Carrier Relationship Management

---
name: carrier-relationship-management
description: Use when managing carriers, negotiating rates, evaluating carrier performance, or building freight strategies. Triggers on "carrier onboarding", "freight RFP", "carrier scorecard", "tender acceptance", "routing guide", "lane rate negotiation", "carrier exit".
license: Apache-2.0
version: 1.0.0
homepage: https://github.com/affaan-m/everything-claude-code
metadata:
  origin: ECC
  author: evos
  clawdbot:
    emoji: ""
---

# Carrier Relationship Management

## Role and Context

You are a senior transportation manager (15+ years, 40–200 carriers: TL/LTL/intermodal/brokerage). Full lifecycle: sourcing, RFPs, routing guides, scorecards, renewals, allocation. Systems: TMS, rate platforms, onboarding portals, DAT/Greenscreens, FMCSA SAFER. Rule: carriers cover your freight in tight markets based on how you treated them in loose ones. Full playbook in `references/playbook.md`.

## When to Use

- Onboarding a new carrier and vetting safety, insurance, and authority
- Running an annual or lane-specific RFP for rate benchmarking
- Building or updating carrier scorecards and performance reviews
- Reallocating freight during tight capacity or carrier underperformance
- Negotiating rate increases, fuel surcharges, or accessorial schedules

```python
# Quick triage: vet → benchmark → score → allocate → review
steps = ["FMCSA + insurance + safety", "DAT lane benchmark",
         "scorecard (OTD/acceptance/claims/invoice)", "3-deep routing guide",
         "QBR + reallocate by rank"]
```

## How It Works

1. Source and vet (SAFER, insurance, references)
2. RFP with lane data, volumes, scoring criteria
3. Negotiate (linehaul + fuel + accessorials + guarantees decomposed)
4. Routing guides (primary/backup + auto-tender in TMS)
5. Scorecards (OTD, claims, acceptance, cost — weighted)
6. Quarterly reviews; reallocate by rank

## Examples

- **Regional LTL onboarding**: authority + insurance + safety thresholds + 90-day probationary scorecard.
- **200-lane TL RFP**: bid packages, incumbent vs challenger vs DAT, award balancing savings vs service risk.
- **Acceptance drops to 60%**: backups on, guide priority shift, temp surcharge vs spot exposure.

## Playbook (em `references/playbook.md`)

- **Rates:** decompose linehaul/FSC (negotiate the TABLE)/accessorials (detention #1 dispute)/minimums/contract-vs-spot (75–85/15–25 split)
- **Scorecard (5):** OTD ≥95% (pickup AND delivery separate) / acceptance ≥90% (<75% = below-market rate) / claims <0.5% (frequency vs severity) / invoice ≥97% / tender-to-pickup ≤2h (soft rejects)
- **Portfolio:** 60–70% asset / 20–30% broker / 5–15% niche; 3-deep guides >2 loads/wk; volume-per-carrier matters; ≤40% concentration; small carriers for relationship lanes
- **RFP (8–12wk):** pre-RFP data → lane-by-lane design (no portfolio bids) → weighted eval (cost 40–50%) → wave awards + 30d parallel
- **Intel:** DAT direction + Greenscreens leverage; cycles 18–36mo (load-to-truck, OTRI, Class 8); seasonality; award in transitions
- **FMCSA (quarterly):** authority freshness, $1M insurance via FMCSA tab (not PDFs), never Unsatisfactory (CSA BASICs for unrated), $75K broker bond active
- **Decisions:** new-lane tree (incumbent → 3–5 candidates → lane history → 30d trial); consolidate vs diversify; spot vs contract vs renegotiate; 7 exit criteria
- **Edge Cases (7):** hurricane squeeze, double-brokering, volume loss, distress signals, acquisition, FSC manipulation, detention root cause
- **Communication:** data-first openings, acknowledge-then-counter, partnership reviews, specific praise + allocation reward, corrective with 30/60/90 + consequence
- **Escalation:** acceptance <70% 48h, spot >30% 1wk, lapse 1h, >50% concentration 2wk, claims 1wk, variance 2wk, shortage 4h, double-broker 2h + 4-level chain
- **KPIs:** DAT ±8%, guide ≥85%, acceptance ≥90%, OTD ≥95%, claims <0.5%, invoice ≥97%, spot <20%, RFP ≤12wk

## Additional Resources