News

The Latest News, Events and Developments

BoldIQ covered in Seattle 24X7

Real-Time Software for the On-Demand World: BoldIQ Builds It One Solution at a Time

Optimizing On-Demand Air Travel, Ground Transportation, Health Care Operations, and HR Staffing  — from the Inside-Out.

Frequent flyer Ed Iacobucci was growing weary of the downtime he routinely suffered in business air travel. Instead of gaining valuable face-time with colleagues and customers, the inefficiency of airport layovers and a myriad of other logistical challenges meant costly delays.

Was a 24-hour investment really necessary for a two-hour trip? At the time, the Brazilian-born systems architect was helping forge the joint IBM-Microsoft design initiative for IBM DOS and had learned two important lessons: Working with Seattle was easy. Getting there was hard.

Before Ed would go on to found Citrix Systems — and eventually foster the time-saving “virtual meeting” — the tech jet-setter had what people in the industry would call an optimization problem on his hands.

What if there was a software solution that combined flight scheduling and logistics with executive jet aircraft — and that worked with Occam razor-like efficiency?  In aviation, the software’s checklist was complex: flight plans, pilots, co-pilots, attendants, weather, airports, fuel, food, and above all else, safety.

The IBM manager who was helping to enable the Microsoft DOS lift off would soon find an answer with another Microsoft engineer emeritus and a former CEO of Symantec by the name of Vern Raburn. Raburn’s startup company in Albuquerque, New Mexico, known as Eclipse Aviation, was on a similar mission to build a fleet of jet “taxis” for under a million dollars a piece. A major stake-holder on the Eclipse project at the time was one Bill Gates.

Iacobucci called upon a unique team of problem-solvers, a retinue of Jewish emigres from the former Soviet Union who had been brought over from Israel after the startups they had created were acquired by Citrix. It took the squad over four years to build the initial core optimization engine.

Day Jet, the aviation Uber of its day, stayed aloft for just over three years until, in 2008, the company was grounded on two fronts — first, the economy careened, sharply curtailing demand. Secondly, the cost of the planes could not come in under one million dollars, but closer to $3 million instead.

The aviation service was hangered, but the software engine had been cleared for take-off. The brainchild of Iacobucci, Raburn (and investor Gates), was taken over by a group of investors and became the propulsion engine for Bellevue-based BoldIQ.

Biography aligns with trajectory.  As BoldIQ’s CEO, Ganzarski combined the logistical vision he developed as Chief Customer Officer for Boeing’s Flight Services division with over three decades of global business management expertise. Today, Roei sits on the board of the Washington Technology Industry Association and is chairman of the global business advisory board at the University of Washington Foster School of Business. He has earned an MBA from the UW, and a BA in Economics from The University of Haifa.

Seattle24x7:  Welcome, Roei. BoldIQ appears to be squarely positioned to empower the “on-demand” economy. We can’t help but notice the irony that the software solutions you create are also developed “on-demand,” according to each of your customer’s “demands” from the inside-out!

Roei: In essence, we began not as a software company that was looking to solve a problem, but as an operations company that uses software to solve real world operational challenges. That fact, by itself, provides a completely different twist on how we look at and solve a problem. We do not try to reach the ultimate, mathematical solution. Rather, we strive to provide our customers with the best plan possible that meets their operational needs at the time they have to make an operational decision.

Seattle24x7: Your approach represented a major departure from the linear optimization software of the time?

Roei:  Yes, there were, and still are, optimization engines out there that focus on trying to reach an ultimate mathematical goal.

Traditional optimization software was based on linear programming. Because it is linear by nature, the constraints employed are limited to outcomes like ‘yes or no,’ or a rising scale calculation, and so forth.

We did some benchmarking with other companies and universities comparing the elements of traditional mathematical optimization versus our model, and where we would solve queries in 15 seconds to 15 minutes, it would take the traditional optimization platforms anywhere from a few hours to “overnight” to process.

We have been able to “crack the code” and take a whole different approach to what true, logistics operational optimization means. One, it’s working from the “inside-out.” Two, it’s understanding expectations. If I’m an operator I don’t need a 100% empirical solution. I need something I can use when I need to use it. That requires a different approach.

Seattle24x7: Linear is not the model for real-time decision support?

