When I took a deep look at CPFR several years ago, CPFR included a number of pre-defined, rigid, processes. These reminded me of Rosetta Net – defined by a committee to cover all possible cases. The result is a system requiring so much data, and so complex, that it becomes extremely difficult to implement, confusing to users, and ultimately falls out of favor.
On the other hand, I know of several major electronics companies who have implemented the CPFR principles:
capture forecast (their own to suppliers or from their major customers),
review changes from the previous cycle,
firm up on a common view of the demand.
Then, if getting demand from customers, they test/simulate the capability of their supply chain to satisfy that demand, resulting in a committment back to their customers (which could result in an adjustment to the demand the customer plans to place on them).
When communicating with suppliers, the objective is to obtain a committed supply back from the supplier, which is then used to feed committments back up the chain.
The point is, not only CAN it be done, but that it IS being done with EXCELLENT results. However, the process has been simplified from formal CPFR into something that can be implemented and used.