Unregistered Carriers on 03/12/2009 - 686
Unregistered Carriers on 03/15/2010 - 687
Illinois - 96.83%
Maine - 96.24%
Indiana - 92.12%
Alabama - 91.76%
Kentucky - 89.84%
In my last post, I said that the registration side (as opposed to the enforcement side) of UCR involves two major tasks:
1) Carrier contact
2) Act of carrier registration
Let's look at Carrier Contact first. I can tell you that when it comes to carrier contact, any state that is not using capabilities comparable to those found in the UCR-Link product will lose the carrier contact battle to the vendor every time.
First, you will be contacting only the current crop of unregistered UCR Universe carriers. That list changes every day and is impossible to keep up with without functionality of this kind.
Second, you have the Emailer, which provides the capability to automatically contact all unregistered carriers with email addresses every fifteen days - free! Hands-off!
These capabilities put a vendor or state in the position of being able to contact only the appropriate carriers relentlessly. You are virtually guaranteed to increase your registration percentage with that kind of activity going on.
So, in my opinion, the best a state can do is achieve a "draw" against a vendor
when it comes to Carrier Contact.
Next time, we'll focus on the second major task - the actual act of registration.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Friday, March 12, 2010
Vendor as "State Proxy" - Part 1
Unregistered Carriers on 03/10/2009 - 741
Unregistered Carriers on 03/12/2010 - 686
Illinois - 96.84%
Maine - 96.24%
Indiana - 92.10%
Alabama - 91.69%
Kentucky - 89.85%
In Wednesday's post, I said that a vendor that "acted like a state on behalf of the state" - via outsourcing - might very well out-perform the state for which the vendor was the proxy. Please understand that this idea is sort of hypothetical, but, having been on the vendor side, I know the idea to be workable as well.
Let's assume at the outset of this "thought experiment" that the quality of service provided by the vendor would be at least as good as the state would provide - whatever that means. I'll leave it to your imagination as to how high that bar would be set.
Let's also assume that the vendor is operating under the following - and only the following - contraints.
First, the vendor can't do illegal, unethical or immoral stuff.
Second, the vendor will be told by the state what, specifically, will constitute "acceptable or unacceptable" registrations, and will use the same acceptability decision-making mechanism as the state. ("This guy claimed 1,000 power units and paid for one! Why did you accept that?")
Those assumptions will do for starters. We may need to add some as we go.
OK, as I see it, the registration side (as opposed to the enforcement side) of UCR involves two major tasks: carrier contact and then the actual act of carrier registration.
In my next post, we'll compare the state approach to the vendor approach and see who would likely come out on top.
Unregistered Carriers on 03/12/2010 - 686
Illinois - 96.84%
Maine - 96.24%
Indiana - 92.10%
Alabama - 91.69%
Kentucky - 89.85%
In Wednesday's post, I said that a vendor that "acted like a state on behalf of the state" - via outsourcing - might very well out-perform the state for which the vendor was the proxy. Please understand that this idea is sort of hypothetical, but, having been on the vendor side, I know the idea to be workable as well.
Let's assume at the outset of this "thought experiment" that the quality of service provided by the vendor would be at least as good as the state would provide - whatever that means. I'll leave it to your imagination as to how high that bar would be set.
Let's also assume that the vendor is operating under the following - and only the following - contraints.
First, the vendor can't do illegal, unethical or immoral stuff.
Second, the vendor will be told by the state what, specifically, will constitute "acceptable or unacceptable" registrations, and will use the same acceptability decision-making mechanism as the state. ("This guy claimed 1,000 power units and paid for one! Why did you accept that?")
Those assumptions will do for starters. We may need to add some as we go.
OK, as I see it, the registration side (as opposed to the enforcement side) of UCR involves two major tasks: carrier contact and then the actual act of carrier registration.
In my next post, we'll compare the state approach to the vendor approach and see who would likely come out on top.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Pay No Attention To The Man Behind The Curtain!
Unregistered Carriers on 03/09/2009 - 746
Unregistered Carriers on 03/10/2010 - 741
Illinois - 96.59%
Maine - 96.20%
Indiana - 92.00%
Alabama - 91.46%
Kentucky - 89.77%
A couple of weeks ago, I was sitting on a beach in Florida thinking about UCR. That statement, in and of itself, should raise a bunch of red flags!
