motor carrier firms: a status report.

Electronic-Data-Interchange (EDI) is evolving rapidly, with the number of transportation transactions that can be done electronically estimated to be 300 in 1990.|1~ By 1995, at least 400,000 companies worldwide will implement EDI, according to one source.|2~ Many shippers and carrier firms believe that EDI will become a competitive necessity both domestically and internationally. As one executive has stated, "No company that is serious about competing in the marketplace of the future can ignore EDI."|3~

In light of such statistics and statements, the appearance of many articles on EDI is not surprising. Articles focusing on rail and steamship operations have appeared,|4~ as have a few mentioning motor carriers.|5~ However, no study to date has examined EDI experienced motor carrier firms as a group. While the number of carriers currently involved is believed to be small, their systems are considered the most advanced in the transportation industry in terms of sophistication and capability.|6~ Their experiences, therefore, can provide meaningful insights as to the consequences of EDI implementation for individual motor carrier firms as well as for the motor carrier industry. This article addresses this gap. Results from a survey of EDI capable motor carrier firms as to their experiences with EDI are presented and analyzed. The survey inquired as to what has been involved in implementing EDI services and how this service offering is expected to evolve in the next several years. Thus, the focus of the study is EDI experienced firms and the insights to be gained from them, rather than the expectations of firms planning to offer EDI services in the future.

The firms included in the mail survey were all carriers that had self-identified as offering EDI services to the Management Systems Council (MSC) of the American Trucking Associations (ATA) as of April 1991. The list contained 176 firms, an increase of 25 from the results in April 1989. This group represents approximately one-half of the population of all motor carriers offering EDI services as of April 1991, according to sources at the MSC of the ATA. Other sources were contacted as to the remaining portion of this population. In total, however, the firms identified subsequently were already on the list provided by the MSC/ATA.

The survey instrument addressed six primary topics related to EDI. The first was the type and extent of services offered by the firm. This was examined in terms of the geographical coverage, the EDI transaction sets offered today, and whether the firm provides intermodal EDI linkages. The second topic examined the reaction of shippers to the EDI service offerings. Questions on the amount of freight movement now and in the future with EDI linked customers, the level of customer specific systems, what industries had been most supportive, and others were employed to address this issue. This research also sought to determine the benefits at the administrative, operational, and strategic levels from offering EDI. The costs and hurdles to implementing and operating EDI systems were the focus of the fourth topic. The extent to which organizational, technological, and standard and trading partner related factors impacted each firm's efforts was the focus in this area. How the firm has been impacted by these factors was the next issue examined. The level of impact on the functional areas and the degree of direct functional linking were the questions directed at answering this topic. Finally, the firms were asked what developments they see in the future of EDI, and what advice they would give to a motor carrier contemplating doing so.

CHARACTERISTICS OF RESPONDING FIRMS

The questionnaire was sent to senior level executives at the firms on the list provided by the Management Systems Council of the American Trucking Associations. For purposes of this study, EDI was defined as the intercompany, computer-to-computer communication of data in a standard format that replaces the function of business documents.

Thirty-three of the firms responded, yielding a response rate of 19 percent. A concern common to all survey research is the ability to project from the respondents to the entire sample. In order to test for nonrespondent bias, the list of transactions sets or message formats offered by the respondents to this survey was compared to the list from the MSC survey of all 176 firms. (The list for the respondents to this survey is provided later in this article.) The three most widely offered transaction sets were identical across the two surveys, and eight of the ten most commonly offered sets were the same across both surveys. Hence, in terms of the EDI services offered, the respondents appear similar to the entire sample.

These firms all reported having offered EDI services for at least one year. As the data in Table 1 indicate, almost two-thirds of the firms have offered EDI services for at least three years.
Table 1. Respondent Experience Offering EDI Services
 (N) (%)
Less than 1 year 0 0%
1 to 3 years 12 36
3 to 5 years 17 52
More than 5 years 4 12


Based on the data in Table 1, the survey sample has had significant experience with EDI. Therefore, the responses from these firms can provide useful insights for those contemplating implementation or those who have recently begun implementation.

