Category Archives: Best Practices

Are You Going to Be Able to Control Costs this Year?

Costs are rising across categories and verticals and will likely continue to do so. There are a number of direct and indirect reasons for these increased costs, but the most substantial are the following reasons which could collectively rip a supply chain out from under even the largest of multi-national corporations.


1) Inflation is back with a vengeance

Commodity costs are rising across the board. According to the Royal Bank of Canada, the commodity price index increased for the third straight month and hit a five-month high in September. They increased 8.2% since June! Barley and Corn have exceeded the highs of 2008. The price of Live Cattle is almost 50% more than it was just two years ago. Copper is climbing back to its recent high. And these are just a few examples.


2) Market growth is stagnant and, as a result, so is job growth.

Stagnant growth in their markets can limit a company’s ability to increase the breadth of its strategic sourcing activities and get more spend under management, a critical key to cost control. While stagnant markets should be the bugle call for a company to get more spend under management, the lack of resources, primarily due to lack of hiring of new talent and investment in new technology, has kept many companies from expanding the growth of their sourcing efforts. In addition, stagnant market growth means that volume is not going to increase, and this limits a Supply Manager’s ability to negotiate (additional) volume-based savings going forward.


3) There is a widening gap between risk identification and mitigation.

The amount of research on risk and risk mitigation has reached an all time high, but there has been little or no movement towards the identification and implementation of an effective risk identification and mitigation strategy. In 2008, a Marsh survey found that only 35% of organizations self-reported that supply chain risk management was moderately effective at their companies. Stated another way, 65% of companies did not have a risk management program that was at least moderately effective. In 2011, researchers at Vlerick Leuven Gent Management School and Ghent University did a supply chain risk management study and again found that 64% of
the companies have no one responsible for managing supply chain risks! That’s essentially zero improvement in the last
three years!

And these are just three of the reasons (or fates) costs are rising across categories and verticals! For the other four reasons, the seven elements missing from an average Supply Managemnt organization exposing it to these seven fates, and the ten competencies that every Supply Management organization needs to master in order to acquire the seven elements that will allow a Supply Management organization to fend off the seven fates, remember to download the Top Ten Things to Do in 2013 to Control Costs, a free white-paper from BravoSolution (registration required) authored by Sourcing Innovation.

Five Common Sense Ways to Power Manufacturing Growth in a Down Economy

Last summer, Industry Week ran a short article on Ways to Power Manufacturing Growth in a Down Economy that you might have overlooked, as it was short and ran during peak vacation season, but it is quite important nonetheless. This article provided some easy ways to squeeze more value out of your operations.

  • Reduce Market Uncertainty
    There are two big uncertainties that most manufacturers have to deal with: customer demand and supply availability. In addition, raw material costs can often be unpredictable. But all of this uncertainty can be greatly reduced with long-term contracts. As the article points out, demand certainty at reduced margins is often better than demand uncertainty, especially since innovation and lean improvements can often reduce costs year-over-year.
  • Put Safety First
    Accidents cause downtime and result in reduced yields, both of which increase operating cost and eat up margins. Keeping lines up and yields constant is the best way to reign in costs and get the most out of every dollar.
  • Near-Source
    Reduce shipping costs and gain more control over manufacturing processes and costs by using suppliers closer to your manufacturing facility. It’s a lot easier to work out a problem with a supplier in your own state than with a supplier in a different country, as you can just jump in the car and visit the supplier’s location when a face-to-face meeting is needed to resolve an escalating situation.
  • Redefine Value-Add using Customer Value
    Find out precisely what customers want and eliminate all unnecessary features and functions that are not desired by the end customer. It’s not value-add unless the customer wants it. If the customer doesn’t want built-in auto-correct software that messes up 20% of the time in their smartphone, don’t waste money delivering it to them!
  • Encourage Innovation
    Empower, motivate, and reward employees who identify product and process improvements throughout the organization that increase quality or product value (to the end customer) while holding steady or decreasing costs.

The point is that, even if demand is down, margin can still be up.

An Informative Piece on Making Better Decisions with Cost Modelling

The ISM recently published an informative piece on how to “make better decisions with cost modelling”. Given that projected cost modelling can help supply management organizations reduce procurement costs and generate information that could improve cost performance throughout the supply chain, proper cost modelling is something every organization should have a good grip on.

The breakdown graphic is very good. The cost of any particular good is:

  1. the direct material costs plus
  2. the direct labour costs plus
  3. the indirect overhead costs plus
  4. the (amortized) SG&A costs (of the organization) plus
  5. the (amortized) R&D costs plus
  6. the profit margin

The last three costs in particular should not be overlooked. While they will typically be small in comparison to the other costs, they are there, and they cannot be driven to zero no matter what the volume requirements or the economies of scale. They will always exist, and squeezing a supplier’s profit margin to unreasonable levels seriously jeopardizes the health of the supplier. In addition, while tempting to do so, SG&A costs that are not directly applicable to the good being produced should not be included in the indirect cost. While the indirect costs can be reduced with production line efficiency, SG&A cannot.

