|
By Lonnie Childs
If you’re in the Supply Chain business, right up there
with Newton’s Law of Gravity stands Murphy’s
Other Law stipulating that Demand and Supply, if left to
their own tendencies, will always tend to diverge and get
you in trouble. In the case of Gravity, we have all hopefully
learned to predict what it personally means to us (jump out
of a tree and down you go!), and so we readily know how to
avoid its negative effects (don’t jump!). With Demand
and Supply (D/S) imbalances, while we all recognize the symptoms
(back-orders, extended lead-times, irate customers, etc.),
Murphy, unlike Newton, never seems to give us advance warning
or enlighten us on how to avoid falling into their trap.
Further adding to the D/S fulfillment dilemma, Sales and
Operations do not inherently share a common language upon
which to base their discussion of issues and potential resolutions
when Murphy strikes. I suppose that “finger-pointing” might
be a mutually shared form of sign language, but not a very
helpful one! Yet, the ability to succeed grows exponentially
when Sales and Operations share common motivations and a
clear understanding of how to collectively act together to
defeat Murphy. High levels of customer satisfaction and shareholder
benefit only result when optimization occurs across the enterprise.
Imagine a world where Sales and Operations are actually rowing
in the same direction!
Welcome to the world of Predictive Demand/Supply
Planning whose mission is to predict imbalances as far in advance
as possible, in order to provide ample time and opportunity
to design and implement corrective Sales & Operations
solutions. The more time we allow for resolving forecasted
imbalances, the greater the number of potential cost-effective
solutions. So how do we design a system for identifying potential
issues and expressing them via a commonly understood key
process indicator (KPI) where the cause and effect of our
actions can be readily measured?
Step 1. Define the Indicator – When and where will
Murphy strike?!
ChainLink’s Parallax view focuses on the optimization
of inter-enterprise links as a key to success, and further
stresses the need for “predictive metrics”. One
can view this process of Sales and Operations addressing
D/S fulfillment as an intra-enterprise microcosm of this
same issue – how can two functional links in the chain
express their interactions with metrics that are commonly
understood, forward looking, and preventive in nature. If
we are not successfully integrated within the enterprise,
then optimization of external links in the supply chain will
fail proportionally. In the Parallax view however, if we
can change our orientation to the problem, we can achieve
a new view that provides new direction.
Traditional Demand and Supply planning systems serve first
as great storehouses for data, and second as rule-based calculators
which can make recommendations for action on an exception
basis. But they rarely express issues in a language or format
that facilitates meaningful Sales and Operations discussion
(come on, is that possible?). I personally learned early
in my SCM career that when I said that we have a material
shortage, it only begged the question by Sales or the Customer, “So
how does that affect my order, and what are my options?” This
question was sometimes followed by other less kind words!
After multiple occurrences of this dysfunctional conversation,
the need to develop a common format to proactively describe
the problem and frame the resulting question became evident.
The type of production strategy that your business utilizes
will determine the KPI that you employ to answer that question.
In a Configure to Order (CTO) or Make to Order (MTO) business,
Customer Lead-time (CLT) serves as the primary indicator
or unit of measure for defining Customer service levels.
The main driver of D/S success, and thus CLT performance,
will generally be the availability of raw material components.
Using various methods, a business can determine what is an
acceptable or, better yet, competitive lead-time for the
cycle-time from the time of receiving the order to shipping
or delivering it to the Customer. Using a targeted CLT as
a benchmark, the business can measure how well it performs
in meeting that targeted CLT. Customer Backlog, as the inverse
of CLT, becomes a quick reference KPI for understanding on
a daily basis how the business stands in terms of meeting
targeted CLTs (i.e. as Backlog decreases, CLT decreases).
Thus, when Operations talks to Sales, or Sales to Customers,
the common language should be the predicted CLT to ship or
deliver the order. It may not be good news, but at least
you preempt their questions and provide an accurate, intelligent
response (which may at least eliminate the unkind words!).
In a Make to Stock (MTS) business, Finished Goods Inventory
levels expressed in Day’s Supply of Inventory (FG-DSI)
and/or its inverse corollary of Backorder Days serve as the
KPIs for defining Customer service levels. In this fulfillment
strategy, Customers expect to place their order and receive
instant gratification in having their order shipped (i.e. < 24
hrs). The performance measure then becomes Fill Rate % while
FG-DSI or Backorder Days indicate your general fulfillment
health or ability to satisfy Customer order. In this case,
the response by Operations to Sales or Sales to the Customer
will be either immediate product availability or projected
Backorder Days (days before the product will ship). Again,
you can beat them to the figurative punch and tell them what
they really want to know.
