New Articles

How to Save Money through Suppliers without Sacrificing the Value they bring

wwex iot market suppliers EMO logistics fuel warehouse

How to Save Money through Suppliers without Sacrificing the Value they bring

With inflation hampering product sales and price rises, manufacturers have profits to protect. Many will react, as the sector has done for decades, by beating down suppliers on price. All this does though is bounce the problem around the supply chain. It drains suppliers of the resources they need to deliver vital enhancements—including supplies, information, and ideas—without which, brands are less competitive.

So, how can they protect profits without being vulnerable to significant risks and open to new opportunities? 

Costas Xyloyiannis, CEO of supplier experience platform HICX, says brands can keep a competitive edge despite inflation. “Let’s help suppliers help us,” he says. Here’s how… 

  • See suppliers as partners.

The best thing brands can do to cut costs through suppliers is to partner with them. This empowers suppliers to give their best, and when suppliers can give their best, brands are better placed to extract the value they need—such as quality ingredients, compliance information and ideas for innovation—in addition to reducing costs.

Therefore, the solution to managing profits in inflation is not to squeeze suppliers. It’s to give them a helpful experience. If there is one thing brands really need in order to collaborate with their suppliers, it’s trustworthy data. 

  • Build from the data up. 

When better to establish dependable supplier data than the moment each new supplier is integrated? Data is at the heart of every good supplier interaction. Without it, suppliers have a tough time working with brands and struggle to provide essential information. And without this information, brands are blind to social and environmental risks. Additionally, they miss opportunities such as to innovate sustainably and elevate their reputations. 

When suppliers struggle to work with a brand, they’re also less inclined to go the extra mile—a recent HICX study shows that suppliers are 20% more likely to prioritize an order if they’re low on stock for a customer-of-choice.

The best supplier data is in the form of a “single source of truth”. When data is considered trustworthy, brands can make the working relationship significantly easier. This simplifies what it takes to receive helpful supplies, information, and ideas.  Underpinning these goals is reliable supplier data, the collection and safeguarding of which should be established early.

  • Safeguard data integrity

Getting this right also requires brands to control how changes to the data are managed. There is a simple analogy with removing plastic from the world’s oceans—it’s pointless cleaning what’s already there while neglecting to address future pollution. Rather, invest disproportionately in preventing future plastic from entering the water. The same is true with supplier data. A ‘single front door’ through which all new data and all changes to existing data must pass, is essential. That door has both a technical and a governance role: it disables any other systems from making changes and governs who can make changes and under what circumstances.

  • Smooth out communication friction.

When supplier data is compromised, brands can’t communicate well with all their suppliers. Too often, they send long surveys to suppliers in order to receive information with which to manage risks and opportunities. And too often, the task is irrelevant to many of the recipients. For example, an initiative to determine how many product packaging suppliers in the USA comply with sustainability regulations might go to every packaging supplier in every country—including those who sell boxes for shipping. Each of these businesses would have to engage with the survey to determine whether it applies to them. This costs them time. Big brands might not directly feel the consequences, but logic dictates that it will be harder for these suppliers to give them quality information and work efficiently.   

Thankfully, the reverse is also true. Brands that receive and store accurate supplier data—including contacts, plant-level, global and local data—properly and at the start of each new relationship can communicate better with their suppliers. This creates the perfect conditions in which to find cost-savings together while keeping sight of compliance risks and ways to innovate. 

  • Don’t accept supplier friction.

While it’s sensible for brands to steady these communication issues from the outset, suppliers face many other bugbears. Late payments, unrealistic expectations and confusing technology are just some of the challenges. Brands can invest in supplier relations by understanding the friction points that their people, processes and technology put on suppliers. And by adopting truly supplier-friendly mindsets and technologies through which to work with all suppliers—from day one.

It’s one thing to give a handful of strategic suppliers a helpful experience, but if brands do so across the network, they can successfully reach their goals at scale. Every supplier should be treated as a partner. Encouragingly, forward-thinking brands such as Mondelez, Unilever, Mars and more, are already collaborating with all their suppliers. 

We need more manufacturers to join the “supplier experience” movement. Because as we weather the cost-of-living crisis the route to staying profitable and competitive, is through mutual success. 

About the Author

Costas Xyloyiannis is co-founder and CEO of HICX, the leading supplier experience management solution. Costas founded HICX in 2012 to address the challenges of bad supplier data in the enterprise. 

