2012
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
1

2012

Approaching 2013, we see a number of important trends in supply chain management. The collective insights from 1,400 leaders who participated in this SCM World research demonstrate that we live in a world where change is constant, and where groundbreaking approaches must be embraced to effectively compete and win in today’s volatile global economy.
The report’s findings are a loud call to action for everyone in our discipline. Individually and collectively, we must establish tight strategic alignment between our supply chains and businesses. We must harness digital commerce systems to serve new market niches and maximise profitable growth by delivering unprecedented operational flexibility. We must define and execute world-class social and environmental responsibility practices. We must construct more robust risk management systems to persevere through supply disruptions and adverse market conditions. And finally, we must fully embrace the idea that world-class talent is a powerful engine of business innovation and competitive advantage.
This is a complex and interconnected set of challenges. Each one requires its own focused transformation plan. However, broad operating principles can guide us in harmonising these plans and meeting the demands of today’s chaotic world. At Lenovo, there are two in particular on which we rely very heavily
– driving speed of execution and customer focus.
Increasing speed demands a sustained focus on continuous improvement, a strong risk management process and the talent to make good decisions quickly. These capabilities enable the flexibility and agility needed to quickly adjust product mixes and routes to market in response to all types of business conditions, including periods of supply disruption, while serving the “tail” of demand.
Being a customer-centric supply chain means having clear metrics tightly aligned with real experience.
Collaboration skills also are critical, as supply chain professionals must execute across marketing, product development and sales, as well as external suppliers, to deliver a truly world-class customer experience.
Finally, our organizations cannot address the challenges of the day without great talent. This is a personal passion of mine because, as former US Secretary of State Colin Powell once said, “no battle plan survives contact with the enemy”. You need people with the skill, knowledge and intuition to improvise in responding to unpredictable scenarios with groundbreaking business innovation. That is why talent development is a core pillar of Lenovo’s supply chain strategy and why we make significant investments in this area.
This Chief Supply Chain Officer Report advances a common view of our path forward to supply chain excellence and strategic relevance in our industries. And many of the best practices to advance our discipline will come from knowledge sharing and collaboration within our professional community.
Lenovo is proud to be a part of this process, and we look forward to tackling our opportunities and challenges strengthened by this spirit of partnership.
Gerry P. Smith
Senior Vice President
Global Supply Chain & Global Services
Lenovo Group

36
41
20
29
49
50
13
14
4
6
This document is the result of primary research performed by RaptureWorld Ltd. RaptureWorld’s methodologies provide for objective, fact-based research and represent the best analysis available at the time of publication.
Unless otherwise noted, the entire contents of this publication are copyrighted by RaptureWorld Ltd and may not be reproduced, distributed, archived or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior written consent by
RaptureWorld Ltd (6443794).
© 2012 SCM World, a RaptureWorld Company. All rights reserved.

6
This is the third consecutive year that SCM
World has published its annual Chief Supply
Chain Officer Report. In July 2012 almost 1,400 practitioners from a wide range of industries and geographies – more than twice as many as in 2011
– completed a 40-question survey covering five main topics:
1. Strategy alignment and value creation
2. Digital consumers and eCommerce
3. Social and environmental responsibility
4. Risk management
5. Talent management
STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE
CREATION
• Operating cost reduction is still the foundation of supply chain excellence, with almost two-thirds of survey respondents saying it is “very important”. But increasingly, companies are using high-performing supply chains as a way to support the company’s business strategy. This enables value creation and provides competitive advantage. Hence, supply chain strategy and business strategy must be aligned.
The key findings contained in this report can be summarised as follows:
• The importance of aligning supply chain strategy and business strategy has led to the recognition and appreciation of the supply chain function as an integral part of the company’s business leadership. Over half of the respondents agree that their supply chain is viewed as an integral function for business success. Hence, supply chain and strategy alignment is also linked with organisational alignment within the firm.
• There are many ways in which highperforming supply chains can support value creation and competitive advantage. Leading the way, according to our survey participants, is the ability of high-performing supply chains to enhance customer service, leading to customer loyalty. The driving factors for great value to be gained from enhanced customer service are the ability of customer service to generate repeat purchases and customer service becoming an important criterion in determining the customer’s purchasing decisions.
• The other important ways in which highperforming supply chains can support value creation and competitive advantage provision include stronger supplier relationships, acceleration of new product introduction, and business expansion in existing and new markets. More than twothirds of respondents say these deliver high or very high value in their companies.
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• This year’s results are a reconfirmation of last year’s. And the trend is continuing for companies to use supply chain excellence as a means for creating value and competitive advantage. Companies where supply chain management is still viewed as a supporting function, or where supply chain management is only viewed as a way to reduce operating costs, have a lot of catching up to do, as they are missing great opportunities.
DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE
• Digital demand and eCommerce appear to be driving complexity from the consumer upstream into the supply chain in every way possible, including packaging, pricing,
SKU counts, distribution networks and even manufacturing strategies. The sensitivity to this pressure is much higher closest to consumers (retail, distribution, consumer products) suggesting that tier suppliers upstream may lack the agility needed to meet fast-changing demand patterns.
• The influence of eCommerce and digital/ mobile consumers is expected to increase complexity of demand at the point of fulfilment. By a ratio of 4:1 respondents expect consumers to be increasingly receptive to offers trading price, convenience and selection against each other rather than merely seeking the lowest possible price.
This effect is also most pronounced closest to the consumer (in retail) and less powerful further upstream in the supply chain.
• Digital demand and eCommerce are also expected to increase SKU counts as opportunities to serve the “long tail” of demand are exploited. Again, the effect is significantly greater among respondents closest to the consumer.
• Three-quarters of all respondents expect changes to their distribution networks to be driven by digital demand. Opinions split evenly between those who see a case for
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
Do your CEO and executive management team appreciate the alignment of business strategy and supply chain strategy?
31
8
2
Value created by a high-performing supply chain
59
Enhanced customer service and customer loyalty
3 15 40
1
Stronger supplier relationships
4 19 46
41
31
1
Accelerated new product introduction
5 20 43 31
Expansion of business to new market segments in existing/new regions
2 8 22 40 29
1
Expanded offerings of value-added services
8 30 41
Facilitation of premium pricing
2 10 31 38
20
19
Leverage opportunities created by external supply disruptions
6 17 30 30 18
% of respondents
No value whatsoever
Little value
Moderate value
High value
Very high value n=1,379
Note: Figures may not add up to 100 because of rounding
Future effect of eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer on SKU assortments
26
13
36
25
Absolutely. Supply chain is understood as an equally important part of business success as sales & marketing or R&D/product development
Yes, but only as an enabler of product or sales-driven business strategies
Not really. Supply chain is understood primarily as a cost center that affects margins
No. Supply chain is strictly seen as a function meant to service the business
% of respondents n=1,373
Drive much larger SKU assortments as brands pursue ever smaller niches of demand
Drive some SKU expansion as brands pursue some smaller niches of demand
Have little or no effect on
SKU assortments
Drive smaller SKU assortments as brands simplify to cut costs in response to price pressure
% of respondents n=1,337
7

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Social media is playing little role today in supply chain strategies, but in the future will be a source of customer feedback, inform product innovation and warn of supply disruptions.
Views on the use of customer data smaller, more local distribution centres and those who expect larger, centralised, more flexible multi-mode distribution centres. It appears likely that some hybrid of the two may become common.
respondents shy away from mining sources such as search histories or social networking activity. Rich demand data may exist, but using it to design a supply response seems inappropriate to many.
• Three-quarters of all respondents also expect changes in their manufacturing strategies. Respondents in the hi-tech sector are the most certain that manufacturing strategies will change (only 16% see “little or no effect”), while chemicals reject this idea
(54% see “little or no effect”).
• A majority (56%) expect brands to develop their own direct-to-customer fulfilment systems, while a quarter anticipates reliance on eCommerce specialists such as Amazon.
One-fifth sees little reason to change.
SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL
RESPONSIBILITY
• Positive customer image and brand equity remains the key driver for social and environmental responsibility (SER) initiatives, with 71% of survey respondents saying this is a board-level motivation.
Companies can use SER to strengthen their customer relationships and enhance their value propositions.
• Social media is playing little role today in supply chain strategies (47% see “no effect”), but in the future many see opportunities to get customer feedback (56%), inform product innovation (46%) or warn of supply disruptions (41%).
• SER efforts start with visibility of SER performance inside the company as well as the extended supply network. While progress has been made, companies are still far from having good visibility of their suppliers and the extended supply network
– only a quarter say they currently have this.
• Seeking demand insight in emerging data sets elicits some concern about privacy. Most
• Companies have stepped up their action in response to SER violations by suppliers. A third do not give suppliers warnings before
The board’s motivations for investing in SER
Customer transaction data should be mined to understand buying behaviour
4.08
3.75
Customer webstore data
(cookies, eCommerce history) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
3.55
3.27
Customer geospatial data
(mobile GPS) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
3.20
2.98
Customer private web data
(Google search, Facebook, etc) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
2.89
2.69
Disagree
Weighted average rating, 1-5 scale n=1,346
8
Neutral
At an aggregate level
At an individual level
Agree
Create a positive customer image and enhance brand equity
71
75
Satisfy government regulations
49
42
Reduce costs and/or increase efficiency (e.g., through better use of energy, raw materials)
43
32
Ensure no disruption of supply
37
30
Fend off shareholder or external PR concerns
28
22
Increase sales revenue
17
31
2012
2011
% of respondents n=1,281
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
2012
2011 reacting and taking often punitive actions.
And these punitive actions have shifted to a more severe kind – immediate termination of the business relationship is now more common than it was a year ago.
• Positive incentives are still necessary to improve SER performance in the long run.
Punitive actions will hopefully induce more compliance, but getting commitment requires a collaborative effort, with the company willing to invest and work with suppliers for real improvements. Preferred supplier status and increased business are the two most popular incentives, as they were in 2011.
• The SER journey for many companies is maturing, and companies are beginning to realise more significant benefits from their
SER efforts than in previous years. More than half of survey respondents report good or substantial results in complying with government regulations and laws, and in improving both supplier relationships and customer satisfaction.
both about price pressure or customers appearing not to care, and a lack of resources for SER efforts.
• Despite the challenges, most companies are still pushing forward with their investments in SER efforts. Such investments are multidimensional, involving internal operations, product design, supply network and customers. The trend towards increased
SER initiatives seems to be unstoppable.
RISK MANAGEMENT
• The impact of last year’s natural disasters in
Japan and Thailand is strongly in evidence, with shortages of raw materials and components heading the list of risks that survey respondents are most concerned about. The hi-tech sector, in particular, is very concerned about this, as are almost half of those based in the Asia-Pacific region – twice the level of European respondents.
• Measuring benefits continues to be a challenge for almost 6 out of 10 respondents, however. And more than half are concerned
• More than two-thirds of supply chain executives are also concerned about shipping disruptions, incidents at supplier facilities and the failure of key suppliers when they consider the potential of supply-
Penalties for breach of SER standards
Impact of supply- and demand-side disruptions in the past two years
Companies are beginning to realise more significant benefits from their SER efforts than they did in previous years.
Warning first, followed by
14
58
42
28
39
47
No warning, immediate action taken in the form of
13
53
47
% of respondents n=1,227
Monetary fines
Reduced business
Termination of business relationship
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
Loss of sales/revenue 45
Lower profits
Delays to new projects/product introduction/growth plans
35
62
44
Loss of customers
Higher cost of capital
19
41
27
Damage to image, reputation or brand
Lower share price
19
34
14
Failure to meet legal or regulatory requirements
13
None 16
8
19
16
14
15
33
% of respondents n=1,240
Supply-side disruption
Demand-side disruption
9

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
10
A move back toward highwage countries may make sense for organisations working to balance their talent portfolios.
and demand-side disruptions to negatively impact their businesses during the next 12 months. And more than a quarter are very concerned about regulatory issues and counterfeit products.
• Better and more frequent communication with suppliers is the most popular method of identifying potential risks – a trend that accelerated during the 2008 financial crisis and is now an integral part of many companies’ supplier relationship management programmes. This is followed by more formal and structured risk tools such as supply chain risk mapping, business impact analysis and scenario planning.
• Dual or multi-sourcing of key materials, components and products is the most widely used approach to mitigating risk, with more than three-quarters of respondents (and
94% in the chemicals sector) doing this on the supply side. Audits of key suppliers and holding safety stocks are also common, with two-thirds of companies using these tactics as part of their risk management efforts.
TALENT MANAGEMENT
• during the past two years. Almost half have suffered a loss of sales/revenue and more than a third have seen lower profits from both upstream and downstream events in their value chains. A third have also lost customers and 44% have suffered delays to product introductions, new projects or growth plans as a result of supply risks becoming live issues.
Supply chain talent management has become even more problematic in the past year, with companies experiencing increasing levels of difficulty in finding, hiring and retaining skilled people. Some improvement can be seen in the area of providing “a compelling career progression”, which saw a drop in the share of respondents who feel this is extremely challenging. It may be the case that even mild economic growth has tightened talent markets, while leadership has worked to improve opportunities for those willing to commit.
• More than 8 out of 10 companies have been hit by supply- and demand-side disruptions
• In addition to tighter competition for talent, it seems the pain of lost talent has also worsened. More respondents say the
Challenges in respect of knowledge workers
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
Impact when talented staff are lost
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
4.00
4.00
3.50
3.50
3.00
3.00
Finding talent
EMEA
Hiring talent
APAC
Developing talent
Relocating talent
Measuring talent
Career progression
Retaining talent
Americas n=1,302
2.50
Lost production Lost process IP Lost product IP Cost of transition
EMEA APAC Americas n=1,294
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY problems arise from disruption and the cost of transition than from lost know-how – a reversal from 2011.
• Geographic cuts of this data show that the problems are most severe in Asia, where retention is a prominent issue and penalties for lost talent hurt most.
• China is clearly no longer a “low-cost country” in the traditional sense. Knowledge workers in China are generally not seen as lacking in technical or business skills, but do pose problems in terms of rising costs and poor retention. The implications for talent management in a global supply chain strategy include a need to diversify away from Asia, and China in particular, as tighter labour markets increase the risk of damaging departures among key staff.
• Comparing opinions of overall “value for money” and “biggest risk” talent markets suggests a move back toward high-wage countries may make sense for organisations working to balance their talent portfolio.
Best value talent markets
US
2.61
Germany
India
2.13
2.12
2.11
China
UK
Singapore
Brazil
Eastern Europe
Japan
Taiwan
Mexico
1.59
1.58
1.55
Netherlands
France
South Korea
1.41
1.38
2.01
1.89
1.82
1.77
1.60
Biggest risk talent markets
UK
Eastern Europe
Taiwan
Germany
Singapore
France
Japan
South Korea
Netherlands
China
US
India
Brazil
Mexico
2.98
2.11
2.05
2.03
1.98
1.74
1.72
1.72
1.69
1.66
1.60
1.59
1.58
1.22
Weighted average rating
(1-5, where 5=highest value) n=1,172
Weighted average rating
(1-5, where 5=highest value) n=1,108
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
11

