Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom - The reality
Closing the implementation gap
Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom - The reality
Closing the implementation gap
Prof. Richard Wilding,
research director,
Professor of Supply
Chain Strategy at
Cranfield School of
Management
Prof. Alan Waller,
research director,
Solving Efeso Vice
President Supply
Chain Innovation,
Visiting professor at
Cranfield School of
Management
Clive Geldard,
co-author,
Solving Efeso
Group Vice
President, Retail and
Supply Chain
Steve Mayhew,
co-author,
Solving Efeso
Principal Consultant,
Operations strategy
and Supply Chain
analytics
Solving Efeso White Paper
4 Closing the implementation gap
5 Supply Chain gains greater representation on the Board
6 Performance Drivers of strategy lead by cost focus
Strategic planning cycles shorten
7 Strong correlation between Board involvement and successful SC strategy implementation
8 Vision, risk management and tracking benefits are vital
9 The significance of Collaboration and benchmarking
10 Need for radical improvement in achieving successful implementation of strategy
11 Behavioural models reflect corporate maturity
13 New ‘skills set’ for supply chain directors
14 Avoiding the ‘poison chalice’
Methodology
Acknowledgements
Abstract
The supply chain is an intrinsic element of the enterprise and its ability
to adapt quickly to changes in the commercial environment is critical to
the financial and market performance of the business. However, research
by Solving Efeso, in collaboration with Cranfield School of Management,
points to a yawning gap between supply chain strategy and successful
implementation, making change a perilous process that needs to be
addressed as a matter of urgency.
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Ten key factors the Board must get right
The report’s findings can be summarised in the form of ten areas within the Board’s
responsibility that it must ‘get right’:
Vision led The strategy must be Vision led
Boardroom involvement It needs active top level (Boardroom) involvement
and support
Cross Functional Involvement The other relevant business functions also
need to be actively engaged in planning and execution
Quantitative modelling Planning and implementation should be informed by
rigorous quantitative modelling
Risk management techniques will render the strategy resilient yet flexible
Benefit Tracking Benefits gained (or expected and not realised) must be tracked
continuously from the start of the process
Continuous review The plan should be under frequent or continuous review
Continuous adaptation Such review will allow, even mandate, continuous
adaptation of the plan to changing conditions, without losing sight of the original
vision
Sharing Learning and Experience Planning and implementation will be
informed by the learning and experience of others wherever this can be found (which
also implies that the Board must be prepared to share its own experience as well)
Change Management Focus Finally, the Board will recognise that
implementing a strategic plan is an issue of change management, and that cultural/
people issues are much bigger and more intractable than the merely technical.
3
4
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Closing the implementation gap
Research undertaken by the Global management consultancy firm Solving Efeso, in
collaboration with Cranfield School of Management, highlights the chasm that exists between success and failure in the implementation of supply chain initiatives. The findings
of this in-depth, three year review of supply chain activity at the most senior level gives
an illuminating insight into the dynamics of the Board and its influence on the successful
outcome of a supply chain project or transformation.
Conducted between 2009 – 2012, this global survey of 238 businesses from across a
broad spectrum of global industries is believed to be the first practitioner led, academically grounded, study of how real-life Boards at the business unit level organise themselves to consider supply chain strategy - how they plan, implement and revise their
strategies, and what factors in the Boardroom tend to influence the success or failure of
major initiatives.
Processes and
techniques of
companies are
themselves drivers
of success
Given the considerable capital resources that are allocated to major supply chain
transformations and the critical nature of their outcome to corporate performance, it is
perhaps surprising that greater attention has not been focused on understanding the
processes by which supply chain strategy is executed and the findings applied to ensuring a far higher success rate for such projects.
“Thought leaders have long since advocated supply chain as a source of competitive
advantage and differentiation. Our experience confirms that organisations can do so
provided they successfully navigate their way through the supply chain strategy design
and avoid the pitfalls that can scupper implementation. Moreover, this research gives
evidence that the mindsets, processes and techniques of companies - to develop and
implement supply chain strategies - are themselves differentiators and drivers of success,” says Clive Geldard, Group Vice-President, Retail & Supply Chain at Solving Efeso.
