New Articles

“Tariffs Are on the Table for U.S. Importers, Whatever the Election Outcome” 

global trade company import

“Tariffs Are on the Table for U.S. Importers, Whatever the Election Outcome” 

In an era of shifting global trade dynamics and geopolitical uncertainties, U.S. importers and corporations face complex decisions regarding their manufacturing strategies. The ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China, coupled with the potential for tariffs regardless of election outcomes, have prompted many companies to reevaluate their reliance on Chinese manufacturing. However, the decision to onshore, nearshore, or reshore operations is far from straightforward, as evidenced by cases like Foxconn’s decision to invest $137.5 million in China in July 2024. Foxconn will be building a new HQ in Zhengzhou, China.

Read also: Top 25 Container Ports In The United States

To navigate this challenging environment, companies must get involved in a comprehensive analysis that spans multiple functions. At the forefront of this analysis is a thorough cost assessment. 

Labor costs, often a primary driver for offshoring in the past, must be carefully examined. Companies need to compare not only current wage rates but also long-term trends in labor costs across potential destinations. It’s crucial to consider that while wages in some alternative locations may be lower than in China, differences in productivity and quality could offset these savings.  

End-to-end supply chain must be analyzed and optimized. The costs of raw materials and components can vary significantly between regions, and companies must ensure reliable suppliers are available in potential new locations. Transportation and logistics costs and disruptions such as weather, possible wars, strikes, as well as any Force Majeure are other critical factors, as changes in manufacturing location and the above-mentioned events can dramatically impact shipping expenses and lead times to end markets.

Tax implications also play a significant role in the decision-making process. Corporate tax rates, available incentives, and the overall impact on a company’s tax liability must be carefully evaluated for each potential location. In some cases, special economic zones or tax breaks for relocating businesses could tilt the balance in favor of a particular option.

Operational considerations extend beyond costs. Supply chain resilience has become a top priority for many businesses in the wake of recent global disruptions. Companies must assess the vulnerability of potential locations to natural disasters, geopolitical risks, and other potential disruptions. Diversifying manufacturing across multiple locations can enhance overall resilience, but it also introduces new complexities that must be managed.

The regulatory environment in potential new locations is another crucial factor. Stability and predictability in regulations can be as important as the regulations themselves. Companies need to consider not only current requirements but also potential future changes that could impact their operations.

Workforce considerations go beyond cost. The availability of skilled labor, the need for training or upskilling, and employee turnover rates all factor into the equation. A cheaper workforce that lacks necessary skills or experiences high turnover could ultimately prove more costly than a more expensive but stable and skilled labor pool.

Market access is a strategic factor for companies thinking about relocating and should play a pivotal role in relocation decisions. It is a key consideration to evaluate how different manufacturing locations might impact their ability to serve key markets efficiently. Trade agreements can provide significant advantages in certain locations and should be factored into the decision-making process.

Global trade agreements such as the USMCA, ASEAN, and the RCEP, may affect the USA’s  

importers’ decisions as to whether they should keep manufacturing in the USA, or manufacture in China, or in other countries in Southeast Asia, or in Mexico. The global trade and business environments are constantly evolving, requiring continuous reassessment of manufacturing location strategies. Companies should consider hybrid approaches from different strategies. Such approaches could include features of those different strategies thereby providing a balance between efficiency, resilience, and risk mitigation.

Intellectual property protection is another critical strategic consideration, particularly for companies with valuable proprietary technologies or processes. The strength of IP protections varies significantly across regions, and companies must assess what additional measures might be necessary to safeguard their innovations in different locations.

Brand perception can also be significantly impacted by manufacturing location decisions. While “Made in America” labels might resonate positively with some consumers, others might be more price sensitive. Companies need to carefully consider how relocation might affect their brand image and whether there are potential brand risks or benefits associated with different locations.

The long-term geopolitical outlook is an increasingly important factor in today’s volatile global environment. Companies must assess the political stability of potential locations and consider how changing geopolitical dynamics might affect their operations in different regions of the world in the long term. 

Financial analysis is paramount to any relocation decision. This includes not only a detailed assessment of relocation costs and projected ROIs, but also scenario analysis to understand how different tariff scenarios or other potential changes might impact costs in each location. Companies need to compare these projections against the baseline of maintaining current operations in China.

