SEAHORSE | THE MARITIME SYMBOL

Shipping is the backbone of global trade, yet it operates under the most comprehensive energy-efficiency framework imposed on any industrial sector. The IMO’s EEXI, CII, SEEMP and EEOI are often described as four separate instruments — but in truth they form one operating ecosystem. When understood together, they reveal the physics of compliance, the psychology of crew execution and the economics of carbon performance. In today’s paused-NZF environment, these existing instruments remain the centre of gravity for compliance and commercial performance. With the extraordinary MEPC session adjourned and earliest potential changes not entering into force before 2028, industry attention is reverting to tight execution of the current toolkit—refining EEXI controls onboard, managing CII as an operating carbon budget, running a living SEEMP Part III with verifiable corrective actions, and using EEOI as the voyage-level diagnostic that underpins trust. As policy discussions continue, pressure may grow to tighten or broaden the instruments already in force (including exploration of well-to-wake elements within CII). In parallel, regional regimes (notably EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and the emerging UK ETS scope) act as near-term price and intensity signals, raising the premium on evidence integrity, ship–shore alignment and audit-ready data. For owners and crews alike, mastery now lies in orchestrating design limits, operational behaviour and verifiable records as one feedback loop - so that every tonne saved is measured, defensible and bankable. Overview of the ecosystem surrounding EEXI, SEEMP, CII, and EEOI in maritime operations, highlighting regulations and guidelines for energy efficiency and carbon intensity, aimed at enhancing compliance and performance in international shipping. LET’S DECODE 1. EEXI — The Design Floor The Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index defines a ship’s design baseline. It expresses how efficiently the vessel is built to perform at a fixed engine power and configuration; hull form, propeller and machinery settings set the technical ceiling. EEXI is a mandatory certification that applies to existing ships of 400 GT or more on international voyages, and a new or revised attained EEXI must be calculated when the ship is technically altered or newly built such that design or propulsion parameters change materially. A vessel without an EEXI certification may not sail. In practice, compliance pathways remain unchanged and are predominantly achieved via Engine Power Limitation (EPL) or Shaft Power Limitation (ShaPoLi). These measures must be governed by an approved Onboard Management Manual (OMM) that sets out the authorisation, release and re-engagement steps for any temporary override, together with mandatory override logging and supporting records. The regime applies as is to ships ≥400 GT and is actively enforced by flags and recognised organisations. EEXI Applied A vessel that meets EEXI on paper (its design and documented limits look compliant), may operate very differently in reality if its day-to-day controls and evidence don’t match that design. That misalignment erodes audit confidence and charter value, and it raises the likelihood of CII slippage later in the year. It is imperative to pair EEXI changes with SEEMP controls and transparent EEOI evidence so performance and documentation move together. Audits are placing heightened emphasis on practice versus documents - especially the fidelity of override procedures, the completeness of evidence trails (OMM entries, shaft-power data, noon reports, VDR extracts) and the ship-shore follow-up on any deviations. To stabilise CII outcomes while staying within the EEXI envelope, owners are increasingly deploying targeted hydrodynamic retrofits: eg. propeller re-optimisation, energy-saving ducts, pre-swirl/boss-cap fins, and bulb/bow adjustments. Properly matched to the vessel’s trade and hull form, retrofits have achieved segment-dependent main-engine fuel reductions in the order of 0.5–6%+. All such measures should be codified in SEEMP, with EEOI-based validation to evidence realised savings and ensure operational behaviour and documentation remain aligned. 