Real, Measurable Results Delivered By K.M.E. Services
Multi-Location Asset-Based Fleet
Boards, lenders, and owners prioritize predictability, control, and risk containment over short-term cost cuts. This engagement demonstrated that restoring centralized control across the fleet operating system can stabilize cash flow, protect assets, reduce volatility, and return the business to a position of operational and financial credibility.
Case Study: Stabilizing Cash Flow, Stopping Reposession of Assets, Restructuring Business For Long-term sustainability
Situation
A multi-location, asset-based trucking operation was facing escalating financial and operational distress. Cash flow had become unstable, asset visibility was poor, and lender pressure was increasing as performance deteriorated across the network. Decisions were increasingly reactive, costs were volatile, and leadership lacked reliable control over where risk was accumulating.
While symptoms appeared operational, the underlying issue was systemic: fragmented execution, weakened accountability, and loss of centralized control across the fleet. As conditions worsened, the business was approaching forced asset actions and limited strategic options without immediate intervention.
Objective
Stabilize the business by restoring financial and operational control across the fleet, protecting assets from forced action, and stopping cost volatility—without reducing capacity, deferring critical work, or compromising safety or service reliability.
Approach
Embedded executive leadership was installed with authority across the entire fleet operating system—not a single function. The mandate was immediate stabilization: regain control of cash, assets, execution, and decision-making before forced actions occurred.
The focus was not analysis, reports, or functional optimization. It was decisive intervention inside the business to stop loss acceleration, eliminate reactive decision-making, and re-establish centralized control across locations, assets, and leadership.
Key actions included:
• Centralizing financial and operational decision authority
• Restoring real-time visibility into cash flow, asset exposure, and risk
• Imposing disciplined execution across locations to stop uncontrolled spend
• Aligning operations, finance, vendors, and asset strategy under a single control framework
• Re-establishing leadership cadence, accountability, and decision clarity
The work addressed the full operating system simultaneously—because partial fixes do not stabilize distressed fleets.
- Maintenance cost per mile reduced by more than 20% year over year
- Total maintenance spend declined while fleet utilization increased
- Outside repair exposure reduced by over 80%, eliminating the largest source of cost volatility
- Tire spend stabilized and aligned with mileage, reversing prior volatility
- Unit-level cost variance tightened, improving budget predictability and lender confidence
- Cash flow stabilized
- Vendors stabilized
- Bad debt collected
- Improved OR
- Employee Morale Improved
- Order to Cash Time Shortened
Importantly, these gains were driven by process discipline and execution control.
What Changed
Before
Fragmented decision-making with no centralized control
Reactive responses to cash, asset, and operational pressure
Escalating cost volatility with limited visibility into root causes
Assets, vendors, and departments operating independently
Business outcomes dependent on short-term reactions, not control
After
Centralized authority and disciplined decision-making
Stabilized cash flow, asset protection, and risk visibility
Predictable operating behavior across the fleet
Aligned execution across operations, finance, vendors, and leadership
Fleet performance driven by control systems—not crisis response
Why It Matters
Boards, lenders, and owners prioritize predictability, control, and risk containment over short-term cost cuts. This engagement demonstrated that restoring centralized control across the fleet operating system can stabilize cash flow, protect assets, reduce volatility, and return the business to a position of operational and financial credibility.
Key Takeaway
When fleets enter distress, survival is driven by decisive control of cash, assets, and execution—not incremental fixes or cost cutting.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Multi-Location Asset-Based Fleet
Case Study: Reducing Fleet Maintenance Cost Per Mile by More Than 20% Without Adding Resources
Situation
A multi-location trucking operation was experiencing rising maintenance volatility, frequent breakdowns, and unpredictable cost-per-mile performance. Preventive maintenance compliance was inconsistent, outside repairs were driving budget swings, and unit-level cost variance made forecasting unreliable. Leadership suspected the problem was “cost pressure,” but the root cause was execution discipline inside the maintenance system.
Objective
Stabilize maintenance execution, reduce cost-per-mile, and eliminate risk-driven spend—without increasing staffing, deferring maintenance, or cutting corners on safety.
Approach
Embedded maintenance leadership was introduced with authority to rebuild the maintenance operating system. The focus was not on reports or recommendations, but on daily execution inside the shop.
Key actions included:
- Enforcing PM compliance and scheduling discipline
- Reducing unplanned and outside repair exposure through tighter authorization controls
- Installing tire program governance and casing accountability
- Improving shop workflow, inspection follow-through, and technician productivity
- Creating clear maintenance KPIs tied to uptime, cost-per-mile, and unit-level accountability
Results (6-Month Outcome)
- Maintenance cost per mile reduced by more than 20% year over year
- Total maintenance spend declined while fleet utilization increased
- Outside repair exposure reduced by over 80%, eliminating the largest source of cost volatility
- Tire spend stabilized and aligned with mileage, reversing prior volatility
- Unit-level cost variance tightened, improving budget predictability and lender confidence
Importantly, these gains were driven by process discipline and execution control, not deferred maintenance or reduced miles.
