Mattel and China: Why Supplier Performance Management Matters
This is particular interesting if you consider that "it took Chinese authorities up to two weeks to identify the factories responsible for the tainted pet-food ingredient that caused such a stir in March. The North American companies had bought the ingredient through a trading company. Mattel, in contrast, had a longstanding relationship with the factory responsible in this case. That didn't avert corner-cutting on the supplier's part, but it did make the problem easier to trace, and correct."
The future of global trade depends on the willingness of procurement organizations to invest in supplier development and quality programs to apply local standards to products and services sourced around the world. Just as Dell learned with it's now famous call center issues in India, many manufacturers are now realizing that an underinvestment in supplier development and performance monitoring -- be it in China or the country next door -- can lead to catastrophic supply disruptions and/or significant negative PR. Perhaps this latest round of quality concerns will be the spark that really forces companies to go beyond the scorecard when it comes to supplier performance and risk management.
I've got another reason to be proactive -- especially in today's supply risk laden times. And that's your suppliers -- and their executives, in at least one case -- might not be around if your wait. Unfortunately, for Mattel, it looks like they won't have the same old factory general manager to work with to improve things at their old supplier for one of the toy recalls in question. Why? Because he committed suicide last weekend.
- Jason Busch










http://www.purchasing.com/article/CA6469922.html