Building resilience into the supply chain: interview with Yossi Sheffi
In his new book, The Power of Resilience, MIT professor Yossi Sheffi looks at how businesses can anticipate, prepare for, and respond to disruptive events.
How vulnerable is your supply chain? What can you do to protect it from disruptions, especially those you cannot anticipate? These questions take on more and more urgency in an age of complex global supply chains, where events in one region can disrupt the operations of businesses and their customers on the other side of the world.
In his new book, The Power of Resilience: How the Best Companies Manage the Unexpected, Yossi Sheffi examines what many companies have done—and are doing—to anticipate, prepare for, and respond to disruptions that can range from earthquakes to hurricanes to cyberattacks to issues with sourcing that could harm business reputations.
The book is Sheffi's second on the topic of resilience. His first, The Resilient Enterprise, was published in 2005 in response to the 9/11 attacks. In the intervening decade, much has changed in both the landscape of supply chain risks and the implementation of corporate resiliency programs, Sheffi says. The new book looks at what companies have learned since that time and at new threats that have arisen.
Sheffi, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) and director of the MIT Center for Transportation and Logistics, discussed the new book and supply chain resilience Peter Bradley, the editorial director of CSCMP's Supply Chain Quarterly's sister publication, DC Velocity. This is an edited and condensed version of the interview.
Â
Q: What led you to decide it was time for a second book on the topic of resilience?
A: The first book was motivated by 9/11, looking at what companies were doing to prepare for disruption. When I started work on that book, I figured I'd begin by seeing what had already been written about this topic and I found nothing on logistics, supply chain, and transportation—in academic writing, at least. Since I didn't have any literature to draw from, I did research. I talked to well over a hundred companies. That research, which took four years and involved 30 people, led to the first book.
Then, when I was out talking to companies a few years back, more and more people were telling me, "Look, it's time for a new book because the threats are becoming more serious and more frequent, but we're also becoming a lot better at a number of new activities and processes, and (business continuity planning) has been taken to a higher level in corporations." So I put together a team and starting working on the new book.
Q: You write in the preface that we shouldn't look at this book as a sequel or a new edition of the original, that it really is something different. Tell me how.
A: It looks at a whole new set of threats that I didn't cover very much in the first book. For example, think about cybersecurity problems. Ten years ago, we were just starting to hear about cybersecurity problems. Today, "cyber" is a weapon. Many physical systems are being run by digital means and can be attacked.
It also became very important to talk about social and environmental responsibility: (the factory fires) in Bangladesh; the conflict mineral issues, which forced Intel and Apple to go to this very deep level—10 to 12 tiers deep—in the supply chain to find out where these minerals were coming from. This became a real corporate reputational risk. And, of course, there have been things like the Japanese earthquake and tsunami that changed a lot of companies' views on risk and their own vulnerability to disruption.
In the new book, I also emphasize a point that I did not make and should have made last time that people always look at the top right corner [in a quadrant chart of possible disruptions and estimations of their likelihood and impact] where the probability (of an event) is high and the consequences are high, but that is the wrong place to look. Companies prepare for these events, and as a result, although the impacts could be severe, they are not that high because companies are ready for them. I point out the really worrisome quadrant is the high-consequence/very-low-probability corner because this is the "black swan." This is the 2008 financial meltdown. This is 9/11. This is Chernobyl. These are the things that nobody expected and nobody knew how to deal with. And the question is, how do you prepare for things that you cannot even imagine, things that you don't even know that you don't know. A lot of the issues in the book have to do with general preparation or general resilience for what you can't even imagine because it never happened to you, to your competitors, or to other people in the industry.
Another change that is introduced to this framework is what I call "detectability"—the time from when you know something is going to happen to the first impact. Think of the classic example, a hurricane. You know three days before we see the storm.
But you (also) have to prepare for something that you only find out about after the fact. Think about some sabotage, some people stealing trade secrets, some cyberbug in your system.
There are a lot of new software applications that didn't exist 10 years ago that are designed to alert you as soon as something happens and tell you what the implications are, what the value risk is, which customers and products will be affected, and what problems you're going to have. I cover some of these new software applications in the book.
Q: You talked a few minutes ago about how while the risks are higher today, we have also learned a lot. What have we learned over the last 10 years that we've been able to put to work to help mitigate risks?
A: In terms of things that you can point to, such as an earthquake in an area that's prone to quakes or floods, you have to prepare for things that have happened before and can happen again. What is the communication plan? How should you notify whoever it is: the customers, Wall Street, suppliers, whatever? Who should be notified? Who should be involved in making up the plan? How do you respond?
The other side is the completely unexpected situation where you don't know what to do beyond general resilience measures. For this, you first of all have to have an emergency response operation and you have to have all the communications lines. The number one thing is what I said: You have to know who to call. Who should be the people to man these emergency operations? In a manufacturing company, it should be basically two functions, supply chain management and engineering.
Supply chain management should focus on inventory—looking at how to acquire more supplies where needed and seeking alternative suppliers. Engineering should look for damage solutions. Can we replace a component with another part? How do we qualify another part and so forth?
