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."
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.