Implementation considerations are equally important. The complexity and the time it takes to transfer operations to a new location must be carefully analyzed. Companies should have a plan in place that minimizes or eliminates production disruptions as well as the effects that the production transfer will have on existing supplier and customer contracts commercially and legally.

Quality assurance is another critical factor. Companies must ensure that they can maintain or improve production standards in new locations, which may require significant investments in quality assurance systems. For companies adopting a multi-location strategy, ensuring consistent quality across different sites adds another layer of complexity.

Customer impact must also be carefully considered. Changes in manufacturing location can affect service levels, lead times, and the ability to offer customized products. Companies need to assess how these changes might impact customer relationships and whether they can maintain or improve their competitive position.

Sustainability and ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) factors are increasingly important in corporate decision-making. Companies must consider how relocating manufacturing might affect their carbon footprint and whether there are opportunities to improve sustainability in new locations. Social responsibility considerations, including labor practices and community impact, also play a role in these decisions.

Risk management is another crucial aspect of the relocation decision. This includes assessing commercial risks, exchange rate risks, geopolitical risks, and the potential for supply chain disruptions in different locations. Companies need to develop comprehensive risk mitigation strategies for each potential scenario.

Technology and innovation considerations are becoming increasingly important in manufacturing location decisions. Companies need to assess how relocating might affect their access to technological innovations and R&D capabilities. The potential for increased automation in different locations can significantly impact labor costs and productivity projections.

Legal and compliance issues add complexity to the decision-making process. Companies must be very knowledgeable about different legal systems, contract enforcement mechanisms such as arbitration. The complexity of the legal systems may vary drastically which may require a world-class team to understand and to lead.

Cultural aspects, while sometimes overlooked, can have a significant impact on the success of nearshoring and offshoring. International business practices, communication styles, and potential language and dialect barriers must be taken into consideration prior to making and implementing any relocation decision.  

Government relations can play a crucial role in the success of manufacturing operations. Companies need to assess the level of support offered by local governments in potential new locations, including incentives and other forms of assistance. The stability and continuity of these incentives over time are very important considerations.

The existence of competitors requires that relocating companies consider how competitors implemented their relocation and what competitive advantages or disadvantages resulted from the different competitors. The same strategy should apply not only to competitors, but to that industry at large.  The intelligence obtained from industry trends as well as the results achieved or problems faced by competitors provide priceless   Understanding broader industry trends and emerging manufacturing hubs can provide priceless insights into potential opportunities, or a change of course altogether.

Workforce availability, level of experience, training availability and management must be at the forefront of all considerations, and should include not only the present need, but also the future needs of the workforce. This should include the relocation’s effects on employees and on leadership development. Strategies for developing the local workforce are crucial for long-term success.

Laser focus on consumers and the proximity to those consumers offer priceless insights into how the products of the competitors perform and the customers’ response to those products. That said, manufacturers should assess how their relocation will affect the speed of their response to their customers. The speed of their response reflects the manufacturer’s ability to connect their different divisions, especially their product development and manufacturing units to optimize customer service.     

Inventory management strategies may need to be adjusted based on new manufacturing locations. Companies must consider how changes will affect optimal inventory levels and whether lean manufacturing practices can be maintained or improved in new locations.

Partnerships and alliances can play a crucial role in successful relocation strategies. Companies should explore potential strategic partnerships or joint ventures especially in China. These partnerships may facilitate market entry and reduce risks in new locations.

Besides partnerships and alliances, the country’s physical and technological infrastructures are paramount in today’s business environment. Companies need to assess the technological capabilities of new locations, and what investments may be necessary to ensure continuous connectivity. As important, will the new location be able to support new technologies? The answer will have a significant impact on production, and the ability of the company to remain relevant vis-à-vis its competitors.

In conclusion, successful implementation of any relocation strategy requires long term planning, a capable and experienced executive team, as well as continuous monitoring of the global economy and geopolitical events. By asking the right questions, conducting due diligence, and having contingency plans, companies can sail through VUCA and position themselves for long-term sustainability and resilience in a world where complexity and volatility have become the modus operandi. 

global trade contract negotiation loans

The Role of Confidence and Strategy in Contract Negotiation

Negotiation is an intricate dance of strategy, psychology, and skill. Success in this arena often hinges on the ability to balance confidence with a strategic mindset. Confidence can be both an asset and a liability, depending on how it is wielded. Similarly, a strategic approach can guide negotiators through complex terrains, ensuring not only the achievement of immediate goals but also the fostering of long-term relationships. This article delves into the critical role of confidence and strategy in contract negotiation, addressing common handicaps and offering insights into achieving win-win outcomes.