Roe: Let me give you an example of an Asian airline rule required to be upheld when a flight plan included travel to mainland China: they must have four cabin crew that speak Mandarin Chinese. That’s a fairly simple, linear constraint. But here is a twist: one of the cabin crew has to be a male, and when there are male cabin crew onboard, there have to be an even number of them.  So you can see how this set of constraints becomes non-linear. Traditional linear based programming cannot solve it.

What the airline used to do with their old software was to try and create a perfect schedule (an initial investment of eight hours roughly), and then spend 2-3 days manually manipulating the plan to incorporate the language rules. Once we were able to put the same rules into our engine, the airline could produce a month-long schedule in twenty minutes that met all their needs.

Seattle24x7: Are these real world constraints entered on-the-fly by the operator, or pre-programmed during design?

Roe: What we have is a set of algorithms, whether it’s for business aviation, last mile mobile workforce, health care, or HR staffing. In each case, we look at the issues the industry must solve. What do the problems look like? How can we sequence or combine the algorithms that fit the industry? There is a mathematical theorem called “No Free Lunch,” that ordains you can’t have one generic solution that solves everyone’s problems.  So our approach is to build a customized solution for each industry. Within that framework, the customer or operator can decide which rules are relevant to them or not, and to configure each of these rules themselves.

Seattle24x7: Looking at transportation and e-commerce, the next generation appears to be about delivery vehicles like drones and driverless cars. The logistical challenges boggle the mind.

Roei:  It is a complicated problem. Yet, from our perspective, we look at the Internet of Things, driverless cars and drones as just the next input-output session. A driverless car or a delivery drone is just another resource. Instead of having a driver receive an optimized schedule of the various pickups on a route, it’ll be a driverless car that gets it through a remote API.

From an optimization standpoint, a key question that could be asked is why should an Amazon delivery vehicle only deliver Amazon products? It could also deliver Walmart products, Google products or Nordstrom products. The idea of four different cars, or drones, coming to the same house requires over capacity and creates unwanted congestion and waste.

Seattle24x7: Speaking of ground transportation, we have a traffic congestion problem here in Seattle that is in dire need of optimization.

Roei:  A city is limited by the driving resources it has in term of roads and highways. You can’t just build another road on demand.  The number of paved roads and lanes is fixed at least for a given period of time. The number of parking spots is also pretty much fixed, So when it comes to adding automobiles, you can either flood the roads with cars and create congestion, or make the use of cars more efficient and reduce the use of the same number of resources. No mathematical wizardry there.

In Seattle, what has happened it that taxi companies have not been efficient enough in their operations to meet the needs and demands of the riding public. So they basically created a situation that in essence invited in the ride-sharing companies. The city of Seattle could require cab companies who want to continue operating in our city, to start using some efficiency tools and technology. I’m not talking about so called radio or computer dispatching. I’m talking about intelligent scheduling.

We should be asking cab companies to show us increased levels of efficiency and service. Instead, what we have done is invite more cars into the city in the form of ride sharing companies to meet the same demand. Again this creates over capacity, congestion, and waste.

The challenge for the city of Seattle, and any city with a finite resource of roads, is purely operational optimization. Provide the level of transportation required for the riding public, with the least amount and waste of resources.

Seattle24x7:  How would we think about real-time scheduling in another industry, say the health care field?

Roei:  In a hospital environment, there are a myriad of resources needed to do a job. Let’s say, for example, that you need to perform neurosurgery. First of all, you have a finite number of operating rooms and surgical equipment available at any given time. Then you have a specific pool of highly skilled doctors and surgeons who are certified to perform the procedure. Add in the nursing staff, including those who are specialized.

Next, you have the demand-side of the equation which are the patients. You need to make sure that each patient is well-prepared. For instance, that they haven’t eaten in the last 24-hours, have passed their pre-op checks, etc.

What’s more, a number of surgeries will take place in a given time period. So, the question arises – in a steady state, what is the best schedule that will allow you to have the most surgeries done with the most efficient use of those resources in a way that adheres to quality and safety rules and an optimal patient experience?

Seattle24x7:  You’re a board member of the Washington Technology Association and you chair the Global Business Advisory board of the University of Washington’s Foster Business School. What excites you most about the Seattle area?

