Chapter 9 Negotiaton.pptx

Chapter 9
Managing the global pipeline

IMPORTANT
DATES
MIDTERM: December 1 (Fri)
ASSSIGNMENTS: December
4 (Mon)
FINAL EXAM: December 7
(Thurs)

Global brands and companies now dominate most markets. Over the last two decades there has been
a steady trend towards the worldwide marketing of products under a common brand umbrella –
whether it be Coca-Cola or Marlborough, IBM or Toyota. At the same time the global company has
revised its previously localized focus, manufacturing and marketing its products in individual
countries, and now instead will typically source on a worldwide basis for global production and
distribution.
The logic of the global company is clear: it seeks to grow its business by extending its markets whilst
at the same time seeking cost reduction through scale economies in purchasing and production and
through focused manufacturing and/or assembly operations.
However, whilst the logic of globalization is strong, we must recognize that it also presents certain
challenges. Firstly, world markets are not homogeneous, there is still a requirement for local variation
in many product categories. Secondly, unless there is a high level of co-ordination the complex
logistics of managing global supply chains may result in higher costs and extended lead times

These two challenges are related: on the one hand, how to offer local markets the variety they seek
whilst still gaining the advantage of standardized global production and, on the other, how to manage
the links in the global chain from sources of supply through to end user. There is a danger that some
global companies in their search for cost advantage may take too narrow a view of cost and only see
the purchasing or manufacturing cost reduction that may be achieved through using low-cost supply
sources. In reality it is a total cost trade-off where the costs of longer supply pipelines may outweigh
the production cost saving.

Trade-offs in global
logistics
Figure 9.1 illustrates some of the
potential cost trade-offs to be
considered in establishing the
extent to which a global strategy
for logistics will be cost-justified.
Clearly a key component of the
decision to go global must be the
service needs of the marketplace.
There is a danger that companies
might run the risk of sacrificing
service on the altar of cost
reduction through a failure to fully
understand the service needs of
individual markets.

The trend towards global organization of both manufacturing and marketing is highlighting the critical
importance of logistics and supply chain management as the keys to profitability. The complexity of
the logistics task appears to be increasing exponentially, influenced by such factors as the increasing
range of products, shorter product life cycles, marketplace growth and the number of supply/market
channels.
There is no doubting that the globalization of industrial activity has become a major issue in business.
Articles in the business press, seminars and academic symposia have all focused upon the emerging
global trend. The competitive pressures and challenges that have led to this upsurge of interest have
been well documented. What are less well understood are the implications of globalization for
operations management in general and specifically for logistics management.

At the outset it is important that we define the global business and recognize its distinctiveness from
an international or a multinational business. A global business is one that does more than simply
export. The global business will typically source its materials and components in more than one
country. Similarly it will often have multiple assembly or manufacturing locations geographically
dispersed. It will subsequently market its products worldwide. A classic example is provided by Nike –
the US-based sportswear company. The company outsources virtually 100 per cent of its shoe
production, for example, only retaining in-house manufacturing in the US of a few key components of
its patented Nike Air System. Nike’s basketball shoe, for example, is designed in the USA but
manufactured in South Korea and Indonesia from over 70 components supplied by companies in
Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Indonesia and the United States. The finished products are sold around
the world.

The trend towards globalization and offshore sourcing has been growing rapidly for several decades.
There has been a transformation from a world where most markets used to be served from local
sources to one where there is a growing worldwide interdependence of suppliers, manufacturers and
customers in what has truly become a ‘global village’.
Early commentators like Levitt1 saw the growth of global brands and talked in terms of the growing
convergence of customer preferences that would enable standardized products to be marketed in
similar fashion around the world. However, the reality of global marketing is often different, with
quite substantial differences in local requirements still very much in evidence. Thus, whilst the brand
may be global, the product may need certain customization to meet specific country needs, whether
it be left- or right-hand-drive cars or different TV transmission standards or local tastes. A good
example is Nescafé, the instant coffee made by Nestlé, which has over 200 slightly different
formulations to cater for preferences in taste country by country.

