Port Closure Tabletop Exposes Single-Point Dependency
An apparel importer sources 65% of volume from Vietnam and moves 70% through the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach, with a distribution center in Memphis. A labor dispute closes the port for 10 days; the importer has three weeks of inventory for top sellers and six weeks for slow movers. The incident management team activates, but the plan names only the port and the primary drayage carrier, which has no alternate terminal access. The TMS shows 1,100 containers in transit, but 240 have no reliable ETA because carrier EDI updates stopped. Air freight would cost an extra $400,000 for the highest-priority orders, and two retail customers have penalties of $25,000 per day for late deliveries. The DC has capacity for 14 days of inbound receipts at normal volume and a labor contract that limits temporary workers. The COO wants to promise customers full recovery in five days. The resilience lead must set priorities for the first two weeks and challenge the COO’s promise.
1. Triage the first two weeks. What should the incident team do first, and how should it challenge the COO’s five-day recovery promise?
Read the worked answer
The five-day promise is not supportable. The port is closed for 10 days, 240 containers lack reliable ETAs, and the DC can absorb only 14 days of normal inbound receipts. Even if the port reopened immediately, drayage, rail and DC labor constraints would create a backlog. Promising full recovery would damage credibility and may trigger customer penalties or commercial claims.
First, establish a single incident log and a daily situation report. Segment orders by customer penalty, margin, inventory cover and substitutability. Protect top sellers and penalty-bearing orders; allocate scarce inventory explicitly. Second, assign a team to locate the 240 containers through terminal, carrier and rail sources, and stop relying only on EDI. Third, evaluate alternate ports and routings, transload options, and a targeted air bridge for orders where the $25,000 daily penalty exceeds air cost. Fourth, give customers a realistic range with assumptions and a next update time. The COO should communicate recovery by customer tier, not one blanket date.
2. Identify the most serious business continuity gaps exposed by the event and recommend improvements with owners and triggers.
Read the worked answer
The most serious gap is single-port and single-drayage dependency: 70% through one port complex and no alternate terminal access. The second is visibility: 240 containers without ETA because EDI stopped, with no manual fallback. The third is DC surge capacity: 14 days of receipts against a 10-day closure and a labor contract limiting temporary workers. The fourth is an untested plan that does not name alternates or decision triggers.
Recommend a diversified routing playbook with pre-qualified alternate ports, drayage carriers and rail options. Set triggers such as a port closure over three days, ETA gaps over 10% of containers, or DC utilization over 85%. Assign owners for carrier relationships, visibility reconciliation and DC surge labor. Pre-negotiate temporary storage and transload capacity. Build a manual ETA recovery process using terminal and carrier portals. Update the plan with customer communication templates and a decision authority for air freight. Exercise the alternate routing annually and after any major disruption.
3. Define recovery metrics for the board and customers. Which measures show whether resilience is improving rather than just activity?
Read the worked answer
Use outcome metrics, not just meeting counts. For customers: on-time delivery by tier, order fill rate, days of penalty exposure, and percentage of containers with a reliable ETA. For operations: time to restore normal inbound flow, backlog clearance days, DC receipts versus capacity, and demurrage/detention cost. For resilience: percentage of volume with a qualified alternate route, number of days of inventory cover for top sellers, and time to activate an alternate carrier or port.
Report the cost of the event separately: air freight premium, extra handling, penalties and expediting. Compare actual recovery with the plan’s assumptions, including the COO’s five-day promise. A board dashboard should show trends over several quarters and identify residual single points of failure. Customer reporting should be factual and tied to corrective actions, with a clear statement of what has changed since the event. Avoid presenting activity such as daily calls as evidence of resilience; the test is whether flow, visibility and cost recover faster next time.