Automation for logistics and freight
Freight brokers, carriers and 3PLs. This is the sector where the phone is still the integration layer between systems.
What a proactive shipment status build looks like6 steps, 1 decision
- 01Milestone receivedScan, EDI message or API event
- 02Matched to the loadAnd to the customer who cares
- 03Late against the ETA?Yes, exception alert with the reasonNo, routine status out
- 04Customer updatedBefore they think to ask
- 05Event loggedOne timeline per shipment
- 06No scan in 12 hoursChases the carrier automatically
Each one is priced on the pricing page. Automations start at $499, or bundle into a package. The detail is below.
01Proactive shipment status updates
What happens now: customers call and email to ask where their freight is. Someone checks the TMS, possibly the carrier portal, possibly rings the driver, and replies. Repeated dozens of times a day.
What we build: tracking events pulled from carrier APIs and EDI, normalized into one status model, and pushed to the customer automatically at meaningful milestones: picked up, in transit, out for delivery, delivered, and crucially delayed. Plus a self-service tracking link so the routine question stops being asked.
Highest hours saved in this sector. The status-chasing load is enormous and almost entirely mechanical.
02Exception alerting
Detection of shipments that have gone quiet, missed a milestone, or are tracking late against the committed date. Surfaced to a person while there is still time to act, rather than discovered when the customer calls.
The design point: this is monitoring for the absence of an event, which is harder than reacting to one and is exactly the silent-failure class described in why automations break. A shipment with no scan for 36 hours has not errored. It has just stopped, and only an explicit check will notice.
03Carrier rate comparison and tendering
Rates pulled from contracted carriers and spot APIs for a given lane and service level, compared against your margin rules, and tendered to the chosen carrier with automatic fallback down the list when a tender is rejected or times out.
Cost driver: how many carriers, and how many of them are API-integrated versus EDI versus email. Each non-API carrier is effectively a separate small integration project.
04Proof of delivery capture and matching
PODs collected from carrier APIs, driver apps or emailed scans, matched to the correct shipment automatically, stored against the record, and released to billing. Missing PODs flagged before they become an invoice dispute.
Cash effect: in businesses that cannot invoice without a POD, the delay between delivery and document is a direct delay to cash. Removing it typically pulls collection forward by several days across the whole book.
05Billing reconciliation and carrier invoice audit
Carrier invoices matched against the tendered rate and the actual service delivered, with accessorial charges validated against contract terms. Discrepancies queued for review with the variance and its reason attached.
Usually pays for itself fastest. Carrier invoice errors are common and overwhelmingly in the carrier's favor, because nobody has time to check every line. This is one of the few automations where the return is recovered cash rather than recovered hours.
06Customer onboarding and rate setup
New customer paperwork, credit check initiation, rate card setup in the TMS, EDI or portal configuration, and account provisioning, sequenced from one intake rather than assembled across four teams.
07Driver and compliance paperwork
Document expiry tracking for licenses, medicals, insurance and vehicle inspections, with escalating reminders ahead of expiry and automatic flagging of anyone who has lapsed. Onboarding packs assembled and chased.
Compliance value: operating with a lapsed credential is a regulatory problem, not an administrative one. The tracking is trivial to automate and routinely done in a spreadsheet that one person maintains.
The integration reality in this sector
| Layer | Common systems | Integration reality |
|---|---|---|
| TMS | McLeod, Turvo, Alvys, in-house | Modern ones have good APIs; older on-premise systems often need database access |
| Carrier connectivity | EDI 204/210/214/990, carrier APIs | EDI is still the standard. Budget for it properly |
| Load boards | DAT, Truckstop | APIs exist, licensing terms constrain use |
| Telematics / ELD | Samsara, Motive, Geotab | Generally good modern APIs |
| Accounting | QuickBooks, Sage, TMS-native | Varies; TMS-native billing is often the harder side |
A large share of logistics integration is EDI rather than REST: batch files, trading-partner agreements, X12 transaction sets, and a VAN in the middle. It is entirely workable and it is not the same job as calling a JSON API. If your carrier connectivity is EDI-based, say so on the first call: it moves the timeline and the price, so it belongs in the quote.
What we would do first
Status updates, then carrier invoice audit. Status updates remove the largest pool of interruption-driven work and improve the customer experience immediately. Invoice review comes second because it recovers money directly, which makes the business case for everything after it much easier to make.
Rate comparison and tendering is the most technically ambitious build here and benefits from being later, once carrier connectivity is established and understood.
How many "where is my freight" calls a day?
Count them for a week. That number is usually the entire business case.
You will talk to Fayez or Kareem. Nobody else.