Barbara Gaudenzi is Associate Professor in Supply Chain Management & Risk Management at the Department of Business Administration of the University of Verona (Italy).
George A. Zsidisin is the John W. Barriger III Professor and Director of the Supply Chain Risk and Resilience Research (SCR3) Institute at the University of Missouri—St. Louis.
Firms have engaged in global supply chains for centuries. This is due to the many benefits organizations experience from trading globally, such as expanding their customer base, attaining lower purchasing costs, and obtaining higher quality products and services, among many other factors. Although firms have been enjoying the fruits of global supply chain management for many years, there are also inherent uncertainties and risks that can quickly erode profitability.
One such form of risk prevalent in these supply chains is foreign exchange (FX) risk. Firms may suffer an increase in operating costs due to changes in exchange rates when purchasing components or materials from nondomestic suppliers, or they may lose margins when they sell products in markets with a lower exchange rate. For example, the price of a cup of coffee is the same every morning, and the price of the bakery product is the same on the shelf. But, if suppliers are paid in their own currency, the cost of the commodities—coffee beans and grain—can significantly increase due to the fluctuation in the country-of-origin’s currency, affecting production costs and profit margins.
FX risk can severely affect profitability, especially in industries characterized by tight product margins, low levels of stock, and short lead times. A 2018 survey of 200 chief financial officers, for example, found that 70% of respondents had suffered reduced earnings in the prior two years due to avoidable, unhedged FX risk.1
This finding shows the need to carefully consider FX risk. In addition, global political risk trends are increasing many firms’ exposure to FX risk. For example, the currency markets became particularly volatile after the British vote to leave the European Union.
Many firms have implemented financial hedging to manage FX risk. However, from an operational perspective, there are additional approaches firms can consider for mitigating this form of risk. In a recent research program, partly funded by the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), we uncovered five principles organizations should consider in creating a supply chain FX risk mitigation strategy. The primary focus of these principles is oriented more towards a supplier-facing perspective of the supply chain, but they take into consideration internal and downstream FX risk exposure as well. These principles include 1) creating flexibility up front, 2) looking upstream and downstream in the supply chain, 3) incorporating multiple sources of cost/price uncertainty, 4) using a range of risk mitigation approaches, and 5) considering relationships. (See Figure 1.)
[Figure 1] Five principles for creating a supply chain FX risk mitigation strategy Enlarge this image
Creating flexibility up front
Firms can mitigate a great amount of FX risk by considering a variety of sourcing strategies during the initial product development and supplier evaluation and selection stages. Sourcing a component or product from a sole supplier located in a foreign country leaves a firm vulnerable to changes in the exchange rate. When possible and feasible, firms should consider establishing a multisourcing strategy (or at least backup suppliers) by qualifying and selecting a domestic supplier or one from an alternate foreign country. Although identifying and qualifying alternate sources of supply can be costly, firms should see it as an investment in flexibility. It gives firms the opportunity to mitigate unfavorable fluctuations in FX rates by switching the purchasing quantity to another supplier.
We have seen organizations create backup, domestic sources of supply as well as qualify suppliers that use a third currency. For example, one Italian firm we studied purchases components from China, but it has also qualified a supplier in the U.K. and can source from another supplier in Italy. This example supports findings from a recent survey, which found that 80% of the companies studied invest in supplier relationships and flexibility to reduce risk.2
However, companies need to be careful when creating these plans. They should make sure to consider additional expenses such as the costs of switching from one supplier to another, including the cost of changing manufacturing and distribution processes and any new transportation costs. Hence, before deciding whether or not to invest in flexibility by qualifying suppliers that use a different currency, it is crucial to carefully assess the expected benefits versus the cost for implementing the plan. One way to make this assessment is to use real options valuation (ROV) in combination with simulation tools.3 This avoids having firms build flexibility when it does not prove to be worthwhile.
Flexibility, in fact, has its limitations. It is very difficult to frequently change supply sources due to switching costs and process changes. Therefore, companies need to understand both the short- and long-term FX rate uncertainties and forecasts in order to determine if switching sources is really worthwhile, especially since it may take six months or more before another switch is viable. Longer time between switches may in fact dramatically erode the value created by the flexibility itself. At the extreme, if the next switch is only viable several months later, another fluctuation in FX rates may make the switch financially unfavorable.
Looking upstream and downstream
It is important for firms to know where in their supply chains they could be exposed to foreign exchange rate risk. To uncover these points of weakness, they need to look both up and down their supply chain. Upstream sources of risk include having suppliers located in countries using a different currency and having suppliers whose own suppliers receive payments in various currencies. Downstream FX risk exposure can come from customers in foreign countries who pay in their respective currencies as well as from making payments to providers of transportation and other supply chain services in a foreign currency.
It is also important to understand how these FX risks may affect your supply chains. How will fluctuations in foreign exchange rates affect your cash-to-cash cycle and your firm’s profitability? Are there opportunities for natural hedging where sales and purchases are done using the same foreign currency? The mitigation of FX risk might be particularly crucial for firms located in countries where raw materials are scarce or the share of imported material from abroad (spend in other countries) is significant and experiences currency volatility. This can especially occur in developing countries, such as with BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India, and China). In such cases, experiencing a devaluation of the local currencies (the currency of the selling product) may produce a significant loss for a firm.