He holds a Master’s degree in Computer Science from Imperial College London and has 20 years’ experience in helping some of the world’s largest companies to take control of their supplier data and deliver a superior supplier experience.

He strongly believes in the importance of data and supplier-centricity, as a foundation for digital transformation in business, and is a regular speaker and contributor on this topic. 

 

ethylene

The UK, Norway and Finland Benefit from Rising Sweden’s Ethylene Imports

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Sweden – Ethylene – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends And Insights‘. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

Sweden is rapidly ramping up ethylene imports. In the first half of 2021, Sweden purchased 100K tonnes of ethylene. Last year, imports spiked from $125M to $388M, or from 116K tonnes to 525K tonnes in physical terms. The UK, Norway and Finland supply 80% of Sweden’s ethylene imports. In 2020, the UK’s exports rose fourfold, while Norway’s and Finland’s recorded an eightfold increase. The average ethylene import price dropped by -31.8% y-o-y to $739 per tonne.

Ethylene Imports into Sweden

In the first half of 2021, Sweden imported 100K tonnes of ethylene. Over the last year, imports soared from 116K tonnes to 525K tonnes. In value terms, imports surged from $125M in 2019 to $388M (IndexBox estimates) in 2020.

In 2020, the UK (295K tonnes) constituted the largest ethylene supplier to Sweden, with a 56% share of total imports. Moreover, ethylene imports from the UK exceeded the figures recorded by the second-largest supplier, Norway (88K tonnes), threefold. Finland (36K tonnes) ranked third in terms of total ethylene imports with a 6.8% share.

Over the last year, imports from the UK grew fourfold in physical terms. Purchases from Norway and Finland increased by eight times, while France expanded exports to Sweden threefold.

In value terms, the UK ($227M) constituted the largest supplier of ethylene to Sweden, comprising 59% of total imports. The second position in this ranking was occupied by Norway ($62M), with a 16% share of total imports. It was followed by Finland, with a 7.2% share.

In 2020, the average ethylene import price amounted to $739 per tonne, declining by -31.8% against the previous year. Average prices varied noticeably amongst the major supplying countries. In 2020, the countries with the highest prices were the Netherlands ($776 per tonne) and Finland ($774 per tonne), while the price for Portugal ($628 per tonne) and France ($641 per tonne) were amongst the lowest. In 2020, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Portugal, while the prices of the other significant suppliers experienced a decline.

Source: IndexBox Platform 

travertine

Turkey’s Marble and Travertine Exports Slump as China and India Reduce Purchases

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘Turkey – Marble And Travertine – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

Turkey’s marble and travertine exports fell from $865M in 2019 to $663M in 2020. In physical terms, exports shrank by -23% y-o-y to 3.5M tonnes. China and India, the key importers of marble and travertine from Turkey, rapidly decreased the volume of purchases by -22% y-o-y and 28% y-o-y, respectively. The supplies to China comprise 76% of Turkish exports of marble and travertine.

Turkey’s Marble and Travertine Exports

In 2020, marble and travertine exports from Turkey declined rapidly to 3.5M tonnes, reducing by -22.7% against the year before. In value terms, marble and travertine exports dropped from $865M in 2019 to $663M (IndexBox estimates) in 2020.

China (2.6M tonnes) was the leading destination for marble and travertine exports from Turkey, with a 76% share of total exports. Moreover, marble and travertine exports to China exceeded the volume sent to the second major destination, India (341K tonnes), eightfold.

In 2020, Turkish supplies to China fell by -21.8% y-o-y. Exports to India and Egypt dropped by -28.1% y-o-y and -9.6% y-o-y, respectively.

In value terms, China ($538M) remains the key foreign market for marble and travertine exports from Turkey, comprising 81% of total exports. The second position in the ranking was occupied by India ($60M), with a 9% share of total exports.

In 2020, the average marble and travertine export price amounted to $191 per tonne, remaining relatively unchanged against the previous year. Prices varied noticeably by the country of destination; the country with the highest price was China ($203 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Egypt ($76 per tonne) was amongst the lowest. In 2020, the most notable growth rate in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to Egypt, while the prices for the other significant destinations experienced a decline.

Source: IndexBox Platform

Phenol

Chinese Phenol Imports Soar Over $1.7B

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘China – Phenols – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

In 2020, China boosted its phenol imports by +20% y-o-y to 1.5M tonnes. In value terms, they exceeded $1.7B. South Korea, Taiwan and Thailand constitute the key phenol suppliers to China, with a combined 58%-share of the total imports. Taiwan, the U.S., Thailand and Japan expanded their exports to China, while shipments from South Korea dropped in 2020.