12
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

Images of Apple CEO Tim Cook unveiling the company’s latest iPhone stand as a milestone for many in the world of supply chain. Having built his career in materials management and fulfilment, Cook’s ascendance to the leadership of the world’s most valuable company speaks volumes about the potential for supply chain to impact business.
Despite this symbolic achievement, the supply chain management discipline is still in its early years.
Wikipedia credits the coining of the term to a Booz Allen Hamilton consultant named Keith Oliver as quoted in a Financial Times article in 1982. Thirty years has seen some progress toward general acceptance of what supply chain means and how it relates to business, but few would argue the journey is anywhere near its end.
Since 1982 so much has changed in the shape of the global economy that the principles underpinning what we mean by “supply chain” have had little opportunity to stabilise. Today’s chief supply chain officers (CSCOs) are wrestling with new types of consumer demand, wider accountability for impacts on the environment and society, and heightened exposure to risks, both natural and man-made. At one level, the challenge includes finding and co-ordinating skilled people to handle the ongoing quest for better performance; at another, assuring that supply chain strategies are aligned with business strategies.
The survey on which this report is based polled the worldwide professional community to get a picture of how these forces are affecting our work now and in the future.
As well as crystallising a view of the top issues facing senior supply chain leaders as they begin to plan for 2013, the purpose of this research effort was to assemble a data set large enough to allow almost any question about the state of supply chain in 2012 to be answered with at least some factual basis. Our respondent base consists of almost 1,400 practitioners answering over 40 questions each. This means detailed cuts by industry, location, job function and job level, as well as by opinion, are possible. Our hope is that individual SCM World community members, all of whom will have access to aggregate data, can get the facts they need to benchmark their plans against peers and, when necessary, make the case for change within their own organisations.
We would like to thank everyone who took part in this year’s study, E2open for once again sponsoring it, and Gerry Smith at Lenovo for writing the Foreword. Your support has been invaluable and is much appreciated.
Dr Hau Lee
Chairman, SCM World and Thoma Professor of Operations, Information and Technology,
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Kevin O’Marah
Head of Faculty, SCM World
Geraint John
Senior Vice President, Research, SCM World
13
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

14
The design and operation of a company’s supply chain is critical to its business performance.
However, it is important that the supply chain strategy is aligned with the corporate strategy of the firm. The orchestration of the supply chain should support the company’s attainment of its strategic goals. Likewise, a company may have to refine these goals in light of the constraints faced by its supply chain. The ideal situation is that the supply chain can be developed in a way that aligns completely with the company’s strategic goals.
Last year’s Chief Supply Chain Officer Survey was one of the first attempts to dive deeply into these issues. In 2012 we continue this exploration, in order to more concretely understand how the role of supply chain is evolving, and how value can be created through excellence in supply chain management.
A MIXTURE OF COST REDUCTION AND
VALUE ENHANCEMENT
This alignment also means that the supply chain is making major contributions towards the attainment of those goals. The role of supply chain management in this process can be viewed as twofold. Traditionally, it is a supportive role – a supply chain enables the goals to be accomplished with the highest efficiency, often defined to be cost and time. The second role, which is increasingly the modern view of supply chain management, is that the supply chain enables the company to set even higher goals or expand its strategic directions.
A value-creation view of supply chain management requires supply chain executives to work closely as an integrated part of the company’s top executive team. The supply chain function is not in the background in driving the company’s strategic performance; rather, it becomes part of the steering team in the executive suite, building value through strategic alignment.
As in 2011, the main way that supply chain improvement is contributing to business strategy is through operating cost reduction. Almost twothirds of survey respondents say this contribution is “very important”, with another third saying
“important” (see Figure 1). Those in the hi-tech sector express this view most strongly, with 7 out of 10 rating it very important. This contrasts with just 44% in the chemicals sector who say the same. This gulf can be explained by the fact that in hi-tech industries new products can be commoditised quickly, due to the shortening of product lifecycles. Fierce competition requires companies to be both innovative in new product introduction on the one hand, and be extremely cost efficient on the other. Hence, operating cost reduction through effective supply chain management is critical. In chemicals, however, product margins are still high and it is the control of source materials that matters the most. Supply chain management is concerned more with reliable supply than with operating cost reduction.
While there has been anecdotal evidence and small sample studies showing that some companies have started to view supply chain management as an integral part of the top management team, and that supply chain has begun to assume more of the value-creating role, how this trend is developing among a wider pool of companies is still not well known. In addition, how exactly does supply chain management create value? In what ways does supply chain management influence key strategic levers that allow value to be created?
What are the key factors that could drive such value-creation levers? These issues have not been well understood.
Cost reduction may still be regarded as the fundamental role of supply chain management by practitioners, but a strong supply chain supports a firm’s business strategy in other ways too. Just over half of our sample believes it has a very important role in increasing revenue, with 93% in total seeing this as an important role. Again, respondents from hi-tech firms are most strident on this point.
Just a few percentage points behind is competitive advantage through differentiated customer service, with almost 9 out of 10 identifying this as a means through which supply chain
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE CREATION can drive improvements. The logistics sector leads the way here, with 56% saying this is very important. This is followed by 84% who rate competitive advantage through strategic supplier engagement as important (with the healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors being the most dominant); while 77% of respondents assign importance to value creation through long-term equity improvement – up from 61% in 2011, with the food and beverage industry a full 20 percentage points above this all-sector average.
HOW HIGH-PERFORMING SUPPLY
CHAINS DRIVE VALUE
High-performing supply chains can enable companies to create value in multiple ways.
Examples include accelerated new product introduction, the facilitation of premium pricing, enhanced customer service and loyalty, expansion to new market segments and stronger supplier relationships. This year’s CSCO survey shows that the majority of supply chain executives believe that high value is delivered for their companies in these and other areas (see Figure 3). Relative to last year, the gap between those who view supply chain improvement as important for operational cost reduction and those who see it as important for creating value in these other forms has reduced. This confirms that, increasingly, supply chain management is not only important for operational excellence, but is also being used by companies to create value.
Supply chain management’s growing role as a value creator can be related to the observation that the supply chain function is also increasingly viewed as an integral part of a company’s strategic management. We asked participants how their
CEO and executive team see the position of supply chain. A clear majority (59%) say it is viewed as equally important as other major functions such as
R&D, marketing, sales and product development.
Among those in logistics firms, more than twothirds believe this is the case.
Enhanced customer service leading to customer loyalty is top of the list, with 41% believing it has produced “very high value” and a further
40% saying “high value”. This is a similar finding to 2011. Supply chain excellence improves customer service, strengthens the customer relationship and builds customer intimacy and loyalty, which ultimately leads to increased revenue and the development of competitive advantage. Again, those practitioners working in logistics and distribution firms are the most bullish, with 9 out of 10 convinced that the supply chain function has had a strongly positive impact in this area.
Figure 1: Supply chain value contribution
How important is it for your company’s business strategy to focus on supply chain improvements for the following?
This compares with 31% who say supply chain is viewed as an enabler of product or sales-driven business strategies (see Figure 2). Almost half of respondents in the retail sector agree that this is the case. The remaining 10% of the sample overall say that supply chain is viewed primarily as either a cost centre or as a support function to serve the business. So it is gratifying to see that the majority of companies appear to see supply chain as an integral part of business strategy. The rising importance and recognition of the supply chain function is also linked to the earlier observation that supply chain’s role is increasingly about value creation and building competitive advantage, as opposed to purely operational cost reduction.
1
Operating cost reduction
2 33 64
Value creation through increasing revenue
1 6 42 51
Competitive advantage through differentiated customer service capabilities
2 9 41 48
Competitive advantage through strategic supplier engagement
3 12 42 42
Value creation through long-term equity improvement (e.g., brand equity)
4 18 40 37
Not at all important
Somewhat unimportant
Neither
Important
Very important
% of respondents n=1,381
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
15

STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE CREATION
Customers are willing to pay a premium price if they value speed, flexibility and reliable supply. Supply chain excellence must therefore encompass such levers.
In second place are stronger supplier relationships.
More than three-quarters of survey participants
(77%) believe that these have resulted from high performance in the supply chain – a rise of seven points year on year. The hi-tech sector is fully 10 percentage points higher than the allsector average, with 87% ranking it as a high-value outcome. In that industry, as well as many others, the ability to obtain supply when faced with disruptions or capacity shortages, to collaborate with suppliers in product development, and to integrate better through information sharing and co-ordination can all be sources of competitive advantage and value. When Microsoft entered into the game console market, for example, it relied on
Flextronics, Nvidia and Intel heavily to develop the supply chain for its product development effort. More recently, Cisco worked closely with
Foxconn on the successful launch of its Viking router product.
It’s a similar picture on accelerated new product introduction, which completes the top three sources of supply chain value in this year’s survey. Supply chain provides the backbone for such time-critical activities, including in the ability to ramp up production quickly, and its role in enabling greater speed here has always been widely accepted. Not surprisingly, perhaps,
Figure 2: Appreciation of supply chain’s role
Do you believe your CEO and executive management team appreciate the alignment of business strategy and supply chain strategy?
given its rapid product churn, hi tech also views supply chain as most critical in faster new product introduction – 83% of practitioners working in this sector believe the function adds high or very high value here.
In the current economic climate, countries such as China, Brazil, India, Turkey and Mexico are experiencing faster growth than the more mature markets of North America, Europe and Japan.
Hence, it is important for western companies to find ways to expand their business in these newer markets. For the second year in a row, more than two-thirds of our respondents say that supply chain excellence is providing an important means to support such expansion for their companies.
Although leveraging opportunities created by supply disruptions ranks last on our list of value drivers, this has actually changed most significantly in the space of 12 months. In 2012,
48% of those surveyed say this is of high or very high value – up from 40% last year. At the same time, the proportion saying it creates little or no value has fallen from 27% in 2011 to 23% today. Experiences garnered in the aftermath of the major disruptions in Japan and Thailand last year have no doubt convinced more supply chain professionals that such events tend to reward those whose strategies, plans and supplier communications are more finely tuned (for more on this, see Section 4).
31
8
2
59
Absolutely. Supply chain is understood as an equally important part of business success as sales & marketing or R&D/product development
Yes, but only as an enabler of product or sales-driven business strategies
Not really. Supply chain is understood primarily as a cost centre that affects margins
No. Supply chain is strictly seen as a function meant to service the business
There were some other ways mentioned by respondents on how value is created from highperforming supply chains. The bulk of these concerned the ability of the supply chain to reduce cost and be lean. This, in turn, leads to better utilisation of capital, reduced inventory and cycle time improvement. This is value related to operational cost reduction, one of the key contributions of supply chain management indicated earlier. The other key ways mentioned related to product quality improvements, which can be considered as a lever to enable new product introduction, premium pricing and market expansion.
% of respondents n=1,373
16
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE CREATION
VALUE-CREATING ELEMENTS OF SUPPLY
CHAIN EXCELLENCE
In the survey, respondents who rated the dimensions described above as either high value or very high value were then asked about the specific attributes within each area that helped to deliver that value. Figure 4 shows the most relevant factors for value creation through supply chain excellence – those rated as “extremely relevant” by more than half of survey respondents.
As indicated, building customer loyalty through customer service is the most highly rated means for value creation through supply chain excellence.
The factors for success come from the ability to convert customer loyalty into revenue gains. These factors naturally depend on whether customers use customer service as a purchasing decision criterion
(rated most highly by hi-tech respondents), and whether a positive experience leads to a repeat purchase (rated highest among retail respondents).
Assuming that these factors are in place, then strong value creation potential can result.
In the case of new product introduction, it is all about managing time. Supply chain management can be a way to speed up the new product development process (through strong integration of the supply chain and product development teams), provide timely and cost-effective launches, enable flexibility in product ramp-up, and orchestrate the phasing in of new products and the phasing out of existing products. Here, hi-tech companies again view such levers as more highly relevant than those in other sectors.
For new geographical market expansion, efficient distribution of products to customers and the ability to satisfy local regulatory requirements are both viewed as highly relevant, particularly in the CPG, healthcare and pharmaceutical sectors. Since many of the new markets are likely to be in emerging economies where logistics and distribution infrastructures are not as well developed, successful penetration requires the ability to establish efficient channels. This requires well-managed information systems, the use of local distribution partners, effective warehouse and trade management processes, and so on.
Other levers, such as the ability to customise for local needs, the use of local manufacturing or sourcing capacity, and after-sales service support, are valued highly by the hi-tech sector.
Customers are willing to pay a premium price if they value speed, flexibility and reliable supply.
Supply chain excellence must therefore encompass such levers. The hi-tech sector, as expected, values speed in the form of quick response, while the retail sector values reliable supply in the form on on-time and dependable delivery. Customers of logistics providers, however, value flexibility in delivery schedule change offered by these providers. And food and beverage respondents, as part of the consumer products sector, values flexibility in order quantity change.
For expanded offerings of value-added services to be a source of value creation, the key has to be that the customers see this as important, so that one can differentiate oneself from the competition. Our survey results indicate that the logistics and distribution industry has the highest proportion of respondents who see the offering of such value-added services as a source of competitive differentiation for their companies.
Figure 3: Value of a high-performing supply chain
At your company, what is your assessment of the value created by having a high-performing supply chain?
Enhanced customer service and customer loyalty
3 15 40
1
Stronger supplier relationships
4 19 46
41
31
1
Accelerated new product introduction
5 20 43 31
Expansion of business to new market segments in existing/new regions
2 8 22 40 29
1
Expanded offerings of value-added services
8 30 41
Facilitation of premium pricing
2 10 31 38
20
19
Leverage opportunities created by external supply disruptions
6 17 30 30 18
No value whatsoever
Little value
Moderate value
High value
Very high value
Building greater customer loyalty through customer service is the most highly rated means for value creation through supply chain excellence.
% of respondents n=1,379
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
17

STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE CREATION
Supply chain management is no longer the engine in the back of the company, but at the front supporting and enabling business growth.
Exploiting opportunities presented by supply chain disruptions, meanwhile, requires an ability to generate quick response times and have contingency plans in place (with the retail sector valuing this the most), and collaborative relationships with partners and visibility of gaps created by external disruptions (with the hi-tech sector valuing this the most).
cost efficiency gives rise to quick response, lean processes, excellent service, cycle time reduction, favourable terms and conditions and speed in new product introduction (NPI). All of these levers are based on a supply chain being fast and cost efficient.
Lastly, value can be created through strategic supplier relationships. This can be achieved through the suppliers giving priority and loyalty to the company, collaboration on design improvements or favourable terms and conditions. Again, our survey data suggests that companies in the hi-tech sector put a slightly greater emphasis on these levers than do their peers.
The levers described above are all based on supply chain excellence, which is anchored on core competencies such as time and cost efficiency, flexibility and agility, reliability and accuracy, and collaboration. As illustrated in Figure 5, time and
Flexibility and agility are related to the company’s ability to respond to unexpected situations, or to provide a bigger range of services. Hence, they are the anchor to support levers such as expanded and differentiated customer service, flexibility in responding to customers’ needs in delivery schedule, quantity and product mix, the complex processes of transition management, product ramp flexibilities, and providing contingency plans to unexpected disruptions. Reliability and accuracy are means to provide on-time delivery, on-schedule NPI, dependable customer service, consistency in distribution in new markets, and the dependency needed in contingency plans.
Lastly, the ability to collaborate with partners is the foundation for the levers of collaboration
18
Figure 4: Most relevant factors for value creation through supply chain excellence
Value creation channel Value creation levers
New product introduction
Premium pricing
On-schedule product introduction
Ability to ramp up fast
Product development cycle time reduction
Ability to manage product transitions
Customer value of on-time, dependable delivery
Customer value of quick response
Customer value of your flexibility in delivery schedule change
Customer value of your flexibility in order quantity change
Expanded offering of value-added services Differentiation from competition with value-added services
High levels of customer service
New or existing geographical market expansion
Strength of customer service and repeat purchase
Importance of service as a criterion of customer purchase decision
Distribution efficiency in new markets
Flexibility to satisfy local regulatory constraints
Exploit opportunities from external disruptions
Strategic supplier relationships
Response time to react
Existence of contingency plans for supply chain reactions
Strength of collaborative relationships
Visibility of needs or gaps resulting from external disruptions
Supplier giving you priority in times of tight supply
Strength of supplier loyalty
Supplier collaboration on design improvements
Supplier willing to take favourable terms
% of respondents saying
‘extremely relevant’
63%
63%
58%
54%
72%
61%
56%
53%
74%
72%
63%
65%
70%
58%
57%
55%
61%
58%
54%
65%
63%
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

STRATEGY ALIGNMENT AND VALUE CREATION with suppliers on design improvements, the ability to work with partners for quick response in times of disruptions, gaining visibility in the supply chain, and working with local partners for new market expansion.
chain management to deliver tangible business results, and accordingly align their organisations such that supply chain management is an integral part of the executive suite. Supply chain management is no longer the engine in the back of the company, but at the front supporting and enabling business growth.
It is clear from this year’s CSCO survey that supply chain management has come a long way within companies. It is still the backbone for operational cost reduction, and the supportive role of supply chain for business performance is still the foundation. But from 2011 to 2012 we have seen how companies are increasingly appreciating the need to align their supply chain strategies with their business strategies. This is because high-performing supply chains can also enable companies to create value and develop a competitive advantage.
There are many channels in which value and competitive advantage can be created via supply chain excellence, and different industry sectors are experiencing differential value in each. Many more companies are realising the power of supply
Figure 5: Strategy alignment and value creation
Supply chain competency Value creation levers
Time/cost efficiency
Flexibility & agility
Reliability & accuracy
Collaboration
Service & repeat purchase & procurement criteria
Supply priority & loyalty
Design collaborations
Favourable terms
NPI speed, ramp speed
Transitions management
Distribution efficiency
Flexibility for local needs
Differentiation from services
On-time delivery
Quick response
Flexibility in time & quantity
Response time
Collaborative relationships
Contingency plans, visibility
Value creation channels
Enhanced customer service
Strategic supplier relationships
Accelerated new product intro
New market expansion
Expanded value-added services
Facilitation of premium pricing
Leverage disruption opportunities
Strategy alignment
Operating cost reduction
Value creation:
• Revenue increase
• Long-term equity improvement
Competitive advantage:
• Differentiated service
• Strategic supplier engagement
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
19

20
The newly empowered consumer is suddenly expecting a lot more from the global supply chain and is able to shift allegiances very quickly if those expectations are not met.
One of the most disruptive and fast-moving transitions impacting supply chains is the emergence of digitally empowered consumers.
The transition involves far more than just online shopping via web stores. In fact, the digital revolution encompasses everything from communication and social interaction to opinion shaping and spatial tracking. It also permeates the physical space of supply chain by adding new points of sale (home computers, mobile devices), new retail functions (in-store kiosks, smart shelves) and new logistics considerations
(direct-to-consumer fulfilment, in-store returns).
Add the emerging potential for smart appliances, vehicles and infrastructure to the mix and it becomes clear that digitisation of consumer demand will force some radical changes in supply chains.
KING CUSTOMER MEANS MORE
COMPLEXITY FOR SUPPLY CHAINS as choice, convenience and availability than to simply push for discounts. Our survey question even went so far as to explicitly call out that this receptivity to such trade-offs meant a willingness to “pay a premium for valued service”. Digital consumers want choice, not just cheap.
On the one hand this is good news. Consumer demand that can be effectively interpreted along these types of trade-offs can be served in some cases with higher-priced solution bundles and in other cases with bargain basement, stripped down assortments. The problem is that supply chains built to take standard orders or simply replenish a shelf are unlikely to be able to take and execute a complex order that may include extra packaging, assembly, shipping or professional service. The added complexity of fulfilling not only item/ location/quantity combinations but also several other variations could pose serious problems for supply chain systems. More complexity in demand must be met with more capability in supply.
Google any item and within a second thousands of options fill your screen. Where once the consumer knew little or nothing about what was available until they entered a retail store, today almost all have searched for what they want online before leaving the home. Further, they are likely to do more research on their smartphones once they’re in the mall perusing the shelves.
This newly empowered consumer is suddenly expecting a lot more from the global supply chain and is able to shift allegiances very quickly if those expectations are not met.
The data collected on this question also shows clearly that those closest to the consumer see this surge in complexity far more decisively than do those further up the chain. Retailers are most sensitive to this issue. By a ratio of more than
8:1 they expect consumers to be more receptive to complex offers. Logistics and distribution businesses, which are often handling the complex fulfilment requirements being driven by digital consumers, are second in most heavily leaning toward consumers’ receptivity to premium prices for value-added services. One school of thought says that this surge in consumer power will take shape as a relentless push for ever lower prices. Amazon has shaken much of traditional retail by collapsing margins across many categories. Other innovations such as
Groupon’s daily deal approach and eBay’s auction system all seem to point toward low prices as the dominant trend fostered by eCommerce. The data, however, rejects this premise. In fact, by a ratio of 4:1 overall, supply chain executives across industries see this new digital consumer as more likely to weigh price against other factors such
Beyond these sectors, CPG, hi tech and food
& beverages are all clearly anticipating more subtlety in consumer demand, while healthcare, pharmaceuticals and chemicals firms are much less sensitive to this trend (see Figure 7).
The implications of this data, especially when cut by industry sector, suggest that consumer-facing businesses will feel pain as their customers push for more specialised fulfilment, while suppliers’
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE operations remain tuned to a cost competition, mass production mentality. Retailers or consumer products firms hoping to offer selections ranging from bargain basement configurations to highend pack types may find less flexibility in the supply base than they need.
DEMAND COMPLEXITY REACHES BACK
INTO THE SUPPLY CHAIN
To pursue the notion of supply chain complexity increasing with digital demand we also asked what supply chain professionals expected in terms of
SKU assortments, distribution network design, manufacturing strategies, and direct-to-consumer fulfilment. In each case, the data shows that those closest to the consumer are expecting more of the global supply chain than are those upstream.
Overall, respondents see an increase in SKU complexity with 25% agreeing that “eCommerce and mobile-enabled customers will drive much larger SKU assortments as brands pursue ever smaller niches of demand”. The opposite answer, that these customers will “drive smaller SKU assortments as brands simplify to cut costs in response to price pressure”, was chosen by half as many (13%), while more than a third said the drive would be toward “some SKU expansion” and another quarter saw little or no effect.
Cut by industry, this data confirms the pattern that those closest to consumers expect the greatest pressure to offer more variety (see Figure
9). Retailers and distribution businesses, for instance, are most likely to say they expect “much larger” SKU assortments, perhaps because they are already experiencing this trend. A Wells Fargo investment research report last year claimed that
Amazon offered 80 times the number of items as did Wal-Mart.com, suggesting that the bar for variety is getting higher quickly. Other sectors with close consumer ties such as CPG and hi tech also anticipate more SKU expansion than chemicals and industrials. Some of this SKU expansion may come in the final stages of the value chain with minor packaging differentiation
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
Figure 6: Consumer demand variability
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will be:
14
25
61
More receptive to offers trading product choice, price point, availability and convenience against each other (i.e., willing to pay a premium for valued service, or accept inconvenience in return for lower price)
Less receptive to offers trading product choice, price point, availability and convenience against each other (i.e., only interested in lowest price)
The same as regards offers trading product choice, price point, availability and convenience against each other
% of respondents n=1,335
Figure 7: Customer receptiveness to variable offers vs lowest price only
Retail
Hi Tech
8.25
Logistics &
Distribution
Food & Beverage
7.43
5.2
5.07
CPG
4.78
Industrial
3.76
Chemical
Healthcare &
Pharmaceutical
2.55
1.21
Ratio of variable offer to lowest price n=1,335
Figure 8: SKU complexity
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will drive larger or smaller SKU assortments?
26
13
36
25
Drive much larger SKU assortments as brands pursue ever smaller niches of demand
Drive some SKU expansion as brands pursue some smaller niches of demand
Have little or no effect on
SKU assortments
Drive smaller SKU assortments as brands simplify to cut costs in response to price pressure
% of respondents n=1,337
21

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE or other late stage bill of materials variation, but one wonders whether tier suppliers upstream are ready for the differential demand pressures that this consumer trend implies.
This finding may reflect a level of sophistication associated with the steeper learning curve in hi tech exemplified by the case of Motorola, which under new leadership recently installed by
Google is reportedly planning to “cut the number of devices [it] makes from the 27 it introduced last year to just a few” 1 . Apple, whose product line-up is famously simple, seems to be able to succeed by pushing its complexity into the postpurchase content assortment rather than physical inventory. Complexity may be on the rise with digital demand, but not all businesses plan to tackle it in the same way.
An interesting observation in the data here shows that hi-tech and distribution firms are most clearly expecting at least some impact on
SKU assortments from the digital consumer.
Logistics and distribution respondents who are most likely to say they expect “much larger
SKU assortments” are also least likely (16%) to say they expect “little or no impact”. Clearly, eCommerce is changing their world. Hi-tech respondents are similarly unlikely (17%) to say they expect little or no change, but interestingly are the most likely of all to see a drive toward smaller SKU assortments (18%).
Not all respondents feel the pressure. Half of all chemicals companies, for instance, see little or no change and healthcare and pharmaceuticals respondents are similarly more likely to say they expect no change than either an increase or decrease. For chemicals supply chains this makes sense as they are, to a large degree, limited by asset-intensive production facilities that cannot readily increase variety without capital expenditures. Healthcare supply chains, however, which are increasingly impacted by new channels like Express Scripts online drug ordering, may be overlooking a wave of change at their peril.
Putting some rough estimates around this opinion data shows that those closer to consumers see
SKU counts increasing by 15-20%, while tier suppliers look for closer to a 5-10% increase
(see Figure 10). Somewhere in here agility must make up the difference. If the 1,350-plus supply chain professionals in our sample are right, we should anticipate at least a 10% increase in the total number of unique items available for sale in the near future. Coupled with the data above indicating consumers’ desire for more variation
1 New York Times , 13 August 2012
Figure 9: SKU complexity by industry
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will drive larger or smaller SKU assortments?
Figure 10: Overall SKU change
Estimated % change
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
Chemicals
Healthcare
& Pharma
Industrial
Food &
Beverage
Hi Tech
CPG
Retail
Logistics &
Distribution
5
6
9
13
16
17
18
21
Chemicals CPG Food &
Beverage
Healthcare
& Pharma
Hi Tech Industrial Logistics &
Distribution
Retail
Much larger (+50%)
Somewhat larger (10%)
Little or no change
Smaller (-10%)
% of respondents n=1,337 n=1,337
22
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE n=1,337 in sale offers it looks likely that supply chains’ fulfilment duties are set to become dramatically more challenging.
THE DISTRIBUTION CENTRE OF THE
FUTURE: BIGGER AND SMALLER chain) to share DC facilities across suppliers in order to have more nodes of supply closer to stores with tighter delivery windows and smaller shipments. A similar argument may apply to fresh food businesses like Sysco whose network must manage multiple temperature zones and deliver prepared items as well as packaged items.
In terms of distribution networks, eCommerce and the digital consumer are also driving change.
The most obvious element of this change has been the Amazon phenomenon where directto-consumer, non-store retail has upended the economics of consumer spending by building dozens of new warehouses in the past few years.
The trend could be toward “gigantism” (a term used to describe supply chains in mining) with examples like Marks & Spencer’s East Midlands distribution centre in the UK which consolidates all fulfilment of stores in-region, eCommerce worldwide and international sales arising as a means to provide the agility demanded of supply chains by the digital consumer.
Closer examination of the data reveals a difference between consumer-facing businesses and tier suppliers with some mild bias in favour of larger, more centralised distribution centres in the eyes of those closest to the consumer.
There also seems to be some mild correlation between those who say they expect much more
SKU variety and those anticipating the bigger
DCs. Interviews around this topic suggest that the likely answer for most, regardless of industry, is a bit of both.
A counter argument can be made for smaller, more local distribution centres (DCs) which may allow quick turnaround response and higher-touch customer service support. One such example is an effort made by Seven and I
Holdings (parent company of the 7-Eleven stores
One takeaway may lie in seeing the link between wide product assortments and mega-scale in warehouse management as a means of delivering on the “long tail” supply chain. Another may be that complex value-added services able to justify premium pricing are best served at the local level.
CPG and food & beverages were the only two sectors more likely to bet on smaller, local DCs than on larger, centralised DCs. Long-tail supply
Figure 11: Distribution centre design
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will:
Figure 12: Manufacturing strategies
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will:
If the 1,385 supply chain professionals in our sample are right, we should anticipate at least a 10% increase in the number of unique items on sale in the near future.
23
26
35
41
36
Require larger, more centralised distribution centres serving many/ all channels
Require smaller, more local distribution centres serving separate channels
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
% of respondents n=1,336
Require minimal change to existing distribution centre networks
Drive brands to develop mass customisation manufacturing strategies
39
Drive brands to pursue the lowest possible cost mass manufacturing strategies
% of respondents n=1,338
Have little or no effect on brands’ manufacturing strategies
23

