Search
or Search by TOPIC
Signup Bookmark page Sitemap  
 
  Sign-Up Free Newsletter
 
  Top Stories
Strategic Supply Chain always Just Around the Corner?
Logistics News: When Evaluating WMS, the "How" Question is Critical
Reader Supply Chain Question: Prepaid DHL Envelopes
First Thoughts
  By Dan Gilmore - Editor-in-Chief  
     
   
  April 10, 2008  
     
 

The New Supply Chain Lessons from Dell

 
 

Something quite extraordinary happened last week, and it has received relatively little attention from the supply chain world.

The headline news is that Dell is closing its world famous Topfer PC plant in Austin, TX, named for Mort Topfer, an ex-Motorola executive who in the mid-1990s became vice chairman and helped lead Dell out of an earlier slump.

Gilmore Says:
It’s “Back to the Future,” in a very real sense. Just a few years ago, Dell was positioned as the supply chain place where most of us needed to be.

Click Here to See Reader Feedback

To put it simply, Dell is significantly revamping its entire supply chain strategy and, in large measure, abandoning its make-to-order model. In addition, it will begin to make much greater use of contract manufacturers for the first time.

The strategy was outlined in a presentation by Mike Cannon, President of Global Operations – what is, in essence, a chief supply chain officer role. Interestingly, Cannon was previously CEO of contract manufacturer Solectron. Also interesting is that Cannon’s presentation started the meeting off – a pretty good indication of how important and dramatic these changes are.

I must admit to feeling that I made a good call with my column Time for New Supply Chain Icons in 2006, which said for many reasons we needed to look beyond the always cited Wal-Mart and Dell.

As Cannon noted, the Dell build-to-order and “do it all ourselves” model served the company well for almost 20 years, but “the environment has changed.”

I was debating whether to save this for the end, but I’ll say it now. It’s “Back to the Future,” in a very real sense. Just a few years ago, Dell was positioned as the supply chain place where most of us needed to be: almost no finished goods or parts inventory; negative cash-to-cash cycle (paid by customers before paying suppliers); “have it your way” flexibility/the epitome of mass customization; sophisticated demand management techniques to drive buyers to what was most profitable or available in terms of PC configs; cut out the middleman.

Now, it appears, Dell itself doesn’t want to be there.

“Our supply chain needs to change dramatically,” Cannon said.

So I guess we can stop chasing the vision too, in part. Dell will still operate that model for the customers who value it, but obviously at very reduced levels (i.e., like a whole Austin plant’s worth), but its now more replicating the supply chains of its competitors, which just a few years ago were lambasted by most for being so far behind Dell: make-to-stock with some limited last minute config changes before shipping, often by distributors; use of contract manufacturers and low-cost country production; sales through retail channels.

Cannon certainly made a strong case.

Dell’s approach added a lot of complexity – and cost. He said, for example, that for many models, there were as many as 500,000 configuration options, though of course nowhere near that many were actually ordered.

Why do that? “Because we could,” Cannon said. “We had a very flexible supply chain that allowed us to offer that level of configuration choice.”

That approach, contrary to popular belief, in turn actually led to higher product costs in many cases. Here’s how. Base/entry models had to be built in a way that permitted all these add-ons to much higher end models. So, if/when customers configured their way up to a high-end unit, Dell made good money. But if a customer stayed with a basic offering, the company lost margin because the base unit versus the competition had extra costs to support the potential of high-end add-ons. And it certainly added to overall supply chain complexity.

One could say that the essence of Cannon’s comments and strategy is that now, in the computer world, cost trumps speed and flexibility. He said Dell is committed to leading the industry in delivering equipment “at the lowest total landed cost” anywhere on the globe. “That’s what drives our supply chain decisions,” Cannon stated.

That clearly means, in part, production in low-cost countries, not Austin. And the company believes there are a large segment of customers who just don’t need Dell’s traditional supply chain model.

“They are very happy with fixed configurations and extended cycle and delivery times,” Cannon said.

Dell has said it believes it can save $3 billion annually from various measures, and Cannon said most of that will come out of these changes to the supply chain over the next 2-3 years. It had sales of $61 billion last year, so that’s about a 5% reduction in total costs.

Like a growing parade of other companies, it also sees its future growth tied heavily to developing markets – where the price/cost structure must be radically different (See End of a Supply Chain Era).

When asked what his biggest insight was upon joining Dell about a year ago, Cannon said after a moment’s reflection that “I think we underestimated the capabilities of our supply chain partners.”

He said the company, understandably, in recent years kept trying to incrementally improve its existing model that had led it to market leadership. In reality, the model needed to be substantially transformed – or one might say blown up.

