The impact of COVID-19 showed that traditional sales and operations planning (S&OP) may not be able to keep pace with today’s dynamic changes. Should we abandon S&OP altogether—or could adding a robust sales and operations execution (S&OE) process save the day?
From health care distribution and e-commerce fulfillment to food service, auto production, and beyond, the relentless onslaught of COVID-19 laid bare weaknesses across almost every industry—and the supply chain was spared no mercy.
The extreme environment, intensified by the emergence of the omicron coronavirus variant, has exposed existing faults across three core areas, requiring supply chain organizations to respond to supply and demand challenges most were unprepared for:
1. Supply chain tie-ups that delayed production and deliveries forced a staggering spike in allocation and trade-off decisions that needed to be made quickly. This overwhelmed many companies’ planning processes, especially those that assumed steady availability of supply.
2. At the same time, channel shifts—for example, the dramatic increase in business-to-consumer e-commerce—forced modifications to product mix and requirements, catching many companies by surprise and leaving them shocked by how poorly they were able to react and respond.
3. Lastly, the extended supply chainsdeveloped over the last several decades fell short when it came to agility, which prompted some companies to revisit the concept of reshoring.
As we (hopefully) begin to emerge from the worst of the pandemic, these and other pandemic-related challenges are leading supply chain executives to realize that some of their traditional sales and operations planning (S&OP) processes are no longer sufficient to keep pace with today’s dynamic changes in supply and demand. The clock speed has changed.
Sales and operations planning is one of the few structured, cross-functional processes at most companies. S&OP aligns strategy, finance, supply chain, operations, sales, marketing, and product development/engineering on longer-term operating decisions. Effective S&OP ties executive decisions with the activities of the dock. It creates a common view of future operations, and it holds people accountable for variances that impact the bottom line.
A mature S&OP process drives alignment and decision-making over a time horizon of three to 24+ months on strategic demand and supply plans, related policies, and significant investments. The executive S&OP meeting is the capstone of this structured process, which features a defined set of monthly meetings. The S&OP process typically includes:
sequential processes,
calendared demand (tied to specified time horizons),
inventory and supply meetings,
limited number of segment or margin scenarios to review, and
relatively predictable inputs.
Many of our clients, however, have found that the competencies and tools that typify S&OP placed them in a position of being unprepared to respond to disruptions that had no precedent, such as unpredictability of supply, supply hoarding, sudden labor shortages, immediate and dramatic demand and channel shifts, and cost swings. Instead, S&OP’s “what-if” planning discussions have been replaced with “What in the world will happen next”?
The experiences of the past two-plus years have many supply chain professionals questioning the value of planning. But we would argue that these processes and tools should not be abandoned. Effective planning creates a framework for addressing challenges when they occur; if the planning system is robust, then plans will align with company strategy. That’s why the planning process is still critically important: The ability to act when new challenges arise, quickly and in line with organizational goals, is separating companies that will be in a position of strength from those that will be struggling to pick up the financial pieces in these challenging times.
The pandemic continues to disrupt supply chains and crank up the uncertainty level. Today more than ever, organizations need capabilities that will allow them the flexibility to both improve their ability to forecast demand (improve accuracy) and reduce their reliance on that forecast (improve agility).
What’s an organization to do? Supplementing S&OP with a planning process known as sales and operations execution (S&OE) could help companies better meet the moment.
Understanding the pitfalls of S&OP
Effective S&OP requires a well-functioning set of “building blocks” that operate together. As shown in Figure 1, these building blocks fall into six interconnected dimensions that together form the framework of the S&OP process.
[Figure 1] Foundation of a well-functioning S&OP program Enlarge this image
Figure 1 shows that the elements of S&OP are well-defined. But S&OP is more than a process—it is a way of working. It must be as much a part of an organization’s culture and priorities as is sales. As illustrated by the top three blocks, securing executive buy-in for an S&OP program is critical for successful execution. When we’re introduced to a new company, we often ask if there is a supply chain professional on the executive team. Sometimes there is. Often there isn’t—and this can say a great deal about the company’s commitment to planning. Having a supply chain professional on the executive team suggests a level of maturity and an appreciation for their supply chain’s complexity and contribution to the company’s success. Supply chain executives help corporate leadership as well as sales and marketing understand the implications of alternatives and trade-offs. In short, failing to include a supply chain executive on the executive team does not set up the S&OP process for success.