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE
24
It is telling that hi-tech firms, whose product lifecycles are shortest and learning curves steepest, seem most certain that manufacturing strategies will be impacted by eCommerce and the digital consumer.
chain may work well in a lights-out, automated warehouse for books, electronics and luxury items but may require kitchens, workshops and a friendly face for grocery items.
MANUFACTURING STRATEGIES
SCHIZOPHRENIA
Added complexity at the consumers’ point of sale implies more variety upstream. If this variety is limited to final packaging or presentation it is possible that manufacturing strategies will be largely unchanged. Otherwise, tier suppliers will be looked to for more flavours, colours, sizes and configurations. Of course, powerful consumers able to search online for the lowest possible prices might also force manufacturers of plastics, food ingredients, fasteners or electronic components to streamline production for lower unit costs.
Digital consumer power appears ready to inform product innovation too, potentially helping to forecast demand for “hot” products. Winners often surge ahead of capacity, leaving money on the table, while losers show up as excess and obsolete inventory write-offs. Spain’s Zara built a manufacturing and supply chain strategy explicitly around this problem even before eCommerce and digital consumers had really
Figure 13: Customer fulfilment
Within the context of your industry, do you believe the eCommerce and mobile-enabled customer of the future will: emerged. Manufacturing strategies based on the
Henry Ford quip “any colour you want as long as it’s black” may struggle in this new world.
At an aggregate level our respondents are split on this issue. While only a quarter overall see little or no effect on manufacturing strategies, the remainder break almost evenly between those who agree that the emergence of eCommerce and digital/mobile consumers will “drive brands to develop mass-customisation manufacturing strategies” and those who expect “lowest possible cost mass manufacturing strategies” to dominate.
Chemicals companies are by far the most likely to say their manufacturing strategies will not change (54%), while hi-tech firms are clearly the most convinced that they will see changes in manufacturing (16% see “little or no effect”). Retail is the only industry sector whose respondents are more likely to foresee more mass customisation in manufacturing than low-cost mass production. Other sectors generally forecast change in manufacturing approaches with a mild bias in favour of lower-cost mass production.
Here again, we see the same theme of those closest to consumers bracing for change while those upstream wait to see the impact. It is telling that hi-tech firms, whose product lifecycles are shortest and learning curves steepest, seem most certain that manufacturing will be impacted by eCommerce and the digital consumer.
23
21
56
Drive brands to develop direct-to-customer fulfilment capabilities
Drive brands to rely on eCommerce retailers for customer fulfilment
Have little impact on existing retail channels for customer fulfilment
% of respondents n=1,334
This group (comprising 336 survey respondents) is nearly evenly split between believers in lowcost mass production and more variable mass customisation, suggesting that the end game may include significant amounts of both approaches.
Certain inputs may well be so commoditised
(memory chips, for instance) that consumers, no matter how informed or discerning, simply don’t care. These will likely gravitate to ever more massive, basic production operations. Other inputs (exterior shells, for instance) could benefit from unique designs, demanding smaller batch runs on more flexible production lines.
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE
DIRECT TO CONSUMER AND CHANGES
TO RETAIL
Perhaps the most obvious implication of eCommerce is that all companies have an opportunity to make more direct contact with their customers. For industrial or B2B brands this connection lends itself to ever deeper product information sharing, forecast collaboration and order streamlining, but is essentially just a superpowered version of the telephone-and-catalogue relationship it replaces. For consumer brands, the implications reach into order management and fulfilment and potentially mean significant changes to channels.
When asked about how these trends will affect channels, a clear majority overall believe that eCommerce and digital consumers will “drive brands to develop direct-to-customer fulfilment capabilities”. Nearly a quarter of respondents see the future driving brands to “rely on eCommerce retailers for customer fulfilment”, suggesting that many see the need to serve customers with home delivery but that they expect to outsource this function to specialists like Amazon. Around a fifth of the respondent pool sees little impact on existing channels.
eCommerce have provided channel fulfilment to many brands for years now. Recently, however, some appear to be taking the function back in house (Marks & Spencer, Target and Clark’s shoes have all been cited in media reports within the past year as moving this way). Interviews with some large CPG companies have also pointed toward supply chain strategists developing their own direct-to-consumer capabilities as a way to maintain visibility to demand and sell more product at retail rather than wholesale prices.
The execution implications of this movement are profound. While shipping full pallets to
Amazon’s DCs is a familiar process for most manufacturers, picking, packing and shipping to individual consumers is another matter entirely.
Secondary packaging, in particular, adds cost and hassle to consumers who may end up associating brands’ performance in fulfilment with satisfaction in consumption of the product itself.
Also, the added inventory needed to populate a full assortment and quick response supply chain means more cost.
Getting the execution right while keeping costs under control will, in many cases, mean changes in production processes even further upstream to allow inventory buffering prior to
Industry cuts show some decisive, if obvious, differences. Hi tech and retail each believe overwhelmingly (by a ratio of 6:1) that brands will develop direct-to-customer fulfilment rather than leave channels alone. Healthcare, pharmaceutical and chemicals firms are much more likely than those in other industries to see the future in terms of minimal channel change. The takeaway suggests that classes of product suitable to classic online shopping (consumer electronics, apparel) are gearing up to ship direct to the home. One wonders what pharmaceuticals is thinking.
No effect
Improved communication with trading partners
Integrate structured and unstructured information
Improved demand sensing and forecasting
47
27
23
21
An interesting finding may be the relatively low and strangely consistent percentage of respondents across industries who anticipate relying on eCommerce retailers for fulfilment.
Figure 14: Social media and supply chains today
What effect, if any, is social media (Chatter, Facebook, expert blogs/chatroom, etc) having on your company’s supply chain strategy today?
Competitive advantage
17 The more interesting finding in this data may be the relatively low and strangely consistent percentage of respondents across industries who anticipate relying on eCommerce retailers for fulfilment. Amazon and its peers in pure-play
Improved employee productiviity
11
% of respondents n=1,345
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
25

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE
Respondents in Asia are the most likely to see immediate impacts from social media on supply chain strategy.
the finished goods stage. Imagine consumerordered configurations rolling directly off a packaging line. The engineering needed mirrors what BMW does in its vehicle plants or Dell did in its Austin PC factories during the heyday of build-to-order dominance.
SOCIAL MEDIA DOESN’T DO MUCH NOW,
BUT MANY EXPECT IT TO HELP
The digital consumer of the future does not only shop. He or she also tweets, blogs, posts on Facebook and otherwise shares feelings about life, including which products rock and which do not. The social media wave that seems overwhelmingly powerful in terms of modern culture may be relevant to supply chain strategies, although no one seems perfectly clear how.
When cut by industry and geography, however, some potentially important trends emerge. Hi tech is clearly the most confident that social media has an effect today, while chemicals roundly dismisses it. Asian respondents are similarly decisive in being the most likely to see immediate impacts from social media on supply chain strategy, while European respondents are least convinced. The correlation may be explained in terms of growth rates. European mobile networks are top notch and the UK has the highest rate of eCommerce penetration of any major country, so technophobia is probably not an explanation. The higher growth rates seen in Asia as compared to other geographies and hi tech as compared to other industries suggests that, as a strategic tool, social media may be most valuable in volatile markets.
Source of real-time customer feedback
Inform product enhancement/ innovation priorities
Provide advance warning of potential supply disruptions
Help forecast demand for ‘hot’ products
56
46
41
39
Nearly half of our survey respondents (47%) say that social media is having “no effect” on their company’s supply chains today. Of those who do see some impact, the most common is “improved communication with trading partners”, rather than anything to do with customers. Only 21% see “improved demand sensing and forecasting”, despite abundant discussion about how important Facebook, Twiiter and the like are to brand building and consumer influence.
Figure 15: Social media and supply chains in the future
How do you expect social media to inform your company’s supply chain management practices in the future?
Looking ahead at how social media might affect supply chain strategies in the future, we see significantly more optimism. Over half (56%) of all respondents expect social media to provide real-time customer feedback and significant minorities look for product enhancement information or “hot” product predictions (see
Figure 15). Cut by industry, this data also shows that expectations of impact are not limited to those high-growth areas that are seeing effects today. Retailers, for instance, are particularly hopeful that social media will offer real-time customer feedback (80%) and help forecast hot products (65%). CPG manufacturers are most bullish on the role social media will play in influencing product innovation (52%).
Geographically, it is in the Americas, rather than
Asia, where optimism about social media and supply chain influence is highest. Social media’s role in supply chain strategy is still decidedly unsure, but many see the potential for it to make a difference.
Shed light on social/ environmental practices
33
Other
5
% of respondents n=1,284
Our survey participants offered some other novel ideas for social media in supply chain’s future.
Among the most interesting are quality early warning systems, compliance support, supplier health tracking, or even “as a source of feedback
26
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE from employees on company performance and practices”. One consumer packaged goods
CSCO offered the following summary of what is conceivable: “Cloud base supply network visibility from consumer, to customer shelf, to manufacturer, to suppliers’ supplier is where we’re headed.” Having interviewed this same executive in the past, it is clear that this really is the company’s plan.
(transaction data only, web store data, geospatial data, and private web data such as Google searches) and at the aggregate and individual levels. The answer is that many are still hesitant to take full advantage of all the information today’s digital consumer is putting out there.
Social media is very likely to be at least part of your supply chain strategy. Among businesses close to the consumer, demand sensing is expected to be important. Even for the most asset-intensive basic materials industries it is conceivable that
“sentiment analysis” based on social networking could forecast price movements in commodities that might help with capital planning.
The only type of data respondents are clearly comfortable mining is traditional customer transaction data, and while there is a bit less certainty that individuals’ data should be probed it is clear that most supply chain professionals see this as fair game. Web store data, which might be seen as owned by the business, is significantly less acceptable as an area to mine.
This may reflect some degree of privacy concern around clickstream analysis or other methods of analysing the customer’s thought process.
Conducting deep analysis of data on customers’ physical movements seems for many to go too far.
MINING FOR INSIGHT: WHAT IS TOO DEEP?
During a discussion on the topic of digital commerce earlier this year, a member of SCM
World’s Executive Advisory Board posed the question of how far it was reasonable to dig into customer data given the massive amount of detailed information now available on the movements, interests and preferences of individuals.
Here, as at every level of the analysis, respondents are more comfortable using this data in aggregate than at the individual customer level.
Going deeper into data that tracks customers’ physical movements seems for many to go too far. At the deepest level, where customers’ personal web data including things like their search history and social network affiliations are found, the view is that mining this for business advantage is not acceptable.
Consumer insight used to rely on relatively dumb point-of-sale data mixed with third party (IRI,
Nielsen) data and market research. Experience, instinct and guesswork came together to paint a picture of demand across customer segments.
Today, many consumers carry GPS-enabled mobile devices that link to his or her entire intellectual universe of email, web searches, social networking and more. Cross-referencing all of these data sets could, in theory, deliver incredibly deep, granular analyses of exactly what each person is willing to buy, when and where.
How deeply should demand planners drill into this data before they strike a nerve?
Figure 16: Customer data mining
Within the context of your company/industry, please indicate your level of agreement/ disagreement with the following statements about the use of customer data:
Customer transaction data should be mined to understand buying behaviour
Customer webstore data
(cookies, eCommerce history) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
Customer geospatial data
(mobile GPS) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
4.08
3.75
3.55
3.27
3.20
2.98
We asked our survey respondents how appropriate they believe it is probe into these new data sets to develop customer insights at four levels of depth
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
Customer private web data
(Google search, Facebook, etc) should be mined to understand buying behaviour
2.89
2.69
Weighted average rating, 1-5 scale n=1,346
Disagree Neutral
At an aggregate level
At an individual level
Agree
27

