1 Reply Latest reply on Aug 12, 2009 9:37 AM by doppenheim

    Compelling data from Accenture Supply Chain survey

    Duncan Klett Elite

      An interesting thread started in LinkedIn, from a white paper posted by Accenture.  Here is the link to the LinkedIn thread.  Follow this link to the Accenture paper, High Performance through Supply Chain Planning:  Accenture Research and Insights into Supply Chain Planning Mastery.


      The Accenture research contains three conclusions:

      • Planning must be a widely embedded capability
      • The ability to adapt, to respond to change, is much more important than the ability to generate long-range forecasts and supply plans
      • Planning must happen faster, more frequently, and must be tightly integrated with other processes. In short, supply chain planning needs to be a key element of a frequent, responsive S&OP process.


      This emphasis on responsive supply chain planning, creating a responsive supply chain, aligns perfectly with my own experience.  You will never have a perfect plan, but you need to adjust your plans constantly as real events unfold.  Visibility and response are the keys.

        • Re: What separates the Masters from the Laggards?

          A very interesting article, even the best (Masters) are averaging only 82% forecast accuracy, so how do they handle the unexpected?


          Compared to the Laggards group the Masters have:

          •   45% lower average lead times
          •   54% shorter throughput time

          These certainly help! I think the two most compelling metrics from this study are:


          "Automatic notices to respond" where the Masters group has 4x the capability (59% versus 14%)


          "Respond to Disruptions" where the masters group has 3x the capability (59% versus 19%)


          Clearly these competitive advantages provide the means to mitigate the unexpected.


          One could argue, that thier MRP/ERP system gives plenty of automated notices.  Indeed! My experiance has been with these systems is there are so many messages they never get worked before the messages become obsolete, and the methods for prioritizing those messages are limited.


          So what separates the Masters from the Laggards? Perhaps a clue is found in these words from the article:


          "Three times as many masters used up-to date information and dynamic planning models to repond rapidly  ... and are far more likely ... to use technology to automatically monitor key events and have formalized processes...