New industry research has revealed a striking contradiction at the heart of transport technology: despite greater budgets, resources and IT capability, larger fleets are no more integrated than medium-sized ones.

The UK Haulage: Technology & Resilience Benchmark Report 2026, produced in partnership with the RHA, found that 91% of hauliers still operate below the level of seamless integration.

But perhaps the more interesting question is why scale isn’t closing the gap.

In this Industry Matters contribution, the Fargo Group’s Commercial Director Jim Slade looks beyond the headline statistic to explore where the integration challenge really lies – particularly in complex intermodal movements – and why connecting more systems may be only part of the answer.

Why scale doesn’t fix integration?

New research with the RHA found 91% of hauliers running below seamless integration. The finding sitting next to it is the one worth an hour of your time.

The number everyone will quote from the RHA research is 91%. That’s the share of road transport operators running below seamless integration, which is a large and quotable figure and has been doing the rounds since released.

However, we think the finding printed alongside might just be more useful to the industry. Integration doesn’t improve with scale. Enterprise fleets came out no better connected than medium ones.

That should stop you for a second. Bigger operators have more budget, more IT people, more governance and considerably more reason to care. If integration were a money problem, or a maturity problem, or a we-haven’t-got-round-to-it-yet problem, the large fleets would have pulled clear. They haven’t. They are sitting at the same ceiling as everyone else.

So, it is worth asking what kind of problem it actually is.

Here is a take worth considering. Integration inside a business is broadly a solvable discipline. You can scope it, buy it, resource it and finish it. The bigger challenge and the one we’d argue is fundamentally more difficult to solve is the integration between businesses. Especially in industries where the number of businesses you have to work with is significant and potentially grows faster than your capacity to connect to them.

In the middle mile, every new customer arrives with a portal. Every new subcontractor has its own way of telling you where the vehicle is, and its own idea of how quickly that update needs to happen. Every terminal runs its own booking system, its own reference format and its own view of the moment a container became available. Win more work and you add counterparties faster than you add connections. The ceiling sits at the edge of your tech stack, at the point where your data stops and someone else’s starts.

Which could explain the survey result. Scale doesn’t relieve the pressure. Scale is the pressure.

Intermodal is where this bites hardest

Anyone running an intermodal corridor will recognise this in an uncomfortable way.

A straightforward road movement might involve two companies. A single intermodal movement involves a port, a collection leg, a rail operator, at least one terminal, a delivery leg and a customer. There is a good chance no two of them are the same business, and a better chance no two of them use the same system. The handovers are not an inconvenience in the middle of the job. The handovers are the job. They are also the points where the information goes quiet.

That is why the integration ceiling is a harder ceiling in intermodal than in road. You are not connecting a fleet. You are trying to hold a common picture across organisations that have no obligation to keep you informed, no shared vocabulary, and no shared definition of success. The rail operator’s job is done when the train arrives. The depot’s job is done when the container leaves the gate. Each party is focused on their own leg, not the movement the end customer actually cares about.

The part the integration conversation keeps skipping

Suppose you fixed it anyway. Suppose every system in your business and every system belonging to everyone you work with spoke to each other perfectly.

You would have solved the plumbing. What comes out of the tap is still data. More of it, arriving faster and better organised, and none of it able to tell you which of tomorrow’s four hundred moves is the one that will hurt.

A container sitting at a terminal for six hours is either completely normal or the start of a bad week. The feed cannot tell you which. Only a record of how that terminal, that corridor and that customer usually behave can tell you which, and that record has to be long enough to know the difference between a delay and a pattern.

Tidiness of architecture matters less than the industry currently assumes. Knowing on Tuesday what Thursday looks like matters a great deal more. Connection tells you where things are. It does not tell you what to do about it, and the gap between those two things is where most of the cost in this industry lives.

There is one more result worth pulling out 

Asked what they want from AI, operators named smart document processing and predictive maintenance. Those two answers map almost exactly onto the two things they said frustrate them most day to day.

This has already been described as a lack of ambition. I would call it good judgement. These are people who have been sold transformation before, more than once, and would now like something that works on Monday morning.