Roei:  What a phenomenal place to live and work. You have Amazon who is advancing retail software and logistics. You have Microsoft building and embedding global software as a service. You have Boeing, Paccar, F5, to name but a few.

At the same time, you have a marvelous mix of technology bases. If you want to do .NET stuff, you go to the Eastside. If you want to do more Java work, you go to Seattle. To top it all off you have a world class university – UW – teaching the next generation of leaders. Ultimately, where Silicon Valley was all about startups, Seattle is also widely focused on global business in retail and manufacturing. Here, there is not just one industry that limits in which direction you can grow. You’ll find the people and the experience to do it all —in a gorgeous and friendly environment. [24×7]

Click to se the full cover online

0

BoldIQ featured in Information Age delivery story

The future of connectivity and delivery by Information Age Nick Ismail

 

While the promise of autonomous vehicles, IoT and smart cities is on the horizon, what hasn’t been examined is how these next generation technologies will affect the average person.

‘Roads are packed, not much parking space, and a lot of opportunity for tight rapid deliveries. A small bot that can manoeuvre the sidewalks with ease yet without much risk to its surroundings makes a lot of sense in an urban area’ (Information Age article photo)

Location will dictate the impact next generation technologies, like IoT and drone tech, will have on a person’s life.

For example, in New York City, London and other metro hubs, autonomous trucks won’t be delivering goods, like the recent successful long-haul beer run across rural Colorado by Uber.

Instead, Roei Ganzarski, CEO of BoldIQ believes delivery of Amazon purchases or restaurant orders will soon be transported from point A to B by small bots and drones alleviating traffic by minimising the number of large vehicles in a city.

Meanwhile, rural areas may see some drone deliveries, but the majority will be made by autonomous trucks hauling goods long distance.

Once these reach depots on the outskirts of cities, like Amazon’s new cargo hub in Kentucky, workers will transfer the shipments to smaller bots or drones. Thus, connecting rural and urban areas, ensuring cities are ‘smart.’

In an interview with Information Age, Ganzarski – a former executive at Boeing – discussed the future of connectivity and delivery.

How will location impact how consumers experience IoT technologies of the future, including autonomous vehicles, drones and bots?

Drones, driverless delivery vans and other future technologies have the potential to make a great impact on our day to day lives – from less congestion on the roads to 24×7 real-time deliveries.

With that said, these new technologies (that have not yet been completely proven out) have some obvious inherent risks and some that are also less obvious.

Before they become commonplace, live operational testing is expected to have to take place.

From a completely different direction, delivery drones and driverless vans (as examples) can create great efficiencies and bring a level a service that may be missing in various areas.

For example, it may not make economic or practical sense to send a driver with a car on a two-hour drive to deliver a package in a rural community.

The four-hour time frame will erode half a work day for a single package. But what if there was no driver whose shift was a limiting factor for this delivery?
Taking both these points into account, rural areas are more likely to see these new technologies being implemented and tested first.

I myself live in a more rural area. There are less cars on the roads, less houses in a given area, and no buildings or high rises. That means it should be an easier and less risky environment to trial drone deliveries, for example.

When first trying drone deliveries, would we rather have the drone flying over a dense neighbourhood, with playgrounds and schools underneath, or in an area with farmland and open space?

Take the recent news about Amazon’s patent application regarding parachuting a package down to a receiver. Seems it would be more appropriate to try in areas of five acre homesteads than a town-home community.

Similarly, with much less traffic and less cars on the road, the implementation of driverless technology is simpler and less risky in rural areas than congested cities.

Rural areas also reduce the various obstacles a drone or driverless car might face like buildings and narrow alleyways.

On the complete other spectrum, small delivery bots will most likely be seen in those very congested cities for the exact same reasons.

How will this impact business and consumers’ day-to-day lives?

Assuming the above holds true, businesses will be able to provide efficient lower cost on-demand rapid service, even in rural areas and with less restrictions of employee shifts.

In turn, consumers in those areas will be able to get an increased level of service that has become commonplace in urban surroundings.

They may then find themselves buying more, simply because they can which increases business, etc.

In the urban areas, bots will enable even more rapid deliveries and better predictability since the delaying elements of traffic and parking will be eliminated.

