Port call and vessel service coordination system
The ship's agent, terminal and service providers combine the times of the same visit. Predicted arrivals are visible, agreements approved, and preparations made by participants.
The ship's predicted arrival is confused with the requested service time, and the change is inconsistent with the berth and dependent service readiness. Participants prepare for a different plan; the ship or service team waits for the missing condition.
How the solution works
- The visit combines participants, service locations and required services.
- Each system in charge of the data provides a forecast, requested time, or confirmation of readiness.
- The change raises the dependencies affected and the need for re-alignment.
- Authorised participants adopt an updated plan; unconfirmed parts remain visible.
- The coordinator compares the planned and actual progress of the visit and the recorded reasons for the wait.
Key challenges
- Arrival time and preparation not reliable enough
Solution capabilities
Ship arrival and service times
The location, source of information and whether the time is planned, requested, or already registered are indicated at the time. Separately tracked arrivals to port accesses and to the quay.
Quay dependencies
Getting a designated berth readiness and an estimate of the end of previous service by the operator responsible for it.
Service readiness
The required work of pilots, tugs or other participants has an availability and reception status when that service is applied.
Adaptation of the amendment
Updated time indicates which participant needs to approve the new plan; delivery of the message is not acceptance of the service.
History of Visit Events
The fact and its correction preserves the source and the previous record so that the wait is analyzed according to the known course.
Business context
- Arrival time and preparation not reliable enough
- The ship's predicted arrival is confused with the requested service time, and the change is inconsistent with the berth and dependent service readiness. Participants prepare for a different plan; the ship or service team waits for the missing condition.
- Visiters plan according to the time agreed
- It is important for the ship's agent and customer to distinguish the arrival forecast from the approved service agreement. Linked berths and service readiness allow for coordination of the change with affected participants. This facilitates information for the customer and reduces the likelihood of waiting due to uncoordinated actions.
Core features
- Ship arrival and service times
- Quay dependencies
- Service readiness
- Adaptation of the amendment
- History of Visit Events
Key integrations
- Vessel or Agent Source
- Visit data and location-specific time forecast and preparation.
- Terminal and quay plan
- Approved service location, its readiness and the dependence of previous visit departure.
- Port and service participants
- The access granted provides the necessary permissions, admissions, and relevant restrictions.
- Sources of visit facts
- Actual time of arrival, start and end of the ship according to agreed event definitions.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Waiting caused by uncoordinated preparation
6–25%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 20-50% of waiting caused by missing information or unclear responsibility can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 30-50%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
The waiting time assigned to the confirmed cause is measured by a comparable visit type.
Work on coordinating the change of visit
12–36%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 30-60% of manual data entry and handover work can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
The coordinator's active time is compared to receiving the required answers, separately from external waiting.
Part of negative feedback on ship service coordination
4–15%Decreasing
Indicative assumption: 15-30% of negative reviews relate to untransferred changes in the ship's visit times. The decision could reduce this share by 25-50%. This is a scenario of potential; assumptions need to be verified by feedback collected by the company.
When a company starts collecting feedback, negative feedback about the coordination of ship service is calculated from all assessments received on the subject. The same method of assessment applies before and after deployment and similar customer groups are compared. Without initial data, the actual change is not determined.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- Several service providers are involved in the ship's service, for whom different arrival and start times are important.
- When the plan is changed, the team does not see if all responsible providers have confirmed new times.
Implementation requirements
For ship service, participants align the sources of predicted, requested, and confirmed times. Coaster and dependent service readiness must change the overall plan with clear acceptance responsibilities and information access limits.
Further development options
- Inclusion of additional visit services in the overall alignment
- Coordinated arrival scenarios where participant processes and contracts allow for a plan change