Managing carrier relationships is delicate work. Yes, we need to be able to deliver our products in a cost-effective manner. That has been true in the past and will always be true going forward. However, we likewise rely heavily on our carrier partners’ ability and willingness to deliver our products on time, without damage, and in a way that meets our technical, administrative, and operational needs. So simply viewing our carriers solely as “vendors” is short sighted. At the same time, we must acknowledge that the carriers’ annual GRIs and their now incessant, nearly bi-weekly, surcharge changes, zoning, fee, and other pricing actions can result in excessive and un-budgeted cost increases, as the carriers try to offset cost increases and flat or flagging volumes to reinforce revenue and margins.

Carrier management today, in a hyper-dynamic parcel market, is an always‑on, explicitly strategic discipline. Let’s look at some of the things that have changed in the last five years:

·A flood of new carrier options arrived — and a nontrivial number exited

·Many USPS consolidation partners effectively disappeared

·USPS launched Ground Advantage, creating a credible lightweight-parcel alternative

·Capacity swung from scarcity to surplus

·Amazon entered the market in a meaningful, external-facing way

·Carrier cost-to-serve rose materially

·National networks were reconfigured, with service standards and operating models shifting beneath shippers’ feet

·Frequent national carrier pricing actions

Against that backdrop, I have seen too many shippers swing like a pendulum: when capacity is loose, they negotiate hard; when capacity tightens, they scramble to become a “shipper of choice.” That oscillation leaves value on the table. A better model is what I call the fulcrum approach: keep one foot on each side — relationship and leverage — and shift your weight deliberately as market realities change. Do what you say you will do, insist on accountability, maintain optionality, and tactically exploit openings without burning bridges.

Below are practical ways to operationalize that balance.

Protect Carrier Independence

Revenue commitments and “capture the majority of your spend” clauses have become standard fare. They are not often enforced, but they do create risk and — just as importantly — a psychological barrier when you consider alternatives. Treat commitment language as a first-order strategic question, not boilerplate to be signed in the eleventh hour.

The ability to quickly and (relatively) painlessly integrate new carrier options from an operational, technical, and administrative perspective is also a consideration. If it would take you 18–24 months to stand up a new carrier — technically, operationally, and administratively — you effectively have no carrier independence, no leverage, and no options. Those are not “IT projects.” They are strategic enablers that buy you speed, leverage, and resilience.

Become a Shipper of Choice — On Purpose

Strong relationships are not about being “nice.” They are about lowering your carrier’s cost to serve, giving them line‑of‑sight to your future, and creating space to trade value. Practical steps:

·Run real QBRs: Share your roadmap, product/packaging changes, promotions, and forecasted volume by service and geography. Ask for the same transparency in return, especially on capacity, network changes, and future pricing actions.

·Engineer win‑wins: If a change on your side (consolidation, packaging, induction point, manifest timing, address hygiene, etc.) meaningfully reduces your carrier’s cost or improves density, do not give it away — trade it.

·Broaden the relationship: Connect Directors and VPs on both sides, not just the day‑to‑day ops teams. When networks wobble or negotiations get tight, executive advocates matter.

·Pay attention to their objectives: revenue mix, peak planning, zone optimization, or specific lanes they want to build — knowing these lets you coin mutually beneficial proposals.

No illusion here: much of parcel contracting is zero‑sum. But genuine, occasional win‑wins do exist — and carriers are far more likely to surface them for shippers who are predictable, data‑literate, and easy to serve.

Market Leverage

The carrier relationships and win-wins aside, most of parcel contract negotiation is a zero-sum game. Every dollar you save is a dollar out of the carrier’s pocket. For this reason, it is critical to understand what is or may be achievable in carrier negotiations. Read the industry trade publications (like PARCEL). Talk to your industry peers. Turn over every rock you can to understand the current state of the market and your place in it. And always remember, everything is negotiable. Whatever anyone tells you, negotiation always comes down to leverage. And if you do not understand your leverage, you will leave money on the table. That is a plain fact, as certain as gravity.

Institutionalize Scorecards, QBRs, and CAPs

With broad service guarantees largely waived and networks still in flux, “trust us” isn’t governance. Create a cadence and a common language of performance:

·Carrier scorecard review and discussion

oClear, measurable KPIs

oKPIs that are tied directly to cost, service, customer satisfaction, and strategic goals

oDefinitions of the KPIs do not change over time

·Ongoing strategic initiatives and future plans / outlook

·Capacity / volume forecast by service and geography (particularly as peak approaches)

·Discussion of carrier network changes, labor and labor contracts, recent and upcoming pricing changes

·Pricing and service shortfalls and corrective action plans (CAPs) and review of progress on previous CAPs.

·Carrier’s opportunities for growth and value-added propositions

“Set it and forget it” never really worked. In today’s market, it is reckless.

Pulling It All Together

The point I am trying to convey is that carrier management is a delicate balance. The key factors to consider are:

• Your goals and objectives
• Your customers’ demands
• The market
• The options
• Your carriers’ needs and wants

Considering these variables should inform your strategy and how far you lean into one area of carrier management versus another.