port – Random Thoughts from A Random Mind

Edit

As a young researcher working at the Port of Long Beach, I answered requests generated from the port staff. (As my time in Long Beach occurred before the Internet became the “knowledge search tool”, I had to understand what people needed and why they needed the information!) After plenty of, “This is not what I need”, “I wanted it like the report you did a year ago”, “how much do you spend on data purchases”, I realized that it was not only understanding their “question”, but knowing what intelligence they needed. So, I asked questions about their request (sometimes the light bulb takes a while to come on…). Surprising, once I took the time to question the requester, the better the research (more timely, focused, etc.) became. (There was a great discussion on the importance of questions by Hal Gregersen on “The One You Feed” Podcast.)

Disclaimer: The following assumes these are internally generated questions. While the same approach could be used for evaluating service consulting requests, there exist other program elements one would add beyond these questions.

The questions fall into four broad categories: Institutional, Skills, Costs, and Review. The Institutional category links the inquiry to the organization’s goals and values. One could argue these are the most important to know, for they outline what is expected, but I would argue they are not the only thing to assess. The Skills category is a self-determination about your ability to provide the answer, while Costs outline what (if any) additional resources may be needed. Finally, the last category is Review, i.e., what can I do better/different in my current work activities based on this request. (Rearranging the 4 categories results in RISC, an appropriate reminder of the possible consequences of bad/misinformed research.)

Institutional: The objective is to provide timely intelligence to support the organization’s mission. In many ways, knowing the right answer but for the wrong question does not help anyone, and researchers must guard against our own biases concerning what we think someone needs. I had to learn to ask the following questions:

Who needs this,
Who asked the question,
When do they expect an answer,
What are their expected outcomes (and by when),
Can you repeat their inquiry back to them in a clear, concise manner,
Will this require an internal review, and if so, who would do that work,
Will this intelligence be used internally or externally,
Who will review this work,
How important is this request when compared to other requests,
Into what format do you want the report (chart, text, etc.)
Is this question related to some legal request, requiring documentation, or following specific guidance goal,
While this require a presentation/training on my part when completed,
What level of confidence are they willing to accept, which can range from a rough guess to a high degree of confidence?

Skills: In many ways, this is the hardest category to consider, for one must be honest. Without this assessment, the researcher may needlessly expose themselves to having their work deemed less than acceptable over time. Some questions may include:

Do I have the time,
Do I have access to the data to complete the task,
Do I have the software/skills to complete the task,
Do I want to do this research,
What happens if I don’t do this,
Is this like previous questions I (or others) have answered in the past,
Can you repeat their inquiry back to them in a clear, concise manner,
Can someone else answer this question better than me,
Do I have the domain knowledge to understand the topic,
Do I need a collaborator,
Do I need some training to answer this question?

Costs: Sometimes there are costs associated with doing business researcher. Not all data is accessible in the format one needs, nor, as people believe is all information “free” on the internet. The researcher must understand the resource costs, but these may matter little to the person who generated the inquiry!

Do I need to purchase data/information services,
Do I need to get a license or right to access the data,
Do I need to purchase software or hardware,
Do I need to hire a consultant because I do not have the skills time or energy to complete this project is anticipated format,
Can I legally share this data, or does it have to be summarized, etc.?
Do I need to pay for training to respond to this request?

Review: After the work is delivered, sometimes it is helpful to review with the inquirer to understand how your research met their needs. And for any professional researcher, this is an ongoing query regarding “do I have the right knowledge to do my appointed tasks”. These questions may include discussions such as:

Will I be asked similar questions in the future,
Do you want to yourself/others to access this information directly without asking me,
Do you need training to access the data themselves,
Do you or I need more domain knowledge,
Did the information satisfy our organization’s needs?

So, what did I do once I better understood internal needs?

After a while, I started to see where most questions centered around “who was doing what where” and “were they successful”. Knowing most questions focused on certain topics, it was easy incorporate those queries into my ongoing data/market research activities. Ultimately, this lead to the development of the Port’s first maritime data mart by integrating PIERS into Oracle with many long-forgotten programs (such as Paradox and Brio). The datamart, using various scripts, generated quarterly market reports for Senior Staff. The information also provided specialized research studies for current or potential clients of the port concerning market patterns.

But people do not “understand the value of information”, something every researcher laments. When I was at the Port of Long Beach, Don Wylie, my boss, instructed me to include on every report “the data was developed by the Trade and Maritime Services using PIERS data”. The following year, there was no debate concerning renewing the PIERS data purchase, nor the value that the Trade Office provided.

In sum, asking the right questions, through a structured approach, can illuminate everyone’s expectations. This should result in more successful projects, while demonstrating the value of a robust internal research mission.

While attending a course on Maritime Supply Chains at the University of Antwerp, we visited the Port of Zeebrugge.

There is a saying that if you see one port, you have seen them all. Others will say, if you see one port, you have only seen one port. I would add when you see one port, you see one port for that day, as traffic patterns can change quite a bit. That was the issue here, as several presenters discussed the lower traffic in the port was the result decline after a surge of cargo moved to Britain prior to the last Brexit deadline.

After a great introductory presentation, we drove around the port, which handles a lot of autos! We first toured the facilities in the morning, while it rained, only to see it clear up later that day.

One auto storage facility, we saw in the afternoon! No rain!

Yes, typical bus tour in the rain! Notice the cranes, COSCO shipping will move to Zeebruggee, but there was little international containers when compared to the containers moving to/from Britain.

We even watched a ship pass the sealock outside the port administration building.

The question of Brexit remained a constant topic. The Port of Zeebrugge is a major gateway between Europe and the United Kingdom. Traffic through Zeebrugge remains integrated into supply chains for British retailers, even to the point of handling larger trucks, which are allowed in the UK, but not in the EU.

Different equipment pieces to handle containrs
Containers ready to go to UK
Looking into a RoRo ship

It was a great visit, hearing the presenters talk about importing fresh fruit, how interdependent the UK was for EU firms stocking their shelves, and how the port itself developed. (There is a lot of rail in Zeebrugee. They can build European block trains at the port.)