DIGITAL CONSUMERS AND eCOMMERCE
28
Despite the digitisation of demand hurtling forward, we won’t have a real-time global supply network anytime soon.
Cutting the survey data by industry and geography further corroborates what we have seen elsewhere in this section – namely, that supply chains closest to the consumer are most aggressive in looking for ways to engage and serve this emerging digital/mobile demand.
Retail, in particular, is most bullish on all means of drilling into customer data, both at an aggregate and individual level. Even for personal web data, retailers agree (although just barely: 3.05 individual and 3.35 aggregate on a 1-5 scale, where 3 is neutral) that analysis to
“understand buying behaviour” is appropriate.
For healthcare and pharmaceuticals, however, the opposite is true. These respondents generally believe that mining anything other than transaction data is inappropriate.
drive tremendous complexity upstream into the supply chain for every class of product. Those closest to the consumer are feeling the pressure most acutely and will inevitably look back to their supply base for support. The immediate implications include more and better flexibility in packaging, retail presentation and configuration options. These forces will drive suppliers of raw materials and components to streamline changeovers for their brand-owning customers and carry inventory that allows variable demand to be met without overburdening working capital.
Considering these trends, it appears that supply chain organisations’ ultimate imperative may be assuring agility.
Geographically, Asian respondents are clearly the most comfortable using all types of customer data, both in aggregate and individually. Even in the use of personal web data at an individual level, Asian respondents are only just negative
(2.91 on our weighted scale), indicating that even here most are at worst neutral about whether to poke around individuals’ web search histories or Facebook pages. Europeans generally don’t consider it appropriate to mine such data and are least in agreement across the board.
These findings suggest that despite the digitisation of demand hurtling forward in terms of technical enablement, we won’t have anything like the “real-time global supply network” anytime soon. Data mining tools are certainly available to digest all of this customer information, and consumers, despite lip service given to privacy worries, are happy to leave their electronic footprint everywhere. If anything, it appears that consumers are more comfortable having their demand data scrutinised than businesses think.
Retailers may be right about this – consumer data probably should be drilled into more deeply than is currently the case.
The forces of change arising from today’s digitally empowered consumer appear set to
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

Corporate executives, from the board level down, are increasingly concerned with their supply chain’s performance across social and environmental dimensions. Environmental responsibility includes the control and containment of the carbon footprint, energy usage and pollution of the supply chain. Social responsibility includes health and safety, labour practices and contribution to the well-being of local communities. The initial attention has been on a company’s own internal operations, but that has rapidly shifted to the extended supply chain.
Whether a company is legally liable or not, the negative publicity and the resulting scrutiny by the general public of violations that occur in its extended supply chain are significant enough that the scope of social and environmental responsibility (hereafter referred to as SER) often consists of multiple tiers of the supply network.
SER journeys, they are beginning to see that the benefits come not so much from sales revenue
(customers being generally unwilling to pay more for socially or environmentally friendly products), but from reducing the cost of manufacturing and distributing their products. The gap between the two is widest in the food and beverage sector, where 53% of respondents say cost reduction and efficiency gains are the driver compared with just
13% who say increased sales revenue.
Of course, switching to new materials, improving the energy efficiency of production processes, and increasing the amount of recycling and reuse of materials takes time. But our research findings and conversations with supply chain leaders suggest that companies are beginning to move more in this direction, and we expect to see further evidence of this shift in the next couple of years.
Why are companies so concerned with SER? This year, 71% of our survey respondents indicated that the motivation is to create a positive customer image and enhance brand equity (slightly down on last year – see Figure 17). Hence, the driving force remains customers and the general public. This is strongest in the chemicals industry, where more than three-quarters of respondents (77%) say this is the case. The second biggest driver of SER, as in 2011, is government regulations. Almost half of respondents (49%) indicated that SER efforts are designed to satisfy government regulations – a rise of seven percentage points year on year.
Ensuring no disruption of supply and fending off shareholder or external public relations concerns also both increased by several points this year. A small percentage of participants told us there were “other” reasons for SER efforts.
Most indicated that these were derived from corporate beliefs and corporate culture: their companies want to do the right things for the earth, the community and mankind in general.
Figure 17: Drivers of SER investment
What is your best judgment of your board’s motivations for investing in SER?
CUTTING THE COST OF GREENER
PRODUCTS
But perhaps the most interesting finding concerns the third main driver: cost reduction and greater efficiency through better use of energy and materials, reducing waste, and so on. This year, 43% of participants say this is the driver of their SER efforts – up from 32% in 2011. At the same time, the proportion who believe their board’s reason for investing in SER is to boost sales has fallen sharply. This is a major change. The implication could be that as more companies mature in their
Create a positive customer image and enhance brand equity
71
75
Satisfy government regulations
49
42
Reduce costs and/or increase efficiency (e.g., through better use of energy, raw materials)
43
32
Ensure no disruption of supply
37
30
Fend off shareholder or external PR concerns
28
22
Increase sales revenue
17
31
% of respondents n=1,281
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
This year, 43% of participants say cost reduction and greater efficiency in the use of energy and materials is the driver of their
SER efforts – up from 31% in 2011.
2012
2011
29

SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
30
VISIBILITY AND MONITORING OF SER
VIOLATIONS
SCM World has advocated a Six Sigma process cycle as a good framework to look at SER efforts.
This cycle has four stages: measure-identifyanalyse-act. Measuring SER performance, identifying and analysing root causes, having corrective actions in place to improve performance, and then continuously measuring and going through the cycle is the basis of a sound SER journey.
In this year’s survey we asked about both the visibility and monitoring of SER performance.
What we found is a strong correlation between the monitoring systems that supply chain executives have in place and the visibility of SER violations. In other words, most executives are relying on the monitoring systems to know if there have been violations or not, and these are generally effective.
Visibility of SER performance can be accomplished at two levels. At the first level, supply chain executives need to have visibility of SER violations in their supply chains. This is necessary, but it is not the most effective means to manage SER. The ideal visibility is continuous monitoring of performance before violations occur. This is analogous to how we manage quality. It is necessary for us to have a good final inspection process so that we are able to identify defects in finished products.
But that is not good enough. We need process monitoring systems in place to make sure minimal or zero defects are produced during the manufacturing and assembly stages.
Visibility of SER performance starts with having visibility and monitoring of one’s own internal operations. A more progressive company will also have visibility of their immediate suppliers. And the most advanced ones will, in addition, also have visibility of their extended supply networks.
Hence, companies should strive to be at the most advanced level of having total visibility of the extended supply network.
In 2012 we found that a quarter of companies have visibility of both environmental and social standards violations in their extended supply networks (see Figures 18 and 19). Visibility at the immediate supplier level was slightly higher, at 28% and 29% respectively, while internal visibility was higher still, constituting 39% and 38%. It is gratifying to see that a larger proportion of companies now have visibility
Figure 18: Environmental performance visibility
At which of the following levels do you have visibility of environmental sustainability performance measures (e.g., carbon footprint)?
Figure 19: Social performance visibility
At which of the following levels do you have visibility of social sustainability measures (e.g., violations of labour compliance regulations)?
8
None
Extended supply network
Immediate suppliers
Internally
39 25 38
9
24
28
% of respondents n=1,352
29
% of respondents n=1,346
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
% of respondents n=1,346 beyond their internal operations (since the total sum of percentages for those with visibility of immediate and extended supply networks is greater than the percentage with visibility of internal operations). At the same time, fewer than 1 in 10 companies say they have no visibility of any environmental or social compliance violations in their supply chains.
Another observation is that visibility of environmental and social compliance violations seem to be tied together. Hence, companies treat both types of violations as equally important and would not have visibility of one without the other. Compared with last year’s findings, there are definitely more companies with visibility of their extended supply networks this year. This indicates that good progress has been made in extending visibility to a more comprehensive supply network.
violations and monitoring systems lies in the extended supply network. Less than a fifth of companies have monitoring systems in place for their extended supply networks, compared with the quarter that have visibility of environmental and social sustainability violations (see Figures 20 and 21). Such violations are “easier” to capture, whereas ongoing monitoring systems require much bigger efforts and investments. Hence, we are still far from having many advanced companies that are able to monitor their extended supply networks effectively.
CORRECTIVE ACTION: FIRMS ARE MORE
LIKELY TO SWITCH SUPPLIERS
Once out-of-control states are identified, and assignable causes and opportunities are analysed, the Six Sigma process can move on to the fourth step: act. In SER supply chains, action involves both correcting problems and putting in place processes or systems designed to improve SER performance.
The observations about monitoring systems of
SER performance are quite similar to the visibility of SER violations. Again, the most advanced companies have monitoring systems in place for their extended supply networks, followed by those having systems for immediate suppliers and then for internal operations only. The most distinct difference between the visibility of SER
In terms of corrective actions, we found that companies do react promptly when suppliers are found to have breached SER standards.
Around two-thirds of respondents say they give suppliers a warning first before taking punitive
Figure 20: Environmental performance monitoring
At which of the following levels do you have monitoring systems in place for environmental sustainability performance measures?
It is gratifying to see that a larger proportion of companies now have visibility of SER violations beyond their internal operations.
Figure 21: Social performance monitoring
At which of the following levels do you have monitoring systems in place for social sustainability measures?
10
None
Extended supply network
Immediate suppliers
Internally
45 19 44
10
19
26
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
% of respondents n=1,340
27
% of respondents n=1,342
31

SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
32
Companies are increasing the pressure they put on suppliers to improve SER performance.
actions if things do not improve, while a third take immediate action without giving suppliers a second chance. This shows just how seriously companies take violations of their social and environmental standards.
from 56% to 53% year on year, while those terminating the relationship increased from 42% to 47%.
So what are the consequences for suppliers if they fail to comply? As Figure 23 shows, the most likely – used by more than half of companies, regardless of whether or not they issue a warning first – is to reduce the amount of business they give to a supplier. More than 4 out of 10 opt to terminate the business relationship completely.
Monetary fines are the least popular tactic, used by less than 15% of companies, indicating that most do not believe these are an effective means of correcting the violation problems.
Although the most likely consequence of noncompliance remains a warning followed by reduced business (52% of the sample overall, compared with 20% who immediately terminate the relationship), our findings indicate that companies are both increasing the pressure they put on suppliers to improve SER performance and changing the way they respond to violations.
Increasingly, they are willing to stop using those responsible for breaches of social or environmental standards and find alternative suppliers to replace them.
INCENTIVES FOR SUPPLIERS TO IMPROVE
SER PERFORMANCE The main difference between this year’s findings and those in 2011 is that companies seem more willing to terminate the relationship altogether rather than reduce the volume of business. This trend is most significant among those that issue a warning first. In 2011, 73% said they would reduce business and 36% would terminate the relationship. In 2012, these figures are 58% and
42% respectively. Among the third of respondents who say their companies take immediate action without warning, those reducing business fell
Of course, suppliers need to be committed and motivated to help their customers make progress in SER in a way that enhances their public image and brand equity. Many studies have found that the best way to ensure this is not more compliance audits, but to collaborate with suppliers so that they benefit from SER improvements and are willing to invest time, money and resources in a way that supports their customers’ objectives.
Figure 22: Warning signals
If suppliers are found to be in breach of your company’s SER standards, do you give a warning first before imposing “penalties”?
Warning first
No warning
Figure 23: Penalties for breach of SER standards
Warning first, followed by
14
58
42
32
68
% of respondents n=1,227
No warning, immediate action taken in the form of
13
53
47
Monetary fines
Reduced business
Termination of business relationship
% of respondents n=1,227
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
For the second year running, our CSCO survey shows that the most widely used incentives are preferred supplier status (giving priority for future business) and increased business engagements.
However, the proportion of respondents who say their companies use preferred supplier status has fallen from two-thirds in 2011 to 58% now.
Increased business engagements show no change year on year at slightly under half of the sample
(see Figure 24). At the same time, the numbers willing to grant price premiums and better terms and conditions to suppliers in exchange for
SER commitments and improvements has risen slightly. This suggests that the mix of incentives may be changing somewhat as companies gain more experience about the most effective ways to incentivise suppliers. Granting preferred supplier status is a positive incentive, but it is not as concrete a benefit as better terms and conditions and price premiums. As companies began to realise the positive cost savings and benefits of
SER efforts, they are willing to give more explicit benefits to their suppliers.
In general, we also found that companies in the hi-tech and CPG sectors tend to be more likely to use the incentives described, while those in the logistics and distribution industry are least likely. (More than a fifth of logistics firms offer no incentives, for example, compared with 12% across all sectors.) And among those respondents who indicated that their companies used other means, the most common are supplier assessment programmes to identify capability and performance gaps, knowledge sharing with suppliers, and participation in industry forums or industry-wide SER programmes.
supplier relationship and customer satisfaction improvements. And 41% have seen at least good results in terms of operating cost reduction – almost the same percentage who say this is a driver of their SER investments, as we noted earlier in this section. A small number of respondents indicated some other benefits, such as better brand image, public relations, employee morale and working environment, community contributions, and image as an industry leader.
Sector analysis of the data suggests that hi tech, logistics and CPG seem to be industries that have derived greater benefits from their SER efforts.
Although the scale used for this question varied slightly from the one in 2011, we can still make some year-on-year comparisons. In 2011, the top benefit (combining the ratings of 4 and 5 on a
1-5 scale) was customer satisfaction improvement
(47%), followed by reduced violations of government regulations and laws (44%), supplier relationship improvements (35%), new or improved sales opportunities (32%) and operating cost reduction (31%). Comparing these findings with those in Figure 25, we can see that the 2012 results are better across the board.
This suggests that companies are seeing more substantial results from their SER efforts than they were a year ago.
Figure 25: SER incentives for suppliers
LEGAL COMPLIANCE AND SUPPLIER
RELATIONSHIPS ARE THE BIG WINNERS
What about the benefits companies are getting from their SER efforts? In 2012, reduced violations of government regulations and laws are the most significant, with 60% of survey respondents claiming good or substantial results. More than half also say the same about
Preferred supplier status
(priority for future business)
58
66
Increased business engagements
You invest in training and education
48
48
42
44
Public recognition (e.g., supplier of the year awards)
32
32
Better terms and conditions
25
22
Price premiums
8
10
8
As companies begin to realise the positive cost savings and benefits of SER efforts, they are willing to give more explicit benefits to their suppliers.
2012
2011
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
33

SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY
34
Global brands such as Apple and Samsung have attracted significant negative publicity during the past
12 months as a result of SER violations by their suppliers.
The 16-point jump in benefits from reduced violations of government regulations and laws in 2012 is interesting. A possible explanation is that governments have tightened their scrutiny and enforcement of such regulations. And the 19-point jump on supplier relationship improvements indicates that companies are finding beneficial ways to collaborate on SER initiatives. Overall, our evidence shows that such initiatives are maturing and more of the investments in SER are beginning to pay off.
This is indeed a very encouraging trend.
OBSTACLES TO SER PROGRESS REMAIN
SIGNIFICANT
Despite this progress, however, measuring the benefits of SER initiatives continues to challenge many companies. Almost 6 out of 10 survey participants say this is “somewhat” or
“extremely” challenging. Just one percentage point behind is the customer not caring or price pressure (which drew the highest proportion of
“extremely” challenging responses, at 15%) and a lack of resources. In addition, supplier resistance and a lack of internal knowledge and expertise are both rated challenging by half of our sample
(see Figure 26), so the barriers to forging socially and environmental responsible supply chains should not be underestimated.
Although, once again, we are not able to compare the results of 2012 with those of 2011 directly, the qualitative results suggest that the key obstacles and challenges are more or less the same.
The observation of customer not caring and no price premium being a major challenge is an interesting one. At first glance it may seem at odds with the earlier results that customers are increasing their efforts and stepping up their punitive actions for SER violations. How can we interpret this finding? One explanation is that a company will typically have multiple customers, some of whom may be extremely concerned with SER performance and some not. As a supplier, one still has to improve SER in general, and getting the latter group of customers to care and be appreciative of these efforts can be a major challenge.
Moreover, we have seen that only 10% of companies are willing to offer price premiums as an incentive for supplier SER improvements. So investing here could be very challenging when the supplier is already faced with cost pressures. To
Figure 25: SER benefits
What kind of results have you achieved through your SER efforts to date?
Reduced violations of government regulations and laws
12 11 17 39
Supplier relationship improvement
8 12 26 42
Customer satisfaction improvement
8 13 26
Operating cost reduction
14 18 27
New or improved sales opportunities
14 20 32
40
33
27
None
Minor
Moderate
Good
Substantial
21
12
13
8
7
% of respondents n=1,237
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
Figure 26: SER challenges
No measurable returns
7 8 27
Customers do not care / price pressure
4 9 29
50
43 15
9
Lack of resources
5 10 27
Supplier resistance
5 14 32
44 14
43 7
8
Lack of knowledge and expertise to pursue improvement projects
12 31 42 8
Internal resistance
17 17
Not at all challenging
Somewhat unchallenging
Neither
Somewhat challenging
Extremely challenging
31 30
% of respondents n=1,234
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
4
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

Lack of knowledge and expertise to pursue improvement projects
SOCIAL & ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITY address such challenges, we see the importance of industry-wide efforts or joint programmes in helping to unify the value and priority that companies put on SER performance. Equally important is ensuring that suppliers do not perceive SER efforts as costly, and that there is real business value to be gained.
and respond approach. Sensitivity to SER performance is increasing, and more companies than in 2011 have been able to gain visibility and control of SER violations in the extended supply network.
COMPANIES ARE STEPPING UP THEIR
IMPROVEMENT EFFORTS
As for the future outlook of SER efforts, our findings show that the biggest focus areas for companies will be continuing to work with their immediate suppliers (73% are planning to increase their efforts here), internal operations
(71%) and their extended supply network (65%).
This is followed by internal product design (63%) and customers (56%) – see Figure 27
However, a big gap still exists, and many more companies still have only limited visibility today.
In response, companies are becoming more stringent about SER violations, with one-third of our participants reacting to SER violations with immediate actions without warning. At the same time, investing in collaborative efforts and creating incentives are found to be the effective way for proactive SER improvements. Challenges remain, but it is clear that SER efforts are starting to become a central thrust of a company’s overall supply chain strategy.
Comparing these figures with those from our
2011 survey (which used an identical question), we see an increase in the proportion of respondents planning to step up their efforts of at least five percentage points across the board.
In the case of supply networks, both immediate and extended, the 2012 figures are double-digit percentages higher – 21 points and 14 points respectively. The significant negative publicity for major global brands, such as Apple and Samsung, stemming from suppliers’ SER violations during the past 12 months could explain the heightened attention here. As in 2011, companies are working on multiple dimensions in their SER efforts.
And SER improvements can only be made with integrated and collective efforts involving internal operations, suppliers, customer support and engineering/product development functions.
From this year’s survey, we see that most companies have come a long way on the SER journey. There is sufficient evidence that their SER efforts are paying off with real cost savings, and companies are maturing in their experience and learning how to make the right investments to realise such benefits. To improve
SER performance, companies are using a sense
Figure 27: Future SER focus areas
Looking ahead, to what extent do you intend to focus your SER efforts in each of the following areas?
Immediate suppliers
2 25
Internal operations
2 27
Extended supply network
3 31
Internal product design
2 35
Customers
2 41
Significantly reduce effort
Reduce effort
No change
Increase effort
Significantly increase effort
60
57
50
51
44
Improvements in SER require integrated efforts between the operations and customer support teams, engineering and product development functions, and suppliers.
13
14
14
13
12
% of respondents n=1,230
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
35

9
Figure 28: Most significant risks
How concerned are you about the following risks within your supply and demand chains in 2012-13?
Supply shortage of raw materials / components
3 7 16
Shipping / logistics disruptions
43
2 7 20 48
Incident at supplier facilities (e.g., fire, strike, technical problems)
3 8 20
Natural disaster affecting supplier facilities (e.g., earthquake, flood)
6 9 19
Financial failure of critical supplier
3 9 21
44
50
42
Legal/regulatory issues (e.g., trade policy, tax laws)
2
Inability of customer to fulfil production/sales targets
3
8
7
24
24
40
46
Financial failure of critical customer
6 11 23 38
Counterfeit products
7 10 25
Data security / IT incidents
3 11 29
Breach of intellectual property rights
32
6 11 31
Supplier ethical standards exposed as unsatisfactory
6 14 31
War, terrorism or other geopolitical issues
9 14 32
36
30
33
31
32
23
23
25
26
26
19
19
21
20
23
16
15
36
Not at all concerned
Somewhat unconcerned
As an organisational discipline and capability, risk management has come a long way in the past decade or so. Major, and highly visible, global events such as the earthquake and tsunami in
Japan and floods in Thailand in 2011 have shown that a greater level of focus and professionalism can pay handsome dividends when disaster strikes, in terms of keeping production lines running, shelves stocked and customers and shareholders happy – as evidenced earlier in this report. And yet risk management remains an extremely challenging area for many supply chain leaders.
about this, with a further 43% “somewhat concerned” (see Figure 28). Those in the hi-tech sector see this as a particularly acute risk, with 4 out of 10 very concerned, compared with just 1 in 10 in the retail sector (which is more able to pass on the higher costs incurred in buying scarce commodities to its customers). And from a geographical standpoint, the proportion of respondents based in the Asia-Pacific region who are very concerned about supply shortages is double that of their peers in EMEA – 48% to 24%.
In this year’s CSCO survey, we posed four key questions: What are the risks you are most concerned about? How does your organisation go about identifying its potential exposure to these risks? What strategies and tactics have you adopted to mitigate them? And – perhaps most importantly – what negative impact, if any, have disruptions on both the supply and demand sides had on your business?
SUPPLY SHORTAGES TOP THE RISK LIST
Asked about risks they are concerned about in the next 12 months, survey respondents cite shortages of raw materials and components as the most significant. A third say they are “very concerned”
Neither
Somewhat concerned
Very concerned
Note: Figures may not add up to 100 because of rounding
31
% of respondents n=1,312
In a volatile and uncertain global economy it is no surprise that the risk of supply shortages should be front of mind for supply chain executives.
Strong demand in fast-developing countries such as China in recent years has placed enormous strain on the supplies of some commodities, such as steel, although there are signs that these pressures are easing as growth in these emerging markets slows. And, of course, supply shortages are also a function of natural disasters and manmade incidents such as fires and strikes. Last year’s events in Japan and Thailand halted production at many factories and led to shortages of items such as lithium ion batteries, LCD displays, automotive components and food products.
For John Haydon, chief supply officer at electronics giant Philips, these events exposed the fact that few companies really understand the lower tiers of their supply chains (suppliers at levels 2, 3 and 4). In Philips’ case, he explains, the impact of Japan’s earthquake and tsunami was much greater than might have been expected by looking at the sourcing data – just $50 million out of his $14 billion annual procurement budget spent directly with Japanese tier 1 suppliers.
Understanding where suppliers are sourcing their components and raw materials is one area where
CSCOs need to drill deeper, says Haydon. But so too is knowing which other major customers your suppliers are serving, and ideally which are likely to get the highest priority in the event of supply shortages.
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

RISK MANAGEMENT
Incidents affecting supplier facilities are third and fourth in our risk ranking overall, behind shipping disruptions, with more than two-thirds of respondents expressing concern about the potential impact these could have on their value chains. The financial failure of critical suppliers
– an issue that took centre stage for many companies when the 2008-09 recession hit – completes the top 5. As with supply shortages, respondents working in hi-tech firms have higher-than-average concerns about all of these risks, while those in retail and chemicals appear to be the least worried. And those located in
Asia express higher levels of concern than their counterparts in either Europe or North America.
The risks that most exercise CSCOs after supply shortages, however, are legal/regulatory issues and counterfeit products. More than a quarter are very concerned about both. Perhaps not surprisingly, given their push into emerging market countries such as China and growing competition from local rivals, it is consumer goods, healthcare and pharmaceutical firms that express the greatest concerns both about their products being ripped off and red tape negatively impacting their ability to compete effectively.
At the other end of the spectrum, geopolitical issues (including war and terrorist attacks) generate the least concern. But this is a relative statement – just under half (46%) of respondents are concerned to some extent, compared with just under a quarter who are not concerned and a third who are neutral. And this is one of only two types of risk (the other being supplier ethical standards) that dip below the 50% mark. So there are many sources of risk that organisations need to mitigate and manage to ensure that their value chains function as smoothly as possible.
MITIGATING RISK THROUGH SUPPLIER
DIALOGUE
So what techniques are companies using to identify potential risks? Figure 29 shows that better/more frequent communication with suppliers is top of the list, with two-thirds using this as a channel. The risk of critical suppliers going out of business in the past few years has prompted many customers to step up their dialogue, rather than rely on classic sources of information such as financial statements, which can often be woefully out of date. Alongside this, the growth of supplier relationship management
(SRM) programmes has encouraged business partners to share and discuss risk issues more openly – a trend that is to be applauded.
However, the average hides some wide disparities between industry sectors and regions. Seven out of 10 respondents in hi-tech firms say they tap suppliers for information, compared with just a quarter of those in retail. And 73% based in the Americas take this approach, versus just 55% in Asia and Australia (EMEA is in between on
63%). Retailers also rely more heavily on intuition or management insight – a more traditional approach – than other sectors, with 43% using it compared with just 27% in logistics/distribution and chemicals firms, for example.
Scott Murphy, vice-president of global supply chain at US-based retailer Dunkin’ Donuts, explains this by pointing out that intuition is often good enough to answer key questions such as “will these donuts rise enough” or “will they
Figure 29: Methods for identifying potential risks
What techniques does your company use to identify its exposure to potential supply or demand chain risks?
Better/more frequent communication with suppliers
65
Supply chain risk mapping
63
Business impact analysis 62
Scenario planning 54
Better/more frequent communication with customers
46
Third-party research / intelligence 41
Quantified risk analysis 40
Intuition or management insight 36
Failure mode & effect analysis 34
Hazard & operability studies 23
Sentiment analysis (i.e., monitoring social media)
11
% of respondents n=1,289
Last year’s disasters in
Japan and
Thailand exposed the fact that few companies really understand the lower tiers of their supply chains.
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
37

RISK MANAGEMENT
9
3
2
3
6
3
3
6
6
6
7
7
7
Dual or multiple sourcing of key materials/components/products
77
Conduct regular audits of key suppliers 66
Hold safety stocks of key materials/ components/products
Implement performance-based contracts with key suppliers
Evaluate business continuity plans of key suppliers
Implement & test business continuity plans internally
Establish risk registers/reporting/ governance
65
49
47
44
35
Expand into new/undeveloped markets
33
Diversify customer base/product range
Maintain spare in-house production capacity
Negotiate mutual aid contingency plans
(e.g., with competitors, distributors) to maintain supply in a crisis situation
Purchase supply chain risk insurance
33
32
20
13 look good on our shelves”? Whereas for hi-tech firms, he suggests, a greater level of precision is generally required.
market price. “We have to be able to react much quicker than in the past,” he says.
The other primary methods of identifying risk are the more formal and structured tools of supply chain risk mapping (63% of respondents), business impact analysis (62%) and scenario planning (54%). Supply chain risk mapping – a visual approach to pinpointing key geographic and relationship dependencies – is most popular among healthcare and pharmaceutical firms; while business impact analysis (a method of differentiating critical and non-critical activities) and scenario planning (a long-term, strategic assessment of various “what ifs?”) are most widely used by CPG firms and least used by industrial firms, according to our data.
A much newer method of identifying risks before they happen (and potentially inflict damage) is sentiment analysis. This uses software to track and assess postings made on social networks such as
Twitter and Facebook according to the strength of positive or negative views expressed. In theory, this could be a useful early warning signal in terms of detecting, say, troubled customers or suppliers, politically unstable hotspots or the likelihood of new regulations becoming law.
Dunkin’ Donuts started using scenario planning this year, explains Murphy, as a response to what he describes as “a heightened sense of priority” on risk management, and commodity price volatility in particular. Scenarios considered so far include the impact of a massive drought across the US – work that has proved useful given the wheat shortages experienced there this past summer, which prompted a 43% rise in the spot
As Figure 29 shows, just 11% of our survey respondents say they are using sentiment analysis at present. Companies operating in the businessto-consumer realm – notably, those manufacturing food and beverages, household and personal care products, and hi-tech gadgets – are more likely to be using sentiment analysis to identify risks than those in the business-to-business domain.
This can be partly explained by the fact that these firms, their products and their supply chains are the subject of more extensive discussion in social media forums – and hence there is a larger and more frequently updated body of data to analyse.
Figure 30: Risk management approaches
What strategies and tactics has your company adopted to mitigate the impact of potential supply or demand chain risks?
25
However, as we saw in the earlier section on digital consumers and e-commerce, practitioners expect the usefulness of social media to grow significantly in the next few years, including in
B2B supply chains. Almost half of respondents in the industrial sector believe that social media will provide advance warning of potential supply disruptions, for example, compared with the allsector average of 41%. So the likelihood is that tools such as sentiment analysis will become much more widely used in future.
% of respondents n=1,285
PUTTING FEWER EGGS IN THE
SOURCING BASKET
Getting better visibility of potential risks and assessing their significance is a vital component of any risk management initiative. But the debate then becomes one of which strategies and tactics
38 16
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
31
15