Key considerations for Supply Chain leaders
Express supply chain activities in terms of sales, margin and profit impact.
Translate functional measurements of product availability and on-time in full
service measures (OTIF) to that of equivalent revenue and lost sales. Likewise
express inventory, lead-time and assets performance in terms of cash or capital
avoidance.
The only route to supply chain action and performance is through people.
Place human resources, people development and communication at the heart
of any supply chain initiative.
Form collaborative relationships with other functions using the language
of sales, margin and profit. Line up KPI measures/ Key Results Areas and
incentives with other functions in the same way.
Forge close links between supply chain and finance teams so that supply chain
activities can be routinely and rigorously measured and validated in terms of
the impact and contribution to business performance.
Source: Leaders in Supply Chain (LiSC UK), Survey 1 to 1 Interviews
To succeed and
operate effectively
in the Boardroom,
supply chain
leaders must
learn to speak the
business language
of the Boardroom
5
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Supply Chain gains greater representation on the Board
The first and in some ways most significant finding is that this research has been possible
at all. A decade or so ago, supply chain representation at Board level was highly unusual
and also supply chain ‘strategy’ often amounted to little more than the aggregation of
individual functional decisions. In addition, any ‘supply chain’ seat at the Board typically
represented only a part of the ‘source-make-deliver’ continuum. As a result many Boards
had minimal involvement in the planning and execution of strategy beyond signing off
on Capital Expenditure.
Senior supply chain person is on the
board according to about 70% of
respondents
Is the senior supply chain person in the business unit on the Board?
Stage one results
1. Update level has increased from
72% to 86%
Stage two results
2. New respondents show slightly
lower % on Board at 64%
Yes
72%
No
28 %
N:181
Yes
86%
Yes
64%
Yes
69%
Update
New
All
N:22
N:73
N:95
This research, however, shows that in well over half of the companies surveyed the most
senior supply chain person now sits on the Board of the business unit and suggests that
this trend is accelerating. Furthermore, in companies with manufacturing operations, the
proportion with responsibility for Source, Make and Deliver is approaching 50 per cent,
which should be driving much greater integration across the entire value chain.
Responsibilities of the most Senior Supply Chain Manager
(manufacturers only)
14%
1%
5%
38%
11%
Source
& Make
& Deliver
16%
4%
2009-2010
Source
& Make
48%
14%
1%
30%
N:101
13%
5%
2011-2012
Source
& Deliver
Make
& Deliver
Source
Make
N: 56
Deliver
For manufacturers, the %
respondents responsible for Source,
Make and Deliver increased from
38% to 48%.
The 14% reduction in Source
Deliver suggests that Make is being
increasingly integrated with Source
Deliver.
This should drive
more integrated
supply chain
and operational
strategies
6
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Performance Drivers of strategy lead by cost focus
Given that a majority of Boards are now in a position to discuss end-to-end supply chain
strategies with the people who will be responsible for delivery, it is important to understand what drives these discussions. Cost focus is the primary overall driver, followed
by customer lead-times and customer quality, although the most recent update suggests, unsurprisingly, that working capital considerations are of increased importance.
Of course, each firm’s situation is different and there will be many for whom some other
event, such as a merger, acquisition or new market entry, is of supreme significance.
Cost and Working Capital have unsurprisingly become more important, and
Quality has overtaken Lead-time
2009-2010
Rank
2011-2012
Functional Driver
Rank
Functional Driver
1
Cost focus
1
Cost focus
2
Customer Lead-time
2
Customer Quality
3
Customer Quality
3
Working Capital
4
Customer Considerations
4
Customer Lead-time
5
Working Capital
5
Customer Considerations
6
Cash to Cash
6
Asset Utilisation
7
Asset Utilisation
7
Cash to Cash
N: 181
N: 91
Strategic planning cycles shorten
‘Events’ are impacting the Boardroom in another way. In times past, strategic planning
horizons, based in large part on capital expenditure considerations, would be of five to
seven years or longer and strategic reviews would, similarly, be carried out at intervals of
several years. This research indicates that these cycles have shortened dramatically – in
the vast majority of companies strategy is being reviewed on at least an annual basis, and
up to half of companies are planning a continuous strategy review policy.