But then, I had this thought, which should be taken as nothing more than the ramblings of a man who's not smart enough to think about something other than UCR while he's basking in the sun - or who's been out in the sun too long.
My thought was this:
What if a state completely outsourced its UCR registration operation to a "UCR Vendor"? Lock, stock and barrel. Not enforcement, just registration. Which one would do the job better?
Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that 1) the vendor could legitimately claim to carriers that they represented the state ("Hi, this is the state of Illinois calling"), 2) the vendor had capabilities equivalent to UCR-Link and 3) there was some kind of incentive for the vendor to do their best job - performance clauses, bonuses, or whatever - just like there are for states (except, of course, for those crazy caps!). Perhaps the following would work: the vendor gets the same percentage of the agreed-upon compensation as the state's UCR registration percentage. Sold!
I have to be honest - I kind of like the vendor's chances. Why? Because it could be run very similarly to a for-profit project. Combine that with enforcement and you've got a winner!
Unregistered Carriers on 03/10/2010 - 741
Illinois - 96.59%
Maine - 96.20%
Indiana - 92.00%
Alabama - 91.46%
Kentucky - 89.77%
A couple of weeks ago, I was sitting on a beach in Florida thinking about UCR. That statement, in and of itself, should raise a bunch of red flags!
But then, I had this thought, which should be taken as nothing more than the ramblings of a man who's not smart enough to think about something other than UCR while he's basking in the sun - or who's been out in the sun too long.
My thought was this:
What if a state completely outsourced its UCR registration operation to a "UCR Vendor"? Lock, stock and barrel. Not enforcement, just registration. Which one would do the job better?
Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that 1) the vendor could legitimately claim to carriers that they represented the state ("Hi, this is the state of Illinois calling"), 2) the vendor had capabilities equivalent to UCR-Link and 3) there was some kind of incentive for the vendor to do their best job - performance clauses, bonuses, or whatever - just like there are for states (except, of course, for those crazy caps!). Perhaps the following would work: the vendor gets the same percentage of the agreed-upon compensation as the state's UCR registration percentage. Sold!
I have to be honest - I kind of like the vendor's chances. Why? Because it could be run very similarly to a for-profit project. Combine that with enforcement and you've got a winner!
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
What The MTN Ratio DOESN"T Tell You
Unregistered Carriers on 03/08/2009 - 783
Unregistered Carriers on 03/09/2010 - 746
Illinois - 96.56%
Maine - 95.88%
Indiana - 91.96%
Alabama - 91.35%
Kentucky - 89.76%
Actually, there are LOTS of things the MTN Ratio doesn't tell you. The "thing" I was thinking about was that the MTN Ratio does not reflect when a state like New York or Texas registers lots of non-participating state carriers. The MTN ratio only applies to carriers domiciled in the states under discussion at the time.
Take New York, for example. Please! Take New York! (Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, I'll be here through Saturday night.)
New Jersey - a neighboring non-participating state - has 13,000 carriers. A great many of them are registered by our good friend in New York, Bill Leonard. So ... if you add NJ's MTN ratio of 130 to New York's 170, you could argue that Bill has an MTN Ratio of close to 300. And that's just one extra jurisdiction that Bill deals with - there are also carriers from another 8 to 10 jurisdictions who could choose NY if they so desired.
So, we could surmise that if you were going to seek out exclusive registration of carriers from a non-participating state, you might get a rough idea of how much work you were in for by using the MTN Ratio. That's the theory, at least.
Unregistered Carriers on 03/09/2010 - 746
Illinois - 96.56%
Maine - 95.88%
Indiana - 91.96%
Alabama - 91.35%
Kentucky - 89.76%
Actually, there are LOTS of things the MTN Ratio doesn't tell you. The "thing" I was thinking about was that the MTN Ratio does not reflect when a state like New York or Texas registers lots of non-participating state carriers. The MTN ratio only applies to carriers domiciled in the states under discussion at the time.
Take New York, for example. Please! Take New York! (Thank you very much, ladies and gentlemen, I'll be here through Saturday night.)