RISK MANAGEMENT to deploy in an effort to mitigate their likely impact. Our research shows that supply-side levers are the most widely used. Chief among these by some margin is dual or multi-sourcing of key materials, components and products – a strategy favoured by more than three-quarters of respondents (see Figure 30).
Set against a backdrop of fears about supply shortages and the financial health of key suppliers, this is an understandable response, albeit one that is not always as carefully planned as it ought to be (witness the hi-tech firms affected by the Thai floods last year, for example, which discovered that their alternative suppliers were based in the same geographic area).
Here, the evidence from our survey is pretty unequivocal: disruptions usually result in damage of one kind or another. Just 15-16% say their organisations have not been affected during the past two years. Loss of revenue is the most significant consequence – almost half of respondents say their organisations have suffered this as a result of both supply-side and demand-side disruptions. Lower profits are the second most likely effect of the latter, with 39% reporting a negative impact (see Figure 31).
Companies in the chemicals sector are the most likely to use dual or multi-sourcing to mitigate risk, with 94% doing so. The same is true on holding safety stocks – the third most adopted tactic – where 82% of chemicals practitioners say they do this compared with an all-sector average of 65%. Chemicals firms also use regular audits of key suppliers more often than most sectors, albeit slightly less than those in healthcare, pharmaceuticals and food & beverages.
On these two key measures of financial performance, the chemicals firms again top the list of affected sectors. Almost 6 out of 10 report a negative impact on sales revenue from both supply-side and demand-side disruptions, while more than 4 out of 10 say profits have been hit.
On the supplier side, meanwhile, the second major consequence of disruptive events (at
44%, just one percentage point behind loss of revenue) is delays to new products, projects or growth plans. Almost half of respondents in the industrial sector say their companies have
Interestingly, the chemicals sector also leads the use of demand-side levers, in terms of diversifying their customer base and product range, and expanding into new markets. This is no doubt due in part to the significant level of demand volatility and business uncertainty that has characterised this sector of late. But the fact that chemicals companies appear to be using a wide range of proactive tools (and just 3% rely on the fallback option of risk insurance) may also be a response to the damage they have suffered as a result of risks becoming reality.
“Chief supply chain officers need a more structured and disciplined approach to managing risk,” says Philips CSCO John Haydon. “Risk will continue to move up our agenda and you’ve got to be on top of your game.”
THE FINANCIAL CONSEQUENCES OF
DISRUPTION
Figure 31: The impact of disruptions
Which of the following consequences, if any, has your company suffered during the past two years as a direct result of supply-side and/or demand-side disruptions?
Loss of sales/revenue 45
Lower profits
Delays to new projects/product introduction/growth plans
35
62
44
Loss of customers
Higher cost of capital
19
41
27
Damage to image, reputation or brand
Lower share price
19
34
14
Failure to meet legal or regulatory requirements
13 8
16
19
14
33
The likelihood is that newer tools for identifying and monitoring risk, such as sentiment analysis, will become much more widely used in future.
39
28
47
Supply-side disruption
Demand-side disruption
None 16 15 % of respondents n=1,240
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
39

RISK MANAGEMENT been affected by this, compared with less than a third of those in logistics and distribution. But the latter’s good fortune here is counterbalanced by the fact that a higher than average proportion
(39%) say they have lost customers as a result of demand-side disruptions.
Although participants were not asked to put hard numbers against these losses, it is fair to assume that, with half of the sample working for companies with more than $5 billion in annual turnover, they are not trivial.
One other observation worth making is that, despite all the headlines they generate, less than a fifth of survey respondents say their organisations have suffered damage to their brand or reputation in the past two years. Those in healthcare and pharmaceutical firms top the sector list, with
27% saying supply-side disruptions have had a negative impact. Counterfeit products are a particular problem, which explains why concern about this type of risk is highest in these sectors, as we saw earlier in this section. The World Health
Organisation reckons that in some markets half of all the drugs sold are fakes.
The financial knock-on effects of this are significant – estimates put the losses to established pharmaceutical companies in the tens of billions of dollars a year. But other examples such as
BP with the Gulf of Mexico oil spill or, more recently, the security firm G4S’s failure to provide sufficient personnel for the Olympic Games in
London (for which it has already taken an $80 million charge) serve as reminders that a failure to adequately manage risk can have devastating consequences. And supply chain professionals are on the front line.
40
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

For the second straight year our research has probed the topic of talent management in supply chain. Concern persists among senior leaders about the gap between the amount and type of skill needed to operate today’s supply chain and what is available in the market. In last year’s survey we looked at which associations offered valuable skill development (APICS – the Association for
Operations Management – the Supply Chain
Council and the Institute for Supply Management were top), which universities provided strong recruits (Stanford, MIT and Michigan State led) and which consulting firms’ alumni were worth hiring (Accenture, McKinsey). Most, however, agreed that new hires from industry were best qualified overall and this means poaching talent from each other. board. New questions this year were designed to better understand the talent management issue globally, including a specific question on staffing concerns in China as well as country-bycountry assessments of “best value for money” and “biggest risk” talent markets. The data casts doubt on the oversimplified notion of low-cost country sourcing as a sure bet to cut costs. Talent management in the global supply chain of 2012 is more complex and subtle than ever.
TALENT CHALLENGES ARE BECOMING
MORE SEVERE
Another topic we studied last year was what specific types of skill were most important to the job. Traditional disciplines such as planning
(85% consider this essential), logistics (77%) and sourcing (69%) were deemed most important.
Many, however, also considered a number of enabling skills to be nearly as critical (performance management was essential to 81% and change management to 76%). Our Executive Advisory
Board felt that much of this information was unlikely to change significantly from one year to the next and so these questions were not asked in 2012.
Building and managing a team in today’s global supply chain occupies a huge share of senior leaders’ time and accounts for much of their angst. The problem is not as simple as plugging brains into the right slots and letting them run.
Compared to building a sales team, for instance, which generally operates as a collection of individual producers supported by a common infrastructure, supply chain organisations are deeply interdependent, with each function (plan, source, make, deliver) affecting the success of all the others. To make matters worse, most young people entering careers still have little awareness of supply chain as a profession.
Figure 32: Knowledge worker challenges
The takeaway then, which we assume remains valid as a basis for planning now, is that technical supply chain skills are not enough.
Talent requirements include many of the same business skills needed to succeed in roles such as sales or finance. Supply chain does not exist merely to serve the business, but instead is integral to the business.
For 2012 we repeated a couple of questions from
2011 to begin developing a time series view. The repeat questions were around what elements of talent management are most challenging and what hurts most when talented people leave. As we’ll see below, the data for 2012 shows some worsening of the talent problem across the
Finding talent
Hiring talent
Career progression
Retaining talent
Developing talent
Relocating talent^
66
66
66
50
83
62
77
50
63
50
55
Measuring talent
47
40
% of respondents saying somewhat/extremely challenging
^Not included in 2011 n=1,302
Technical supply chain skills are not enough. Talent requirements include many of the same business skills needed to succeed in roles such as sales or finance.
2012
2011
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
41

TALENT MANAGEMENT
4.50
Across the lifecycle of talent management much of the pain is still at the front end – finding and hiring talent. These tasks have gotten substantially tougher since last year, now ranking decisively as the top two problems leaders face
(see Figure 32). Also more challenging in 2012 than in 2011 are retaining talent, developing skills among existing staff, and even measuring and differentiating talent among staff.
effort from the top to cultivate future leaders.
Career progression is especially susceptible to committed effort by the senior supply chain executives who care about retaining their best people and are willing to lay out the details of how to get ahead. Leadership here at least is already making a difference.
It is likely that improving economic conditions have contributed to a tightening in the talent market for supply chain roles over the past year. Considering that global economic growth remains stuck in a relatively low gear, however, it should be worrying that by an overwhelming
17:1 ratio our 1,385 survey participants feel that finding talent is very challenging. What happens when business starts to boom again?
When data for this question are cut by industry we see little variation in the rank order of which talent management tasks are most challenging.
Food & beverage respondents seem to feel the greatest pain in finding talent, perhaps because of the increasing focus in that sector on food safety compliance. In fact, the Coca-Cola
Company recently partnered with Michigan
State University specifically to improve its capabilities here.
The only area in which we saw meaningful improvement from last year was “offering staff a compelling career progression” – the top pain point in last year’s survey. Although two-thirds of respondents in both 2011 and 2012 say this is challenging, the proportion saying “extremely challenging” fell from 25% to 18% year on year. This shift probably reflects a concerted
Figure 33: Talent management challenges by industry
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
The data also shows a somewhat surprising result in hi tech where finding talent, although still the top overall challenge, is actually perceived to be less severe than in other sectors. Anecdotal evidence suggests that talent searches in hi tech are advantaged somewhat by an active network of existing professionals who know who to ask for referrals. Also noteworthy is the high score retailers give to the challenge of offering a compelling career progression. Other research
SCM World has conducted in the past year may shed some light here, as it appears this sector is still wrestling with how supply chain interacts with other retail-specific functions such as merchandising and store operations.
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
Chemicals Healthcare
& Pharma
Food &
Beverage
Industrial Hi Tech
Finding talent
Hiring talent
Developing talent
Relocating talent
CPG
Measuring talent
Career progression
Logistics &
Distribution
Retail
Retaining talent n=1,302
Viewing talent management challenges by geography shows that finding talent is problematic everywhere, but that retaining it is especially difficult in Asia. Much of the poaching that goes on appears to happen in Asia. This finding confirms other data in this survey which indicates that talent markets in the region, especially China, are rich with technical and even business knowledge, but that they are very high risk and, for many, represent worse value for money than traditional, high-cost labour markets, especially the United States.
42
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

TALENT MANAGEMENT
VOLATILE TALENT MARKETS ARE
HURTING OPERATIONS MORE IN 2012
THAN 2011
The problems associated with losing talented people start with the disruption of operations, but may include lasting impacts arising from deficits created around knowhow – both process and product. In aggregate, just over half of respondents in 2011 said retention of talent was either “somewhat” or “extremely” challenging. In 2012, this has risen to twothirds. The ratio of those who have a retention problem against those who don’t is now 6:1, proving that recruiting talent from competitors is exploding. Accordingly, the level of concern associated with lost talent has also risen in the past year.
fewer concerns about product IP, probably reflecting the relative lack of manufacturing in the business for most. Hi-tech businesses suffer most overall from all worries borne of lost talent, while CPG suffers least. Hi tech’s volatile environment and active talent market likely explain the sector’s problems, while
CPG supply chains may benefit from a stable and sophisticated view of the function at the board level. Leading CPG companies (Procter
& Gamble, Unilever, PepsiCo, Clorox, etc) are relatively strategic in their approach to supply chain management and thus may have more mature succession and contingency planning already in place.
In 2011 the top concern overall was lost process intellectual property. A third of all respondents last year were “very concerned” about this problem and nearly 70% were at least “somewhat concerned” – more than any other issue. This year the emphasis has clearly shifted toward concerns about near-term impacts, especially
“cost of transition to replacement” (two-thirds are at least somewhat concerned about this).
Even “lost production”, which is the least vexing concern overall, nonetheless saw a big jump from
2011 to 2012 (see Figure 35).
By geography, our data again shows higher levels of concern where growth is fastest – Asia, followed by the Americas, and last in Europe
(see Figure 36). Europe probably also reflects some degree of greater labour market stability, supported in part by legal structures and in part by cultural traditions. A number of respondents also specified other concerns when talent is lost including negative impacts on the company’s reputation, lost or damaged relationships with key suppliers and adverse effects on morale among remaining staff.
Figure 34: Talent management challenges by location
These results could reflect an improved economy and less tolerance for production disruptions, but considering that we are nowhere near booming globally, one wonders whether such shortterm impacts could become serious problems in the next two to three years. Talent retention initiatives may be worth starting now before the pressure builds.
Pain felt when talent is lost viewed by industry confirms the same rank order importance across all sectors. Chemicals companies notably fear production losses less than other industries, probably because of the asset-intensive manufacturing process. Retail has substantially
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
4.00
3.50
3.00
Finding talent
EMEA
In 2011, just over half of respondents said retention of talent was
‘somewhat’ or ‘extremely’ challenging. In
2012, this has risen to twothirds.
Hiring talent
Developing talent
Relocating talent
Measuring talent
Career progression
Retaining talent
APAC Americas n=1,302
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
43