2. SEEMP — The Playbook The Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (SEEMP), a mandatory regulation, is the procedural heart of compliance - plan, do, record, improve. Put together, the three parts form one closed-loop system - plan how you will run (Part I), prove what actually happened (Part II), and use that verified data to manage, correct, and improve your CII “over time” (Part III). Part I:  energy-efficiency management for ships 400 GT or more. Part II:  the plan for IMO DCS fuel oil consumption data (including how fuel is measured/verified and required parameters such as distance travelled and hours underway) for ships 5,000 GT or more. Part III:  CII implementation for ships 5,000 GT or more, requiring the attained annual CII, required CIIs for the next three years, an implementation plan, self-evaluation/ continuous improvement, and a plan of corrective actions where applicable. With the NZF adjourned, SEEMP Part III serves as the real-time operating system for carbon performance—managing monthly targets, rolling forecasts, and pre-set corrective triggers (e.g. deviations from the CII glidepath or biofouling flags)—instead of being a static document. Verification standards call for rigorous version control (complete change logs and approvals), defined roles and accountabilities, and auditable links connecting procedures, data, and decisions. Operationally, SEEMP should set out how EEXI limits are honoured, covering EPL/ShaPoLi override authority, logging and review and how CII is run as an in-year budget. With EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and UK ETS acting as immediate price/intensity signals, companies are building allowance and penalty exposure—as well as regional reporting specifics—into SEEMP planning and periodic reviews to align commercial and compliance drivers. SEEMP Applied A robust Part III turns regulatory burden into predictable operations and better commercial terms. An executable, up-to-date SEEMP Part III (clear roles, data trails, corrective-action triggers) stabilises your CII, strengthens claim defensibility, and speeds class/flag audits while lowering PSC disruption risk. The knock-on effect is fewer off-hire events, higher charterer confidence, and reduced compliance overhead. To build that level of robustness, use Resolution MEPC.282(70), Chapter 5 (“Guidance on Best Practices for Fuel-Efficient Operation of Ships”) and the IMO GreenVoyage2050 Appraisal Tool (Appraisal Tool: GreenVoyage2050 ( imo.org )) to select, combine and document the right measures for each vessel. Successful execution hinges on robust evidence and coordinated ship–shore processes. Standardise validation and reconciliation for noon reports, sensors, BDNs, MRV/DCS filings, VDR tracks, CMMS records, and class approvals, and record exception handling and root-cause analysis inside SEEMP procedures. Set initial, additional, and periodical verification checkpoints in your annual cycle. Use rank-specific prompts and avoid duplicate data entry to manage crew workload efficiently. When you apply retrofits or operational measures (for example, cleaning cadence, trim targets, routing rules), define measurement and verification steps—often using EEOI-based voyage analyses—and record lessons learned so SEEMP Part III is updated continuously. Finally, keep the charterparty interface in scope: SEEMP artefacts now underpin performance clauses, emissions cost pass-through, and claim defensibility—which shortens negotiations and reduces off-hire risk. 3. CII — The Operating Budget The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) is an annual operational measure that expresses a ship’s CO₂ emissions per unit of capacity-based transport work for ships 5,000 GT or more. It is a mandatory regulation and assigns an A–E rating to the vessel each calendar year. Improvement is expected “over time” via SEEMP actions; not a regulatory requirement to improve every year, but to remain within the defined rating bands; a plan of corrective actions is required if a ship is rated D for three consecutive years or E in any one year. Given the current pause in the NZF process, CII remains the primary global, in-service carbon performance signal for owners and counterparties. As reference lines continue to tighten, a substantial share of tanker, bulk, and container tonnage is vulnerable to mid-year rating slippage without proactive interventions. As policy attention shifts to the existing instruments, stakeholders are watching for a potential broadening of CII’s scope (for example, exploring well-to-wake elements), although no formal decision has been taken by the IMO/MEPC. In parallel, regional schemes (EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, and a widening UK ETS) are driving near-term costs and carbon intensity, making CII ratings more commercially consequential on impacted routes. CII Applied CII turns everyday operations into an A–E rating that directly affects what your ship is worth to counterparties. A weak or slipping rating cascades into commercial and contractual pressure (shortlisting, lower rates, stricter time-charter clauses, potential early redelivery) and bleeds into finance (higher margins, tougher refinancing, softer resale). Maintaining an in-band rating is therefore a balance-sheet imperative, run like a budget with forecasting and corrective measures rather than a year-end formality. Practically, this means running CII as a live budget through SEEMP Part III, with month-by-month targets, in-year forecasts, and triggered corrective actions evidenced by data. The dominant levers remain speed management, weather routing, trim/draft optimisation and hull/propeller condition (cleaning cadence aligned to biofouling risk). Owners are strengthening evidence integrity to defend ratings: reconciling noon and sensor data, matching BDNs with MRV/DCS filings, and preserving VDR, CMMS, and class records for claims and audits. On EU/UK trades where CII increases exposure, operators are pricing allowances and penalties into charterparties and voyage plans. A unified ship–shore loop ensures operational behaviour, records, and year-end verification stay aligned. 4. EEOI — The Voyage Truth Meter The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) is an operational metric, not regulatory, recognised by IMO as a voluntary monitoring and diagnostic tool supporting SEEMP and CII. It measures what actually happened on each voyage or period: CO₂ per unit of actual transport work using real cargo carried and distance. Operationally, EEOI should follow MEPC.1/Circ.684, with fuel-specific emission factors, a consistent transport-work definition (such as cargo mass × distance), a stated distance basis (through-water versus over-ground) used consistently, and clearly defined voyage boundaries (laden, ballast, port legs, exclusions). Owners are adopting a single calculation specification fleet-wide so vessel comparisons and year-on-year trends are defensible. EEOI is voluntary; its usefulness rests on rigorous methods and clean data: keep traceable links to BDNs, noon reports, shaft or flow meters, engine logs, VDR tracks, and reconciled MRV/DCS data. Operators increasingly tag each EEOI entry with condition states (hull/propeller fouling, weather/sea state, draught/trim) to distinguish operational factors from condition losses and to plan cleaning and maintenance. EEOI Applied If your EEOI evidence is not trusted, you cannot credibly prove what saved fuel or why performance changed, so SEEMP updates lack justification and CII forecasts drift. That uncertainty undermines cooperation with charterers (harder to agree on speed, routing, or benefit-sharing) and slows claim resolution. The result is higher operating cost and weaker negotiating power; you spend more time arguing the numbers and less time earning on-hire. The current best practice is to make EEOI the measurement and verification (M&V) backbone for SEEMP Part III and CII management: define pre-approved baselines, run A/B or pre/post analyses for measures (cleanings, propeller upgrades, routing rules, speed programmes) and record confidence intervals and assumptions in a standard template. On data quality, operators are tightening noon-versus-sensor reconciliation with defined tolerance bands and exception workflows; when discrepancies exceed thresholds, ships attach a root-cause analysis (e.g. meter calibration issues or current/leeway estimation errors) before closing the record. From a commercial standpoint, robust EEOI documentation are now used to support benefit-sharing arrangements, performance warranties, and emissions-cost pass-throughs on EU/UK trades; reducing dispute time and strengthening claim defensibility. Finally, synchronise EEOI tags with EEXI practices (including explicit EPL/ShaPoLi override notes) to make any temporary power release visible in the voyage record, maintaining alignment between behaviour on board, documentation, and CII projections for audit. CLOSING SYNTHESIS - OPERATING AS ONE SYSTEM EEXI, SEEMP, CII and EEOI are not four tasks; they are one control loop. EEXI sets the lawful design envelope—typically