|
|
|
02 Oct 2008
Comments:1
When I joined courier firm Amtrak in November 2002, I inherited a 1980s infrastructure that had lacked a lot of investment. A new management team brought in by venture capitalist 3i was trying to stem the losses.
I saw this as a chance to use technology to leapfrog competitors. Our aim was to slash the cost of IT ownership, increase productivity and shrink overheads by improving the quality of management information and management’s decision-making ability.
In my first year we implemented volumetric charging via automated systems that added nearly £2m directly to the bottom line, helping Amtrak towards a profit not seen for some years. We also introduced new handheld scanners for drivers, based on cameras rather than the older laser technology.
Deployment of two-dimensional barcodes allowed storage of more information in the barcode itself including full address information. This helped reduce the number of misdirected parcels.
Money troubles
We also moved Amtrak to an MPLS WAN, reducing our reliance on lease lines
between central and remote locations. Previously, we were being charged per
mile.
Where do I think it went wrong? After acquiring another courier, Nightspeed, a US-based private equity company purchased Amtrak, but was not interested in capital investments. We still had a lot of work we wanted to do, but no money to do it.
Our systems were not fully integrated and due to gaps, tallying the
information gathered from the tracking of parcels to the
information required for billing them could be hit and miss.
I wanted to move to a more integrated platform based around a CRM and data-warehousing strategy where information could have been better consolidated.
Cashflow problems escalated with the loss of Farepak hampers, one of Amtrak’s accounts; Amtrak went into receivership and was acquired by Netfold.
I know Netfold understood that the right technology can enhance this type of
business. However, it probably took the company longer to get financial
headroom. I resigned in March 2007, but believe that the right technology
investment at the right time could have saved Amtrak.
Related articles
In this video find out about the fast-growing Chinese vendor's plans for market domination and how the channel is its route of choice
Find out what gifts Acer has in store for partners for 2012 in this exclusive roundup of its recent conference
CRN's premier networking event is back on 17 May at the Ricoh Arena
Date: Thu 17 May 2012
Channel fighters preparing to square up once more on 24 May
Date: Thu 24 May 2012
The proliferation of endpoint devices within the enterprise has highlighted the shortcomings of one of the traditional approaches to data security
This Forrester report compares the costs and benefits of legacy email and productivity software with Google Apps
Dave discovers that rozzers are seemingly living in the technology dark ages
Mark Needham, founder of distributor Widget, argues that John Browett leaves for Apple with Dixons in better shape than when he arrived
|
|
|
Do you agree?
Another full-of-himself manager
Yet another former manager trying to justify himself. The simple truth was that amtrak was carriying too much dead wood which management was unwilling or incapable of dealing with. The IT infrastucture was overpriced, had so many bugs that it could get up and walk away by itself. Network administration and security was a joke, with far too many unofficial users leaving the systems vulnerable while viewing inappropriate material.
The new netfold management were naive in the extreme - despite previous experience- in relying on the same layers of middle management who told them what they wanted to hear, not what was going on out in the field, at the depots, the main customers, and the transportation. The opinions and insights of the people who actually did the work were dismissed by middle management as an irrelevance. I was unfortunate to be with amtrak at the end, having been with them since before Mr Young joined the company, so I speak with some experience. Many of us long serving employees had seen the company declining but were powerless to do anything about it. Nevertheless the sudden demise shocked us all, despite the fact that at the time head office were incapable of runing a bath, let alone a multi-million pound company.
Posted by Former Employee | 22 Jan 2009
Have your say