On Wednesday, the White House blog announceda long overdue initiative, A National Strategy for Global Supply Chain Security. Overall, Supply Chain Matters applauds this initiative, and we urge our fellow supply bloggers, chain social media influencers, and professional groups such as CSCCMP to do the same.

The initiative, outlined in a White House PDF document, acknowledges that:” The global supply chain system that supports trade is essential to the United States’ economy and security and is a critical global asset.”  The effort is directed at articulating policies to strengthen inbound and outbound supply chains within the U.S. and its trading partners. The outlined document provides further details including the key objectives needing to be addressed in an implementation plan which readers can review.

The strategy includes two goals:

1. Promote the efficient and secure movement of goods, protecting the supply chain from exploitation and reducing its vulnerabilities to disruption.  This goal is described as strengthening the security of physical infrastructures, conveyances and information assets.
2. Foster a global supply chain that is prepared for, and can withstand, evolving threats and hazards along with recovering rapidly from any disruptions.  This particular goal umbrellas the management of overall supply chain risk through layered defenses.

The timetable for this initiative is rather aggressive and calls for the Departments of State and Homeland Security to provide recommendations in six months, with implementation of recommendations to begin immediately upon its release.  We believe that one of the most important aspects of this initiative is a White House encouragement of input from key stakeholders, including governmental and private sector interests and agencies.  The Department of Homeland Security has setup a custom web site that outlines how key stakeholders can submit recommendations.

What immediately concerns us is that this long overdue initiative has to address two very major issues, either of which would justify its own set of comprehensive initiatives.  This includes the threat of a major disruption event such as severe natural disaster or terrorist related, as well as countering a growing proliferation of goods that are illegitimate and not what they are represented to be.  The other aspect is that six months is not a lot of time to gather and assimilate stakeholder input, but we suppose that a longer timetable would only elongate this effort without near-term governmental actions in place.

Our hope is that industry bodies such as the Supply Chain Risk Leadership Council and the Global Risk Network shepherded by NYU will elect to be active contributors to this effort since each has developed much key learning and recommendations on supply chain resiliency and threats.

A final observation relates to the current toxic political climate that surrounds Washington DC.  No doubt, some on the right may elect to seize on the headline of this initiative as an election year political stunt, or another effort directed at more government regulation and oversight.  Supply Chain Matters emphatically declares that this initiative is much too critical to be tossed into the current toxic political discourse, and is rather one of the most important efforts needed to insure the economic viability of the U.S. economy.  Reflect back on the incidents of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita that previously impacted the U.S. Gulf coast and the tragic tsunami and floods that impacted Asia in 2011.  Consider the current vulnerabilities of the U.S. west coast or southwest, the U.S. power grid, and other potential threats.

In the coming months Supply Chain Matters will do its part to detail more of the activities and highlights of this effort.

Let us all enthusiastically get behind the President’s initiative on protecting global supply chains.

Bob Ferrari

We have all been reading the tragic circumstances surrounding the accident involving the cruise liner Costa Concordia, and we at Supply Chain Matters posted our related commentary, Should We Be Concerned About Ship Safety?

Earlier this week, the Wall Street Journal printed edition published the article Carnival CEO Lies Low After Wreck.  (paid subscription required or free metered view) The article begins with the question: Where is Mickey Arison?  Mr. Arison is the chief executive and chairmen of Carnival Corp., which owns ten cruise lines, one of which is Costa Crociere, the designated operator of the Costa Concordia. According to the WSJ, it seems that as events continue to unfold, Mr. Arison is allowing Costa Crociere CEO Luigi Foschi to be the public face to corporate responsibility and to account for the on-scene response. Mr. Foschi has already blamed the ship’s captain for causing this tragedy.  The article notes a Carnival company statement that Mr. Arison is “in continuous contact” with Costa executives, but the CEO decided that the Costa team is best suited to handle the response.  A longtime acquaintance of Mr. Arison is quoted as stating: “He wants to distance Carnival from this disaster.” “If he talks, Carnival is Speaking.” Others are quoted as to Mr. Arison’s calming, behind the scenes influence.

All of this however, once again raises the question of corporate reach-out in times of crisis, especially considering this new era of enhanced social media profiles.  Although remaining out of public view, Mr. Arison has leveraged company news releases and has utilized Twitter to express condolences to the victims and families involved in the incident. He has also provided “personal assurance” that Carnival would “take care” of passengers, crew and victims. The WSJ notes that some have questioned the wisdom of Mr. Arison not taking a more public role in the wake of this tragedy, and one crisis communications consultancy executive notes that you cannot be invisible when the spotlight is shining.

