Lora's Latest Post

Supply Chain Resilience. Really?

Today, I speak at the North American Manufacturing Association, Manufacturing Leadership Conference, in Nashville on the use of data to improve supply chain resilience. This follows the recent announcement by the White House Council on Supply Chain Resilience launching 30 proposed actions to strengthen America’s supply chains and the ASCM recent publication on resilience. Here I share some insights from my research.

Background

The Council of Supply Chain Resilience met for the first time this month. The Council is co-chaired by the National Security Advisor and National Economic Advisor, and include the Secretaries of Agriculture, Commerce, Defense, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Housing and Urban Development, the Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, the Treasury, and Veterans Affairs; the Attorney General; the Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency and the Small Business Administration; the Directors of National Intelligence, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy; the Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers; the U.S. Trade Representative; and other senior officials from the Executive Office of the President and other agencies.

Key elements include a focus is the use of the defense production act to improve accessibility of medicines to prevent drug shortages. Improve cross-government data sharing and analyze resilience. Expand the “FLOW” program for logistics information sharing to forecast transportation flow. In addition, the Council will conduct a supply chain review by December 31, 2024, to evaluate the impact of the supply chain on National Security

Lora’s Take

I think that we need to be skeptical without getting political. (Think this is possible? Somedays, I am not sure.)

Let’s start the beginning. I am not clear on the White House mission. What is supply chain resilience? And why does it matter? I find that the term is used, and now over-used, a lot. But few define it with use.

When you ask most supply chain professionals to define resilience, the question stops the person in their tracks. The reason? We are not clear on definition. I define supply chain resilience as:

Supply chain resilience. The ability of an organization to deliver reliable and consistent results for revenue, margin, customer service, and quality in the face of demand and supply variability. Source: Supply Chain Insights

ASCM defines resilience in the SCM Supply Chain Dictionary as the ability of a supply chain to anticipate, create plans to avoid or mitigate, and to recover from disruptions to supply chain functionality. In short, resilience is what keeps things running during a disruption — and what helps companies get back on track afterward.

So, if you use the Supply Chain Insights definition, you might ask, how are we doing commercially against this goal? Interestingly, in Q3 2023, 38% of manufacturers, distributors and retailers missed their target for revenue guidance for the quarter. The result was restatement. My conclusion? If businesses cannot accurately forecast revenue, the organization is not resilient.

I believe that the ASCM definition is too reactive and rooted in the traditional, and outdated concepts on risk management. I would like for organizations to be more proactive to sense, respond, and adapt. Today, this is not the case.

Let me give you an example. I am currently doing research on inventory management. In the research, I ask inventory planners to define resilience. I cannot get a clear answer. Of the twenty companies interviewed, only one can answer the question, “Do you have a good inventory plan?” We have implemented conventional demand planning technologies and processes, yet, in eight out of ten companies that I work with, I see a negative Forecast Value Added (FVA) measurement. Is this a risk to resilience? Yes, I think so. No technology in the market measures inventory health.

So, you might say, so what? My answer is why are we spending so much money in technology and human capital to degrade the forecast with an exponential impact on inventory. So, my question for the President’s task force is, “If the industry is not clear, and you don’t have a definition, how can you deliver your mission?”

Lora’s Advice

If the President’s group called me and asked for my advice, these are the steps to take:

  • Ask all “experts” to leave their egos at the door.
  • Define the mission.
  • Align on definitions.
  • Consider actions to take
  • Drive execution

My fear is that the group is focused on tactics without this alignment. I would then consider taking five actions:

  1. Build on the Power of Existing Networks. Force interoperability. Build a network of networks. Under the Defense Production Act, force all public network companies to interoperate. Improve visibility across the networks that operate in self-serving business models. For example, change the business models so that Ariba must interoperate with GT Nexus, E2Open with Elemica, MPO (Kinaxis) with Nulogy, etc. Maximize the value of the purchase order flow data already in the existing networks. (A purchase order changes many times and needs synchronization. Reporting off of transportation data is a delays the signal by weeks and months.) The Flow project, which is a limited set of transportation data to forecast future demand, is not well defined, and is like putting a teaspoon in the ocean. Just as DARPA led the way to build the Internet, drive an interoperability model across networks and harvest the data through the Department of Commerce to report flows. (Enforce the private nature of the individual transactions and harvest the data to help commercial entities improve flow and drive insights.)
  2. Stop Venture Capital Turnover of the Existing Networks. A major risk to the supply chain is the venture capital churn of network companies. Exostar’s purchase by Arlington Capital Partners from Thoma Bravo was completed this month. The pattern is dangerous. Thoma Bravo buys the company, sheds marketing assets and defines a more conservative R&D agenda to take money out of the network. Thoma Bravo bought and sold Elemica and GHX. In a similar fashion, Insights Partners bought and sold E2Open. Each churn reduces the opportunity for innovation and introduces supply chain risk.
  3. Mandate Unique Identifiers. To track fair labor, food safety and improve corporate social responsibility, we need to be able to improve track and trace capabilities. To accomplish this, we need unique and authoritative identifiers for company entities, warehouses and manufacturing locations.
  4. Provide a Data Lake of Government Data to Use for Demand Predictions. With advancements in narrow AI, NoSQL, and the graph, companies are experimenting with the building of outside-in processes. Catalogue the data making it available for commercial usage.
  5. Constantly Define and Analyze Defense Supply Chain Capabilities. The current understanding and usage of network design and inventory optimization technologies by government agencies is low. The DLA was chartered under an efficiency agenda, when warfare requires a responsive supply chain. These are different by design and the armed forces lacks modeling technologies to understand the differences. Invest in building and refining modeling capabilities for requisite flows for ship building, aircraft refurbishment and armaments. Invest in simulation and optimization technologies to improve readiness.

