Logistics-Outsourcing Exit Board Adviser

The mandate

The group’s principal 3PL contracts renew within a year after repeated inventory discrepancies, labour instability and delayed automation. Management frames the choice as price renegotiation or insourcing, but asset ownership, employee transfer, warehouse-control knowledge, licences and master data make neither option immediately executable. The adviser’s standing question is which logistics capabilities the group must control, which can be contracted with stronger evidence, and what must be made portable before any credible remedy, recompete or exit decision.

The cadence is four days monthly: one site-and-contract evidence review, one operating-boundary challenge, chair preparation and either committee attendance or warehouse immersion. Six committee sessions and five site visits are included. A material step-in, people or continuity question receives a response within forty-eight hours. Live provider management, labour consultation, procurement, contract notice and operational decisions remain with authorised executives.

The term lasts ten months through option design, renewal gates and one peak operating period. A single two-month renewal may be approved if a named transfer decision extends past term and conflicts are refreshed. The adviser closes with capability boundaries, site archetypes, portability gaps, option conditions, decision history and board gates for cure, partial step-in, recompete, insource, transition and controlled reversal.

The adviser has no line authority, executive responsibility, procurement mandate, employment-transfer role, contractual agency or board vote. Management runs sites and supplier relationships; legal and labour teams determine rights; directors choose the operating model. The adviser may challenge cost, controllability, timing and evidence, but cannot issue notice, direct the 3PL, commit capital, select bidders, promise employment outcomes or approve transition.

Relationships with incumbent or prospective 3PLs, warehouse property owners, automation vendors, labour advisers, technology providers, investors, insurers or potential transition partners require disclosure. A current role for a party under review triggers recusal. Other non-conflicting work may continue within cadence. Compensation is independent of insourcing, contract award, savings, asset sale, headcount outcome, automation choice or transaction completion.

Why the board wants this voice

Procurement sees contractual leverage, sites see daily dependence and finance sees an expensive asset decision. The renewal clock can force a false binary before operational prerequisites are understood. Directors want someone who has exited and mobilised contract logistics at scale and can distinguish theoretical rights from executable control without becoming the transaction leader.

What you will own

• Press management to map inventory, process knowledge, people, assets, property, licences, data and supplier dependencies by site.
• Test remediation, partial step-in, recompete, insource and hybrid options against peak continuity and reversal requirements.
• Challenge cost cases that omit stranded automation, dual running, employee transfer, knowledge capture and inventory reconciliation.
• Examine contract rights for data, access, assistance, assets, subcontractors, cure, termination and post-exit cooperation.
• Shape board gates for portability, notice, labour consultation, bidder release, transition launch and operational acceptance.
• Maintain an independent conflict register, evidence gaps, option conditions, management commitments and adviser dissent.
• Leave the committee an operating-boundary review that can be repeated before each site-level irreversible decision.

Candidate qualifications

• Has governed material 3PL exits, insourcing or recompetes across multi-site industrial or regulated logistics operations.
• Can evidence a sourcing decision changed because contractual exit rights did not equal operational portability.
• Understands contract logistics, inventory custody, property, automation, systems, labour transfer, licences and dual-running risk.
• Has challenged procurement, finance and operations without issuing notices, selecting suppliers or directing live transitions.
• Can distinguish contractual control, practical knowledge, system access, qualified capacity and accepted operating capability.
• Is independent of incumbent providers, likely bidders, property interests, automation suppliers and transition advisers.

Non-negotiables

• Can attend six Munich committee sessions and complete five warehouse evidence visits across the estate.
• Will not issue contract notice, direct providers, select bidders, promise labour outcomes or approve capital.
• Brings direct 3PL exit and mobilisation governance; outsourcing strategy or procurement category expertise alone is insufficient.
• Will disclose provider, property, automation, labour, technology and investor relationships before site review.

1. 49 words maximum. Which contractual exit right proved unusable when an actual 3PL transition began?
2. 49 words maximum. What provider, bidder, property or automation interests require disclosure for this estate?
3. 49 words maximum. When did you recommend a hybrid boundary instead of full insourcing or re-outsourcing?