TALENT MANAGEMENT
The biggest challenges with knowledge workers in China reflect a tight pool for talent.
The top concern is rising costs, closely followed by poor retention.
Figure 35: Impact of lost talent
TALENT IN CHINA: NO LONGER A ‘LOW
COST’ COUNTRY
In preparing this year’s survey, substantial input from our Executive Advisory Board drove us to look at the talent question specific to geographies known to be problematic. Chief among these, of course, is China. In last year’s survey an entire section was dedicated to globalisation and emerging markets. One of the most obvious spikes in the data was in the degree to which supply chain executives around the world rely on China for sourcing, manufacturing and even product design. What started many years ago as a move to tap cheap labour has since become a deeply symbiotic relationship between brand owners, retailers and other product creators and the technically sophisticated supply base of
China.
These emerging markets are also now essential sources of demand and growth, meaning that
“low-cost country sourcing” has nearly run its course. Markets are global for money, products and talent and China is at the centre of it all.
To test the question of whether talent problems are different here we asked respondents to rank their top concerns about knowledge workers in
China. At the bottom of the list overall were “lack of technical skills” and “lack of business skills”.
Where once quality concerns, language barriers and competence may have been problematic it appears these issues are fading. To be fair, though, the ratio of respondents who were concerned against those who are unconcerned is still at least 2:1 in these areas, meaning that knowledge workers in China are not yet seen as the equal of those in, say, the United States or Germany (more of which below). But this is by no means the biggest talent challenge facing supply chain leaders.
The biggest challenges with knowledge workers in China instead reflect a tight pool for talent.
The top concern, and by a ratio of 6:1, is rising costs, followed closely by poor retention (see
Figure 38). The dynamic of the market for talent in China appears to be heavily influenced by poaching. Our data does not so much point to a limited talent pool (ranked joint third overall as a concern) as to a talent pool made up of people willing to be lured away from rivals for more money. As we’ll see below, this may translate into substantial risk for businesses which suffer high short-term costs of transition. In other words, betting on building a great, long-term supply chain team in China may not be so smart.
Figure 36: Impact of lost talent by location
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
4.00
Cost of transition
Lost process IP
Lost product IP
Lost production
75
61
66
69
54
47
49
31
% of respondents n=1,227
2012
2011
3.50
3.00
2.50
Lost production Lost process IP
EMEA APAC Americas n=1,294
Cost of transition
44
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
2011
TALENT MANAGEMENT
As we saw earlier in this section, supply chain leaders consider the issue of relocating talent internationally, to countries such as China or
Mexico, to be a relatively low-level concern.
Anecdotal evidence, for instance from PC maker
Lenovo, suggests that global leadership of a supply chain organisation can be assembled from all over the world, even on a Chinese foundation.
China may be essential to most global supply chain strategic designs, but it need not, and probably should not, be strictly Chinese.
Industry cuts of the data confirm the overall rankings of where concerns are highest (see
Figure 39). Hi tech predictably stands out as feeling these cost and retention problems worst, although industrial and chemicals businesses are not far behind. CPG and food & beverage are less exposed as naturally regional or even country-based supply chains, but retail, whose
China sourcing strategies (think Wal-Mart) initiated much of the rush to low-cost country sourcing, seems to see a serious cost problem.
BANG FOR BUCK IN SUPPLY CHAIN
TALENT? TRY THE US OR GERMANY
In an effort to understand how talent is valued by supply chain leaders holistically we asked two simple questions: where is the “best value for money” and where is the “biggest risk”?
These questions were structured with a long list of countries to choose from and the instruction to rank the top five against each of the criteria.
No explicit definition was offered for either
“best value for money” or “biggest risk”, leaving respondents to use their judgment in making selections.
The results were somewhat surprising. We used an inverse point system (five points for a
#1 rank, one point for a #5 rank) to grade the overall “best value” of each country included and found, by a wide margin, that the United
States came out on top. In part this must reflect the size of the country, since the number of times the US was ranked anywhere was highest overall (880 respondents ranked the
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
Figure 37: Impact of lost talent by sector
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
4.00
3.50
3.00
2.50
Chemical Healthcare
& Pharma
Food &
Beverage
Industrial Hi Tech CPG
Lost production
Lost process IP
Lost product IP
Cost of transition n=1,294
Logistics
& Distrib
Retail
Figure 38: Concerns about knowledge workers in China
Rising costs
4 8
Poor retention
4 9 9 6
25 27
Lack of business skills
5 10 10 9 27
Limited talent pool
5 11 14 9
33
Lack of technical skills
8 11 12 12 31 34
Other
17
32
% of respondents
17
4
Not at all concerned
Somewhat unconcerned
31
36
45
33
50
43
44
Neither
Somewhat concerned
35
42 32
30
28
10
22 15
14
9
7
10
Very concerned n=1,234
Note: Figures may not add up to
100 because of rounding
45

TALENT MANAGEMENT
46
Risk-averse supply chain leaders would be wise to scrutinise plans for new hiring in China before putting too many eggs in one basket.
US somewhere between #1 and #5). However, nearly as many (749) ranked China somewhere on the spectrum, but proportionally far more put it further down. Recalling data from last year’s survey also may help with context – 37% of respondents listed China as their number one sourcing location against only 20% who listed the US. In other words, the ranking does not only reflect size, but does capture at least some variation in perceived value.
offs accordingly. It also seems that the rising costs in China referred to above have cut into its appeal. Given time series data on this question one might begin to see advance warning of geographies where talent bargains can be found, as well as those less worthy of new investment in permanent staff.
TALENT RISK: CHINA’S DARK SIDE
After the US, Germany, India and China all saw substantial confidence from our respondents in terms of value for money. In the case of
Germany, few would argue that these results reflect low costs. German employees are notoriously difficult to fire and far from low paid.
They do, however, have a reputation for quality and reliability that appears to more than justify the higher costs. India, in contrast, scored worse than both China and Brazil in last year’s survey questions about risk and reliability, suggesting that costs there are low enough to put up with a few mishaps.
The results of our “value for money” question show China still scores well as a place to find talent, despite abundant evidence that costs are rising fast and in some regions (Shanghai, for instance) are no longer at all low. Where Chinese talent markets do pose a problem, however, is in terms of risk. Data discussed above shows a volatile market in which employers (or customers of closely tied contract manufacturers) must be vigilant about threats employees pose to business continuity, cost and intellectual property.
The implications of this data should not be over-interpreted. It does appear that supply chain leaders see good value for money in highcost countries and are able to weigh the trade-
Turning to the top five “biggest risk” talent markets (where risk is not defined, but instead is meant to encompass any and all worries supply chain leaders have about talent in any given geography), the data in aggregate shows overwhelmingly that our respondents rank China as the riskiest. Again, scale matters – the US is the
Figure 39: Concerns about knowledge workers in China by sector
4.50
*1-5 scale, where above 3.00 = challenging
4.00
3.50
3.00
4
2.50
Chemicals Healthcare
& Pharma
Food &
Beverage
Industrial Hi Tech
Limited talent pool
Lack of technical skills
Lack of business skills
Poor retention
CPG
Rising costs n=1,172
Logistics &
Distribution
Retail
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

TALENT MANAGEMENT second biggest risk market with 560 individual respondents ranking it as one of their top five.
For comparison, however, consider that whereas
166 individuals ranked the US as the number one biggest risk, 444 chose China for this distinction.
Risk-averse supply chain leaders would be wise to scrutinise plans for new hiring in China before putting too many eggs in one basket.
Looking for stable, reliable talent pools in supply chain is one way to diversify away from some risk. Many global supply chain organisations are currently in the process of regionalising their structures. Often the primary goal is proximity to customers, but an added benefit is limitation of risk. Among the most appealing in terms of low talent risk is Germany, which is ninth overall on the risk dimension but second overall on value for money. The reverse is true for Mexico, which ranks near the bottom overall on value for money but near the top for risk.
It seems that in much the same way that risk mitigation strategies call for dual or multisourcing of supply, so too might organisational strategy benefit from a diverse talent pool.
Figure 40: Best value talent markets
US
2.61
Germany
India
2.13
2.12
2.11
China
UK
Singapore
Brazil
Eastern Europe
Japan
Taiwan
Mexico
1.59
1.58
1.55
Netherlands
France
South Korea
1.41
1.38
2.01
1.89
1.82
1.77
1.60
Figure 41: Biggest risk talent markets
UK
Eastern Europe
Taiwan
Germany
Singapore
France
Japan
South Korea
Netherlands
China
US
India
Brazil
Mexico
2.98
2.11
2.05
2.03
1.98
1.74
1.72
1.72
1.69
1.66
1.60
1.59
1.58
1.22
Weighted average rating
(1-5, where 5=highest value) n=1,172
Weighted average rating
(1-5, where 5=highest value) n=1,108
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
47

48
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

“Be careful what you wish for, because you just might get it,” goes an old saying. This little bit of wisdom says a lot about the times as captured in the 1,385 survey responses we tallied for this year’s
Chief Supply Chain Officer Survey.
For a discipline accustomed to feeling underappreciated, the results of this year’s survey promise great things for the future. Senior business leadership appears not only to grasp the role supply chain plays in making money, but also increasingly to expect direct and unique contributions to everything from new product development to brand equity. The “new news” includes heightened awareness of the need for risk management as a core duty of the supply chain and a tightening of the vice on overall social and environmental responsibility. Where once such matters were seen as frills worthy of attention only after every box had been shipped and every penny had been pinched, now it seems the boss links these things to his or her personal success.
If accountability is on the rise, so too are the drivers of productivity in supply chain. Digital demand looks ready to force tremendous new levels of complexity upstream in the supply chain as consumers’ expectations inflate. The potential for deeper demand sensing and management implied with this digital revolution is exciting. Unfortunately, it appears that the component and material supply base may find itself playing catch-up in terms of manufacturing and distribution agility.
Perhaps most important, the deepening understanding of how supply chain operations pull specific levers to impact customers and profits means that innovation is now a necessity. Far from merely enabling the business, supply chain in many organisations today extends the envelope of competitive strategy with new business models or previously unimagined levels of performance.
A damper on this otherwise rosy outlook for the supply chain profession is, ironically, our own human capital. Finding and managing talent has been a sore point for some time now, but this year’s data suggests the problem is worsening. At one level it is apparent that global supply chain no longer means low-cost country sourcing with all the brains at headquarters. At another level it is clear that dependencies on key people have become too important. The bigger, more strategic role of supply chain seems to rest on too few shoulders, leaving organisations with less resilience than they need.
Looking ahead, supply chain strategists may feel an urgent need to consolidate some of the organisational power that has built up under the CSCO title before reaching for more. Expectations of our collective ability to handle the risks and responsibilities now assigned to supply chain could quickly outrun our skills. Credibility at the board level takes a long time to earn, but it could be lost quickly.
Supply chain strategists may feel an urgent need to consolidate some of the organisational power that has built up under the CSCO title before reaching for more.
49
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

50
Hi Tech 25
CPG 18
Industrial
Healthcare &
Pharmaceutical
Logistics &
Distribution
Food &
Beverage
Chemicals
10
8
7
7
5
Retail
Media &
Telecommunications
Professional Services
4
3
3
Utilities & Energy 2
Automotive
Agriculture & Mining
Aerospace & Defence
Fabric & Apparel
Construction &
Engineering
Software
1
1
1
Paper & Packaging 1
2
2
1
This is the third annual Chief Supply Chain
Officer Report published by SCM World.
Invitations to complete an online survey were sent to corporate members of SCM
World’s global community and to other supply chain, procurement, operations and relevant practitioners on our database in July 2012. In total, 1,385 completed responses were received during the two-week survey period and the key demographics of this sample are as follows.
Location: An equal number of respondents are based in the
Americas and EMEA, with just under a quarter located in the
Asia-Pacific region.
1
38
Europe, Middle
East & Africa
Asia & Australia 38
North & South
America
Rest of the World Industry sector: Hi-tech, consumer goods and industrial firms drew the largest number of respondents. The healthcare/pharmaceutical, logistics and distribution, food and beverage, chemicals and retail sectors also each had at least 50 respondents and have been included in sectorspecific analysis throughout this report.
23
% of respondents n=1,385
Company size: In terms of revenue, half of the respondents work for companies with more than $5bn in annual sales, with another fifth in the $1bn-5bn bracket. Just under a fifth of the sample did not disclose this information.
% of respondents n=1,385
Job function: Almost half of respondents work in supply chain, with 13% each in procurement and operations. Just under a tenth are general managers.
25
31
Under $1bn
$1bn-$5bn
$5bn-$10bn
$10bn-$25bn
$25bn+
17
19
8
% of respondents n=1,127
Job level: Four out of 10 respondents are at senior executive, vice president or director level, with just under half at manager or head of department level.
14
8
Supply Chain
47
Operations
Procurement
General Management
Manufacturing/
Production
Engineering
Transport &
Distribution
Quality Assurance
9
2
1
6
2
13
13
Finance
IT/IS/Technology
Other
1
1
3
% of respondents n=1,385
47
SVP/EVP/Board
VP/Director
Manager/Head
Other
32
% of respondents n=1,385
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012

SCM World, a RaptureWorld company, is the leading global community and think-tank for senior level supply chain executives. Hosting a dynamic and interactive annual programme of end-user and academic-led webinars, events and research projects for its members, SCM World is the de-facto benchmark for forward-thinking supply chain leaders and their global teams to stay current through cutting-edge content. Organisations from across multiple industry verticals use SCM World to further enhance supply chain learning and development, including the likes of HP, Nestlé, Tyco, RIM, Nike,
GlaxoSmithKline, Cisco, Schneider Electric, Shell, Motorola, The Dow Chemical Co, BASF, Applied
Materials and many more.
www.scmworld.com
Contact:
Geraint John
Senior Vice President, Research
+44 (0) 20 7357 8321 geraint.john@scmworld.com
REPORT SPONSOR
E2open is a leading provider of cloud-based, on-demand solutions enabling enterprises to procure, manufacture, sell, and distribute products more efficiently through collaborative execution across global trading networks. Brand owners use E2open solutions to gain visibility into and control over their trading networks through the real-time information, integrated business processes, and advanced analytics that E2open provides. E2open customers include Celestica, Cisco, Dell, Hitachi, IBM,
L’Oréal, LSI, Motorola, Seagate, and Vodafone. E2open is headquartered in Foster City, California with operations worldwide. For more information, visit e2open.com.
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012
51

52
THE CHIEF SUPPLY CHAIN OFFICER REPORT 2012