Teaching leadership: How to reach non-supply chain audiences
Supply chain professionals with backgrounds in engineering or business often struggle to reach nonquantitative thinkers. One way they can make their presentations more persuasive is to include "human elements."
Bruce C. Arntzen is the executive director of the supply chain management program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Center for Transportation & Logistics.
New hires from top supply chain programs are often expected to be powerful change agents in their new companies. In large organizations, this task of "go make change happen" requires persuading many people of all "different stripes" to change their behavior and adopt new practices. It can range from convincing buyer-planners to give up their beloved spreadsheets and use the new enterprise resource planning (ERP) software to persuading the vice president of sales to change the incentive system to smooth out the end of month order spike. Or convincing the marketing organization to regulate the introduction of new stock-keeping units (SKUs).
Many or most of these people will be "regular" (nonquantitative) people. Perhaps they studied the arts, humanities, literature, music, history, or other fields and ended up working in planning, sales, marketing, distribution, or a dozen other jobs. By contrast, most top supply chain students were industrial engineers, supply chain majors, math majors, or business majors as undergraduates. These are quantitative/logic-based disciplines. Data is gathered. Calculations are performed. Significance is tested. Charts and graphs are created. Business cases are presented. Graduate education in supply chain management takes this even further with more sophisticated modeling tools, data-based analytics, and now artificial intelligence and machine learning. When do we get around to teaching our best and brightest how to talk to "regular people?" The answer often is: We don't.
Because we don't, our graduates have a much harder time than necessary gathering broad support for change programs. Charts, graphs, and spreadsheets by themselves won't close the deal in generating excitement around change. For many people, a well-timed emotional argument can shoot down an analysis that you spent weeks preparing.
How Humans Communicate
At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Supply Chain Management Program we have invented four leadership workshops to fill this gap. The workshop described here teaches quantitatively minded students how to use what we call "the human element" to connect with a large audience of regular people.
The human element is based on the fact that when humans talk to each other we do so much more than listen to the words. We watch the facial expressions and see excitement or fear or joy. We listen to the volume and intonations of the voice and hear urgency or empathy or anger. We see hand gestures and body language. When these are all in synch, such as an angry face, words, voice, and gestures, it delivers a powerful message that sticks in the mind. However, in most business documents and slide presentations, we use only charts and graphs and sterile words, disembodied from any person, face, or voice. Without a human element, much of the power of the message is forfeit.
There are two ways, however, that you can incorporate a human element into your business presentation:
1. Use photos of human faces. Human beings like to look at other human faces. The next time you go to the airport, pause in front of one of those large magazine stands and look at the covers. You will see that almost every magazine has a person's face on the cover. Humans find faces very interesting to look at.
2. Use quotes that come from a specific person. Human beings seem to process words differently and retain the statements better if they appear to be a quote coming directly from a specific person. (Please note this is just an observation from my own experiments in the classroom and professional life, I am not pretending to be a psychologist.)
The natural human behaviors of reading faces and connecting quotes to faces can be exploited when giving a speech or making a presentation to both hold the audience's attention and to get our points across more successfully. How do I know? Because I tried it.
In 2009, at the bottom of the last recession, I gave a presentation to a regional supply chain management conference on the "Recession-Readiness of Supply Chains." The talk reviewed the history of stock market crashes and the effects of recessions on supply chains, and it explained many good and bad business practices related to recessions. I was well prepared. The 50 slides included dozens of charts, graphs, statistics, tree diagrams, and text slides. The audience seemed to understand the points, applauded, and shuffled on to the next presentation.
In 2017, after eight years of recovery and fearing that the next crash was imminent, I was asked to return to the same regional conference and give the same presentation. This time however, I included the human element. I still had 50 slides, but most of the charts and graphs were removed. Instead, the key messages were delivered by people. I searched databases of images for pictures of people whose appearance and facial expressions perfectly fit the quote and message that I was assigning to them to deliver. I found pictures of people who looked like a CEO, a CFO, a vice president of purchasing, several sales people, a human resources manager, a country manager from France, an administrative assistant, and many more.
For honesty's sake, I told the audience that the pictures of people and the quotes assigned to them were not real. Nevertheless, the parade of human faces and their lively quotes kept the audience enthralled the whole time. Furthermore, the business messages were very well received as evidenced by the heads nodding in agreement in the audience. At the conclusion, half of the attendees came up to the front asking questions, shaking hands, and thanking me for the presentation. It was exactly the same message as eight years earlier—except it was delivered with the human element.
People, faces, and quotes
In a slide presentation or a journal article, we cannot reproduce all of the body language, intonations, hand waving, shouts, and emotions that one sees in a real human encounter. But we can at least show a photo of the speaker's face and some gestures that reinforce the message that they are delivering. The quote backed up by the photo makes the business message much "stickier." Here are some examples of how putting a person, a facial expression, and a quote together can create a powerful message:
Before the market crash: salesman
"In this industry, we do business with a handshake. My customers are honorable people and we trust each other to honor our commitments."
