Skip to main content

Count the spreadsheets running beside your system

Every one of them started as something the system couldn't do. That gap doesn't close as you go, it widens, because your business keeps changing and the software doesn't.

How the gap opens, every time

It fits at signature

You scored it against how you work this quarter, on a feature list long enough to look complete. Nobody scores a platform against the things nobody thought to ask about yet.

Then the business moves

A new trade lane. A customer whose paperwork works differently. A compliance rule that didn't exist when you signed. None of it was in scope, because none of it had happened.

So the silos appear

The shipment has to move today, so the gap gets closed outside the system. A spreadsheet, a side database, a Friday reconciliation. The platform stays. It stops being where work happens.

The shape of it

The gap does not close. It widens.

Your operation keeps changing. The software steps forward once or twice, then stops. What fills the space between the two lines is the part nobody budgets for.

The widening gap between what a business needs and what its software doesA rising line shows what the business needs over four years. A stepped line below it shows what the software does, flattening after year two. The space between the two lines widens each year and is labelled as the work that moves into spreadsheets and side systems.Year 1Year 2Year 3Year 4What the business needsWhat the software doesIt fits hereFilled by spreadsheets

A silo is not a workaround. It is a second system with no owner.

A trailer loading onto a RoRo vessel at dusk while the ship waits to sail

The spreadsheet has no audit trail, no access control, no backup and no support. It has one person who understands it, and it holds part of the truth about live shipments. Nobody decided to run operations that way. It accumulated, one urgent requirement at a time, and by the time anyone counts them there are six.

The real cost isn't the licence, and it isn't even the change requests. It's that the record stops being shared. Every silo is a place where two parties can hold different versions of the same shipment and both believe they are right, which is precisely the failure a platform was bought to prevent. A booking amended in a spreadsheet is not amended for the terminal, the agent or the customer.

It compounds in one direction only. Businesses change faster than the systems serving them, so the share of your real operation living outside the platform grows every year you run it. Which makes the question everyone asks at evaluation the wrong one. What matters isn't whether a system fits how you work today. It's what happens the next time how you work changes.

A longer feature list isn't the defence. Length makes the evaluation harder without making the gap smaller, because the gap was never about how many features exist. It's about whether the one you need can come to exist, and how much of your operation moves outside the system while you wait.

A new requirement arrives. What happens next?

FeatureA fixed-process platformA customized buildConfiguredLogisoft
Where the requirement ends upOutside the systemIn a quoted projectA setting, most of the time
Who owns the answerWhoever built the spreadsheetThe vendor's backlogYour operations team
What it costs youA silo you maintain foreverA quote every timeThe time to set it up
Stays inside the shared record
Effect on your next upgradeNone, the silo sits outside itIt has to be re-testedNone, you are on the standard product
Who else benefitsNobodyNobodyEvery customer, and you gain from theirs
Where you are in three yearsRunning two systemsOn a version only you haveOn the same product, set up your way

What should be a setting, not a quote

Charges and billing

What's chargeable, at what rate, on which event, and how it reaches an invoice. Terminals and carriers price differently, and neither has to describe its model in the other's words.

Booking validation

The checks that must pass before a booking is accepted. What is mandatory, what is permitted, and what has to be confirmed by whom, defined by the people who own the process.

Your documents

Output comes out on your own templates, resolved for the party printing and the role they hold on that shipment, with a standard version underneath where you have not supplied one.

Who sees what

Access assigned by role across bookings, invoicing, customs, yard operations and reporting, set at the level of the individual action rather than the whole module.

Trading partner connections

Carrier, OEM, customs and ERP links are product connectors, not one-off projects. A new one gets added to the platform itself, rather than bolted onto your instance alone.

Who's involved

Forwarders, agents, terminals, brokers and receivers work the same record, each with their own view of it. Your operating model decides who takes part in a shipment, not ours.

Frequently Asked Questions

Every workaround started as a missing feature