# 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.

By the WorkflowPal team. Published 2026-10-05.

## 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?

Before and after:

| 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 |

- **2+ hrs/day**: back per broker after automating check calls (~60-person brokerage) ([case study](https://workflowpal.com/case-studies/freight-check-call-automation/))

**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.

- **~3 hrs/day**: per broker given back within a week of go-live (45-person brokerage) ([case study](https://workflowpal.com/case-studies/freight-check-call-automation/))

## 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](https://workflowpal.com/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](https://workflowpal.com/industries/freight-brokerage/) and [AI workflow automation](https://workflowpal.com/services/ai-workflow-automation/).

## Related

- [AI automation for freight brokerages](https://workflowpal.com/industries/freight-brokerage/)
- [AI workflow automation](https://workflowpal.com/services/ai-workflow-automation/)
- [All case studies](https://workflowpal.com/case-studies/)

---

Last updated: 2026-10-05

Next step: request a free workflow audit at https://workflowpal.com/free-workflow-audit/ or book a call at https://calendly.com/dan-workflowpal/30min.

Canonical HTML: https://workflowpal.com/case-studies/freight-check-call-automation/

WorkflowPal · PO Box 704, Brandon, SD 57005