Read also: Building Resilient Supply Chains: The Role of Source-to-Contract Management in Mitigating Risk  

Lack of Confidence and Alternative Deals

A lack of confidence can cripple a negotiator, causing them to accept unfavorable terms or miss out on potential opportunities. One of the most significant factors contributing to this is the absence of a solid alternative deal to fall back on. When negotiators do not have a Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA), they are more likely to settle for less than they deserve. Developing a strong BATNA boosts confidence, providing leverage and the ability to walk away if terms are not favorable.

Too Much Confidence

Conversely, overconfidence can be just as detrimental. It can lead to unrealistic expectations and an underestimation of the opponent, causing negotiations to stall or fail. Striking a balance between confidence and humility is essential. Negotiators must remain open to new information and willing to adjust their strategies based on the evolving dynamics of the negotiation.

Preparation Prevents Poor Performance (PPPP)

Preparation is the bedrock of successful negotiation. The adage “Preparation Prevents Poor Performance” (PPPP) underscores the importance of being thoroughly prepared. This involves understanding not only one’s own goals and limitations but also those of the counterpart. Effective preparation includes researching the market, knowing the key players, and anticipating potential objections. A well-prepared negotiator can navigate conversations with ease and respond to challenges with agility.

Asking the Right Questions

Effective negotiation hinges on asking the right questions. Poorly framed questions can lead to misleading answers, resulting in misguided decisions. Good negotiators ask open-ended questions that encourage detailed responses. This not only helps in gathering crucial information but also in understanding the motivations and goals of the counterpart. Insightful questions can reveal latent factors that might otherwise be overlooked, guiding the negotiation toward a mutually beneficial outcome.

Interests Over Positions

One common pitfall in negotiations is focusing on positions rather than interests. Positions are the stated demands, while interests are the underlying needs and motivations. By concentrating on interests, negotiators can identify common ground and develop creative solutions that satisfy both parties. This shift from positions to interests fosters collaboration and paves the way for win-win outcomes.

Internal Collaboration and Agreement

Negotiations can be derailed by a lack of internal, cross-organizational collaboration and agreement. When different departments or stakeholders within an organization have conflicting objectives or are not aligned on the desired outcome, it weakens the negotiator’s position. Ensuring internal consensus and collaboration is critical for presenting a united front and negotiating from a position of strength.

Seeing the Big Picture

Failing to see the big picture is another common handicap. Negotiators often get bogged down in the minutiae, losing sight of the overall objectives. A strategic approach requires maintaining a holistic view, understanding how individual terms and conditions fit into the broader context of the business relationship. This perspective helps in making decisions that are aligned with long-term goals and sustainability.

The Importance of Training

Many individuals have an inflated view of their negotiation skills and underestimate the importance of training. Effective negotiation training can provide valuable insights, techniques, and frameworks that enhance a negotiator’s ability to achieve favorable outcomes. Training programs should cover a range of topics, from basic principles to advanced strategies, tailored to the specific needs of the organization.

Measuring Success

A lack of metrics for measuring negotiation success can lead to complacency and missed opportunities for improvement. Establishing clear criteria for success, such as achieving specific financial targets, securing strategic partnerships, or maintaining long-term relationships, provides a benchmark for evaluating performance. Regular assessment and feedback can drive continuous improvement and better outcomes.

Long-Term Thinking

Short-term gains often overshadow long-term benefits in negotiations. Focusing solely on immediate outcomes can damage relationships and lead to suboptimal agreements. Successful negotiators think long-term, considering the future implications of their decisions. Building trust and fostering strong relationships with counterparts can result in more favorable terms and opportunities down the line.

Fear of Missing Out (FOMO)

FOMO can drive negotiators to make hasty and costly decisions. The fear of losing out on a deal can cloud judgment and lead to agreements that are not in the best interest of the organization. It is crucial to remain objective and not let emotions dictate decisions. A well-defined strategy and clear understanding of the organization’s goals can help mitigate the impact of FOMO.