The trend towards globalization in the supply
chain
Over the last 50 years or so the growth in world trade has tended to outstrip growth in global gross
domestic product. In part this trend is driven by expanding demand in new markets, but the liberalization
of international trade through World Trade Organization (WTO) accords has also had a significant effect.
Once, companies established factories in overseas countries to manufacture products to meet local
demand. Now, with the reduction of trade barriers and the development of a global transportation
infrastructure, fewer factories can produce in larger quantities to meet global, rather than local, demand.
Paradoxically, as the barriers to global movement have come down so the sources of global competition
have increased. Newly emerging economies are building their own industries with global capabilities. At
the same time technological change and production efficiencies mean that most companies in most
industries are capable of producing in greater quantity at less cost. The result of all of this is that there is
now overcapacity in virtually every industry, meaning that competitive pressure is greater than ever
before.

chain
To remain competitive in this new global environment, companies will have to continually seek ways
in which costs can be lowered and service enhanced, meaning that supply chain efficiency and
effectiveness will become ever more critical.
In developing a global logistics strategy a number of issues arise which may require careful
consideration. In particular, what degree of centralization is appropriate in terms of management,
manufacturing and distribution, and how can the needs of local markets be met at the same time as
the achievement of economies of scale through standardization?
Three of the ways in which businesses have sought to implement their global logistics strategies have
been through focused factories, centralized inventories and postponement.

chain
Focused factories
The idea behind the focused factory is simple: by limiting the range and mix of products manufactured in a single
location the company can achieve considerable economies of scale. Typically the nationally oriented business
will have ‘local-forlocal’ production, meaning that each country’s factory will produce the full range of products
for sale in that country. On the other hand the global business will treat the world market as one market and will
rationalize its production so that the remaining factories produce fewer products in volumes capable of satisfying
perhaps the entire market.
One company that has moved in this direction is Mars. Their policy has been to simultaneously rationalize
production capacity by seeking to manage demand as a whole on at least a regional level and to concentrate
production by category, factory by factory. Hence M&Ms for sale in Moscow are likely to have been produced in
the United States. In a similar fashion, Heinz produces tomato ketchup for all of Europe from just three plants
and will switch production depending upon how local costs and demand conditions vary against exchange rate
fluctuations. A further example is provided by Procter & Gamble which manufactures its successful product
Pringles in just two plants to meet worldwide demand.

chain
Focused factories
Such strategies have become widespread as ‘global thinking’ becomes the dominant mindset.
However, a number of crucial logistics trade-offs may be overlooked in what might possibly be a too-
hasty search for low-cost producer status through greater economies of scale. The most obvious
trade-off is the effect on transport costs and delivery lead times. The costs of shipping products, often
of relatively low value, across greater distances may erode some or all of the production cost saving.
Similarly the longer lead times involved may need to be countered by local stock holding, again
possibly offsetting the production cost advantage.
Further problems of focused production may be encountered where the need for local packs exist,
e.g. with labelling in different languages or even different brand names and packages for the same
product. This problem might be overcome by ‘postponing’ the final packaging until closer to the
point-of-sale.

chain
Focused factories
Another issue is that created by customers ordering a variety of products from the same company on
a single order but which are now produced in a number of focused factories in different locations.
The solution here may be some type of transshipment or cross-dock operation where flows of goods
from diverse localities and origins are merged for onward delivery to the customer. Finally, what will
be the impact on production flexibility of the trend towards focused factories where volume and
economies of scale rule the day? Whilst these goals are not necessarily mutually incompatible it may
be that organizations that put low-cost production at the top of their list of priorities may be at risk in
markets where responsiveness and the ability to provide ‘variety’ are key success factors.

chain
Focused factories
In response to these issues a number of companies are questioning decisions that previously were thought
sound. For example, Sony used to manufacture digital cameras and camcorders in China, attracted by the lower
labor costs. However, they came to recognize that because life cycles were so short for these products, it was
better to bring the assembly back to Japan where the product design took place and, indeed, where most of the
components originated. Other high-tech companies are also looking again at their offshore production and
sourcing strategies for this same reason. Typically less than 10 per cent of a high-tech company’s costs are direct
labor. Hence the decision to source offshore, simply to save on labor costs, makes little sense if penalties are
incurred elsewhere in the supply chain.
All in all it would appear that the total logistics impact of focused production will be complex and significant. To
ensure that decisions are taken which are not suboptimal it will become even more important to undertake
detailed analysis based upon total system modelling and simulation prior to making commitments that may later
be regretted.

chain
Centralization of inventories
In the same way that the advent of globalization has encouraged companies to rationalize production
into fewer locations, so too has it led to a trend towards the centralization of inventories. Making use
of the well-known statistical fact that consolidating inventory into fewer locations can substantially
reduce total inventory requirement, organizations have been steadily closing national warehouses
and amalgamating them into regional distribution centers (RDCs) serving a much wider geographical
area.
For example, Philips has reduced its consumer electronics products warehouses in western Europe
from 22 to just four. Likewise Apple Computers replaced their 13 national warehouses with two
European RDCs. Similar examples can be found in just about every industry.

chain
Whilst the logic of centralization is sound, it is becoming increasingly recognized that there may be even greater gains to be had
by not physically centralizing the inventory but rather by locating it strategically near the customer or the point of production
but managing and controlling it centrally. This is the idea of ‘virtual’ or ‘electronic’ inventory. The idea is that by the use of
information the organization can achieve the same stock reduction that it would achieve through centralization whilst retaining
a greater flexibility by localizing inventory. At the same time the penalties of centralizing physical stock holding are reduced, i.e.
double handling, higher transport charges and possibly longer total pipelines.
One of the arguments for centralized inventory is that advantage can be taken of the ‘square root rule’. Whilst an
approximation, this rule of thumb provides an indication of the opportunity for inventory reduction that is possible through
holding inventory in fewer locations. The rule states that the reduction in total safety stock that can be expected through
reducing the number of stock locations is proportional to the square root of the number of stock locations before and after
rationalization. Thus if previously there were 25 stock locations and now there are only four then the overall reduction in
inventory would be in the ratio of 25 to 4 , or 5:2, i.e. a 60 per cent reduction.

chain
Many organizations are now recognizing the advantage of managing worldwide inventories on a
centralized basis. To do so successfully, however, requires an information system that can provide
complete visibility of demand from one end of the pipeline to another in as close to real time as
possible. Equally such centralized systems will typically lead to higher transport costs in that products
inevitably have to move greater distances and often high-cost air express will be necessary to ensure
short lead times for delivery to the customer. Xerox, in its management of its European spares
business, has demonstrated how great benefits can be derived by centralizing the control of
inventory and by using information systems and, in so doing, enabling a much higher service to its
engineers to be provided but with only half the total inventory. SKF is another company that for many
years has been driving down its European inventory of bearings whilst still improving service to its
customers. Again, the means to this remarkable achievement has been through a centralized
information system.

chain
Postponement and localization
Although the trend to global brands and products continues, it should be recognised that there are still
significant local differences in customer and consumer requirements. Even within a relatively compact market
like western Europe there are major differences in consumer tastes and, of course, languages. Hence there are a
large number of markets where standard, global products would not be successful. Take, for example, the
differences in preference for domestic appliances such as refrigerators and washing machines. Northern
Europeans prefer larger refrigerators because they shop once a week rather than daily, whilst southern
Europeans, shopping more frequently, prefer smaller ones. Similarly, Britons consume more frozen foods than
most other European countries and thus require more freezer space.
In the case of washing machines, there are differences in preference for top-loading versus front-loading
machines – in the UK almost all the machines purchased are front loaders whilst in France the reverse is true.

chain
How is it possible to reconcile the need to meet local requirements whilst seeking to organize logistics on a global basis? Ideally
organizations would like to achieve the benefits of standardization in terms of cost reduction whilst maximizing their marketing
success through localization.
One strategy that is increasingly being adopted is the idea of postponement discussed earlier in this book. Postponement, or
delayed configuration, is based on the principle of seeking to design products using common platforms, components or
modules but where the final assembly or customization does not take place until the final market destination and/or customer
requirement is known.
The advantages of the strategy of postponement are several. Firstly, inventory can be held at a generic level so that there will
be fewer stock keeping variants and hence less inventory in total. Secondly, because the inventory is generic, its flexibility is
greater, meaning that the same components, modules or platforms can be embodied in a variety of end products. Thirdly,
forecasting is easier at the generic level than at the level of the finished item. This last point is particularly relevant in global
markets where local forecasts will be less accurate than a forecast for worldwide volume. Furthermore the ability to customize
products locally means that a higher level of variety may be offered at lower total cost – this is the principle of ‘mass
customization’

chain
To take full advantage of the possibilities offered by postponement often requires a ‘design for
localization’ philosophy. Products and processes must be designed and engineered in such a way that
semi-finished product can be assembled, configured and finished to provide the highest level of
variety to customers based upon the smallest number of standard modules or components. In many
cases the final finishing will take place in the local market, perhaps at a distribution center, and,
increasingly, the physical activity outsourced to a third-party logistics service provider

Gaining visibility in the global pipeline
One of the features of global pipelines is that there is often a higher level of uncertainty about the
status of a shipment whilst in transit. This uncertainty is made worse by the many stages in a typical
global pipeline as a product flows from factory to port, from the port to its country of destination,
through customs clearance and so on until it finally reaches the point where it is required. Not
surprisingly there is a high degree of variation in these extended pipelines.
Shipping, consolidation and customs clearance all contribute to delays and variability in the end-to-
end lead time of global supply chains.

End-to-end lead-time
variability (days)
This is highlighted in the example
shown in Table 9.1. This can be a
major issue for companies as they
increasingly go global. It has the
consequence that local managers
tend to compensate for this
unreliability by over-ordering and
by building inventory buffers.

One emerging tool that could greatly improve the visibility across complex global supply chains is
supply chain event management.
Supply chain event management (SCEM) is the term given to the process of monitoring the planned
sequence of activities along a supply chain and the subsequent reporting of any divergence from that
plan. Ideally SCEM will also enable a proactive, even automatic, response to deviations from the plan.
The Internet can provide the means whereby SCEM reporting systems can link together even widely
dispersed partners in global supply chains. The use of XML communications across the web means
that even organizations with different information systems can be linked together. The key
requirement though is not technological, it is the willingness of the different entities in a supply chain
to work in a collaborative mode and to agree to share information

The progression to supply
chain event management
Supply chain event management
enables organizations to gain
visibility upstream and
downstream of their own
operations and to assume an
active rather than a passive
approach to supply chain risk.
Figure 9.2 shows the progression
from the traditional, limited scope
of supply chain visibility to the
intended goal of an ‘intelligent’
supply chain information system.

Event management software is now becoming available from a number of providers. The principles
underpinning event management are that ‘intelligent agents’ are created within the software that are
instructed to respond within pre-determined decision rules, e.g. upper and lower limits for inventory
levels at different stages in a supply chain. These agents monitor the critical stage in a process and
issue alerts when deviations from required performance occurs. The agents can also be instructed to
take corrective action where necessary, and they can identify trends and anomalies and report back
to supply chain managers on emerging situations that might require pre-emptive attention.
Whilst event management is primarily a tool for managing processes, its advantage is that it can look
across networks, thus enabling connected processes to be monitored and, if necessary, modified.
Clearly the complexity of most supply networks is such that in reality event management needs to be
restricted to the critical paths in that network. Critical paths might be typified by such features as:
long lead times to react to unplanned events, reliance on single-source suppliers, bottlenecks, etc.

Organizing for global logistics
As companies have extended their supply chains internationally they have been forced to confront the issue of how to
structure their global logistics organization. In their different ways these companies have moved towards the same conclusion:
effectiveness in global logistics can only be achieved through a greater element of centralization. This in many respects runs
counter to much of the conventional wisdom, which tends to argue that decision-making responsibility should be devolved and
decentralized at least to the strategic business unit level. This philosophy has manifested itself in many companies in the form
of strong local management, often with autonomous decision making at the country level. Good though this may be for
encouraging local initiatives, it tends to be dysfunctional when integrated global strategies are required.
Clearly there will still be many areas where local decision making will be preferable – for example, sales strategy and, possibly,
promotional and marketing communications strategy. Likewise the implementation of global strategy can still be adjusted to
take account of national differences and requirements.
How then can the appropriate balance of global versus local decision making be achieved in formulating and implementing
logistics strategy?
Because specific market environments and industry characteristics will differ from company to company it is dangerous to offer
all-embracing solutions.

However, a number of general principles are beginning to emerge:
• The strategic structuring and overall control of logistics flows must be centralized to achieve worldwide
optimization of costs.
• The control and management of customer service must be localized against the requirements of specific
markets to ensure competitive advantage is gained and maintained.
• As the trend towards outsourcing everything except core competencies increases then so does the need for
global co-ordination.
• A global logistics information system is the prerequisite for enabling the achievement of local service needs
whilst seeking global cost optimization.

Structure and control
If the potential trade-offs in rationalizing sourcing, production and distribution across national boundaries are to
be achieved then it is essential that a central decision-making structure for logistics is established. Many
companies that are active on an international basis find that they are constrained in their search for global
optimization by strongly entrenched local systems and structures. Only through centralized planning and co-
ordination of logistics can the organization hope to achieve the twin goals of cost minimization and service
maximization.
For example, location decisions are a basic determinant of profitability in international logistics. The decision on
where to manufacture, to assemble, to store, to transship and to consolidate can make the difference between
profit and loss. Because of international differences in basic factor costs and because of exchange rate
movements, location decisions are fundamental. Also these decisions tend to involve investment in fixed assets
in the form of facilities and equipment. Decisions taken today can therefore have a continuing impact over time
on the company’s financial and competitive position

Structure and control
As the trend towards global manufacturing continues, organizations will increasingly need to look at
location decisions through total cost analysis. The requirement there is for improved access to
activity-related costs such as manufacturing, transportation and handling. Accurate information on
inventory holding costs and the cost/benefit of postponement also becomes a key variable in location
decisions.
The opportunities for reducing costs and improving throughput efficiency by a reappraisal of the
global logistics network, and in particular manufacturing and inventory locations, can be substantial.
By their very nature, decisions on location in a global network can only be taken centrally.

Customer service management
Because local markets have their own specific characteristics and needs there is considerable
advantage to be achieved by shaping marketing strategies locally – albeit within overall global
guidelines. This is particularly true of customer service management where the opportunities for
tailoring service against individual customer requirements are great. The management of customer
service involves the monitoring of service needs as well as performance and extends to the
management of the entire order fulfilment process – from order through to delivery. Whilst order
fulfilment systems are increasingly global and centrally managed there will always remain the need to
have strong local customer service management.

Customer service management
Key account management (KAM) has become a widely adopted approach for managing the interfaces
between suppliers and their global customers. Because of the growing shift in the balance of power
in many industries, it is now a critical pre-requisite for commercial success that suppliers tailor their
service offerings to meet the requirements of individual customers. The purpose of key account
management in a global business is to ensure that all the resources of the supplier are harnessed to
deliver solutions that are specific to a particular customer. This contrasts with the ‘one size fits all’
approach to global customer service which typified many companies’ policies in the past.

Outsourcing and partnerships
As we have previously noted, one of the greatest changes in the global business today is the trend
towards outsourcing. Not just outsourcing the procurement of materials and components but also
outsourcing of services that traditionally have been provided in-house. The logic of this trend is that
the organization will increasingly focus on those activities in the value chain where it has a distinctive
advantage – the core competencies of the business – and everything else it will outsource. This
movement has been particularly evident in logistics where the provision of transport, warehousing
and inventory control is increasingly subcontracted to specialists or logistics partners.
To manage and control this network of partners and suppliers requires a blend of both central and
local involvement. The argument once again is that the strategic decisions need to be taken centrally,
with the monitoring and control of supplier performance and day-to-day liaison with logistics
partners being best managed at a local level.

Logistics information
The management of global logistics is in reality the management of information flows. The information system is
the mechanism whereby the complex flows of materials, parts, subassemblies and finished products can be
coordinated to achieve cost-effective service. Any organization with aspirations to global leadership is dependent
upon the visibility it can gain of materials flows, inventories and demand throughout the pipeline. Without the
ability to see down the pipeline into end-user markets, to read actual demand and subsequently to manage
replenishment in virtual real time, the system is doomed to depend upon inventory. To ‘substitute information
for inventory’ has become something of a cliché but it should be a prime objective nevertheless. Time lapses in
information flows are directly translated into inventory. The great advances that are being made in introducing
‘quick response’ logistics systems are all based upon information flow from the point of actual demand directly
into the supplier’s logistics and replenishment systems. On a global scale we typically find that the presence of
intervening inventories between the plant and the marketplace obscure the view of real demand. Hence the
need for information systems that can read demand at every level in the pipeline and provide the driving power
for a centrally controlled logistics system.

Thinking global, acting local
The implementation of global pipeline control is highly dependent upon the ability of the organization
to find the correct balance between central control and local management. It is unwise to be too
prescriptive but the experience that global organizations are gaining every day suggests that certain
tasks and functions lend themselves to central control and others to local management.
Much has been learned in the last 20 years or so about the opportunities for cost and service
enhancement through better management of logistics at a national level. Now organizations are
faced with applying those lessons on a much broader stage. As international competition becomes
more intense and as national barriers to trade gradually reduce, the era of the global business has
arrived. Increasingly the difference between success and failure in the global marketplace will be
determined not by the sophistication of product technology or even of marketing communications,
but rather by the way in which we manage and control the global logistics pipeline.

Global co-ordination and
local management
Table 9.2 summarizes some of the
possibilities.

The future of global sourcing
One of the most pronounced trends of recent decades has been the move to offshore sourcing, often
motivated by the opportunity to make or buy products or materials at significantly lower prices than
could be obtained locally. Companies such as the large British retailer Marks & Spencer, which once
made it a point of policy to source the majority of their clothing products in the United Kingdom,
moved most of their sourcing to low-cost countries, particularly in the Far East. Manufacturers, too,
closed down western European or North American factories and sought out cheaper places to make
things – often many thousands of miles away from their major markets.

The future of global sourcing
At the time that many of these offshore sourcing and manufacturing decisions were being made, the
cost differential between traditional sources and the new low-cost locations was significant. However,
in recent years there has been a growing realization that the true cost of global sourcing may be
greater than originally thought.3 Not only have the costs of transport increased in many cases, but
exchange rate fluctuations and the need for higher levels of inventory because of longer and more
variable lead times have affected total costs. In short life cycle markets there is the additional risk of
obsolescence with consequent mark-downs or write-offs. Other costs that can arise may relate to
quality problems and loss of intellectual property. With growing concern for environmental issues,
there is also now the emerging issue of ‘carbon footprints’ (to be dealt with in more detail in Chapter
13).
All of these issues are now causing many companies and organizations to review their offshore
sourcing/manufacturing decisions. Whilst there will always be a case for low-cost country sourcing for
many products, it will not universally be the case as the following news item suggests.

Chapter 9 Negotiaton.pptx

More Related Content

Similar to Chapter 9 Negotiaton.pptx (20)

More from Sheldon Byron (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Chapter 9 Negotiaton.pptx