New Jersey - a neighboring non-participating state - has 13,000 carriers. A great many of them are registered by our good friend in New York, Bill Leonard. So ... if you add NJ's MTN ratio of 130 to New York's 170, you could argue that Bill has an MTN Ratio of close to 300. And that's just one extra jurisdiction that Bill deals with - there are also carriers from another 8 to 10 jurisdictions who could choose NY if they so desired.
So, we could surmise that if you were going to seek out exclusive registration of carriers from a non-participating state, you might get a rough idea of how much work you were in for by using the MTN Ratio. That's the theory, at least.
Monday, March 8, 2010
More About The Move The Needle (MTN) Ratio
Unregistered Carriers on 03/05/2009 - 763
Unregistered Carriers on 03/08/2010 - 783
Illinois - 96.39%
Maine - 95.88%
Indiana - 91.93%
Alabama - 91.34%
Kentucky - 89.72%
First, let me say that we were "lambasted" by a bunch of USDOT number "adds" - looks like most of them were an upload of inspections for carriers not previously in the UCR Universe. We also got a notification from FMCSA that they had a file problem. We'll have to sort it all out tomorrow.
Meanwhile, I've been doing more thinking about the MTN ratio, which, I'm convinced, is destined for whatever the Oscar-equivalent is for cool numbers.
As nearly as I can tell, this number may also be a reflection of the range of effort required of states - and the efficiency of that effort - in administering UCR registration next year. See if this makes sense.
I have a total of 21,684 carriers in my current universe. One percent of that total is 216.84. In 2010, I will have to register 217 carriers in order to ratchet my registration percentage up one percent. If I have 3 FTE's working on my UCR registrations, I'm going to need roughly 72 registrations per FTE per percentage point.
Meanwhile, a number of states (ME, RI, NM and MT) have ratios between 28 and 30, meaning they have to register 28 to 30 carriers to ratchet their percentage up one percent.
I guess I'm speculating that they should be able to "move their needle" about 2.5 percent for each FTE they are assigning to UCR if their productivity per FTE is about the same as ours here in IL.
I've got to think about this some more. If you have thoughts about today's post, let me know.
Unregistered Carriers on 03/08/2010 - 783
Illinois - 96.39%
Maine - 95.88%
Indiana - 91.93%
Alabama - 91.34%
Kentucky - 89.72%
First, let me say that we were "lambasted" by a bunch of USDOT number "adds" - looks like most of them were an upload of inspections for carriers not previously in the UCR Universe. We also got a notification from FMCSA that they had a file problem. We'll have to sort it all out tomorrow.
Meanwhile, I've been doing more thinking about the MTN ratio, which, I'm convinced, is destined for whatever the Oscar-equivalent is for cool numbers.
As nearly as I can tell, this number may also be a reflection of the range of effort required of states - and the efficiency of that effort - in administering UCR registration next year. See if this makes sense.
I have a total of 21,684 carriers in my current universe. One percent of that total is 216.84. In 2010, I will have to register 217 carriers in order to ratchet my registration percentage up one percent. If I have 3 FTE's working on my UCR registrations, I'm going to need roughly 72 registrations per FTE per percentage point.
Meanwhile, a number of states (ME, RI, NM and MT) have ratios between 28 and 30, meaning they have to register 28 to 30 carriers to ratchet their percentage up one percent.
I guess I'm speculating that they should be able to "move their needle" about 2.5 percent for each FTE they are assigning to UCR if their productivity per FTE is about the same as ours here in IL.
I've got to think about this some more. If you have thoughts about today's post, let me know.
Friday, March 5, 2010
My New "Move The Needle" Performance Ratio
Unregistered Carriers on 03/02/2009 - 796
Unregistered Carriers on 03/05/2010 - 763
Illinois - 96.48%
Maine - 95.68%
Indiana - 91.86%
Alabama - 91.24%
Kentucky - 89.72%
I was sitting around contemplating the notion that some states have to work a lot harder than others in order to significantly move their registration percentage "needle" when, inspired by the fact that even Al Gore can win a Nobel prize, I decided to invent a new ratio to reflect the level of effort required by each state to "move the needle". I call it, appropriately enough, the "Move the Needle" (MTN) ratio.
Essentially, the MTN ratio is a function of how many percent a state has left before they reach full (100%) registration divided into how many unregistered carriers they have left. The ratio represents the number of carriers by which a state must reduce its unregistered list in order to "move the needle" 1%.
