Its factories supply the world with shoes, sweaters, consumer electronics and toys. Now China is starting to emerge as a major supplier of auto parts. What will this mean for automotive supply chains?
Peter Bradley is an award-winning career journalist with more than three decades of experience in both newspapers and national business magazines. His credentials include seven years as the transportation and supply chain editor at Purchasing Magazine and six years as the chief editor of Logistics Management.
It's big in textiles. It's big in electronics. And China is rapidly becoming a major player in the automotive industry, a development that has enormous implications for automakers around the world. Automotive supply chains and distribution networks will inevitably undergo sizable shifts as China ramps up production of both automotive parts and finished cars—and develops a big appetite of its own for automobiles.
China's production of automotive products has lagged behind its output in other areas. Writing last year in McKinsey & Company's quarterly newsletter on China and India, analysts Marcus Bergmann, Ramesh Mangaleswaran and Glenn A. Mercer reported that OEMs around the world had been reluctant to use Chinese or Indian suppliers, largely because of quality concerns. As recently as 2003, the McKinsey report said, China exported just $4 billion worth of auto parts, and most of those were low-quality aftermarket items.
That is changing, albeit slowly. Driven in large part by the growth of their own car markets, Chinese and Indian parts suppliers have improved the quality of their goods (and the efficiency of their operations). Automakers and their top suppliers, which are leaving no stone unturned in their search for cost-cutting opportunities, have taken note. Mercer and Stefan Knupfer, a McKinsey director, wrote in a McKinsey newsletter in September that U.S. imports of Chinese parts alone now total about $4 billion a year—a figure growing by about 25 percent annually. That's still a small piece of the action. The U.S. automotive supply industry produces about $250 billion in parts each year, according to McKinsey.
The shift to Chinese or Indian sources may be slow, but the McKinsey analysts believe it could have a huge effect on automakers' costs. "The cost savings may be enormous: carmakers could cut their parts bills by up to 25 percent," they wrote last year. "A company that manufactures about five million vehicles a year could theoretically lighten the tab by more than $10 billion annually."
But even as they issued those heady savings projections, the consultants cautioned that shifting to overseas suppliers carries some risks. For one thing, the savings could be largely offset by high shipping costs. For another, there are the potential delays caused by an immature (although fastdeveloping) logistics infrastructure in China and by constraints on the U.S. transportation infrastructure's ability to handle the surging tide of imports.
Staying the course
One company that's keeping a close eye on developments in China is Vector SCM, the lead logistics provider for General Motors. Vector SCM, a five-year-old joint venture between GM and CNF Inc. (and part of CNF's Menlo Worldwide third-party services division), manages GM's logistics supply chain in North America, overseeing the flow of production materials and finished goods. The company also jointly manages supply chain operations with GM in Latin America, Europe and the Asia-Pacific, where Vector SCM is firmly established. The company's Asian operating divisions include Vector SCM Asia-Pacific, which is based in Singapore, and Vector SCM China, which is based in Shanghai.
Greg Humes is president and CEO of Vector SCM, based at its Novi, Mich., headquarters. "There is a great focus on China," he acknowledges, but he warns that the rush to source low-cost parts from overseas raises some problems of its own. "One is infrastructure capacity," he says, "not only international capacity, but import and export capacity as the supply base footprint [shifts more to] China ..." Humes is particularly concerned about the implications for ocean freight."Have we got the ocean capability and capacity?" he asks. "Are [the carriers] able to keep up with the [fast-paced growth]?"
A second worry—one that bedevils importers regardless of industry—is U.S. port capacity, both at the docks and at landside operations. It's an open question right now, says Humes, whether the ports will be able to handle shipments on a timely basis. Faced with the prospect of congestionrelated shipping delays, Humes and other supply chain executives say their challenge is to find alternatives to some of those bottlenecks. That won't be easy. Despite their size, automotive giants like GM and Ford have less leverage with ocean carriers than you might expect. The automakers ship a relatively small volume by ocean compared to, say, the big retailers.
Even so, Humes reports that this year, his company hasn't experienced any major problems in the flow of goods from the Asia-Pacific into North America. But that doesn't mean he isn't worried about the future. "What becomes more of an issue is staying up for the future, the protection of supply," he says. "We're constantly monitoring things." Right now, he reports, Vector SCM monitors the flow of goods at 19 checkpoints for any hint of supply disruption.
Despite the uncertainties, Humes' faith in outsourcing remains unshaken. He insists that GM and Vector SCM have no intention of abandoning offshore sourcing and stockpiling inventories closer to home. "Our strategy is to watch those critical milestone points to maintain lead times," he says. "GM is not planning on building up huge inventories in its plants or warehouses."
