Companies need to plan for top five supply chain risks of 2025
Everstream sees high risk factors in climate change/weather, geopolitical instability, cybercrime, rare metals/minerals, and the crackdown on forced labor.
“The past year has been unprecedented, with extreme weather events, heightened geopolitical tension and cybercrime destabilizing supply chains throughout the world. Navigating this year’s looming risks to build a secure supply network has never been more critical,” Corey Rhodes, CEO of Everstream Analytics, said in the firm’s “2025 Annual Risk Report.”
“While some risks are unavoidable, early notice and swift action through a combination of planning, deep monitoring, and mitigation can save inventory and lives in 2025,” Rhodes said.
In its report, Everstream ranked the five categories by a “risk score metric” to help global supply chain leaders prioritize planning and mitigation efforts for coping with them. They include:
Drowning in Climate Change – 90% Risk Score. Driven by shifting climate patterns and record-high temperatures, extreme weather events are a dominant risk to the supply chain due to concerns such as flooding and elevated ocean temperatures.
Geopolitical Instability with Increased Tariff Risk – 80% Risk Score. These threats could disrupt trade networks and impact economies worldwide, including logistics, transportation, and manufacturing industries. The following major geopolitical events are likely to impact global trade: Red Sea disruptions, Russia-Ukraine conflict, Taiwan trade risks, Middle East tensions, South China Sea disputes, and proposed tariff increases.
More Backdoors for Cybercrime – 75% Risk Score. Supply chain leaders face escalating cybersecurity risks in 2025, driven by the growing reliance on AI and cloud computing within supply chains, the proliferation of IoT-connected devices, vulnerabilities in sub-tier supply chains, and a disproportionate impact on third-party logistics providers (3PLs) and the electronics industry.
Rare Metals and Minerals on Lockdown – 65% Risk Score. Between rising regulations, new tariffs, and long-term or exclusive contracts, rare minerals and metals will be harder than ever, and more expensive, to obtain.
Crackdown on Forced Labor – 60% Risk Score. A growing crackdown on forced labor across industries will increase pressure on companies who are facing scrutiny to manage and eliminate suppliers violating human rights. Anticipated risks in 2025 include a push for alternative suppliers, a cascade of legislation to address lax forced labor issues, challenges for agri-food products such as palm oil and vanilla.
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.
Maersk’s overall view of the coming year is that the global economy is expected to grow modestly, with the possibility of higher inflation caused by lingering supply chain issues, continued geopolitical tensions, and fiscal policies such as new tariffs. Geopolitical tensions and trade disruptions could threaten global stability, climate change action will continue to shape international cooperation, and the ongoing security issue in the Red Sea is expected to continue into 2025.
Those are difficult challenges, but according to Maersk, a vital part of logistics planning is understanding where risk and weak spots might be and finding ways to dampen the impact of inevitable hurdles.
They include:
1. Build a resilient supply chain As opposed to simply maintaining traditional network designs, Maersk says it is teaming with Hapag-Lloyd to implement a new East-West network called Gemini, beginning in February, 2025. The network will use leaner mainliners and shuttles together, allowing for isolation of port disruptions, minimizing the impact of disruptions to supply chains and routes. More broadly, companies should work with an integrated logistics partner that has multiple solutions—be they by air, truck, barge or rail—allowing supply chains to adapt around issues, while still meeting consumer demands.
2. Implementing technological advances
A key component in ensuring more resilience against disruptions is working with a supply chain supplier that offers advanced real-time tracking systems and AI-powered analytics to provide comprehensive visibility across supply chains. An AI-powered dashboard of analytics can provide end-to-end visibility of shipments, tasks, and updates, enabling efficient logistics management without the need to chase down data. Also, forecasting tools can give predictive analytics to optimize inventory, reduce waste, and enhance efficiency. And incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) into digital solutions can enable live tracking of containers to monitor shipments.
3. Preparing for anything, instead of everything Contingency planning was a big theme for 2024, and remains so for 2025. That need is highlighted by geopolitical instability, climate change and volatility, and changes to tariffs and legislation. So in 2025, businesses should seek to partner with a logistics partner that offers risk and disruption navigation through pre-planned procedures, risk assessments, and alternative solutions.
