A procurement team decides whether to include you in a tender using the website, usually before anyone speaks to your commercial team.
Logistics and supply chain website design has to make network coverage, modes, warehousing, handling capability and certification status legible in a few minutes, and give tender enquiries and existing customers their own clear routes.
A shipper comparing providers is not reading for tone. They are checking whether the network reaches where they need it to, whether the handling conditions match the commodity, whether the warehouse footprint has capacity, and whether the certifications hold the right scope. Design choices borrowed from consumer brands tend to obstruct that reading, because they slow down the retrieval of specific facts.
Logistics and supply chain website design works when the layout supports scanning: coverage stated in structured form, capabilities listed with their conditions attached, and certification detail placed where a buyer completing a supplier questionnaire will look for it, rather than inside a corporate PDF or a news post from two years ago.
A map with pins on it is decorative unless it distinguishes what you operate from what a partner operates, and unless each point carries capacity, services and handling conditions. Most network sections communicate reach and leave the reader to guess about capability, which is the part that decides whether you are shortlisted.
We design the network as a structured, filterable component: sites and hubs with their services, warehouse capacity and certifications, modes and frequencies by corridor, and an explicit distinction between owned operations and agent coverage. Being clear about where partners are involved tends to increase confidence rather than reduce it, because every experienced buyer assumes some of the network is contracted.
A tender enquiry carries volumes, lanes, commodity, handling requirements, incoterms and a timeline. A general question carries none of that, and pushing it through a procurement questionnaire tends to lose it. A single combined form serves neither audience well.
We design distinct routes: a structured request path that captures what your commercial team needs in order to respond with something useful, and a short contact route for everything else. Both land in the systems your teams already work in, with the originating page carried through, so the first reply can start from context rather than from a request for more information.
Once a customer is live, the reasons they return change entirely: shipment tracking, proof of delivery, document retrieval and booking. Those journeys carry different requirements from the marketing pages around them, including being used on a phone in a yard, a warehouse or a cab, on a connection that is not always good.
We design the portal entry point so existing customers reach it immediately without disrupting the sales narrative, and scope the functionality against the requests your operations team currently handles by email and phone. That list is usually shorter and more specific than a feature comparison suggests, and anything needing a new data source is worth pricing before it is committed.
Code Industrial is the industrial B2B practice of Code Barcelona, an agency building corporate websites and digital platforms since 2015. The same strategy, design and engineering team works on every industrial project, from the first scoping session through to life after launch.
What comes up when operational capability has to be assessed through a website.
Making operational fit assessable. Coverage by lane and mode, the sites and capacity behind it, the handling conditions you are certified for and where partners rather than your own assets are involved. Broad reliability claims do little, since every provider makes them. Specific operational detail, presented so it can be scanned quickly, is what gets a provider onto a shortlist.
A map is useful as navigation and weak as evidence. We normally pair it with a structured view where each site carries services, capacity, handling conditions and certifications, and where owned operations are distinguished from agent coverage. Buyers use the structured view to qualify you and the map to orient themselves, so both have a job as long as neither pretends to be the other.
Where your transport management system exposes the data, yes. We usually start from what customers already ask your operations team for, confirm which of those requests the system can serve through an interface, and scope the portal to that. Tracking, proof of delivery and document retrieval are the common three. Anything needing a new data source is worth pricing separately before it is committed.
In most cases no, since they share customers, markets and often the same sales team, and separate microsites fragment both authority and maintenance. The design has to give each business a clear route and its own proof without pretending they are one undifferentiated service. Separate sites make more sense when the divisions carry distinct brands and separate customer bases.
The operational journeys have to work on a phone, on a variable connection, often in poor light or with gloves on. That affects tap targets, document downloads, table behaviour and how much of a page has to load before it is usable. We test those journeys on real devices rather than on a desktop browser resized, because the failure modes differ.
It can, which is why URL mapping, redirects and the treatment of existing capability pages are handled during the design work rather than after launch. Pages that already attract qualified traffic are identified first, and their content and internal links are carried into the new structure deliberately. See industrial technical SEO audit for how that check is run.
Rarely as published figures, since pricing depends on volume, lane, commodity and contract terms that a form cannot capture reliably. A structured request that gathers those variables and sets expectations on response time works better. Where a spot quote tool is viable for a defined service, it should be scoped narrowly and be explicit about what it excludes.
Tell us how shippers and procurement teams currently evaluate your network. We will set out the page structure, capability templates, proof components and portal scope that support the decision they are trying to make.