The recent report on Supply Chain Strategy in the Board Room by the Cranfield School of Management and Solving Efeso had some interesting and surprising statistics on the frequency of supply chain strategy review and the supply chain planning horizon. Namely, while the frequency of review was all over the place and ranged from less than a year at some companies to over 3 years at others, with an average of approximately 1.25 years for the electronics industry and 2.70 years for the heavy machinery industry, with the exception of APAC, the average planning horizon was between 3 and 4 years, and with the exception of the automative industry (which had an average planning horizon of 5 years), the average planning horizon was almost exactly 4 years across all of the other industries. That’s right, the average planning horizon for construction, heavy industry, electronics, consumer goods, chemicals, textiles, pharma, retail & distribution, and food & beverage was 4 years.
If empirical evidence is to be taken as truth, than this would suggest that 4 years is the right planning horizon for your supply chain. But is it? While the organization does need flexibility and the ability to change direction quickly if the market shifts, does that mean the entire supply chain needs to be reinvented every 4 years?
Product life-cycles are shorter than they used to be, but will the organization be producing completely different products in only 4 years? Or simply bigger, better, badder versions of the current product. At an industry level, most product categories have lifespans of decades … or longer. The basics offerings in any electronics category don’t change that often. CRT TVs lasted decades. Cell phones were primarily analog for about a decade. Than they were primarily digital for another before the modern smartphone came along, which will probably not change much (except with respect to the feature/function/performance classifications) for another decade. The technology for packaging food and making clothes changes very little from decade to decade. Even if the products themselves change rapidly, the production technologies change slowly and the dominant suppliers tend to retain dominance for years and relevance for over a decade, if not two. If a supply chain is properly designed, there’s no reason to think that the fundamentals will have to change every few years.
Furthermore, isn’t a long term strategic planning supposed to look forward five to ten years into the future? Maybe 4 is the new 5, but deeper thought would seem to suggest that this is a very-shortsighted view that will prevent the company from ever realizing all of the efficiencies and economies of scale that are available. This insight from one of the more forwarding thinking interviewees (who’s viewpoint was shared by about 10% of the respondents, who could be considered the leaders) sums it up best:
The review is continuous but the planning horizon is 7 years because the results couldn’t be reached in a shorter period.