The same instinct is worth applying one level up. If a system tells you a vehicle is late, you have a feed, and you almost certainly already knew. If it tells you on Tuesday that Thursday’s train is at risk because the terminal has been running an hour behind all week and your customer’s booking pattern says the load will be tight, you have something you can act on. Same pragmatism. Applied to decisions rather than admin.

A question for this week 

None of this makes the integration work optional. The plumbing still has to be done, and the RHA’s members are right that the effort involved is a real drag on productive time.

But it is worth being precise about the kind of integration you are buying. Connecting one more counterparty, one more time, is a bilateral answer to a multilateral problem. Do it fifty times and you have fifty things to maintain, fifty things to break, and still no single account of what happened on a movement. That is the arithmetic behind the 91%, and it is why the large fleets never pulled clear of the medium ones. They were not underfunded. They were solving it in pairs.

Getting those parties onto one record is the first half of the prize, and the smaller half. The larger half is what a shared record does over time. Fifty pairs of integrations produce fifty half-stories, none of which can tell you how this terminal behaves in the last week of the month, or which customers quietly move their booking pattern in December, or how much slack this corridor actually absorbs before a delay turns into a missed connection. A record held in common learns those things. Pairs cannot, because neither side ever sees the whole movement.

That is the difference between a system that shows you the day and a system that has an opinion about the week. One requires connection. The other requires enough history, across enough of the parties involved, to know what normal looks like and to say so early.

So before you spend another year measuring how connected you are, try this instead. Take the next fifty moves in your plan. Count how many depend on information belonging to a company that does not work for you. Then ask a harder question than whether you can see it.

Ask what your systems know today that they did not know twelve months ago. If the answer is nothing, connecting another one will not change it.

thefargogroup.com

For more than 30 years, Matthew Deer has worked in container logistics. Over that period, the industry has invested heavily in transport management systems (TMS), vehicle technology, telematics, container tracking and increasingly sophisticated supply chain visibility. Yet one critical part of the operation has remained largely manual: securing reliable haulage capacity quickly enough to keep freight moving.

“People often ask why we built FCLHUB,” says Matthew. “The simple answer is that we’ve experienced these challenges first-hand. We weren’t trying to create another piece of technology. We wanted to solve a genuine operational problem.”

That challenge is familiar to almost everyone involved in container logistics

A container needs to be collected from the port. The planner contacts one haulier, then another, to check availability. By the time a decision is made, the preferred vehicle has often already been allocated to someone else, and the process starts again.

“No one has done anything wrong,” Matthew explains. “The market has simply moved while the decisions were being made.”

For decades, this approach has been underpinned by strong commercial relationships and deep operational knowledge. However, rising costs, persistent driver shortages and increasing customer expectations mean planners now need access to capacity at a speed that traditional methods struggle to match.

Availability is the challenge

Much of the conversation around digital procurement focuses on price, but Matthew believes the industry’s biggest constraint is something else entirely.

“People assume the biggest issue is price. Most days, it’s availability. The industry still spends too much time finding capacity and not enough time moving containers.”

That insight led directly to the creation of FCLHUB.

Built by people with decades of experience in container logistics, FCLHUB is a trusted digital marketplace and growing network connecting shippers, freight forwarders, and verified container hauliers. By bringing procurement into a single secure environment, the platform reduces administration, improves responsiveness, and helps keep freight moving.

Unlike many technology businesses entering logistics, FCLHUB has been built from within the industry rather than from outside. Every aspect of the platform reflects real operational challenges, commercial pressures and the importance of protecting long-standing customer relationships. That practical understanding has shaped not only how the platform works, but also how it has been introduced to the market.

Importantly, FCLHUB is not designed to replace existing TMS platforms. It complements the systems businesses already rely on by digitising the procurement process, which often remains outside operational workflows, with future integrations planned to make the process even more seamless.

Built on trust

For Matthew, speed alone is not enough.

“In logistics, confidence matters as much as availability. Businesses need to know the operator collecting their customer’s container is professional, compliant and dependable.”

Every haulier joining FCLHUB undergoes a rigorous onboarding and verification process before joining the network. That diligence gives shippers and freight forwarders confidence that every operator has been professionally vetted, helping to reduce risk while maintaining the high standards the industry expects.

“The relationships in our industry are incredibly valuable,” says Matthew. “Technology shouldn’t replace them. It should make them easier to maintain and grow.”