It may be considered that in a volatile economic climate this is the abandonment of
strategy in favour of tactical responses. However, the evidence suggests that firms are still
setting out and working to a long-term vision of the supply chain but are much more
prepared, and able, to adapt and evolve the implementation of the vision in response to,
or anticipating, shorter cycle marketplace changes.
This near-continuous review process is now using planning horizons of three years or less
in the majority of cases, although of course strategies involving major capital expenditure
may necessarily require longer planning horizons. These shorter horizons reflect the
increased difficulty of longer-term forecasting: while the current economic situation is
certainly a factor here, it also reflects a greater speed of change and evolution in
commerce - the impact of e-commerce channels being one obvious example.
Findings from workshops and interviews indicate that at least a few companies now have
resources permanently dedicated to an ongoing review of supply chain strategy, and some
others include this activity as a regular component of the ‘day job’. Professor Alan Waller
comments that “continuous review is beginning to look like ‘best practice’ for most sectors”.
“Implementation
starts on the first
day of strategy
formulation.”
Prof. Alan Waller, Vice President,
Supply Chain Innovation at Solving
Efeso and Visiting professor at
Cranfield School of Management
7
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Shorter planning
horizons reflect
the increased
difficulty of longer
term forecasting
and greater speed
of change.
Planning horizon is much shorter than previously experienced
Stage two results
60
60
50
50
40
40
% of respondents
% of respondents
Stage one results
30
20
10
30
20
10
0
0
1 year
3 years
5 years
10 years
up to1 year 2 to 3 years 4 to 5 years 6 to 10 years
N:174
N:86
Strong correlation between Board involvement and successful SC strategy
implementation
How engaged is the Board in strategic supply chain planning and implementation processes? Most Boards are at least consulted, some frequently, and a significant proportion
are seen as being actively involved - although gauging Board involvement does seem
to be sensitive to the question asked. However, the research very clearly demonstrates
a strong positive correlation between the extent of Board involvement and subsequent
success in implementing the supply chain strategy.
Leading the strategy from a senior level is therefore an important success factor.
However, where the strategy is being driven by the CEO or MD in isolation, implementation seems to be less likely to succeed. Having explored this in workshops and interviews
the researchers conclude that, beyond the obvious problem of the CEO having many
other urgent priorities, this situation often arises where the strategy has been handed
down, for example at a Group or Holding Company level, or as the result of Merger &
Acquisition activity. Understandably, ‘buy-in’ to the strategy is likely to be relatively weak
in such circumstances.
There is evidence that increasing
board involvement improves likelihood of success
CEO / MD drives
4 - Fully
Actively involved at key stages
3
Routinely consulted
Involved / consulted as required
Not much
increasing success
N:181
Stage one results
Increasing board involvement
board involvement
board involvement
Board involvement in Supply Chain Strategy
2
1 - Partly
increasing success
Stage two results
Increasing board involvement
N:56
8
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Vision, risk management and tracking benefits are vital
There are several other factors in the Boardroom environment that correlate strongly
with successful implementation of strategy. One such is that the strategy is ‘vision led’;
another, which should be obvious to firms but apparently is not, is the integration of
risk management procedures (for example, asking and answering ‘what-if?’ questions) in
both strategy development and implementation.
This of course requires quantitative modelling of the supply chain as well as the ability
to challenge established thinking. A third factor with a very strong positive correlation
to successful implementation is the systematic tracking of benefits gained. If benefits are
not tracked no one knows whether the implementation is succeeding or not. It appears
that in too many companies benefits are only properly assessed towards the end of the
process, by which time it may be too late for remedial adaptation.
