Imagine this common scenario: A shipper and carrier agree on a freight rate, but they have different ideas about what “delivery window” means. The shipper expects a precise 2-hour slot, while the carrier thinks it means a 4-hour period. This business communications confusion causes disputes, possible fines, and tension – all because of unclear definitions. Further, without standard meanings for terms like “inventory on-hand” or “shipment visibility,” this confusion extends to technology adoption. Indeed, especially for supply chain commerce, companies struggle to innovate their disjointed systems due to data interoperability caused by a lack of clarity in basic business communications.
In this article, I’ll first look at how commonplace it is for different supply chain organizations to misunderstand each other. This includes specific supply chain examples of how lapses in operational clarity cause major problems within supply chains. Lastly, I’ll identify how the poor use of business terminology is impeding technological innovations such as supply chain visibility, intermodal interoperability, and data interoperability to name a few.
“It is not necessary to change. Survival is not mandatory.”
W. Edwards Deming
1. First, What Is Clarity When It Comes to Business Communications.
Without a doubt, clarity is essential in business communications. Organizations must ensure clear communication among employees so everyone understands their work tasks and how to collaborate effectively. Additionally, what is communicated must be understood in context. So, let’s look at a specific example.
a. “Delivery” Definition: Example of the Challenges with Communicating Meaning in Business Communications.
Supply chains use hundreds of industry-specific business terms in their day-to-day communications. Further, these business terms can be conveyed by various mediums such as verbally or digitally. As an example, let’s take the word “delivery” in the context of a supply chain operation. Below are two definitions of delivery.

Dictionary Definition of “Delivery”
“the act of taking goods, letters, packages, etc. to people’s houses or places of work”
Cambridge Dictionary
DCSA Definition of “Delivery”
“The action of delivering a container to a customer location. The delivery is completed once the possession of the container is legally transferred to the customer from the haulier.”
Digital Container Shipping Association (DCSA)
Although both definitions are valid, they offer clarity only in specific situations and contexts. For instance, the Cambridge Dictionary is too vague for supply chain operations. It neither provides criteria for determining if a delivery was completed nor specifies what is delivered (e.g., part of a shipment, a newspaper, a baby). On the other hand, while the DCSA definition is tailored for the delivery of ocean containers, it does not apply well to other types of shipping. Specifically, much of the context in the DCSA definition is either irrelevant or unclear for other transportation modes such as parcel or Less-Than-Truckload (LTL).
Thus, this example of “delivery” definition illustrates the challenges in business communications to make things easily understandable. This is particularly evident in complex supply chains where organizations deal with numerous tasks and collaborate with various other organizations and stakeholders. As per the previous example, the term “delivery” can have multiple meanings within different functions of the supply chain and across diverse organizations. Furthermore, misunderstandings within supply chains are more apt to happen as employees often work with a wide array of individuals from different organizations with whom they are not familiar.
“Clarity is the preoccupation of the effective leader. If you do nothing else as a leader, be clear.”
Marcus Buckingham
2. Supply Chain Examples Where Things Go Wrong Due to Misunderstandings in Business Communications.
So in the example above, I just focused on one word, “delivery,” within a person-to-person communication exchange. In reality, supply chain professionals and their systems use hundreds of operational terms like “shipped,” “delivered,” and “paid” to communicate across the supply chain. As a result, this lack of clarity not only hampers business communications but also impedes technology adoption. Undeniably, digital technologies require clear business definitions to work correctly. Consequently, poor communication negatively impacts both operational performance and supply chain digitization efforts. Unfortunately, there are countless instances where misunderstandings occur due to different interpretations of business terms. Below are some examples:
Examples of Supply Chain Miscommunications
- Delayed Deliveries. A supplier mishears the delivery date as “15th” instead of “5th”, leading to a delayed shipment of critical components.
- Increased Costs. A procurement team fails to notice a clause about additional fuel surcharges, resulting in higher-than-expected transportation costs.
- Unfulfilled Orders. Due to a miscommunication about inventory levels, a retailer accepts customer orders for products that are actually out of stock.
- Misallocation of Resources. A forecasting team misinterprets a sales projection, resulting in overproduction of one product and underproduction of another.
- Regulatory Compliance Failures. Import staff misunderstand updated customs regulations, leading to detained shipments and potential fines.
- Quality Control Issues. R&D fails to clearly specify new material standards, resulting in prototype failures and rework.
- Customer Dissatisfaction. Customer service reps provide conflicting information about order status, leading to frustrated calls and potential lost business.
“Clarity precedes success.”
Robin Sharma
3. Examples of Tech Innovations Stalled in Supply Chains Due to Operational Clarity Issues.
Just recently, the ASTM F49 Committee, an organization that sets standards for digital information in the supply chain, started reviewing common supply chain glossaries associated with digital cross-border trade. This included the Maritime Transportation Data Initiative (MTDI) Lexicon, UN/CEFACT, WCO, GS1, IMO, IATA, ICC, and others. The goal of this review is to make communication within the supply chain clearer. Not surprisingly, there is a lot of overlap and inconsistency in terms used by these different supply chain glossaries. See ASTM’s news release for more information on this initiative. In summary, until this gets resolved, miscommunications will continue, and technology adoption is hobbled within this particular supply chain domain.
Indeed, this is just one example of the business communications challenges on-going within supply chains that adversely affects operations and digital technology initiatives. Below are more examples where a lack of operational clarity is hobbling technology adoption.
a. Supply Chain Visibility: A Need for Business Specification on Type of Visibility Needed.