I have a number of other thoughts here, but am out of space. In next Tuesday’s SCDigest On-Target edition, we’ll run a transcript of Cannon’s full comments under our Manufacturing section. I’d love now or then to get your thoughts on this.

It’s another end of an era, though one we’ve seen coming for some time. It’s Back to the Future indeed. Dell is now like the rest of us.

What is your take on Dell’s dramatic supply chain strategy shift? What are the lessons for the broader supply chain? Are they making the right moves, given the times?

Let us know your thoughts at the Feedback button below.

 
 
     
  Send an Email  
 
Feedback

April 16, 2008

I believe that computing became a commodity time ago when the Asian region opened themselves as cheap Contract Manufacturers. As a commodity there is not much to add to the good. Customers looks for price. They do find extreme customization on these products when they approach the retail store.

We also all know that boards and screens are all made in same factories with same design and same quality assurance. So why people will pay more for what Dell was proposing?


I think Dell should had done this some time ago - but then again, is not too late. 

Sebastian Mieres
Jigsaw Consulting


April 14, 2008

All I can say is: About Time!

I pointed out this trend to Dell management over 5 years ago and was told the Dell Direct Model will not change.  It will be the diversity of channels marketing, in combination with more low cost country manufacturing, that will impact the computer industry.  Some developing markets can only be entered through their distribution channels such as China.

The good old days of upselling from the base model worked during the growth period within U.S. and Europe, but a different approach is needed for other markets.

Denise Frohling
BP



April 14, 2008

Very interesting article. Here is my initial reaction.  Dell was doing BTO like Mercedes does BTO.  Or for that matter, like most people who think BTO means complete customer configuration.  The lesson they failed to learn was that there are many components, probably the majority,  with no interest to the consumer.  Dell would have been better off had they realized that the customization of a computer that would satisfy a consumer can be accomplished by a knowledgeable retailer. 
 
I will give you an example.  I tried to buy a Dell desk top for my wife mostly because I like the Dell story and because I wanted to have them reaffirm my belief in their business model. To my surprise, they could not do it at a price I was willing to pay. 
 
Instead, I went to Best Buy, bought an HP, had Best Buy configure it with the components important to me (media center, 400 gig hard drive, 2 gig memory, etc.) for about 65 percent of the cost Dell wanted to charge. 
 
The point of all this is that HP could provide me a BTO computer at a substantial discount because they had incorporated postponement strategies into their BTO model and had integrated their supply chain (namely Best Buy) appropriately. 
 
I do not think Dell is having some great revelation or that there is a new day dawning in supply chain evolution.  I think they tried to apply traditional build-to-order thinking in a global, integrated, contemporary supply chain world. That was not cutting edge.  It was short sighted.
 
 
John P. Collins, CSCP, CFPIM
President and CEO
Sustainable Solutions International, LLC


April 12, 2008

Dell indeed is rethinking its supply chain model, at least in part because it now has to supply retail customers like Wal Mart, in full trucks, on pallets, with ASNs (or RFID), which much of its make to order, ship to the end user did not require.

 

Back to the Future, for Dell, means trying to catch up with world class manufacturer to retail supply chains that efficient retailers require today. B to B is significantly different than B to C from a supply and planning perspective.

 

 

Lamar Johnson, P&G Retired, and

Executive Director, Center for Customer Insight & Marketing Solutions and

Senior Associate Director Center for Supply Chain Excellence

McCombs School of Business, University of Texas



April 11, 2008

 

I think the reality of the Dell transition is pretty straight forward.  I was on record many times with Tom Meredith former Dell CFO and the Dell team back in my i2 days that they were genius creating cashflow and negative working capital selling PCs to the 10-20 percent of the market that wanted or could buy build to order -- not retail.  I even helped introduce them originally to advanced planning in manufacturing. 

 

However I was always also emphasizing  that build to order was a replenishment strategy for only a minority of the Computer market and always spoke also about a distribution planning / inventory planning approach that necessary for other product lines / sub markets of computers but was never of any real interest to them. When desktop PCs were more expensive, corporate standards tighter and, internal IT departments needing custom software installs (that Dell could do cheaper then the internal IT department)  then the whole build to order postponed mfgr model was a glorious business / supply chain strategy / cashflow / working capital approach -- and still is for the percent of the market that wants to buy this way.

 

However, the percent of the PC buying market that wants a build to order approach NOW -- with the ability to get a fully featured machine off the shelf -- has shrunk dramatically.  Retail sales cannot be as profitable as the Dell build to order model but since customers want a zero time lead time of DEMAND  to be matched with a zero time immediate lead time of supply (immediate gratification) -- the customer wins, thus it makes sense to stage inventory. This just reinforces the concept that supply chain strategy is never about anything but supporting customers, exceeding competition and aligning supply chain execution to business strategy.  Inventory becomes a cost buffer to make customers happy and or respond to customer needs and competitive threats. 