To provide one example, my wife and I have been on previous cruises from rival Norwegian Cruise Lines and both just received a direct email message from that company’s CEO stating safety as the number one priority and further providing a listing of that company’s existing policies and measures directed at assuring safety and training of captains and crew.

Supply Chain Matters has provided previous commentary on the leveraged use of social media tools when corporate crisis occurs, specifically the early 2011 incident surrounding Rolls Royce PLC’s Trent 900 series aircraft engine was involved in a near tragic in-air uncontrolled blowout involving a Qantas Airways A380 super jumbo aircraft. During the events related to the actual incident, and later events tracing the cause and remediation, Rolls Royce executives were publically silent, choosing instead to allow airline senior executives such as the CEO of Qantas to be the public persona of the incident and its consequences to the aircraft’s safety.  The complete research report involving this particular incident can be downloaded free of charge in our Research Center.

Business and supply chain executives, like it or not, exist in a new and highly viral medium of communication fueled by social media and mobility.  In tragedy, those equipped with smartphones can beam live video of an incident in a matter of minutes, and victims can leverage social media applications such as Twitter and Facebook to express first-hand emotions. A corporate response and persona is becoming a mandatory component to these incidents, along with timely communication of what is being done.

In the specific case of Carnival, we believe that readers can and will form their own opinions relative to the public profile and subsequent actions of Mr. Arosin.  The fact that high profile business publications now openly question a senior executive’s presence in the social based narrative is the more important takeaway.

Travel counselors and future cruise consumers are savvy enough to know or to figure out which cruise lines are owned by which large operators, and as the post-accident investigation and consequences become more apparent, will easily connect the dots.  Consumers will henceforth add safety considerations to their cruise vacation selection process.

The lesson is that the right combination of personal and social media outreach during and after a crisis incident, along with a narrative of concern and active response, is becoming a key component to any risk disruption and mitigation plan.

Bob Ferrari

©2011 The Ferrari Consulting and Research Group LLC and Supply Chain Matters.  All rights reserved.

Supply Chain Matters provides another reader update regarding the global supply chain impacts from the devastating monsoon floods that impacted Thailand and other Southeast Asian countries in the Fall of 2011. Readers might recall that beyond the tragic loss of life, the flooding impacted over two-thirds of the country’s provinces and that seven of country’s important industrial manufacturing parks were severely flooded. While some factories have restarted operations, others continue to struggle with various issues.

In our previous general update in mid-November, we honed in on the specific impacts that both the high tech and automotive industries would potentially encounter. As we enter 2012, these impacts continue, although the picture appears to be a bit more optimistic.  On the other hand, as noted in our 2012 Predictions for Global Supply Chains, the broader and more far reaching implications concerning the Thai flooding and other 2011 disruptive events are raising significant new considerations for strategic and other product sourcing decisions in the months to come.

For high tech and consumer electronics, all eyes remained focused on hard disk drives (HDD) production.  Western Digital, initially the most impacted manufacturer, re-started some partial HDD production in its Thai Bang Pa-in facility in the first week of December, one week ahead of schedule.  That facility had been submerged under six feet of water.  Western Digital expects to ramp-up production at this facility during the March 2012 quarter. Other of the company’s production facilities in Thailand are in the process of re-starting.  The expected impacts on reduced overall HDD supply and pricing are underway.  Both EMC and HP increased large-scale storage system pricing in late December in the range of 5 to 15 percent, but supply shortages have amplified price levels even further. In Asia, there are reports that HDD pricing at the retail level has spiked as much as 50 to 100 percent. The Semiconductor Industry Association (SIA) released a statement in early January noting: “Supply chain disruptions resulting from the floods in Thailand have impacted semiconductor sales in the near term, however OEM’s are expected to recover production losses over the course of the next few months.” Industry leader Intel attributed its latest quarterly decline in revenues to the impact of supply brought about from the result of the floods.

Computer OEM’s such as Apple, HP, Lenovo and Dell remain publically silent concerning an ongoing shortage of disk drives but we are sure that internal supply planning teams have been hard at work sorting out disk allocation and various product offering scenarios.  As anticipated, most of the available supply is being allocated to higher priced, more profitable PC products.

Regarding other industry impacts, reports from Japan indicate that the country experienced a 2.6 percent month-to-month drop in factory production for November, which was worse than had been predicted. According to an AFP report, production of passenger cars and mobile phones were among the hardest hit because of the supply shortage impacts emanating from Japanese-plant sourcing in Thailand. However, Japanese automotive providers were reported to be more optimistic for December and January production output levels. Both Toyota and Honda have now acknowledged that the combination of massive supply disruption brought about from the earthquake and tsunami that impacted Japan in March, and the Thai monsoon related floods, have caused both to lose market share because of reduced vehicle output.

