Category Archives: Cost Reduction

You Can Have Any Color You Want …

… so long as it is black.

This is one piece of advice from the early 20th century that we should not have forgotten in the early 21st. Maybe if a few more companies remembered this, they would not be in such dire straits. Consider the case of PolyOne Corporation that we discussed in a recent post on coming back from the brink to cash in the bank and how the complexity of too many manufacturing locations producing too many product variants was running them deep into the red.

Now consider the case of Apple — one iPad with 2 network connectivity options and 3 memory options. That’s only 6 variations, with only 2 components different in each variation. They’re “you can have any iPad you want, as long as it’s white” produced the best selling pad/tablet PC this year (with sales in excess of 2 Million units in less than 60 days, before it was available outside of the US), just like their “you can have any iPhone you want as long as it’s black” produced the best selling phone three years ago.

I was reminded of this while reading a recent piece on getting a handle on complexity which offered up a four step approach to reduce complexity, which, while workable, lacks the simplicity of:

You can have any color you want, so long as it is black.

Remember this, and you just might get your complexity, and associated costs, under control.

Share This on Linked In

Making Cost Cuts Stick

A recent article in the McKinsey Quarterly noted that it is often difficult to make cost cuts stick, especially when the economy is improving, and that only 10% of cost reduction programs show sustained results three years later. To try and improve the situation, they offered us five ways CFOs can make cost cuts stick, which, briefly, were:

  • Assign accountability at the right level

    Make sure the people actually spending the money are accountable for how it is spent, and that their compensation is related to how well they adhere to the initiatives.

  • Focus on how to cut, not just how much

    Set policies and procedures that are in tune with desired spending behaviours.

  • Don’t Let P&L accounting data get in the way of cost reduction

    P&L categories don’t give the kind of per-unit insights that help focus cuts in specific categories, like travel expenses, that the company can most afford to cut.

  • Clearly articulate the link between cost management and strategy

    Strategy must lead cost-cutting efforts so managers can deliver a consistent message on how the identified cost reductions will strengthen the company.

  • Treat cost management as an ongoing exercise

    It’s not a one-off exercise driven by the need to manage short-term profit targets, but a long-term initiative designed to build a competency in cost management.

And these are all great ways to control costs and maintain cuts, but I think the real key to making cost cut sticks is to cut what needs to be cut. If you cut what needs to be cut, then the cut is a justifiable and defensible one. This makes it easier to articulate the link, focus on the how, treat cost management as an ongoing exercise, assign accountability, and bypass the P&L as you go straight to the data source.

Share This on Linked In

From the Brink to Cash in the Bank – Supply Chain Management Can Save You Too

The SCMR is back, Quinn is still in charge, and it looks like he’s striving to maintain the quality that the SCMR was known for. I was quite impressed with one of the first articles on driving a turnaround in tumultouos times, which presented a case study on PolyOne and how it came back from the brink of bankruptcy. In March of 2009, it’s share price reached an abysmal low of $1.32. On May 27, it was $10.19. That’s an eightfold improvement in a little over a year and the reason analysts are now recommending it as a buy.

In the past year, it generated $218 Million of free cash flow and reduced its net debt by $233 Million. This is very significant given that it’s sales in 2009 were only 2.061 Billion as it means that PolyOne not only freed up 10% of their total sales for working capital but also managed to direct over 10% of their total sales to reduce their net debt. Plus, not only is their long term debt only 60% of what it was in 2005, but they went from a net loss of 273 Million in 2008 (when sales were 33% higher) to a net income of 68 Million in 2009, an incredible turnaround.