4. Diversifying all aspects of the supply chain Supply chains have felt the impact of disruption throughout 2024, with the situation in the Red Sea resulting in all shipping having to avoid the Suez Canal, and instead going around the Cape of Good Hope. This has increased demand throughout the year, resulting in businesses trying to move cargo earlier to ensure they can meet customer needs, and even considering nearshoring. As regionalization has become more prevalent, businesses can use nearshoring to diversify suppliers and reduce their dependency on single sources. By ensuring that these suppliers and manufacturers are closer to the consumer market, businesses can keep production costs lower as well as have more ease of reaching markets and avoid delay-related risks from global disruptions. Utilizing options closer to market can also allow companies to better adapt to changes in consumer needs and behavior. Finally, some companies may also find it useful to stock critical materials for future, to act as a buffer against unexpected delays and/or issues relating to trade embargoes.
5. Understanding tariffs, legislation and regulations 2024 was year of customs regulations in EU. And tariffs are expected in the U.S. as well, once the new Trump Administration takes office. However, consistent with President-elect Trump’s first term, threats of increases are often used as a negotiating tool. So companies should take a wait and see approach to U.S. customs, even as they cope with the certainty that further EU customs are set to come into play.
For an island measuring a little less than 14,000 square miles (or about the size of Belgium), Taiwan plays a crucial role in global supply chains, making geopolitical concerns associated with it of keen interest to most major corporations.
Taiwan has essentially acted as an independent nation since 1949, when the nationalist government under Chiang Kai-shek retreated to the island following the communist takeover of mainland China. Yet China has made no secret of the fact that it wants to bring Taiwan back under its authority—ambitions that were brought to the fore in October when China launched military drills that simulated an attack on the island.
If China were to invade Taiwan, it could have serious political and social consequences that would ripple around the globe. And it would be particularly devastating to our supply chains, says consultant Ashray Lavsi, a principal at the global procurement and supply chain consultancy Efficio. He specializes in solving complex supply chain, operations, and procurement problems, with a special focus on resilience. Prior to joining Efficio’s London office in 2017, he worked at XPO Logistics in the U.S. and the Netherlands.
Lavsi spoke recently with David Maloney, Supply Chain Xchange’s group editorial director, about what might happen if China moves to annex Taiwan—what shortages would likely arise, the impact on shipping lanes and ocean freight costs, and what managers should be doing now to prepare for potential disruptions ahead.
It’s no secret that China has ambitions on Taiwan. If China were to attempt to seize control of Taiwan, how would that affect the world’s supply chains?
There would be wide-ranging disruptions around the world. The United States does a lot of trade with both China and Taiwan. For example, the U.S. imports about $470 billion worth of goods from China, while China imports about $124 billion from the U.S. Meanwhile, Taiwan is the No. 9 trading partner for the U.S. So all of this trade could come to a halt, depending on the level of conflict. Supplies would likely be disrupted, and trade routes could be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs.
Furthermore, there would likely be disruptions to trade not just between the U.S. and China, but also across the board. It could very well be that the NATO members get involved, that South Korea gets involved, that Japan gets involved, the Philippines get involved, so it could very quickly spiral into widespread disruptions.
We’ve seen big changes in the way businesses in Hong Kong operate since Britain handed control of Hong Kong over to China nearly 30 years ago. If China were to succeed in bringing Taiwan under its authority, would we see a similar outcome?
Indeed, I would expect so. I read recently that since around 2020, foreign direct investment in Hong Kong has dropped by nearly 50%, from $105 million to $54 million. The drop was primarily because of increased regulatory oversight. There are now a lot of restrictions on freedom of speech as well as tighter control over business operations. Something similar could very well happen in Taiwan if China were to succeed in taking over the island.
As you mentioned, the United States conducts a lot of trade with both Taiwan and China, and both countries have become strategic supply chain partners. Beyond the diplomatic considerations, what would a military or economic conflict mean for the United States?