enforced on existing tonnage via EPL/ShaPoLi under an approved OMM with clear override authority and logging. CII then converts operations within that envelope into an annual A–E budget that tightens over time and, with the NZF adjourned (earliest change unlikely before 2028), remains the dominant global in-service signal alongside regional price/intensity regimes (EU ETS, FuelEU Maritime, UK ETS). SEEMP is the operating system that keeps it coherent: Part I sets the footing, Part II safeguards DCS data integrity, and Part III runs CII in year with targets, forecasts and triggers—while codifying how EEXI limits are respected (including override authorisation, logging and review) and how allowance/penalty exposure on affected trades is handled. EEOI (voluntary) provides the voyage-level M&V per MEPC.1/Circ.684, explaining CII movements with method-true choices for emission factors, transport work and distance basis. When any variable drifts—biofouling, missed propeller maintenance, routing or loading shifts, or an unplanned speed-up—the effects propagate through CII, SEEMP and EEOI and can surface as audit findings if practice and documents diverge (for example, an override not logged per OMM). The dominant levers are well known: hull/propeller condition, speed management, routing/weather windows, trim/draft and loading. Mastery now lies in managing the interrelationship, not the acronyms: run CII as a live budget through SEEMP Part III; keep EEXI discipline with clean override logs; and make EEOI the M&V backbone. Above all, double-down on evidence integrity - standardised reconciliation across noon reports, sensors, BDNs, MRV/DCS, VDR and CMMS, with firm ship–shore version control - so every tonne saved is measured, defensible and bankable, and the fleet is ready whether existing instruments tighten/broaden (including potential well-to-wake considerations for CII) or a global framework resumes. In Part II , we will map the strategic pain points for each instrument and show how an offline-capable, retrieval-augmented generative AI - working across OEM documents, class approvals, SEEMP artefacts, and enterprise systems - binds the system together to deliver operational certainty, audit readiness, and commercial resilience.

In Part I, we decoded each instrument and the interrelated logic between them. It is clear that they were designed to drive safer, cleaner, more efficient shipping; But for most ship owners, these four instruments now define the daily reality of speed, cost and negotiating power. In Part II, we unpack how EEXI, CII, SEEMP and EEOI show up as pain points in daily operations and outline practical, on-board ways to turn them from compliance burden into performance tools. Here is where they are biting you - and what you can do on board: Pain Points 1. EEXI — Design limits made operational The Energy Efficiency Existing Ship Index (EEXI) fixes a legal power envelope via Engine Power Limitation (EPL)/ Shaft Power Limitation (ShaPoLi) and Onboard Management Manual (OMM) procedures. The costs show up as: Lost commercial headroom  – older hulls accept deeper power caps, tightening schedules and options. Retrofit CAPEX and planning friction  – propeller work, ducts, fins, bow/bulb, dry-dock and class coordination. Assurance risk  – if override practice and evidence don’t match the OMM, findings appear in surveys and re-surface in charter talks. 2. SEEMP — Governance, data, people The Ship Energy Efficiency Management Plan (Parts I, II, III) (SEEMP) is the operating system: plan, do, record, improve. Its costs are mainly organisational: Governance  – version control, approvals, roles and change logs. Data engineering  – noon, sensors, Bunker Delivery Notes (BDNs), Monitoring, Reporting and Verification (EU) (MRV), Data Collection System (IMO) (DCS), Voyage Data Recorder (VDR), Computerised Maintenance Management System (CMMS), class, all standardised and reconciled. Crew workload  – prompts by rank, minimal double entry, clean close-outs. Weakness here means non-conformities, slower Port State Control (PSC) inspections, and longer charterparty negotiations because your claims are harder to defend. 