Case study
How a ~60-person brokerage gave brokers 2+ hours a day back
At a ~60-person freight brokerage, the biggest drain wasn’t finding loads. It was 40+ calls per broker per day on status checks, appointments and carrier follow-ups. We automated status tracking and carrier communication. Brokers got 2+ hours a day back, and customer satisfaction went up because updates were faster and more consistent.
- Trigger
- AI step
- Person decides
- Your systems
- TriggerLoad in transit
- AI stepStatus requests and appointment confirmations go out
- Your systemsReplies logged automatically
- Your systemsCustomer gets a consistent update
Exception path Late, missed appointment or no response: routed to a broker
- back per broker after automating check calls
- 2+ hrs/day
At a glance
- Client
- A ~60-person freight brokerage (anonymized)
- Problem
- 40+ calls per broker per day on status checks, appointments and carrier follow-ups
- What we built
- Automated status tracking and carrier communication, with exceptions routed to brokers
- Results
- 2+ hours a day back per broker; customer satisfaction up
The client is anonymized. The figures are the real before-and-after numbers from the project, reported as-is and not rounded up.
What was the problem?
Check calls are necessary and almost never need a broker’s judgment. At this brokerage they had grown to 40+ calls per broker per day, crowding out the work that does: covering loads and looking after customers.
What did we build?
Automated status tracking and carrier communication. Status requests, appointment confirmations and follow-ups go out and get logged automatically, and customers receive consistent updates. Exceptions go to a broker.
What changed?
| Measure | Before | After |
|---|---|---|
| Check calls per broker | 40+ calls per broker per day | Handled automatically; brokers handle exceptions |
| Broker time | Spent on check calls | 2+ hours a day back per broker |
| Customer updates | Whenever a broker got to it | Faster and more consistent |
- back per broker after automating check calls2+ hrs/day~60-person brokerage case study: back per broker after automating check calls
A second brokerage. The audit found brokers spending about 3 hours a day on carrier sourcing, check calls and TMS data entry. Three workflows on the existing TMS and load boards gave those hours back within a week. That is a separate client, a 45-person freight brokerage, and its numbers are reported on their own.
- per broker given back within a week of go-live~3 hrs/day45-person brokerage case study: per broker given back within a week of go-live
What should you know before building something similar?
- Define what counts as an exception (late, missed appointment, no response) before go-live. That list decides what still reaches a broker.
- Keep carrier messages short and from your own addresses. Carriers respond to the brokerage they know.
- Send customers the same update format every time. Consistency is a large part of why satisfaction improves.
Could this work for you?
If your team does similar work by hand, probably. Request a free workflow audit and you get a one-page plan: the 3 tasks worth automating first, hours saved, and what a build would cost. See also AI automation for freight brokerages and AI workflow automation.