Figure
1. Demand/Supply KPIs
by Production
Strategy |
Performance Measure |
| CTO |
Customer Lead-time |
Backlog Days |
Ship to Target Lead-time % |
| MTO |
Customer Lead-time |
Backlog Days |
Ship to Target Lead-time % |
| MTS |
Finished Goods DSI |
Back Order |
Days Fill Rate % |
Step 2. Develop a predictive process and
tool – We’ve
got ways of finding you, Murphy!
The value of good planning systems resides in their capability
to predict supply imbalances in the future and make recommendations
for supply-side action based on a user managed set of rules.
As stated earlier, they fall short, however, in not further
translating that picture of the future into a common indicator
that facilitates the discussion between Sales and Operations
on what consensus corrective actions can be taken, particularly
if supply is constrained. Now that we have the common language
defined, addressing this short-coming isn’t a Herculean
task.
Without great technical effort, a reporting tool can be
designed as an adjunct to your current planning systems which
identifies potential D/S issues based on a pre-configured
set of tolerances (example – items with actual demand > 20%
or < 20% of forecast). After some analysis of these out
of tolerance items, the tool can facilitate downloading planning
data from the MP and MRP systems into a spreadsheet format
(using Excel or another alternate application) which calculates
the appropriate KPI for your business (i.e. CLT or FG-DSI
and Back Order Days). A spreadsheet format, such as Excel,
provides the advantage of allowing for sensitivity analysis
of the potential D/S issue by playing with the variables.
This exception process for identification of potential D/S
issues and the resultant predictive analysis should become
a normal output of the standard planning process. Following
is an example of the D/S spreadsheet format predicting CLT
in a CTO environment.

Target
CLT = 5 days, Time to Act!
Figure 2. Spreadsheet to project Customer Lead-time
(CLT) in a CTO business
Step 3. Establish a D/S forum – The Murphy SWAT Team!
Now that the KPIs, tool, and process exists, a regular D/S
meeting must be created to address the items identified as
potential issues. The forum should be attended generally
by Master Schedulers, Marketing, and Sales representatives,
along with the appropriate Managers who can make the necessary
decisions involving corrective actions to be taken. Master
Schedulers will typically bring the list of issue items displayed
in the KPI spreadsheet format along with the details of the
potential supply-side actions and/or those already completed.
Generally, D/S imbalances should first be resolved on the
supply-side if possible, since meeting customer service objectives
takes precedence. However, when that is not possible or if
additional supply cost is involved, the regular D/S meeting
provides an opportunity for Sales and Operations to collaboratively
decide on the action plan, particularly if the resolution
requires “demand shaping” (pricing, promotion,
etc.) to influence demand and move it to alternative items.
The CLT or FG-DSI predictive spreadsheet enables a logical,
quantitative, and non-emotional language in which to discuss
the issue, and an objective method to assess cause and effect
after actions have been implemented. Additionally, the predictive
outlook can enhance the customer expectation setting, since
it expresses the issue with a Customer-centric KPI.
With a new language of KPIs, a predictive process, and a
Sales and Operations forum for resolving D/S issues, you
have now enabled a cultural transition to occur where collective,
consensual decision-making can rapidly occur. Two links in
the intra-enterprise chain (Sales and Operations) can bond
together for optimization of business results. Having experienced
first hand in a CTO business the use of this predictive D/S
process and a resultant cultural shift, I can attest to how
organizational behaviors can evolve for the better over time,
if you put the right enablers in place and then focus on
the desired result (I know, easier said than done!). In my
experience, Sales and Operations “finger pointing” became
obsolete and unacceptable, and as an SCM executive, I even
became intolerant of my team expressing the sentiment that “if
the forecast was just right!...”
Conclusion – Murphy goes down in defeat!
In today’s competitive world, sound planning processes
and systems will keep you in the game, but may not get you
the win. Instituting KPIs, processes, and tools that predict
D/S issues, and expressing them in a way that facilitates
Sales and Operations discussions and customer expectation
settings, improves the probability of success. Building a
culture where Sales and Operations utilize these capabilities
and consistently work together to defeat Murphy and optimize
results across intra-enterprise links can create real competitive
advantage, and very importantly, enable next steps in optimizing
across the inter-enterprise links of your supply chain. The
power of fast, collaborative decision-making and aligned
D/S actions will leave Murphy frowning and keep a big smile
on your Customers’ faces!
©2004
ChainLink Research, Inc.
|