Manufacturing procurement is not like other sectors. A delayed shipment of finished goods costs a retailer a sale. A delayed component shipment can stop a production line. When a factory idles, the cost compounds by the hour, and catching up is not simply a matter of moving faster. Production schedules, customer commitments, and downstream supply chains all move with the disruption.
This is the operating environment of 2026. According to Xeneta's 2026 survey of 450 procurement and supply chain leaders, conducted in partnership with Vanson Bourne, 94% of manufacturing respondents saw their freight spend increase above budget due to disruption in the past 12 months, with an average overrun of 10%. Not a rounding error. A structural drain on margin, repeated across the sector, quarter after quarter.
More revealing still: 82% of manufacturing respondents agree that maintaining their current procurement and supply chain practices puts their organisation at risk. They know the problem. The question the data raises is why so little has changed.
The Disruption Manufacturing Cannot Absorb
The Middle East conflict, which began on February 28, hit at the worst possible moment for manufacturers already navigating tariff volatility and Red Sea rerouting.
Airspace closures across the UAE, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Bahrain abruptly removed a significant share of capacity on the critical Far East–Europe corridor.
Global air cargo capacity fell 18% within 24 hours, and five weeks later remained roughly 30% below pre-conflict levels.
This loss of capacity moved quickly from a network disruption to an operational constraint.
For manufacturers, air freight underpins the movement of high-value, time-sensitive components: semiconductor fabrication equipment, precision industrial parts, and electronics that keep production lines running. These flows cannot easily absorb longer transit times or unpredictable rerouting.
As available capacity tightened, the impact propagated rapidly through cost structures. Rates on Asia–Europe lanes surged by around 50% within weeks, while jet fuel prices rose 57% in three weeks, feeding directly into long-haul surcharges.
The result is a structurally constrained system. Air freight capacity was removed while ocean freight networks were already under strain, compressing both modes at the same time and limiting substitution options.
Manufacturers that had been shifting from air to ocean to manage costs saw those strategies stress-tested in real time, with fewer viable alternatives across either mode.
At the same time, the tariff environment is adding another layer of pressure.
New Section 301 investigations, announced in March 2026 and targeting a broad set of US trading partners, introduced additional cost exposure before companies had fully adjusted to previous supply chain changes.
Manufacturing footprints cannot move quickly or cheaply.
The companies managing this best are redesigning logistics networks, building multi-sourcing strategies, and treating supplier bases more like financial portfolios – diversified, hedged, and resilient by design.
A Sector That Knows What It Does Not Know
The most striking feature of Xeneta's manufacturing data is not the scale of disruption. It is the self-awareness. Manufacturing procurement leaders are not in denial about their exposure. They have diagnosed the problem with unusual clarity.
77% agree that without access to external market data, teams are negotiating blind. 95% agree that transparency into carrier performance and market rates strengthens procurement's role in the organisation. And 53% of manufacturing respondents say supply chain disruption has increased compared to five years ago, the highest directional reading across the entire study.
Yet the tools and investment to act on that awareness remain inadequate. The data reveals a cohort absorbing the consequences of a visibility gap in real time:
For manufacturers with long production cycles, fixed customer commitments, and capital equipment that cannot be easily substituted, each of these outcomes carries a cost that extends well beyond the freight invoice.
The Transition Underway, and the Gap Holding It Back
Manufacturing is a sector in transition.
Five years ago, 76% of companies described their freight procurement approach as primarily relationship-driven. Today, that figure has fallen to 43%, with 51% now operating a more balanced model that combines relationships with market intelligence and digital tools. Looking ahead, respondents expect a further shift, with 41% anticipating a mostly or fully data-driven approach by 2031, up from just 6% today.
The direction of travel is clear, but the pace remains uneven.
Nearly half of manufacturing respondents (48%) have increased their use of data and digital tools over the past five years, outpacing the cross-sector average. Yet structural constraints continue to limit progress. A shortage of digital skills is cited by 43% as a top organisational challenge, while 39% point to limited budgets and 38% to continued reliance on long-standing suppliers, carriers, and partners.
These constraints are reflected at the process level.
40% of manufacturers report difficulty forecasting and planning tenders, bookings, or rate reviews, compared to a cross-sector average of 33%. In a market where conditions can shift materially between tender cycles, that gap in forecasting capability translates directly into weaker procurement outcomes.
The same pattern appears in how decisions are made.
35% of respondents say negotiations rely too heavily on information provided by suppliers or carriers rather than independent data. Without reliable benchmarks, it becomes difficult to assess whether rate increases reflect underlying market conditions or commercial positioning.
The cumulative impact of this data gap is visible in spend performance.
94% of manufacturing respondents report freight costs exceeding budget due to disruption, with an average overrun of 10%. This is not the result of a single event, but the accumulation of procurement decisions made with limited visibility in a volatile market – where freight is a critical input cost and budgets are tied to long-term production plans.
What the Leading Teams Are Doing Differently
The manufacturing companies navigating this environment most effectively share a common characteristic. They have separated the question of what freight should cost from the question of what a carrier says it costs.
In practice, this means using independent rate benchmarks at the lane level, not trade corridor averages, during bid processes. It means benchmarking across multiple rounds of negotiation rather than accepting the first proposal. It means using market intelligence to provide internal stakeholders with month-over-month and year-over-year context, so that a sudden freight cost increase arrives with an explanation rather than as a surprise. And for manufacturers managing both air and ocean volumes simultaneously, it means having a unified view of both modes so that air-to-ocean conversion decisions are grounded in current, comparable data rather than historic assumptions.
Some manufacturers are also using this period to reconsider their contracting structures. 43% of manufacturing respondents cite increasing use of flexible or index-linked contracting models as a priority for the next five years, with 74% rating this capability as very important or critical. In a market where a single geopolitical event can move rates by 50% in a week, the value of a contract structure that adjusts with market conditions rather than locking in exposure is increasingly understood.
The appetite for change is also there: 90% of manufacturing respondents have at least some appetite to modernise. 57% say skills development within procurement teams is the single biggest enabler, above the cross-sector average. And 95% agree transparency into carrier performance and market rates strengthens procurement's standing in the organisation, with zero manufacturing respondents disagreeing.
The conversation that matters most is between procurement and leadership. Among manufacturers with low modernisation appetite, 53% cite lack of prioritisation from leadership or finance as the primary barrier— yet 82% of that same group recognise that current practices expose the organisation to risk.
To close that gap, manufacturers need to make the cost exposure visible. The companies that move first are those that can clearly quantify the difference between what they are paying and what the market supports. Independent benchmarking turns freight from a negotiated cost into a measurable on – and gives procurement the evidence needed to unlock investment.
The data already exists. The advantage comes from acting on it.
Manufacturers are already doing this in practice. At Continental, procurement teams use Xeneta benchmarks to validate every tender against the market – giving them continuous visibility into whether rates are aligned or not.
See how leading manufacturers are using Xeneta to benchmark, negotiate and plan with confidence:
.jpg?width=387&name=ocean-freight-shipping-reliability-scorecard--feb-26%20(1).jpg)