On the flip side, some shippers are doubling down on the partnership philosophy, signing longer contracts with their 3PLs, deepening their engagement, and emphasizing collaboration and true partnerships with shared gains. They’re leveraging that 3PL’s historical knowledge and experience as an expert logistics execution resource, fully embedded in the shipper’s operations. In every case, these supply chain operators deal daily with challenges old and new as well as an intense demand to be more agile, flexible, and efficient—in any economic situation.
And if traditional supply chain challenges and demands weren’t enough, a global tariff battle between the world’s largest economies is throwing even more sand into the gears, with as yet undetermined consequences.
AGILITY, AGILITY, AGILITY
In a supply chain environment influenced by so many issues, internal and external “agility is something that [3PLs] definitely have to deal with and get better at,” notes Bart De Muynck, a veteran industry analyst and principal at the advisory service Bart De Muynck LLC. “It’s about being able to respond quickly to customers and to what have become very rapidly changing needs of their business.”
In his conversations with shippers, one theme comes up consistently: the need for more resilient supply chains and the ability to deal better and faster with any number of disruptions. “They want a more customer-centric focus [and] a better understanding of their needs and the solutions [available] to them. That is where we see 3PLs investing, increasing their focus around digital transformation, and providing more [in the way of] analytics, automated processes, data management, and communications” to help shippers reduce costs and optimize their day-to-day logistics.
One stumbling block, according to De Muynck: older tech systems still being employed by 3PLs. “These old on-premises systems can be inflexible and have a hard time interacting with newer technologies, which limits how agile and adaptable they can really be,” he says. Many 3PLs have recognized this and are investing in newer systems, “which comes with a cost and also means they need to invest in talent and training to fully benefit when newer systems come online.”
Another challenge is cybersecurity. Newer systems are likely to be designed from the start with embedded cybersecurity processes, controls, and protections. Older systems, however, “are at risk. Data security—making sure systems are secure against breaches or hacking and can recover quickly if a system goes down—is still a critical priority.”
In many cases, De Muynck has seen shippers who stay on older 3PL systems because of cost or an inherent cultural resistance to change. That can be dangerous. “If you outsourced your [logistics] operations and data to a 3PL that is still on an older [and vulnerable] system and it gets hacked,” he says, “you are pretty much screwed.”
THE PACE OF CHANGE
During the pandemic, the three greatest pain points for shippers were capacity, market volatility, and sustainability. Yet even with those conditions, the basic value proposition of a 3PL did not change, believes Michael Castagnetto, president of North American surface transportation for C.H. Robinson, one of the largest global 3PLs. Finding a truck to haul your freight was a daunting challenge. Keeping that provider in your network even more so.
Fast forward to today. What has emerged, in Castagnetto’s view, “is an accelerated pace of change in global supply chains. Disruptions are more frequent and more intense. Forecasting is dynamic, not ‘set it and forget it,’” he explains. “Almost any day we might wake up to a new world, and shippers count on their 3PL to be looking at the horizon and be ready for it.”
Shippers also have not taken their foot off the gas when it comes to looking for efficiencies. One specific area of customer interest for cost savings, Castagnetto says, is drop-trailer services—arrangements in which a driver “drops” or leaves a trailer at a shipper’s facility for loading/unloading at the recipient’s convenience, then returns at an agreed-upon time to pick it up. “We expanded these to help customers get to the right ratio of ‘live load’ to drop,” he notes. “It’s funny how some people don’t realize we do drop-trailer service. We’re actually a top-five drop-trailer provider in North America; it has become a $900 million business for us.” The most active industries for this service are retail, automotive, and health care, he says. Feedback from shippers has been that some find it beneficial to use a 3PL “instead of just asset players for [drop-trailer services] so they can streamline their provider mix,” he adds.
One other area where there appears to be a growing gap in the market, says Castagnetto, is for bundled managed services.
“Shippers are tired of having to piece together TMS, 3PL, and 4PL services. [A 4PL typically operates as an overarching manager or orchestrator working with the client and directs other 3PLs and service providers in the network.] They want to be able to get those services in one place but also affordably choose which they need—whether they’re a small business or one of the largest shippers in the world,” he notes. “They especially need those services to cope with the immense volatility they are operating under.”
INSOURCING VERSUS OUTSOURCING
Much as a pendulum swings back and forth from one side to the other, so has the debate between outsourcing and insourcing logistics functions.
“There is a great breadth of operating models today,” observes David Gonzalez, VP analyst with industry research firm Gartner. “Many shippers feel they want to take back control. [There are] some things they have outsourced too much in the past,” he notes, adding that these are typically activities businesses have decided would provide a competitive advantage if brought back in house.
“[Those businesses] are the ones looking to invest more in that capacity, their thinking being, ‘Let’s not be too reliant on our outsourcing partners; let’s be more empowered and better informed,’” he notes. “We can invest in that capability by bringing [some of these functions] in house.” The objective: managing and controlling critical supply chain data “to drive greater degrees of intelligence,” he says.
