| Status | |
| Owner | VAN OS-ext, Nico |
| Stakeholders | Najaite Nidboufker |
BluJay is the legacy TMS system in North America (NA). This system caters multiple modes of Transport. As with the ERP Rebuild Hub project SAP TM is introduced, it is only logical to evaluate what should happen with a TMS system as BluJay: Replace or Integrate.
This question has reached higher urgency, because CLX (an important transportation provider) has decided to no longer support the current BluJay version (previously called Kewill Transport). CLX would like Syensqo to migrate to system TM Shippers instead.
The deadline for this transition is beginning of 2026.
The expectation is that the TM Shippers transition is a 5-6 month project and some of high level activities required are listed below:
If Syensqo would like to avoid having a second and standalone TMS system for NA, it would require doing a proper analysis of NA’s detail requirements. Based on these requirements, a fit-gap analysis needs to be done to have an understanding of what effort would be required to deliver these requirement.
A POC for certain requirements could be helpful to take away worries about the maturity of SAP TM. Or this could confirm that TM Shipper (next version of BluJay) is the correct solution.
Requesting CLX to support the current BluJay solution for a longer period of time would be helpful, especially if this scope becomes part of ERP Rebuild Hub project.
ERP Rebuild Hub is foremost intended to replace the existing two SAP systems. With the introduction of the latest SAP version (S/4 HANA) , the module SAP Transportation Management (TM) is part of the business suite.
SAP TM is developed as a global solution for managing transportation. Both for LSP businesses as well as shippers. Initially as a standalone system, but later it was integrated with S/4 HANA.
The objective is to have full TMS capability including the functions of;
North America Specifics
The region of North America is the most complex region for transportation to comply with local regulations and industry standards. Some of the requirements that are specific to North America (mainly for USA) are:
When trying to consider to integrate or replace with the local TMS solution, the following consideration can be made:
Integrate | Replace |
By utilising the existing TMS solutions and replicating the the existing interfaces there are benefits that need to be considered:
| When a new system is being implemented with same or similar functionality then considering replacement of an existing makes sense because of following considerations:
|
As imposed by CLX, Syensqo needs to transition to a new TMS system by end of 2025. The expectation is that the TM Shippers transition is a 5-6 month project.
Based on this information the following options could be explored:
n/a
n/a
n/a
Option A) Integration with BluJay
To have a better understanding of what the process will look like when SAP S/4 HANA system is integrated with BluJay it is probably easiest to describe it by following a (complex) transportation scenario. Below describes a scenario with two Sales Orders for one customer, consolidation in one container and it is a CIF shipment to port of discharge.
Note: Steps described are based on full manual planning. For automation see paragraph "Automation and Shortcuts".

Automation and Shortcuts
The presented scenario is a complex scenario. However, for scenarios where the process is more straightforward there are options to have automation or apply shortcuts. Where and how this is applied in the process will be part of detail design. Some options that can be considered and used are;
Decisions to be taken during detail design
Option B) Replace BluJay
When replacing BluJay, the SAP TM system has to take over the functions of BluJay. In this KDD we'll highlight the main functions that are considered most important to solve for North America. When these functions can be resolved in SAP TM then the confidence would increase that BluJay could be replaced. The functions that impact this are:
1. SMC3 CzarLite & CarrierConnect XL
Introduction
In a nutshell, SMC3’s CzarLite LTL base rate provides a neutral rating standard that allows LTL shippers to quickly and accurately evaluate shipping rates from multiple carriers at a glance to help make informed carrier selection decisions - removing the unnecessary complexity that would otherwise accompany this process.
In North America the rate base - or “list price” of freight charges - is usually not the price shippers actually pay for services. This is because carriers deliver discounts on top of this price to account for the variances in freight class, density, distance, and other factors.
Another layer of complexity: each carrier works with their own base rate and these “list prices” vary across each carrier. This means understanding the true cost of working with an individual carrier requires complicated math to untangle base rates, freight discounts, and other factors. This makes it difficult to compare carriers, and it often leads to billing discrepancies. This is where SMC³’s CzarLite fills a critical and growing need.
Solution
A Freight Agreement has a Charge Calculation Sheet. Inside this calculation sheet a charge line can be assigned with calculation method "External" (CALL_SMC3).

This calculation method utilises web services that encapsulate functionality that are called over the internet. For these charge types the system will call SMC3 to collect the transportation charges.
Some comments:
DOE National Average Diesel Fuel Price, Railway Fuel Surcharge Rates, and other index tables can be custom build using web services (similar as SMC3 integration), however most often this is solved by using Rate Tables. Rate Tables can be embedded in the Freight Agreement, but it is also possible to maintain a rate table outside of the agreement and reference it in multiple agreements.
It can be decided if this requires automation, or that manual maintenance of the rate table is sufficient.

3. Accessorial Charges
Carrier accessorial charges occur for many different reasons. Generally, these fees fall into three different categories: administrative, in-transit, and equipment.
Some accessorial charges in transportation are anticipated as part of the transportation needs of a shipment. These carrier accessorial charges are applied at the time of shipment booking. Fees incurred later often result from errors during planning or poor visibility of transportation movements.
Carrier Connect XL
Fuel Price and other index tables
Accessorial Charges
As consultant we would like to guide Syensqo to choose the correct future landscape. With the timeline for BluJay this is an extra complication. Support from management is required to make the decision making process possible. If there is a strong preference to implement TM Shipper, then ERP Rebuild should not spend lots of effort on making that assessment.
For this reason the scope of this decision document is on the process and it is not a final decision of which system landscape to choose.
n/a
Version | Date | Author | Change log |
0.1 | 27 Jun 24 | Nico van Os | Initial version |