What are some recent examples where we’re starting to see the infrastructure in place for these next gen technologies?

I don’t think there are enough examples to share since the focus right now is still very much on getting the individual technologies to work.

For example, working on an individual driverless car or individual drone. There is still some work to be done on making sure the technology works well and safely before deploying it in real mass use cases.

With that said, there are some interesting first movers like the passenger drone coming up in Dubai and the delivery bots in Redwood City, CA and Washington, DC.

From the technology perspective, what is the most exciting aspect about smart cities coming to fruition?

For me the Dubai drone transport is really exciting. It opens the door to levels of service and efficiency never seen before.

Click here to read the full story online

0

BoldIQ featured in Flying Magazine’s coverage of ATC Privatization

Tech Startup CEO: GA Needs to Join ATC Privatization Discussion

Roei Ganzarski, CEO of Seattle-based aviation software firm BoldIQ, says an ATC shakeup is needed — and it’s time for general aviation to be a part of the process. By Stephen Pope

Roei Ganzarski, the CEO of BoldIQ, a transportation logistics software startup firm based in the Seattle area, says that whether you agree with Donald Trump’s politics or not, on the issue of ATC privatization the president is 100 percent right.

Privatizing air traffic control would lower costs, boost efficiency and usher in new technologies that are impossible to implement quickly under the current NextGen ATC modernization program managed by the FAA, he argues.

“ATC in this country is antiquated. The president is exactly right; by the time NextGen technologies are implemented, they’re already outdated,” Ganzarski said. “Privatization could solve all of this by enabling ATC to advance at the same rate as the technology aboard aircraft has.”

His message for general aviation? It’s time to stop fighting to block privatization and focus instead on ensuring this segment of the industry has a place at the table.

“For ATC privatization to work, we need equal representation from all parties, including the airlines, general aviation and even the military,” he said. “No one group should be able to dominate the conversation about the future of ATC modernization.”

BoldIQ creates software solutions for aviation and ground-transportation companies. One of its major customers is Boeing-owned Jeppesen, which uses BoldIQ’s cloud-based scheduling software. Ganzarski himself is no stranger to Boeing, having served as chief customer officer for the plane maker’s Flight Services division in Seattle.

At a White House meeting with airline CEOs last week, Trump described NextGen technology rolled out by the FAA as the “wrong stuff” and signaled his enthusiasm for privatizing ATC.

The president’s comments drew a rare response from the agency, which pointed to $2.7 billion in benefits to the airlines and passengers thanks to NextGen modernization, and an expected benefit of another $160 billion through 2030.

“NextGen is one of the most ambitious infrastructure and modernization projects in U.S. history,” the FAA said in a statement following the president’s comments. “Its successful, ongoing rollout is the result of rigorous acquisition, program and portfolio management, and stakeholder engagement with the airline industry and other members of the aviation community.”

GA interests led by the National Business Aviation Association are opposed to ATC privatization, arguing that the corporate entity’s board of directors would be dominated by the airlines and the move inevitably would lead to the implementation of user fees for general aviation.

“It appears that some airline interests want to shift the conversation away from taking a bipartisan approach to modernization, to focus instead on their decades-long objective of privatizing ATC, funding it with new user fees, and placing it under the governing control of a self-interested, airline-centric board of directors,” said NBAA President Ed Bolen after the president’s sit-down meeting with airline CEOs.

Ganzarski’s response? “ATC privatization could be very good for everybody, and that’s the conversation we ought to be having right now.”

Click here to read the full story online

0

Juniper Research covers BoldIQ in IoT Report

UK based global research firm Juniper Research includes BoldIQ in their IoT Consumer, Industrial & Public Services 2016-2021 report released December of 2016.

Juniper’s latest IoT research looks deeper into the world of IoT by addressing the ‘what’s next?’ in terms of moving beyond simply connecting devices. Juniper’s research provides a comprehensive perspective on the three key market segments encompassing IoT applications:
•    Consumer
•    Industrial
•    Public Services

As part of their research, Juniper presents their leaderboard. Their approach is to use a standard template to summarize company capabilities. This template concludes with their views of the key strengths and strategic development opportunities for each covered organization.

