The introduction of automation capabilities has truly transformed conventional terminal practices. However, automation is still in its early stages regarding widespread adoption and incite a few challenges to any stakeholders who encounter the following:

1. Non-real-time Communication in Equipment

There is several third-party software on the market, providing an interface with your TOS to the automation module. What terminal operators may misunderstand is that this third-party software adds a layer hindering direct real-time communication. As a result, CHEs in the terminal yard receive obsolete work instructions that incur additional re-handling instructions. Therefore, productivity drops 7-15% rather than increases in the presence of automation. The forged real-time connection in the equipment remains as one of the most significant root causes of automation failure.

2. Poor Data Quality

Poor data quality arises as one of the most significant issues that ports and other organizations confront today when automation is not providing the expected results. It is the result of an absence in structure and visibility enforced in data, creating difficulty for immediate monitoring, and diagnosing of operations in the performance of equipment. Ports may also not be able to collect or exchange data optimally due to misalignment (or even absence) of standards, formats, and data structures, preventing a common data language. Poor data quality makes interfacing with a variety of equipment and systems complicated, costly, and risky. The risk of automation failure increases with most ports; according to the Mckinsey & Co survey declaring, they are liable to poor quality of data and the data analytics not being strong enough to operate automated ports effectively.

3. Siloed Operations

The few automated container terminals operating today are closed systems that have been custom designed at high costs. These closed systems contribute siloed operations, which translate into operations unable to share information, tools, and processes with other procedures. The lack of interoperability causes information fragmentation and is difficult to contain within a specific process, which may spiral or evolve into more issues. The disconnect between different functions makes it more challenging to contain the arising problem within a process. Therefore, ports and terminals are unable to realize the full potential of automation.

4. Shortage of capabilities

Startling statistics of the survey reveal the main issue preventing ports from experiencing the results they deserve is the lack of specialized positions left unfulfilled. Even the most experienced engineers can take as long as five years to train. Many ports have underestimated the process of procuring the required set of capabilities, particularly in planning and implementation. This alarming number not only details the reason for Automation failure but also calls for a new learning approach, such as online courses or hosting seminars, to bridge the gap of acquiring knowledge. However, a system or module requiring that long to train is an indicator the system is too complicated than necessary.

5. Handling of Exceptions

A large amount of handling exceptions is indicative of a poor understanding of automating manual processes. If terminals are experiencing a decrease in efficiency, it is likely due to an increase in re-handling of exceptions. A fit TOS embedded with true automation capabilities will have dynamic work instructions, changing in real-time if needed as environmental conditions change.

We all can realize and curate a more robust understanding of automation through trials and test cases, and it offers an opportunity to improve on the knowledge foundation required in a TOS. The five reasons have helped RBS develop a fine-tuned, highly reliable, and powerful solution that rectifies the potential downturns while ensuring that terminal operators obtain the true benefits of automation.