In a Gartner study released in January 2025 that was authored by Gonzalez and his colleague Carly West, the researchers found that “logistics leaders often concede too quickly when senior leaders challenge their reasoning for internalizing logistics operations” since outsourcing often is the path of least resistance for management. They further found that “some organizations use outsourcing as a misguided attempt to fix a persistent problem, not realizing that outsourcing logistics does not remove the responsibility for managing the process.”
The research also showed that “four out of five [respondents] intend to internalize some [logistics] activities,” with the leading contenders being network design, managed transportation, logistics control tower operations, and freight audit and payment.
Gonzalez also found an interesting parallel trend: shippers buying and implementing their own technology, then leaning on their 3PL to run it. In these cases, it’s because the shipper does not want to add headcount or staff the function itself. Instead, the shipper “wants to use [the 3PL’s] experience … and tribal knowledge of the business to operate the technology and execute the functions for [it].” That’s a particularly attractive alternative in a market where hiring and retaining experienced, qualified logistics personnel is difficult, Gonzalez notes.
Conversely, Gonzalez says, there are shippers “who view their [3PLs] as indeed partners, are more strategic in their relationships, and are more invested in making sure the 3PL has the right outcomes.” He cites this as an indicator that some shippers, in many cases larger enterprises, find value as well as stability in shifting to longer contracts and building collaborative long-term relationships versus tactical or transactional ones.
C.H. Robinson’s Castagnetto found a somewhat similar sentiment about outsourcing partnerships among customers in the 3PL’s 2025 customer study, noting, “It didn’t surprise us when 23% of shippers said they plan to outsource more of their supply chain needs.”
TRADING COST FOR SERVICE
In today’s market, it is not uncommon for businesses, particularly large enterprises with extended supply chains and multiple operating sites, to mix and match 3PLs based on regional coverage and capability. It’s also common in a weak freight market for a shipper to consider doing more transportation buying on its own, since capacity is plentiful and relatively cheap.
In this instance, “the shipper is trading cost for service,” says Steve Sensing, president of supply chain and dedicated transportation solutions for the logistics giant Ryder. “Right now there are more carriers than freight; they [carriers] don’t have a lot to pick from.”
That market condition is reflected in what Sensing calls the carriers’ “tender acceptance rate,” which today is as high as 95%. “When a carrier [quickly] accepts a tender, they are not shopping the market,” he explains. “As you see the economy bounce back, that becomes more difficult. A carrier may initially accept your freight but at the last minute drop it for [a load] with better pricing.”
Helping customers manage that shifting dynamic is where Ryder shines, Sensing says. “We have [vetted] relationships with 115,000 carriers, and proven systems and people that manage and optimize freight. There are disruptive forces out there that will come back when the economy heats up. When that happens, finding reliable capacity becomes very complex, and that is where our value really pays off for the shipper.”
Even as shippers look to adjust their strategies, Sensing stresses that, in any market, Ryder is staying true to its mission of being a “port to door” solutions provider. That can entail a completely integrated network solution or address a discrete, single point of pain for the customer. “Every deal we look at is from the ground up to make sure we are providing a unique solution that addresses the customer’s specific need,” he emphasizes. “It can be a full-network operation, a regional solution, or something as specific as Ryder personnel with boots on the ground in the warehouse doing the work and executing the operations.”
SQUEEZING OUT COSTS
Even with new technologies and access to reams of data and powerful analytics and optimization tools, shippers are dissatisfied with some of the tech capabilities of their 3PLs. They may further feel that some fundamental “block and tackling” opportunities to shave costs are being left unaddressed, says Satish Jindel, principal at SJ Consulting Group Inc. and head of freight analytics firm ShipMatrix.
He’s received feedback from shippers who say they are dissatisfied with their 3PL “because their TMS [transportation management system] is not current with the capabilities that today’s technologies should provide. That’s partly because some of these systems are not even supported any more, yet customers keep using them because there is no urgency to change or replace them,” he notes. “The carrier doesn’t complain, so why should I change?”
Yet even so, he believes there are numerous opportunities to find cost-saving wins by simply turning a critical eye on basic logistics planning and execution.
“We have a lot of data about shippers, consignees, and freight,” he notes. “What [3PLs] need [to do more of] is look at shipping cycles and practices of customers, and the ordering pattern of consignees.” He notes that in many cases, shippers and 3PLs are doing things a certain way “simply because that’s the way it’s always been done.”
Instead, why not be more observant and introspective, asking questions and using more common sense and attention to detail in how freight is loaded and tendered? That can be the key that unlocks more savings, Jindel says.
“I’m a shipper sending three pallets a week to the customer. One has 15 boxes, another 12, and another 17, with a space in the middle. They are paying to ship air! Do they really need [to ship] three days a week? Could they stack the product on pallets better, using all the space, do more optimized shipments more frequently, or consolidate them into fewer shipments per week?”
At the end of the day, “people are creatures of habit. Absent any incentive, change is hard, especially when you don’t think to look at something and question it. We really need to do more to help the consignee understand the opportunities and to order in quantities that are optimal for the carrier and their supply chain,” Jindel believes. “That can mean a more efficient and responsive operation as well as savings across the supply chain,” he concludes.
