3. To gauge the levels of customer satisfaction.
To understand the customer perception of
Allcargo’s services in comparison to other
competitors.
Incorporate necessary changes in service
based on their feedback.
6. PARAMETERS Company who
performed better
Allcargo’s rating(on
10)
Knowledgeable and
presentable
No one 6
Extent of preparation GDL(8) 7
Execution quality
(communication)
GDL
(8)
ULA
(8)
Hind
(8)
2
Problem solving ability GDL
(8)
ULA
(8)
Hind
(8)
3
Competitors-(GDL [Gateway Distriparks], ULA [United Liner Agencies of
India], Maersk, Hind Terminals)
7. PARAMETERS Company who
performed better
Allcargo’s rating(on 10)
Ability to solve
problems/
emergencies quickly
and/or give alternate
solutions
All the above
GDL(5),ULA(9),Maersk
(4), Hind(6)
1
Understanding the
issue faced
All except Maersk
GDL(7),ULA(6),Hind(3)
1
Ability to develop
systematic approach to
solve the problem
All except Maersk
GDL(6),ULA(4),Hind(3)
2
Timely and apt
communication of
Updates
Hind Terminals(5) 4
Flexibility and Patience No one 4
Systems and Processes All the above
GDL(6),ULA(8),
1
8. PARAMETERS Company who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Seamless Execution GDL(6),ULA(8),Hind(6) 5
Accuracy of
documentation and
invoicing
All the above
GDL(8),ULA(4),Maersk
(4),Hind(4)
1
Relationship
Management
GDL(5),ULA(6) 4
Reporting All the above
GDL(6),ULA(5),Maersk(
5),Hind(6)
1
(Competition : GDL, ULA, Maersk, Hind Terminals)
10. The primary concern that Mondelez had was that service and
execution were not up to par.
One major thing emphasized was that there was that there
was no single POC .
Their suggestion was that a single POC should be looking
after
Invoicing
Execution
Coordination with Mondelez,the CHA and CFS.
13. PARAMETERS Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Knowledgeable and
presentable
All were rated 8 8
Extent of Preparation No one(DAMCO did
equally well)
8
Quality of execution
and communication
No one(DAMCO did
equally well)
8
Problem solving ability A(9) 7
Overall Rating A(8) 6
Competition : DAMCO, Company A,B and C
14. PARAMETERS Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Ability to solve
problems/
emergencies quickly
and/or give alternate
solutions
A,B,C(8) 6
Understanding the
issue faced
A,B,C(8) 6
Ability to develop
systematic approach
to solve the problem
All the above
DAMCO(8),A(8)
5
Timely and apt
communication of
Updates
DAMCO(8) 5
Flexibility and Patience A,B,C(8) 6
Systems and Processes DAMCO(7) 6
15. PARAMETERS Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Seamless Execution All scored 6 6
Accuracy of
documentation and
invoicing
All scored 6 6
Relationship
Management
All scored 6 6
Reporting All scored 6 6
17. They wanted an improvement in terms of
customer service and operations.
Their prime concern was that Allcargo should
have a better idea about freight levels and
services. Information should come from our end.
Allcargo should be able to comment on and
communicate the market situation without being
told.
On an overall, we should be ready with latest
updates.
Through these updates we can add extra value to
service.
20. PARAMETERS Companies which
performed better
Allcargo’s score
Knowledgeable and
presentable
No one 6
Extent of Preparation No one 6
Quality of execution
and communication
No one 7
Problem solving ability No one 7
Overall Rating All were same 6
Competition : LEAAP International Private Limited
21. CUSTOMER SERVICE Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Ability to solve
problems/
emergencies quickly
and/or give alternate
solutions
No one 7
Understanding the
issue faced
No one 7
Ability to develop
systematic approach
to solve the problem
All scored the same 6
Timely and apt
communication of
Updates
No one 7
Flexibility and Patience No one 6
Systems and Processes No one 6
22. OPERATIONS Companies who did
better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Seamless Execution All performed the
same
6
Accuracy of
documentation and
invoicing
No one 7
Relationship
Management
All performed the
same
7
Reporting All performed the
same
7
Competition : LEAAP International Private Limited
24. The conclusion was that on an overall they were
satisfied.