Other industry impacts have come to light.  PPG Industries has indicated that production of certain optical components prevented that company from satisfying supply contracts and conducting normal business.  Goodyear Tire and Rubber warned in December that impacts of the Thai flooding could result in “a potential global shortage” of aircraft tires.

Beyond the tragic loss of life, the World Bank estimates that flood damage has reached $45 billion and rebuilding efforts are estimated at about $25 billion. This loss, along with the unprecedented magnitude of loses emanating from certain areas of Asia and Australia has motivated major global insurers and re-insurance firms to reduce their exposure to certain catastrophe prone areas.  The Financial Times recently reported that exposures in Australia, Indonesia, Taiwan and Vietnam have all experienced large insurance premium rises during key early January policy renewal negotiations.  Noted were premium rate increases in the range of 10 percent to as high as 35 percent in these countries, with certain exposures in Australia rising in the range of 40-75 percent, and New Zealand 80-150 percent.

Supply Chain Matters continues to believe that these developments will motivate CFO’s and Chief Supply Chain Officer’s to revisit near and longer-term sourcing strategies that directly relate to regions deemed high risk for natural or catastrophic future incidents.  Beyond the cost of direct labor and transportation, a new, more sobering financial input has been added to the evaluation of strategic sourcing, and that should be prompting strategic sourcing teams to begin to revisit sourcing strategies.

The year 2012 has not added to the confidence of a year that was not like 2011 in terms of global supply chain disruption.  Last week, a 7.2 magnitude earthquake that struck of the coast of Indonesia prompted a brief tsunami warning.  Luckily, the tsunami did not occur and damage was reported as minimal, but nerves were definitely rattled.  The bottom-line is that the probability for global supply chain disruption prompted by natural disasters and catastrophe events remains high and manufacturers are about to actively re-examine global sourcing strategies weighting a new and financial sobering aspect of geographic exposure to regions more prone to these incidents going forward.

Bob Ferrari

©2012, The Ferrari Consulting and Research Group LLC and Supply Chain Matters blog, All rights reserved.

Over this weekend, international media has been reporting on New Zealand’s worst maritime disaster, the story of the stricken cargo ship Rena which is breaking-up on a highly ecological barrier reef.  The vessel  struck the Astrolabe Reef enroute to the port of Tauranga in early October and has remained aground all of this time.  The ship is registered in Liberia, owned and crewed by the Greek shipping company Costamare Inc., and was under charter to Mediterranean Shipping Group (MSC).  Reports indicate that the ship has been servicing routes involving Australia, China, New Zealand and Singapore.

This incident has many twists and turns. The actual grounding incident occurred on October 5th when the cargo ship ran head-on to the reef steaming at 17 knots. The reef itself has been documented on sea charts for over 200 years. At the time of the incident, the ship itself was some distance off course and outside recognized shipping lanes.  Both the captain and second officer, who were in command at the time, were previously arrested by New Zealand maritime authorities and await a formal investigation and hearing.

The ship containers and fuel were initially spilled into adjacent waters. Since October crews were somehow attempting various salvage operations, but continued high seas in the area have finally taken a dangerous toll as the ship is now breaking-up and threatens to do more ecological and other physical damage.

A BBC video and news report this morning notes that heavy seas have snapped off the stern section of the vessel and up to 300 containers have been washed overboard.  Some containers contained milk powder but there are concerns for some potentially dangerous cargos.  Salvage crews, however, had managed to attach tracking devices to suspect containers.  As can be viewed in the video and news account, two parts of the ship are now 20-30 meters apart and the hull has been breached by waves. The BBC reports that container recovery company Braemar Howells noting that 200-300 containers out of 800 still aboard had additionally washed overboard when the ship split. Salvage crews, however, had managed to remove 1100 tonnes of fuel oil from the vessel up to this point, but 385 tonnes remain on board, which to some small extent limits the potential for a far more severe ecological disaster.

This is yet another visible incident of the increasing potential for physical and environmental harm focused in ocean container shipping.  Readers may recall our coverage of the August 2010 incident involving two ships that collided near the port of Mumbai which also provided international news media with many visuals related to the dangers of these incidents.