Adaptation is the
positive ability to
remain relevant,
dynamic and agile
1. Success levels increase when the
Vision Led vs Success
supply chain strategy is vision led
Benefit tracking vs success
2. Strong correlation between ben4.0
4.5
3.5
4.0
3.0
3.5
3. Adaptation based on sensing and
incorporating changed conditions is
an important lever for success
3.0
2.5
2.5
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.5
success
success
efit tracking and successful delivery
1.0
0.5
0
1
(not at all)
2
3
4
1.0
0.5
0
5
(fully)
1
(not at all)
vision led
N: 237
2
3
4
5
(fully)
degree of benefit traking
combined Stage one and Stage two results
Increasing board involvement
Increasing board involvement
Adaptation vs success
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
success
Supported by the research is a correlation between the ability to adapt during
implementation of the strategy and ultimate success. More starkly illustrated by
the research is the huge negative impact
of a failure to adapt. Workshop discussion
has revealed some of the background:
although the majority of companies
see adaptation as the positive ability to
remain relevant, dynamic and agile, there
are some where ‘changing the plan’ is
seen as a sign of weakness or an admission of past error.
N: 222
1.0
0.5
0
1
(not at all)
2
3
4
5
(fully)
degree of adaption
combined Stage one and Stage two results
N: 225
Increasing board involvement
Richard Wilding, Professor of Supply
Chain Strategy at Cranfield School of
Management, notes, “Some might say that you can not have a strategy that is being
changed on a continuous basis. But, if you have got the right vision you can start to have
adaptation occurring. Clarity of vision, or being ‘vision led’, means that you know what
you want to achieve and that enables you to change things as they occur – you are still
aligned to that vision.”
Clarity of vision, or
being ‘vision led’,
means that you
know what you
want to achieve
and that enables
you to change
things as they
occur
Professor Richard Wilding, Professor
of Supply Chain Strategy, Cranfield
School of Management
9
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
The significance of Collaboration and benchmarking
Other factors that can be influenced by the Board and which correlate positively with
success may be bundled together as ‘co-operation’ or ‘openness’. Cross-functional
involvement is important, not just across the supply chain functions - an issue which
appears to be being addressed by the wider portfolios of Board level supply chain
representatives - but with marketing, sales, finance, IT and other functions. Similarly, the
involvement of external actors is valuable and these may include customers, suppliers,
and third party service providers. This implies that Supply Chain is to be regarded as a
process, not just as a function.
However, there are limits to ‘openness’ and this has emerged as an important finding,
self-generated by the research (it was not one of the original questions).
Cross functional involvement vs success
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
success
This is that sharing learning with, and
benchmarking against, other companies’
strategic processes generates the most
successful outcomes of all. Companies
really struggle to find sources of information on what has worked and what
has not for other companies - either in
terms of overall strategy development
and implementation processes or the
building blocks thereof. The findings may
be interpreted as a ‘plea for help’ and it
could be construed that there is a need
for a ‘marketplace’ in which supply chain
professionals can benchmark and share
learning.
1.0
0.5
0
1
(not at all)
2
3
4
5
(fully)
degree of cross functional involvement
Stage two results
N: 113
Increasing board involvement
Higher levels of Cross functional
involvement correlate well to successful outcome
10
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
-Supply chain strategy implementa-
Success of Supply Chain strategies implementation
tions are not straightforward
-Very few supply chain strategy
Smooth implementation
on time&budget
implementations run smoothly and
to time and budget
-A substantial number incur signifi-
Minor problems
cant implementation difficulties
Significant problems
Severe problems
Met resistance/abandoned plans
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
N: 181
Need for radical improvement in achieving successful implementation of
strategy
Although the more recent work suggests some modest improvement, the primary
research reported only two per cent of supply chain strategies having been smoothly
implemented on-time and to budget. 61 per cent encountered either ‘significant’ or
‘severe’ implementation difficulties and a further seven per cent of strategies were
abandoned completely. (Note that these figures reflect the success or otherwise of
implementing the strategy – how well the strategy worked for the business is a different,
unasked, question).
