Loading...

Explain OTIF Declines Faster

When OTIF or OTD drops, the Logistics & Distribution Manager has to manually pull shipment performance from the TMS, compare it to carrier SLA scorecards, and check market transport indices for capacity and fuel pressure. That means stitching together lane-by-lane shipment data, carrier tender acceptance and on-time pickup trends, and regional capacity signals just to explain whether the problem is carrier execution, mode mix, warehouse dwell, or market tightness. The candidate states this briefing process takes hours rather than days with the workflow; without it, the manager is spending that time assembling evidence instead of deciding how to recover service and escalate with carriers or 3PLs.

OTIF Drop Driver Attribution Brief is a Decision Intelligence workflow designed for the Logistics & Distribution Manager. It automates execution-layer work such as cross-domain querying, period-over-period OTIF decomposition, signal triangulation across SLA and market data, ranked driver calculation, and briefing-format narrative assembly; the candidate estimates about 70% of the execution layer is automated, freeing roughly 35% of team time overall. The manager gets back time for corrective action decisions, carrier conversations, and service trade-off judgment.

Interactive Demo

See the Decision Intelligence Workflow in Action

This workflow handles a compound cognitive task: quantify where OTIF moved, test which operating signals best explain the change, and assemble the result into a defensible escalation narrative. It starts with shipment-level performance by lane, carrier, and mode, then checks whether the decline aligns with tender lead time, dwell, carrier SLA deterioration, or broader market capacity pressure.

👤
Designed for line-of-business leaders — specifically the Logistics & Distribution Manager who is accountable for service performance but should not have to manually reconcile TMS records, carrier scorecards, and external market signals every time OTIF slips. The workflow turns a recurring analysis burden into a repeatable operational brief. Why this matters: What line-of-business leaders actually need from decision workflows →
Decision Intelligence Playground · OTIF Driver Attribution Brief
KWF Runtime
Start with an example
See the OTIF brief run on your own data.
In a working session, we'll map your shipment, carrier, and market inputs to the workflow and walk through how the ranked driver brief is generated. We'll show you this workflow running on your Databricks environment, review the evidence logic step by step, and identify where your team would use the output in carrier management and service reviews.
Schedule a Databricks Session
How It Works

What the Decision Intelligence Workflow Does

This workflow handles a compound cognitive task: quantify where OTIF moved, test which operating signals best explain the change, and assemble the result into a defensible escalation narrative. It starts with shipment-level performance by lane, carrier, and mode, then checks whether the decline aligns with tender lead time, dwell, carrier SLA deterioration, or broader market capacity pressure.

Click any step below to see the business logic, data query, and sample output for that step of the workflow.

Pre-specified logic, not runtime guessing — Most AI agent frameworks work by figuring things out on the fly. These Decision Intelligence workflows work differently. The Knowledge Work Foundry analyzes the cognitive labor pattern before deployment and encodes the decision logic directly into the configuration — which tables to query, which thresholds define a breach, how signals are ranked, and what the output artifact should contain. That analysis happens once. By the time the workflow runs, there is nothing left to figure out.
1
Find Variance
Compares current-period OTIF by lane, carrier, and mode against the baseline and isolates the shipment pockets contributing most to the decline.
2
Test Cause
Checks whether SLA deterioration lines up with regional market capacity pressure or with carrier-specific execution problems.
3
Build Brief
Ranks the most credible OTIF drivers and formats them into an escalation-ready narrative with evidence and next actions.
↑ click a step to explore the logic, query, and output
1
Step Detail

                      

                    

The output is a ranked Driver Attribution Brief that shows the OTIF deviation, the top contributing lane × carrier × mode pockets, evidence for each driver, and recommended next actions. It can also be used as the standard narrative for S&OP reviews and carrier or 3PL escalations.

What this workflow does NOT do: It does not decide whether to escalate a service issue into a formal vendor contract review, determine how much volume to permanently move between carriers, set tendering policy or mode strategy for the network, approve expedite spend, or choose which customer accounts should be contacted first about service risk.
Under the Hood

Data Warehouse Integration

The workflow is designed for warehouse-resident operational data that already exists across transportation and partner reporting systems. It queries shipment execution data, carrier SLA scorecards, and market transport indices together so the analysis can be reproduced without rebuilding the same spreadsheet package for every exception review.

That cross-domain join matters because OTIF declines are rarely visible in one source alone: shipment timing lives in the TMS, carrier performance lives in the scorecard, and capacity pressure shows up in external market indices.