Wrap-up

I witness too much groupthink in the industry. The lack of clear definitions and objectives makes me itch. I feel that the industry is hi-jacked by opinions and too few facts and well-founded definitions.

Search the Archives
Search
Share this Post
Email
Twitter
LinkedIn
Facebook
Pinterest
WhatsApp
Featured Image
Recent Posts

Warning: Sidestep the Narrative of the Misguided Goldiggers

Ten years ago, I started writing a book titled Stories of the Misguided Gold Diggers. The book was a collection of stories from two decades of stories of technology leaders perpetuating the myth of integrated end-to-end supply chain planning.

I dusted off the manuscript on Saturday. I think that we have a new chapter. Companies focused on putting Artificial Intelligence (AI) on top of existing architectures are putting AI Stupid on steroids.

Read More »

The Myth of End-to-End Planning

Supply chain planning, supply management, supply chain execution, network design, and transportation/logistics management operate in silos. Not much has changed over four decades. The connections flow back through transactional systems: order-to-cash and procure-to-pay. There is a myth that companies can buy an end-to-end supply chain management solution. This is largely a myth. Here we explain.

Read More »

Lead Time: A Broken Gossamer

If you are struggling with supply chain planning, dancing in the light of shiny objects, and scratching your head, please read on. My goal is to help you.

Please do not AI Stupid. What do I mean? AI Stupid is putting agents and agentics on top of existing architectures believing that making them faster and hands free add value. To me, this is fools play.

I love AI. I am excited about new technologies. To this end, I want to shine a light on how new technologies can help address the black holes and inconsistencies in today’s supply chain, which largely stem from the limitations of the first generation of supply chain planning and execution technologies. In this blog, I give you three places to start.

Read More »

Do You Need a Supply Chain Coach?

Supply chain is where the rubber hits the road. For a public company, over 40% of market capitalization is tied to the trade-offs between growth, operating margin, inventory management, and Return on Capital Employed.

The road for supply chain improvement is fraught with issues. Here we share some and offer some advice.

Read More »

Is your Supply Chain AI Ready?

A simple quiz to assess an organization’s AI readiness.

The pace of change is fast and furious. Every day, technology advances faster than we can digest. A great challenge to have.

Determining whether a supply chain is “AI-ready” is less about technology and more about the gray matter between the ears of supply chain leaders. Leadership, alignment, and clarity of goals matter.

Too few companies are clear on the definition of supply chain excellence. Measuring and rewarding functional metrics reduces the firm’s value. Putting agentics on top of today’s processes can make bad practices run faster, reducing value.

The toughest job for the supply chain leader is challenging existing supply chain paradigms that were defined by the limitations of decades of supply chain technologies. As the curtain lifts on the potential of new forms of technology, process redefinition is our opportunity, but only if we are clear on what drives value. (Here, I link to the Supply Chains to Admire reports to help you define value. The next report will be published on June 23rd, along with my Dynamic Benchmarking Product, to help you define value in the face of your AI readiness. More information about the launch is at the bottom of this blog.)

Read More »

Case Study: A Scrappy Demand Management Approach

This study of Franklin Sports shines a light on the work that needs to be done at the sales account level to challenge a retail forecast, and also highlights the importance of a new technique for a forecast engine — reinforcement learning.

Artificial intelligence comes in many forms — large language models, generative AI, machine learning, unstructured text mining, deep learning, neural networks, reinforcement learning, agents, and agentics. While the industry is wigging out about agentics, I think reinforcement learning is a great step forward in the journey of Artificial Intelligence.

Read More »