There is a lot of trade in goods like agricultural products, aircraft, electronic components, and machinery, and our access to all of those items could be cut off. On top of that, China controls 70% of the world’s rare earth minerals [which are crucial for the production of a wide variety of electronic devices]. So any conflict in the region would almost certainly result in many disruptions, particularly in critical sectors like technology and electronics—disruptions that would lead to shortages and increased costs.
Trade routes would also be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs. U.S. companies would need to seek out alternative suppliers for critical materials or components they currently source in China, if they haven’t already. And if they haven’t lined up alternative suppliers, any hostilities could result in a complete halt in production.
What effect would such a move have on the global economy?
It’s been quite a few years since economies have just been localized. Any disruption now has widespread ripple effects across the world. As we discussed, any conflict between the United States and China naturally pulls in countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and the NATO countries, and it can very quickly spiral out.
Look at the semiconductor, or chip, shortages. If you recall, back in 2021, those shortages led to almost a half-trillion-dollar loss for the automakers, who lost out on sales of 7.7 million vehicles because they couldn’t meet demand. We could see a repeat of that situation—maybe even on a larger scale.
I found this statistic interesting—we often talk about the semiconductor shortages during the pandemic, but if you look at true production numbers, the actual production of chips went up from 2020, to 2021, to 2022. The shortage was driven not by a drop in production, but rather, by a surge in demand for PCs from people working from home. That demand has since dwindled, but we’d still face a major semiconductor shortage if much of the production were halted. So that’s going to be a very big change, a very big disruption.
Of course, the United States, along with a number of other countries, has taken steps to reduce its exposure to risk by bringing some semiconductor production back to its own shores. But it will take time to get those operations up and running, and their output would still be just a drop in the bucket compared to what’s needed. So what would a takeover of Taiwan mean for the overall semiconductor flow?
It essentially stops, right? Let me paint a picture that illustrates the importance of the Taiwanese semiconductor industry to global manufacturing. Semiconductors go into everything from cars to military equipment to computers to data centers to microwaves—they are in everything around us. Taiwan produces 60% of the world’s semiconductors and more than 90% of the advanced chips. Just let that sink in: More than 90% of all the advanced chips produced worldwide come from Taiwan, primarily from a big fabrication company called TSMC.
So the complexity and the precision required to make advanced semiconductors, combined with the limited number of companies around the world, make Taiwan’s position unmatched. The second-largest producer after TSMC is South Korean-based Samsung, which produces 18%, so that’s the gap that we are talking about.
As you rightly said, there are efforts by governments across the world to reduce their reliance on Taiwan. For example, TSMC is building three fabrication facilities in Arizona—the third with funding from the U.S. government. The first plant is set to go live next year and the third by 2030. But even once all three plants are up and running, the production volumes won’t be close to what TSMC produces in Taiwan. It’s going to take years to reduce our reliance on production in Taiwan. If that supply is cut off, the ripple effect will be tremendous.
Setting aside the historical and political claims China has made on Taiwan, is Taiwan’s dominance in the semiconductor industry a main reason why China has set its sights on it?
It could be. China has been investing heavily in chip production—for instance, today, most, if not all, of the chips in the latest Huawei phones are locally produced in China. But China is still quite a few years behind TSMC. So that’s definitely going to be one of the big factors, right? One article that I found very interesting declared that chips are the new oil. If you control chip production, you control the global market.
Let’s talk about the implications for shipping lanes. If you take a look at the map, you realize that the Taiwan Strait is a very important shipping lane for containerized goods coming out of both China and Taiwan. If China were to institute a military blockade, how would that affect the world’s container flows?
That flow would be affected tremendously. The Taiwan Strait plays a crucial role in global shipping, particularly for goods moving between Asia and the rest of the world. It is one of the busiest shipping lanes, and any blockage would severely disrupt global container flows.
Now let me put that into perspective. Fifty percent of the world’s containerships pass through the Taiwan Strait—50%. That’s a huge number. By comparison, the Suez Canal handles about 20% of global trade. Or to use another measure: 88% of the world’s largest ships by tonnage passed through the Taiwan Strait in 2022.
