I was somewhat surprised at the common themes noted among the Top 25, particularly that many of these same companies have been practicing more active strategies related to vertical integration of supply chain vs, pure outsourcing. In my mind, that is an acknowledgement of overcoming increased supply chain risks associated with outsourcing.
It must commend AMR for finally acknowledging that the Top 25 voting is too skewed toward a U.S. audience, and that more voting representation from Europe and Asia-Pacific might have changed some of the designations. Perhaps one day we will finally see more Asian based companies besides Samsung.
Viewers should also take note of the change in the rating criteria this year.
As a Brit working in the USA I agree about the North American bias in the results. AMR are right to attempt to recruit more voters from outside the USA and not to blame the peers who are voting - as they will, of course, vote according to their experience which is North American. That said we should also remember that most of the companies are global brands. European and Asian voters will also know P&G, Apple etc so we should still expect the see a large American presence in the list in future.
I am pleased to see Tesco there. AMR reports on their US Brand "Fresh and Easy" indicate that for some categories of ready meals Tesco could not find a US partner able to meet their requirements for co-location and service. As a result a UK and Spanish company got their break in the USA with brand new plants next door to the Tesco DC in CA.
To add to Bob's comments - Jim Rowan from RIM also suggested during a panel discussion that many larger enterprises can learn from the mid-market (e.g. NCR) and yet they are disqualified at the outset. He further added that no contract manufacturers make the list, despite working with the amalgamation of 10's to 100's of complex supply chains driven by their many brand owner customers. It will be interesting to see how AMR will be influenced for next year's Top 25.
So it looks like those European suppliers who co-located with Tesco didn't do very well - as a result of Fresh and Easy's slower than expected expansion in the USA:
"Tesco takes over Fresh & Easy suppliers:"
Yes, there are a number of issues play here.
I don't think that you can put all supply chains in a table and shake them up and declare a winner.
Instead, I think that a better way is to compare like value chains.
What do you think?
I admit that I have not gone through the full document and the methodology.
I dont know if there is any penalty for public events of supply chain disruptions that
may occur. If not , then it may make sense to add such a penalty.
For instance for Apple (#1) and Best Buy (#24) - they have handled the iphone 4 launch
very badly from a supply chain perspective (among a lot other areas)
a) Total supply-demand mismatch - white iphone, display material shortage etc
b) Lack of inventory visibility - when I pre-ordered my phone at Best Buy they did not
have any data on inventory to tell me whether I will receive the phone on launch date or not.
Later they call me on the 23rd and tell me that I will not get it on the 24th and that they dont
know when they will get it.
c) Retailer-supplier collaboration - Radio Shack, Best Buy and Wal Mart do not seem to have any
clue of their existing inventory, future inventory across the board further confusing customers.
My observation was that the iPad launch was handled better than the iPhone 4 with fewer glitches.
However after your note, I called up all the Apple stores in the DFW metroplex within a 50 mile
radius and none of them have any in stock ! The only way to order is through the Apple
website which is showing a 2-3 week backorder.
It seems to me that Apple is banking on the loyalty of their core customers rather than the
impulsive nature of purchases of other customers.