Many have claimed in recent months that the global supply chain is faulty, but now experts are backing up that assertion with research figures.
The latest study by the Business Continuity Institute cites adverse weather conditions as the biggest culprit, although researchers say a variety of factors will require companies to rethink the way they manufacture and move goods. The research found 72 percent of respondents experienced at least one disruption in their supply chain in 2010, with 53 percent citing adverse weather as the main cause of disruption worldwide, up from 29 percent in 2009. Unplanned IT and telecommunication outages and the failure of service provision by outsourcers were cited by 35 percent of supply chain professionals who participated in the survey, up from 20 percent in 2009.
The "Supply Chain Resilience Report 2010" concludes that companies on average reported five supply chain delays in the past 12 months, but some organizations experienced more than 50 incidents. Survey respondents came from 35 countries across 15 industry sectors, with the majority outside the UK, so the findings are not limited to one region in the world.
Half of companies surveyed have tried to optimize businesses through outsourcing, consolidating suppliers, or adopting lean manufacturing techniques. And note that businesses that shift production to low-cost regions significantly increase their risks of supply chain disruptions, with 83 percent experiencing problems. I reported on this earlier this decade.
We only had to wait about 10 years for an organization to confirm what we already knew. Executives at third-party logistics companies have been telling supply chain professionals for years that outsourcing will cost more in the long term. Actually, the findings are quite shocking. Fifteen percent of respondents do not review their business continuity plans with key suppliers; 18 percent do not seek evidence of business continuity; and 50 percent do not validate that key supplier business continuity plans actually work in practice.
The study looks at financial services, manufacturing, government, education, retail, and more. What have you done in the past 10 years to lower supply chain costs? And how long did it take for your company to reap the return on investment?
For the first time since owning my home, I was affected by extreme weather--what we call the 100-Year Storm. We had two feet of water in our basement, our heater and hot water were gone, and everyone within 50 miles was in the same--no pun intended--boat. No sump pumps, no generators--nothing. What I learned about the supply chain is this: the single most important factor is being a good customer. People will move heaven and earth if they can for you. The folks that ripped out our carpet; our electrician and plumber and the guys that carted our damaged stuff away we'd used before; always offered to recommend them to other customers; and treated them with respect. We were moved to the top of the list every time. People around here were months getting service. We were dry--but far from normal--in less than a week.
I have finally accepted there is nothing you can do about water, fire and nature's other elements. But you can be a good partner all the time.
Thanks for your thoughts, Ariella. I do think some company execs who made the decision to outsource offshore in the early days didn't have the complete picture, though they tried to cover all bases.
Hi Laurie, I just want to clarify that you are referring to offshore outsourcing rather than all outsourcing on this post.I would find it strange that 3PL executives would say that outsourcing would cost more for companies in the long term, since 3PLs are by definition an outsourced function.
Laurie, it stands to reason outsourcing for the sake of lower cost would come at the price of increased delays. Any time you add more variables to the mix -- and outsourcing abroad, certainly adds a number of variables due to distance, politics, service, and weather -- you increase the risk of something untoward happening that will affect your supply chain. Every company should go over the numbers to assess the ratio between risk and benefit before deciding to outsource.
I know that many people seek to outsource to sources of cheap labor abroad by using services provided by companies like oDesk. That puts buyers in contact with service providers all over the world. Compensation for work can drop to $1 an hour, and I've seen job posts that wanted work done for even less. Then the buyers complain that the workers don't really work (oDesk enables snapshots of what is on the computer during the time people log in for their work hours) but chat or shop online during the time they bill. There is an object lesson there in "you get what you pay for."
Thank you for sharing your view. I don't expect everyone to agree with me. Thank goodness they don't or the world would be a boring place. Can you provide one example of a company that benefited from outsourcing and didn't have to pay the price in one way or another? If they outsourced Q&A, can they really trust the company to put out a quality product, and did it save the company money in the long run? Or did the company end up having to delay so many planes that eventually consumers chose another airline? I won't name names. I'm sure there are success stories, but would you share?
We only had to wait about 10 years for an organization to confirm what we already knew. Executives at third-party logistics companies have been telling supply chain professionals for years that outsourcing will cost more in the long term.
I have to say that I disagree with this statement. Sometimes outsourcing will indeed cost more in the long term, but sometimes you will save lots of money in the long term.
Just because something is outsourced doesn't mean its chances of long term profitability suddenly diminish. Like anything, a poorly conceptualized or planned project/endeavor will likely lose money and a well-planned and conceived project will likely have a better chance of success.
There is so much variation in outsourcing that I think it is a bit foolish to say that just because something is outsourced, that means that it is not a worthwhile long term proposition. Outsourcing can mean far too many things, its scope can vary so widely, and the locations involved can range from 10 feet away to halfway across the world. A "low-cost region" could mean India, or it could mean Indiana. Pretty big difference!
Anyhow, I'm not saying I disagree with your whole point: I generally agree with you! I just had a quibble with that one statement.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This