Whereas the length of time respondents have offered EDI services is tightly clustered between three and five years, their size as measured by annual revenues varies greatly. The average annual revenue reported is $122 million, with a range from $5 million to greater than $700 million. The median for the sample was $39 million.

The firms also vary considerably in terms of the geographical coverage provided. The firms were nearly equally divided among those offering coverage on a regional (34 percent), national (34 percent), and international (32 percent) basis.

Beside their substantial involvement with EDI, these firms differ from the general motor carrier industry in the availability of intermodal EDI linkages. While no figures are available on the level of intermodal EDI linkages in place today with motor carriers, one recent article characterized these linkages as almost nonexistent among ocean and rail carriers and trucking companies.|7~ Thus, it is rather surprising that 26 percent of the respondents offer intermodal EDI linkages when intermodal has been portrayed as slow in accepting and implementing EDI.|8~ The motor carrier firms reporting these links had at least three years of experience with EDI in all but one case. A total of thirty-one managers responded to this question; one of twelve with less than three years of EDI experience reported having intermodal linkages, whereas seven of nineteen with three years or more of EDI experience reported having such linkages.

EDI SERVICES OFFERED

A list of transaction sets or message formats was provided to identify those services offered today and those planned to be offered in three years. Of the thirty-three questionnaires returned, thirty-one indicated those offered today and twenty-one indicated adding at least one additional set in the next three years. Specific results are contained in Table 2.

The message formats mentioned by at least half of the respondents to this question were Motor Carrier Freight Details and Invoice, Motor Carrier Shipment Information, and Motor Carrier Shipment Status Message. Functional Acknowledgement was noted by 48 percent of the group. Only one transaction set, Motor Carrier Tariff Information, was specified TABULAR DATA OMITTED by more than half of the respondents in terms of what they plan to add in the next three years. The next most frequently listed sets to be added were as follows: Motor Carrier Loading and Route Guide, Motor Carrier Shipment Status Message, Shipment Delivery Discrepancy Information, and Ship/Notice Manifest.

Possible extensions of EDI applications in the future were investigated through an open-ended question. Many of the responses mentioned electronic funds transfer and the use of bar coding. Others indicated that all communications with customers would likely occur electronically. Still another group saw EDI being employed on a more proactive basis through interactive systems for real-time status tracking and decision making.

Respondents also were asked to categorize the services provided to their EDI linked clients in terms of the truckload (TL)/less-than-truckload (LTL) mix (See Table 3). The most frequently noted category was the "pure" truckload category. The next most frequently cited category was the "pure" LTL category, followed closely by the 25/75 percent TL/LTL split.

Because of the heightened "information intensity" in the LTL sector, this roughly equal split between TL and LTL dominated (i.e., freight volume |is greater than~ = 75 percent) categories is interesting. The sheer volume of transactions required for LTL services would appear to warrant EDI implementation more readily than for TL services. Perhaps many customers and carriers are beginning with point-to-point shipments to facilitate the introduction of EDI.
Table 3. Truckload (TL)/Less-Than-Truckload (LTL) Mix of EDI
Service Offerings
TL/LTL Mix (N) (%)
100/0 13 40%
75/25 4 13
50/50 2 6
25/75 6 19
0/100 7 22
 N = 32 100%
Table 4. Importance of EDI Services Today and in Three Years
 Today In 3 Years
 Percent Range Percent Range
Freight volume 17% |1-40~ 49% |3-90~
Freight revenues 20% |5-45~ 53% |5-90~
Customers 6% |1-30~ 25% |3-75~


REACTIONS BY SHIPPERS

The importance of EDI linked customers varies greatly across the firms. Results on freight volume, freight revenue, and customer base are provided in Table 4.