What Changed
Before
- Reactive repairs
- Inconsistent PM execution
- Budget volatility driven by breakdown events
- Maintenance results dependent on which units happened to run
After
- Predictable maintenance behavior
- Proactive PM enforcement
- Controlled risk exposure
- Fleet-level performance driven by systems, not luck
Why It Matters
Boards, lenders, and owners value predictability more than short-term savings. This engagement demonstrated that disciplined maintenance execution can materially reduce cost-per-mile while improving reliability, safety posture, and operational confidence.
Key Takeaway
Sustainable maintenance cost reduction is not achieved by cutting—it is achieved by controlling execution inside the maintenance system.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Multi-Location Asset-Based Refrigerated Fleet
Case Study: Poor Safety Performance, High Cost Volatility, and Elevated Risk Exposure
Within six months, the fleet transitioned from a reactive, risk-exposed operating posture to a controlled, execution-driven maintenance and safety environment.
Maintenance cost per mile declined by more than 22% year over year, while fleet utilization increased. Total maintenance spend was reduced without deferring work, reducing miles, or compromising safety or compliance.
Tire spend was stabilized and aligned with mileage through restored casing accountability and standardized practices, eliminating prior volatility that had increased breakdown risk and roadside exposure.
Unit-level maintenance cost variance tightened materially, restoring predictability and improving budget confidence for ownership, lenders, and insurers.
Safety and Risk Outcomes
In parallel, CSA performance improved across Hours of Service, Unsafe Driving, Crash Indicator, and Vehicle Maintenance BASICs. These gains reflected stronger inspection follow-through, fewer breakdown-driven events, improved driver–shop coordination, and disciplined execution inside the maintenance system.
As risk exposure declined, the fleet entered insurance renewal from a position of strength. Improved CSA posture and operational discipline contributed to a per-unit reduction in insurance cost, reinforcing the direct link between maintenance execution, safety outcomes, and financial risk.
Fuel purchasing risk was also addressed. A renegotiated fuel program tied purchasing behavior to improved pricing and rebates, delivering a $0.05 per gallon reduction while improving cost control and forecast accuracy.
What Changed
Before • Reactive repairs and breakdown-driven maintenance
• Inconsistent PM execution and inspection follow-through
• Uncontrolled vendor decisions increasing cost and safety risk
• Volatile unit-level cost performance
• Safety results dependent on individual behavior, not systems
After • Enforced PM and inspection discipline
• Controlled repair authorization and risk exposure
• Predictable maintenance and safety behavior across the fleet
• Reduced roadside events and operational risk
• Performance driven by systems, execution, and accountability
Key Takeaway
Sustainable maintenance, safety, and risk improvement is not achieved by cost cutting or deferred work. It is achieved by restoring execution discipline, control, and accountability inside the maintenance and safety operating system, where cost, compliance, and risk intersect.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Asset Based Fleet With Several Hundred Trailers and Multiple Shops
Case Study: Reducing Trailer Maintenance Cost and Downtime Through Execution Discipline
Situation
A multi-terminal fleet operating a large, mixed trailer population was experiencing rising trailer maintenance spend, frequent road calls, and inconsistent availability across locations. Preventive maintenance intervals were unevenly enforced, inspection defects were not consistently corrected, and trailer-related failures were creating service interruptions and downstream operational risk.
Trailer costs were viewed as “unavoidable overhead,” but analysis showed the real issue was fragmented execution and lack of ownership across the trailer maintenance system.
Objective
Stabilize trailer maintenance performance, reduce cost volatility, and improve trailer availability—without adding staff, deferring inspections, or compromising DOT compliance.
Approach
Embedded maintenance leadership focused specifically on trailer systems, execution discipline, and accountability. The objective was to bring the same level of control and predictability to trailers that high-performing fleets demand from tractors.
Key actions included:
- Enforcing trailer PM intervals and inspection standards across all locations
- Closing the gap between inspection findings and actual repair completion
- Reducing repeat defects through root-cause correction, not rework
- Controlling outside repair and road-call authorization
- Standardizing brake, lighting, and tire practices to eliminate variability
- Establishing trailer-specific KPIs tied to availability, defects, and cost-per-unit
The emphasis was on execution inside the shop, not reports or after-the-fact explanations.
Results (9-Month Outcome)
- Trailer maintenance cost reduced by approximately 30% year over year
- Road calls and on-route trailer failures materially reduced
- Outside repair spend significantly curtailed, removing a major source of cost volatility
- Trailer availability improved, reducing load disruptions and last-minute swaps
- Inspection defect closure rates increased, strengthening compliance posture
These results were achieved through disciplined execution and control—not deferred repairs or reduced utilization.
