| Vose Software

Industry: Transportation
Product: Tamara
Application: Route optimization


The Corridor Was Promised for October 2027. The Go-Live Date Is Really a 160-Day Spread

A global logistics operator set out to stand up a new multi-modal freight corridor from Asia to Europe — design the lane, contract carriers, fit out the ocean, rail and road legs in parallel, run an integration pilot, then go live. Treated as a delivery programme and scheduled the orthodox way, the roll-up gave a clean 430-day, October 2027 go-live. Carrier capacity was contracted against that single date and working capital committed to it — as if the corridor would stand up on one day rather than somewhere across a wide range of plausible days.

Rebuilt in Tamara, Vose Software's Monte Carlo project risk tool, with each activity carrying a Beta-PERT duration and six discrete operational risks on top, the go-live date resolves into a full distribution — and the published plan sits at its left edge, not its centre:

Histogram of corridor go-live date with the deterministic plan, P50 and P90 marked

The body of the spread runs from a P10 of 494 days to a P90 of 654, centred on a P50 of 570 days (February 2028) with a mean of 573, against the 430-day plan. The probability of going live by that plan is just 1%, and the gap to the P80 go-live is 195 days — roughly 6.4 months of contingency the single date concealed.

Activity-Level Spread

The same simulation places every leg in time as a band, not a bar:

Stochastic Gantt showing modal legs with P10 to P90 finish spread

The three modal legs run side by side, and the integration pilot's whisker is the widest of all because it absorbs the spread of every leg feeding it. Whichever leg is slowest in a given iteration drives the merge, so the corridor inherits the worst of the three, not the average — which is exactly why the deterministic roll-up understates the date.

Where the Risk Actually Lives

Plotting every activity by criticality index against cruciality gives the de-risk map; the top-right corner is where to spend first:

Scatter of criticality index versus cruciality for corridor activities

The integration & pilot run dominates (criticality 100%, cruciality 0.50) — the merge point that inherits all three legs — followed by ocean-leg port slots & handling (53%, 0.36) and customs & compliance setup (58%, 0.35), with service ramp & validation (100%, 0.28) and the rail-leg terminal & paths (33%, 0.26) behind. The action list is the integration pilot and the slowest modal leg, not whichever leg is easiest to expedite.

Schedule Risk Is Cost Risk

Every day to go-live ties up working capital and holds contracted carrier capacity idle, so a late corridor and an over-budget corridor tend to be the same corridor. Plotting each iteration on cost-versus-schedule axes shows the coupling:

Joint scatter of stand-up cost versus go-live date with the budget and plan lines marked

The late-and-over-budget quadrant — past plan and above the $55M budget — holds 25% of all runs: a quarter of futures miss on both axes at once, because the same slow legs that push go-live out also burn the carry. Cost and schedule are one risk here, not two.

The Discrete Risks That Drive the Tail

Six operational events were modelled as Bernoulli risks — port congestion, rail strikes, customs holds, fuel spikes, weather, IT slips. Ranking them by expected schedule impact (probability × delay) gives a clean Pareto:

Pareto of discrete risk events by expected schedule impact

Five of the six events carry ~80% of the expected discrete-event delay — port congestion / berth wait (4.2 weeks expected), a rail strike or path withdrawal (3.0), a customs/border hold (3.0), severe-weather route closure (2.7) and a control-tower IT slip (2.5), with a fuel-price spike (2.0) trailing. The largest strikes the ocean leg — the same leg the scatter flags — confirming where to bypass high-risk transit points. A mitigation package (priority-berth booking, a rail/road fallback, a fuel hedge and earlier IT integration) cuts the P80 go-live by 52 days (625 → 573) and drops the overrun probability from 25% to 3%, with the cost mean falling from $51M (P90 $59M) toward a P90 of $52M.

What Tamara Changed

  • The go-live commitment moved from the 1%-likely October 2027 date to a risk-informed P80, so carriers and finance planned against the real 494–654-day spread.
  • Risk-reduction effort was directed to the integration pilot and the ocean leg — the two highest-cruciality items (0.50 and 0.36) — instead of being spread across all three legs.
  • The 25% chance of being late AND over budget was quantified, forcing cost and schedule to be managed as one risk.
  • A priority-berth and hedging package was approved on its tail-clipping effect, cutting budget-overrun probability from 25% to 3%.

Tamara Functionality Used

  • Monte Carlo schedule simulation over the corridor network, with Beta-PERT durations and parallel-leg merge logic.
  • Finish-date histogram rendering the go-live commitment as a distribution rather than a point.
  • Discrete risk-event modelling (Bernoulli occurrence × Triangular impact) for port, rail, customs, fuel and weather risks.
  • Criticality and cruciality analysis naming the integration pilot and the ocean leg as the governing drivers.
  • Joint cost–schedule analysis quantifying the probability of being late and over budget at once.
  • Scenario comparison quantifying the mitigation package's before/after impact on both the P80 go-live and the overrun probability.

A new corridor is not a launch date; it is a distribution set by its slowest leg and its merge. Tamara is what turns "when can we go live?" into a probability operations and finance can both commit to.