Executives often express frustration and dissatisfaction that the S&OP process is “not working.” Often, that is not true; the process is working, just not in the way executives expected it would or as effectively as they think it should. There is no question that S&OP is a challenging process to implement and manage, and there are many reasons it may not be working as desired.
Figure 2 highlights some of the pitfalls that companies struggle with when they implement an S&OP process across their organization. For example, one that we frequently see occurs when a company’s S&OP process has become overburdened with short-term execution matters that it was never intended to handle. It’s not uncommon for high-level monthly meetings to get “hijacked” by participants focusing on short-term or tactical issues at a more fine-grained level. By design, S&OP facilitates cross-functional discussion, but this drift from its primary intent and charter makes it difficult for an S&OP meeting to achieve its objectives.
Significant deficiencies in any of the operating dimensions listed in Figure 2 will undermine an organization’s commitment to a plan. For example, recently we were introduced to a large manufacturer that had a very capable planning team utilizing what is a truly best-in-class S&OP technology solution for their particular industry. The team worked hard to collaborate across operations, finance, and sales to create a signal that drove plant requirements—which was then largely ignored by manufacturing.
The company had not adopted the clearly defined organizational roles required to effectively drive and support an S&OP program. This lack of organizational alignment allowed competing agendas across functions to take hold, and there was no accountability for failing to execute according to the plan the staff had worked so hard to develop. The S&OP process essentially broke down, and the severe impact of the pandemic on supply and demand only made those poor outcomes worse.
The benefits of adding S&OE
We began this article with a provocative question: Is it time to “blow up” S&OP? Despite planners’ concerns that the impacts of the pandemic are too unpredictable for S&OP’s structured process to handle, we believe the answer is no. For all its shortcomings, S&OP is still very much necessary; good planning will position an organization to be effective and agile. Yes, the forecast is always going to be wrong, but it’s possible to be less wrong—and that distinction is valuable.
Rather than abandoning the practice, we believe S&OP should be augmented with a robust sales and operations execution (S&OE) process.
S&OE is a cross-functional process that helps organizations determine discrete, tactical steps that are necessary to meet the quarter’s requirements. Like S&OP, it enables cross-functional communication that an organization otherwise would not have. S&OE aligns finance, supply chain, operations, and sales on decisions made about exceptions that occur in the 0–13-week horizon. These decisions may involve allocations, substitutions, inventory, labor, and expediting. The S&OE process is typically supported by structured demand/supply analysis and a weekly cross-functional meeting. Importantly, it does not replace S&OP rather, it supports that process by ensuring that S&OP remains focused on the longer-term horizon. (Figure 3 provides a simplified comparison of the two approaches.)
S&OE can begin as simply as a weekly demand/supply meeting to tackle cross-functional decisions that need to be made to help ensure quarterly objectives are met. Or it can start as a weekly touchpoint among S&OP participants to discuss “in-flight” disruptions that were not known during the normal S&OP cadence. In either case, the objective is simple: answering the question, “What’s changed?”
While S&OP is quite difficult to get right, S&OE (a term and concept originally introduced by the analyst firm Gartner) is less complex. Its narrower focus complements S&OP by identifying sudden supply chain complications that are often specific to a region, a supplier, or a customer/market, and then generating a response—a capability that is especially valuable in light of pandemic-related supply chain disruptions. S&OE also supports S&OP by functioning as the “adjust” component of a “plan-execute-compare-adjust” strategy. When both processes are in place and are functioning well, S&OE escalations are fed into the S&OP process, and S&OP policy decisions are reflected in the S&OE process.
There are some common S&OE pitfalls that companies should avoid. For example, all too often, S&OE efforts don’t incorporate the process input and discipline that are built into S&OP. And some companies, disillusioned with S&OP, try to implement S&OE by itself. But an organization that relies solely on S&OE will only be “fighting fires”—reacting to one near-term problem after another—without making the long-term, strategic decisions in areas like procurement and manufacturing that could address the root causes of the short-term challenges.