Source system: Transportation Management System (TMS)  ·  Domain: Logistics Operations
Role in this workflow: This table provides the shipment-level operating record used to calculate current and baseline OTIF by lane, carrier, and mode. It also supplies tender lead hours and dwell hours, which are the first execution signals used to test whether a service decline is linked to planning, facility delay, or carrier execution.
CREATE TABLE pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.tms_shipments (
  shipment_id STRING,
  region_id STRING,
  origin_dc_id STRING,
  dest_city STRING,
  lane_id STRING,
  carrier_id STRING,
  mode STRING,
  ship_date DATE,
  promised_delivery_date DATE,
  actual_delivery_date DATE,
  on_time_flag BOOLEAN,
  tender_lead_hours DOUBLE,
  dwell_hours DOUBLE
);

SELECT
  region_id,
  lane_id,
  carrier_id,
  mode,
  SUM(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{start_date}' AND string">'{end_date}' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS curr_shipments,
  AVG(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{start_date}' AND string">'{end_date}' THEN CAST(on_time_flag AS INT) END) AS curr_otif,
  SUM(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{compare_start_date}' AND string">'{compare_end_date}' THEN 1 ELSE 0 END) AS base_shipments,
  AVG(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{compare_start_date}' AND string">'{compare_end_date}' THEN CAST(on_time_flag AS INT) END) AS base_otif,
  AVG(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{start_date}' AND string">'{end_date}' THEN tender_lead_hours END) AS curr_tender_lead_hrs,
  AVG(CASE WHEN ship_date BETWEEN string">'{start_date}' AND string">'{end_date}' THEN dwell_hours END) AS curr_dwell_hrs
FROM pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.tms_shipments
WHERE region_id = string">'{region_id}'
  AND ship_date BETWEEN string">'{compare_start_date}' AND string">'{end_date}'
GROUP BY region_id, lane_id, carrier_id, mode
HAVING curr_shipments > 0;
Source system: Carrier / 3PL performance scorecard reporting  ·  Domain: Carrier Management
Role in this workflow: This table provides the contractual and operational service metrics needed to determine whether a carrier's performance actually deteriorated between periods. It is the evidence base for distinguishing lower OTIF caused by acceptance, pickup, or delivery breakdowns from OTIF changes driven by internal warehouse conditions.
CREATE TABLE pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.carrier_sla_scorecard (
  carrier_id STRING,
  region_id STRING,
  lane_id STRING,
  report_date DATE,
  tender_accept_rate DOUBLE,
  on_time_pickup_rate DOUBLE,
  on_time_delivery_rate DOUBLE,
  claims_rate DOUBLE
);

Source system: External transportation market index feed  ·  Domain: Market Intelligence
Role in this workflow: This table adds regional capacity and fuel context so the workflow can test whether weaker performance occurred in a tighter freight market. It helps the manager avoid over-blaming a carrier when the region is under broad capacity stress, while still identifying cases where one carrier underperforms peers facing the same market conditions.
CREATE TABLE pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.market_transport_indices (
  region_id STRING,
  index_date DATE,
  capacity_index DOUBLE,
  fuel_index DOUBLE
);

SELECT
  s.carrier_id,
  s.lane_id,
  s.region_id,
  s.report_date,
  s.tender_accept_rate,
  s.on_time_pickup_rate,
  s.on_time_delivery_rate,
  m.capacity_index,
  m.fuel_index
FROM pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.carrier_sla_scorecard s
JOIN pura_vida_foods_dev.logistics_dw.market_transport_indices m
  ON m.region_id = s.region_id
 AND m.index_date = s.report_date
WHERE s.region_id = string">'{region_id}'
  AND s.report_date IN (string">'{compare_end_date}',string">'{end_date}');
Cognitive Labor Analysis

Where the Work Sits in the Labor Stack

Not all cognitive labor is equally automatable. The KWF analysis breaks the workflow into three layers — execution, judgment, and strategic — and maps each step to the layer it belongs to. Execution-layer work is automatable. Judgment and strategic work stays with the manager.

Execution 50% Judgment 35% Strategic 15%
Execution Layer
50%
The execution layer retrieves TMS, SLA, and market data, calculates OTIF variance and corroborating signal changes, ranks likely drivers, and formats the result into a briefing artifact.
Judgment Layer
35%
Judgment stays with the manager to interpret whether the evidence is sufficient, choose the right corrective lever, and communicate expectations to operations, carriers, and commercial stakeholders.
Strategic Layer
15%
Strategic work remains with leadership to renegotiate SLAs, change committed-capacity structures, and set longer-term lane, mode, and service-cost policies.
Value Model

The Business Case for Automation

Time Recovered
35% team time freed
Based on the candidate's value model, automating about 70% of execution work frees roughly 35% of total time across the managers and analysts doing OTIF exception reviews.
Annual Savings
$449k net benefit
The candidate's conservative team-level model estimates about $489k in value uplift and roughly $449k net annual benefit after workflow cost assumptions.
Strategic Upside
Faster Carrier Accountability
The strategic upside is a consistent, evidence-backed escalation narrative that reduces misattribution, avoids unnecessary expedites, and protects retailer service performance.
Kill Question: Without this workflow, the manager still has to explain the OTIF decline by hand: pull shipment detail from the TMS, compare baseline and current lane performance, look up carrier acceptance and on-time pickup trends, check whether regional capacity tightened, and then assemble a narrative for Sales and the carrier. The result is slower escalation, more debate over root cause, and more time spent proving the issue than correcting it.

Primary Valuation Metric: % of OTIF exception reviews where the brief is used as the single source of truth for the escalation narrative