For DCs that handle electronic products, it's not enough just to deliver the goods at warp speed. They also have to add value and oversee a mysterious process called distributed order fulfillment.
As any manager working in the electronics industry knows, the supply chain loop offers all too many opportunities for short circuits. Whether they deal with tiny electronic components like computer chips that go into other products or finished products for consumers,like PCs and peripherals,manufacturers and distributors in this field face daily reminders that even a minor slipup can translate into a major hit to their company's profitability.
There are several reasons for their edginess. To begin with, they have to keep the inventory moving. Nowhere is profitability so closely tied to the rapid movement of inventory than it is in electronics manufacturing and distribution.
Next, they're expected to add value, lots of value. Conditioned by the likes of Dell, consumers have come to expect highly customized products for delivery within days of the order. That means assembly at the 11th hour—most likely somewhere in the distribution process.
Then there's the challenge of coordinating the deliveries of components from multiple suppliers. The greater the number of players involved, of course, the greater the chances for disaster. And with complex electronic equipment, there are bound to be a lot of players.
Distribution at warp speed
With their notoriously short shelf life, electronic products are almost as perishable as food products. The latest models can command a premium price, but usually not for long.As soon as competitors catch up, prices plummet. Clearly, the pressure's on to get products out the door as quickly as possible.
Rapid technological advance also means rapid obsolescence. DCs that don't move electronic products right out may find themselves sitting on a pile of nearly worthless inventory. Many an electronics manufacturer has been stuck with millions of dollars in inventory that can only be written off. Some never recover.
"Inventory has become the hot potato of the electronics industry," says Rob Cushman, a senior manager with Accenture, a consulting firm whose clients include semiconductor manufacturers, PC manufacturers and wireless communications providers. To keep from being caught with that hot potato, managers like Bill Apel, director of distribution for computer manufacturer Systemax Inc., are substituting information for inventory. "With real-time information, we can cut our safety stock levels," he says. "This reduces our investment in inventory and improves our delivery service to customers at the same time."
The ability to "see" inventory in the supply chain lets companies shift products or components to where they're most needed. It's not at all unusual in the electronics industry for routing changes to be made while inventory is intransit. The greater the visibility, the easier it is for DCs and other supply chain players to adjust inventory flow for maximum profitability.
The push to add value
Distribution of electronic products is much more than storing and moving boxes. In this industry, DCs routinely handle some assembly and manufacturing. "In electronics distribution, the ability to perform value-added services is very important," confirms John Davies, co-founder and vice president of marketing for Optum, a provider of supply chain execution (SCE) software."
"People look to us [for] customization," reports Jim Smith, senior vice president of operations at Avnet, an electronic component distributor."They are looking for us to perform very specific services." These run the gamut from straightforward inventory management and parts "kitting" for assembly operations to more complex steps such as build-to-order manufacturing and programming. At Avnet's DC in Chandler, Ari z., for example, electronic chips are often diverted to special areas where they will be custom programmed to meet individual customers' specifications.
Accenture's Cushman does not expect the trend to slow anytime soon. In fact, he expects the opposite. "We see the need for value-added services increasing in coming years," he says.
A matter of coordination
Then there's the coordination challenge: Pressed by demands to cut costs without sacrificing service, more electronics companies today are outsourcing various tasks to supply chain partners that can do it for less. That has the effect of spreading responsibility for order fulfillment through the supply chain—a trend known as distributed order fulfillment.
But somebody still needs to manage the process, says Cushman. "As more functions get outsourced in an effort to reduce costs, the ability to execute involves multiple partners and multiple systems." Most companies look to software as the answer. "The ability to make this model work depends on having a distributed order management and transactions management system that can sit on top of this model and provide visibility and execution coordination for all parties involved."
Keys to success
Though the challenges may vary somewhat from company to company, most electronics industry players agree that success depends largely on the following:
Advanced technologies that can enhance supply chain management. Leading-edge supply chain execution systems, warehouse management systems (WMS), software that provides full supply chain visibility and other technology tools can be very valuable for DCs in electronics distribution.
Flexibility in inventory handling. This often requires special material handling equipment and product identification and tracking technologies that are used to identify individual components or products automatically, and divert them to locations as needed.
Highly trained employees. At least part of the work force should have a high degree of technical competence, which is often required to perform value-added services of increasing technical complexity.
The ability to cope with continuous change. The electronics industry is so fast-paced that leading companies undergo nearly constant change to keep up with new technologies and new business processes.
modify processes, not software
Jim Smith knows now that it was a big mistake. When his company, electronic component distributor Avnet, installed data-transfer technology in its Chandler, Ariz., DC several years ago, it opted to take standard software (in this case a package from Optum) and modify it to fit the facility's existing processes.
He would do things differently today. "After we implemented the new system, changes in our business forced us to go back and change the software," says Smith, the company's senior vice president of operations. "Modifying custom software is very time-consuming and often costs more than you'd expect. If we were doing it all over again, we would modify our existing business processes to fit the software, instead of the other way around."
Another disadvantage of customizing software is that you then have to customize the training manuals and support documentation, making it tougher to train multiple users, Smith continues. Then there's the dependency issue: Using custom solutions can make a user company too reliant on one individual who knows the solution well. "The more you depend on that individual," he says, "the more problems you will have if he or she leaves the company or is reassigned to another internal position."
To others about to embark on a digital adventure, Smith recommends working closely with the software vendor. Many times, vendors will upgrade their standard software offerings to meet the customer's needs, he reports. "Software that requires customization today may be the vendor's standard offering tomorrow," he says. "Software vendors are very receptive to hearing about a customer's future needs. In a sense, users are the vendor's research and development center."
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."