Learning Launch Tools Find Effective Fuel Surcharge Methodology 

 By 

 Sachin Cordova 

 Challenge 

 I am a consultant for a Last Mile Delivery / Less - than - Truckload ( LTL or small freight ) logistics company in   Ohio . The challenge I have been tasked with is to find an appropriate fuel surcharge methodology that   will not alienate any existing customers , nor be an impediment to attracting new business . The project is   limited to internal resources , with the project team consisting of myself , and members of both the sales   and marketing departments . Other key stakeholders include company senior management and   members of the accounting department . We are focusing on trying to discover what customers will   accept best and respond to most positively . The fuel surcharge will be a new line item , going live as a   new company revenue stream and appearing on all customer invoices beginning January 2 . 

 Selection 

 After detailed usage of other Design Process activities , including spending time with several Accounts   Payable personnel to understand how current invoices were received and processed , we have been   utilizing Learning Launch Tools . We have been placing “ small bets ” in hopes of discovering what   invoicing methodology will be most effective now and in the future with clients . 

 The IBM trade show booth section of the course materials was particularly helpful in this stage of our   process , as the stakes to my client are as high or higher than a trade show attendee not entering a booth   or leaving quickly . The wrong billing approach could lead to the ending of the business relationship . Just   as the course explained , gaining “ Greater Comfort ” is crucial to adoption . 

 Application 

 The Learning Launch has been two - fold : first , testing multiple billing formats , and gauging reaction from   a group of Client Contacts on the receipt of an invoice containing a new line item , breaking out Fuel   Surcharges for the previous month . Would they contact our company and question the need for it ?   Would they not contact the company , but instead silently have a measure of resentment ? Would it   affect their view of the company and impact future business opportunities ? 

 Second , the multiple billing formats have been reviewed by a group of Accounts Payable personnel .   Would the new formats create questions ? Would it cause their internal management to need to review   the new invoices ? Would any of them create an impediment or any other kind of delay in getting the   invoice processed ? 

 These were some of the questions we asked , in the hopes of finding out where there would be a “ Big   Fail ” , to use the Corning example from the course materials . Would , and if so under what conditions ,   would customers reject this new billing methodology ? 

 Insight 

 What we have found is generally good news … customers understand and accept the need for a   separate line team for a Fuel Surcharge in their monthly invoices . Many customers are familiar with the   methodology , having done extensive business with global logistics chains such as FEDEX and DHL .   Additionally , the Learning Launch Tools and process uncovered that customers understand that the Fuel   Surcharge is linked to national market rates for fuel and can increase as market conditions change . 

 One surprise we discovered , however , is that customers have little to no tolerance for any “ Black Box ”   formula on how the surcharge is calculated each month . A simple formula , easy to understand by all   client personnel , accounting and non - accounting alike , is expected as a baseline for instituting any new   methodology . 

 Approach 

 The Learning Launch Tool has been appropriate , and has given us the proper range of testable solutions   needed to uncover a commonality in client acceptance : Feel free to add the Fuel Surcharge line item   next year , but with complete transparency on its calculation . As such , I feel confident that my client will   go live on January 2 with a new Fuel Surcharge line item on its invoices . It will utilize a simple formula   with $ 2 per gallon as a reference point , that any Client Contact can calculate easily after passing by a gas   station and seeing the day ’s prices . 

 While our process appears to have proven to be sound , and we gave a wide variance of billing formats   for clients to review , we came away with a usable takeaway for similar processes in the future . As an   alternative , it would have been better to limit the sample billing formats to a maximum of 5 - 6 . We used   8 - 10 different concepts in this process , and the surplus of choices likely took away from the overall   curation to a small degree . 