They said their requirements were simple.
The only suggestion they had was that Allcargo
should be able to handle the logistics part
entirely once the task was given to them.
There should be no need for MARKSANS to
interfere.
They want that responsibility must be completely
delegated to us, and we should only provide
them with the end result without having to
consult them.
27. PARAMETERS : Companies which
performed better
Allcargo’s score
Knowledgeable and
presentable
No one,
Allcargo,DBS,HC,DHL,
K+N performed the
same)
8
Extent of Preparation DBS(8),DHL(8) 7
Quality of execution
and communication
DHL(8),HC(8) 7
Problem solving ability DHL(8),Safex(8) 7
Competition-
Hindustancargo/HC, Safex, C.H.Robinson, D.B.Schenker, DHL,
Kuehne+Nagel,Panalpina)
28. CUSTOMER SERVICE Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Ability to solve
problems/
emergencies quickly
and/or give alternate
solutions
All others
(8)
7
Understanding the
issue faced
All others
(8)
7
Ability to develop
systematic approach
to solve the problem
All others
(7)
5
Timely and apt
communication of
Updates
All others
(6)
6
Flexibility and Patience No one 8
Systems and Processes All others 6
29. OPERATIONS Companies that
performed better
Allcargo’s score
Seamless Execution All the above(8) 7
Accuracy of
documentation and
invoicing
All performed the
same
8
Relationship
Management
DBS,DHL,Safex,HC;
all(8)
7
Reporting DBS,DHL,Safex,HC;
All (8)
7
Competition-
Hindustancargo/HC, Safex, C.H.Robinson, D.B.Schenker, DHL,
Kuehne+Nagel,Panalpina)
31. They suggested that there should be trained
onsite staff on the warehouses to handle
everything such that the customer intervention is
minimum.
Improvement of FIFO of materials
Improvement of the systems.
In the past, a company called Expiditors had
invested capital in Timken’s customer premises,
they suggested that Allcargo can do the same
They wanted cost to be 100% variable wrt
business volumes in channel
34. SALES CALLS Companies who
scored better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Knowledgeable and
presentable
TVS(8) 7
Extent of Preparation TVS and Allcargo
scored the same
7
Quality of execution
and communication
No one 7
Problem solving ability TVS(8),M&M(8) 6
Competition : TVS Logistics, Mahindra and Mahindra,Leevay
Logistics,Tongolit Autologistics
35. CUSTOMER SERVICE Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Ability to solve
problems/
emergencies quickly
and/or give alternate
solutions
All the above
TVS(8),Lee(7),M&M(7),
Tongolit(7)
6
Understanding the
issue faced
No one 8
Ability to develop
systematic approach
to solve the problem
TVS(7),Lee(7) 6
Timely and apt
communication of
Updates
No one 9
Flexibility and Patience No one 9
36. OPERATIONS Companies who
performed better
Allcargo’s score on 10
Seamless Execution TVS(7) 6
Accuracy of
documentation and
invoicing
TVS(8) 7
Relationship
Management
No one 9
Reporting All the above
TVS(8),M&M(8),Lee(7),
Tongolit(6)
5
TVS Logistics, Mahindra and Mahindra,Leevay Logistics,Tongolit
Autologistics
38. They said that contract logistics could be
expanded further to fleet managemnt
services.
They said 4PL could be introduced.
We should try and focus on clean and green
supply chain.- i.e. reducing SCM cost with
more research on operations
They also said Asset on lease would be of
interest to them in the future.
They finally commented on establishing a
good end-to-end SCM.
41. For the NVOCC companies, the most important
trait was services offered.(Marksans and BILT)
For companies using contract logistics, one stop
shop was the most important trait(Timken and
Ashok Leyland)
For CFS/ICD(Mondelez) – netowrk base was
important.
There was a general dissatisfaction with
customer service with scores being less than 7 in
most cases.
There were several regional players who had
better performance particularly in customer
service.