Ford retools its supplier base
In what may or may not turn out to be a better idea, Ford Motor Co. last month announced a major shift in its sourcing strategy. The automaker plans to sharply reduce the number of suppliers it uses for key commodities and to develop long-term strategic partnerships with those that make the cut. Over time, Ford said, it expects to cut the ranks of suppliers, which now number about 200, in half.
Thomas K. Brown, Ford's senior vice president of global purchasing, refused to say how much the company expects to save, noting only that the amount would be substantial. Brown was also reluctant to point to a model for the strategy, which bears some resemblance to Japanese automakers' purchasing practices. "We have not explicitly said that we want to do what someone else is doing. We said the problem with our business model is that it was not working effectively for [suppliers], and was not working effectively for us," he said during a press conference following the announcement.
Though the announcement undoubtedly left many of Ford's suppliers feeling a bit unsettled, at least a few can heave a sigh of relief. The automaker has already announced the first group of suppliers selected for the program, which it has dubbed the Aligned Business Framework. They are Autoliv, Delphi, Johnson Controls, Lear, Magna, Visteon and Yazaki.
Ford says the agreements that it will forge with its suppliers spell out business practices designed to increase future collaboration, including phased-in up-front payment of engineering and development costs. It will also ask suppliers to commit to developing technological innovations that will benefit both parties.
The new program also calls for earlier supplier involvement in the product development process. Ford hopes that involving suppliers earlier in the process will help the automaker compress its time to market, Brown explained. "Our expectation is that our suppliers will offer us better technology sooner and faster."
A move by federal regulators to reinforce requirements for broker transparency in freight transactions is stirring debate among transportation groups, after the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) published a “notice of proposed rulemaking” this week.
According to FMCSA, its draft rule would strive to make broker transparency more common, requiring greater sharing of the material information necessary for transportation industry parties to make informed business decisions and to support the efficient resolution of disputes.
The proposed rule titled “Transparency in Property Broker Transactions” would address what FMCSA calls the lack of access to information among shippers and motor carriers that can impact the fairness and efficiency of the transportation system, and would reframe broker transparency as a regulatory duty imposed on brokers, with the goal of deterring non-compliance. Specifically, the move would require brokers to keep electronic records, and require brokers to provide transaction records to motor carriers and shippers upon request and within 48 hours of that request.
Under federal regulatory processes, public comments on the move are due by January 21, 2025. However, transportation groups are not waiting on the sidelines to voice their opinions.
According to the Transportation Intermediaries Association (TIA), an industry group representing the third-party logistics (3PL) industry, the potential rule is “misguided overreach” that fails to address the more pressing issue of freight fraud. In TIA’s view, broker transparency regulation is “obsolete and un-American,” and has no place in today’s “highly transparent” marketplace. “This proposal represents a misguided focus on outdated and unnecessary regulations rather than tackling issues that genuinely threaten the safety and efficiency of our nation’s supply chains,” TIA said.
But trucker trade group the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) welcomed the proposed rule, which it said would ensure that brokers finally play by the rules. “We appreciate that FMCSA incorporated input from our petition, including a requirement to make records available electronically and emphasizing that brokers have a duty to comply with regulations. As FMCSA noted, broker transparency is necessary for a fair, efficient transportation system, and is especially important to help carriers defend themselves against alleged claims on a shipment,” OOIDA President Todd Spencer said in a statement.
Additional pushback came from the Small Business in Transportation Coalition (SBTC), a network of transportation professionals in small business, which said the potential rule didn’t go far enough. “This is too little too late and is disappointing. It preserves the status quo, which caters to Big Broker & TIA. There is no question now that FMCSA has been captured by Big Broker. Truckers and carriers must now come out in droves and file comments in full force against this starting tomorrow,” SBTC executive director James Lamb said in a LinkedIn post.
Bloomington, Indiana-based FTR said its Trucking Conditions Index declined in September to -2.47 from -1.39 in August as weakness in the principal freight dynamics – freight rates, utilization, and volume – offset lower fuel costs and slightly less unfavorable financing costs.
Those negative numbers are nothing new—the TCI has been positive only twice – in May and June of this year – since April 2022, but the group’s current forecast still envisions consistently positive readings through at least a two-year forecast horizon.
“Aside from a near-term boost mostly related to falling diesel prices, we have not changed our Trucking Conditions Index forecast significantly in the wake of the election,” Avery Vise, FTR’s vice president of trucking, said in a release. “The outlook continues to be more favorable for carriers than what they have experienced for well over two years. Our analysis indicates gradual but steadily rising capacity utilization leading to stronger freight rates in 2025.”