In this report, Juniper identifies BoldIQ as a ‘Developing’ company covering ‘Mid-market or segment focused’.

Juniper states: “BoldIQ has developed a very innovative solution that will undoubtedly find frequent use in IoT analytics applications. The company’s present focus is aimed at aviation and road vehicles; we expect this to expand in the future.”

Juniper view on key strengths and opportunities reads as follows:

  • “The company has adopted a sensible strategy of not attempting to spread itself too thinly by addressing multiple industry verticals at this stage. By starting with the aviation industry, it has established a respected position in an industry that can often present complex business challenges. This will prove to be a benefit as the company broadens the number of target verticals.
  • The ability to deliver its optimisation as a product as well as a service will help in addressing markets such as the automotive industry, where companies are loath to release their data beyond the corporate firewall.“

BoldIQ related excerpts from the comprehensive report:

Click here to access the report on Juniper’s web site

0

BoldIQ Team TechTarget talks about 2017 IoT predictions (including BoldIQ)

IoT predictions 2017: Revenue, data, latency issues top the list – TechTarget – Sharon Shea

From the story:

The internet of things’ growth spurt over the past year leaves many wondering what the next 12 months will bring. Industry experts looked in their crystal balls and offered IoT predictions for the days and months ahead.

IoT prediction #1: Disembodied voices seeking recurring revenue

IoT prediction #2: The data lakes will be drained

IoT prediction #3: Latency is the enemy

Roei Ganzarski, president and CEO of BoldIQ, found room for skepticism in his 2017 projections: “Not enough will be done on the integration of [smart devices] in the next few years since it is less sexy and creates less news and media coverage. Thus adoption of these will be slower than people anticipate.”

If Ganzarski is right, 2017 won’t be the first year when predictions ran well ahead of actual timelines.

Click to read the full story

0

Industrial Distribution interviews BoldIQ for 2017 Predictions For the Logistics And Shipping Industry

Q&A: 2017 Predictions For the Logistics And Shipping Industry

With 2016 rapidly coming to a close and everyone looking to what 2017 will bring, BoldIQ president and CEO Roei Ganzarski discusses what the top trends and disruptions will be next year in the transportation and logistics industries.

Q: What changes will transportation and logistics companies need to make in 2017 in order to keep pace with the on-demand economy?  

A: The decrease in demand combined with the growing ‘On-Demand’ economy is driving the need for transportation operations to become demand driven.

On-demand means a consumer or customer can get what they want, at the time and place they want it, and only have to ask for it when they are ready to ask and not before. While this is the customer facing aspect, the transportation operator aspect (the organization that needs to provide the service) must be demand-driven in order to serve the on-demand need in an efficient manner that enables scale, growth, and profitability. The on-demand economy is shortening planning cycles and significantly shortening decision-making time frames. This means the need for intelligent, data driven, and real-time decisions is critical.

Being demand-driven means having the ability to utilize your resources at the highest level possible and do so in real time in a dynamic and ever-changing environment. Note that this assumes organizations have finite resources to do their work. This must be viewed differently from the so-called ‘sharing economy’ where an operation will use someone else’s resources because they are so inefficient, they have spare time or capacity on their resources. The sharing-economy in fact thrives on the inefficiency of the current environment.

I believe this will lead to 3 trends:

  1. Consolidation and elimination of some transport companies that cannot adapt fast enough to the change.
  2. Emerging transport leaders that can rapidly adopt new technologies that will enable them to become demand-driven.
  3. Unfortunately, an emergence of ‘sharing-economy’ based transport companies that own no assets but thrive on the newly created excess capacity are in fact driving more inefficiency into the industry.

Q: What are the biggest implications for the transportation and logistics industry in 2017 with advancements in IoT, big data and software?

A: The next few years will have a lot of IoT ‘things’ being created as individual products. A driverless car; a drone; a crewless ship; etc. A lot of effort, money, and media coverage go along with these great developments. See for example the recent Uber delivery truck that transported beer; the first US government-approved drone delivery using a Flirtey drone transporting 10 pounds of medical supplies to a rural health clinic; and more.

