date has focused on efficiency, as measured by container
throughput, vessel turn times, labor activities, and equipment utilization. PPRN decided to investigate
effectiveness—how well seaports perform in
delivering the services their customers
want. If they could determine how users
evaluate ports’ performance, the
researchers reasoned, then port management could use that information to
better serve customers and make their
operations more competitive. This
information could also help them prior-itize planned improvements in order to
make the best use of scarce investment
dollars.
It’s a subject that merits investigation,
because competition is a bigger concern
for ports today than it was in the past.
Thanks to intermodal networks, most
importers and exporters are no longer
“captive” to the nearest harbor, and ports
on opposite sides of the continent may
battle for the same business, Brooks says. Furthermore,
today’s huge retailers and consumer goods companies have
more economic clout than their counterparts did in the
past. “In terms of the entire supply chain, they are much
more important and powerful now,” says Brooks’ Dalhousie
Business School colleague Tony Schellinck. “They’re dictating where goods arrive, and through
their need to minimize inventory, they
have increased their involvement in the
distribution system and have forced
changes [that affect ports].” Add in carrier consolidation and the trend toward
bigger ships calling on fewer ports, and
it’s clear that port authorities must work
hard to attract and keep customers.
To find out what users really want
from seaports—and how well ports are
meeting their needs—PPRN has been
surveying ports’ three main constituen-cies: cargo interests (importers,
exporters, and agents that purchase
ocean transportation services), ocean
shipping lines, and asset-based warehousing and transportation companies
that do business with ports. Researchers
asked survey takers in all three categories to rank 12 general evaluation criteria based on their importance in port
selection decisions. These criteria covered areas like infor-
Responsiveness ranks high with port users
Evaluation criteria specific to cargo interests
Effectiveness of decision-making process (e.g., altering
schedules, amending orders, changing processes to
meet our demands)
Port authority responsiveness to requests
Terminal operator responsiveness to requests
On-schedule performance
Capability of employees (can they accommodate
our needs?)
Ability to develop/offer tailored services to
different market segments
Cost of rail/truck/warehousing
Availability of rail/truck/warehousing companies
Overall cost of using the port
Overall
satisfaction
Competitiveness
Effectiveness in
service delivery
10.0
8. 1
7. 8
7. 7
10.0
9.0
5. 3
7. 7
10.0
7.0
7. 1
7. 3
7. 4
4. 3
6. 8
6. 9
5. 5
5.0
0.0
8. 1
6. 9
5. 5
0.0
6. 9
6. 1
4.0
0.0
SOURCE: ADAPTED FROM CONSTRUCTS IN PORT EFFECTIVENESS RESEARCH (JULY 2010), M. BROOKS, T. SCHELLINCK, AND A. ATHANASIOS
WHAT MAKES PORT CUSTOMERS HAPPY? A RECENT SURVEY OF IMPORTERS, EXPORTERS, AND THEIR AGENTS SHOWED THAT THE BIGGEST FACTOR IN USER
SATISFACTION IS “EFFECTIVENESS OF DECISION-MAKING,” WHICH EARNED AN INFLUENCE IMPACT SCORE OF 10 OUT OF 10. (NUMBERS SHOWN IN TABLE
INDICATE THE IMPORTANCE OF VARIOUS EVALUATION CRITERIA RELATIVE TO THE TOP-RANKED CRITERION.)