Designed for the industry

Matthew is keen to distinguish FCLHUB from traditional freight exchanges.

“We’re not creating a race to the bottom. This isn’t about driving prices down. It’s about helping businesses find the right capacity more quickly, with greater visibility and more informed commercial decisions.”

The platform supports transparent commercial negotiation while protecting existing relationships across the industry. Jobs are matched through FCLHUB’s verified network, with confidentiality maintained throughout the procurement and execution process. This enables freight forwarders to retain control of their customer relationships while giving verified hauliers access to new work opportunities without creating unnecessary competitive tension.

The result is a faster, more efficient procurement process that reflects how container logistics has always operated, combining trusted relationships with commercial flexibility while removing much of the manual administration that slows decision-making.

The platform creates value across the supply chain. Shippers and freight forwarders gain quick access to verified operators when additional capacity is needed. At the same time, hauliers benefit from new work opportunities and guaranteed 14-day payment terms that support healthier cash flow. The result is a more responsive supply chain, helping keep freight moving without compromising established commercial relationships.

Looking ahead

Matthew believes digital procurement will play an increasingly important role in container logistics, but only if it aligns with the way the industry already operates.

“The industry has always been built on relationships,” he says. “Technology has transformed almost every other part of logistics. Procurement is simply the next step. If we can help businesses make trusted decisions more quickly while protecting the relationships they’ve worked so hard to build, everyone benefits.”

For Matthew, the ambition behind FCLHUB has always been to combine industry experience with practical technology to strengthen trusted connections, improve access to capacity, and help build a more responsive, resilient and collaborative container logistics sector.

Swain Group

Rail freight is firmly at the heart of the UK’s future logistics strategy, with a new report from the Rail Freight Group setting out an ambition to increase volumes by 75% by 2050.

The Freight Forward report highlights rail’s expanding role in supporting domestic supply chains, reducing emissions and enabling economic growth, as pressure mounts on road networks and sustainability targets tighten.

Rail already handles a significant share of containerised port traffic and is expected to play an increasingly important role as infrastructure, construction and energy projects accelerate across the UK.

However, the report makes clear that growth at this scale will require more than demand. Investment in infrastructure, terminal capacity and network capability will be critical, alongside closer alignment among ports, operators and logistics providers.

In the intermodal sector, the direction is clear: rail is moving from a complementary mode to a central pillar of UK freight. But delivering on that ambition will depend on how effectively the industry can coordinate an increasingly complex intermodal network.

Freight Forward report

Image: Courtesy of the Port of Felixstowe

Steve Collins, Managing Director of Fargo Group, asserts that although visibility has revolutionised logistics over the past decade, intermodal operators are now entering a second stage, characterised not by tracking but by control. As networks become more interconnected across roads, rail, and terminals, the emphasis is shifting from monitoring activities to organising and coordinating them.

Over the last ten years, logistics technology has centred on visibility.

Where is the vehicle?
Where is the container?
When will it arrive?

Real-time tracking revolutionised the industry. It reduced uncertainty, improved communication, and raised customer expectations. In road haulage, rail freight, and inland terminals, visibility bridged gaps that once defined daily operations.

But visibility was only ever the first stage of digital maturity. Watching an operation is not the same as managing it. And in intermodal logistics, that difference is becoming more significant.

The limits of dashboards

Most container operators now have telematics, tracking feeds, and reporting tools in place. They can monitor vehicle movements, receive alerts, and provide real-time customer updates.

Yet many would recognise that planning remains reactive.

Margins are still checked after decisions are made.
Workflows continue to span multiple systems.
Operational and commercial visibility are not always aligned.

A dashboard displays what is happening; it does not necessarily organise what should happen next.

That is where the industry is now shifting.

Intermodal complexity demands integration.

Intermodal logistics is non-linear; it is interconnected.

A road movement links to a rail departure.
A rail delay impacts terminal throughput.
Yard capacity affects driver allocation.
Subcontractor choice influences margin.

Small decisions carry wider consequences.

Historically, these interdependencies have been managed through separate systems – a TMS for roads, a TOS for yard activities, spreadsheets for commercial checks, and manual processes bridging the gaps.

That fragmentation has been accepted because the industry has evolved naturally.

However, increasing cost pressures, stricter service expectations, and growing operational complexity are revealing the limitations of disconnected environments.

