For a collaborative public-private partnership to work, the individual interests of the private sector must be brought into alignment with the requirements of the collective good.
Karl Buschmann is a strategic advisor for the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals. He works with the executive leadership team on key business development initiatives, such as the Executive Inner Circle, the development of private/public partnerships, and brand building. He acts as an ambassador, influencer and evangelist for CSCMP with other associations, industry trade groups, and stakeholders in the supply chain discipline. Using his background in global trade and higher education, Buschmann has been instrumental in helping to create the semiconductor supply chain report, an alliance with The Association for Manufacturing Technology, and new channels for membership growth and expansion. He is also an adjunct policy analyst at RAND.
Bradley Martin is the director at the RAND Corporation's National Security Supply Chain Instituteand a senior policy researcher at the RAND Corporation, where he has worked since November 2012. His work has emphasized issues of vulnerability resulting from economic interdependence, strategic readiness impacts from logistics and infrastructure shortfalls, and the overlap between geopolitics and supply chain exposure. His most recent work has focused on the challenges associated with China’s position in multiple different supply chains critical to the U.S. and its allies.
Daniel Egel is a senior economist; director at the RAND Corporation's Economics and National Security Initiative; and a professor of policy analysis at the Pardee RAND Graduate School.
The United States is at an inflection point in its approach to supply chain management. Facing off against China, an adversary that has both a proven capability and willingness to weaponize supply chains against the United States and its allies, both the U.S. government and U.S. private companies are embracing a pivot away from efficiency to resilience.
Effectively managing this transition from efficiency to resilience, while ensuring that the United States is postured for the economic and national security threats created by hyper efficient supply chains, will require new modalities for public-private partnership.
Recent decades have demonstrated that market forces generally do produce very efficient supply chains. These supply chains, under private sector ownership, have resulted in a worldwide economy that is in some respects prosperous beyond the wildest expectations of the 18th and 19th century economists who initially pointed to the virtues of specialization.
However, this efficiency depends, in large part, on geopolitical stability. The quarter-century following the end of the Cold War proved remarkably stable. However, this stability is increasingly under threat, both by acute threats like Russia's war in Ukraine and the increasing tensions between Washington and Beijing.
A public-private approach—widely acknowledged as critical to overcoming these supply chain risks—is at the heart of a series of landmark U.S. efforts. This is demonstrated by the design of the Supply Chain Disruptions Task Force, Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, CHIPS and Science Act, and Inflation Reduction Act. Each embraces a partnership between the U.S. government and the private sector in addressing the supply chain disruptions that began with the COVID-19 pandemic and have evolved with rising U.S.-China competition.
The U.S. government has long recognized the value of public-private partnerships in addressing systemic challenges to supply chains. An example is the Advisory Committee on Supply Chain Competitiveness, which was established with the specific purpose of giving the Secretary of Commerce industry expert advice on a comprehensive national freight infrastructure policy. The potential of these types of partnerships is illustrated by this committee's role in raising awareness of systemic congestion and bottlenecks at ports in 2021.
However, there is often a disconnect between the public rhetoric of public-private partnerships and the reality of how they are implemented.
This is demonstrated most clearly, perhaps, in the difficulties that the White House has faced in effectively engaging with commercial actors in executing its landmark programs. As a prominent example, the CHIPS and Science Act has been criticized for picking winners and losers rather than filling gaps that the private sector is not equipped to fill. Missed opportunities for collaboration have resulted in mistrust.
Another missed opportunity is the White House's new Council on Supply Chain Resilience, which was announced with little private sector consultation. There is no doubt that coordination across U.S. government agencies, the primary mandate of this council, is indeed valuable. However, it is an open question whether this council can be effective without private sector collaboration. Building a private sector counterpart to this council, perhaps building from the model of Commerce's analogue advisory committee, seems like a policy worth considering. The three leading supply chain professional organizations—Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, Association for Supply Chain Management, and Institute for Supply Management—could enable the objectives that this council seeks to achieve and provide a mechanism for monitoring supply chain performance.