Incorporating multiple sources of cost/price uncertainty
Firms are exposed to uncertainty from many different sources. These sources of uncertainty can include, but are not limited to: global political dynamics, demand volume volatility, commodity price fluctuations, tariffs, and transportation costs. Further, many of these sources of uncertainty influence other sources. For example, the price of oil (a commodity) has an influence on transportation rates. Likewise, the uncertainty around the recent COVID-19 pandemic is dramatically affecting global demand, changing its volumes and affecting the equilibrium between off-shored and domestic manufacturing needed to meet that demand. Some of these sources of uncertainty can offset the effects of FX risk, while others can amplify unfavorable FX rates.
For example, the COVID-19 pandemic severely affected the global oil market because demand for oil from China (which accounts for 20% of total global consumption) dropped by about 3 million barrels a day. As a result, global oil prices, such as the Brent crude oil price, dropped to their lowest level in more than a year. This drop also affected shipping prices and generated high volatility in commodity prices, which in turn affected foreign exchange rates.4
Commodity price shocks, higher prices due to disruptions to global supply chains, and the shortage of demand from the tourism industry all resulted in severe fluctuations in foreign exchange rates.
As recent events show, FX risk cannot be considered in a vacuum. Instead, we have found it is important for firms to create total cost models that holistically assess their entire financial risk exposure. These models would include FX risk as one of several factors. Similarly, when companies create a FX risk mitigation strategy, they should take into consider other cost drivers and how they influence FX risk.
Using a range of risk mitigation approaches
There is no one “silver bullet” for mitigating FX risk. Larger firms for many years have employed financial hedging instruments, such as derivatives and currency swaps, for reducing their exposure to FX risk. Although financial hedging remains an important tool and approach in creating a FX risk mitigation strategy, other approaches, especially at the operational level, can also be employed for actively addressing this form of financial risk and creating supply chain flexibility in the case of unfavorable FX valuation rates.
One common approach that supply chain professionals utilize for reducing the effects of significant FX valuation shifts is negotiation. Many suppliers want to ensure that they keep their customers’ business. From the purchasing firm’s perspective, we have found it beneficial for organizations to simply communicate to its supplier how FX rate shifts affect its cost structure. This tactic gives suppliers the opportunity to adjust their sales prices to counter the currency value shift and remain price competitive. Further, these negotiations, especially when they are done during the contracting stage, can include escalation and de-escalation clauses, where this form of risk is shared between the companies. For example, if future changes of FX valuation shift by more than 5% above or below an established rate, then the price increase or decrease due to currency differences would be shared between the buyer and supplier. Other mitigation techniques can include suppliers switching or reallocating volume for reducing the effects of FX risk, financial hedging, and natural hedging.
Considering relationships
The success of many of the approaches to FX risk mentioned above is dependent upon a firm’s current and future relationships with its customers and suppliers. Further, the power balance in the relationship will also partly determine how FX risk is mitigated.
For example, building in flexibility by switching suppliers or reallocating volume may be a viable strategy when there are no production capacity constraints and the relationship with the supplier is more transactional. However, it may be the incorrect decision if the supplier is considered strategic to your success. Also, a multisourcing approach may strengthen your firm’s purchasing power by providing information that can be used to improve current relationships or negotiations with new suppliers. Therefore, investing in flexibility may be seen as a “strategic tool” to adopt from a longer-term perspective, based on the FX rate forecasts.
Understanding the relationship between yourself and a supplier is also key to successfully using negotiation as an approach to mitigating FX risk. By establishing rules at the very beginning of the negotiation, you may create efficiency and limit opportunistic behaviors by your suppliers. In this sense, negotiation may be a “tactical tool” used to manage specific suppliers for shorter-term periodic FX rate fluctuations. Having strong, established relationships and rapport with suppliers is an important requisite for negotiating contractual terms in response to FX risk.
When determining what approach to take in mitigating FX risk, companies should ask themselves, what is the true value of the supplier or customer? Is FX risk considered a win-lose game, where one organization gains temporary financial benefits from currency valuation shifts at the expense of the other? Or is it an opportunity to mutually discover opportunities for financial success?
Supply chain relationships are not just external. Internal supply chain relationships with other business functions (such as production, finance, and marketing) should be taken into consideration. Is finance/treasury considered the primary entity responsible for this form of risk? How can we work with them in mitigating FX risk? Are there opportunities for creating a natural hedging strategy with marketing and sales? How do our decisions affect production? Creating a supply chain FX risk mitigation strategy cannot be done in isolation. It needs to incorporate both external and internal supply chain partners and functions.
The path forward
There is no question about it—firms are subject to a myriad of uncertainties that can detrimentally affect their profitability. Currency fluctuations and their inherent risk is one such uncertainty supply chain professionals need to be aware of and incorporate into their plans for managing their supply chains and contributing to corporate profitability. The five principles provided in this article shed some insight into what factors you may want to consider when creating such a strategy.
Authors’ Note: The authors would like to thank the companies participating in this research and CSCMP for a grant helping to support this study.
Notes:
1. Rethinking Treasury, HSBC and FT Remark, 2018: https://www.gbm.hsbc.com/the-new-future/treasury-thought-leadership/risk-management-survey
3. Real option valuation (ROV) methods are based on the concept of “real options,” which are defined as “the right but not the obligation” to choose a course of action and obtain an associated payoff. ROV methods have been widely used for project/asset valuations when the exercise of further options is not certain and depends on the evolution of other events, but comes at a certain initial cost. Examples are having the managerial flexibility (that is, the option) to expand, abandon, or contract a project, based on different states being realized in future
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."