But FTR said its forecast remains unchanged. “Just like everyone else, we’ll be watching closely to see exactly what trade and other economic policies are implemented and over what time frame. Some freight disruptions are likely due to tariffs and other factors, but it is not yet clear that those actions will do more than shift the timing of activity,” Vise said.
The TCI tracks the changes representing five major conditions in the U.S. truck market: freight volumes, freight rates, fleet capacity, fuel prices, and financing costs. Combined into a single index indicating the industry’s overall health, a positive score represents good, optimistic conditions while a negative score shows the inverse.
Specifically, the new global average robot density has reached a record 162 units per 10,000 employees in 2023, which is more than double the mark of 74 units measured seven years ago.
Broken into geographical regions, the European Union has a robot density of 219 units per 10,000 employees, an increase of 5.2%, with Germany, Sweden, Denmark and Slovenia in the global top ten. Next, North America’s robot density is 197 units per 10,000 employees – up 4.2%. And Asia has a robot density of 182 units per 10,000 persons employed in manufacturing - an increase of 7.6%. The economies of Korea, Singapore, mainland China and Japan are among the top ten most automated countries.
Broken into individual countries, the U.S. ranked in 10th place in 2023, with a robot density of 295 units. Higher up on the list, the top five are:
The Republic of Korea, with 1,012 robot units, showing a 5% increase on average each year since 2018 thanks to its strong electronics and automotive industries.
Singapore had 770 robot units, in part because it is a small country with a very low number of employees in the manufacturing industry, so it can reach a high robot density with a relatively small operational stock.
China took third place in 2023, surpassing Germany and Japan with a mark of 470 robot units as the nation has managed to double its robot density within four years.
Germany ranks fourth with 429 robot units for a 5% CAGR since 2018.
Japan is in fifth place with 419 robot units, showing growth of 7% on average each year from 2018 to 2023.
Progress in generative AI (GenAI) is poised to impact business procurement processes through advancements in three areas—agentic reasoning, multimodality, and AI agents—according to Gartner Inc.
Those functions will redefine how procurement operates and significantly impact the agendas of chief procurement officers (CPOs). And 72% of procurement leaders are already prioritizing the integration of GenAI into their strategies, thus highlighting the recognition of its potential to drive significant improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, Gartner found in a survey conducted in July, 2024, with 258 global respondents.
Gartner defined the new functions as follows:
Agentic reasoning in GenAI allows for advanced decision-making processes that mimic human-like cognition. This capability will enable procurement functions to leverage GenAI to analyze complex scenarios and make informed decisions with greater accuracy and speed.
Multimodality refers to the ability of GenAI to process and integrate multiple forms of data, such as text, images, and audio. This will make GenAI more intuitively consumable to users and enhance procurement's ability to gather and analyze diverse information sources, leading to more comprehensive insights and better-informed strategies.
AI agents are autonomous systems that can perform tasks and make decisions on behalf of human operators. In procurement, these agents will automate procurement tasks and activities, freeing up human resources to focus on strategic initiatives, complex problem-solving and edge cases.
As CPOs look to maximize the value of GenAI in procurement, the study recommended three starting points: double down on data governance, develop and incorporate privacy standards into contracts, and increase procurement thresholds.
“These advancements will usher procurement into an era where the distance between ideas, insights, and actions will shorten rapidly,” Ryan Polk, senior director analyst in Gartner’s Supply Chain practice, said in a release. "Procurement leaders who build their foundation now through a focus on data quality, privacy and risk management have the potential to reap new levels of productivity and strategic value from the technology."
Businesses are cautiously optimistic as peak holiday shipping season draws near, with many anticipating year-over-year sales increases as they continue to battle challenging supply chain conditions.
That’s according to the DHL 2024 Peak Season Shipping Survey, released today by express shipping service provider DHL Express U.S. The company surveyed small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) to gauge their holiday business outlook compared to last year and found that a mix of optimism and “strategic caution” prevail ahead of this year’s peak.
Nearly half (48%) of the SMEs surveyed said they expect higher holiday sales compared to 2023, while 44% said they expect sales to remain on par with last year, and just 8% said they foresee a decline. Respondents said the main challenges to hitting those goals are supply chain problems (35%), inflation and fluctuating consumer demand (34%), staffing (16%), and inventory challenges (14%).
But respondents said they have strategies in place to tackle those issues. Many said they began preparing for holiday season earlier this year—with 45% saying they started planning in Q2 or earlier, up from 39% last year. Other strategies include expanding into international markets (35%) and leveraging holiday discounts (32%).
Sixty percent of respondents said they will prioritize personalized customer service as a way to enhance customer interactions and loyalty this year. Still others said they will invest in enhanced web and mobile experiences (23%) and eco-friendly practices (13%) to draw customers this holiday season.