As is evident from the data, carrier firms are establishing links with some of their larger clients first since the percentage of freight volume is nearly three times as great as the percentage of customers involved.|9~ Motor carriers expect a substantial increase in all areas. All forecast, on average, at least a doubling of volumes and revenues, with the number of EDI linked customers expected to grow by a factor of 4 overall.

Forecasts of freight movement under EDI vary widely. One article cites a figure of 75 percent by 1994 versus 40 percent in 1989.|10~ A forecast provided by the Council of Logistics Management proffers 55 percent of all orders by 1995.|11~ We will not add to this debate except to say that it seems unlikely that 50 percent will be achieved if the more experienced carriers do not plan to do more than this amount.

It has been claimed that the lack of standardized documentation formats and computer software makes many EDI systems shipper-specific.|12~ This was confirmed by the respondents who noted that 51 percent of their systems were customer-specific.

Executives were asked which industries they had found to be the most receptive to establishing EDI linkages. While a variety of industries were mentioned, manufacturers of food and chemicals were cited most often, followed by the auto and metal processing industries.|13~ Also mentioned by several respondents were retailing and distribution organizations. Others characterized their customers' responses in a different fashion; e.g., "about equal across customer base" and "about everyone we discussed EDI with."

These characterizations are consistent with other data provided by managers in response to a question asking them to categorize their customers' reaction to EDI from strongly positive to strongly negative in percentages. The results are summarized in Table 5, including the range of values returned. Nearly half of all clients are at least positive about the establishment of EDI linkages, while 14 percent appear negative in attitude.
Table 5. Customers' Responses to EDI
Customers' Responses Percent Range
Strongly positive 23% |0-95~
Positive 25 |1-85~
Neutral 38 |0-97~
Negative 12 |0-50~
Strongly negative 2 |0-32~


Several articles have suggested that EDI has emerged because of JIT manufacturing.|14~ To determine the extent to which JIT accounts versus other customers are impacting implementation, several questions were posed. First, the percentage of their customers with EDI links that require EDI was requested. On average, nearly half of these links are required, although the responses ranged widely from 1 to 100 percent. Next, the percentage of firm's customers who are JIT accounts was collected. For the fifteen firms reporting they service JIT accounts, these accounts represent 36 percent of all customers (range: 1 percent to 90 percent). Of their JIT customers, 40 percent require EDI (range: 1 percent to 100 percent). With 50 percent of all customers requiting EDI versus 40 percent of JIT customers doing so, it does not appear that JIT alone is pushing firms to go this route.

EDI can be a means for creating closer ties which may foster longer-term relationships between carriers and shippers.|15~ Slightly more than two-thirds of the returns specified that there exists a different relationship with EDI linked firms versus those without EDI links. An open-ended question covering these relationships was included, and numerous and varied responses were received.

All but one of the twenty responses to the open-ended question were positive. Relationships were seen to be stronger and less vulnerable with a less adversarial approach. Customers were less likely to shift business and several respondents noted an increase in business with EDI linked clients. Mutual access to each other's computer systems requires trust but permits benefits for both. Problems can be identified and resolved sooner. According to one manager, there is "a greater willingness to work together for mutual benefit over the long term." The one response that characterized the EDI-based relationship negatively stated that it made for a more strained situation since it was easier for shippers to evaluate a carrier's performance.

These views are similar in character to those found in the literature on EDI programs involving suppliers other than carriers with their customers.|16~ Together these studies provide evidence that where firms coordinate production or shipping schedules, both firms can benefit. In part, this is due to the need for cooperation to solve problems at the interfaces of the firms, be it where the flow of materials cross organizational boundaries or the flow of information. To be able to coordinate, both firms must comprehend the needs of one another, leading to a better understanding of what each requires. As demonstrated in a number of instances, these partnership types of relationships can provide "win/win" situations. A partnering agreement can be negotiated and set in place outside of EDI, and probably should be handled in this fashion, according to one expert.|17~ Yet, EDI is one of several ways to foster the development of such an arrangement and to solidify one that has begun.

