Category Archives: Supply Chain

One Supply Chain Misconception That Should Be Cleared Up Now

Not that long ago, Inbound Logistics ran a similarly titled article that quoted a large number of CXOs that made some really good observations on common misconceptions that included, and are not necessarily limited to (and you should check out the article in full as a number of the respondents made some very good points on the observations):

The misconceptions included statements that supply chains should:

reduce cost and/or track the most important metric of cost savings
accept negotiations as a zero-sum game
model supply chains as linear (progression from raw materials to finished goods)
… and made up of planning, buying, transportation, and warehousing silos
… and each step is independent of the one that proceeds and follows
accept they will continue to be male dominated
become more resilient by shifting production out of countries to friendly countries
expect major delays in transportation
… even though traditional networks are the best, even for last-mile delivery
accept truck driver shortage as a systemic issue
accept the blame when anything in them goes wrong
only involve supply chain experts
run on complex / resource intensive processes
… and only be optimal in big companies
… which can be optimized one aspect at a time
press pause on innovation or redesign or growth in a down market
be unique to a company and pose unique challenges only to that company
not be sustainable as that is still cost-prohibitive
see disruption as an aberration
return to (the new) normal
use technology to fix everything
digitalize as people will become less important with increasing automation and AI in the supply chain

And these are all very good points, as these are all common misconceptions that the doctor hears too much (and if you go through enough of the Sourcing Innovation archives, it should become clear as to why), but not the biggest, although the last one gets pretty close.

THE BIGGEST SUPPLY CHAIN MISCONCEPTION

We Can Use Technology to Do That!

the doctor DOES NOT care what “THAT” is, you cannot use technology to do “THAT” 100% of the time in a completely automated way. Never, ever, ever. This is regardless of what the technology is. No technology is perfect and every technology invented to date is governed by a set of parameters that define a state it can operate effectively in. When that state is invalidated, because one or more assumptions or requirements cannot be met, it fails. And a HUMAN has to take over.

Even though really advanced EDI/XML/e-Doc/PDF invoice processing can automate processing of the more-or-less 85% of invoices that come in complete and error free, and automate the completion and correction of the next 10% to 13%, the last 2% to 5% will have to be human corrected (and sometimes even human negotiated) with the supplier. And this is technology we’ve been working on for over three decades! So you can just imagine the typical automation rates you can expect from newer technology that hasn’t had as much development. Especially when you consider the next biggest misconception.

The Sourcing Innovation Source-to-Pay+ Mega Map!

Please Use The 2026 V2 Mega Map Instead. Thank you!

Now slightly less useless than every other logo map that clogs your feeds!

1. Every vendor verified to still be operating as of 4 days ago!
Compare that to the maps that often have vendors / solutions that haven’t been in business / operating as a standalone entity in months on the day of release! (Or “best-of” lists that sometimes have vendors that haven’t existed in 4 years! the doctor has seen both — this year!)

2. Every vendor logo is clickable!
the doctor doesn’t know about you, but he finds it incredibly useless when all you get is a strange symbol with no explanation or a font so small that you would need an electron microscope to read it. So, to fix that, every logo is clickable so you can go to the site and at least figure out who the vendor is.

3. Every vendor is mapped to the closest standard category/categories!
Furthermore, every category has the standard definitions used by Sourcing Innovation and Spend Matters!
the doctor can’t make sense of random categories like “specialists” or “collaborative” or “innovative“, despises when maps follow this new age analyst/consultancy award trend and give you labels you just can’t use, and gets red in the face when two very distinct categories (like e-Sourcing and Marketplaces or Expenses and AP are merged into one). Now, the doctor will also readily admit that this means that not all vendors in a category are necessarily comparable on an apples-to-apples basis, but that was never the case anyway as most solutions in a category break down into subcategories and, for example, in Supplier Management (SXM) alone, you have a CORNED QUIP mash of solutions that could be focused on just a small subset of the (at least) ten different (primary) capabilities. (See the link on the sidebar that takes you to a post that indexes 90+ Supplier Management vendors across 10 key capabilities.)

Secure Download the PDF! (or, use HTTP) [HTML]
(5.3M; Note that the Free Adobe Reader might choke on it; Preview on Mac or a Pro PDF application on Windows will work just fine)

You Need a Plan to Mitigate Supply Chain Risks. But You Also Need a Platform.

A recent article over on Supply & Demand Chain Executive on Navigating a Supply Chain Management Toolkit noted that with a plan in place, organizations can quickly respond to any changes and help mitigate any supply chain risks.

Which is true, but how much of the risk they can mitigate is the question.

The article, which is very good and definitely worth reading (so check out the link), noted that problems arose as a result of COVID and disruptions since because many organizations use just-in-time inventory management (which we’ve already noted should have ended by now along with seasonality). The article also noted that the problems were often exacerbated by the fact that order processes were often not documented effectively and, in general, most organizations don’t spend the time and resources to really manage their supply chain. All of this is correct, as is the observation that these challenges can be alleviated with wholly embracing the tried-and-true methods for effective supply chain management because effective processes, measurements and accountability are … key to a supply chain that works for an organization.

But, on their own, not the key. Today, you also need a platform that enables the organization to:

quickly detect a risk event has occurred
quickly analyze the impact
quickly initiate any pre-defined mitigation plan
quickly implement new decisions and processes where the mitigation plan isn’t sufficient and doesn’t exist
monitor the impact of the risk event and the response in near real time

Otherwise, your process could be too slow, your measurements inaccessible and/or unrecorded, and your accountability (under audit) non existent.

For example, the article indicates you should start by getting a better grip on inventory management (which is correct, no product, no business for most companies), and that involves a self-assessment, forecast accuracy review, and inventory segmentation. All correct. But that doesn’t help you when all of a sudden there’s a fire in the factory, a strike at the port, or a strait/border closing. What do you do then?

It also tells you that you should focus on better supplier relations, which is also extremely important, and focus on vetting suppliers before you onboard them and then measuring them and computing the total cost of ownership of keeping them, which is also very important as suppliers should improve over time and costs should not inch up faster than inflation. It also mentions the importance of proper strategic sourcing (matrices) to get the right products from the right suppliers. Another definite. But fails to tell you what you do when all of a sudden a key supplier can’t deliver or becomes unavailable.

The answer here is you use all of your good relationships and data to immediately identify the next best supplier. If you were splitting award, you try to shift to the other supplier (if they can handle the volume — if you were doing an 80/20 split and the 80% supplier suddenly became unavailable indefinitely, the 20% might not be able to support you, or at least not for very long, and you will have to add a new supplier to the mix. If you were doing proper sourcing, and proper supplier vetting before including them in an event, then you already have potential suppliers — the runners up from your last event. A good platform will let you immediately identify them and immediately start another sourcing event to onboard a new supplier as fast as possible.

If you have a good logistics (sourcing) platform, and your primary carrier / route becomes unavailable, you may be able to identify another carrier / route that will get you the products on time, or at least be able to accelerate an order from a secondary source of supply while you wait for the first source through a lengthier route.

The point is, while you need great processes, measurements (to indicate if something is taking too long, such as an order acknowledgement or a delivery, which can be a sign of a potential risk event materializing), and accountability (to show you made efforts to detect and mitigate risks in a reasonable time frame), you can’t measure, execute processes, or provide unquestionable audit trails of accountability without a proper platform. Never forget that. (And for help, you can see our Source-to-Pay series which helps you to identify where to start with your acquisitions and what vendors you might need to look at.)

And again, remember to read the article on Navigating a Supply Chain Management Toolkit as it will help you understand the basic processes you need to put in place.

Even Forbes is Falling for the the Gen-AI Garbage!

This recent article in Forbes on the Supply Chain Shift to Intelligent Technology is what inspired last week’s and this week’s rant because, while supply chains should be shifting to intelligent technology, the situations in which that is Gen-AI are still extremely rare (to the point that a blue moon is much more common). But what really got the doctor‘s goat is the ridiculous claims as to what Gen-AI can do. Claims with are simultaneously maddening and saddening because, if they just left out Gen-AI, then everything they claimed is not only doable, but doable with fantastic results.

Of the first three claims, Gen-AI can only be used to solve one — and only partially.

Procurement and Regulatory Compliance: This is one example where a Closed Private Gen-AI LLM is half the battle — it can process, summarize, and highlight key areas of hundred page texts faster and better than prior NLP tech. But it can’t tell you if your current contracts, processes, efforts, or plans will meet the requirements. Not even close. In fact, no AI can — the best AI can just indicate the presence or absence of data, processes, or tech that are most likely to be relevant and then an intelligent human needs to make the decision, possibly only after obtaining appropriate expert Legal advice.
Manufacturing Efficiency: streamline production workflows? optimize processes? reduce errors? No, Hell No, and even the Joker wouldn’t make that joke! You want streamlining? You first have to do a deep process cycle time analysis, compare it to whatever benchmarks you can get, identify the inefficiencies, identify potential processes and tech for improvement, and implement them. Optimize processes? Detailed step by step analysis, identification of opportunities, expert process redesign, training, implementation, and monitoring. Reduce errors? No! People and tech do the processes, not Gen-AI — implement better monitoring, rules, and safeguards.
Virtual Supply Collaboration: A super-charged chatbot on steroids is NOT a virtual assistant. Now, properly sandwiched between classical AI and rules-based intelligence it can deal with 80% of routine inquiries, but not on its own, and it’s arguable if it’s even worth it when a well designed app can get the user to the info they need 10 times faster with just a couple of clicks. Supply chain communicating? People HATE getting a “robot” on a support line as much as you do, to the point some of us start screaming profanities at it if we don’t get a real operator within 10 seconds. Based on this, do you really think your supplier wants to talk to a dumb bot that has NO authority to make a decision (or, at least, should NEVER have the authority — though the doctor is sure someone’s going to be dumb enough to give the bot the authority … let’s just hope they can live with the inevitable consequences)?

And maybe if the article had stopped there the doctor would let it pass, but
first of all, it went on to state the following for “AI”, without clarifying that Gen-AI doesn’t fit in the process, leading us to conclude that, since the first part of the article is about Gen-AI, this part is too, and thus is totally wrong when it claims that:

“AI” understands dirty data: with about 70% accuracy where it counts IF you’re lucky; that’s about how accurate it is at identifying a supplier from your ERP/AP transaction records; an admin assistant will get about 98% accuracy by comparison
it can “confirm” inventories: all it can do is regurgitate what’s in the inventory system — that’s not confirmation!
it can identify duplicate materials: first it has to identify two records that are actually duplicates;
and how likely do you think this is with a supplier mapping accuracy of 70%?
it can identify materials to be shared among facilities: well, okay, it can identify materials that are used across facilities and could be located in a central location — but how useful is that? it’s not because, first of all, YOU ALREADY KNOW THIS, and, second, IT CAN’T DO SUPPLY CHAIN OPTIMIZATION — THAT’S WHAT A SUPPLY CHAIN OPTIMIZATION SOLUTION IS FOR! OPTIMIZATION!!! We’ll break it down syllabically for you so you know what to ask for. OP – TUH – MY – ZAY – SHUN!
it can recommend ideal storage locations: again, NO! This requires solving a very sophisticated optimization model it doesn’t have the data for, doesn’t know how to build, and definitely doesn’t know how to solve.
it can revamp outdated stocking policies: well, only the solution of a proper Inventory OPTIMIZATION Model that identifies the appropriate locations and safety stock levels can identify how these should be revamped
it can recommend order patterns by consumption and lead time: that’s classical curve fitting and tend projection

And, secondly, as the doctor just explained, most of what they were saying AI could do CAN’T be done with AI, and instead can only be done with analytics, optimization, and advanced mathematical models! (You know, the advanced tech (that works) that you’ve been ignoring for over two decades!)

The Gen-AI garbage is getting out of control. It’s time to stop putting up with it and start pushing back against any provider who’s trying to sell you this miracle cure silicon snake oil and show them the door. There are real solutions that work, and have worked, for two decades that will revolutionize your supply chain. You don’t need false promises and tech that isn’t ready for prime time.

Somedays the doctor just wishes he was the Scarecrow. Only someone without a brain can deal with this constant level of Gen-AI bullsh!t and not be stressed about the deluge of misinformation being spread on a daily basis! But then again, without a brain, he might be fooled by the slick salespeople that Gen-AI could give him one, instead of remembering the wise words of the True Scarecrow.

Source-to-Pay+ Part 10: Over 55 Supply Chain Risk Vendors to Check Out

Last quarter, we ran a 9-part series that served as An Introduction to Supply Chain Risk where we introduced you to the risk elements not covered by traditional supplier management platforms (which we covered in our 39 Steps … err … 30 Clues … err … 39 Part Series on Source to Pay where we listed over 90 supply management companies of which over 1/3 claimed to have some degree of “risk”, which we dub supplier “Uncertainty”, management).

In our series, we focussed heavily on corporate risk, third party risk (which included ESG, Human Rights, Regulatory Compliance), supply chain risk (including transparency, traceability, and multi-tier tracking), transport risk, cyber risk, and analytics. We also noted that our next instalment would provide a starting list of vendors that you could check out to meet (some of) your supply chain risk needs.

This is that instalment. Hopefully this starting list will be useful to you. In the months that come, the hope is that some of these will be covered

Finally, a second reminder that inclusion on this list DOES NOT imply Sourcing Innovation is recommending the vendor.

Legend

3P	3rd Party / TPRM
S/V	supplier risk / verification
SCT	supply chain transparency
T/L	transport / logistics
MT	multi-tier
C	cyber
ESG	Environmental, Social, Governance
HR	Human Rights
RC	Regulatory Compliance
BoM	Bill of Materials (Direct)
DX	Discovery
TX	Traceability