However, not enough work will be done on the integration of these in the next few years (since it is not as ‘sexy’ and creates less news and media coverage) and thus the adoption of these will be slower than what people anticipate. In integration, I am referring to two levels:

  1. Integrating into the relevant networks – For example, does having a drone that can deliver a package mean a delivery company knows how, when, and where to use it? Does having a smart water meter mean that the utilities companies know what to do with that data?
  2. Integration across platforms – For example, when the smart water meter detects a leak and a need to be replaced, will the utilities company know to have a replacement part sent by drone to the house and have a technician scheduled to arrive at the right time to do the work?

While the above two examples of ‘back office’ operations are not as sexy or news generating than the ‘thing’ itself, these are required to make sure that as a smart city, smart community, and indeed smart society, we are able to truly take advantage of the IoT to better our lives.

Q: What major disruptions can the shipping industry expect?

A: The disruption is happening now. Consumers are demanding goods when and where they want them and are ‘ordering’ them very last minute. This means the manufacturing needs to be faster and more dynamic and transport needs to be faster and more dynamic. On the other hand, this will also lead to real-time on the fly manufacturing of many good we previously thought not possible. 3D printing will enhance and grow and price points will drop. Thus, the overall need for shipping will shrink.

Q: Autonomous vehicles: Hype or industry game-changer?

A: Game-changer without a doubt. The question will be at what level. If no holistic real-time scheduling and coordination operation is put in place, then the game changer will be that on my commute to work I can read the paper as opposed to focusing on the road and there will be fewer accidents. All great.

If there is holistic coordination, then we can truly move to having less car ownership and travel/transport on demand without compromise. Super!

Q: Drones: How and when will they be utilized?

A: They already are. You just don’t see it every day. Ask the militaries of the world. DoD. Firefighting. Search and Rescue. Film making. We just don’t see deliveries being made with them yet. That will take time due to public perception and regulation. Perhaps 2020.

Q: What challenges will e-commerce present in 2017 for transportation and logistics?  

A: See answers above. It is not so much e-commerce as it is the ability and now consumer behavior of creating demand last minute but expecting to get the purchase when and where they want. E-commerce is the tool that enables the new expectations.

Q: What is the number one pitfall contributing to operational inefficiency in the transportation and shipping industry? How can this be mitigated in 2017 and beyond?

A: Human behavior is the number one pitfall. The false belief that ‘no one and no software can do what I do or as good as I do it’ is what stops operations from using technology to significantly enhance their operational efficiency.

Click to read the story online

0

BoldIQ interviewed for the future of trucking in Fleet Owner

Q&A: The move to demand-driven freight transportation

Should trucking shift to a “demand-driven” mode of operation in 2017? This software provider thinks it will be vital to do so.

The on-demand economy is shortening planning cycles and significantly shortening decision making time frames, says Roei Ganzarski. This means the need for intelligent, data-driven, real-time decisions is critical. (Photo by Sean Kilcarr/Fleet Owner)

Roei Ganzarski, CEO of scheduling BoldIQ, which provides optimization software for asset scheduling, believes trucking and the freight transportation industry as a whole is ripe for a shift to a “demand-driven” operational format in 2017.

But what does that exactly mean?

A Boeing executive with 13 years under his belt in the commercial aviation industry, Ganzarski believes the wider use of “real-time data” by trucking and logistics providers will be critical in terms of meeting customer demands for faster yet less costly freight delivery services – while doing so in a way that helps preserve the bottom line of transportation companies.

Ganzarski further fleshed out that forecast for freight industry changes in a recent interview with Fleet Owner.

What’s in store for freight transportation companies in 2017 as they look to adjust in the decrease in demand?

The decrease in freight demand combined with the growing “on-demand” economy is driving the need for transportation operations to become more “demand-driven.”

“On-demand” means a consumer or customer can get what they want, at the time and place they want it, and only have to ask for it when they are ready to ask and not before. While this is the customer facing aspect, the transportation operator aspect – the organization that needs to provide the service – must be “demand-driven” in order to serve the on-demand need in an efficient manner that enables scale, growth, and profitability.

The on-demand economy is shortening planning cycles and significantly shortening decision making time frames. This means the need for intelligent, data-driven, real-time decisions is critical.