After the market crash: corporate attorney:
"The customers dropped us like a rock. They cancelled all their orders and we have no contracts and no risk sharing agreements. We built product based on their forecast, and now they won't take it. We're screwed."
Another example of quotes and faces synchronized:
Before the market crash: hardware engineer:
"We take great pride in our product designs. We use the latest cutting-edge materials and components to get industry-leading performance out of our products."
After the market crash: purchasing manager:
"We let the engineers use all kinds of fancy new unique materials. Now we can't cancel orders of those materials. We are bleeding CASH for stuff we don't need."
Another example of quotes and faces synchronized:
Before the market crash: purchasing agent:
"My supplier is not a risk. Even though they're a private company, they've been around for 20 years and the owners live in my same neighborhood. Their kids play with my kids."
After the market crash: CFO:
"Purchasing never even asked about their financial situation. When they closed, we lost our only supplier. It will take us 90 days to bring on a new supplier ... if we can stay afloat that long."
The workshop
For students who have come up through the ranks of, say, industrial engineering, the idea of including pictures of people and quotes is completely foreign. All of their training has been to make your case using numbers, logic, tables, charts, and graphs. Present the evidence! We now have to teach them that this approach often fails and is sometimes counterproductive with regular people. If you only present information that looks like it came from a math book, people will tune you out entirely. And you are opening the door for an opponent who people can relate to more easily. So, we have to make our students practice multiple times using the human element in their presentations.
We use hands-on small teams to have the students practice including the human element. After an initial briefing, the students are divided into teams of four students and sent to small breakout areas. Each team is assigned one of several "causes" to promote, either for or against. Teams are given 60 minutes to create a short presentation that promotes their side of the issue using the human element in their slides. They get practice at converting their key arguments into compelling quotes. They then carefully select photos of people with facial expressions that reinforce the sentiment of the quote. Teams return to the classroom and use their presentation to sway the rest of the class to support their position. The class votes on which presentation was the most persuasive. As a teacher, it is interesting to see this technique show up later in the semester in their capstone presentations.
Supply chain graduates, engineers, and business professionals use numbers, facts, charts, and graphs to present information to each other. But to "go make change happen" in large organizations, they need to convince regular people to adopt new practices. Currently university curricula and corporate training programs fall short of teaching their rising stars to effectively lead in large mixed organizations. Including the human element in terms of people, faces, and quotes in presentations is a more effective way to connect with people and to make your arguments more powerful and memorable.
ReposiTrak, a global food traceability network operator, will partner with Upshop, a provider of store operations technology for food retailers, to create an end-to-end grocery traceability solution that reaches from the supply chain to the retail store, the firms said today.
The partnership creates a data connection between suppliers and the retail store. It works by integrating Salt Lake City-based ReposiTrak’s network of thousands of suppliers and their traceability shipment data with Austin, Texas-based Upshop’s network of more than 450 retailers and their retail stores.
That accomplishment is important because it will allow food sector trading partners to meet the U.S. FDA’s Food Safety Modernization Act Section 204d (FSMA 204) requirements that they must create and store complete traceability records for certain foods.
And according to ReposiTrak and Upshop, the traceability solution may also unlock potential business benefits. It could do that by creating margin and growth opportunities in stores by connecting supply chain data with store data, thus allowing users to optimize inventory, labor, and customer experience management automation.
"Traceability requires data from the supply chain and – importantly – confirmation at the retail store that the proper and accurate lot code data from each shipment has been captured when the product is received. The missing piece for us has been the supply chain data. ReposiTrak is the leader in capturing and managing supply chain data, starting at the suppliers. Together, we can deliver a single, comprehensive traceability solution," Mark Hawthorne, chief innovation and strategy officer at Upshop, said in a release.
"Once the data is flowing the benefits are compounding. Traceability data can be used to improve food safety, reduce invoice discrepancies, and identify ways to reduce waste and improve efficiencies throughout the store,” Hawthorne said.
Under FSMA 204, retailers are required by law to track Key Data Elements (KDEs) to the store-level for every shipment containing high-risk food items from the Food Traceability List (FTL). ReposiTrak and Upshop say that major industry retailers have made public commitments to traceability, announcing programs that require more traceability data for all food product on a faster timeline. The efforts of those retailers have activated the industry, motivating others to institute traceability programs now, ahead of the FDA’s enforcement deadline of January 20, 2026.
Inclusive procurement practices can fuel economic growth and create jobs worldwide through increased partnerships with small and diverse suppliers, according to a study from the Illinois firm Supplier.io.