In general, the response should be two-pronged and involve two separate teams. One team should deal with the people. What is the impact on people? How do we find everybody? How do we deal with our suppliers? The other team should deal with business continuity issues. Because otherwise, depending on the nature of the team, they pay too much attention to one or the other.
Q: Let me go back to risk assessment for a moment. You talked about Intel and how deeply it had to dig to find out where its minerals come from. How does a company find out the risk deep in its supply chain, in its tier three, four, or five?
A: Oh, there was talk about a tier 12 or something. Anyway, Intel learned that four metals used in electronic products might be "conflict minerals," metals that have been mined under conditions of coercion and violence, and mobilized a team to ensure that its operations were "conflict free." The first question was, "Are we using conflict minerals?" But nobody knew. So the company started going backward in the supply chain, and it realized that it had to go back to about level five or six. Beyond this, you cannot tell where a material is coming from because the supplier gets it from multiple sources and just mixes it all together.
Intel decided to focus on the smelters and make sure the smelters' brokers only bought from approved mines. The thought was the company was not going to buy anything from mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo, but that would just throw hundreds of thousands of people out of work in a very poor country. So it couldn't do that.
So then it went to the smelters and tried to convince them to do it, but the problem is, as big as Intel is, it is not a very big customer of the smelter. And the smelter says, "I am not selling to you. I'm selling to some broker who then sells to another customer, who sells it to some other company." So Intel put together an industry consortium [the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition]. And it paid the smelters to qualify certain mines so it knew where minerals were coming from. It took Intel years, by the way.
Q: One of the arguments you make in the book is that by looking at your risk, by preparing for risk, you actually strengthen the entire enterprise. Expand on that a bit.
A: For an example, there is Intel. It had to map its entire supply chain. Knowing who the people upstream are, you not only get risk protection—the sense that if something happened to one of them, you know what the implications are—but you also learn more about what's going on in the supply chain. You start understanding your own supply chain a lot better, which always brings good things.
Businesses are cautiously optimistic as peak holiday shipping season draws near, with many anticipating year-over-year sales increases as they continue to battle challenging supply chain conditions.
That’s according to the DHL 2024 Peak Season Shipping Survey, released today by express shipping service provider DHL Express U.S. The company surveyed small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to gauge their holiday business outlook compared to last year and found that a mix of optimism and “strategic caution” prevail ahead of this year’s peak.
Nearly half (48%) of the SMEs surveyed said they expect higher holiday sales compared to 2023, while 44% said they expect sales to remain on par with last year, and just 8% said they foresee a decline. Respondents said the main challenges to hitting those goals are supply chain problems (35%), inflation and fluctuating consumer demand (34%), staffing (16%), and inventory challenges (14%).
But respondents said they have strategies in place to tackle those issues. Many said they began preparing for holiday season earlier this year—with 45% saying they started planning in Q2 or earlier, up from 39% last year. Other strategies include expanding into international markets (35%) and leveraging holiday discounts (32%).
Sixty percent of respondents said they will prioritize personalized customer service as a way to enhance customer interactions and loyalty this year. Still others said they will invest in enhanced web and mobile experiences (23%) and eco-friendly practices (13%) to draw customers this holiday season.
The practice consists of 5,000 professionals from Accenture and from Avanade—the consulting firm’s joint venture with Microsoft. They will be supported by Microsoft product specialists who will work closely with the Accenture Center for Advanced AI. Together, that group will collaborate on AI and Copilot agent templates, extensions, plugins, and connectors to help organizations leverage their data and gen AI to reduce costs, improve efficiencies and drive growth, they said on Thursday.
Accenture and Avanade say they have already developed some AI tools for these applications. For example, a supplier discovery and risk agent can deliver real-time market insights, agile supply chain responses, and better vendor selection, which could result in up to 15% cost savings. And a procure-to-pay agent could improve efficiency by up to 40% and enhance vendor relations and satisfaction by addressing urgent payment requirements and avoiding disruptions of key services
Likewise, they have also built solutions for clients using Microsoft 365 Copilot technology. For example, they have created Copilots for a variety of industries and functions including finance, manufacturing, supply chain, retail, and consumer goods and healthcare.
Another part of the new practice will be educating clients how to use the technology, using an “Azure Generative AI Engineer Nanodegree program” to teach users how to design, build, and operationalize AI-driven applications on Azure, Microsoft’s cloud computing platform. The online classes will teach learners how to use AI models to solve real-world problems through automation, data insights, and generative AI solutions, the firms said.
“We are pleased to deepen our collaboration with Accenture to help our mutual customers develop AI-first business processes responsibly and securely, while helping them drive market differentiation,” Judson Althoff, executive vice president and chief commercial officer at Microsoft, said in a release. “By bringing together Copilots and human ambition, paired with the autonomous capabilities of an agent, we can accelerate AI transformation for organizations across industries and help them realize successful business outcomes through pragmatic innovation.”
Census data showed that overall retail sales in October were up 0.4% seasonally adjusted month over month and up 2.8% unadjusted year over year. That compared with increases of 0.8% month over month and 2% year over year in September.