People barriers are
much higher than
Technical barriers
People barriers are much higher than technical barriers
Type of barrier
Quotes from survey participants:
20%
Technical issues
80%
13% Deliver
N:181
People issues
Sum of scores for people related vs technical related barriers
Prof. Alan Waller, who has been involved in over 50 supply chain studies globally notes,
“Change is difficult, and strategic change is very, very difficult”. The supply chain’s success
rate may not be significantly worse than that of other areas, such as major IT implementations, and strategies for end-to-end supply chains typically include 50 per cent or more
of functionality that is externally provided and over which the supply chain director has
little direct control. Nonetheless, the figures beg questions not only about the complexity of the issues but, perhaps, about the immaturity of the profession and its impact on
‘No technical barriers or restraints,
the issues are around change management. The situation is improving
with implementation successes
which feed to accelerate the implementation process.’
‘The main constraint is the speed of
change. We reckon that we are not
very good at change management
- the culture doesn’t let us be fast
enough.’
11
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
the value chain. The supply chain’s ability to resolve purely technical issues is undoubtedly improving. There are still significant barriers in terms of data and information
quality, the way and extent to which it is exchanged, as well as the ability to detect and
act on signals (especially demand signals). There are also a host of other issues which are
essentially managerial, even cultural, rather than technical.
Asked to rank a list of potential barriers to success, companies identify as top key barriers: Company culture, lack of leadership from senior management, and lack of information along the supply chain. In round terms the barriers to success are 80 per cent
‘people’ and just 20 per cent ‘technical’.
Behavioural models reflect corporate maturity
“Separating
strategy
formulation from
execution does not
work and can be
harmful.”
Dr Pietro Micheli, Cranfield School of
Management
The research findings suggest a series of behavioural models that describe the typical
characteristics of companies on a continuum ranging from those with little or no capability to adapt their strategies, which themselves are reviewed at long intervals or on an
ad-hoc basis, to those who are continuously reviewing and adapting their strategies.
Companies who see supply chain as a major source of business improvement should
strive to move from the former towards the latter.
At what might be termed the least evolved level ‘developer/maintainers’, they typically
update strategy infrequently if at all, and ‘when it’s done, it’s done’. They are inflexible
and resistant to change and modification. The strategy is likely to be oriented around
specific business cases for investment, in assets, infrastructure, and IT, and as a result the
strategy can become misaligned with other business plans and market requirements.
Developer/
Maintainers
12
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
There is a real risk of creating technical solutions that are not appropriate - rigid automation, bespoke IT systems, distribution centres and other facilities that cannot be altered
in terms of scale or geography.
‘Reviewer/Reactor’ companies typically hold regular, but infrequent, strategic reviews
and are largely reactive: updates and changes are typically triggered by significant
internal or external events. There may well be some degree of cross-functional involvement, and use of external resources, but this is likely to be unsystematic with a lack of
structured or formal processes.
Reviewer/Reactor
Routine Continuous
4
3
2
Ad hoc
Supply Chain Strategy Development
Four emerging behavioural models towards Supply Chain strategy and execution
1
Increasing board involvement
No adaptation
4
Innovator /
Adapter
3
Anticipator/
Evolver
2
Reviewer /
Reactor
1
Developer/
Maintainer
Continuous adaptation
Supply Chain Strategy Execution
Source: Solving Efeso
‘Anticipator/Evolver’ companies do enjoy a comprehensive vision of their supply chain
strategy goals and take an evolutionary approach to execution. There will be crossfunctional accountability (not just responsibility) for delivery, and an update process on
at least an annual basis that focuses both internally and externally. Such organisations
will often use scenario modelling and other tools to ask ‘what if?’ questions and thus
build into the strategy the flexibility to accommodate a wide range of potential internal
and external disruptions. Risk management, in its widest sense, is an integral part of the
planning and execution process.