This incident, however, has far more issues at play. A report published by the New Zealand Herald in late December notes that this vessel had at least 17 documented safety problems identified through ongoing safety inspections conducted in China, Australia and New Zealand prior to the actual grounding incident.  The violations included the metal pins securing cargo container . Authorities in Australia impounded the vessel, noting that containers might not remain secure in rough weather, but released it the next day after Liberian maritime authorities intervened and declared the ship safe to sail. In late September, just prior to the incident, inspectors in the New Zealand port of Bluff documented 19 problems, but allowed the vessel to continue.   The NZ Herald article features one excerpt of mention that should capture the attention of ocean container shippers:

“Whether or not the problems found in July contributed to the navigational error in October or the subsequent loss of cargo, experts say the Australian records paint a picture of an aging ship in poor repair and highlight a dangerous cost-cutting culture under the so-called flag-of-convenience system.”

The whole issue of “flag of convenience” registration, which now accounts for more than half of merchant cargo vessels, is used as a means to avoid safe operating procedures. It is an issue that is sure to come under additional scrutiny in the coming months.

Supply Chain Matters and other industry media have already noted the ongoing excess capacity and financial challenges now impacting the ocean container industry. Too many ships, declining cargo volumes and hemorrhaging balance sheets are evident.  The industry must now come to grips with a potential byproduct, namely issues of overall safety, crew competency and sea readiness of vessels.

Bob Ferrari

A highly significant supply chain related news story comes this week from Honda Motor Co., one that has the potential to bring significant change to North America based manufacturing.  As the Christmas holidays approach, Honda’s North American and supply chain partner employees will certainly have some cheer.

According to an article published in the Wall Street Journal (paid subscription or free metered view restriction), Honda plans to shift a major portion of its production capacity into North America over the next few years.

The implication for Honda’s current North American production facilities and supporting supply chains are highly significant since the numbers indicate as much as a 40 percent increase in production and the positioning of Honda North America as both a producer for both domestic and global export markets.  If the full plans are implemented, North America would represent more than 50 percent of Honda’s global production capability, with export volumes in the range of 200,000 to 300,000 vehicles annually.

The reasons for this major announcement are fairly obvious and far reaching.  With the continued stubborn strength of the Japanese yen making manufacturing exports highly unprofitable, many Japanese based manufacturers can no longer afford to have the bulk of export oriented manufacturing based in Japan.  This has led to many difficult decisions, not only for Japan’s automotive producers, but high tech and consumer electronics manufacturers as well.  The one high visibility exception has been Toyota, with its chairmen continuing to believe that the company has a commitment to continue to have some export production based in Japan. But even Toyota has begun planning for shifting increased capacity and output to North America and other global based facilities.

The other motivation points to global supply chain risk mitigation. The major disruptions concerning the devastating earthquake and tsunami that struck northern Japan and the monsoon-related floods that impacted numerous manufacturing facilities within Thailand have exposed certain risk vulnerabilities. At the height of the tsunami crisis that impacted Japan, Nissan exported V6 engines from its North America plants to Japan in order to keep its southern Japan plants operating. That action, along with others, caused Nissan to overcome the crisis much quicker than some of its Japan based competitors.

As noted in our 2012 Predictions series, 2011 events have been a wake-up call for globally sourced manufacturers, and global insurance and reinsurance carriers are in the process of re-evaluating high risk geographies, which could result in higher insurance premiums for regions more vulnerable to catastrophic natural disaster.

The prospects for increased manufacturing and automotive supply chain related jobs for the U.S. are obvious.  Supply Chain Matters, however, would add a note of caution.  For North America to become a new source of global export capability there will need to be major investments in supply chain and skills infrastructure.  In the case of Honda, the concentration of North American production and supply chain facilities lies in the U.S. Midwest region (Ohio, Indiana, Ontario Canada), and vehicles will have to be transported to export ports on either the U.S. west or east coasts.  If other Japanese and foreign owned manufacturers also expand, current facilities in the U.S. Southern region would add transportation segments to export-related ports.  With the pending opening of an expanded Panama Canal, U.S. ports could experience a dramatic increase in operations. Air freight hubs such as Huntsville and Nashville would be impacted with increased operational volumes.  With inter-modal trucking and rail capacity currently constrained, port authorities as well as rail, third party logistics and trucking carriers will need to invest in added infrastructure, equipment and productivity tools.  In the area of skills, many U.S. manufacturers complain that they cannot fill existing needs because of a lack of technically skilled people.

Our readers in North America should have one significant takeaway from the implications of this latest Honda announcement.  Now is the time to hold politicians and industry accountable for actively supporting and shepherding the required investments in world class transportation, logistics and skills infrastructure that can sustain North America as a global manufacturing hub and a generator of jobs.