In this example, businesses will invest in large data integration initiatives to build a “digital twin” or create a global Business Intelligence (BI) dashboard. However in many cases, there are ambiguous business specifications. As a result, this ambiguity ends up being a very expensive, time-consuming IT project where the business is overwhelmed with data and underwhelmed with insights.
In too many cases, these tech innovation projects fail due to a lack of business clarity. For instance, the business does not provide enough business definition in their requirement to obtain “visibility”. For instance, is the IT project suppose to provide transportation visibility (“Where’s My Stuff”) or is it to identify choke points in the supply chain? Indeed, without clear business specifications on what type of supply chain visibility is needed, businesses will drown in data. For more details on types of supply chain visibility, see my article, Surprisingly Supply Chain Visibility Has Many Forms: See Which One Is Best To Be Your Business’ First Focus.
“Just because you can measure everything doesn’t mean that you should.”
W. Edwards Deming
b. Intermodal Interoperability: Absence of Business Definition, Both Physical and Digital Specifications.
Intermodal revolutionized the transportation industry over a half century ago with the standardization of shipping containers. Today, the intermodal industry is challenged to adopt new digital technologies due to a lack of business clarity and cooperation. Indeed, these challenges are mostly business, rather than digital. As a result, these business clarity issues, both physical and digital, hinder the benefits of digital technology investments.
For instance, intermodal is hamstrung by many competing business terminologies between transportation modes, such as discussed in the ASTM lexicon example above. Further, the Intermodal Industry has the operational complexities of dealing with many regulatory authorities, physical interoperability challenges, financial entities, and other stakeholders such as Freight Forwarders. As a result of this operational complexity coupled with a lack of a coherent business terminology framework, the intermodal industry is challenged adopting digital technologies. For more details on intermodal interoperability challenges, see my article, Intermodal Transportation Requires A Breakthrough To Overcome Its Interoperability Problems.
“Quality starts in the boardroom.”
W. Edwards Deming
c. Data Interoperability: A Need to Put Business Smarts Into Digital Integrations.
A lack of operational definitions is a major reason supply chains are challenged with data interoperability and leveraging data-intensive technologies such as AI and data analytics. On the surface this may not seem to be a problem in that most businesses, to varying degrees, can exchange data. For instance, most businesses have the data communications capability to transfer data files or use an Application Program Interface (API). However, the real challenge is that the data transferred often gets “lost in translation”. This results in data that is practically useless. In most cases, these “dumb” data integrations are not due to a technical issue, but because of a lack of business definition of the data transferred.
Indeed, businesses need to better define and agree on industry terms and definitions. Throwing more technology at the problem will not do much to fix this issue. For a more detailed discussion of logistics data interoperability, see my article, Achieving Logistics Interoperability: The Best Way to Breakthrough The Tangle Of Dumb Data Integrations.
d. Countless Other Supply Chain Examples Where Tech Innovations Are Stalling Due to Operational Clarity Issues.
Indeed, clarity in business communications is the key for supply chain success. Moreover, without business clarity, the return on investment (ROI) on new tech innovations is difficult at best. Further, these business communications issues extend far beyond the tech examples I discussed above. This also includes tech innovations such as digital identity, knowledge graphs, digital transformation, data analytics, digital freight bill processing, and Decision Intelligence to name a few.
“People work in the system. Management creates the system.”
W. Edwards Deming
Conclusion.
So, this lack of clarity with supply chain terminology and definitions hobbles technology adoption. Indeed, especially for supply chain commerce, companies struggle with disjointed systems due to data interoperability caused by the lack of clarity in basic business communications. Specific examples of stalled technological innovations include supply chain visibility, intermodal interoperability, and data interoperability to name a few. Without a doubt, it is time for supply chain professionals to work together to fix these business communications issues in order to improve supply chain operations and fully leverage new technologies.
More References.
See below, for more references on how the lack of clear business terminology is hobbling the adoption of new technologies.
- Data Ladder’s article, The impact of poor data quality: Risks, challenges, and solutions, provides more details on the risks of poor data quality.
- Wikipedia’s Operational Definition details what an operational definition is and provides example of the consequences when operational clarity is lacking.
- Claravine’s articles, The Urgency of Digital Data Standards and Data Standards Defined and Explained: Learn How to Create Data Standards provide business cases for data standards and lessons-learned in the marketing industry.
- Peter Carter’s article, Lack of Traceability Standards Not the Issue, points out that the lack of digital trade standards is not necessarily the issue – rather the lack of awareness of those standards
- segura’s article, Supply Chain Compliance – Why we need shared industry data standards, provides examples of increasing business reporting requirements in the Fashion Industry that are not aligned such as deforestation, human rights, microplastics, sustainability, and much more.
- See SC Tech Insight’s article, Poor Operational Definitions Impede Supply Chain Tech Adoption: Now Is the Time For A Big Change, that looks at the need for clear, measurable definitions to improve data interoperability.
For more from SC Tech Insights, see the latest articles on Interoperability, Data, and Supply Chain.
Greetings! As an independent supply chain tech advisor with 30+ years of hands-on experience, I take great pleasure in providing actionable insights and solutions to logistics leaders. My focus is to drive transformation within the logistics industry by leveraging emerging LogTech, applying data-centric solutions, and increasing interoperability within supply chains. I have a wide range of experience to include successfully leading the development of 100s of innovative software solutions across supply chains and delivering business intelligence (BI) solutions to 1,000s of shippers. Click here for more info.