Transportation Management System (TMS) Support
TMS programs don't fail because the software is inadequate. They fail because carrier relationships, rate accuracy, routing logic, and operational adoption aren't managed with the rigor they require.
A TMS sits at the center of freight execution, touching planning, tendering, tracking, settlement,
and analytics. When programs break, it's usually a combination of poor carrier integration,
unrealistic routing assumptions, weak data quality, and users who revert to manual processes
because the system doesn't match how freight actually moves.
BaszGroup supports organizations through TMS rollouts, carrier onboarding, network optimization,
and recovery when systems fail to deliver expected results.
How TMS Is Used Across Industries
Transportation needs vary dramatically by industry. The TMS approach has to match freight characteristics and business constraints.
3PL & Logistics Providers
Multi-client freight, complex billing, diverse carrier networks, and rapid quote turnaround. TMS must support client-specific routing rules and margin visibility.
Learn more about 3PL programs →Consumer Packaged Goods (CPG)
Retail routing guides, parcel and LTL mix, promotional spikes, and tight delivery windows. TMS must enforce compliance and optimize carrier selection under volume pressure.
Learn more about CPG programs →Industrial & Manufacturing
Heavy freight, dedicated lanes, milk runs, and supplier coordination. TMS must handle complex inbound logistics and just-in-time delivery requirements.
Learn more about Industrial programs →Grocery & Food
Temperature-controlled freight, tight store delivery windows, cross-dock scheduling, and perishable timing. TMS must protect cold chain and manage appointment slots.
Learn more about Grocery programs →Medical & Regulated Products
Validated carriers, chain of custody tracking, temperature monitoring, and audit trails. TMS must support compliance documentation and recall traceability.
Learn more about Regulated programs →Where TMS Programs Break
Carrier integration and EDI fail under real volume
- Tender acceptance and rejection workflows aren't designed for exceptions
- EDI 204, 214, and 210 mappings work in test but break under production load
- Status updates are inconsistent or delayed, creating visibility gaps
- Carrier portals and APIs are fragile and require constant manual intervention
- Invoice reconciliation breaks when actuals don't match quotes
Rate tables and accessorials are incomplete or wrong
- Contract rates aren't loaded correctly, causing quote failures
- Accessorial charges are missing or misconfigured, breaking cost accuracy
- Fuel surcharges and dynamic pricing aren't maintained
- Lane-specific exceptions and minimum charges are overlooked
- Rate updates from carriers lag behind actual pricing changes
Routing logic doesn't match operational reality
- Optimization algorithms prioritize cost over service commitments
- Carrier selection rules don't account for performance history or capacity constraints
- Mode selection (parcel, LTL, FTL) logic doesn't reflect actual break points
- Routing guides aren't enforced, so planners override constantly
- Multi-stop and consolidation opportunities are missed because rules aren't tuned
Load and shipment data quality is poor
- Weight, dimensions, and freight class are inaccurate, causing reweighs and adjustments
- Pickup and delivery windows don't reflect actual constraints
- Hazmat, stackability, and special handling flags are missing or wrong
- Origin and destination addresses are incomplete, causing tender rejections
- BOL and packing list data doesn't sync cleanly from WMS or ERP
Reporting and analytics don't drive decisions
- Dashboards show data but not actionable insights
- Carrier scorecards exist but aren't used for selection or negotiation
- Cost per mile, per order, and per lane metrics are unavailable or unreliable
- Freight spend analysis requires manual extraction and reconciliation
- Exception reports are buried in noise, so trends go unnoticed
User adoption is weak because workflows don't fit
- Planners find the system too rigid and work around it
- Training focused on screens, not how to handle real freight scenarios
- Exception handling requires manual steps that weren't designed
- Carrier communication still happens via email because the system is slower
- Teams default to legacy processes because the TMS feels like extra work
Facing TMS Challenges?
If your TMS program isn't delivering the expected value, we've helped organizations get back on track.