Being “demand-driven” means having the ability to utilize your resources at the highest level possible and do so in real time in a dynamic and ever changing environment – and this also assumes organizations have finite resources to do their work. This must be viewed differently from the so-called “sharing economy” where an operation will use someone else’s resources because they are so inefficient, as they have spare time or unused capacity. The sharing economy in fact thrives on the inefficiency of the current [freight] environment.

I believe this will lead to three trends:

  • Consolidation and elimination of some transport companies that cannot adapt fast enough to the change.
  • Emerging transport leaders that can rapidly adopt new technologies that will enable them to become demand-driven.
  • Unfortunately, an emergence of “sharing economy” based transport companies that own no assets but thrive on the newly created excess capacity and in fact driving more inefficiency into the industry.

With Uber making its first successful autonomous trucking delivery in Colorado, what can we expect to see with in autonomous trucking in 2017? How does this impact “business as usual”?

We are far from having autonomous deliveries. The trial, while very cool, ground breaking, and leading edge, was a very limited one. It cannot be defined as the first successful autonomous trucking delivery; maybe instead as the first partial semi-autonomous trucking delivery.

The first part of the trip (getting to the highway) was done by a driver, while the last part (from the highway to the delivery point) was done by a driver. Only the highway section was done independent of a driver but with a driver on board.

We will see continued focus and trials on this type of technology, but I doubt we will see it implemented in 2017.

In 2017, truck operators should focus on how they can better utilize the trucks and drivers that they have today.

What are the biggest implications for the transportation and logistics industry in 2017 with advancements in the Internet of Things (IoT), big data and software?

The biggest implication is the real ability to improve operational efficiencies in he controlled part of the business – i.e. use of controlled resources such as vans, trucks, planes and ships, drivers, pilots, and crew. These resources are both the major growth constraint and the major cost factor in the operation. Being able to truly “do more with less” is now a reality, if taken advantage of.

What is the number one pitfall contributing to operational inefficiency in the transportation and shipping industry? How can this be mitigating in 2017 and beyond?

The false belief that demand is what should drive the growth and profitability of the industry is the key driver (pun intended) to operational inefficiency.

Companies tend to latch on to the one thing they really can’t control – demand. And they base their resource plans, growth plans, and cost cutting plans to that one element.

Yet the one element they can fully control – the use of their own resources – is too many times left as an afterthought. While the demand side of the equation is becoming more and more “on-demand,” dynamic, and in real-time, the supply side of the operation (the resource side) remains static and lagging.

Companies in 2017 can overcome this by shifting their mindset to do what it takes to become demand-driven; i.e., able to shift and utilize resources in a dynamic real-time fashion thus enabling them to quickly adapt their operations to the existing status of the demand’s on their operation.

The technology to do this exists today. The mindset and will to do so is what is required.

Click to read the full story on Fleet Owner

0

InsideBigData interviews BoldIQ CEO

InsideBigData Interview: Roei Ganzarski, President and CEO of BoldIQ by Daniel Gutierrez

 

I recently caught up with Roei Ganzarski, President and CEO of BoldIQ, to talk about the “smart cities” revolution taking place that’s powered by IoT technology. Roei is responsible for the overall growth and business of the company as well as day-to-day operations, engineering and development. Prior to joining BoldIQ, he was with the Boeing family of companies for thirteen years in continuously increasing roles of responsibility. His last role at Boeing was Chief Customer Officer for Boeing’s Flight Services division where he led all worldwide customer and market facing organizations and was responsible for revenue growth and customer service. His other experiences prior to Boeing include private investment banking, corporate finance, advertising, and the military. He is a graduate of Wharton’s Advanced Management Program, earned an MBA from the University of Washington, and a BA in Economics from The University of Haifa. Roei sits on the advisory boards of Zealyst and the Washington Technology Industry Association board; and is chairman of the global business advisory board at the University of Washington Foster School of Business.

insideBIGDATA: What is the biggest obstacle smart cities must overcome before becoming widespread by the projected year 2025?

