Logistics and transportation
Logistics tech
Software running the movement of goods.
Logistics software is bought after a long, sceptical evaluation. A logistics head lists requirements, an IT lead asks what breaks at integration, and both start by asking an engine what the category is even supposed to do. Vendor sites answer with feature grids, analysts answer from behind a paywall, and the requirement document gets assembled out of whatever is left. That document decides which three vendors are asked to bid.
Where the answer is being lost
Your category gets explained to your buyer by someone else.
A supply chain IT lead at a mid-size manufacturer opens an engine and asks "What should a transport management system do for a mid-size shipper". The answer comes back assembled from analyst summaries, a competitor's feature page and a consultancy blog. It sets the requirement list before anyone contacts you, and it decides which three vendors get the RFP. You are not in it because you never wrote the definition. Meanwhile the shipper carries on running freight spend on spreadsheets and phone calls, and when they finally buy, they buy from whoever framed the question.
How we win this
The programme for logistics tech
Write the category definition
Buyers arrive without a requirement list. They ask what the software is supposed to do, what sits inside the core and what is a bolt-on, where the boundary with an ERP falls. answer-pages that set out modules, scope and decision criteria get retrieved for exactly that question, because most of what exists is either a feature grid or an analyst paywall.
Answer the integration question
Deals in this sub-category are lost at integration, not at demo. The IT lead wants to know which ERP connectors are native, what master data has to be cleaned first, how a cutover is sequenced and what a rollback looks like. blogs written at that level of detail are rare, and they are the writing an engine cites when the question turns technical.
Answer build against buy
Before a shipper picks a vendor it asks whether it needs one. Whether the ERP module already covers the job. Whether a spreadsheet, a broker portal and one good planner hold at current volume, and at what volume they stop holding. Vendors dodge that question because the honest answer sends part of the audience away. answer-pages that take it on are retrieved by everyone still deciding, and the readers who do need software arrive knowing why, which is a different conversation from a demo.
The spec sheet, not the homepage
Deployment model, module list, native connectors named one by one, carrier and marketplace integrations, the fleet size or warehouse size the product is genuinely built for. A salesperson releases those facts one call at a time. schema and technical work make them standing record instead, and the record then has to be kept: a connector list is out of date one release after it is written, and a stale one is read as a false claim.
The mix that carries it
Content
Answer and comparison pages
Cost, process, eligibility and comparison pages built for direct extraction, not for a reader who scrolls.
Content
GEO blogs and authority content
The definitive written answer to the questions your buyers put to an engine, structured so it can be lifted and attributed.
Authority
Original data and benchmarks
Proprietary numbers, surveys and benchmarks — the most-cited asset class there is, because nobody else has them.
Foundation
Entity and schema engineering
Structured data and entity definition so engines know exactly what you are, where you operate, and what you are credible in.
Content
Video and YouTube
Video run as a primary AI source, for the dense, entity-rich transcripts models read and quote.
Authority
Digital public outreach
Earned mentions, trade coverage and third-party citations — the corroboration a model checks before it names you.
The constraint we work inside
A saving only goes on the page when your own instrumentation produced it and the customer it came from has cleared the release. That disqualifies most of what this category calls proof, so early work is mechanics: what the software does, what it connects to, what an implementation costs in effort. Speed is the other thing to be honest about. A buying committee moves at the pace of its own budget cycle. This work changes who is on the shortlist and how early the first conversation starts. It does not shorten procurement.
Specialisations
4 total
The pitch is different for each one, because the buyer, the trigger and the rules on what may be published are different for each one. Open the one that is yours.
An internal audit flags that freight spend cannot be traced to a lane, and the logistics head starts by asking an engine what a transport management system should do.
The question deciding this today
“What should a transport management system do for a mid-size shipper”
- Who they sell to
- Companies planning and executing transport in software
- Who signs
- Logistics head or supply chain IT lead
- What starts it
- Freight cost visibility gap, network complexity, manual planning burden, audit finding
- Cost of staying invisible
- Freight spend managed on spreadsheets and phone calls
Ask an engine "What should a transport management system do for a mid-size shipper" and you get a generic module list drawn from analyst glossaries and two or three large vendors who publish heavily. Nobody explains what a mid-size shipper actually needs, which modules are theatre at that scale, or where a TMS stops and an ERP begins. That definition then becomes the requirement document. Your name never enters the process, because you were never part of the explanation.
What we would run
- 01Answer and comparison pages
A scoped requirement page for mid-size shippers: which TMS modules matter below a given freight spend, what an ERP transport module already covers, and the decision points between them.
This is the exact shape of the question the logistics head asks first, and it is the page the engine has nothing better to cite.
- 02GEO blogs and authority content
Integration writing for the IT lead: native connectors by ERP, master data prerequisites, how rate tables and carrier contracts are loaded, and a realistic cutover sequence with rollback points.
The second signatory on this purchase is technical, and enterprise cycles stall on integration doubt long before they stall on price.
- 03Entity and schema engineering
Entity definition for the product itself: modules, deployment model, ERP and carrier integrations named individually, shipper size bands served, geographies, so the software is a described object rather than a homepage.
Narrow questions name a specific ERP or a specific industry. You only appear in those answers if the connector list is readable as fact.
- 04LinkedIn
Posts in the voice of your own implementation and solution consultants: what an audit finding usually reveals, why a planning process resists automation, what goes wrong in the first quarter after go-live.
Logistics heads and supply chain IT leads read peers there during a long evaluation, and the posts are also indexed as a source about you.
What we would not recommend
- Quora. Answers there attract students and consultants, not the committee running an RFP, and generic TMS questions are already answered by lead-generation spam.
- Reviews and testimonials. Freight spend and carrier mix are commercially sensitive. The customers best placed to vouch for a saving will not put a lane-level number in public, and the reference call happens privately once you are already on the shortlist.
- Medium. A connector list or a cutover guide republished on a domain you cannot revise goes stale at the next release, and the IT lead who finds the old version has no way to tell it is old.
What a lead looks like
A logistics head at a manufacturer with an audit finding on freight spend. He has read your module scope page and your ERP connector list, has ruled out two vendors already, and wants to walk through his lane structure and current planning process to see whether the fit is real before he involves procurement.
What we measure
- Named in mid-size TMS answers
- Connector questions arriving pre-qualified
- Inclusion against the large incumbents
- Enquiries before the RFP is written
What changes
Enquiries start arriving at requirement-setting stage rather than at RFP stage. A logistics head gets in touch having read your module scope page and wants to check it against a network they describe in the first call. An IT lead writes with a list of connectors to confirm. A fleet owner asks how matching works before he lists a truck. Fewer of these are price comparisons and more of them are fit conversations.
Start here
See who gets named in logistics tech today
We put your buyers' real questions to the live models and come back with the businesses they name, the sources behind those answers, and the gap between that list and yours.