Why TMS Adoption and Value Degrade
Carrier relationships deteriorate because execution is messy
- Tender quality is poor, so carriers reject or delay acceptance
- Pickup and delivery instructions are incomplete or conflicting
- Payment and invoice disputes increase because of data mismatches
- Carrier onboarding is slow and inconsistent, limiting network options
Optimization features are turned off because they don't work
- Auto-tendering is disabled because it picks the wrong carriers
- Load consolidation logic creates more problems than savings
- Route optimization doesn't account for real-world constraints
- Teams revert to manual planning because automation isn't trustworthy
Freight audit and payment become manual again
- Invoice matching fails because actuals don't match quotes
- Accessorial validation requires manual review and disputes
- Payment approval workflows are bypassed to avoid delays
- Cost allocation and GL posting are disconnected from actual freight spend
Where Data Migration Breaks
Carrier contracts and rates aren't migrated cleanly
- Contract hierarchies and effective dates are lost or misaligned
- Rate tables are incomplete, causing quote failures at go live
- Accessorial definitions don't match between legacy and new TMS
- Lane-specific exceptions and minimum charges are overlooked
Historical data is lost or inaccessible
- Shipment history needed for analysis and disputes isn't migrated
- Carrier performance data starts from zero, losing negotiation leverage
- POD and audit trail documentation is left in the legacy system
- Reporting continuity is broken because historical trends are unavailable
In-transit shipments fall through the cracks
- Open loads at cutover aren't tracked in either system
- Status updates for in-transit freight are lost during transition
- Invoice reconciliation for loads spanning cutover is manual and error-prone
- Customer visibility and exception management break during the switch
Need Help with TMS Data Migration?
Carrier data, rate tables, and shipment history are complex to migrate. We help organizations transition cleanly.
The Challenge of Replacing an Existing TMS
Replacing a TMS is operationally disruptive. The legacy system holds carrier relationships,
historical rate agreements, optimized routing logic, and workflows that users trust.
Cutover timing is critical because freight can't stop moving.
The transition requires careful planning around in-transit shipments, carrier communication,
and dual-system operation to avoid service failures.
Carrier onboarding and communication break during transition
- Carriers receive tenders from both systems, creating confusion
- EDI connections need to be switched, causing tender and status update delays
- Carrier portals and API credentials require re-establishment
- Performance tracking resets, losing historical context for carrier selection
Parallel operations create data fragmentation
- Some loads are in the old TMS, some in the new, with no unified view
- Reporting becomes impossible because data is split across systems
- Carrier settlement and payment workflows are duplicated and inconsistent
- Cutover decision is delayed because teams fear losing control
Legacy decommissioning is rushed
- Historical shipment data is archived but not accessible for disputes
- Open invoices and accruals are lost or misallocated
- Users still need legacy for edge cases but access is cut too soon
- Audit trail and compliance documentation become incomplete
Measurable Success in TMS Programs
- Carrier tender acceptance rates improve to 95%+ within 60 days
- Freight cost per unit decreases as optimization matures
- On-time delivery performance stabilizes or improves
- Users trust routing logic and stop overriding selections
- Carrier integrations run reliably without manual fixes
- Invoice matching accuracy exceeds 90% without disputes
- Reporting becomes proactive, identifying savings opportunities
- Carrier scorecards drive performance improvement conversations
- Rate negotiations are data-driven, not anecdotal
- Legacy system is decommissioned with full audit trail preserved
- Freight execution happens in the TMS, not spreadsheets
- Continuous optimization becomes routine, not aspirational
Where We Engage
We support TMS programs from planning through stabilization and recovery. Our focus is carrier integration, rate accuracy, routing optimization, and user adoption. We help organizations move from manual freight execution to data-driven transportation management.
Pre Go-Live Advisory
Carrier onboarding strategy, rate table design, routing logic validation, integration testing, cutover planning, and risk control. For teams that want disciplined execution.
Go-Live Command Center + Stabilization
Hands-on support during the critical transition window. Triage, daily cadence, carrier issue resolution, integration monitoring, and performance tracking.
Program Recovery and Remediation
For TMS programs that are underperforming or stuck. Root-cause assessment, carrier relationship repair, rate and routing corrections, retesting, and stabilization execution.
Legacy Replacement and System Sunset
Controlled migration from legacy TMS to new platform. Carrier transition planning, data conversion, parallel operations governance, and clean decommissioning.
Learn More About Our TMS Services
Ready to Talk About Your TMS Program?
Let's Optimize Freight and Reduce Risk
Whether you're planning a rollout, struggling with carrier integration, or recovering from a difficult program, we can help.