Category Archives: Supply Chain

Perks and pitfalls of knowledge diffusion in the supply chain


Today’s guest post is by Professor Ralf W. Seifert & Olov H. D. Isaksson.
Ralf W. Seifert is Professor of Operations Management at IMD and he teaches in the “Leading the Global Supply Chain” (LGSC) program.
Olov Isaksson is a PhD candidate at the Chair of Technology and Operations Management at EPFL, specializing in buyer-supplier relationships. He previously worked at Henkel as a supply chain project manager.

Do you collaborate with, and learn from, your suppliers, or are you serving them the knowledge to compete with you head-on on a silver platter? This question is increasingly relevant in today’s global competitive environment. Firms are routinely leveraging global sourcing to gain cost advantages but competition nowadays occurs between supply chains, rather than businesses. Thus keeping an eye on your supplier’s ambitions is vital.

Case in point, just look at the ongoing patent infringement lawsuits between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. Apple turned to Samsung as a supplier for its new iPod and iPhone products back in 2005. At first the two companies jointly developed the components, which gave Samsung an insight into Apple’s technology and operations. Being the only supplier for the processors, Samsung also gained critical knowledge on Apple’s prediction of the market size for the iPhone. In 2010, Samsung launched its own smart phone and has since become Apple’s largest competitor. Today, Apple still remains dependent on Samsung, but it is trying hard to diversify its supplier portfolio.

The above situation exemplifies the negative aspects of knowledge spillovers in the supply chain — i.e. how important knowledge that exceeds the scope of the formal transaction can be diffused between customers and suppliers, and then be used in a rivalrous manner. At the same time, spillovers can also have positive effects and lead to a competitive advantage for the supply chain as a whole.

How does your desire to draw on trading partners for innovation balance with the need to protect strategic knowledge? And, to what extent do you take co-competition from suppliers into account in your supplier assessments? We engaged 34 executives from different high-tech firms and asked them about their opinion. Their consensus: recognizing knowledge spillovers is a critical issue in today’s supply chains. Both suppliers and customers are seen as important sources of information for innovation (see Fig 1).

“We get plenty of valuable information about the market, its players in the value chain and its main drivers from our customers and suppliers. My business relies on it. It is a great input for our R&D portfolio,” said Dr. Ir. Kees Joziasse, Director of Innovation at Corbion Purac.


Figure 1
While most high tech firms protect their innovations through patents, most of the executives stress that knowledge spillovers occur outside formal collaborations — to a large extent via personal interactions between employees of the firms (Figure 2).


Figure 2
Greg Nelson, Sr. Director R&D LED Systems at Philips highlights that employees possessing important knowledge must be conscious of the risks and rewards of knowledge spillovers when interacting outside the firm:

“Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain are a clear attention point. There is a need to create awareness up front with people who have these contacts and to have an explicit policy regarding what can be transferred. Policy restrictions must be balanced with the potential benefits that can be derived from collaboration and not hinder speed in the process. While policies and procedures are not always 100% effective, they do help create awareness in the organization to guard against unintended transfers.”

The Supplier Perspective

While a supplier can learn from its customers, it cannot choose who wants to buy its products/services. Still, Ted Smith, EMEA Sales Director at ON Semiconductor suggests that firms can leverage knowledge spillovers and gain a competitive advantage by carefully choosing collaboration/innovation partners.

“We typically don’t select which customers to do business with, but we do select customers to innovate with. We work with selected alpha-customers, or early adopters, who support supplier innovation in return for a head start in the market.”

The Supply Chain Perspective

Good and enduring partnerships can lead to a competitive advantage for the supply chain as a whole: Mukesh Singh, Senior Regional Manager at BASF explains that “Suppliers easily share their new learning/knowledge if the customer has a strong supplier relationship management program.”

However, it is important to agree upfront how innovative output that is generated in a collaboration should be divided. Dan Negrea, Managing Director AEMtec GmbH and Chief Technology Officer at ECMS exceet, elaborates:

“We strictly consider the background and foreground intellectual property (IP) in our cooperation with partners. The background IP is a source of information “for free.” The foreground IP is normally shared between our company and the customers. Product related IP goes to the customer and process related IP stays with us. In most cases, cutting edge products require the parallel development of a product and a manufacturing process.”

The Customer Perspective

Most executives viewed knowledge spillover as a positive phenomenon. Reflecting on the Apple-Samsung example, others might beg to disagree. Managers do need to protect important knowledge from potential competitors and patents offer only limited protection. Thus, strategic supplier assessments and a detailed supply chain contract are vital to mitigate this risk. If the knowledge in question is critical, in-house production or vertical integration of the supplier might still outweigh short-term gains.

Takeaways

Knowledge spillover readily occurs in your supply chain. Managers need to be aware of the risks of negative leaks, which can have detrimental consequences for the firm. At the same time, knowledge spillover can offer significant benefits for your supply chain if suppliers leverage newly acquired competences to your advantage. These are our recommendations:

  • Explicitly recognize the potential of knowledge spillovers in collaboration and sourcing decisions up-front! What do you need to protect from your competitors? Are there limitations in your supply chain contract? To what extent can your enforce non-use, non-disclosure and non-competition clauses in a global marketplace?
  • People buy from people. Make sure that employees are aware of the risks and benefits of knowledge spillovers! Create an appropriate policy regarding disclosures and interactions outside the firm!
  • Have a clear strategy with regards to each supply chain partner! Do you want a win-win situation or to squeeze a supplier? In collaborations, clearly agree upfront how innovative output shall be divided! If the knowledge is strategically important, in-house production or vertical integration of the supplier might be the safer option.


Thanks Ralf and Olov for this interesting take on Supply Chain collaboration.

Market Disruption Forces Supply Chain Change

 

Market Disruption Forces Supply Chain Change

Despite what the title of this recent article on “disruptive market drives supply chain change” over on Just Style might suggest, market disruption does not drive supply chain change, it forces it. However, the article is right when it notes that having an efficient and fast-reacting supply chain should be a must for any brand or retailer.

The difference is slight, but important. Driving implies there is some guidance to the movement. But the nature of disruption, especially in today’s supply chain, does little to guide an organization that needs to respond, and do so quickly. The organization is forced to change, because failure to do often results in a change in liquidity status from profitable to bankruptcy.

And it’s not just demographic shifts that a retailer or brand needs to react to, but disruptions further down the supply chain. Even if a brand can react quickly to a change in consumer preferences and adapt its main product line to have the look, feature, or ruggedness demanded by its target customer base, if a fire takes out its main manufacturing plant, or a labour dispute cuts off production of a needed rare earth metal, or an act of piracy results in its shipment being stolen, what is the brand going to do?

Organizations need supply chains that can react fast, but they also need supply chains that are informed even faster. In order to react, supply chains need multi-tier visibility into critical product lines, such as the visibility that Resilinc can provide. Otherwise, all the market intelligence in the world on changing consumer consumption patterns won’t do them any good if they don’t see that a critical even in their supply chain prevents them from being able to react accordingly.

 

Early Payment Discounts vs. Early Payment Rebates

Are we dealing with six of one and half a dozen of the other? After reading “The Art of the Play” (PCubed.com), I have to wonder.

They are different in that you get one right away and you get the other later, and they are different in that one is just a reduction in spend and the other can be treated as an income stream, if the CFO so desires, but in the end they both have the same effect on the bottom line — less spend.

So why would an organization favour one over the other when the big difference is capturing the savings now versus capturing the savings later? If the organization was limited in cash and was trying to maximize savings, then capturing the savings right away would definitely make more sense, but if the organization was flush with cash and the supplier offered tiered rebates that improved with volume, then the organization might want to wait until later. Otherwise, the doctor can’t see much of a difference.

However, one area where there is a big difference is paying for a platform vs. paying for a service, especially for a big company. For example, the Oxygen Finance model described in the article is to provide you with a service where you pay up to 50% of the discount or rebate captured by transaction. While this is a good deal for a mid-sized company that might not have the up-front cash required to implement the end-to-end e-Procurement solution required to effectively take advantage of discounts and rebates offered by suppliers for quick payments, this can be a very expensive solution for a large enterprise. Consider a company that spends 250 Million a year, the low-end of the market for Oxygen Finance. If the average rebate is 1.5%, and you give one third of that up to the service provider, then the organization is paying 1.25 M a year for the solution, and only achieving a 2X ROI.

A company of this size can acquire a SCF solution for a fraction of this cost and realize a much larger ROI.

When you dive in, you realize that there are only three reasons most companies can’t create or take advantage of most of the early payment discount and rebate opportunities available to them:

  1. Invoices aren’t getting in the system fast enough
    because most of them are coming in as (e-)paper.
  2. Approved invoices aren’t getting to AP fast enough
    because routings for approval take too long.
  3. Procurement doesn’t have the manpower to negotiate rebates on 100% of spend
    because there are too many suppliers.

And while these were valid problems a few years ago, without (m)any real solutions (that an average organization could afford), today:

  1. An organization can acquire a SaaS end-to-end invoice automation framework, such as the one offered by Nipendo, that will convert all incoming invoices into one standard e-format for six figures.
  2. An organization can acquire a number of rules-based e-Procurement and invoice automation solutions (including Nipendo‘s) that will automatically approve and route all error-free invoices that match a PO or contract to the AP system and route those that require manual correction or approval to the right individual for online (e-mail) approval.
  3. An organization can see significant returns addressing only 80% of the spend which is typically with less than 20% of the supply base.

An organization that takes this approach can typically acquire a solution for (much) less than 500K a year, save 1.5% on 200 M of spend, and see a (minimum) 6X return, which is the return you should be looking for from an e-Procurement solution.

Maybe there’s another reason for a large enterprise to go transaction-fee SaaS for discount and rebate management, but if there is, the doctor ain’t seeing it — and he’s been covering SCF for years. As far as he is concerned, the sweet-spot for transaction-fee SaaS for discount and rebate management is the 50M to 250M range, because the implementation cost of the necessary end-to-end e-Procurement, invoice-Automation, and SCF solution isn’t that much cheaper for a mid-sized organization than for a Global 3000, and at less than 200M of addressable spend, the ROI multiplier starts to drop considerably.

Any differing opinions?

Supply Chain Insights 7 Steps to Failure

A recent Slideshare presentation by Supply Chain Insights (SCI) on 7 Reasons You May Fail in the Race for Supply Chain 2020 had some great insights into what many organizations are doing wrong but, more importantly, cemented the need for the 3Ts, as discussed in SI’s recent post on Supply Chain 2020 – What Will It Take to Get There, if you want you Supply Chain organization to make it to 2020.

According to SCI, these are the 7 reasons your supply chain may fail:

  • You treat your supply chain like a function
    rather than an end-to-end process.
  • You hired a boatload of consultants and spent buckets of money on “best practices”
    that were actually “emerging practices”.
  • Your technologies are more about you than your customers
    even though customer data is more readily available.
  • You are moving like a snail in a fast-paced world
    when you need to be executing in real-time.
  • You are simply not prepared to compete for supply chain talent
    which is the missing link in the supply chain.
  • Your technologies are quickly becoming legacy
    while new technologies are emerging every day.
  • Your supply chain is too reactive
    when it needs to sense and learn.

SCI is right on the money. If your supply chain:

  • lacks talent
  • runs on antiquated technology
  • hasn’t transitioned to new processes in decades
  • only reacts to disruptions, instead of trying to predict & mitigate them
  • doesn’t work with customers and never asks for their data
  • doesn’t focus on solutions instead of the “hot” methodology of the day and
  • doesn’t focus on strategic organizational planning because it’s spending all it’s time executing tactical processes

it’s not going to be around very long.

A supply chain needs to be:

  • driven by talent
  • enabled by technology
  • transitioning to improved processes all the time
  • focussed on risk management and mitigation
  • collaborating with customers and suppliers up and down the chain
  • solution-driven, not “emerging practice” focussed and
  • strategic, not tactical.

And that’s just the start. For more insights into what attributes your supply chain needs to adapt in order to survive the race for Supply Chain 2020, check out SCI’s 7 Reasons You May Fail in the Race for Supply Chain 2020 before your supply chain starts stumbling too (if it hasn’t already).

These Transformations Worked For Samsung. With a Few Tweaks, They Will Work for You Too!

Samsung is not only none of the most successful global electronic brands, but one of the most successful brands period. (And with the surging popularity of Android, and it’s new Galaxy tablet, it’s market share is increasing rapidly in that market – one of the hardest to compete it.) On top of this, it is a supply chain leader, ranked #8 on the Gartner 2013 Supply Chain Top 25. How did they do it? A recent piece over on Supply Chain 24/7 on 7 Best Practices that Transform Samsung Electronics’ Supply Chain by SupplyChainOpz that referenced research by the Harvard Business Review, Supply Chain Management: The International Journal, and the Journal of the Operational Research Society did a great job of identifying the key decisions, and transformations, that helped propel Samsung from a much smaller player in trading, food processing, textiles, insurance, securities and retail to a world leader in electronics and digital technology.

Since they will work for any Supply Chain with a few tweaks, SI is strongly suggesting that you (re-)read SupplyChainOpz 7 Best Practices that Transform Samsung Electronics’ Supply Chain before continuing on to SI’s 7 Transformations that will transform your CPG Supply Chain.

7 Transformations that will Transform Your CPG Supply Chain

  1. Listen to the Voice of the Customer
    Look at the top 10 of the Gartner Supply Chain Top 25. Apple, McDonald’s, Amazon.com, Unilever, Intel, P&G, Cisco, Coca-Cola, and Colgate-Palmolive. Every single one of these companies sells products the customer wants in every market they are in. To better understand the market, Samsung sends senior employees to MBA programs at local universities to help them understand the market and then establishes connections with appropriate leaders and partners in those markets to keep the insights coming in after the executives return to their HQ. While it’s not critical to attend a program in the target market, it is critical to be tapped in. Pay attention to market intelligence, go to trade shows and see what is attracting attention, follow the emerging trends, and consider what an average individual in your target market does in the course of a day and a week.
  2. Setup a Cross Functional Team Composed with the Right Talent
    As a Supply Management practitioner, this is a best practice that should be well ingrained by now as you should be setting one up for every strategic sourcing project. However, there should also be a cross-functional team that guides the over-arching supply chain strategy.
  3. Adopt a Measurable Supply Chain Improvement Methodology
    Samsung adopted Six Sigma and transitioned to DMAEV (Define, Measure, Analyze, Enable, and Verify). There’s also TPS and the Lean Methodology that fell out. The particular improvement methodology is not as critical as the commitment to implementing and executing on it day in and day out.
  4. Transition to Standardized Technology, Processes and Parts
    Samsung standardized parts and processes and produces the majority of its components in Korea to enable them to better monitor and manage product quality. But don’t stop at parts, and production processes, move to planning and management processes and the underlying technology processes. For every function, there should be one system and one version of the truth. Each department can use its own best-of-breed systems if, and only if, there is a central data store that functions as the master data repository that each system works off of and that is always taken as the one version of the truth.
  5. Utilize Advanced Sourcing, CRM, and Production Systems
    An Advanced Planning and Production System is a good start, but lets face it, true efficiencies materialize by getting the sourcing right. Be sure to source all strategic or high-value components using a strategic sourcing process that makes use of spend analysis and decision optimization and other advanced technologies. In addition, be sure to capture all of the sales data and user feedback that you can with good CRM systems. And be sure to make sure that you react to sales forecasts appropriately with your advanced planning and production systems.
  6. Implement Risk Monitoring and Measurement
    The best laid plans are easily and quickly ruined by a single supply chain disruption. Implement an advanced supply chain visibility and monitoring system that monitors your suppliers and their suppliers to detect minor supply hiccups before they become major supply chain disruptions and to make sure you are aware of any significant event (such as an earthquake, border closing, civil uprising, etc.) that could affect your supply chain as soon as it happens.
  7. Focus on Your Talent
    Samsung threw out the seniority-based performance evaluation system and implemented a performance-based system in its place that allows the best and the brightest to have their career fast-tracked. Make sure you have a system that allows talent to advance through your organization if you want to attract, and retain, the talent you need for your supply chain.