INDUSTRY FOCUSPROJECT FORWARDER NETWORKS
from the industry, or do not have sufficient overall experience in the project freight and logistics industry… This will not add to the quality of those networks or generate business for its members.” The PLA’s Weyhausen agrees. “Some
networks are just run by marketing people, who don’t know anything about the industry.”
Code of ethics Since founding the Worldwide Project Consortium (WWPC) in 1998, the members of this network worked together to form a code of ethics and terms and conditions to create the successful formula on which the network is operated. “It has also been deemed to be an
advantage that a leader of a project forwarding network comes from the industry of project forwarding with a successful career and transport qualifications,” said Wolfgang Karau, operational director at WWPC. “As the past years have shown, the owners and operators of a project forwarder network need to listen to their members, accepting democratic voting on certain issues to move forward together as one unit, always keeping in mind the best interest of the members.” Gary Dale Cearley, executive director of
the XLProjects (XLP) network added: “Many projects people don't understand the work that goes into properly running a professional group like XLP. It seems there is a perception that we simply sit at our computers and recruit new members and take the money to the bank. That's why you are seeing a lot of the new 'me too, me too' networks. Cearley said his experience as a project
forwarder helps to attract good members and identify which prospects are bona fide project freight forwarders: “Many people running competing groups think that having project forwarding experience is a badge of authority. Not really. The purpose of the group is to help them grow their business. That takes a different approach than moving a heavy lift. If you are resting on your heavy lift experience to run the group you might just have made a bad career choice. You are meant to be a business development facilitator, not king of the hill.” One bone of contention is whether to
operate a one-member-per-country strategy, or increase the scope of the coverage and allow multiple companies per country to join. WCA Projects, PCN and GPLN, for example, operate on a non-exclusive basis. WCA Projects limits membership to
three-to-five per country, except in larger markets such as China, USA, Turkey,
122 January/February 2017
Delegates pictured at last year’s XLP AGM in Panama.
Germany, UAE and Brazil. “It is important to have choices and competition in each market,” argued Cutillo. “Members may offer different service specialties, have a different industry focus, facilities or geographic coverage. More members also translate into more opportunities, worldwide, within any group.” PCN follows in a similar vein, with five
members in the largest markets. “This policy is important because a non-exclusive membership produces a higher level of business for the whole network and members have a better chance of finding a compatible company to work with for each individual project… In addition, our members are not required to annul established agency relationships. We simply ask that all new business that comes into the office is first offered to fellow PCN members for quoting,” said Humphrey.
Haffter added: “We do not believe that
there is at every location the perfect member that excels at handling oversized and overweight cargo by air, sea and land, and is at the same time an expert in lifting and owner of heavy duty trailers and cranes. This simply does not exist.”
Member numbers Fuchs said Project Partners has taken a different approach. “Our terms foresee one member per country and a second one whenever it appears reasonable for us.” Multiple members per country are allowed if, for example, members have different specialisations, or if the market is large. “A limitation in size though is inevitable
for the heavy lift industry in order to avoid competition within the network and to create a mutual family feeling within the network,” he added. CLC Projects’ Drewsen echoed this
sentiment: “We allow a maximum two members per country with the exception of Brazil, Russia, India, China and USA. The advantage to limiting membership is that members are not competing so much with each other for business intelligence that we or members circulate within the network.” PFN operates a one-member-per-
We are pleased to announce that we are developing a five-module online training programme on a specially developed e-learning platform. – Rachel Humphrey, Project Cargo Network
country policy with strict entry criteria, “which has made us decline more companies then we have added to the membership”, claimed Bouwhuis. This exclusivity will form a key part of the network’s “second level strategy”, which it intends to implement in 2017. “We are directly in discussion with EPCs,
energy, construction, infrastructure, oil and gas, and aerospace companies to get projects and project freight and heavy lift shipments for our members. We will run the first pilot projects in the first quarter of 2017.” Karau also championed the
one-member-per-country policy. “This does
www.heavyliftpfi.com
XLP
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148