I’ve been reading up on this in the past few months and it seems that a military blockage is a very likely scenario—one that would cripple Taiwan’s economy without a full-scale invasion. So instead of a mounting a full-on attack, China might just block the strait, which would lead to delays in the delivery of goods, affecting global supply chains and causing shortages across Asia and the U.S.
Given the escalating tensions between China and Taiwan, should shippers and manufacturers be preparing today for a potential conflict?
Businesses have to begin preparing today. If businesses were to say, “Okay, I’m going to wait until the conflict breaks out, and then figure out what I’ll do,” it will be too late. You’re done. Your production comes to halt. You can no longer satisfy your customer requirements. So proactive measures are an absolute requirement.
What should they do to prepare?
I would urge manufacturers and shippers to take what’s essentially a two-pronged approach.
First, you need to segment and identify your critical components, based on how crucial they are to your production operations and the risk associated with their sources, where they’re coming from. After you segment them, you list your top-priority items—the critical components that you absolutely cannot do without. You then split your supply chain into two, so that you have a much more redundant supply chain built for those critical items and then a second supply chain for everything else.
To build redundancy, you establish multiple suppliers and diversify them geographically. You also build in stringent contingency measures, which could include strategic stockpiling, nearshoring, and friendshoring, which is where you store inventory with an ally or in a friend consortium, as well as buying alternative components wherever possible. So all of those measures need to be put in place for the components that you’ve identified as absolutely critical for your production.
What is the second prong?
The second prong is the need to manage increased costs. There’s no getting away from higher costs, right? If you’re holding more inventory, you have higher inventory carrying costs. And if you’re diversifying your supply base, that means you don’t have as much leverage [with individual suppliers]. You’re also going to be managing multiple supply chains, which requires an increase in human capital because you’ll need more people to manage the more complex supply chains that you’re putting in place.
One way to manage costs could be by implementing strategic sourcing programs across the board that are aimed at mitigating some of the expenses. By taking these steps, manufacturers can safeguard their operations against potential disruptions and ensure continuity.
A lot of U.S. companies have been nearshoring to Mexico, which has now become the United States’ leading trade partner. Is that a simple solution for companies looking to reduce their reliance on Asia?
It is one of the solutions. But you won’t be able to replace your Asian supply base immediately—as with semiconductors, it may take a few years to build out that capacity.
So you need to start stockpiling essential components now—particularly if you won’t be able to find alternatives. You want to make sure that you’re holding the right amount of inventory of the components that you absolutely need. So nearshoring is an option, but you need to be careful what you move to Mexico.
Is that because moving production to Mexico will raise your costs compared to sourcing in Asia?
Yes, production costs will be higher compared to a place like Vietnam, where wages are currently lower than in Mexico. It might reduce the logistics cost, but I think there’s still a net increase overall because you’ll have higher expenses for things like regulatory compliance. Plus you’ll have the one-time cost of setting up the facilities.
Ideally, you’ll never have to face these problems we’ve been talking about, but it’s always better to be prepared.
Editor’s note:This article first appeared in the November 2024 issue of our sister publication DC Velocity.
Keep ReadingShow less
Attendees visit the CSCMP EDGE 2024 Resource Center.
As I assume the role of Chair of the Board of Directors for the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), I fondly reflect on the more than 10 years that I’ve had the privilege of being part of this extraordinary organization. I’ve seen firsthand the impact we have had on individuals, companies, and the entire supply chain profession.
CSCMP’s journey as an organization began back in 1963. It has since grown from a small, passionate community to the world’s premier association for supply chain professionals. Our mission—to connect, educate, and develop supply chain professionals throughout their careers—remains not only relevant, but vital in today’s world.
As we look ahead, the opportunities are vast. What stands out the most to me is simply this:We are stronger together. Every individual brings a unique perspective, and it’s through our collective wisdom and efforts that we will continue to advance the work we do. The road ahead is not one we travel alone. It’s a path we navigate as a community—one united in purpose and direction.
