The shocks of recent years, the COVID-19 pandemic, geopolitical conflicts, the energy crisis, and increasingly frequent climate extremes have fundamentally changed the operating conditions of the logistics and transport sector.

According to Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (VILNIUS TECH) Prof. Dr. Aldona Jarašūnienė, what used to be considered an exception is today becoming a daily reality. Supply chains operate in an environment of constant uncertainty, and a crisis is increasingly perceived not as an isolated event but as a permanent state. Therefore, mere declared preparedness is no longer sufficient – it must be systematically evaluated and measured.

This situation compels us to revisit the question: are logistics and transport companies truly prepared to operate in such a reality?

Old Approaches No Longer Suffice

In traditional management discourse, a crisis is often perceived as a sudden, temporary disruption, for which pre-prepared procedures are sufficient to manage. However, the logistics and transport sector operates as a complex, closely interconnected system where one disruption quickly cascades to others. Under such conditions, formal plans or isolated risk analyses become insufficient if they are not integrated into the organization's overall operational logic. Scientists agree that the question is becoming less about how to react to a crisis, and more about how to systematically prepare for it.

"In practice, most companies claim to be prepared for crisis situations: they have risk registers, business continuity plans, and alternative suppliers or routes. However, when asked if these elements function as a unified system, the answer is often vague, and preparedness is evaluated not as an integrated whole, but in a fragmented manner," explains Prof. Dr. A. Jarašūnienė of the Faculty of Transport Engineering.

Even more rarely can companies clearly identify their overall level of preparedness or compare it with other participants in the sector. Preparedness remains intuitive, based on experience or the gut feeling of managers – which becomes a serious management constraint under crisis conditions.

Is Declaring We Are Prepared Enough?

The professor emphasizes that if an organization cannot objectively evaluate its level of preparedness, it is essentially operating on intuition.

"Intuition is not a strategy during a crisis. This is where the essential difference between a formal plan and the real ability to act emerges, and it is in this context that the concept of a readiness index becomes increasingly relevant.

The readiness index aims to combine different aspects of preparedness into a single evaluation system, allowing not only for the identification of weaknesses but also for the monitoring of changes over time. Unlike isolated indicators or checklists, it assesses the organization's ability to act as a system under crisis conditions," explains A. Jarašūnienė, a scientist at the Department of Logistics and Transport Management.

According to the professor, conceptually, the index is based on several dimensions. The first is technological readiness: the reliability of information systems, real-time data availability, and decision support capabilities. The second is organizational readiness: a clear distribution of responsibilities, decision-making structure, and the employees' ability to act under conditions of uncertainty. The third is operational readiness: process flexibility, the existence of alternatives, and the ability to reorient quickly. Only the totality of these dimensions allows us to speak of real preparedness.

Marius Gelžinis, a doctoral student at the VILNIUS TECH TIF Department of Logistics and Transport Management, notes that the readiness index is not just a theoretical construct – it can become a practical management tool helping to transition from reactive problem-solving to proactive preparedness: "Companies capable of objectively evaluating their readiness often recover more quickly from disruptions, make more consistent decisions, and better utilize emerging opportunities. Readiness becomes a source not only of resilience but also of competitive advantage."

In the context of Lithuania, this topic is particularly relevant. The country's logistics and transport sector is extremely open to international flows and sensitive to geopolitical and economic changes. The preparedness of individual companies directly affects the functioning of the entire sector, and often the state itself. Therefore, the application of a readiness index could create prerequisites not only for organizational self-assessment but also for broader sector-level analysis, allowing for the identification of systemic risks and priority areas for strengthening.

Prof. Dr. A. Jarašūnienė adds that scientific knowledge must be transformed into practical tools, crisis management plans, assessment methodologies, and data-sharing infrastructure. Equally important is the training of specialists: in logistics and transport study programs, crisis management must become an integral competence rather than a supplementary topic.

"In summary, it can be stated that in the logistics and transport sector, there is an increasing need to transition from perceiving a crisis as an exception to preparing for it as a continuous process. In this transformation, the readiness index can become an important benchmark, helping companies not only to survive crises but also to consciously manage uncertainty.

The final question worth raising for every organization remains simple: is crisis preparedness merely a declaration, or is it a measurable and manageable reality? Clearly defining this boundary is becoming one of the most important challenges in modern logistics sector management," says the scientist.

Article prepared by: Prof. Dr. Aldona Jarašūnienė and doctoral student Marius Gelžinis, Department of Logistics and Transport Management, VILNIUS TECH Faculty of Transport Engineering.