So how did they do this? Great supply chain management. Specifically:

  • Manufacturing RealignmentA series of mergers and acquisitions left PolyOne with over 40 global production facilities, considerably more than it needed to meet demand and mitigate risk. A detailed network analysis indicated that they could more than meet demand and mitigate risk with only 80% of manufacturing capability. This allowed them to close nine production facilities and significantly decrease operating costs.
  • Inventory ReductionAt the end of the third quarter in 2008, the company was carrying $331 Million in inventory, a number equal to 16% of sales in 2009 and an incredible cost. They undertook a two-day Kaizen event to identify opportunities to reduce inventory and cash-to-cash cycle times that identified consignment inventory reductions, opportunities to reduce costs by way of distributors, better inventory transfer practices with key suppliers, and opportunities to improve reorder points. Specifically the first thing they did was kill the re-order points that were on autopilot in the SAP MRP, which didn’t reflect the plummet in demand that came with the economic downturn. Moving to regular, manual review, helped them reduce inventory by $139 Million in just six months.
  • Process ImprovementsThrough numerous process improvements that included inventory stratification, PolyOne also reduced DSI, which dropped from 55 days in first quarter to 37 days in third quarter, while improving on-time delivery.
  • Greater Customer FocusManagement established the mindset that on-time delivery was critical and by improving customer focus, PolyOne improved on-time delivery from 81% in 2005 to 93% in 2009, a 15% improvement.

In short, it was supply chain that saved the day, and its the best practices described in this blog that will get you there. Get a strategy, manage your finances, lean your supply chain, improve your forecasts, optimize your inventory, analyze your opportunities, adopt e-Sourcing, and optimize your awards and you too can go from a net loss of 10% to a net income of 3% literally overnight, on your way to becoming a best in class supply chain company.

Share This on Linked In

How Will Your Organization Deal with the Sustainability Megatrend?

In a recent post we explained how “sustainability is the current megatrend”, but we did not give you any tips on how to deal with this information. In this post we’ll overview some of the advice provided in a recent Harvard Business Review article on “the sustainability imperative” and address how the sustainability imperative may impact your supply chain.

The first piece of advice given in the article is to learn from past megatrends. For example, in both the IT and quality business megatrends, the market leaders evolved through four principal stages of value creation:

  1. Cost, Risk, and Waste ReductionInitially, companies focussed on reducing costs, and on risks that could drive costs up and waste that also unnecessarily increased costs.
  2. Performance Optimization of Product, Process, or Business FunctionsIn this stage, businesses moved from doing old things in new ways to doing new things in new ways. Processes were transformed using new tools and methodologies so that overall operations were more efficient and more cost effective.
  3. Integration of Innovative Approaches into Core StrategiesInnovation was no longer relegated to a black-ops skunkworks unit as entire business strategies were built around continuous product innovation.
  4. Value Proposition Differentiation through New Business ModelsInnovation was extended throughout the enterprise and transformed the underlying business models.

So what do these classic stages of value creation mean to your organization, and, ultimately, your supply chain?

  1. Cost, Risk, and Waste ReductionIn this stage, a company will focus on outperforming competitors on regulatory compliance and environmental risk management. The company will implement trade manage solutions to keep abreast of current and upcoming regulations, switch to greener raw materials when a choice is available, and switch to suppliers with a lower carbon footprint.
  2. Performance Optimization of Product, Process, or Business FunctionsIn this stage, a company will optimize natural resource efficiency across the value chain. Products will be redesigned to remove environmentally harmful materials and reduce the environmental impact of the production process. Lean, Six Sigma, and related approaches will be applied where appropriate to minimize waste.
  3. Integration of Innovative Approaches into Core StrategiesIn this stage, sustainable innovations become the source of new revenue and growth. For example, the organization will switch from manual paper processes to automated systems to improve efficiency, move to the utilization and creation of energy efficient products, and embrace frugal innovation to capture an increasing share of emerging markets.
  4. Value Proposition Differentiation through New Business ModelsIn this stage, a company will embrace a new business model to the point where it permeates the corporate brand and employee engagement. For example, a car manufacturer may switch its entire product line to hybrids.

And that is how your organization will begin to deal with the sustainability megatrend.

Share This on Linked In

Sometimes Old-School Works Just Fine: An EC Sourcing RFP Case Study

It’s still a buyer’s market. Many suppliers are desperate for business, supply (capability) still exceeds demand in many markets, and even though prices are starting to rise in some markets with expectation of recovery, they haven’t risen much yet. According to many strategic sourcing professionals, it’s the perfect market for an (e-)Auction because suppliers will compete for your business. And while that may true, it does not guarantee that you’ll get the best result.