My vision for the year ahead centers around growth—growth in our global reach and, perhaps even more importantly, growth in how we engage and support each other. We have tremendous opportunities for international expansion, especially in Europe, the U.K., Mexico, Central and South America, and Canada. I’m happy to share that we're already seeing progress in our reach to these regions.
I'm incredibly excited about the potential for even more growth ahead. One of the initiatives I am most passionate about is our Centers of Excellence. These centers will provide members the space to engage deeply in key supply chain disciplines. I invite each of you to dive into these areas, share your experiences, and contribute to the innovative solutions we develop together. There will be plenty of opportunity to do so. These centers are not only academic spaces—they are hubs for innovation, where we can share best practices and work together to solve our industry’s biggest challenges.
Education and thought leadership will continue to be at the heart of what we do. By expanding our research capacity, we will offer cutting-edge insights that keep our members at the forefront of industry trends and innovation. Through our platforms, we will create even more opportunities for connection and collaboration—ensuring that every voice is heard. Your insights, curiosity, questions, and engagement will drive the transformation we seek. We all play a part in the advancement of our industry and our profession.
Our impact begins with membership. Expanding collaborations with public, private, and nonprofit sectors will give us new ways to drive progress. In a world where our ecosystem is even more interconnected than ever before, the ability to engage with diverse stakeholders will help us unlock new solutions and truly make a difference on a global scale. None of this would be possible without the strong foundation that has been built over the years by serving our supply chain community. Each of you holds the ability to shape the future of the supply chain, and I can’t wait to see what we will achieve together.
Keep ReadingShow less
Supply Chain Xchange's 2024 Outstanding Women in Supply Chain Award winners
It’s an unfortunate truth: In spite of significant gains, women only represent 40% of the total supply chain workforce and only 35% of managers. These sobering figures come from the “2024 Women in Supply Chain Survey” authored by the analyst group Gartner and AWESOME, a nonprofit focused on advancing women’s supply chain leadership.
But by dwelling on the negative aspects of this truth, we run the risk of overlooking the significant impact that many women leaders are having on the supply chain field today.
Supply Chain Xchange’sOutstanding Women in Supply Chain Award seeks to shine a spotlight on women who are helping to reimagine and direct the future of supply chain management—not just for their own companies but for the profession as a whole.
The 2024 recipients are:
Annette Danek-Akey, chief supply chain officer (CSCO) at Barnes & Noble; Sherry Harriman, former senior vice president of logistics and supply chain for Academy Sports + Outdoors; Leslie O'Regan-Yount, director of product management for distribution center systems and third-party logistics at American Eagle Outfitters Inc.; and Ammie McAsey, senior vice president of customer distribution experience for McKesson's U.S. pharmaceutical distribution division.
Danek-Akey joined Barnes & Noble as CSCO in September of 2024 after a long career at book publisher Penguin Random House, where she had also risen to the role of CSCO. Recently retired, Harriman guided Academy Sports + Outdoors’ logistics and supply chain operations after working for nearly 30 years at Walmart in distribution. With 20 years of experience in the supply chain and technology space, O'Regan-Yount is currently playing an integral role in the implementation of innovative technology for American Eagle’s distribution operations. McAsey is currently responsible for leading the distribution strategy across the U.S. for brand, generic, and specialty pharmaceuticals at health care distributor McKesson. In addition, she supports McKesson’s initiatives to provide COVID-19 vaccines and ancillary supply kits on behalf of the U.S. government.
The award winners were recognized at the CSCMP EDGE Conference in the Fall of 2024. The following is an excerpt from the subsequent panel discussion moderated by
Supply Chain Xchange Executive Editor Susan Lacefield. (The full panel discussion can be view on our website under the video section.)
Can you talk a little bit about your career path, and how you got into the position where you are today?
Annette Danek-Akey: I have an interesting career path because I was for the last 28 and a half years on the publishing side at Penguin Random House, where I was the chief supply chain officer. So I'm looking forward to being on the other side of the supply chain [at retailer Barnes and Noble].
How did I get to where I am? My background is in industrial engineering. When you're an industrial engineer, you have to convince someone else to do a project. So at some point, I realized the best place to be was probably to be in charge, because then I could implement my own ideas. But what I didn't realize is that you still have to convince people and you have to do it in a collaborative fashion.