Inability to Detect Latent Factors

Latent factors are underlying issues or motivations that are not immediately apparent. Detecting these factors requires keen observation, active listening, and astute questioning. Understanding these hidden elements can provide a significant advantage, allowing negotiators to address concerns and craft solutions that satisfy both parties’ deeper interests.

Understanding Motivations and Goals

A successful negotiation hinges on a deep understanding of the other party’s real motivations and goals. This understanding goes beyond surface-level demands and delves into the core reasons behind those demands. By empathizing with the counterpart and aligning solutions with their goals, negotiators can create more compelling and attractive proposals.

The Anchoring Effect

Anchoring is a cognitive bias where individuals rely heavily on the first piece of information they receive (the “anchor”) when making decisions. In negotiations, the initial offer can set the tone for the entire discussion. Skilled negotiators use anchoring to their advantage, setting initial terms that frame the negotiation in their favor. However, it is equally important to recognize and counteract the opponent’s anchors to avoid being unduly influenced.

Best Alternative to a Negotiated Agreement (BATNA)

Knowing one’s BATNA and that of the counterpart is crucial in negotiations. The BATNA provides a fallback option, giving negotiators the confidence to walk away if terms are unfavorable. Understanding the counterpart’s BATNA helps in assessing their leverage and making more informed decisions. This knowledge is fundamental to negotiating from a position of strength.

Reservation Value (RV) and Zone Of Possible Agreement (ZOPA*) *Fisher and Ury

The Reservation Value (RV) is the minimum acceptable outcome for a negotiator. The Zone Of Possible Agreement (ZOPA) is the range within which an agreement can be reached. Knowing these values for both sides helps in setting realistic targets and identifying potential overlaps where a deal can be struck. Clear understanding of RV and ZOPA ensures that negotiators do not settle for less than what is acceptable.

Cultural Differences

Cultural differences can significantly impact negotiations. Misunderstandings and miscommunications arising from cultural differences can lead to conflicts and stalled negotiations. Awareness and sensitivity to cultural nuances are essential. Tailoring communication and negotiation styles to respect cultural differences fosters better relationships and smoother negotiations.

Miscalculations and Time Pressure

Miscalculations can derail negotiations, leading to unfavorable terms or failed agreements. Thorough preparation and a strategic approach help in minimizing errors. Additionally, time pressure can force hasty decisions. Effective time management and a well-paced negotiation process allow for more thoughtful and deliberate decision-making.

Underestimating the Opponent

Underestimating the opponent can lead to complacency and missed opportunities. It is crucial to respect the counterpart’s capabilities and prepare accordingly. Thorough research and a strategic approach help in recognizing and leveraging the opponent’s strengths and weaknesses.

One-Size-Fits-All Approach

Assuming that one negotiation style or process fits all negotiations is a significant handicap. Each negotiation is unique, requiring a tailored approach that considers the specific context, objectives, and dynamics involved. Flexibility and adaptability are key to navigating different negotiation scenarios successfully.

Commercial Understanding

Negotiations often involve complex commercial terms that go beyond legal considerations. A thorough understanding of the commercial aspects of the contract being negotiated is essential. This includes knowing the market, understanding the financial implications, and recognizing the strategic value of different terms. Balancing legal and commercial understanding leads to more comprehensive and effective agreements.

Conclusion

Confidence and strategy play pivotal roles in successful contract negotiation. By addressing common handicaps and adopting a strategic, well-prepared approach, negotiators can achieve win-win outcomes that foster long-lasting relationships. The transformation from a mindset of fear and uncertainty to one of confidence and strategic thinking is crucial. Whether negotiating on behalf of private individuals or corporations, the techniques discussed here are applicable across industries, guiding negotiators toward more effective and successful outcomes. By embracing preparation, understanding motivations, and remaining adaptable, negotiators can navigate the complexities of contract negotiation with confidence and finesse.

gas

The Next Big Disruption of the Supply Chain Network

Turkey and Greece Clash Over Oil and Gas in the Eastern Mediterranean: 14 Actions to Take to Keep Your Cargo Moving and Your Supply Chain Agile and Resilient.