EMAIL: 
ID_NUM: 
NAME_STUDENT: Sachin Cordova
PHONE_NUM: 
STREET_ADDRESS: 
URL_PERSONAL: 
USERNAME: 

### Task: You are a PII (Personal Identity Information) Detection. Given a essays written by students, you have to identify ONLY the following:
NAME_STUDENT - The full or partial name of a student that is not necessarily the author of the essay. This excludes instructors, authors, and other person names.
EMAIL - A student’s email address.
USERNAME - A student's username on any platform.
ID_NUM - A number or sequence of characters that could be used to identify a student, such as a student ID or a social security number.
PHONE_NUM - A phone number associated with a student.
URL_PERSONAL - A URL that might be used to identify a student.
STREET_ADDRESS - A full or partial street address that is associated with the student, such as their home address.
### Input: Learning Launch Tools Find Effective Fuel Surcharge Methodology 

 By 

 Sachin Cordova 

 Challenge 

 I am a consultant for a Last Mile Delivery / Less - than - Truckload ( LTL or small freight ) logistics company in   Ohio . The challenge I have been tasked with is to find an appropriate fuel surcharge methodology that   will not alienate any existing customers , nor be an impediment to attracting new business . The project is   limited to internal resources , with the project team consisting of myself , and members of both the sales   and marketing departments . Other key stakeholders include company senior management and   members of the accounting department . We are focusing on trying to discover what customers will   accept best and respond to most positively . The fuel surcharge will be a new line item , going live as a   new company revenue stream and appearing on all customer invoices beginning January 2 . 

 Selection 

 After detailed usage of other Design Process activities , including spending time with several Accounts   Payable personnel to understand how current invoices were received and processed , we have been   utilizing Learning Launch Tools . We have been placing “ small bets ” in hopes of discovering what   invoicing methodology will be most effective now and in the future with clients . 

 The IBM trade show booth section of the course materials was particularly helpful in this stage of our   process , as the stakes to my client are as high or higher than a trade show attendee not entering a booth   or leaving quickly . The wrong billing approach could lead to the ending of the business relationship . Just   as the course explained , gaining “ Greater Comfort ” is crucial to adoption . 

 Application 

 The Learning Launch has been two - fold : first , testing multiple billing formats , and gauging reaction from   a group of Client Contacts on the receipt of an invoice containing a new line item , breaking out Fuel   Surcharges for the previous month . Would they contact our company and question the need for it ?   Would they not contact the company , but instead silently have a measure of resentment ? Would it   affect their view of the company and impact future business opportunities ? 

 Second , the multiple billing formats have been reviewed by a group of Accounts Payable personnel .   Would the new formats create questions ? Would it cause their internal management to need to review   the new invoices ? Would any of them create an impediment or any other kind of delay in getting the   invoice processed ? 

 These were some of the questions we asked , in the hopes of finding out where there would be a “ Big   Fail ” , to use the Corning example from the course materials . Would , and if so under what conditions ,   would customers reject this new billing methodology ? 

 Insight 

 What we have found is generally good news … customers understand and accept the need for a   separate line team for a Fuel Surcharge in their monthly invoices . Many customers are familiar with the   methodology , having done extensive business with global logistics chains such as FEDEX and DHL .   Additionally , the Learning Launch Tools and process uncovered that customers understand that the Fuel   Surcharge is linked to national market rates for fuel and can increase as market conditions change . 

 One surprise we discovered , however , is that customers have little to no tolerance for any “ Black Box ”   formula on how the surcharge is calculated each month . A simple formula , easy to understand by all   client personnel , accounting and non - accounting alike , is expected as a baseline for instituting any new   methodology . 

 Approach 

 The Learning Launch Tool has been appropriate , and has given us the proper range of testable solutions   needed to uncover a commonality in client acceptance : Feel free to add the Fuel Surcharge line item   next year , but with complete transparency on its calculation . As such , I feel confident that my client will   go live on January 2 with a new Fuel Surcharge line item on its invoices . It will utilize a simple formula   with $ 2 per gallon as a reference point , that any Client Contact can calculate easily after passing by a gas   station and seeing the day ’s prices . 

 While our process appears to have proven to be sound , and we gave a wide variance of billing formats   for clients to review , we came away with a usable takeaway for similar processes in the future . As an   alternative , it would have been better to limit the sample billing formats to a maximum of 5 - 6 . We used   8 - 10 different concepts in this process , and the surplus of choices likely took away from the overall   curation to a small degree .
### Output: 