The current Congressional gridlock must move beyond partisan politics and focus on what generating jobs really implies.  Recent opinion polls indicate that the U.S. electorate holds their Congressional legislators in the lowest regards.  News commentators now joke that criminals have higher public opinion ratings.

Supply Chain Matters continues to believe that the U.S. Presidential Commission on Jobs and Competitiveness must include in its recommendations both assessment and specific action plans for needed changes in U.S. supply chain and logistics infrastructure, and Congress and industry should immediately act in concert for active implementation of needs.

As the saying goes, when opportunity strikes, take action!

Job growth is on the doorstep, but it comes with a resolve to action. Get involved and have your voice heard.

Bob Ferrari

The following commentary is also featured on the Supply Chain Expert Community web site where the author is a featured guest contributor.

Much has been stated and written noting the fact that global enterprises compete not only on the differentiation of offered products and services, but also on the differentiated capabilities of individual supply chains.  There are many industry case studies, but one that continues to evolve is the global automotive industry.

The global automotive industry has experienced a post-recessionary comeback from the depths of the 2008-2009 global financial crises. Growth markets have been in Eastern Europe, China, Latin and North America. There is, however, a strong possibility that the top three players including Toyota, will shift in ranking status because of a series of quality, supply chain disruption and economic setbacks.  Some industry watchers are predicting that Volkswagen will surpass both Toyota and General Motors for the top global spot.

The Financial Times (paid subscription or free metered view) has been featuring a series of running commentaries related to Volkswagen.  This auto maker is current on-track to sell 8 million vehicles on a global basis in 2011, and deploys a supply chain presence involving more than 90 manufacturing plants, over $80 billion in procurement activities supporting the building of 200 different vehicle models.  Revenues have increased 26 percent in the latest quarter with profits surpassing 13.6 billion euros. More importantly, the Times points out that industry competitors view VW as the benchmark for manufacturing efficiency and profitability, a competency that was once the sole purview of Toyota. VW was one of the first auto makers to invest in China, choosing a partnership strategy with existing Chinese producers SAIC and FAW.  Today, VW brands have the number one market status within China, followed by GM and Hyundai.

What is important to keep in mind relative to VW is its diversity of 10 car and truck brands, from low-cost to ultra- premium, its emphasis on integrating product engineering with production and global supply strategy needs, and a ruthless focus of product quality that stems from senior management. While various brands adhere to autonomy in vehicle design and pricing, areas of procurement and production focus on global supply chain leverage.  The more expensive Audi  and lower-cost VW brands are often produced with the same underlying platforms sharing similar supply components. Of late, various brands have customized vehicle features to accommodate local market needs and desires.

The competitive strategy among global automotive players is having the ability to leverage large volumes of vehicle production leveraging just a few vehicle platforms. We recently penned a Supply Chain Expert Community commentary reflecting on Fiat and Chrysler’s efforts to deploy a global supply chain strategy.

Another evolving strategy has been a renewed emphasis on vertical integration of supply, for instance, the ability to customize specialty steel designs.  Supply Chain Matters recently penned a commentary on Hyundai’s efforts in this area.

VW has been hard at work consolidating underlying product platforms to just two basic architectures, engine in transverse position, and engine in a longitudinal position. Engine and drivetrain production is shared among brands, and each Volkswagen-owned factory features the same processes and controls across the globe. VW is in the process of rolling out a “modular toolbox” manufacturing system that allows for platform sharing on a global-wide scale.

VW also believes in leveraged investment in IT technologies to streamline information flows, increase productivity among procurement and supply chain teams as well as enabling sense and respond capabilities to enhance local and global-wide decision-making.

But as the FT article rightfully points out, vast scale and commonality in procurement of components can lead to increased exposure to risk, as Toyota and other Japanese car makers discovered with the effects of the 2011 Japan tsunami and Thailand monsoon related floods. This places a renewed emphasis on risk mitigation and response management as important supply chain capability differentiators.  Recent reports indicate that Nissan may overtake Honda in global ranking, primarily because it was able to overcome recent natural disaster impacts more quickly.  For its part, VW management is reported to have been closely observing the effects that supply chain disruption can have to the overall business, along with the need for geographical redundancy of parts and production capability.

The global automotive industry ranking may well be different in the coming months and years, and the differentiators in our view, will be the seamless integration of product platform design, procurement sourcing, consistency in manufacturing and agility in global supply chain response capabilities.

Bob Ferrari

©2011, The Ferrari Consulting and Research Group LLC and Supply Chain Matters, All rights reserved.