Unfortunately, companies that could benefit from adopting S&OE often fail to do so, in some cases because of concerns about the time and effort involved in adding this additional planning layer. Yet it doesn’t have to be a heavy lift; since the decisions around S&OE are more limited in scope and often are more regionally focused, the harmonization and decision-support requirements may be less rigorous than those for S&OP. The process may even become more automated over time, making it even easier to manage.
The smart move in turbulent times
The turbulence and unexpected events of the past two years might have tempted companies to abandon their planning process, but that is not the right way to go. It is critical to understand that not having a plan does not mean you are being agile. It means you are being naïve and unprepared.
S&OP and S&OE are both important, and they reinforce each other. This is a case where the whole truly is greater than the sum of the parts—and companies need to implement and carry out both to maximize the effectiveness of either. (The quick self-assessment in the sidebar below will help you determine whether you have strong S&OP and S&OE processes.)
The unforeseen “black swan” effects in the past year have not all been about COVID-19 and emerging variants … and it’s likely they won’t be the last ones we’ll have to contend with. Adding agility to your S&OP process by incorporating S&OE will give you greater speed and confidence in your response, positioning you to be thinking ahead about the challenges—and opportunities—that will be presented in the coming months.
Do you have sound S&OP and S&OE processes? A self-assessment
How well prepared are you to tackle supply chain disruptions? Do you have sound S&OP and S&OE processes? How do you know? Here are some questions to ask yourself. If you’re on the right track, your answer should be “yes” to each.
1. Do you make decisions in your S&OE/S&OP meetings? Mature S&OE/S&OP processes are focused on making decisions, not simply reporting historical events. If you are making clear and sound decisions in your process, then you are on the right track. If not, then no matter how “correct” your process appears to be, you are missing opportunities for improvement.
2. Do you have a “single version of the truth” for these events? Often, companies have disparate information systems and weak data governance that make it difficult to achieve an accurate, shared view of business conditions. An effective decision-making process depends on having facts that are agreed upon by all participants.
3. Do you all speak the same supply chain “language”? When business units have different definitions and terminology for parameters and key performance indicators (KPIs), the trade-off decisions across segments may not be based on equivalent information. If you have aligned these details, then you will have a solid foundation for optimizing decisions across all segments.
4. Can you run a demand/supply scenario in a day? If you can do this quickly, then you have a solid decision-making tool for anticipating and managing change at your disposal. You may even be able to quickly run scenarios that include key suppliers, a benefit for both parties.
5. Do you have the right balance of central and local control? If your service delivery model incorporates the right balance of activities under local and central control, then you will be able to maximize the value of your process by optimizing across individual sites and common trading partners.
6. Do you have a balanced scorecard and aligned incentives across business segments? This alignment theme is reflected in several other questions—and no wonder: alignment is at the heart of a successful S&OP process. Without alignment of performance expectations and incentives, it is difficult to make cross-functional decisions that will “stick” and be quickly carried out.
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.
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.
That strategy is described by RILA President Brian Dodge in a document titled “2025 Retail Public Policy Agenda,” which begins by describing leading retailers as “dynamic and multifaceted businesses that begin on Main Street and stretch across the world to bring high value and affordable consumer goods to American families.”
RILA says its policy priorities support that membership in four ways:
Investing in people. Retail is for everyone; the place for a first job, 2nd chance, third act, or a side hustle – the retail workforce represents the American workforce.
Ensuring a safe, sustainable future. RILA is working with lawmakers to help shape policies that protect our customers and meet expectations regarding environmental concerns.
Leading in the community. Retail is more than a store; we are an integral part of the fabric of our communities.
“As Congress and the Trump administration move forward to adopt policies that reduce regulatory burdens, create economic growth, and bring value to American families, understanding how such policies will impact retailers and the communities we serve is imperative,” Dodge said. “RILA and its member companies look forward to collaborating with policymakers to provide industry-specific insights and data to help shape any policies under consideration.”