But delay is cheap. Not at all. Each month that goes by without proper asset tracking comes with its own costs - even if no bill was ever sent to you for them.
Every organization in every sector faces this same discussion every year. An idea for proper asset tracking comes up. It looks like a sensible solution for a very real problem. Then somebody makes that quiet decision that costs far more than any equipment could ever have cost:
"We'll do it later."
Later becomes "next quarter." Next quarter becomes "next year." Next year becomes "we've always done it this way." While the money that was supposed to be saved keeps piling up into ever-higher losses month after month.
You're not making a neutral choice. You're choosing to take on a loss each month.
The excuses - and what they really cost
"Right now, we don't have the budget."
There's an obvious reason why this excuse sounds the most sensible - because it's easily refutable. Budget is not what matters; losses incurred without tracking technology are what costs money. Even a midsize logistics company losing 15–20% of its property each year due to misplacement, phantom inventory, and downtime needs that technology badly, since it's essentially burning the cost of implementing it without benefit.
**
"We need to explore more options first."
**
Exploring multiple options makes sense. Six months of analysis and research is an approach that postpones the decision forever. The asset tracking market is well-developed; tracking technology functions properly and brings profits proven through many industries. Waiting for perfection kills projects; if the tracking system is already working at 80% optimization, it is profitable. If it is still being analyzed, it isn't.
"Our team is simply too busy implementing it at the moment."
The worst possible reason for not implementing it is that you will make yourself even more busy by putting off what is supposed to be making you less busy. Your team is busy because there is no asset tracking in place, so they spend many hours looking for equipment, reconciling inventories, and solving problems that could have been anticipated. This is not a solution but a vicious circle.
**
"This project is not as important as others on the agenda."**
Visibility is a fundamental element of operations; everything else depends on it - maintenance, procurement, compliance, staffing, and deliveries to customers. Many projects that come ahead of it on the priority list are simply the consequences of lack of visibility. You'll find it easy to settle disputes regarding bills and improve deliveries once you can see your assets.
The true price of delay - by the numbers
Cost of delay each month - mid-size logistics company (50 assets)
- Loss/misplacement of asset (15% loss rate per annum) $8,500
- Hours of labor wasted by manual asset tracking (20 employees x 1 hour/day) $6,000
- Premium of reactive versus preventive maintenance (3:1 ratio) $4,200
- Waste caused by unnecessary rental of equipment $3,800
- Total cost of delay each month $22,500 A mid-sized company is spending nearly $270,000 on preventable losses each year. A proper installation of asset tracking for that size company costs a fraction of that amount and pays itself off in a matter of months. A month of delay is another $22,500 that could be invested rather than absorbed.
The compounding cost no one mentions
Losses can compound through mechanisms that don't follow a linear pattern. An invisible ghost asset that isn't discovered after six months doesn't result in losses of only six months' worth of depreciation; rather, it leads to lost opportunities, a replacement asset being procured without realizing the former exists, and an audit finding it as a violation eighteen months down the road.
Deferred maintenance works similarly. Three months after noticing that a bearing is running a little warm, but the sensors hadn't picked up on it in time, it doesn't merely break - it breaks at the worst possible moment, takes other pieces of equipment down with it, and costs ten times what it would've had it been detected earlier. Every month of inaction is another month of risk being compounded.
The cost of investing in asset tracking is a one-time expenditure. The cost of not investing in it is a monthly bill you didn't sign up for.
"Later" in practice
For all those operations teams that eventually get around to deploying tracking after years of procrastination, there is a very predictable pattern to the experience they end up having. Within the first 90 days, they find assets they weren't even aware existed. Within the first six months, maintenance costs start falling. And after one year, the question becomes "Why did it take us so long?"
What's regrettable is never implementing it in the first place - modern implementations are surprisingly quick and smooth. What's regrettable is the lost opportunity and losses that occur during the years of inaction - losses which data now proves were occurring.
That's why AssetTrackPro partners with logistics, manufacturing, and healthcare operations for a successful deployment - in a matter of weeks, rather than months. The longer you wait, the higher the cost of waiting.
The only remaining question
It goes without saying that you know there's a problem. Chances are you've been aware for some time now. But the issue isn't whether asset tracking would benefit your operation; there's plenty of information out there supporting that. The question is, how much longer are you willing to continue losing money when something that can be done today is simply put off until tomorrow?
Each month, the price tag rises. AssetTrackPro helps operations managers move from nothing to everything, quickly and with results that can be measured from day one.
Learn More About AssetTrackPro ➡
Top comments (0)