The question is no longer whether operators possess technology. It is whether that technology functions as a cohesive operational framework.

From visibility to operational intelligence

The next phase of logistics technology isn’t about gathering more data; it’s about integrating decision logic into workflows.

Operational intelligence means:

• Linking planning decisions to real-time commercial impact
• Standardising processes across road, rail and terminal environments
• Reducing manual intervention between operational stages
• Protecting margins at the point of allocation, not weeks later

This is not artificial intelligence in isolation, nor is it merely automation. It is structured integration.

When planning, dispatch, yard control and financial workflows are integrated within the same operational framework, the business gains something more valuable than visibility: alignment.

Alignment between movement and margin.
Between capacity and cost.
Between operational activity and commercial outcome.

Why this matters now

Three structural forces are driving this change forward.

Margin compression. Increasing operating costs leave no room for inefficiencies hidden within manual processes.

Customer expectation: real-time information is assumed. Reliability and predictability are key differentiators.

Network interdependence. Inland terminals, rail operators, and hauliers are more interconnected than ever. Disruption in one part swiftly spreads throughout the network.

In this environment, reactive management is becoming increasingly unsustainable.

Intermodal operators require systems that anticipate, coordinate, and organise activity, not merely report on it.

Intermodal-first approach

Intermodal networks are specifically situated where road, rail, and terminal infrastructure meet. That introduces complexity – but also opportunity.

When operational systems are designed around intermodal from the outset, rather than adapted from single-mode transport models, they can accurately represent the true nature of the network.

They can embed rail schedules into road planning.
They can connect yard movements to dispatch decisions.
They can integrate subcontractor allocation with commercial safeguards.

This is not about replacing planners. It is about providing environments that mirror the realities of modern inland logistics.

Visibility helped the industry understand its operations. Operational control will decide how well those operations function.

Evolution, not disruption

This shift doesn’t necessitate tearing systems out and starting from scratch. Most operators already have digital foundations.

The evolution involves linking them together, transitioning from isolated tools to integrated operational platforms.

Visibility was phase one.

In intermodal logistics, phase two involves clear operational control, where technology not only enhances awareness but also enables smart, coordinated decisions across the entire network.

That could prove to be the key efficiency advantage of the next decade.

thefargogroup.com

A defining moment for logistics
The road to decarbonisation is no longer theoretical. With increasing regulation, mounting customer pressure, and growing public scrutiny, the haulage and logistics sector stands at a pivotal crossroads. We can either embrace the shift to cleaner transport solutions or risk being left behind.

At Swain Group, we’ve chosen to lead. We believe the time for pilots, pilots about pilots, and watching from the sidelines is over. The shift to zero-emission HGVs isn’t just a goal on a distant horizon—it’s happening now. And we’re proud to be among the first movers proving that electric HGVs can work in live, demanding logistics environments.

From concept to concrete: electric HGVs in live operation
In response to the Government’s recent £1 million fund to accelerate the transition to zero-emission HGVs, we moved swiftly. Our approach? Practical application, not just box-ticking trials.

From our London Gateway depot, we’re operating five different electric HGVs from leading manufacturers—flatbeds, curtainsiders, and container vehicles—under full-weight, real-world conditions. These aren’t showroom vehicles on quiet routes; they’re out with customers every day, collecting invaluable data on range, charging times, driver experience, downtime, and suitability.

By September, all five vehicles will be in regular use, feeding back insights not just to us, but to OEMs and industry stakeholders who want to see how these vehicles perform.

Beyond the truck: tackling depot infrastructure
While many in the sector are waiting for OEMs or public charging networks to catch up, we’re focused on a deeper challenge: depot infrastructure.

At London Gateway, we’re investing in scalable, future-proofed DC charging infrastructure, designed to integrate seamlessly into our logistics operation. This work is far from easy. It’s technical, it’s expensive, and it demands long-term thinking. But we believe it’s the only route to making electric HGVs commercially viable at scale.

Collaboration, not competition
No single operator can drive this transformation alone. That’s why we launched eHGV – A Sustainable Future, a fast-growing LinkedIn community of over 550 industry professionals—from hauliers and OEMs to energy providers and policy experts.