I started my career in retail at Sears in logistics, and at some point, I got a call from a recruiter. There was an opportunity to go to this very small book publisher distribution facility. If you're at a big company, sometimes you get pigeonholed into one job, and I wanted to do it all. That's just my personality type. So, I said, “I'm going to take the step.” I went to that smaller company, and I got to learn it all. And then we just happened to grow into the world's largest trade publisher.
Sherry Harriman: Before I retired, I had the opportunity to lead Academy Sports + Outdoor’s supply chain and logistics for six years. But before that, I worked 29 years at Walmart. I started out just needing a job, working my way through college. And so, I say, supply chain found me. I started out as a break-pack order filler, and when I left Walmart, I had responsibility for six distribution centers in the state of Florida and one in Puerto Rico.
When I look back on my career, what worked well for me was always accepting new roles and responsibilities and appreciating that maybe someone had more faith in me or more vision for me than I had.
Leslie O'Regan-Yount: So my career path was a little different. I am very much a go-getter. I'm going to go out and grab an opportunity. I'm not going wait for somebody to give it to me. I have never been promoted in my entire career. When I got promoted, it was because I took a different job with a different company. Essentially, I've talked my way into every career move I've ever made.
That has led me to here, where I am the person responsible for all the software and hardware technologies inside American Eagle to get all our products out to our customers or out to our stores.
Ammie McAsey: My career actually started during a college job at DSC Logistics. I worked second shift in the shipping and receiving window, and I just kind of fell in love with it. I was a marketing major. I wanted to move to North Carolina. I wanted to work on race car teams and work for one of those big Roger Penske teams out in North Carolina. Instead, I took my first job in North Carolina to get my foot in the door. And I never left logistics. So whether it's beverages, building supplies, apparel, or now pharmaceuticals, I've just stayed in love with the industry, and it's gotten me where I am today.
How would describe your leadership style and the skills and experiences that helped shape that style?
Ammie McAsey: It's about caring about people, bringing people together, solving problems, and having fun. If you cannot have fun at work, you're missing out. We start all of our team meetings five minutes late. A lot of people say they're going to end five minutes early. Never happens. But if you start five minutes late, those five minutes allow for everyone to just show up, and that's kind of our social, fun time. There's always a good story. So really, it's about understanding your team, caring about them, working together, and just inspiring the best in everyone.
Leslie O'Regan-Yount: I like to be empowering to the people underneath me. I'm not a micromanager. I don't want to know how you're going to get from point A to point B. I'm going to tell you where point B needs to be, and I'm going to empower you to make the decisions necessary to get there. If you fall along the way, that's fine. I'll pick you up. I'm here to guide you, to help you, to throw ideas off. But I don't want to be that micromanaging boss. I want you to make a decision, and I'm going to back your play, right or wrong.
Also [my leadership style involves] understanding what associates want to get out of their career and trying to help them get to those positions, get to those assignments. That’s what makes people want to come back and work for you.
Sherry Harriman: One of the things that I've learned over my career is, it's a circle: lead with support and follow up for accountability. I've been put in positions in my career where I wasn't the expert, and that [philosophy] just became even more valuable. If you've transitioned into a new department or into a new company, focus on finding out what the teams need to be successful at their job and how do we achieve goals together. Then you follow up to make sure that they did what they said they were going to do. I think that's the best leadership model that you can have.
For talent development, it's caring about people, not just what they do, but who they are, and valuing the diversity of thought. Diverse teams sometimes can have the most controversy, because not everyone thinks alike. But if you can learn to absorb and welcome that feedback—whether it's good feedback or challenging feedback—then you will come up with the best solution.
Annette Danek-Akey: If you ever want to learn about your leadership style, work at a company for 28 years and then leave, because that's when people tell you what they're going to miss about you. So as I left [Penguin Random House], I took it as an opportunity to say, “Well, what was it about me?” I really asked for that direct feedback.
What I found is that there's three things. The first thing for me is that people say I'm visionary. And I was trying to think, “Well, why am I visionary?” And I think it’s because I am an avid reader. I read about a book a week, and I read a lot of fiction. If you read fiction books, you have to have an imagination.
