Immediate Vault Immediate Access

Navigating the Supply Chain Crisis

Two and a half years since COVID-19 emerged and set off a sea change in how we work and live worldwide, business leaders continue to grapple with the challenges it has created for the global supply chain. Extraordinary congestion at critical global ports, decreased availability of key raw materials and component parts, rising freight bills and an increasingly tight job market have all contributed to the need for companies to create an effective logistics risk management program. Such a program must focus on the detailed assessment of key risks to the supply chain and the creation of mitigation strategies that limit their impact on a company’s ability to satisfy its customers.

How Did We Get Here?

To better prepare an organization for the future, it is important to reflect on events in the past. Some of the critical issues that have contributed to the unparalleled supply chain pressure within the logistics world include:

  • Increasing reliance on foreign suppliers for key inputs, adding to the time it takes to secure goods and also leading to a diverse range of exposures that could impact customers
  • Greater dependence on ever more sophisticated components
  • Labor shortages impacting the transportation and port industries
  • Crumbling infrastructure, especially domestically, contributing to increased time and expense to move freight
  • The continued movement to just-in-time procurement, leading to challenges matching supply to demand as supply chains are strained
  • An increasingly sophisticated electronic network to plan, monitor and maintain the logistics chains, leading to increased vulnerability to cyberattacks

While these issues may have been the fuel, it is certainly the COVID-19 pandemic that was the spark for the current challenges facing the supply chain, as the pandemic affected the global supply chain in many ways. For example, reductions in production capacity overseas due to government quarantines left many components in shorter supply.

buy minocin online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/minocin.html no prescription pharmacy

Overseas port capacity was restricted because of quarantines and worker shortages due to illness. Already operating at its maximum after years of limited investment, United States port capacity became overtaxed and less efficient at moving product to final destinations. Additionally, increased consumer demand for foreign produced goods, such as home office equipment, clothing and furniture, further stressed global supply lines.

According to maritime research and consulting firm Drewry, these issues resulted in freight rates increasing by more than 100% year over year, transportation time increasing by almost 50%, and logistics professionals facing greater difficulty guaranteeing the ability to meet their company’s needs. Companies with logistics professionals who developed and implemented supply chain risk management strategies have likely experienced a limited impact in comparison to those without such processes in place.

It’s Not Over Yet

While the majority of the world is now emerging from the most dramatic parts of the unprecedented global shutdown and hope is on the horizon, significant threats remain that require vigilance and focus. This is best illustrated by the impact of the early 2022 lockdowns implemented in parts of China as part of the country’s zero-COVID strategy. With an export volume of more than trillion, what happens in China quickly ripples around the world and impacts every sector.
buy stromectol online https://galenapharm.com/pharmacy/stromectol.html no prescription
From semi-conductors to resins, active pharmaceutical ingredients to petroleum products, China is a critical node in the supply chain of almost every consumer product. With major production and transportation hubs like Guangzhou and Shanghai implementing sweeping lockdowns, companies are once again feeling the pinch in reduced ability to source product and significantly expanded time lines for delivery.

buy tadalista online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/tadalista.html no prescription pharmacy

What Can Be Done?

Business leaders should consider several best practices to minimize disruption to their organization’s supply chain:

  1. Develop risk assessments on primary and secondary suppliers, determining the impact they could have on the company’s ability to produce product.
  2. Create a detailed mapping of critical suppliers that includes manufacturers and service providers, such as freight forwarders, in order to assess catastrophic risk potential.
    buy amaryl online healthdirectionsinc.com/flash/swf/amaryl.html no prescription pharmacy

    Have multiple suppliers, preferably in multiple geographic areas, as sources of critical raw materials and components. This reduces reliance on any single supplier or oversized exposure to geographical catastrophe risk. For identified critical areas, create a business continuity plan that outlines the process to shift to another resource in a separate geographic area.
  3. Maintain increased inventory on hand versus reliance on “just-in-time” methods, increasing the ability to quickly match supply to customer demand.
  4. Invest in supply chain intelligence data and telematics to increase visibility on goods in transit, which will help business leaders identify a quick and effective response to catastrophes as they occur.
  5. Manage customer expectations in respect to delivery schedules. The old adage “Patience is a virtue” may never have been more apt.

Looking Ahead

Corporate executives now have a heightened understanding of the supply chain’s importance to a company’s bottom line, leaving logistics professionals uniquely positioned to gain investment in resources to help address emerging logistics and supply risks. By conducting regular risk assessments and developing risk mitigation strategies to address the exposure, business leaders can better position their company to limit the impact of supply chain challenges and create a stronger, more operationally resilient enterprise.

Japan Earthquake Causes Parts Shortage, Closing 4 GM Plants

The earthquake in Japan earlier this month has impacted the supply chain of General Motors, causing four plants in North America to close temporarily because of a shortage of parts from Japan, the company reported.

GM said in a statement that its manufacturing operations are expected to be down for two weeks beginning April 25 in Spring Hill, Tennessee; Lordstown, Ohio; Fairfax, Kansas andGM logo the Oshawa Flex Assembly in Canada.

The temporary adjustment is not expected to have “any material impact on GM’s full-year production plans in North America,” GM said. In addition, the company “does not expect a material impact to its second quarter or full-year financial results for GM North America.”

Japan’s Kyushu Island was rocked by a 7.0 temblor on April 16, killing 58 people and injuring about 900, according to AIR Worldwide. The quake was the strongest to strike Japan since 2011, when a massive 9.0-magnitude offshore earthquake unleashed a tsunami that killed 18,000 people in the country’s northeast and triggered meltdowns at a nuclear power plant in Fukushima, the New York Times reported.

AIR said the earthquake is expected to result in insured losses between $1.7 billion and $2.9 billion. Those losses only reflect insured physical damage to onshore property (residential, commercial/industrial, mutual), both structures and their contents, from ground shaking, fire-following and liquefaction, AIR said.

The Japan Fire and Disaster Management Agency (FDMA) estimates that more than 3,900 residences and 120 non-residential buildings were damaged or destroyed, a number of mudslides resulted, and 14 fires were attributed to the temblors.

On the same day, April 16, a 7.

8 earthquake struck the central coast of Ecuador, killing 570 people and injuring more than 4,700. AIR estimates losses from that quake between $325 million and $850 million. More than 1,100 buildings are reported to have been destroyed and more than 800 damaged.

Even though they happened just hours apart, the two quakes are not related. The Times reported:

Are the two somehow related?

No. The two quakes occurred about 9,000 miles apart. That’s far too distant for there to be any connection between them.

Large earthquakes can, and usually do, lead to more quakes — but only in the same region, along or near the same fault. These are called aftershocks. Sometimes a large quake can be linked to a smaller quake that occurred earlier, called a foreshock. In the case of the Japanese quake, seismologists believe that several magnitude-6 quakes in the same region on the previous day were foreshocks to the Saturday event.