October’s core retail sales as defined by NRF — based on the Census data but excluding automobile dealers, gasoline stations and restaurants — were unchanged seasonally adjusted month over month but up 5.4% unadjusted year over year.
Core sales were up 3.5% year over year for the first 10 months of the year, in line with NRF’s forecast for 2024 retail sales to grow between 2.5% and 3.5% over 2023. NRF is forecasting that 2024 holiday sales during November and December will also increase between 2.5% and 3.5% over the same time last year.
“October’s pickup in retail sales shows a healthy pace of spending as many consumers got an early start on holiday shopping,” NRF Chief Economist Jack Kleinhenz said in a release. “October sales were a good early step forward into the holiday shopping season, which is now fully underway. Falling energy prices have likely provided extra dollars for household spending on retail merchandise.”
Despite that positive trend, market watchers cautioned that retailers still need to offer competitive value propositions and customer experience in order to succeed in the holiday season. “The American consumer has been more resilient than anyone could have expected. But that isn’t a free pass for retailers to under invest in their stores,” Nikki Baird, VP of strategy & product at Aptos, a solutions provider of unified retail technology based out of Alpharetta, Georgia, said in a statement. “They need to make investments in labor, customer experience tech, and digital transformation. It has been too easy to kick the can down the road until you suddenly realize there’s no road left.”
A similar message came from Chip West, a retail and consumer behavior expert at the marketing, packaging, print and supply chain solutions provider RRD. “October’s increase proved to be slightly better than projections and was likely boosted by lower fuel prices. As inflation slowed for a number of months, prices in several categories have stabilized, with some even showing declines, offering further relief to consumers,” West said. “The data also looks to be a positive sign as we kick off the holiday shopping season. Promotions and discounts will play a prominent role in holiday shopping behavior as they are key influencers in consumer’s purchasing decisions.”
Third-party logistics (3PL) providers’ share of large real estate leases across the U.S. rose significantly through the third quarter of 2024 compared to the same time last year, as more retailers and wholesalers have been outsourcing their warehouse and distribution operations to 3PLs, according to a report from real estate firm CBRE.
Specifically, 3PLs’ share of bulk industrial leasing activity—covering leases of 100,000 square feet or more—rose to 34.1% through Q3 of this year from 30.6% through Q3 last year. By raw numbers, 3PLs have accounted for 498 bulk leases so far this year, up by 9% from the 457 at this time last year.
By category, 3PLs’ share of 34.1% ranked above other occupier types such as: general retail and wholesale (26.6), food and beverage (9.0), automobiles, tires, and parts (7.9), manufacturing (6.2), building materials and construction (5.6), e-commerce only (5.6), medical (2.7), and undisclosed (2.3).
On a quarterly basis, bulk leasing by 3PLs has steadily increased this year, reversing the steadily decreasing trend of 2023. CBRE pointed to three main reasons for that resurgence:
Import Flexibility. Labor disruptions, extreme weather patterns, and geopolitical uncertainty have led many companies to diversify their import locations. Using 3PLs allows for more inventory flexibility, a key component to retailer success in times of uncertainty.
Capital Allocation/Preservation. Warehousing and distribution of goods is expensive, draining capital resources for transportation costs, rent, or labor. But outsourcing to 3PLs provides companies with more flexibility to increase or decrease their inventories without any risk of signing their own lease commitments. And using a 3PL also allows companies to switch supply chain costs from capital to operational expenses.
Focus on Core Competency. Outsourcing their logistics operations to 3PLs allows companies to focus on core business competencies that drive revenue, such as product development, sales, and customer service.
Looking into the future, these same trends will continue to drive 3PL warehouse demand, CBRE said. Economic, geopolitical and supply chain uncertainty will remain prevalent in the coming quarters but will not diminish the need to effectively manage inventory levels.
That result came from the company’s “GEP Global Supply Chain Volatility Index,” an indicator tracking demand conditions, shortages, transportation costs, inventories, and backlogs based on a monthly survey of 27,000 businesses. The October index number was -0.39, which was up only slightly from its level of -0.43 in September.
Researchers found a steep rise in slack across North American supply chains due to declining factory activity in the U.S. In fact, purchasing managers at U.S. manufacturers made their strongest cutbacks to buying volumes in nearly a year and a half, indicating that factories in the world's largest economy are preparing for lower production volumes, GEP said.
Elsewhere, suppliers feeding Asia also reported spare capacity in October, albeit to a lesser degree than seen in Western markets. Europe's industrial plight remained a key feature of the data in October, as vendor capacity was significantly underutilized, reflecting a continuation of subdued demand in key manufacturing hubs across the continent.
"We're in a buyers' market. October is the fourth straight month that suppliers worldwide reported spare capacity, with notable contractions in factory demand across North America and Europe, underscoring the challenging outlook for Western manufacturers," Todd Bremer, vice president, GEP, said in a release. "President-elect Trump inherits U.S. manufacturers with plenty of spare capacity while in contrast, China's modest rebound and strong expansion in India demonstrate greater resilience in Asia."