The second is that I'm very collaborative, and that’s because you can't get that vision done on your own. You need other people to bring that vision to life.
The third thing is people would say I’m very scientific with a methodology to get things done. I think that's true, because the way that you put that vision or supply chain model out there is to say, “Here's our steps.” I personally like having a process to do something, because then people know what to expect.
How do you help mentor people into leaders who maybe don't have what are seen as traditional leadership characteristics?
Leslie O'Regan-Yount: You're going to find that this new generation coming in, Gen Z and Gen Alpha, have a very different take on social skills. A lot more of them are much more introverted than you would want them to be. So to coach them into a leadership role, you have to look for the strength that they have and then figure out ways to allow them to practice to be confident in a safe space (I know that's a terrible way to put it).
For example, I’ve had a lot of folks who were very nervous about getting up in front of people and presenting. Then you need to practice until you're not, whether it’s practicing presenting to yourself, or to the dog, or to another leader who you're comfortable with. It's a different kind of coaching.
The other technique I always teach them is, you better fake it until you make it. So if you're nervous and uncomfortable, that's okay. Pretend that you're not, and one day you won't be. It worked for me for in consulting for many years.
Sherry Harriman: Something that I found successful is, if you know who's going to be in the meeting, then getting them exposure to those individuals previous to the meeting. So that you're not the only sponsor in that meeting. That’s part of building that confidence quietly through one-on-one conversations with some of the key influencers in the meeting. I’ve found that to be very successful as well.
Annette Danek-Akey: One of the things that I encourage people to do if they're trying to practice leadership skills and especially influencing is to go be on a board at a nonprofit organization or help at CSCMP. Because you have to lead through influence, and no one really knows you. It's not the job; so go practice. I try to convince people to do that when they have the time. You have to have the time to do that, but if you do, you'll get so much out of it.
What can we do as an industry to develop and inspire more women to take leadership positions in the supply chain?
Leslie O'Regan-Yount: My vote is always to start younger. To be fair, if you tell a bunch of fifth graders that there's a career in distribution, they're going go, “What's that?” So, I think in this age of robotics, let’s bring all of this cool technology to the younger generation so they get excited about the shiny toy. And then as they get older introduce them to the rest of the topics.
Sherry Harriman: To tag on to that it's not just moving boxes and driving trucks. Logistics and supply chain is so much more than that. You can have any career that you want to have in supply chain. It's analytical. There's a financial piece, there's a marketing piece. You can find your way in it. We need to get the message out that if you want a career that you can have multiple opportunities, there's no better field than supply chain. You can move from one area to the other and grow your career effectively by doing that.
How do we then help them get up to those higher leadership roles? What sort of programs work, and what doesn't work?
Ammie McAsey: It's finding that diverse talent—women, men, it doesn’t matter. Find good talent and bring them along. Bring them through the door that they don't even know exists. They may not have the subject matter expertise, but bring them along. I love all of the employee resource groups that we do, but sometimes leadership is one person at a time, and then multiply that effect. That person that you pulled through, have that person pull somebody else through. It really becomes the multiplier effect that then starts to create this energy.
Sherry Harriman: One of the things I would add is whatever the diversity, you can never look at yourself as a victim. You've already lost the battle if you're thinking from a victim mentality. Victims oftentimes behave defensively, and you have to take your career offensively to make sure that you make it your own.
And then, it can't be men against women. It has to be men with women and women with men. We have often complementary skill sets, and the only way that we can improve the industry is to have it be all of us working together. It can't be women trying to create our own path of success. It has to be bringing others up, bringing others along, all of us together.
Annette Danek-Akey: I always go really pragmatic on this. I think vacation time and paid time off is just key for everyone. The last two years I've worked in England, and so I now see the difference for real. I've been in your shoes, listening to people saying, “we need more vacation” and thinking well it's different [here]. Yeah, it's different, and two weeks just doesn't cut it. So if you want to have a more diverse workforce, add more vacation time, and I know that's easier said than done.