Roei Ganzarski: Two obstacles:

  1. Interconnectivity between the various “smart” elements. Having smart cars operate separately from the smart grid, separately from smart homes, and separately from smart buildings may not add any smartness to the city. In fact, it could create more chaos and havoc. It is imperative that the various elements are intertwined.
  2. Competitive nature of firms and even government entities. The true smart city will be run in an efficient manner utilizing resources to the best of the city’s needs (i.e. its residents). To do this, companies will have to work together and so will government entities. Take transportation for example: if multiple companies each compete to be the ‘main’ means of “efficient transport” then you have by definition, over capacity in the city thus not efficient or smart. Moreover, if the city department of transport is not willing to relook at their transport ‘kingdom’ for the betterment of the city, that too drives inefficiency – not smart.

insideBIGDATA: What city will emerge as the first truly ‘smart’ city?

Roei Ganzarski: Singapore is an obvious leader. The government there controls everything and is not afraid to impose short term pain on companies or government units in return for long term gains like becoming a smart city. They have a high likelihood of “proving the point” of the value of having a smart city.

insideBIGDATA: How is the on-demand economy spurring this movement?

Roei Ganzarski: The On-Demand economy is driving the need for operations (be they for profit businesses or government organizations) to become demand driven. On-demand means a consumer or customer can get what they want, at the time and place they want it, and only have to ask for it when they are ready to ask and not before. While this is the customer facing aspect, the operator aspect (the organization that needs to provide the service or product) must be demand-driven in order to serve the on-demand need in an efficient manner that enables scale, growth, and self-sustainment. Being demand-driven means having the ability to utilize your resources at the highest level possible and do so in real time in a dynamic and ever changing environment. Note that this assumes organizations have finite resources to do their work. This must be viewed differently from the so-called ‘sharing economy’ where an operation will use someone else’s resources because they are so inefficient, they have spare time or capacity on their resources. The sharing-economy in fact thrives on the inefficiency of the current environment. The smart city will not have any sharing economy as part of it because the only resources being used will be done so efficiently to meet demand. There will be no ‘spare’ resources that are used to share.

insideBIGDATA: We see cities becoming smarter/more connected with on-demand transportation, food, shipping, etc. Which industries and services do you expect to see revolutionized next?

Roei Ganzarski: Healthcare!

insideBIGDATA: With 2025 just under a decade away, what are your predictions for the advancement of IoT/on-demand/smart cities in 2017?

Roei Ganzarski: The next few years will have a lot of IoT ‘things’ being created as individual products. A driverless car; a drone; a smart washing machine; a smart bbq; etc. However not enough work will be done on the integration of these in the next few years (since it is less ‘sexy’ and creates less news) and thus the adoption of these will be slower than what people anticipate.

Click to read the full interview online

0

Software Can Help Flight Schedulers with Complex Decision-Making

Software Can Help Flight Schedulers with Complex Decision-Making

Ensuring that flight schedules are optimized to customer needs, internal resources and operational and legal requirements, is one of the most challenging aspects of running any aviation operation – and that’s before factoring in dynamic, real-time disruptions or the desire for sustained profitability.

“The complexities and real-time dynamic nature of on-demand aviation operations are significant, and much more than many other industries we have seen,” said Roei Ganzarski, president and CEO of BoldIQ, which makes real-time schedule-optimization and disruption-recovery software. He will be presenting on this topic during a free, Jeppesen-sponsored webinar on Dec. 14.

“Creating a schedule that meets demand, satisfies all legal and physical constraints, and at the same time utilizes resources in the most efficient way while meeting internal needs, is a difficult problem, even if all of the key variables remain static, which of course they don’t,” he added.

As any flight department team member knows, many variables hardly ever remain static, and this usually presents the biggest challenges when adjusting plans on a day-to-day basis. While schedulers and dispatchers are incredibly capable, they’re also human. Simplifying the problems, such as factoring out a variable or two, to make them easier to solve, means sacrificing effectiveness and efficiency.

This is where software can help, said Ganzarski. Advancements in technology and complex algorithms can provide schedulers and other decision-makers with solutions on how to practically optimize operations – both initially and during disruptions. By understanding more about how best to combine human expertise and science to create a practical, optimized operation, aircraft operators can maximize their resources and gain a competitive advantage.

For an in-depth look at the science behind complex problem-solving and how software can help flight departments maximize their decision-making process, join NBAA and Ganzarski for the webinar titled “Decision Making in Complex Dynamic Environments: Experienced Human vs. Sophisticated Software.”

Click to read on the NBAA site and register for the webinar

0