Chinese Phenol Imports

In 2020, approx. 1.5M tonnes of phenols were imported into China; growing by +20% against the year before. In value terms, phenols imports grew by +3.5% y-o-y to $1.7B (IndexBox estimates) in 2020.

South Korea (302K tonnes), Taiwan (302K tonnes) and Thailand (249K tonnes) were the main suppliers of phenols imports to China, together comprising 58% of total imports.

Taiwan (+95% y-o-y), the U.S. (+82% y-o-y), Thailand (+32% y-o-y) and Japan (+10% y-o-y) saw the highest increases in export volume to China in 2020. By contrast, purchases from South Korea reduced by -15% y-o-y.

In value terms, the largest phenols suppliers to China were South Korea ($319M), Taiwan (Chinese) ($294M) and Thailand ($237M), together accounting for 49% of total imports.

In 2020, the average phenols import price amounted to $1,183 per tonne, waning by -13.8% against the previous year. Prices varied noticeably by the country of origin; the country with the highest price was the U.S. ($1,891 per tonne), while the price for Saudi Arabia ($712 per tonne) was amongst the lowest. In 2020, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was attained by Japan, while the prices for the other major suppliers experienced a decline.

Source: IndexBox Platform

lactose

The U.S. Lactose Export Prices Soar

IndexBox has just published a new report: ‘U.S. – Lactose And Lactose Syrup – Market Analysis, Forecast, Size, Trends and Insights’. Here is a summary of the report’s key findings.

The U.S. remains the leading supplier of lactose and lactose syrup with a 36%-share in global exports. While the volume of lactose shipments from the U.S. was almost unchanged from the previous year, exports in value terms jumped by 8% to $396, as the average exports price has significantly risen. Despite the trade tensions, China remains the key importer of lactose from the U.S., followed by New Zealand and Japan.

Exports from the U.S. by Country

The U.S. remains the largest exporter of lactose and lactose syrup worldwide, accounting for 36% of the global exports. In 2020, lactose exports from the U.S. fell modestly to 379K tonnes, standing approx. at the year before. In value terms, lactose exports expanded rapidly by +8.2% to $396M (IndexBox estimates) in 2020.

In 2020, the average lactose export price amounted to $1,045 per tonne, with an increase of +8.3% against the previous year. There were significant differences in the average prices for the major export markets. In 2020, the country with the highest price was Canada ($1,314 per tonne), while the average price for exports to Viet Nam ($857 per tonne) was amongst the lowest. In 2020, the most notable rate of growth in terms of prices was recorded for supplies to Viet Nam, while the prices for the other major destinations experienced more modest paces of growth.

China (69K tonnes), New Zealand (46K tonnes) and Japan (42K tonnes) were the main destinations of lactose exports from the U.S., together comprising 41% of total exports. Mexico, Indonesia, Viet Nam, the Philippines, South Korea, India, Singapore, Thailand, Canada and Brazil lagged somewhat behind, together accounting for a further 46%.

In 2020, the most notable rate of growth in terms of shipments, amongst the main countries of destination, was attained by Thailand, while exports for the other leaders experienced more modest paces of growth.

In value terms, China ($74M), New Zealand ($48M) and Japan ($41M) were the largest markets for lactose exported from the U.S. worldwide, together accounting for 41% of total exports. Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, India, the Philippines, Viet Nam, Thailand, Singapore, Canada and Brazil lagged somewhat behind, together comprising a further 44%.

Source: IndexBox Platform

global supply chain

Sales & Operations Planning: A Long-Term Solution to Global Supply Chain Volatility

As companies strive to provide the highest quality and service at the lowest cost, global supply chains play a vital role. Companies often approach their global supply chain planning with a “do it and forget it” attitude, expecting that a detailed identification, verification and qualification process will not require frequent revisits of past decisions. Global political climates, tariff wars, and the recent COVID-19 virus outbreak continue to illustrate the urgent need for supply chain agility, risk management and contingency planning.

Sales & Operations Planning (S&OP) is a mid-term tool to ensure alignment among corporate strategic objectives, whereas Sales & Operations Execution (S&OE) is a tool to ensure balance among supply and demand. The flexibility of S&OP allows for an organization to look for imbalances at intermediate levels in a product hierarchy without getting “lost in the weeds” at detailed SKUs but not at too high of a level to be less meaningful.

