Many supply chains have struggled recently to procure critical parts such as semiconductors, metals, and construction materials. Here are five actions that procurement can take to help improve supply chain resiliency in the face of constrained supply.
Alan Brooks (support@brookring.com) is the co-founder and chief operating officer of Brookring Limited, a procurement consulting firm. He has over seven years of supply chain experience as a former U.S. army officer and supply chain consultant for the life sciences industry. He holds an MBA in supply chain management from the University of Tennessee.
It’s becoming more important than ever for supply chain professionals to find innovative and creative ways to build a more resilient and flexible supply chain. Several recent supply chain disruptions have strained many companies’ ability to secure critical parts. For instance, since the global pandemic began in 2020, the semiconductor supply has been severely constrained. Many chip producers operated well-below normal capacity due to pandemic restrictions. Although most of these restrictions have since been lifted, companies are finding it difficult to meet the current demand fueled by increased consumption of electronic vehicles, 5G phones, and other chip reliant products.
In order to respond better to such disruptions, companies need to work on strengthening those aspects of supply chain management that increase resiliency, such as a focus on capacity management, a diverse supplier network, and a culture of continuous improvement. We have identified five levers or actions that can do just that.
What does a resilient supply chain look like?
A supply chain with the following traits will be better able to ensure supply when a disruption occurs.
High capacity: Capacity is an organization’s capability to produce a product or a service. A supply chain with high capacity can persist, adapt, or transform quickly in the face of a disruption. Capacity is one of the most important concepts in supply chain theory. Organizations that are capacity-focused are able to maximize their transportation capacity, production capacity, and distribution capacity, which allows them to lower their inventory requirements and avoid holding extra inventory. As a result, these organizations have lower holding costs and a reduced risk of obsolete products. The ability to quickly meet varying levels of demand through capacity is what separates an average company from a great company.
A high level of forecasting accuracy: When the demand forecast corresponds with high accuracy to actual customer demand, it allows organizations to be more proactive in facing supply chain challenges. Although it depends on industry and product type, a good target for forecast accuracy is usually 70% or above (anything higher is typically costly to attain and requires advanced forecasting software).
Diverse supplier network: When a supply chain is dependent on a small number of suppliers or a specific region for supply, it is often vulnerable to disruption. Ideally, a company should have a high number of primary and alternate suppliers, and the supplier base should be located across several regions. This allows companies to quickly pivot when a disruption occurs at a specific supplier or in a specific region and to outperform the competition.
A culture of continuous improvement: An organization that is regularly assessing and refining its supplier base and making incremental improvements to the overall supply chain is generally more resilient. Organizations that are resilient use internal and external auditing to ensure there is no bias in favor of the current standard operating procedures or suppliers. How often these audits should be conducted will depend on different operational factors, such as industry and product lifecycle.
System thinking: Under this philosophy, challenges are not viewed in isolation but from the context of the entire supply chain, no matter at what stage they occur—from planning to delivery. System thinking is the most important aspect of a resilient supply chain because it avoids or mitigates the risk of common challenges, such as the “great divide” between sales and operations, as well as the bull-whip effect. System-thinking organizations have a structured and deliberate sales and operations planning (S&OP) process that creates buy-in from all stakeholders.
Is the supply chain resilient?
The first step toward building a more resilient supply chain is conducting a qualitative and quantitative assessment of your current supply chain to identify whether there’s a problem and the best course of action to solve it. Start by gathering information and interviewing stakeholders within the organization to identify their pain points. For instance, maybe the company is having issues with its contract manufacturers not procuring enough critical components. In this situation, interviews should be conducted with the contract manufacturer’s purchasing department to determine if this issue is due to external factors, such as a shortage in the market, or internal factors, such as poor demand forecasting practices.
Additionally, an evaluation of the current demand forecast relative to actual supply on-hand is necessary to ensure that the client and its contract manufacturers are using best practices in demand and supply planning. As mentioned earlier, world-class companies usually have between 70% and 80% accuracy in their forecasting.1 Unfortunately, many companies across all industries have been much further off in their forecasts due to the worldwide pandemic and corresponding shortages in key areas, such as raw metals, construction materials, and consumer goods. Supply chain professionals should be aware that it may take a full business cycle—boom through recession—to assess the accuracy of a forecast.
How to make the supply chain resilient?
Once a company has assessed how resilient its procurement process is, it can investigate using the following levers to improve that resiliency.