BENEFITS TO CARRIER FIRMS

In addition to a closer relationship, firms were requested to specify how EDI had benefited their organization. One framework for evaluating an information system in transportation is provided by Jacoby.|18~

A three-level model of the applications of information technology in the transportation industry is utilized. At the most basic level (administrative), technology is employed to accelerate or simplify tasks. At the next level (operational), technology is employed to achieve both cost and noncost based objectives. Information systems are used at the third level (strategic) to enhance the firm's competitive advantage or to provide new value-added services to clients, existing or new.

Factors addressing these levels were specified based on previous research on assessing the benefits of management information systems.|19~ Thirteen factors were included in addition to an open-ended question regarding the strategic level.

Executives were asked to what extent the application of EDI provided benefits in the areas listed in Table 6. To all but three of the items, more than half (and, in many cases, at least two-thirds) indicated the benefits provided by EDI to be Low or None. EDI had reduced information processing costs in 52 percent of the cases and provided more timely information in 69 percent of the cases. However, 75 percent of the respondents stated that the level of benefits was Medium to High in making the firm more competitive and aiding in achieving strategic goals.

These results seem odd at first. Perhaps these firms have been employing other computer-based systems which have led to significant improvements in administrative and operational performance already. Or, perhaps the improvements attained with EDI linked customers are not visible when combined with all customers. That is, EDI linked customers account for less than 20 percent of total freight volumes, on average, for these carriers. A 50 percent reduction in the processing costs associated with this volume with no change in the other 80 percent of freight volumes might yield an overall improvement of 10 percent. Hence, total information processing costs or other measurements of administrative performance would change only moderately at best. Perhaps this is why one executive noted that his firm had not seen any positive ROI yet.

On the other hand, 75 percent indicated strategic benefits from EDI. One respondent checked None for all categories but the last, where High was checked. This individual added a note stating that with EDI, the firm had retained a major customer.

Nearly one-half of the firms (43 percent) specified that they had developed new marketing or operating strategies based on EDI capabilities. Some include EDI in their advertising or have their salespeople mention this to prospective customers.

TABULAR DATA OMITTED

Other firms use EDI as a means of differentiating their organization. For example, one noted that as a relatively small company, it was offering a service similarly sized competitors did not. Another firm stated that it was one of a very few carriers in its geographical region with EDI capabilities. In addition to altering its marketing mix, another firm has taken a different tack. This organization has redefined its target markets and actively solicits freight from customers requiring EDI.

Beyond heralding the availability of EDI, another group of firms identifies the advantages to customers from using EDI. Operating procedures have been modified to provide for more timely less and expensive information exchange. Customers can access their information systems to determine the status of shipments. Such access permits more rapid responses to changes, leading to lower costs and better service for both client and provider. As one executive stated, "EDI allows our firm to offer our customers more than an empty trailer."

HURDLES AND COSTS

In order to obtain the benefits of EDI, firms must overcome hurdles in the development and implementation stages. Executives were asked to specify the barriers encountered by their organizations in four areas: organizational, industry and standard related, technological, and trading partner related.

Internal to the firm, senior management acceptance and support were seen as major hurdles to be overcome by executives in this survey.|20~ One respondent noted that senior management had reluctantly begun implementing EDI until major customers demanded a more rapid development. Previously, one programmer had been assigned to the project, but several more were hired after top management recognized the significance of EDI to its clients.

Subsequent to start-up, two other issues evolved. One was moving EDI from MIS to the operational units. Another writer has characterized this process as the "transfer of ownership." Where ownership is not transferred, EDI is seen as a technical project only. Most importantly, business units will not figure out how to make it work for them.|21~ The other "theme" in the responses was a need to see EDI as an investment for the long term, and not a program with a quick payoff. Continuous application development in the form of modifying existing programs and implementing requests on a timely basis all necessitate sufficient resource availability after initialization.