Here are the MTN ratios for the current top 5 states registration percentage states:
IL - 216.76
ME - 30.56
IN - 134.89
AL - 79.34
KY - 88.81
Here are five highest MTN ratios:
CA - 292.62
TX - 220.95
IL - 216.76
PA - 187.65
NY - 167.83
I'm certain that the history books will eventually acknowledge the importance of this ratio right up there along with the Fibonacci series and the multiplication tables. For now, I have to be content with the knowledge that I have a sound mathematical excuse for getting beat by everybody except CA and TX.
Have a great weekend!
Unregistered Carriers on 03/05/2010 - 763
Illinois - 96.48%
Maine - 95.68%
Indiana - 91.86%
Alabama - 91.24%
Kentucky - 89.72%
I was sitting around contemplating the notion that some states have to work a lot harder than others in order to significantly move their registration percentage "needle" when, inspired by the fact that even Al Gore can win a Nobel prize, I decided to invent a new ratio to reflect the level of effort required by each state to "move the needle". I call it, appropriately enough, the "Move the Needle" (MTN) ratio.
Essentially, the MTN ratio is a function of how many percent a state has left before they reach full (100%) registration divided into how many unregistered carriers they have left. The ratio represents the number of carriers by which a state must reduce its unregistered list in order to "move the needle" 1%.
Here are the MTN ratios for the current top 5 states registration percentage states:
IL - 216.76
ME - 30.56
IN - 134.89
AL - 79.34
KY - 88.81
Here are five highest MTN ratios:
CA - 292.62
TX - 220.95
IL - 216.76
PA - 187.65
NY - 167.83
I'm certain that the history books will eventually acknowledge the importance of this ratio right up there along with the Fibonacci series and the multiplication tables. For now, I have to be content with the knowledge that I have a sound mathematical excuse for getting beat by everybody except CA and TX.
Have a great weekend!
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
We May Just Get To Zero Yet!!!
Unregistered Carriers on 02/26/2009 - 832
Unregistered Carriers on 03/02/2010 - 796
Illinois - 96.32%
Maine - 95.23%
Indiana - 91.80%
Alabama - 90.95%
Kentucky - 89.70%
In case you're not aware of it, the FMCSA indicated today - despite the furlough - that the 2010 fee rule was sent to OMB yesterday, with a potential publication date in mid-June. That development reminded me of a cartoon I saw once that showed two guys fishing in a boat with a huge mushroom cloud in the background. I don't remember the whole caption, but the gist of it was, "I'll tell you what that means, Bob. It means we don't need a license anymore and screw the limit!" Talk about making your lemonade out of your lemon!
Now ... while I hope that OMB moves the 2010 fee rule through their process much faster than mid-June, we could very well be looking at three more months of 2009 registration. That's roughly 60 more work days. If you divide 796 by 60, you get something like 14, which is the NET number of unregistered carriers we would have to remove daily from our list either through registration or deactivation to "get to zero". That's not a small task, but it certainly seems within reach.
So, .... we shall see what we shall see! And Maine will probably beat me to it!
Unregistered Carriers on 03/02/2010 - 796
Illinois - 96.32%
Maine - 95.23%
Indiana - 91.80%
Alabama - 90.95%
Kentucky - 89.70%
In case you're not aware of it, the FMCSA indicated today - despite the furlough - that the 2010 fee rule was sent to OMB yesterday, with a potential publication date in mid-June. That development reminded me of a cartoon I saw once that showed two guys fishing in a boat with a huge mushroom cloud in the background. I don't remember the whole caption, but the gist of it was, "I'll tell you what that means, Bob. It means we don't need a license anymore and screw the limit!" Talk about making your lemonade out of your lemon!
Now ... while I hope that OMB moves the 2010 fee rule through their process much faster than mid-June, we could very well be looking at three more months of 2009 registration. That's roughly 60 more work days. If you divide 796 by 60, you get something like 14, which is the NET number of unregistered carriers we would have to remove daily from our list either through registration or deactivation to "get to zero". That's not a small task, but it certainly seems within reach.
So, .... we shall see what we shall see! And Maine will probably beat me to it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)