How Smart Fleets Are Managing the Messy Middle
- 8 hours ago
- 5 min read
The “messy middle” is a term closely associated with NACFE, which began using the phrase in 2019 to describe the period between today’s diesel-dominant market and a zero-emission freight future. NACFE’s core point is simple; This is not a transition in which one new technology cleanly replaces one old one. It is a period in which fleets must evaluate multiple energy pathways, multiple vehicle platforms, and multiple operational realities at the same time.
While the term emerged in the trucking segment, the concept resonates more broadly because fleet sectors are dealing with the same underlying challenge. Transit agencies, school transportation departments, municipal fleets, and private operators are all facing a more complicated planning environment that includes evolving regulations, new infrastructure requirements, more powertrain options, and a growing need to match vehicle strategy to actual operating conditions rather than to broad assumptions. The management challenge now extends well beyond long-haul freight.
The smartest fleets are not responding by trying to declare one winner. They are building a better decision-making framework. NACFE’s 2026 Messy Middle Operations Report, based on more than 73,000 validated miles across 14 Class 8 tractors and four powertrain pathways, concludes that no single powertrain is universally superior, and that fleets benefit from matching technology to duty cycle, conducting route-specific analysis, evaluating infrastructure realistically, using operational data instead of spec sheets, and investing in operational factors such as driver training, maintenance capability, and dispatch optimization.
That is the real lesson of the messy middle. It is not simply a vehicle-selection challenge. It is a management challenge.
The first thing smart fleets are doing is matching technology to the job. NACFE’s data shows that duty cycle and terrain are stronger predictors of efficiency variation than powertrain technology alone, and the organization’s broader thought leadership has been consistent on this point. In practical terms, a fleet may find renewable diesel attractive in one lane, CNG or RNG in another, battery-electric in a return-to-base application, and perhaps hydrogen only in more limited cases where infrastructure and use case line up.
That same logic comes through in how industry leaders are talking about the transition. In ACT News’ March 2026 interview, Mike Roeth said the Run on Less: Messy Middle work showed fleets pursuing multiple technology pathways rather than a single solution, with duty cycles and infrastructure availability shaping decisions. In a separate Run on Less release, Saia’s Matt Copot described the decision process even more plainly: fleets need to understand where a technology fits, how the diesel equivalent performs, where the equipment will run, and the broader business case. That is not ideology. That is disciplined fleet planning.
The second thing smart fleets are doing is relying more heavily on route-level and corridor-level analysis. NACFE’s 2026 report says route-specific analysis should precede deployment decisions, especially for technologies that are highly sensitive to terrain and infrastructure. The report’s deployment-readiness framework evaluates five dimensions before technology commitment: route and corridor, infrastructure, operational readiness, economics, and sustainability. That matters because broad claims about what a vehicle “can do” often break down once grade, weather, payload, charging access, dispatch variability, and hours-of-service realities enter the picture.
The third thing smart fleets are doing is solving infrastructure earlier. NACFE’s research is clear that infrastructure often shapes deployment viability as much as vehicle capability. In the 2026 report, infrastructure availability is treated as a decisive planning variable, not a footnote. The report also notes that fleets navigating technology transitions benefit from realistic infrastructure evaluation, including current availability, development timelines, and backup options. This is one reason the strongest deployments tend to come from fleets that align technology choice with lanes and facilities they can support, rather than assuming the network will catch up later.
The fourth thing smart fleets are doing is using real-world operating data instead of leaning too heavily on manufacturer claims or abstract TCO models. NACFE’s 2026 report says actual operational performance diverged across all technologies based on terrain, duty cycle, payload, and driver behavior, and it explicitly positions validated operational data as a better guide than projections or specs alone. The ACT interview with Mike Roeth reinforces that the value of the Run on Less work is that it gives fleets a clearer view of costs, performance, and infrastructure considerations under real operating conditions.
That matters because the messy middle is full of conflicting truths. A vehicle may be technically capable, but still poorly matched to a route. A fuel may offer emissions benefits but still create operational friction if fueling is not aligned. A battery-electric platform may perform well in one corridor and poorly in another. Smart fleets are reducing risk by insisting on operational evidence before they scale.
The fifth thing, and one of the most overlooked, is that the stronger fleets are treating workforce readiness as part of the transition, not as something to solve later. NACFE’s 2026 report says human factors influence outcomes across all technologies and specifically identifies driver training, maintenance discipline, and dispatch strategy as performance drivers. It also says fleets benefit from investing in driver training, maintenance capability, and dispatch optimization as they navigate technology transitions.
Not every fleet case study leads with technician training. Some emphasize infrastructure. Some emphasize route fit. Some emphasize data. But where the transition gets more operationally complex, workforce readiness tends to move to the foreground. Kleysen Group’s Run on Less profile is a strong example. Discussing its move into natural gas, the fleet said two of its biggest challenges were finding fuel sources and learning a whole new fuel source, adding that it had to “constantly focus on training.” That does not prove every successful transition hinges on training first, but it is credible operator testimony that capability-building becomes essential when the fuel, maintenance practices, and operating procedures change.
The same pattern is showing up in public-sector fleet planning. Under current FTA competitive bus guidance, applicants proposing zero-emission vehicle projects must dedicate 5% of the zero-emission federal amount to workforce development and training unless they certify that less is needed. That does not turn this into a regulation story, and guidance can change over time. But it does show that, as of 2026, workforce readiness is increasingly being treated as part of serious deployment planning rather than an optional afterthought.
For fleet managers and transportation directors, that may be the most important takeaway. The messy middle is not a sign that the industry lacks direction. It is a sign that the industry has entered a more demanding phase of decision-making. The fleets handling it best are not waiting for perfect certainty. They are using data to match powertrain to duty cycle, planning infrastructure before scale, staying flexible across multiple pathways, and strengthening the operational capability needed to support those decisions in the field.
That is how smart fleets are managing the messy middle. They are not trying to force a square peg into a round hole. They are building the discipline to know which opening matters, which technology fits, and what their team needs to support it once it is in service.
If your fleet is evaluating EVs, charging infrastructure, CNG or RNG, renewable fuels, hydrogen, or other advanced vehicle technologies, WTA can help your technicians build the skills needed to support those systems safely and effectively. Explore WTA training programs or contact us to discuss training at your facility.
Sources & Further Reading
North American Council for Freight Efficiency (NACFE), “The Messy Middle” Operations Report
ACT News, “ACT News Talks Tech: NACFE’s Mike Roeth”
Run on Less, Kleysen Group Participant Profile
Federal Transit Administration, Low or No Emission Grant Program
Comments