Anticipator/Evolver
At the highest level of maturity are ‘Innovator/Adapters’. These companies are driven by
innovation and so the pace of change is often very fast. A continuous strategy review
process is an integral part of the wider business planning cycle, and this will be informed
by sophisticated methods for sensing and anticipating change in the external environment. Often this will involve collaboration with external partners where possible. This
high level of activity may well be supported by dedicated strategy review and continuous improvement resources within the organisation, even if external advice and consultancy is also sought.
Innovator/Adapters
It is recognised that this last model is not necessarily suitable or achievable for every
supply chain – the rates of change, investment cycles and achievable speeds of implementation in, for example, heavy engineering is very different from that prevailing in
consumer retail environments. Nonetheless, the research is unequivocal that high performing organisations tend to conform to the ‘Anticipator/Evolver’ or ‘Innovator/Adaptor’
models.
An interesting observation emerging from company interviews is that those firms with
‘Innovator/Adaptor’ characteristics have often survived some major crisis or ‘wake-up’
call in the recent past, which has rendered them less complacent and more aware of
the need to sense the external environment, which they do through customers, suppliers and the marketplace in general. Such organisations seem to have a DNA or cultural
13
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
mindset that is less complacent and arrogant, and more agile and adaptive, not only
to dangers but also to opportunities. They will have created and nurtured the ability to
communicate the strategic vision, engage with people, organise the execution of the
strategy and translate the strategic goals into practical action at the operational level.
New ‘skills set’ for supply chain directors
Cross-functional involvement in Supply Chain strategy
Supply Chain
Accountable
Operations
Responsible
Procurement
Consulted
Finance
Marketing
IT Department
The Supply Chain
strategy process
is highly crossfunctional with
several functions
at least consulted
Strategic planning
HR
R&D
Employees reps
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
N: 181
Planning and implementing a successful supply chain strategy requires, as we have seen,
the active involvement of the whole Board. Nonetheless, the process will necessarily be
led by the senior supply chain representative on the Board. To succeed in this environment the research suggests that supply chain leaders of the future will need different
skill sets. The traditional profile of a supply chain manager is one with a technical, analytical background focused within a single discipline or function. Based in an environment
of current and historic fact, he or she is not trained to consider or challenge forwardlooking commercial plans and therefore has at best, limited involvement in business and
commercial strategies. Typically, ‘cross-functional’ activity focuses more on mastering the
IT system than on true communication.
Clearly, these traditional skills do not fit the profile required of a supply chain director in
a more mature corporate environment. The individual the supply chain needs there will
be a strong communicator with the gravitas to be an equal – one suited to identifying
and creating collaborative advantage. They will be multi-disciplinary, understanding and
informing corporate and customer-centric strategies. They will be led by a clear vision,
but able to make practical and pragmatic decisions; conversely, they will be able to deal
with ambiguity and ambition without losing sight of the hard facts. Increasingly they
will need to deal with, and influence, a range of global, regional and local cultures and
leadership styles.
These are attributes that exist in what is often termed the T-shaped manager.
Such creatures do exist, in increasing numbers – a trend perhaps reflected in the increasing level of Board representation and the widening scope of responsibility revealed by
the research. But on their own such supply chain leaders are not enough: the Cranfield/
Solving Efeso research reveals what the whole Board must do to assure the successful
planning and implementation of supply chain strategy.
T-shaped
manager, multidisciplinary,
understanding
and informing
corporate and
customer-centric
strategies
Solving Efeso White Paper | Supply Chain Strategy in the Boardroom – The reality - Closing the implementation gap
Avoiding the ‘poison chalice’
Given that the statistics revealed in this report point to a 50/50 chance of “success” or
“failure” for a supply chain implementation, there can be little wonder that supply chain
transformation is widely seen as a ‘poison chalice’ for the Board level sponsor. With high
levels of capital expenditure commonly associated with such projects and the scale of
structural and organisation change that is often involved, the stakes are high - and yet,
the odds are merely balanced. It is, therefore, critical that supply chain professionals address the root causes of failure. Making sure that the odds are stacked in their favour will
require close adherence to the ten key ‘Get Rights’ listed here.
