|
By Robert Bruce
We have talked for years about the many
who are on an endless search for the “silver bullet” to
increase in stock, anticipate demand, and have the goods
in the right
place at the right time. Most continue to look for the perfect
forecasting system to address their needs. Sophisticated
multiple algorithm comparisons, best fit, black box approaches
are sought to obtain the ultimate solution in improving forecast
accuracy.
I must admit that I was also a student of these forecasting
systems and approaches over the years taking scientific approaches
to improving the reliability of systematic forecasts. We
continued to supplement the basic forecasting systems with
techniques to further qualify, tailor and refine the forecast,
further enabling it to anticipate those “special circumstances.” These
techniques were to address various challenges from new items,
short cycle products, limited life cycles, seasonality, and
geographic and demographic preferences. All of these were
designed and implemented to improve forecast accuracy systematically.
These techniques and the supporting business analytics and
data analysis did improve responsiveness and refinement.
The challenge was to break the paradigm and increase service
while decreasing inventory – remember the old adage?
For every tenth of a percent increase in stock service level,
you geometrically increase inventory investment. In an environment
where service levels were already leading the industry, taking
in-stocks from 98 to 99 and approaching 100 percent while
decreasing inventory investment required transformational
thinking.
Neural Networks, artificial intelligence, case based reasoning
were all used, but out of the process came a revolutionary
step. Leverage People. Back in the early to mid 90’s
my thought was how better to increase the accuracy of forecasting
than to leverage knowledge. Retailers do not have all the
answers and manufacturers do not have all the answers, but
together and as trading partners they can leverage the knowledge,
capabilities and expertise in their respective fields. This
was the basis that drove Sam Walton to change the paradigm
and relationship between buyer and seller – retailer
and supplier back in the late 80’s. He helped break
down the traditional adversarial relationship with a new
model jointly crafted between Wal-Mart and Procter & Gamble.
If you look at forecasting systems, they are all pretty
darn good and sound. What raises the bar and standard on
forecast accuracy is refining the causal inputs that drive
the forecast in the first place. It gets back to people.
It means providing rules, systematic approaches, disciplines,
consistency, and most of all open collaboration internally
and externally. This, along with a new and open trading partner
relationship based on trust, was the basis and driving force
in defining CFAR and its successor CPFR. Collaborative Planning,
Forecasting and Replenishment is not a stand alone set of
business processes, but an evolutionary step from opening
communications between trading partners (retailers, suppliers
and transportation providers) to jointly or “co-manage” the
business.
As far as forecasting accuracy, people truly make the difference.
Internalizing CPFR – The Building Block for
Enterprise Wide Collaboration
Back in the mid 90’s, we did not envision or design
collaborative planning, forecasting and replenishment (CPFR)
as the end state. Actually, collaborative merchandise planning
and optimization was the first intended phase of trading
partner collaboration. Collaborative joint business and merchandising
planning is logically the start for building a sound foundation
and integration of consumer demand to feed replenishment,
forecasting, supplier demand planning and logistics execution.
The third planned phase was collaborative transportation
management.
From a practical standpoint and to produce visible benefits
in the shorter term, we focused on integrating the total
replenishment cycle, which had a shorter development time
horizon and would produce more immediate results. Results
are important for any organization because it energizes the
organization behind the effort and the longer-term strategy
that drives it. Obstacles and challenges were still present
even for the world’s largest retailer in embracing
co-managed and collaborative initiatives.
We have often said that internal collaboration is often
the hardest, and I have experienced the same. Various change
management techniques were used to address:
- Understanding
- Old attitudes
- Existing ways of doing business
- Behaviors
These were challenges, but were managed through education,
involvement, peer pressure and realigning goals, objective
setting and performance incentives. There was a larger obstacle
that both retailers and manufacturers face – divisional
alignments within the company. For a retailer, it is store
operations, merchandising and distribution/logistics. There
is a similar alignment for a manufacturer with sales, marketing
and manufacturing. Retailers are often merchandise driven
while manufacturers are marketing driven – it is extremely
important that key executives become business owners, drivers
and change agents. These executives across divisional lines
must also be knowledgeable, involved and help drive the process.
This involvement translates in reinforcing the process of
linking consumer demand through the organization from planning,
merchandising, replenishment, forecasting, demand planning,
and manufacturing to supply chain execution. The key to implementing
any new program like CPFR is to “bridge the great divides” or
functions within the organization. You cannot have some divisions
sitting on the sidelines not involved.
An early key process step is the “internalizing of
CPFR” within the organization by concentrating on:
- Education
- Benefits analysis
- Strategic visioning and project migration
- Project planning
- Resource definition and commitment
- Defining roles and
responsibilities
The first two I consider the most important. It is critical
to provide a complete education and understanding of what
CPFR is and is not and how it supports all key process and
financial goals of the company. The benefits analysis must
be extensive enough to also reinforce the company’s
team and divisional direction, goals, objectives and operational
focus.
When you properly lay the foundation and bridge the main
operating divisions of the company, the building blocks are
laid to support cross-functional internal and external collaboration.
I need to reiterate how important it is to build a structure
of executive process leaders and change champions to help
breakdown some of the barriers that may get in the way of
change.
Once you lay the foundation for CPFR, you have laid the
groundwork for other forms of collaboration beyond CPFR.
These are comprehensive joint business planning, category
and assortment analysis, merchandising, as well as distribution
and logistics incorporating transportation management. This
is upstream and downstream alignment and collaboration over
the extended enterprise of our passion and our knowledge
to Total Value Chain Collaboration.
©2003
ChainLink Research, Inc.
|