What Changed
Before
- Reactive trailer repairs/much damage
- Inconsistent PM and inspection follow-through
- High dependence on outside vendors
- Trailer availability driven by chance, not planning
After
- Predictable trailer maintenance behavior
- Enforced PM and inspection discipline
- Controlled repair authorization and vendor use
- Trailer availability driven by systems and accountability
Why It Matters
Trailer performance directly affects service reliability, safety exposure, and customer confidence—but it is often under-managed. This engagement demonstrated that trailers respond to the same execution discipline as any other asset when leadership, standards, and accountability are applied consistently.
Key Takeaway
Trailer cost reduction is not achieved by cutting work—it is achieved by installing control and execution discipline inside the trailer maintenance system.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Tractor Focused Results
TRACTOR MAINTENANCE RESULTS (EXECUTION-LED)
Scope
Road tractors across multiple terminals
Primary Issues Before
• Inconsistent PM compliance
• High outside repair exposure
• Volatile cost-per-mile
• Repeat breakdown events
Execution Focus
• Enforced PM intervals and scheduling discipline
• Authorization control on outside repairs
• Tire program governance and casing accountability
• Shop workflow and technician productivity standards
• Unit-level KPI ownership
Measured Results
• 20%+ reduction in maintenance cost per mile
• 80%+ reduction in outside repair spend
• Improved uptime with higher fleet utilization
• Predictable unit-level cost performance
Outcome
Cost reduction driven by execution discipline — not deferred maintenance or reduced miles.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Trailer Focused Results
TRAILER MAINTENANCE RESULTS (EXECUTION-LED)
Scope
Large, mixed trailer population across multiple terminals
Primary Issues Before
• Inconsistent PM and inspection enforcement
• High road-call frequency
• Vendor-driven repair decisions
• Unpredictable trailer availability
Execution Focus
• Standardized trailer PM and inspection intervals
• Defect closure accountability (inspection → repair)
• Road-call and outside repair authorization controls
• Brake, lighting, and tire standardization
• Trailer-specific KPIs (availability, defects, cost)
Measured Results
• ~30% reduction in trailer maintenance cost
• Material reduction in road calls and on-route failures
• Significant reduction in outside repair spend
• Improved trailer availability and load reliability
Outcome
Trailer performance stabilized through execution control — not cost cutting.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today
Long-time, Well Established, Mid-Sized Regional Fleet
Case Study: Restoring Cost Control and Operational Stability in an Asset-Based Fleet
Client Profile
Asset-based trucking operation with multiple maintenance locations and a mixed tractor–trailer fleet with terminal tractors.
Situation
The fleet was experiencing escalating cost volatility across maintenance and fuel, frequent breakdown events, and declining predictability in cost-per-mile. Preventive maintenance compliance was inconsistent, outside repair spend was unmanaged, and tire & fuel purchasing lacked structure and leverage. Maintenance CPM had been extremely high for a long period of time.
Leadership recognized that costs were rising faster than revenue, but internal reporting masked the root causes. The operation had become reactive, vendor-driven, and exposed to unnecessary financial risk.
Objective
Stabilize operating costs, restore execution discipline, and materially reduce cost-per-mile — without adding staff, deferring maintenance, or compromising safety or service reliability.
Approach
Embedded executive-level operational leadership was introduced with authority across maintenance, cost control, and vendor strategy.
The engagement focused on execution — not analysis decks or advisory recommendations — and addressed the full operating system.
Key actions included:
Maintenance Execution
- Enforced PM compliance and scheduling discipline
- Reduced repeat breakdowns through root-cause accountability
- Installed authorization controls on outside repairs
- Standardized shop workflow, technician productivity expectations, and KPI ownership
Fuel Purchasing & Cost Control
- Reviewed and renegotiated fuel purchasing agreements
- Eliminated pricing inefficiencies and unfavorable discount structures
- Centralized fuel strategy to align purchasing behavior with negotiated terms
- Installed fuel cost visibility tied directly to operational accountability
Results - (Annualized Impact)
- Maintenance cost per mile reduced by more than 18%
- Outside repair spend reduced by over 30%
- Fuel purchasing improvements delivered more than $350,000 in annualized savings
- Improved uptime and asset availability
- Predictable unit-level cost performance restored
- Reduced exposure to vendor-driven volatility
Importantly, these gains were achieved through execution discipline and control — not deferred maintenance, reduced miles, or service degradation.
What Changed
Before
- Reactive maintenance and frequent breakdowns
- Vendor-driven repair and fuel decisions
- Volatile cost-per-mile with limited forecasting confidence
- Performance dependent on individual decisions, not systems
After
- Predictable maintenance and fuel cost behavior
- Enforced standards across shops and vendors
- Controlled risk exposure
- Fleet performance driven by repeatable operating systems
Why It Matters
For owners, lenders, and boards, predictability matters more than short-term cuts. This engagement demonstrated that disciplined execution across maintenance and fuel strategy can materially reduce operating cost while improving reliability, safety posture, and financial confidence.
Key Takeaway:
Sustainable cost reduction is not achieved by cutting — it is achieved by controlling execution across the operating system.
Click The Image To Speak With Ken Today