Only a few executives indicated that standards presented difficulties, although standards have been identified as a major concern of companies considering EDI.|22~ The change from TDCC to ANSI X 12 standards requires program rewrites and the two standards are not well coordinated, according to one manager. Another noted that the introduction of several Canadian data elements had still not occurred for the motor carrier transactions sets. Standards were also not seen to fit a less-than-truckload carrier well for the types of services offered.

Technological hurdles included finding suitable software reasonably priced. This includes translation and operating software that is adequate and flexible. In other instances, communication technology and interfacing computers made by different vendors imposed difficulties. Overall, however, few managers suggested this to be so today, although standards and technology have presented significant barriers to EDI implementation in the past.|23~

The hurdles encountered with trading partners began with finding customers interested in developing EDI links. Two of the thirty-three firms that returned questionnaires had offered EDI services for several years, but had not attracted any clients willing to become involved. Once interest was expressed, carriers found understanding the client's specific needs and information requirements the next hurdle to development. Part of this difficulty has to do with finding what one executive called "a central clearing point"; that is, a decision maker in charge who is knowledgeable both technically and commercially. Another part is each customer wanting its own format and standards employed.|24~ Each link must be tested extensively and cost sharing must be negotiated. According to one participant, "all linkages have their own idiosyncrasies."

During the introductory stage, time lags regarding problems lead to lags in follow-up and improvement. One manager thought this is attributable to the fact that transportation has last call on MIS resources in many shipping firms. When a third party value-added-network (VAN) will be utilized, finding one acceptable to both parties can become an issue. Furthermore, several persons commented that third parties only added one more place for miscommunication to occur.

Many firms turn to third parties who provide expertise and various services in the set-up and operation of EDI systems.|25~ The extent to which third parties are employed by the firms in this survey for establishing and for operating systems is shown in Table 7. Based on the hurdles described and the desire for developing new relationships, it is not surprising that third parties are employed less for establishing systems than for their operations.

Fifty-two percent indicated that EDI accounts were significantly more expensive to service than non-EDI accounts. The most frequently mentioned costs were third party fees and programming related. The latter cost should decrease over time as more flexible EDI software becomes available.|26~
Table 7. Extent of Third Party Utilization
 None Little Moderate Large
Establishing
EDI systems 31% 25% 25% 19%
Operating
EDI systems 13% 26% 22% 39%


ORGANIZATIONAL IMPACT

The extent to which different functional areas had been impacted by the introduction of EDI also was addressed in the questionnaire. The results, shown in Table 8, indicate that marketing, customer service, and MIS are seen to have been impacted the most by EDI. This is not surprising since these functions are involved directly in developing programs to interface with clients. Reports and programs utilized in these areas will need to be revised in order to meet customer and third party network requirements.

Human resource management (HRM), finance, and operations are seen to have been impacted the least by EDI. The response regarding HRM is not surprising in light of other data collected by this survey. Only 10 percent of the respondents indicated that their firms conduct joint training programs with their customers. In addition, executives were requested to specify what new and/or different training programs related to EDI were introduced at their firms. Ten of the thirty-three returned questionnaires contained responses to this question, and these responses tended to focus on technical aspects, such as the importance of correct data entry and seminars for programmers. Two firms noted training sales and marketing personnel in EDI and one felt that sales personnel needed training, since the concept had not been grasped by sales management yet. Only one response indicated that all business functions had been provided with additional training.

The responses with respect to the impact on operations and finance are somewhat surprising when examined in light of the data on direct TABULAR DATA OMITTED links between EDI and the different functional areas. Operations, customer service, and finance are linked directly in more than one-half of the firms, and marketing in only 31 percent. These results seem somewhat contradictory when considering the responses to which functions had been impacted the most. Perhaps this indicates that while direct links may exist, firms are still learning how to use the additional and more timely data available. Alternatively, finance and operations may be less impacted on a day-to-day basis than marketing and customer service.

SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The individuals providing the data for this study and their firms have substantial experience with EDI. The results reported in this paper will be, hopefully, of value for other firms contemplating implementation. These results indicate also the variety of organizations involved as measured by dollar revenues, by message formats, by geographical coverage, by client industries served, and by other dimensions. Yet, three-quarters believe EDI is making their firm more competitive and aiding in achieving strategic goals.

As a final question, executives were asked what they would recommend to the management of a motor carrier thinking of introducing EDI. Twenty-five of the returned questionnaires contained responses to this item. Most often, the response was "get going now," "go for it," or "hurry up." In most instances, this response was followed by a comment on the competitive necessity of implementation.

Specific recommendations focused on starting with one transaction set, particularly set 210 (Motor Carrier Freight Details and Invoice). Others noted the importance of staying with the existing standards, of buying "canned" programs supported by vendors, and of developing a standard interface for clients. VANs should be selected carefully, and the EDI effort should be managed outside the computer group to ensure that businesswide implications are considered.

Other responses provided useful guidelines for implementation. Several noted the importance of obtaining management's commitment to the project before commencing. Others pointed out the value of starting with a serious, willing, and patient trading partner. In some cases, this will mean training these partners since some believe EDI is voice mail or e-mail only.

Additional recommendations are contained elsewhere in this article. While not a simple task, EDI provides a way to offer more than an "empty trailer." As one executive stated, "Do it. It is well worth the effort."

Mr. Millen is professor of operations management, Northeastern University, Boston, Massachusetts 02115.

Financial support for this research provided by the McNeice Fund for Applied Research, College of Business Administration, Northeastern University is gratefully acknowledged. The author also wishes to express his appreciation for the valuable contributions of the executives who responded to the survey; Ms. Joanne Rang, executive director, Management Systems Council of the American Trucking Associations; Mr. Frank Quinn, editor, Traffic Management; and professors Robert Lieb and Eileen Trauth, College of Business Administration, Northeastern University.

ENDNOTES

1 L. Bradford, "Transportation Industry Moves Toward Paperless Environment," Traffic World (June 20, 1988), p. 9.

2 L. Bradford, "EDI Growth Brings New Breed of Transportation Providers," Traffic World (January 1, 1990), p. 31.

3 Sea-Land executive J. Farquhar, quoted in L. Bradford, "EDI Growth Brings New Breed of Transportation Providers."

4 See, for example, "CSX Speeds Claims Processing Through EDI," Distribution (May 1990), p. 24; also, F.J. Quinn, "Why You Should Know About EDI," Traffic Management (July 1991), pp. 45-48.

5 For example, see W.L. Weart, "Standardization of Transport Formats Facilitates Access to Multiple Carriers." Traffic World (December 3, 1990), pp. 39-40; also, J.D. Schulz, "Shipper Demands, Competition, EDI Continue to Drive Carrier Innovations." Traffic World (November 12, 1990), pp. 41-44.

6 L. Bradford, "Carriers Look at EDI: Past Present, and Future," Traffic World (June 20, 1988), p. 18.

7 L.A. Bell, "Railroads Provide EDI Intermodal Links While Truck Counterparts Play Catch-Up," Traffic World (December 3, 1990), pp. 41-42.

8 L. Bradford, "Intermodal Industry, Rails Not Yet on Right Track in EDI," Traffic World (October 2, 1989), pp. 11-13.

9 This trend to first implement EDI with large volume shippers has also been reported in M.A. Emmelhainz, "Strategic Issues of EDI Implementation," Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 9, No. 2 (1988), pp. 61-62.

10 M.R. Crum and B.J. Allen, "Shipper EDI, Carrier Reduction and Contracting Strategies: Impacts on the Motor Carrier Industry," Transportation Journal, Vol. 29, No. 4 (Summer 1990), pp. 18-32.

