ContributionsOperationsTech

Why shipmanagers don’t collaborate on software development

Owners would love shipmanagers to share some of their software breakthroughs. Don’t hold your breath. The tech is often their USP.

What is stopping major managers from pooling their knowledge together to offer a standardised software for a suite of functions in order to benefit all clients?

It’s something many in shipping have clamoured for, but is unlikely to happen.

Bjorn Hojgaard, CEO of Anglo-Eastern, cites two main factors as to why this unified software offering is not realistic: competitiveness and the fact managers all have different opinions about what a software suite of functions should entail.

Shipping has been slower to undertake the digital transformation journey


Mingfa Liu, managing director of ship services at Singapore’s IMC Shipping, argues that in the highly competitive shipmanagement environment, the people involved at the ground level have similar competencies but it is the operating systems and software which differentiate them.

“Companies tend to guard their software and systems and depend on them to provide them that competitive edge required to gain and maintain business,” Liu says, a point of view picked up by Rajiv Singhal, the managing director of MTM Ship Management.

“What differentiates a manager in high quartiles is his or her shipmanagement software with its value-added and user-friendly features,” Singhal says.

Quite so, says Sachit Sahoonja, CEO and managing partner at Su-Nav. “For most of the managers their software is their USP. If that’s common, there is nothing left,” he says.

Off the peg?

Sean McCormack, the shipmanagement director at Northern Marine, points out that the needs of clientele in shipping are very diverse and attempting to create a standardised off the shelf software that is agile enough to meet all those needs would be a challenge.

“We prefer offering our clients a truly tailored solution that can only be achieved through intimate and detailed collaboration between client and service provider,” McCormack says.

There must be a distinction between digitalisation for the sake of it and systems that deliver tangible benefits


It is also a question of innovation – or the lack of it – within shipmanagement, something few are brave enough to tackle when interviewed by Splash.

Caroline Huot, senior vice president for shipmanagement at Delta Corp, puts her head above the parapet at this point, telling Splash: “Very seldom are managers bringing to the market in-house developments. As service providers and with the profession’s level of profitability, the development costs and the time to market are both difficult to bear.”

Kishore Rajvanshy, who has presided over the development of the award-winning Planning and Reporting Infrastructure for Ships (PARIS) platform during his many years in charge of Fleet Management, has his own thoughts on shipping and digital.

“Shipping has been slower to undertake the digital transformation journey and it doesn’t help that the sector itself is already highly fragmented, so there isn’t necessarily any one solution or approach that everyone can align with,” he says.

Inevitable collaboration

Looking ahead, Claes Eek Thorstensen, vice chairman at Thome Group, thinks that inevitable collaboration across the maritime supply chain is coming.

“We believe there will be close collaboration between equipment providers, service providers and regulatory bodies such as class societies and flag states,” Thorstensen says, going on to predict that data will be shared between owners and managers to ensure sufficient data to contribute to data analytics that leads to better performance of ships under management.

As technical solutions consolidate, and options to gain efficiency become clearer, then it is possible that some software and systems will become ubiquitous, predicts David Borcoski, the CEO of ASP Ship Management.

“However,” he says, “there must be a distinction between digitalisation for the sake of it and systems that deliver tangible benefits.”

What would be hugely beneficial to both owners and managers, argues Andrew Airey, who heads up Bangkok-based Highland Maritime, is to go deeper and standardise the vessel’s raw electronic data collection format and then require that data to be verified, stored and become a statutory part of the vessel asset, passing i tact with the vessel on any change of ownership or management until the vessel is scrapped.

“As long as we can access reliable historic raw vessel data then we can not only manage the vessel more efficiently with less risk, we can also still customise or differentiate our service offering to the client,” Airey says.

This is one of the articles from Splash’s Shipmanagement Market Report, a 72-page magazine published this month. Splash readers can access the full magazine for free by clicking here.

Comments

  1. We’re disrupting the value chain. By providing hardware and software, we create more opportunities for everyone. Hacking motors and flying cars. This is not just tomorrow, it’s now. We are making it easier for you to do what you couldn’t before.

  2. “Sean McCormack, the shipmanagement director at Northern Marine, points out that the needs of clientele in shipping are very diverse and attempting to create a standardised off the shelf software that is agile enough to meet all those needs would be a challenge”.

    When you look at the fleet diversity of the largest ship managers, Mr McCormack is 100% correct in saying that attempts to create a generic catch all management software are complete folly. It only leads to acceptance of a system that does not suit certain niche vessel types as it will be focused on the type of ships that make up the majority under management.

    Workarounds and poor support become the order of the day. All underneath the unsuspecting client’s nose.

  3. Robbie is correct stating “All underneath the unsuspecting client’s nose”
    Ship managers work in silo environment – this means a lot of kings sitting in their high castles and no one gives in for a uniform program that supports especially the Superintendent who in all organisations is “responsible” for the ship’s performance.
    Each entity will usually have their own favoured program, be it accounting, QHSE, Crewing, top floor and all to be feed with data from the TSI who at best has a relatively easy program to work when it comes to monitoring maintenance periods, purchase orders etc.

    Seldom will they have full insight to the exact financial status of the entity as this is not always 100% correct, many will not see accruals or the exact amount still available in accounts only find out when it is to late and get hammered with KPI for not having control
    Thus ship managers will have overworked quality management systems that in all is set to find ways to “fire” anyone that is creating waves – i.e. TSI will not dare to question or ask for hidden information as it is deemed not in theirs to know.
    So from this point of view Ship managers will not easily open pandoras box to owners with 100% transparency as it will backfire on how poor they manage owners cashflow.

Back to top button