spend matters spend matters About this site
Advertise with Spend Matters
Advertise with Spend Matters
 

March 19, 2010

 

When Global Sourcing Backfires

In the past few months, I've thought that Industry Week has done a good job covering the global sourcing and supply risk arenas. Over the weekend, I had the chance to read through their latest piece on the subject. Penned by GT Nexus' Andy Stinnes, the article examines how global sourcing initiatives often fall short of delivering expected savings because "the risks and costs of longer, more complex cross-border supply chains were not properly understood, tracked and managed." Some of the case studies Stinnes notes should serve as perfect warning signs for companies jumping into the global sourcing game without thinking through all of the risks and challenges. Consider, for example, a manufacturing company who "successfully expands its global supplier base, saving $20 million, only to find that logistics costs had increased by $38 million" due to increased transportation expenses.

Or what about the case of the "diversified Fortune 250 retailer ... [who embarked] on an initiative to increase from 5% to 30% a number of material, component and service activities sourced in four low-cost countries, with a projected savings in cost of goods sold (COGS) of $200 million." In reality, the projected COGs savings had to be "significantly adjusted downward" do to the increased logistics costs of sourcing globally.

In practice, it is the unexpected additional costs like these which often render global sourcing decisions much more complex and risky than many companies first think. All too often, that 20% piece part savings can take a turn towards negative territory after an organization takes all of the total landed costs from a low cost country sourcing decision into consideration.

- Jason Busch

Related Blog Entries

Comments
In my experience it's not just that many companies don't appreciate or understand the total landed cost/supply risk concept but that they are still so "stovepiped" organizationally that purchasing and logistics are working to their own performance metrics. I had a client similar to your manufacturing example where purchasing saved about 10% by sourcing from China(actually net of additonal shipping cost) but when we took supply chain pipeline inventory into account and calculated total savings net of additional working capital investment the answer was you guessed it a big fat zero. I even had a conversation with the commodity manager responsible for the China sourcing decision and he admitted to me that yes he understood the inventory impact but he was measured purely by how much he saved on price (admittedly including transportation cost, but not supply chain inventory investment which can be significant). So the motto is certainly educate on total landed cost but also address any silo'd performance incentives. If you don't, those responsible for all the components of TLC will still march to their own tune.
# Posted By Mark Usher | 1/30/07 11:28 AM
Long, complex, cross-border supply chains are like the cockpit of a commercial jetliner and clearly require a two-man crew. Your copilot should be a Logistics/Transportation professional with international trade experience. If you really want to push the edge and get into tax optimization and currency hedging, then put down the jump seat and make room for a professional from the Corporate Treasury department.

Compaq followed this model back in their heyday and achieved remarkable results. The SVP of WW Manufacturing called it a "freight and duty" game and Compaq played it to win. The Compaq Procurement organization pursued total landed cost of globally sourced components with an intensity that left their competitors in the dust.

IBM called the same play on a larger scale with their Integrated Supply Chain organization and Tim Carroll speaks about it often at conferences and events.

Global sourcing can be a complex and risky venture. Tackle the complexity head on and tilt the odds in your favor by not trying to go it alone.
# Posted By Tim Fairchild | 1/30/07 11:49 AM
I'm always amazed at the edicts from the corporate offices that say "we are going to source X ____ of dollars from China." We've all heard it from many companies. But not every product, assembly or category should be sourced globally. Middle market manufacturers, with their typical high mix, low volume parts are significantly challenged with LCCS. There is no magic number as to what a company can source globally...it's on a case by case basis...
# Posted By Lisa Reisman | 1/31/07 8:59 AM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us   © 2004-2010 Spend Matters, LP All rights reserved