Lever 1: Identify and vet alternate vendors. Many organizations are dependent on a limited number of manufacturers and authorized distributors for parts. Having a limited number of suppliers puts an organization at risk of stock-outs and lower supply forecast accuracy over the mid- to long-term. Lower supply forecast accuracy can lead to something resembling a “bull-whip effect,” which takes place when a disruption in forecasting creates progressively bigger disruptions across the supply chain. Procurement and logistics processes are susceptible to these types of demand and supply distortions.
One way to overcome this challenge is to find an alternate vendor base. First, an organization should start by referring to the authorized distributors for a particular part, which can usually be found on a manufacturer’s website. If this list has been exhausted, then it might be necessary to find reliable brokers and traders. It will be necessary to identify, vet, and qualify these vendors because they are not authorized distributors.
Finding the right brokers and traders is a crucial part of the process. It’s important to create a thorough supplier questionnaire for the vendor to fill out to ensure a proven track record of performance and favorable payment terms. One downside to using brokers and traders is the markup on the part’s retail price. Proper negotiation strategies and tactics are thus vital to reaching a deal that’s in the best financial interest of your organization while also securing the critical parts needed.
Lever 2: Identify alternate parts. Although it’s not always possible, try to identify alternatives to primary parts. For example, Tesla was able to successfully pivot to an alternate part this year by rewriting the software in its vehicles to use a different chip, which allowed the company to avoid the brunt of the chip shortage crisis. Purchasing and procurement departments should work closely with their engineering teams to identify approved alternatives and make necessary modifications.
Lever 3: Audit your suppliers. Audits should be completed to ensure that suppliers have capacity, quality control checks, and ethical labor practices. A capacity check is used to determine if the vendor can meet higher levels of demand. Quality control checks help reduce the chance of variation or deficiencies in the product. And lastly, ethical labor practices are crucial to ensure the safety and reliability of the supplier workforce. Unethical labor practices can lead to legal problems for an organization and negative public relations—as demonstrated the media coverage of the strained relationship between Apple and its supplier Foxconn.
Lever 4: Vertically integrate. Taking direct control of the manufacturing of a product or service is another method of risk mitigation. Vertical integration often requires substantial upfront costs but allows businesses to expand their ecosystem and hedge against supply chain disruptions. An important consideration when vertically integrating is whether doing so can lower total cost of ownership or reduce risk.
Lever 5: Have a robust S&OP process. Uniform forecasting models and a single source of truth are both important methods for preventing a potential bull-whip effect. However, one can have the most advanced forecasting tools in the world, but if the data is convoluted, then it’s simply garbage-in and garbage-out. Thus, it’s necessary to have a thorough S&OP process to reach consensus on demand and supply forecasts.
As companies continue to struggle with the lingering economic effects of the pandemic, it’s essential to assess the resiliency of your supply chain to protect against future disruptions. Recent history shows the importance of having a plan to instill resiliency in the supply chain. Now is the time to execute with an actionable strategy so your company is better positioned to weather the next storm.
Note:
1. Rajesh Bagchi and Elise Chandon Ince, “Is a 70% Forecast More Accurate Than a 30% Forecast? How Level of a Forecast Affects Inferences About Forecasts and Forecasters,” Journal of Marketing Research, Vol. 53, No. 1 (February 2016), pp. 31-45: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43832443
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).
As U.S. small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) face an uncertain business landscape in 2025, a substantial majority (67%) expect positive growth in the new year compared to 2024, according to a survey from DHL.
However, the survey also showed that businesses could face a rocky road to reach that goal, as they navigate a complex environment of regulatory/policy shifts and global market volatility. Both those issues were cited as top challenges by 36% of respondents, followed by staffing/talent retention (11%) and digital threats and cyber attacks (2%).
Against that backdrop, SMEs said that the biggest opportunity for growth in 2025 lies in expanding into new markets (40%), followed by economic improvements (31%) and implementing new technologies (14%).
As the U.S. prepares for a broad shift in political leadership in Washington after a contentious election, the SMEs in DHL’s survey were likely split evenly on their opinion about the impact of regulatory and policy changes. A plurality of 40% were on the fence (uncertain, still evaluating), followed by 24% who believe regulatory changes could negatively impact growth, 20% who see these changes as having a positive impact, and 16% predicting no impact on growth at all.
That uncertainty also triggered a split when respondents were asked how they planned to adjust their strategy in 2025 in response to changes in the policy or regulatory landscape. The largest portion (38%) of SMEs said they remained uncertain or still evaluating, followed by 30% who will make minor adjustments, 19% will maintain their current approach, and 13% who were willing to significantly adjust their approach.
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.”