Other examples of missed opportunities are in government-industry exchange programs. These should be ideal chances for civil servants and academicians to learn something about private sector decisionmaking. But, as documented in a 2022 report from the U.S. General Accountability Office, this has not been the case. Correcting this discrepancy would require a change to the Intergovernmental Personnel Act of 1970.
Building Resilient Supply Chains (PDF) from the Economic Report of the President (PDF) outlined the opportunities and challenges in 2022, and suggests both the need and the intent to support this kind of collaboration. However, for this collaborative public-private partnership to work, the individual interests of the private sector must be brought into alignment with the requirements of the collective good perspective and policy goals of the public sector. Both partners have useful tools and working examples to now make this vision happen.
Just 29% of supply chain organizations have the competitive characteristics they’ll need for future readiness, according to a Gartner survey released Tuesday. The survey focused on how organizations are preparing for future challenges and to keep their supply chains competitive.
Gartner surveyed 579 supply chain practitioners to determine the capabilities needed to manage the “future drivers of influence” on supply chains, which include artificial intelligence (AI) achievement and the ability to navigate new trade policies. According to the survey, the five competitive characteristics are: agility, resilience, regionalization, integrated ecosystems, and integrated enterprise strategy.
The survey analysis identified “leaders” among the respondents as supply chain organizations that have already developed at least three of the five competitive characteristics necessary to address the top five drivers of supply chain’s future.
Less than a third have met that threshold.
“Leaders shared a commitment to preparation through long-term, deliberate strategies, while non-leaders were more often focused on short-term priorities,” Pierfrancesco Manenti, vice president analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a statement announcing the survey results.
“Most leaders have yet to invest in the most advanced technologies (e.g. real-time visibility, digital supply chain twin), but plan to do so in the next three-to-five years,” Manenti also said in the statement. “Leaders see technology as an enabler to their overall business strategies, while non-leaders more often invest in technology first, without having fully established their foundational capabilities.”
As part of the survey, respondents were asked to identify the future drivers of influence on supply chain performance over the next three to five years. The top five drivers are: achievement capability of AI (74%); the amount of new ESG regulations and trade policies being released (67%); geopolitical fight/transition for power (65%); control over data (62%); and talent scarcity (59%).
The analysis also identified four unique profiles of supply chain organizations, based on what their leaders deem as the most crucial capabilities for empowering their organizations over the next three to five years.
First, 54% of retailers are looking for ways to increase their financial recovery from returns. That’s because the cost to return a purchase averages 27% of the purchase price, which erases as much as 50% of the sales margin. But consumers have their own interests in mind: 76% of shoppers admit they’ve embellished or exaggerated the return reason to avoid a fee, a 39% increase from 2023 to 204.
Second, return experiences matter to consumers. A whopping 80% of shoppers stopped shopping at a retailer because of changes to the return policy—a 34% increase YoY.
Third, returns fraud and abuse is top-of-mind-for retailers, with wardrobing rising 38% in 2024. In fact, over two thirds (69%) of shoppers admit to wardrobing, which is the practice of buying an item for a specific reason or event and returning it after use. Shoppers also practice bracketing, or purchasing an item in a variety of colors or sizes and then returning all the unwanted options.
Fourth, returns come with a steep cost in terms of sustainability, with returns amounting to 8.4 billion pounds of landfill waste in 2023 alone.
“As returns have become an integral part of the shopper experience, retailers must balance meeting sky-high expectations with rising costs, environmental impact, and fraudulent behaviors,” Amena Ali, CEO of Optoro, said in the firm’s “2024 Returns Unwrapped” report. “By understanding shoppers’ behaviors and preferences around returns, retailers can create returns experiences that embrace their needs while driving deeper loyalty and protecting their bottom line.”
Facing an evolving supply chain landscape in 2025, companies are being forced to rethink their distribution strategies to cope with challenges like rising cost pressures, persistent labor shortages, and the complexities of managing SKU proliferation.
1. Optimize labor productivity and costs. Forward-thinking businesses are leveraging technology to get more done with fewer resources through approaches like slotting optimization, automation and robotics, and inventory visibility.