In order to review this supply and demand balance, one must create supply planning groups and a structure based upon the critical success factors for delivering high levels of service. These planning groups could be internal manufacturing groups, make/buy items, a specific external supplier, or country of origin groupings. Given the extended lead times for international supply chains, S&OP is an ideal process for looking several months out into the future to perform risk analysis.

Strategic Considerations for International Sourcing

Companies initially evaluate their strategic objectives when pursuing an international sourcing initiative, but this should be revisited on a regular basis to ensure that the chosen supply chain continues to meet the companies’ needs. The lowest total cost of ownership is the primary objective, yet as manufacturing has declined in Western economies, the only source for production is often in the younger global economies such as China, India, Malaysia or countries of Eastern Europe.

Over time, labor rates and raw material costs in these countries have fluctuated due to global supply and demand. Combined with changing prices for the underlying commodities in those local markets, companies are facing more frequent price instability. Additionally, tariff uncertainty or increases force a regular review of the global supply chain to ensure strategic objectives have not changed and are still being fulfilled.

Supply Chain Complexity vs. Diversification

It is easier for a supply chain team to manage a single production site within a single manufacturer or at least from within a single country of origin. The obvious downside to that approach is that if that country is subject to a sudden tariff spike, an organization can quickly find itself with no choice but to accept the increase in costs and a likely impact to margins. As a potential alternative, a company can pursue a dual country sourcing strategy where it can cost-average its pricing to mitigate the short-term impact. Over a longer-term, a purchaser has the opportunity to switch volumes between suppliers/countries to mitigate those impacts.

How can S&OP help?

By its very design, the S&OP process is an ideal vehicle to prompt a company to ask the necessary strategic questions on a regular basis. In addition, a robust S&OP process takes into consideration changing costs and gross margin impacts to the bottom line to ensure gross margin or revenue targets are met. Stepping out of the day-to-day S&OE during the S&OP process allows for that broader perspective to evaluate “what-if” situations that could impact costs, demand, supply and margins before they reach fruition. In this manner, S&OP is a useful scenario-management tool to look at these cost changes, price increases and estimated adjustments to volumes at an aggregate level to quickly identify the potential impacts to the bottom-line without having to perform a time-consuming SKU-by-SKU analysis.

Contemporary S&OP tools often have scenario-modeling capabilities and increase the speed and accuracy of these strategic evaluation exercises. However, depending upon the scale and scope of a company’s supply chain, an expensive tool is not always necessary. Well-designed spreadsheet models populated by databases may be a sufficient starting point for a business. No matter what tool is utilized, the S&OP process is designed to identify potential issues and act as a launching point for projects elsewhere in the organization to identify methods for addressing those issues in the most cost-effective manner.

Companies with well-designed and utilized Sales & Operations Planning processes have well-demonstrated benefits of:

-Reduced stock-outs, driving higher service level

-Lower variable labor costs

-More efficient raw material, work-in-process and finished goods inventory utilization

-Lower transportation and material acquisition costs due to more stability

-Higher gross margins

-Increased top-line sales

Strategically including tariff management and other global supply chain variables in the S&OP process to evaluate possible impacts to the supply and demand balance, as well as cost structure, is critical to ensuring the continuity of supply necessary to provide high levels of service and cost management.

________________________________________________________________

Paul Baris is a supply chain expert with over 30 years of experience in the industry as a Vice President of Supply Chain for several companies as well as a consultant implementing Sales & Operations Planning, Inventory Strategy and Demand Planning practices.

Paul’s strengths include: Operational Performance, Root Cause Analysis, Lean & Six Sigma Methodology, Client & Vendor Liaison, Leadership, ERP, Strategic Procurement, Project Management, Warehouse Redesign/Implementation, Supply Chain Engineering, Statistical Process Control, 3PL Management, WMS, Demand Planning, Inventory Planning, Change Management, S&OP, and Operational Layouts. Paul is a certified supply chain professional from APICS and has a Certification in Supply Chain Management from the University of Tennessee. Paul’s professional certifications include: Change Management – Prosci ADKAR, Professional Negotiation – Karrass, Juran on Quality I & II – Kepner-Tregoe, Strategic Procurement – Stanford University, Statistical Process Control, Purchasing Strategy, Oliver Wight S&OP, and S&OP Implementation.