Routing and planning systems are now standard across large logistics operations, yet many fleets still struggle to convert these tools into faster decisions, more agile networks, or consistently reliable execution. New international research from JBF Consulting and Ortec reveals a widening gap between software capability and day-to-day performance, a gap shaped less by algorithms and more by data quality, organizational processes, and operational constraints.
Adoption Is High, Satisfaction Is Not
The survey finds that 68% of respondents use a routing and planning solution, but satisfaction remains muted: 46% describe their experience as neutral, and 24% report dissatisfaction. These responses come from sizable operators, most with annual revenues above $500 million and fleets of 51 to more than 150 vehicles, suggesting the issue is not scale but strategic fit.
Sectors such as retail, grocery, food service, and wholesale distribution dominate participation, aligning with broader industry patterns. According to trade reports, these verticals have intensified route planning investments as SKU counts rise and delivery frequency increases, yet many still rely on workflows that sit outside the planning platform, creating disconnects between planned and actual execution.
Dynamic routing is a particular sticking point. Only 25% of companies use fully dynamic models that continuously optimize routes as conditions change. Most continue to operate static (45%) or hybrid (30%) models because customer time windows, driver familiarity with territories, and entrenched internal processes limit how far dynamic methods can go. The findings mirror observations from major last-mile carriers, which have publicly noted that algorithmic flexibility is often constrained by predictable human and customer requirements.
Cost and internal capacity remain major barriers for non-users: 57% cite cost pressures, and 29% point to insufficient resources. Strikingly, 64% of non-adopters do not plan near-term investments, underscoring that business cases, not technology availability, shape adoption trajectories.
Territory Planning Still Breaks Down in Practice
While 73% of respondents use territory or sequence-design tools, many say these models degrade quickly in operational use. Data inconsistencies affect 31% of companies, while 29% struggle with driver change management, issues amplified in networks with variable demand patterns or seasonal surges. This reflects a familiar industry tension: planning systems assume stable patterns, but real operations rarely behave that way for long.
Visibility and telematics integration appear more mature. Proof-of-delivery and electronic logging equipment each show 36% adoption, mirroring broader digital compliance trends in North America and Europe. Yet customer communication lags. Only 60% provide automated status updates, and 24% still rely on manual or ad-hoc notifications, leaving nearly four in ten customers without timely visibility into delivery progress.
Performance measurement also reveals an operational mindset anchored in cost and asset use. Traditional KPIs dominate: 36% prioritize fleet utilization and 28% focus on uptime. Sustainability indicators remain marginal at just 4%, despite the continued tightening of emissions reporting requirements in markets such as the EU. This imbalance aligns with recent industry commentary showing that decarbonization targets often remain secondary to immediate cost pressures in transport-heavy businesses.
Looking ahead, respondents prioritize capabilities that improve responsiveness rather than theoretical optimization. Real-time tracking with proactive alerts ranks high at 29%, delivery-time prediction at 26%, and integrated daily and territory planning at 24%. These preferences reflect a shift toward exception-led operations, an approach increasingly adopted by parcel carriers and major distributors as geopolitical and weather-driven volatility rises.
What Comes Next for Routing Investments
A growing number of operators are beginning to look beyond truck-level optimization and toward the upstream signals that determine whether routing decisions even stand a chance of holding. Recent trade reports point to companies rethinking how order release timing, store replenishment patterns, and warehouse cut-off processes shape routing stability long before a driver starts the day. As fleets push for tighter delivery windows and higher asset utilization, the organizations that integrate routing with these adjacent decision layers, not just with telematics or dispatch, are finding more room to absorb volatility without escalating cost.