And cost models are not hard to build, at least approximately. Direct material costs can be estimated using public indexes, direct labour costs can be estimated using government statistics bureau data, overhead costs can be estimated using government statistics bureau data and industry averages, SG&A can be estimated using public filings, R&D cost ca n be estimated as an industry average percentage, and profit margin can be estimated using a fair percentage.

Furthermore, cost models are even easier to correct. Simply state that, unless the supplier proves the model wrong, you will assume that it is right and base your negotiations off of it.

And once you have a correct cost model, you not only gain deep insight into a supplier’s costs, but into their inefficiencies. For example, you will learn where they are spending too much on raw materials, whether or not they are not competitive in labour costs, and where their processes are inefficient. Then, you can work with them to either help them negotiate better contracts with their raw material suppliers or buy on their behalf (with a larger aggregated demand that you can use to leverage a better contract) and to remove inefficiencies from their processes. This can create win-win situations and give you preferred customer status, which will be beneficial if demand outstrips supply.

Your Free* Holiday Gift from BravoSolution

Those of you who are BravoSolution customers should have already recieved Sourcing Innovation’s latest white-paper on the Top Ten Things to Do in 2013 to Control Costs in your inbox, and those of you who aren’t can download it from BravoSolution’s site (registration is required).

If you were following @sourcingdoctor on that which calls itself Twitter on Saturday (Dec 15, 2012), you would have received a sneak peak into two things that will tank your Supply Management Organization in 2013 if you’re not ready, which were culled from this paper, and those of you who weren’t can still follow @sourcingdoctor and read the post (tweeted in 140 character increments) in his tweet history. (Be sure to use Twitter or another twitter feed reader that presents tweets in reverse chronological order or you will be reading the post backwards.)

For those of you who disdain that which calls itself Twitter, this is why you want to download this paper:

  1. It cleary identifies and explains the seven fates that are going to tank your Supply Management organization in 2013.
  2. It points out the seven elements missing from your Supply Management organization that are exposing your orgnization to the seven fates.
  3. It lays out the ten competencies that you have to master in order to acquire the seven elements that will allow you to fend off the seven fates.
  4. It’s what you need – now. And it’s cool.**


* Registration required.

** Actually, it’s awesome, but making it too obvious wouldn’t be modest.

Can We Make EOQ Relevant Again?

This summer, Supply & Demand Executive published an article on how to make EOQ relevant again. Going through the recent archives, it got my attention because it is simultaneously a metric that should have never lost relevance and a metric that loses relevance when too much emphasis is placed on JIT or avoiding stock-outs (at all costs).

EOQ, short for Economic Order Quantity, is an old-school metric whose function is to identify the optimum order size that has the lowest cost. Defined as the square root(2UA/IC), where:

  • U is the (annual) usage,
  • A is the acquisition cost per order,
  • I is the inventory carrying rate, and
  • C is the cost per item

if demand is relatively constant, or at least known and predictable, the item is purchased in lots or batches, and the order preparation and inventory carrying costs are constant and known, then the formula tells you how much to order (and, as a result, how often to order) to minimize your overall order cost.

But, as the article points out, even assuming you can mesh this with your JIT production schedule (timing the orders so that you don’t carry too much inventory but still keep production running smoothly), these are not all of the costs associated with an order. Other costs include:

  • purchase order processing cost (which should be included in acquisition cost)
  • a true ICC rate (and not the holding cost computed as the extra cost of money invested in stock) that takes into account opportunity costs (which should be included in I)
  • taxes paid on inventory (which can be substantial and why many auto dealers, for example, have year end clear-outs) (which should also be included in I)
  • stock quantity shrinkage loss due to handling, pilferage, and theft (which should also be included in I)
  • stock risk losses due to product obsolescence, deterioration or shelf life expiration (which should be factored into C)

Thus, in order to use EOQ, you need to first insure that all of these costs can be accounted for. Then, as per the article, you need to insure that:

  • the product(s) are offered at a single price,
  • demand is predictable,
  • prices will not change (significantly) during the time the order is in stock,
  • stock will not exceed the shelf-life,
  • a single order can be placed, and
  • freight is included in the purchase price, or can be factored in.

In this situation, if the additional costs identified above are factored in, EOQ is still very relevant and should be used. However, if multiple assumptions are violated, EOQ may not be appropriate, and, more specifically, if demand is slow, or very unpredictable, then JIT is the preferred method.

And, furthermore, if you

  • establish minimum quantities to reflect minimum purchase volumes,
  • set a maximum ceiling stock for difficult, bulky, or large items, and
  • base adjustments on multiples of packaged lots

then you may find that EOQ is still right for you.