Why are there professionals who do not want to progress?
Undoubtedly, the profession of Foreign Trade is an old-fashioned profession in the style of professionals who insist on not wanting to progress. It it is not known why strange reason, or perhaps, the fear of facing new challenges, new competitors or just facing their inabilities.
Unfortunately an important part of them have accessed the profession without prior training, their knowledge has been passed down from generation to generation, by other "professionals" who were not as well trained in Foreign Trade techniques, acting as mere imitators, repeating the same, again and again, without contributing an apex of evolution.
Even some of them react abruptly when they discover that there are other professionals who do not act as mere imitators and that provide new ways of focusing on foreign trade operations. An example of this is found in the treatment of the Bill of Lading.
I was recently discussing the difference of the fact that the shipper is not synonymous of exporter and therefore, who appears as a shipper in a Bill of Ladinf does not necessarily have to be the exporter.
Moreover, it should never be the exporter when the terms of sale are EXW, or FCA since who embarks is the buyer (previous delivery by the seller) the merchandise in the warehouses (holds) of the seller or warehouses ( hold of the ship ) of the Container load Consolidator or patio (terrace or beach) of containers.
The professional, with more than 10 years of experience, who had a position opposed to mine, argued that he had always seen that the shipper was the exporter and that therefore it could not be otherwise.
I repeatedly reaffirmed the logistics chain of the EXW and the FCA, in any of its variants, even graphically, but his argument was always that it could not be because he had always seen it that way and there could not be a different way.
I came to explain the operation of triangular operations that are so common in the European Union, where the intermediary, a company that buys a product from a supplier located in a country other than its own and sells the product to a buyer who is not located in the intermediary's country, being the direct transportation from the producer's country to the buyer's country on behalf of the intermediary. In these cases, who is listed as shipper is not the exporter (producer) but the intermediary.
My failure was even greater when I argued that the term FOB is a term that the exporter should never handle since he does not control the last phase of the delivery of the merchandise from the container yard to the ship, being dominated by the buyer, given he is the one who hires and pays the freight.
So the most appropriate term is the Terminal Port of the FCA and in this way, we align with what is expressed by the CCI in terms of not using the maritime terms and if it is multipurpose when the merchandise is previously delivered to a container.
I did not want to explain the evolution of the Incoterms towards the term tricoterms, it would have been a real shock.
Enough of imitators. This profession needs true professionals who know how to discern and progress based on knowledge and not the hackneyed phrase "has always been done like this" or "I have been doing it that way for 20 years".
Some day, companies will change these "professionals" for a copy that has imitation capabilities to do what has always been done without thinking if there are other forms of lower risk.
Differentiate yourself from others and form with the leader. ESNI Business School - www.esni.es - Education Humanum- Face to face training : www.cursos-comercioexterior.com On line Training www.cursoscomercioexterior-online.esAuthor: Alberto Rino – Head Teacher and Consultant on Foreign Trade with more than 34 years of experience. Partner and translation: Mar Martin | Specialist in Purchasing, Foreign Trade and Marketing