Category Archives: Risk Management

How Do You Monitor Your Supply Chain for Disruptions?

Are you in the top tier of organizations who actively monitor the global news for potentially disruptive events and that identifies those events that will likely disrupt the organization’s supply chain before the shockwaves disrupt the chain and cause shipments to be late or missed entirely in first, second, and even third tier suppliers, or do you wait until a shipment is late, Sales is screaming, and then figure out what happened?

Be honest. Even though SI readers are the most intelligent, progressive, and sexy Supply Management professionals in the world, the reality is that many work for organizations who are still stuck in 1699 with respect to making the most of modern technological solutions.

And while automatic event monitoring software is, relatively speaking, quite new, as the underlying news monitoring and semantic processing technologies they are built on are quite new, the technology has been around for a few years and is maturing nicely. For example, Resilinc‘s* new’s release, called EventWatch Processional, monitors over 25 different types of disruption events ranging from catastrophic global crisis and natural disasters (such as earthquakes, hurricanes, and floods), to isolated incidents (such as factory fires, labour strikes [at the port], and plant meltdowns), and government regulatory actions (such as border closings and economic sanctions). And while the software can’t pick up on every type of possible disruption (because a single truck getting hijacked inside China carrying your microprocessors might not make the news), if you look at the most costly disruptions over the last two decades, most were due to natural disasters, labour strikes, and port/border closures — and these are all picked up by the EventWatch solution. From a coverage perspective, it’s an 80%+ solution and most of what it misses (such as the theft example above) will be picked up by appropriate collaborative supply chain solutions that track shipments, delivery dates, and milestones. (For example, if your second tier supplier was supposed to get a shipment of microprocessors on the 5th, and they still aren’t there on the 7th, communicates the potential delay to the first tier supplier, who incorporates those microprocessors into power regulator units for your engines, and who knows that every day of delay will delay their production and shipment to you, communicates the potential delay to you, and that’s a problem, and the communication of such problem flows back from you through the first tier supplier to the second tier supplier, the second tier supplier can begin looking into the problem immediately. If the second tier supplier then calls the logistics company who says that the truck can’t be located, a theft can be reported, the information can be communication back up the chain, and mitigations can immediately be investigated in a collaborative effort between all parties).

A good event monitoring solution, like EventWatch, will provide email notification of identified threats that can potentially disrupt the supply chain along with

  • event details,
  • industries and geographies potentially affected,
  • links to further information, and
  • potential impacts to the organization’s supply chain based upon
    information provided by the organization.

This will allow an organization to quickly identify potential supply chain impacts from significant disruptions and, if necessary, begin to work on mitigation plans immediately. Identifying disruptions early is critical given the potential ramifications of a prolonged disruption event. For example, consider the Chilean port strike in 2012. This strike, which first made the global news on March 20, prevented Codelco, Chile’s largest copper mine that was also suffering from an internal strike, from sending shipments — a reality that was identified by Resilinc’s monitoring software on March 28th. Four days later, on April 1, the mine declared a critical force majeure. Since force majeure events result in an unavailability of supply from one or more sources, knowing that they are likely to occur, even four days in advance, gives an organization a significant edge as it can lock in supply from the lowest cost competitor (with excess supply) before that supply, and other sources, becomes unavailable as everyone scrambles to find alternate sources of supply once the unavailability of the primary supply makes the global news.

This is just one example of the importance of disruptive event monitoring. Where supply chain disruptions are concerned, knowledge is power — and the first to know have the power to take actions while there are still actions to be taken. Once all remaining supply is locked up, it’s locked up — and unless the organization can find a substitute product, material, or service (which is not always possible due to regulatory and/or material requirements of the product being manufactured or service being delivered), the organization is, simply put, screwed.


*Just in case you haven’t been paying attention, in full disclosure, Resilinc is an SI sponsor.

Could the Fateful Four Bring Down Your High-Tech or Automotive Supply Chain?

Today, Resilinc announced that leading global supply chains have become dependent on the same small group of sub-tier suppliers – concentrating the risk and significantly increasing the potential for crippling supply chain disruptions. Based on global supply chain mapping data that it gathered over the past year, which analyzed a subset of data from over 600 large and medium suppliers across 2,500+ sites spread over 50+ countries, Resilinc performed a detailed analysis in order to identify specific industry trends that could be used to create stronger supply chain resiliency plans.

This study, which focussed on the analysis of sub-tiers that often hide risks that go undetected by the buying organization, not only found that global supply chain risk tends to be concentrated in certain sub-tier suppliers and localities, but also found that many leading global supply chains, in the High-Tech and Automotive sectors in particular, have become dependent on the same small group of sub-tier suppliers.

In particular, the study found that in the High-Tech and Automotive supply chains, the vast majority of suppliers are dependent on sites that are owned by just four suppliers and that more than 50% of all sites analyzed are located in just four countries: Taiwan, China, the USA, and Japan. Who are these four suppliers that can control the fate of your entire High-Tech or Automotive Supply Chain? Taiwan Semiconductor (TSMC), with an 83.8 B market cap; Amkor Technology (AMKR), with a 926 M market cap; ASE Inc, with a 191.5 B market cap ; and United Microelectronics (UMC) with a 5.2 B market cap. With a combined market capitalization of over 281 B, these fateful four suppliers have a commanding control of your High-Tech and Automotive Supply Chains.

For more information on how visibility can improve your supply chain resiliency, see the IDC Manufacturing Insights on Arguing the Case for Supply Chain Resiliency in 2013 (registration required).

Stop Blaming the Supplier! Melamine in the Milk is Your Fault!

Research reveals that only 6% of procurement managers and directors have ever been made aware of unethical activity in their supply chain. (Source: EY.com)

As much as we’d like to believe that only 6% of supply chains have unethical activity, given that almost 86% of North American companies have a supply chain reliance upon China alone for key parts1, that’s a pipe dream. Depending on how rigid you want your definition of ethical to be, I’d guess that the number should be closer to 60%.

So why is it your fault if your supplier does it? Simple. It’s because less than half of your organizations do any due diligence in their supply chains! Only 48% of UK firms do any due diligence at all! Even worse, 14% of respondents to the EY survey did not even know what third-party due diligence meant, for crying out loud! You have to do due diligence and you have to ask tough questions and someone who can be trusted has to do a site visit to major suppliers at some point. If you do all this, and the supplier lies through their teeth, then, while your company may still be held financially responsible, it won’t be held criminally responsible and ethically you will know you did all you could (except cut the supplier loose before they did the unethical act, but at least you can cut them loose as soon as they do).

This is why you need good supply chain visibility, document management, and CSR monitoring. There are companies that do this, including Resilinc, Integration Point, and Ecovadis. (See the Vendor Post Index or Resource Site for more.) Reach out and get these types of solutions if you don’t already have them. They will be worth it.

1 Supply Chain Disruptions, Ted Landgraf, Above the Standard Procurement Group, July 15, 2012

Supply Chain Security Pays – Why Are You Still Not Doing It?

Recent studies have show that just one in six organizations have continuity plans in place 1 and that of the 43% of organizations that implement supplier codes of conduct, only 25% of these organizations perform even minimal monitoring 2. In other words, organizations are not implementing proper security-based risk management plans, even though they have a 98% chance of experiencing a major supply disruption in the next 24 months. And of the one in six organizations that are implementing security plans, only one in four of these organizations are making the effort to make sure their suppliers are conducting business in a proper, low risk way.

This is despite the fact that we’ve had hard data for over seven years that demonstrates the solid cost reductions for those organizations that invest in supply chain risk management and security. As outlined in this 2006 Sourcing Innovation Post on Quantifying the Value of Supply Chain Security Investments, the benefits of investments include:


  • Improved Product Safety
    38% reduction in loss; 37% reduction in tampering

  • Improved Inventory Management
    14% reduction in excess inventory; 12% increase in on-time delivery
  • Improved Supply Chain Visibility
    50% increase in data access; 30% increase in data access timeliness
  • Improved Product Handling
    43% increase in the automated handling of goods
  • Process Improvements
    30% reduction in process deviation
  • More Efficient Customs Clearance
    49% reduction in cargo delays; 48% reduction in cargo inspections
  • Speed Improvements
    29% reduction in transit time; 28% reduction in delivery time windows
  • Resilience
    30% reduction in problem identification, response, and resolution times
  • Higher Customer Satisfaction
    26% reduction in customer attrition; 20% increase in new customers

Just do it already!

1 The Weakest Link, UK Plc’s Supply Chain; Zurich
2 Safe Supply Chains Help Produce Sustainable Business, Zurich and Rockwell Automation, 2012
3 Innovators in Supply Chain Security: Better Security Drives Business Value, Stanford Global Supply Chain Management Forum and IBM, 2006

The Wheatland Hop Was 100 Years Ago Today

And while it may sound like a new dance craze, it was actually a riot that took place during a strike on the Durst Ranch in Wheatland, California that resulted in four deaths. It was among the first major farm labour confrontations, blamed on the radical syndicalist trade union of the Industrial Workers of the World, and a * example of what an organization can expect if it tries to take advantage of poor workers in developing, and more importantly, emerging countries or, even worse, workers at home by trying to force interns and low-salaried workers to work long hours for little pay and no benefits.

As per the Wikipedia entry, in the summer of 1913, Durst advertised for temporary workers with a promise of ample work at high rates of pay for every hop picker that arrived on the farm by August 5. In this particular year, the supply of willing workers almost doubled the demand, and Durst slashed pay rates. To make matters worse, not only were workers on his farm making roughly half of what workers on other farms were making (for toiling twelve hours a day in fields that could reach 110F / 44C), but the workers were forced to live in tents on a barren hillside that they had to rent for 75c/week when they made, on average, $1.50 a day with drinking water a mile away and unspeakably unsanitary toilet conditions. And to add insult to injury, Durst retained 10% of the earnings until the end of the harvest, and only paid it out if the workers stayed until the end of the harvest.

It was only a matter of days before a temporary local chapter of the IWW was organized that demanded a better pay rate per lb of hops picked, worker supervision of measurement of the hops, provision of drinking water in the fields, improved toilet facilities, and assistants to help women and children load and unload heavy hop sacks. Durst responded that toilet conditions would be improved, water would be provided in the fields, and one worker could be allowed to witness the weighing process. The local chapter of the IWW then threatened a strike. Durst responded by calling the sheriff (who could not do anything for lack of an arrest warrant). By the end of August 2, a mass meeting for all of the workers was planned for August 3. On the 3, with a mass meeting underway, Durst went into town to gather authorities to put down the revolt. The sheriff, a number of deputies, and the district attorney was pulled into the ranch.

Upon arrival, shortly after the mass meeting had begun, the sheriff and his men tried to arrest the leader of the of the local IWW chapter, but workers intervened. In response, one of the law enforcement officials fired a shotgun into the air, which was taken as an act of aggression and which prompted a full-fledged riot and an attack on the sheriff, the deputies, and a district attorney.

Unfortunately, instead of being a warning siren for other farm and ranch owners that used migrant workers, it was only the first of other bitter strikes between California growers and farm workers that would take place over the next couple of decades.

In a nutshell, Corporate Social Responsibility is more than just good PR, it’s good business.