2. Maximize capacity with smart solutions. With e-commerce volumes rising, facilities need to handle more SKUs and orders without expanding their physical footprint. That can be achieved through high-density storage and dynamic throughput.
3. Streamline returns management. Returns are a growing challenge, thanks to the continued growth of e-commerce and the consumer practice of bracketing. Businesses can handle that with smarter reverse logistics processes like automated returns processing and reverse logistics visibility.
4. Accelerate order fulfillment with robotics. Robotic solutions are transforming the way orders are fulfilled, helping businesses meet customer expectations faster and more accurately than ever before by using autonomous mobile robots (AMRs and robotic picking.
5. Enhance end-of-line packaging. The final step in the supply chain is often the most visible to customers. So optimizing packaging processes can reduce costs, improve efficiency, and support sustainability goals through automated packaging systems and sustainability initiatives.
That clash has come as retailers have been hustling to adjust to pandemic swings like a renewed focus on e-commerce, then swiftly reimagining store experiences as foot traffic returned. But even as the dust settles from those changes, retailers are now facing renewed questions about how best to define their omnichannel strategy in a world where customers have increasing power and information.
The answer may come from a five-part strategy using integrated components to fortify omnichannel retail, EY said. The approach can unlock value and customer trust through great experiences, but only when implemented cohesively, not individually, EY warns.
The steps include:
1. Functional integration: Is your operating model and data infrastructure siloed between e-commerce and physical stores, or have you developed a cohesive unit centered around delivering seamless customer experience?
2. Customer insights: With consumer centricity at the heart of operations, are you analyzing all touch points to build a holistic view of preferences, behaviors, and buying patterns?
3. Next-generation inventory: Given the right customer insights, how are you utilizing advanced analytics to ensure inventory is optimized to meet demand precisely where and when it’s needed?
4. Distribution partnerships: Having ensured your customers find what they want where they want it, how are your distribution strategies adapting to deliver these choices to them swiftly and efficiently?
5. Real estate strategy: How is your real estate strategy interconnected with insights, inventory and distribution to enhance experience and maximize your footprint?
When approached cohesively, these efforts all build toward one overarching differentiator for retailers: a better customer experience that reaches from brand engagement and order placement through delivery and return, the EY study said. Amid continued volatility and an economy driven by complex customer demands, the retailers best set up to win are those that are striving to gain real-time visibility into stock levels, offer flexible fulfillment options and modernize merchandising through personalized and dynamic customer experiences.
Geopolitical rivalries, alliances, and aspirations are rewiring the global economy—and the imposition of new tariffs on foreign imports by the U.S. will accelerate that process, according to an analysis by Boston Consulting Group (BCG).
Without a broad increase in tariffs, world trade in goods will keep growing at an average of 2.9% annually for the next eight years, the firm forecasts in its report, “Great Powers, Geopolitics, and the Future of Trade.” But the routes goods travel will change markedly as North America reduces its dependence on China and China builds up its links with the Global South, which is cementing its power in the global trade map.
“Global trade is set to top $29 trillion by 2033, but the routes these goods will travel is changing at a remarkable pace,” Aparna Bharadwaj, managing director and partner at BCG, said in a release. “Trade lanes were already shifting from historical patterns and looming US tariffs will accelerate this. Navigating these new dynamics will be critical for any global business.”
To understand those changes, BCG modeled the direct impact of the 60/25/20 scenario (60% tariff on Chinese goods, a 25% on goods from Canada and Mexico, and a 20% on imports from all other countries). The results show that the tariffs would add $640 billion to the cost of importing goods from the top ten U.S. import nations, based on 2023 levels, unless alternative sources or suppliers are found.
In terms of product categories imported by the U.S., the greatest impact would be on imported auto parts and automotive vehicles, which would primarily affect trade with Mexico, the EU, and Japan. Consumer electronics, electrical machinery, and fashion goods would be most affected by higher tariffs on Chinese goods. Specifically, the report forecasts that a 60% tariff rate would add $61 billion to cost of importing consumer electronics products from China into the U.S.