3. CII — A live operating carbon budget The Carbon Intensity Indicator (CII) turns daily decisions into an A–E rating that financiers and charterers treat as a quality signal. Costs include: Rating slippage  – tighter reference lines drive mid-year drift without active management. Commercial drag  – shortlisting pressure, tougher clauses, rate impact, earlier redelivery. Financial spillover  – higher margins, refinancing friction, softer resale. Regional exposure  – European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), FuelEU Maritime Regulation – the EU regulation promoting low-GHG maritime fuels - (FuelEU Maritime) and United Kingdom Emissions Trading Scheme (UK ETS) translating directly into allowance/penalty costs. Managing CII as an in-year budget needs forecasting, triggers and evidence - time and skill you must either build or buy. 4. EEOI — The voyage truth meter The Energy Efficiency Operational Indicator (EEOI) is voluntary, but it’s the backbone that proves what really saved fuel. Costs sit in quality: Method discipline  – MEPC.1/Circ.684 choices on emission factors, transport work and distance. (The MEPC.1/Circ.684 is the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee Circular 684, which provides guidelines for measurement of ship energy efficiency, distance definition, emission factors, and EEOI methodology.) Instrument health  – meter calibration, current/leeway handling. Analytics time and disputes  – Comparative controlled tests of two scenarios (A vs. B) (A/B tests), before-and-after performance comparisons and arguments when records are not trusted. When EEOI is done well, it shortens disputes and supports benefit-sharing and emissions cost pass-through. When it isn’t, it adds operating cost and weakens your negotiating position. A Practical and Realistic Way Forward: The NIJHOF Central Intelligence Library (Maritime) | NCIL(M) - Your vessel’s offline AI for compliance, evidence and daily decision-making NCIL(M) is a high-performance, fully offline, generative AI system installed on board. We load what matters to your crew - OEM manuals, class approvals, IMO/flag rules, SEEMP Parts I–III, SOPs, training material, MRV/DCS exports, CMMS records, BDNs, routing/trim outputs and selected enterprise data - clean it, structure it, and bind it to a large language model running inside the hardware. The box joins your internal LAN/Wi-Fi. Crew use their existing devices to get instant, accurate, procedure-true answers and step-by-step guidance—no internet required. What It Does On-board Operational guidance  – rank-specific checklists and answers for maintenance, operations and compliance, aligned with OEM limits, class and your SOPs. EEXI discipline  – guided EPL/ShaPoLi workflows, OMM-faithful override prompts and tamper-evident logs, with evidence pre-packaged for surveys and audits. CII as a live budget  – in-year forecasts, “what-if” scenarios (speed, weather, loading, cleaning), and triggered corrective actions; inputs ready for SEEMP Part III updates. Defensible EEOI  – MEPC.1/Circ.684-true voyage sheets, noon-vs-sensor reconciliation, clear exceptions and root-cause notes to separate condition losses from operations. Evidence automation  – one-click audit packs spanning noon/sensor/BDN/MRV-DCS/VDR/CMMS/class with ship–shore version control. Training that sticks  – built-in AI tutorials and micro-modules mapped to your procedures; command can see completion and performance trends to close skills gaps. How We Deliver Lead time is about one month from order. During that period we work with your technical; health, safety, environment and quality (HSEQ) and crewing teams to: Select and prepare sources Clean and structure the data Tailor the system to the vessel’s class, trade and equipment The hardware arrives pre-loaded and ready to join your internal network, with role-based access and full audit trails. Each unit is configured specifically for its vessel. Why it Matters for Your P&L First order effect  – fewer non-conformities and observations in surveys, audits and Port State Control, faster close-out of checks and reduced off-hire risk because evidence and procedures match. Second order   effect – more stable in-year CII performance, better defended speed/consumption and emissions claims, and a stronger negotiating position with charterers and cargo interests. Third order effect  – a lower perceived risk premium for financiers, visible readiness for tighter regional or global measures, and fuel savings that compound across the fleet. If you want to turn compliance into competence – and competence into competitive advantage – send us a message at crew@nijhofcs.com . We will show you how the NCIL(M) can lift decision-making on your vessels and tailor a unit to each ship.

Integrate AI without losing sight of your crew. A five-step, people-first framework for maritime leaders—and any business—seeking AI ROI. Summary Artificial intelligence is surging through every corner of shipping, with 65 percent  of companies now running AI in at least one function[1] and the maritime-AI market already worth US $4.13 billion[2] . Despite rapid adoption, organisational culture trails behind: fewer than one‑third of companies report having a true “AI and data culture,”[3] and Gartner notes that more than half acknowledge their data is still not ready for AI initiatives.[4] Put bluntly, technology will stall unless the people who run it are engaged, skilled, and aligned with the company’s mission. The playbook below shows how to weave AI into your crew’s daily work—so the tech becomes a force-multiplier instead of a morale drain—while also satisfying search-engine signals and reader attention spans. Why “AI + Humans” Beats “AI vs. Humans” Maritime leaders love efficiency gains, but seafarers value safety, meaning, and stability. Deloitte’s 2025 Human Capital Trends survey shows firms that prioritise human capability development are twice as likely  to see strong financial returns[5]. Conversely, “transformation fatigue” sets in when change arrives top-down with little frontline input[6], a key reason over 40 percent  of agentic-AI projects may be scrapped by 2027[7]. The lesson: integrate AI with  your crew, not around  them. A Five-Step Crew-Driven AI Adoption Framework Step Goal Crew Actions 1. Align & Audit Tie the project to company values, objectives, and IMO safety goals Identify frontline influencers (deck officers, engineers, shore staff). Individually ask two open-ended questions—“ What do you think? ” and “ Would it work or not? ” about introducing a generative-AI central-intelligence database. Capture their tactical insights, seed ownership, and set expectations early. 2. Co-Design the Use Case Define what the AI should , can , and will  solve Consolidate the ground-level intelligence to map existing data, missing data, and desired outputs. Hand this bundle to the solution team to architect a model precisely around those needs, ensuring relevance and feasibility. 3. Pilot & Data-Discovery Sprints Validate performance with real users and live data Select 5–10 key influencers to trial a cloud prototype for ~1 month. They stress-test workflows, flag gaps, and confirm every output truly boosts decision-making. The team iterates weekly on their feedback. 4. Roll-out & Continuous Feedback Deploy company-wide while refining After a successful pilot, release the system to the broader workforce and, in parallel, build an offline version for vessels. Maintain an always-on feedback channel so issues route directly to the AI team for same-day fixes—tweaking never stops. 5. Training, Licensing & Trust Embed AI in daily routines and formalise long-term support Deliver just-in-time training so crews adopt the tool naturally, then finalise a simple per-user, per-week licence (priced by vessel class). Contracts are brief, data security is world-class, and the post-trial conversion rate to date is 100 percent—reinforcing that management values crew intelligence and acts on it. Why Your People Remain the Core Asset Shared Vision, Mission & Values A ship’s purpose charts every system on board. Likewise, AI projects must trace directly back to your corporate compass—safety, sustainability, and service—so crews view the tech as an ally, not an audit tool. Microsoft’s 2025 Work Trend Index reveals a gap: 67 percent  of leaders feel fluent in AI agents, but only 40 percent  of employees agree[8]. Closing that gap starts with explaining why  the tool matters to them. Culture Over Code Gartner warns that 57 percent  of firms say their data is not “AI-ready,” a cultural, not technical, issue[9]. Harvard Business Review underscores that success hinges on intelligent investment —balancing build, buy, and partner strategies with workforce buy-in—rather than budget size alone.[10] AI as a Force-Multiplier, Not a Replacement In shipping, AI already spots hull corrosion in minutes and predicts machinery failures days out. Rolls-Royce’s early autonomous-ferry trials proved that sensor-fusion AI can steer a vessel only when paired with human oversight in the loop .