11 This prediction was cited in J.D. Schulz, "Shipper Demands, Competition, EDI Continue to Drive Carrier Innovations," Traffic World (November 12, 1990), pp. 41-44.

12 Crum and Allen, "Shipper EDI, Carrier Reaction and Contracting Strategies: Impacts on the Motor Carrier Industry."

13 This finding is very similar to an earlier one by R.G. House, "Electronic Data Interchange," General Electric Information Services Brochure (1986), cited in A. J. Stenger, "Information Systems in Logistics Management: Past, Present, and Future," Transportation Journal, Vol. 26, No. 1 (Fall 1986), pp. 65-82. At that time, EDI efforts were concentrated in the automobile, chemical, grocery, iron and steel, office products, and paper and pulp industries.

14 See, for example, R. Lieb and R. Millen, "The Response of General Commodity Carriers to Corporate JIT Programs," Transportation Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Fall 1990), pp. 5-11; also, L.C. Jasany, "Are You Ready for EDI?", Automation, Vol. 37, No. 3 (March, 1990), pp. 24-27.

15 B.J. LaLonde and M.C. Cooper, Partnerships in Providing Customer Service: A Third Party Perspective (Oak Brook, IL, Council of Logistics Management, 1989).

16 L. Davis, "Retailers Go Shopping for EDI," Datamation (March 1, 1989), pp.53-55; also, Jasany, "Are You Ready for EDI?"

17 E.L. Anderson, Jr., "EDI is Good! But Does It Do What Needs to be Done?", Purchasing (April, 1990), p. 61.

18 D. Jacoby, "Implementing Strategic Information Systems in the Transportation Industry," Transportation Journal, Vol. 29, No. 3 (Spring 1990), pp. 54-64. His scheme is similar to the one proposed by M. Emmelhainz for analysis of EDI system usage in Electronic Data Interchange: A Total Management Guide (New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1989).

19 See K. Ewusi-Mensah, "A Systems Model for Assessing the Value of Information Technology Projects in Organizations," Working Paper (July, 1991), College of Business Administration, Loyola Marymount University, Los Angeles, CA; also, J.F., Courtney, "Evaluating Information Requirements in MIS Design," pp. 409-415, in R. Galliers (Ed), Information Analysis: Selected Readings (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 1989).

20 This finding is consistent with other writings in this area. See, for example, T. Horan, "Electronic Data Interchange: Outlook and Opportunities," EDI Forum, Vol. 1 (1989), pp. 35-40; also, T.T. Loar, "EDI: Integration of Shipper/Motor Carrier Systems," Transportation Journal, Vol. 27, No. 4 (Summer 1988), pp. 5-8.

21 T. Andel, "How to Beat EDIphobia," Transportation and Distribution (April 1991), pp. 31-34.

22 Andel, "How to Beat EDIphobia."

23 Stenger, "Information Systems in Logistics Management: Past, Present and Future."

24 For a similar finding, see T. Selzer, "EDI: What Level is Right for You?", Distribution (May 1990), pp. 36-42.

25 EDI Research, Inc., The State of U.S. EDI: 1989, Report to Respondents (1989), cited in Crum and Allen, "Shipper EDI, Carrier Reduction, and Contracting Strategies: Impacts on the Motor Carrier Industry."

26 J. Dysart, "New Generations of EDI Software is Geared to Mass Installation," Traffic World (May 14, 1990), pp. 47-48.
COPYRIGHT 1992 American Society of Transportation and Logistics, Inc.
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 1992 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:electronic-data-interchange
Author:Millen, Robert A.
Publication:Transportation Journal
Date:Dec 22, 1992
Words:5166
Previous Article:Airline Deregulation - International Experiences.
Next Article:The logistics-marketing interface: techniques for enhancing cooperation.
Topics:

Terms of use | Copyright © 2017 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters