by Elizabeth Hines | Dec 7, 2016 | Blog, Current Events, Strategy, Supply Chain
Regardless of Trump’s campaign promises, global trade and trade agreements are complex issues that can’t be solved with the wave of a tariff wand.
Trade was at the forefront of the 2016 presidential race, with both candidates putting the United States on a collision course with China. President-elect Donald Trump, of course, made massive tariff hikes one of the defining issues of his campaign.
In stark contrast to traditional Republican rhetoric, Trump vowed during his acceptance speech in July — while also promising to bring jobs back to Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York, Michigan, and “all of America” — “I am not going to let companies move to other countries, firing their employees along the way, without consequences. Not going to happen anymore.”
Although such language makes trade experts and economists balk, that line in particular earned the approval of both Democratic (72%) and Republican (61%) voters who listened to the speech as part of a focus group. If you have been directly affected by the manufacturing layoffs, it may be tempting to assume that waving the tariff wand and putting the screws on American companies will bring about a manufacturing renaissance in the United States.
The complex problem of global supply chains
The reality is, as countless experts caution, far from that simple, threatening instead to severely disrupt U.S. manufacturers that rely on global supply chains.
One of the bleakest assessments by Moody’s Analytics maintains hitting China and Mexico with tariffs of 45% and 35%, respectively — and assuming they do not retaliate with the same rates — would cause two million American workers to lose their jobs, throw the country into recession, and lead to another 1.5 million jobs never being created that otherwise would have been.
Besides the global implications of a trade war, imposing high tariffs on China, to which the United States sold $116 billion of goods in 2016 (including aircraft parts, semiconductors and automobiles) could have far-reaching consequences on the health of our high-value industries if China decides to hit back.
The law of unintended consequences
The law of unintended consequences was on display when the U.S. Commerce Department in 2012 slapped anti-dumping duties on Chinese solar panels after SolarWorld AG charged below-cost Chinese imports cost hurt the company’s U.S. production. In response to the 78% duty, China hit U.S. producers of polycrystalline silicon, the raw material for photovoltaic cells, with 57% duties.
As a result, a fast-growing industry gearing up to meet demand from Chinese solar panel makers took a significant hit. Hemlock Semiconductor in 2014 abandoned construction of a $1.5 billion new silicon plant, while REC Silicon in Moses Lake, Wash., halted production this year.
REC Chief Legal Officer Francine Sullivan commented in Fortune, the “necessity and value in putting on tariffs to protect solar panels in the U.S. was just not thought through. We’ve suffered enormous financial damage as a result of this.”
As I reviewed a variety of opinions for this piece, I came across two quotes that offer valid yet widely different perspectives on the issue:
First, here is Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, in Fortune:
“I don’t think [Trump] does our issue any favors by being so incredibly jingoistic and bombastic. But I believe there is widespread agreement. … There is something amiss with our economic relationship with China, and it’s past time that our government pushes back a little more forcefully.”
Secondly, Doug Oberhelman, chairman and CEO of Caterpillar and president of Business Roundtable, who has described higher tariffs as “very dangerous,” told the New York Times:
“We are 5% of the world population. Ninety-five percent of our potential customers are elsewhere. We’ve got to learn and figure out how to deal with that.”
Regardless of which viewpoint coincides with your own, it is safe to say trade and trade agreements are enormously complex issues that hardly fit into the narrative of populist appeal. An outright trade war will benefit no one.
What is your take on this issue?
This post originally appeared on EBN online.
by Jennifer Hart Yim | Dec 6, 2016 | Big Data, Blog, Data/Analytics, Leadership, Logistics, Strategy, Supply Chain, Transportation & Trucking, Warehousing & Materials Handling
Supply chain leaders must be ready to implement big data in order to continuously improve.
This guest post comes to us from Adam Robinson, director of marketing for Cerasis, a top freight logistics company and truckload freight broker.
Supply chain leaders are enthralled with the idea of using big data, but they tend to fail to understand how to disseminate big data in their organization properly. True, they may know how to roll out big data in a single warehouse, or they may have heard their competitors used branded systems for implementing this new technology. However, the fundamental problem remains.
Supply chain leaders must be ready to implement big data and leverage it to improve their companies without any delay or inhibition. This may sound impossible and frightening, but they must only understand how big data always goes back to these two, simple principles of measurement: review and action.
Ask traditional questions, and let big data provide answers.
The most common complaint of newer companies using big data analytics capabilities tends to revolve around traditional questions of business strategy. Consider the following elements explains John Richardson of Inbound Logistics, that impact business strategy.
- Increasing order efficiency.
- Demand forecasts.
- The quantity of each product.
- Inventory location and management.
- Raw material suppliers and logistics.
- Transportation modes used in procurement and shipping.
- Distribution of goods prior to purchase.
- Demand fluctuations.
Each of these elements more traditionally handles by outsourcing analysis of processes to supply chain consultant. This is actually where the concept of third-party logistics providers involved. However, rapid growth and diversification of products are making shippers, manufacturers, and suppliers rethink their business strategy. In other words, consumers can get practically anything they want at a moment’s notice, and more consumers are expressing a willingness to wait for a product a few days if free shipping is a possibility. So, this need to adapt operations reflects the common concerns of traditional customers and supply chain entities. However, there is a distinction.
Previously, these entities only needed to focus on their local demographic for ensuring continued stability. But the rise of the internet has given consumers and everyone else the ability to access any product from any seller and any place on the globe. This is a traditional business strategy, and it is essential that the modern supply chain is willing to use big data all operations to create a more positive result than consumers, stakeholders or government organization ever needed before.
Performance measurement and management.
As explained in a previous blog post, continuous improvement in an organization can be achieved through the use of performance measurement tools via big data. Mostly, this reflects the skills and actual working capacity of employees. Since employees represent one of the largest expenses an organization may face.
Having the best staff members available can mean the difference between success or failure in a company. Furthermore, big data can help employees understand what they do and do not need to do in order to improve their performance scores. This will also help to prevent oversight from managers and keep all employees on track to complete their responsibilities as assigned.
Performance measurement does not have to be limited to the performance of employees either. It can be expanded to identify poorly performing machines, or it can be used to isolate inefficiencies in collaboration with suppliers or vendors. Ultimately, performance measurement is a metaphor for tracking any metric in the course of the supply chain, but it’s key to being effective is found in transferring the insights gleaned from big data into actionable results.
For example the operational efficiency of a given loading is directly related to how quickly pickers are able to fulfill orders and move them onto the dock. Obviously trucks can only be loaded so fast; what is the number of pickers appropriate for the current workload, or which route through the factory is adding an extra 20 minutes to each worker’s duties?
These questions illustrate that the most insignificant details can be driving forces of inefficiency in the supply chain. But they represent opportunities for continuous improvement. Changes in the design or layout of the warehouse or alterations to the truck schedule may require changing the duties of a certain worker at a moment’s notice. Essentially, the worker must be able to access continuous data measurements on all factors affecting his or her responsibilities.
Supply chain leaders need to focus on continuous improvement.
Continuous improvement is a complex notion. It is based on hundreds, if not hundreds of thousands, of individual metrics from various collection points and analyzed in real time. All of this reflects a very large volume of data. It can be digested and broken down into usable bits, much like the biological processes of the stomach making it essential to surviving the coming season.
This comparison is much more than a metaphor; it is the real issue being faced by supply chain entities and their leaders. Supply chain leaders must use big data to gather insight and create quantifiable measures of performance and functionality across their enterprises on a recurring, frequent and immediate basis.
Related posts:
by Elizabeth Hines | Dec 5, 2016 | Blog, Supply Chain, Talent
Compare your company culture to the attributes of the four Hogwarts houses to determine where you belong.
Company culture is an integral part of who a business is. It affects the product, the kind of talent it attracts, and, ultimately, its business performance.
Company culture can also tell you which Hogwarts house you belong in.
Or, so say the folks at Venngage, a free infographic, template, and design tool. Venngage’s editors sorted their 54 favorite tech companies into the four houses that make up the Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, of Harry Potter fame.
Companies like Twitter and Google fell into Gryffindor, Harry Potter’s house, for their best-in-class ambitions and risk-taking ways. On the other hand, the editors assigned Apple and LinkedIn into Slytherin, the house of dark lord Voldemort, because they are tactic-driven and resourceful.
Which Hogwarts house would your company belong in?
Venngage came up with attributes of each of the four Hogwarts houses that could also reflect company culture. Here are the descriptions for each house:
Gryffindor
Companies with a Gryffindor culture want to be the best in their niche (and maybe even the industry as a whole) and aren’t afraid to take risks to get there. Generally, they are the most likely to use competitive incentives, like sales targets, to drive productivity. Companies with a Gryffindor culture pride risk taking, determination and competitiveness in their team members.
Hufflepuff
An environment of community, collaboration and working towards shared goals is at the base of companies with a Hufflepuff culture. That’s why nonprofits and companies targeting education often align with this house. Companies with a Hufflepuff culture pride trustworthiness, loyalty and a strong work ethic in their team members.
Ravenclaw
Companies with a Ravenclaw culture put a lot of thought into every aspect of their business. They pride themselves on creating the best product and on refining that product through rigorous testing. Companies with a Ravenclaw culture pride creativity, innovation and thought leadership in their team members.
Slytherin
Companies in Slytherin are resourceful and tactic-drive and are always looking for new and better ways to achieve their goals. They may see the value in more traditional hierarchical structures, with a more rigid chain of command. But that doesn’t mean people in a Slytherin company culture don’t take care of their own — they simply regard experience as an important factor of authority. Companies with a Slytherin culture pride ambition and cunning in their team members.
I compared our company mission and values here at Fronetics, and I believe that we’d fall into Ravenclaw house. We are driven by data; we constantly evaluate our clients’ strategies for effectiveness; and creativity and thought leadership are our bread and butter.
What house does your company fall in?
Related posts:
by Elizabeth Hines | Dec 1, 2016 | Blog, Logistics, Strategy, Supply Chain
Consumer expectations of expedited, free shipping come at a cost to e-commerce businesses — but is it worth it?
The race to deliver orders at an ever-increasing pace — free of charge — is raising the stakes for shippers and retailers. Everything from the size of packaging to the selection of the right carrier has to be examined to prevent e-commerce ventures from becoming financially unviable.
While Amazon, the uncontested super power of e-commerce, has been known to rack up big losses to gain market share, smaller players are battling to meet consumer expectations of two-day, next-day, or even same-day delivery. The Amazon effect also means consumers are less willing to pay anything at all for shipping.
As free shipping is becoming a prerequisite for building customer loyalty, retailers know that charging even a minimal amount to deliver the product can break the deal. If the cost of shipping is perceived to be excessive, 63% of consumers surveyed by Jupiter Media Metrix will cancel the purchase.
In addition, consumers have grown accustomed to adding on smaller items to qualify for free shipping. But those items — one-ounce face creams, eye shadow, ear plugs — frequently arrive at their destination at significant cost. Jupiter found, for example, 45% of companies lose money on shipping.
Shippers also pay the price as small items do not necessarily come packaged in small boxes, consuming valuable space at a time when U.S. trucking tonnage is at record highs. FedEx and UPS both made headlines early last year when they, despite low fuel prices, raised shipping rates, partly as a result of dimensional weight pricing.
Now standard industry practice, dimensional weight pricing is estimated to have increased parcel shipping costs by as much as 20%, an additional expense ultimately passed on to consumers as well as small business owners. And with e-commerce forecast to grow from $392 billion this year to $491 billion in 2018, according to eMarketer Projections, demand will remain high at the same time as the shortage of drivers appears to have no real solution.
Pressure is likely to mount further as Amazon seems to be preparing to launch its own global package-delivery service that could rival those of competitors such as UPS and FedEx. With space on pallets a hot commodity, Amazon kicked off the year by adding thousands of trailers to its fleet, which is transported by third-party carriers. The online giant also hopes to build its own U.S. cargo operations to guard itself against delivery delays that affected some shoppers this past holiday season.
So what is the small business owner with a burgeoning e-commerce business to do?
Since it may be nearly impossible to rival the speed of Amazon Prime, focusing on keeping shipping costs to a minimum should pay off, advise several experts interviewed by Entrepreneur.
Steve Strauss, author and founder of www.smallbiz.com, a small-business consulting site, recommends businesses offer at least one express service and one standard service. “In this competitive environment where there’s very little customer loyalty, things like shipping matters. Look at it this way: If you don’t have a store location, you’re saving on rent and employees. Eat the shipping. It’s a small cost to you, and customers will respond,” he said.
What do you think is the key to staying competitive in the e-commerce space?
This post originally appeared on EBN online.
Related posts:
by Elizabeth Hines | Nov 30, 2016 | Blog, Content Marketing, Logistics, Marketing, Social Media, Supply Chain
Companies within the logistics and supply chain industries are increasing customer engagement, market and business intelligence, leads, and more by participating in social media.
Results from a previous Fronetics survey tell us that 100% of responding companies in the logistics and supply chain industries consider social media a strategic tool. So how are they using these platforms, and what benefits are they getting from participating?
Below, find some highlights from that survey.
By the way, if you’re interested in how companies in these industries are using social media, take our latest survey so that we can provide you with the latest results and trends. It takes about 3 minutes, and we’ll send you the new report once it’s completed.
Social media networks popular with the supply chain
According to the survey, the most popular networks are as follows.
- Twitter (94%)
- LinkedIn (86%)
- Facebook (77%)
YouTube (50%) and Google+ (45%) are networks which are also commonly used within the supply chain and logistics industries.
Reasons for using social media
Companies reported participating in social media for the following reasons.
- Increasing the visibility of their company (95%)
- Brand image (90%)
- Establishing the company as a thought leader (86%)
- Attracting new leads and customers (82%)
Top benefits realized from social media participation
Companies reported the following benefits.
- Customer engagement: 80% of respondents reported that they agree or strongly agree that by participating in social media, their company has realized an increase in customer engagement.
- Market intelligence: 80% of respondents also reported that they agree or strongly agree that their company has realized an increase in market intelligence.
- Business intelligence: 73% responded that they agree or strongly agree that their company has realized increased business intelligence through participation in social media.
Other top benefits included increased leads and increased demand for products and services.
You can download the full report below for more information on how your industry peers are using social media. And don’t forget to participate in our new survey so that we can send you the latest information.
Related posts:
by Elizabeth Hines | Nov 23, 2016 | Blog, Strategy, Supply Chain, Warehousing & Materials Handling
The evolution of driverless robotic vehicles continues unabated. But what will it take for them to overtake certain warehouse tasks?
A lucky few have already experienced it — the thrill of taking their hands off the steering wheel and letting the car take care of the driving. As a reporter from the Guardian rode in the driver’s seat of a multi-million euro research vehicle “Jack” by Audi on the autobahn, she observed it carried out maneuvers so smoothly “it felt like the car was participating in a courtly dance with others on the road.”
Despite such glowing reviews and the unabated evolution of driverless vehicles, Jack and many its counterparts will not be available for mass consumption for another decade or so.
AGVs and today’s warehouse
In the world of material handling, the notion of driverless has been around for 60 years since the first Automated Guided Vehicle (AGV) appeared in a grocery warehouse. High-tech warehouse operations are already used to the sight of AGVs performing tasks, such as the vertical storage and retrieval of pallets and the loading and unloading of pallets onto outbound trailers.
Driverless robotic vehicles, on the other hand, have generally been assigned to low complexity and repetitive horizontal movement of materials, as well as assisted order picking that involves a high degree of machine and human interaction. Although it may sometimes sound as if driverless vehicles are about to phase out forklift drivers altogether, Toyota Material Handling, which has developed an Autopilot AGV driverless forklift range, notes in a blog post that “there is still value in human operators in an automated warehouse. Human operators are far more capable of identifying issues in the immediate environment and any problems with picking orders. The role of the human operator in an automated warehouse will be more dynamic and varied as the ‘grunt work’ is now tasked to the automated system.”
This argument echoes the challenge that makers of driverless automobiles have expressed: In order for the technology to reach the next level of effectiveness, it has to assume “human” qualities. While the driverless car comes to a complete stop at the sight of a yellow light, the human driver is more likely to speed up to beat the red light, a fact that has been blamed for a number of collisions during testing of a Google autonomous vehicle prototype.
The potential of driverless vehicles
That being said, driverless robotic vehicles hold enormous potential. In an interesting webcast on DC Velocity — which addresses the technology’s role in distribution operations that include horizontal transport and full-case picking applications — two experts tout ROI and productivity gains.
DC Velocity Senior Editor David Maloney and Marc Wulfraat, president of global supply chain and logistics consulting firm MWPVL International, estimate a three-year ROI is possible and that 20-25% productivity gains for order picking are realistic, as long as certain obstacles are overcome. For example, old legacy applications rarely integrate well with newer real-time technologies. If the two are forced together, it may happen at the expense of speedy processes, thus negating the effect of why the driverless technology was introduced in the first place.
Maloney and Wulfraat explain: “In high-density full-case picking environments (e.g., grocery distribution), an order selector can pick 175 – 200 cases/hr or one case every 18 – 20 seconds. If a 5-second delay due to system latency is introduced, then this would result in a major decrease (19 – 24%) in order selection productivity to 141 – 157 cases/hr. In a facility shipping 1 million cases/week with labor cost of $23/hour fully loaded, this would add around $1.6 M of warehouse labor expense to the operation. Clearly, this type of technology cannot add any system latency, which suppliers are working hard to guarantee.”
Another challenge arises when multiple vehicles have to pass within the same operating aisle. Considering the minimum clearance that it takes for a robotic vehicle to pass another without safety sensors bringing it to a halt could pose a problem in distribution centers with narrow aisle widths.
Still, in the big scheme such challenges pale in comparison to how far the technology has already come. When it comes to automating the horizontal transfer of products in a warehouse or distribution center, driverless robotic vehicles are undoubtedly the answer.
What do you consider to be the main challenges to full-scale adoption of driverless robotic vehicles in the warehouse or DC?
This article originally appeared on EBN Online.
Related posts:
