How does a traditional supply chain compare to a vendor managed inventory supply chain when it comes to performance during disruptions?
The phrase “Supply chains compete, not companies” was coined by Martin Christopher, and it is a fitting reminder for the theme of the CSCMP Europe 2009 Conference: “Overcome Barriers That Face Your Supply Chain and Turn Them into Competitive Advantages”.
Transportation runs along four different modes: sea, air, road and rail. Most goods will change it’s mode somewhere along the route, and in most supply chains that is predominantly sea to road or sea to air or vice versa.
How are companies located in sparse transport networks affected by supply chain disruptions? Are businesses located in regions with sparse transportation networks more prone to supply chain disruptions than businesses located in more favorable locations? Does a sparse transportation network constrain the supply chain setup, such that it is more vulnerable and more likely to be disrupted?
My previous post was part three of a series based on the Swedish business continuity handbook titled “Säkra företagets flöden” and looked at a checklist or questionnaire that can be used in assessing particular disruption risks in your suppliers or sub-contractors. Today’s post will deal with different buyer- supplier relationships and how they can be categorized, and how such relationships may or may not contribute to supply chain disruptions.
Today’s post is part three of my continuing journey through the Swedish handbook titled “Säkra företagets flöden” or”Secure the company’s flows”, as I have translated it. This part takes a look at a checklist or questionnaire that can be used in assessing disruptions risks in your suppliers or sub-contractors. The following checklist is not meant to be exhaustive, but serves as a gateway or teaser towards asking more in-depth questions
Continuing my previous post, which talked about raising the awareness towards disruption risks in general, today’s post will take a closer look at how to analyze your suppliers for potential disruption risks, and what questions that need to be asked to gain more insight into your supply chain. In essence, this post will provide some starting points for supply chain risk analysis.
This the first post in a series that reviews and translates into English some of the content in the book “Säkra företagets flöden” or “Secure the company’s flows” as I have translated it. The book was published in 1999 by the Swedish Emergency Management Agency and is a handbook in Business Continuity Management and Supply Chain Risk Management.
“Secure the company’s flows” or “Säkra företagets flöden” in the original Swedish language is the title of a handbook published in 1999 by the Swedish Emergency Management Agency, the Swedish eqivalent to FEMA in the USA. Although 10 years hold, much of this handbook still holds true.
Is the temporary shut-down of Bangkok’s two international airports important in a supply chain perspective? So far, the issue has been stranded tourists, maybe as many as 100000. Not only that, air freight will also be impacted, but why is this important?
Yesterday I cited the press release of the Norwegian shipping company Odfjell, which no longer will send their tankers through the Suez Canal, but take the long route around Africa instead, hoping to avoid being hijacked by pirates. Maybe just in the nick of time.
Shipping companies are now seriously considering avoiding the Suez Canal and take the long route around Africa instead. One Norwegian shipping company, Odfjell, has already started sending their tankers on the long route.
Shipping companies are now seriously considering avoiding the Suez Canal and take the long route around Africa instead. The Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reports that such move could endanger this year’s Christmas, with presumed presents not arriving on time to be sold from stores.
Are you presenting at the TRB 2009, the Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting? Below is the abstract of a paper I will present at TRB2009, the Transportation Research Board 88th Annual Meeting, in Washington, DC, 11-15 January 2009.
Sparse transportation networks, like in Norway, are a recipe for supply chain disruptions. Furthermore, unlike in regions with a dense transportation network, supply chain management in a sparse network setting comes close to being business continuity management.
The BBC news this morning ran an interesting and worrying story: Shipping companies are considering to avoid The Somali coast and Suez canal on their way to Europe and rather take the long route around Africa. That will make for an extra lead time of 3-4 weeks, but this could mean a temporary supply chain disruption for Europe, while the new lead times settle in.
In Chopra and Sodhi (2004) ‘Managing Risk to Avoid Supply-Chain Breakdown’ the first key message is that some mitigation strategies may actually increase risk in some business areas, rather than reduce it.The second key message is that the cost of mitigating or building up a reserve must be balanced against the level of risk.
When faced with a supply chain disruption, proactive and reactive supply chain risk management can in fact make or break a company’s existence.
When it comes to a business’ physical location in relation to the functioning of the supply chain, obviously there are good locations and bad locations. Can a business’ organization compensate for that?
The vulnerability of the transportation network as part of the supply chain is of particular interest in countries or regions with sparsely populated areas, and hence, a sparse transportation network, because sparse transportation networks, and thus sparse supply chains, are vulnerable to many different kinds of internal and external risks.