[11] The smart play is “centaur operations”—machines crunch data, humans decide. Case-in-Point: Hull-Inspection Pilot Align & Audit  – Vision & values mapped to AI objective   and crew workshop completed (≤ 90 min) to gather frontline insights. Co‑Design the Use Case  – Cross‑functional pilot team named to translate ground‑level intelligence into a scoped AI model. Pilot & Data‑Discovery Sprints  – Clean, labelled data sets agreed before 5–10 key influencers trial the cloud prototype. Roll‑out & Continuous Feedback  – KPI dashboard live before full roll‑out, with an always‑on channel for same‑day fixes. Training, Licensing & Trust  – Continuous learning budget assigned and per‑user, per‑week licence finalised to embed AI in daily routines. Frequently Asked Questions Q1. Does AI threaten crew jobs? No. McKinsey’s 2024 survey shows firms reassign labour to higher-skill tasks rather than cut headcount.[13] AI massively enhances your crew’s existing skill sets and expertise—never detracting, only adding. It not only slashes the time needed to surface the right answers, it also lets employees capture fresh frontline insights in a central intelligence database, further amplifying their value. Q2. What maritime regulations apply? IMO’s 2024–29 Strategic Plan calls for “safe, efficient and sustainable shipping,” explicitly supporting digital systems if they uphold seafarer safety.[14] Our AI solutions cut through the noise of this complex regulatory landscape—spanning both IMO and state-based legislation. Ask the system a question and it will pinpoint the exact rule that applies and spell out the concrete steps you must take to comply. Q3. How long before ROI? Most maritime pilots reach payback within 12–18 months , driven by fuel savings and reduced off-hire days, per Lloyd’s Register research.[15] Financial ROI, however, is only one dimension: our own deployments often break even far sooner—sometimes virtually instant—because we charge a simple per-user, per-week licence (priced by vessel class) with no six-figure upfront cost. And what price can you place on safety, smoother crew relations, and better-maintained vessels? Common sense says those returns are immediate and invaluable. Sources [1] McKinsey & Company. The State of AI in Early 2024: Gen AI Adoption Spikes and Starts to Generate Value  (May 30 2024). Exhibit 1 reports that “65 % of respondents say their organizations are regularly using generative AI in at least one business function.”   [2]  Lloyd’s Register, Beyond the Horizon: Opportunities and Obstacles in the Maritime AI Boom  (2024). [3] Data & AI Leadership Exchange and DataIQ, 2025 AI & Data Leadership Executive Benchmark Survey: Leadership, Transformation, and Innovation in an AI Future  (Data & AI Leadership Exchange, 2025), 9. [4] Gartner, Hype Cycle for Artificial Intelligence 2025  (June 2025). [5] Deloitte, 2025 Global Human Capital Trends Survey  (March 2025). [6] TechRadar Pro, “Transformation Fatigue: The Silent Barrier to AI Success,” July 2025. [7] Reuters, “Over 40% of Agentic AI Projects Will Be Scrapped by 2027, Gartner Says,” 25 June 2025. [8] Microsoft, 2025 Work Trend Index Annual Report: The Year the Frontier Firm Is Born  (April 2025). [9]  Ibid,  n. 4 [10] Harvard Business Review, “It’s Time for Your Company to Invest in AI—Here’s How,” July 2025. [11] Rolls-Royce & Finferries, “World’s First Fully Autonomous Ferry Demonstration,” December 2018. [12] ScoutDI. “Hello Solticom Performs FPSO Cargo Tank Inspections, 100 % BVLOS and without Human Entry.”  ScoutDI  (blog), December 3, 2024. https://www.scoutdi.com/hello-solticom-mexico-performs-fpso-cargo-tank-inspections-with-the-scout-137-drone-and-the-scout-portal-100-bvlos-and-without-human-entry/ (accessed July 29, 2025). [13] McKinsey Global Institute. Skill Shift: Automation and the Future of the Workforce  (May 2018), p. 41. Survey of 3,000 executives finds that firms “which have already extensively adopted automation and AI expect to raise headcount rather than reduce it.”  [14] Boston Consulting Group, Agentic AI in Logistics: ROI and Performance Improvements  (Boston: Boston Consulting Group, March 27, 2025), 4. [15]  Ibid Ready to empower your crew with people-first AI? Book a free Crew-AI Alignment Session  with Nijhof Consulting & Solutions and see how a 60-minute workshop can surface your first high-impact use-case.