The aim? Open collaboration. Sharing what works, what doesn’t, and where the gaps are. It’s not about who gets there first—it’s about ensuring the whole sector gets there together.

To that end, we’re offering other operators the chance to trial electric vehicles on their own loads, using our network. It gives them a low-risk, first-hand understanding of what electrification could mean for their business, without jumping in blind.

The road ahead
Electrification isn’t easy. But neither is standing still in a changing world.

The clock is ticking. Government funding is in place, public expectation is rising, and the technology is ready, if we’re willing to step up.

At Swain Group, we’re not waiting for someone else to lead. We’re doing the work, asking the tough questions, and building the infrastructure that will allow electric HGVs to become more than a headline.

For those ready to move from talk to action, we welcome collaboration. The journey is just beginning—and there’s room on the road for everyone.

Useful links:
Join the eHGV – A Sustainable Future LinkedIn community
Learn more about the Government’s depot charging scheme

Swain Group

At Fargo Systems, we frequently speak with businesses that are frustrated with the limitations of their legacy or off-the-shelf Transportation Management Systems (TMS), particularly regarding the planning and financial accuracy required in today’s intermodal logistics landscape. So, what should a modern TMS deliver, and how do standard systems fall short of this goal?

Where Other TMS Platforms Fall Short

Many solutions promise to streamline operations, but beneath the surface, they often rely on outdated structures and rigid logic. Here are some of the most common complaints we hear:

• Traffic sheets lack intelligence: Containers are not intelligently matched to available trucks, and port delays or status changes are not visible. Planners are left in the dark.
• Revenue accuracy is poor: Jobs split across multiple vehicles often result in imprecise profit and loss reporting, and finance teams can’t accurately account for resource usage.
• Dashboards are just data dumps: Rather than insightful, real-time visualisation, many dashboards offer static data or generic views that don’t reflect business priorities.
• Mapping isn’t integrated: Without live mapping tied to job status, fleet visibility remains limited and reactive.
• Manual processes persist: Rate confirmations, invoices, and reports are often handled via email or external documents, which adds time and introduces risk.

What a Best-in-Class TMS Should Deliver

Here’s what modern logistics operators can (and should) expect:

Traffic Sheet Intelligence

Fargo’s TopsTMS® doesn’t just display jobs – it thinks. Our smart traffic sheet includes:

• Suggested Matches: Based on job details, container status, and fleet availability.
• Exception Alerts: Real-time port status integration and rule-based exception notifications.

Mapping That Powers Decisions

Integrated mapping provides visibility at a glance – supporting proactive planning, improving customer communication, and reducing wasted mileage.

True Fleet Profitability

When a job spans multiple vehicles or resources, Fargo’s TMS accurately:

“Proportions revenue across each allocated fleet unit and captures associated costs per trunk, offering a detailed and fair profit and loss breakdown.”

This is especially critical for businesses operating at scale or with diverse fleets.

Automation That Saves Time

Why chase rate confirmations or rely on manual invoicing?

• Rate Confirmations: Sent automatically based on job triggers.
• Invoice Generation: Linked to job milestones – no double entry.
• Reporting: Custom reports are automatically pushed out, ensuring stakeholders are always informed.

Dashboards That Drive Action

Customisable dashboards for different roles mean everyone, from planners to directors, can view important KPIs updated in real-time.

Steve Collins, Managing Director at Fargo Systems, commented:

“Too many operators are still making do with outdated systems or off-the-shelf packages that simply can’t keep pace with the demands of intermodal logistics. Our TMS was built from the ground up to address the industry’s real-world challenges – not just automate outdated workflows, but rethink how technology should support operations.”

Martin Phillips, CEO of Seacon SG, added:

“Our partnership with Fargo Systems has transformed our inland container management. The transition from spreadsheets to TopsTMS® has streamlined operations, improved visibility, and enhanced cost efficiency across our supply chain. We look forward to continuing this collaboration as we grow.”

Businesses That Deserve Better

We believe companies shouldn’t have to compromise. If your business is still battling limitations from a legacy TMS or common provider limitations, it’s time to ask the question:

So, is your TMS helping or holding you back?

Discover the smarter alternative
To see Fargo Systems’ award-winning intermodal TMS in action, get in touch for a no-obligation demo. Because you shouldn’t have to work around your software – your software should work around you.

fargosystems.com