While the Mediterranean Sea as a whole has been the center of oil and gas explorations, it is in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea that massive gas fields exist. “According to a 2010 study by the US Geological Survey, the Eastern Mediterranean could hold as much as 122 trillion cubic feet of natural gas in total, equivalent to the reserves of Iraq.” However, the discovery of oil and natural gas in the region has reignited territorial conflicts between Turkey and Greece, both of whom are members of NATO.

Turkey has always felt that the Treaties of Sèvres and Lausanne were not only humiliating but that they stripped the country of valuable territory which is now very promising financially, economically, and logistically. In addition to Turkey and Greece, the discovery of gas affects Cyprus, Lebanon, Israel, Syria, Jordan, Egypt, and Libya. But for Turkey especially, it could be a means to leverage itself into a much stronger regional power.

In addition, Turkey felt that excluding it from the regional energy development talks in the Eastern Mediterranean, was a slap in the face. As a result, both Turkey and Greece are boosting their military presence in the Eastern Mediterranean Sea. There is no doubt that 2 events emboldened Turkey’s actions; the world is busy fighting the coronavirus and the strides made in technological advancement which made manufacturing and acquiring weapons a lot cheaper than what it used to be.

BCOs (Beneficial Cargo Owners) operating in this geopolitical climate should consider these long- term strategies:

-Rethink your supply chains by examining the geographical locations, financial and logistical strengths, weaknesses, agility, and resiliency of your suppliers.

-Add 2 to 3 weeks to your transit times. This will protect you from unexpected weather delays, blank sailings, removal of ships from service, or even the cancellation of sailings altogether if the conflict escalates and waterways and bridges are closed.

-Increase your lead time and inventory level, which may seem expensive at first, but will actually be less expensive in the long run, when you will be forced to resort to shipping by air in order to maintain high service levels and promises to customers.

-Review and revise your forecasts weekly.

-Increase your buffer stock and inventory when necessary; doing so won’t necessarily reduce your cash flow if you negotiate good credit terms with your suppliers.

-Build-in your budget increases in spend on ocean freight rates, BAF, and WRS.

-Assume the worst-case scenario and have alternative procurement sources should sanctions be imposed or should war break out.

-Account for the increases in duty should the alternative suppliers be located in countries subject to higher duty rates.

-Make sure that your cargo carries additional insurance coverage to mitigate war risk.

-Avoid the carriers whose ships carry the flag of the conflicting countries.

-Monitor the financial stability of all links in the value chain frequently, especially the stability of ocean carriers given the consolidations and reorganizations that have been taking place lately.

-Make sure that the air freight cost is accounted for and that your customer will accept the additional charges should you have to resort to airlift any cargo. Having these contingency plans negotiated and agreed upon in advance will eliminate delays, surprises, and even possible plant closures due to last-minute disagreements.

-Communicate, plan, and execute with internal and external stakeholders frequently. Constant communication cannot be emphasized enough. So is the frequent evaluation of all suppliers and service providers for products, services, and contract revisions if necessary due to the volatility and complexity of today’s supply chains.

-Stay abreast of events in the whole Middle East region given the daily geopolitical developments some of which may affect the movement of cargo between that region and the world.

This is a conflict that, at first sight, seems to be between Turkey and Greece but, in reality, it’s much more complicated than that because now the USA and the EU are involved. As a matter of fact, the EU is considering sanctions against Turkey.

The best course of action would be for the clashing countries to renegotiate the treaties that caused their grievances including but not limited to their territorial waters and the Law of the Sea.

Lastly, the latest military escalation was not the result of the discovery of gas only as it carries within its centuries of territorial and religious conflicts. Most importantly, this is happening between Turkey and Greece who at one time were glorious empires and who are intent on bringing that glory back.

______________________________________________________________

Omar Kazzaz specializes in business strategy, BPI (Business Process Improvement) as well as supply chain design, planning and execution. He has 28 years of experience in international business, global logistics and supply chain.   

Mr. Kazzaz is a long-standing member of the Global Thinkers Roundtable. In addition, he has been involved in numerous panel discussions on global trade and global logistics. His comments and articles on international trade agreements, global manufacturing and supply chain have been quoted in many publications. 

Mr. Kazzaz holds an MBA in International Management from Thunderbird, The American Graduate School of International Management in Glendale, AZ, and a BA in German and Economics from The University of North Carolina at Charlotte. Besides his native Arabic language, Mr. Kazzaz speaks French and German.