The firm’s “2024 Supplier Diversity Economic Impact Report” found that $168 billion spent directly with those suppliers generated a total economic impact of $303 billion. That analysis can help supplier diversity managers and chief procurement officers implement programs that grow diversity spend, improve supply chain competitiveness, and increase brand value, the firm said.
The companies featured in Supplier.io’s report collectively supported more than 710,000 direct jobs and contributed $60 billion in direct wages through their investments in small and diverse suppliers. According to the analysis, those purchases created a ripple effect, supporting over 1.4 million jobs and driving $105 billion in total income when factoring in direct, indirect, and induced economic impacts.
“At Supplier.io, we believe that empowering businesses with advanced supplier intelligence not only enhances their operational resilience but also significantly mitigates risks,” Aylin Basom, CEO of Supplier.io, said in a release. “Our platform provides critical insights that drive efficiency and innovation, enabling companies to find and invest in small and diverse suppliers. This approach helps build stronger, more reliable supply chains.”
Logistics industry growth slowed in December due to a seasonal wind-down of inventory and following one of the busiest holiday shopping seasons on record, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index (LMI) report, released this week.
The monthly LMI was 57.3 in December, down more than a percentage point from November’s reading of 58.4. Despite the slowdown, economic activity across the industry continued to expand, as an LMI reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
The LMI researchers said the monthly conditions were largely due to seasonal drawdowns in inventory levels—and the associated costs of holding them—at the retail level. The LMI’s Inventory Levels index registered 50, falling from 56.1 in November. That reduction also affected warehousing capacity, which slowed but remained in expansion mode: The LMI’s warehousing capacity index fell 7 points to a reading of 61.6.
December’s results reflect a continued trend toward more typical industry growth patterns following recent years of volatility—and they point to a successful peak holiday season as well.
“Retailers were clearly correct in their bet to stock [up] on goods ahead of the holiday season,” the LMI researchers wrote in their monthly report. “Holiday sales from November until Christmas Eve were up 3.8% year-over-year according to Mastercard. This was largely driven by a 6.7% increase in e-commerce sales, although in-person spending was up 2.9% as well.”
And those results came during a compressed peak shopping cycle.
“The increase in spending came despite the shorter holiday season due to the late Thanksgiving,” the researchers also wrote, citing National Retail Federation (NRF) estimates that U.S. shoppers spent just short of a trillion dollars in November and December, making it the busiest holiday season of all time.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
Specifically, the two sides remain at odds over provisions related to the deployment of semi-automated technologies like rail-mounted gantry cranes, according to an analysis by the Kansas-based 3PL Noatum Logistics. The ILA has strongly opposed further automation, arguing it threatens dockworker protections, while the USMX contends that automation enhances productivity and can create long-term opportunities for labor.
In fact, U.S. importers are already taking action to prevent the impact of such a strike, “pulling forward” their container shipments by rushing imports to earlier dates on the calendar, according to analysis by supply chain visibility provider Project44. That strategy can help companies to build enough safety stock to dampen the damage of events like the strike and like the steep tariffs being threatened by the incoming Trump administration.
Likewise, some ocean carriers have already instituted January surcharges in pre-emption of possible labor action, which could support inbound ocean rates if a strike occurs, according to freight market analysts with TD Cowen. In the meantime, the outcome of the new negotiations are seen with “significant uncertainty,” due to the contentious history of the discussion and to the timing of the talks that overlap with a transition between two White House regimes, analysts said.
That percentage is even greater than the 13.21% of total retail sales that were returned. Measured in dollars, returns (including both legitimate and fraudulent) last year reached $685 billion out of the $5.19 trillion in total retail sales.
“It’s clear why retailers want to limit bad actors that exhibit fraudulent and abusive returns behavior, but the reality is that they are finding stricter returns policies are not reducing the returns fraud they face,” Michael Osborne, CEO of Appriss Retail, said in a release.
Specifically, the report lists the leading types of returns fraud and abuse reported by retailers in 2024, including findings that:
60% of retailers surveyed reported incidents of “wardrobing,” or the act of consumers buying an item, using the merchandise, and then returning it.
55% cited cases of returning an item obtained through fraudulent or stolen tender, such as stolen credit cards, counterfeit bills, gift cards obtained through fraudulent means or fraudulent checks.
48% of retailers faced occurrences of returning stolen merchandise.
Together, those statistics show that the problem remains prevalent despite growing efforts by retailers to curb retail returns fraud through stricter returns policies, while still offering a sufficiently open returns policy to keep customers loyal, they said.
“Returns are a significant cost for retailers, and the rise of online shopping could increase this trend,” Kevin Mahoney, managing director, retail, Deloitte Consulting LLP, said. “As retailers implement policies to address this issue, they should avoid negatively affecting customer loyalty and retention. Effective policies should reduce losses for the retailer while minimally impacting the customer experience. This approach can be crucial for long-term success.”