Methodology
A structured questionnaire was sent to circa 2000 senior logistics and supply chain executives in various parts of the world to understand how real-life Boards at business level
organise themselves to consider Supply Chain Strategy – how they plan, implement and
revise their strategies, and what factors in the boardroom tend to influence the success
or failure of the strategy.
181 complete responses were received between July and November 2009, and these
responses were analysed and key themes were identified. After this a number of one-toone interviews with survey participants were done to further understand meanings behind some responses. The consolidated findings were then published in a Stage1 report
and emerging results were discussed in workshops to capture experience and point of
view from workshop participants.
In 2011-2012 the Stage2 survey was updated to track how organisations are evolving
their management thinking and practices around the development and implementation
of Supply Chain Strategy.
Acknowledgements
We thank all the participants who completed the questionnaire as well as those who
gave their time for the interviews. We also thank all other members of the teams at
Cranfield and Solving Efeso who were involved with this research for their significant
efforts to make this report.
For further information, please contact:
Clive Geldard, Group Vice President, Retail and Supply Chain, Solving Efeso.
Phone: +33 1 53 53 57 00, mail: clive.geldard@solvingefeso.com
Steve Mayhew, Principal Consultant, Operations strategy and Supply Chain analytics, Solving Efeso.
Phone: +44 (0)1606 33 11 22, mail: steve.mayhew@solvingefeso.com
Prof. Alan Waller OBE, Vice President Supply Chain Innovation, Solving Efeso.
Visiting Professor, international Supply Chain management, Cranfield School Of Management.
International President, the Chartered Institute of Logistics and Transport.
Phone: +44 (0) 7802 170 507, mail: alan.waller@solvingefeso.com
Prof. Richard Wilding, Professor of Supply Chain Strategy, Cranfield School Of Management.
Phone : +44 (0)1234 751 122, web: www.richardwilding.info, mail: r.d.wilding@cranfield.ac.uk
web-site: www.solvingefeso.com www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/som/lscm
14
Solving Efeso brings strategic, operations
and change management capabilities
in one integrated team. The company
offers proven methods and proprietary
techniques to deliver a truly world class
performance in strategy execution and
operations.
Solving Efeso brings 30 years’ experience
and thought leadership from across the
retail and fast moving consumer goods
value chain, supporting many of the
leading global brands in both mature and
emerging markets.
Solving Efeso is a Group of some 350
experienced consultants representing
more than 25 nationalities. It operates
from over 20 offices around the world with
a strong presence in Europe, USA, South
America, Middle East, Africa and Asia.
An international scope and local delivery
capability ensures that clients have access
to the specialist skills they require whether
at national, regional or global levels.
Head office:
117, avenue des
Champs-Elysées
75008 Paris, France
Phone +33 1 53 53 57 00
Cranfield School of Management
Cranfield, Bedford
MK43 0AL United Kingdon
+44 (0)1234 751 122
www.solvingefeso.com
www.cranfield.ac.uk
Solving Efeso White Paper
Solving Efeso Offices.
Abu Dhabi
Atlanta
Barcelona
Berlin
Budapest
Buenos Aires
Cairo
Copenhagen
Dakar
Delhi
Geneva
Gothenburg
‘s-Hertogenbosch
Istanbul
Lisbon
London
Manchester
Milan
New York
Paris
São Paulo
Seoul
Shanghai
St. Petersburg
Stockholm
Supply Chain is now at the forefront of business, satisfying customer needs and delivering top line
growth. This survey highlights the changing role of supply chain and that of supply chain leaders.
It demonstrates the need for a revised set of skills and leadership behaviours if future supply chain
managers are to succeed.
ISBN 978-1-907413-16-2