An e-Auction carries a number of risks. The result can be higher prices than a traditional negotiation. For example, if the auction was limited to a small number of suppliers, who are in contact, they may collude to keep prices high — or they may all adopt a strategy of delayed bids and minimum bid decrements which could result in higher prices. The result could be unsustainably low prices. A supplier, desperate to win business, might hope to make up losses in future volume, bid a razor thin margin, and then risk bankruptcy when its costs rise. At this point, the only choice for the organization would be to accept higher prices (through surcharges) or risk an interruption while a search for a new supplier was conducted. And the result could be strained supply base relations. A poorly conducted event can instill animosity in winners and losers alike, which would result in poor service from the winners and lack of response in future bid requests from the losers.

As a result, sometimes the best approach is an old-fashioned multi-round RFX with feedback between each bid, as it was for a certain mid-size apparel retailer, who we’ll call Apparel-For-You, who was new to e-Sourcing and just wanted a way to streamline their ocean freight bidding efforts (for their 25M ocean freight category) and communicate with suppliers in a consultive way. Specifically, Apparel-For-You, not realizing the significant savings opportunity before them, had the following goals in their search for an e-Sourcing solution:

  1. Understand Supplier Willingness to Bid on a Per Lane BasisHistorically, Apparel-For-You had been surprised a number of times not only with respect to bids that came in, but with respect to lanes carriers were willing to bid on individually
  2. Reduce Analysis and Reporting TimeApparel-For-You’s supply base, which provided them with over 2,200 individual SKUs, was spread across 30 ports of origin, 4 major ports of destination, 9 carriers, and 4 container types — which equals 4,320 bids to be collected and analyzed before the 120 lanes can be divided among the carriers. While certainly not impossible to do by hand, that’s still 10 (9 carrier plus 1 integrated) fairly large spreadsheets to manipulate and analyze in a time consuming and error-prone manner.
  3. Communicate with Suppliers in a Consultative and Regular FashionWithout a dedicated sourcing tool, it’s difficult for all team members to know when a carrier was last contacted and what was discussed. The ball could be dropped, and this could lead to a damaged relationship. Given the importance of relationships in Apparel-For-You’s supply chain, as apparel has a short product life-cycle, this is something Apparel-For-You wanted to avoid.

Given these requirements, and Apparel-For-You’s lack of e-Sourcing sophistication, EC Sourcing recommended that Apparel-For-You use a multi-round RFX, starting with an RFI to find out which carrier was interested in which lanes, with analysis and feedback between each round. The carriers were all informed up-front of the new process, and Apparel-For-You consistently followed-through after each round.

Using the built-in templates, Apparel-For-You was able to easily create an RFI that allowed it to create the right pricing matrix for each supplier as well as clarify important T&C’s with each. The process of collecting bids from carriers, who were used to Excel, was simplified by way of Excel integration. This integration also simplified the amalgamation of the bids into a single matrix for analysis purposes, as the integration was automated and free from human error.

Using built-in reports and advanced analysis models provided by EC Sourcing, Apparel-For-You was able to quickly analyze the bids after each round and provide the supplier with feedback on their relative ranking, which included how much they’d have to lower their bids to improve their rank and take the #1 spot. Using this information, the carriers were able to adjust their bids accordingly and focus on the lanes they could perform the best on with respect to the buyer’s needs.

In the end, Apparel-For-You not only accomplished their goals of

  1. Understanding Supplier Willingness to Bid on a Per Lane Basisas this information was known before the first bid was collected
  2. Reducing Analysis and Reporting Timeas the project time-frame was reduced by 35%
  3. Communicating with Suppliers in a Consultative and Regular Fashionas they were able to inform the carriers of their rank and potential awards promptly after each bid, and track when the last discussion took place

but Apparel-For-You also reduced their costs by 19%.

This just goes to show that, sometimes, old school works just fine. The full case study is available in PDF form.

Share This on Linked In