 

Dell has been slow to realize the strategy is keeping the right inventory buffer to meet the right customer / product need and appears to have held on too long that a superior supply chain was only build to order.  Probably driven by Dell having a former CFO as CEO for awhile who just pushed the model but did not understand the first principles of why it worked all the while the market was changing.  

 

The growing popularity of laptops instead of desktops (that are not built in the US) and generally not really built to order (maybe lightly configured) is also an important fact (product change) that has changed the supply chain dynamic dramatically.  Products built in Asia cannot have a zero lead time of supply without holding inventory in some form. Hopefully Dell is looking at bringing over component inventory not just finished goods?

 

Some free advice to Dell would be instead of scrapping their build to order Austin facility they should look to insert a product line into it that customers want built to order? Blade servers, storage systems, high end servers maybe something that is not a direct computer and use their great build to order capabilities and skills profitably.  My opinion is the product changed with Asian mfgr largely dominating laptop components and configurations.

 

If we had any shred of a national / state industrial policy our governmental leaders would have been all over Dell helping them find product lines to save the value add manufacturing in Austin TX vs. let it all slide off shore! I in fact worked with the Governor of TX Advanced Mfgr Industry Cluster,  The Texas Workforce Commission and North Texas Workforce boards philanthropically to promote and established in writing that within TX a postponed distribution model for most industries was the No. 1 economic development opportunity within the State of Texas.

 

I would suggest Governor Perry and his staff get out of their comfy desk chairs and make that long drive across town and meet with Michael Dell and find someway to save this great Dell capability and the jobs tied to it!

 

Jon Kirkegaard

President

DCRA Solutions



April 11, 2008

Clearly Dell needs to provide what the marketplace wants.  There was a time when preconfigured systems were viewed as too constraining (not enough features) or too costly (has features I do not need), giving Dell a very real advantage by offering a customizable option, even though the customer had to wait 7 to 10 days and pay for shipping. 

Today, the low-cost components and demand for instant satisfaction presents customers with an off the shelf option which is cheaper than Dell and configured good enough for the customer.  I can get a decent (meets my needs) HP system from a big box store today, on sale (might not be cutting edge technology), and be cruising the net in a couple of hours.  Instant satisfaction.

What I find interesting is that Dell has had so much trouble with their supply chain.  You would understand a push model manufacturing stubbing their toes trying to transition to a lean model.  But here we have one of the leanest, if not the leanest model of manufacturing known to man trying to transition to some kind of a push model (yes, I said push -- the consumer did not actually place demand -- it was a retailer forecast) and failing badly.  On the surface it would seem that managing the supply chain to build 10,000 customized units to customer order would be way more difficult that for building 10,000 similar configurations to release against a forecast order the customer gave you last month.

Steve Murray
Principal and Chief Researcher
Supply Chain Visions



April 10, 2008

This is a topic you covered to some extent in August last year with your article How Many Supply Chains Does Dell Need Now?  The Dell business model and go-to-market strategy have both changed with their mass entry into the retail channel.  As any good supply chain strategist knows, supply chain strategy is subservient to a company business model and go-to-market strategy.  The direct go-to-market model has been served very well by renowned Dell BTO supply chain. 
 
The indirect (i.e. retail) go-to-market model is not as well served by this. It is kind of overkill as the optimal supply chain is very cost focused and leaned out with an emphasis on limiting variety (as opposed to the almost limitless variety enabled by the BTO model).
 
I do not see what Dell is doing as a complete abandonment of their supply chain strategy but rather a tweak to the existing supply chain model (more outsourcing, less variety) and an additional supply chain to their portfolio (potentially build-to-stock to support retail).  Dell has been a one trick pony for many years, albeit a very good one trick pony.  I think what we are seeing is a natural supply chain evolution as the business at Dell evolves. 
 
Kudos to Mike Cannon for having the guts to go after such a sacred cow.  I would imagine that one of his biggest challenges is to convince Dell employees that the supply chain model they helped perfect and the one that has been put on a pedestal year after year has got to change.
 
Supply Chain Manager
High Tech Company
Name withheld by Request
 
Response from SCDigest Editor Dan Gilmore:
 
Just my quick response..
 
In the presentation, it was presented as a lot more than a tweak. It was presented as a major transformation.
 
I agree with you at one level, but:
 
-- it has been Dell MTO model and all that went with it, really, that has been held up as the paragon. Other PC makers, rightly or wrongly, were often criticized for the failure to get there. 
 
-- For a long while, Dell got to compete on its own playing field. Now it has to compete on the same playing field - and it is starting almost from scratch. In that regard, it is all about execution, and the differences between the leaders will be small. Before, Dell got to compete on SCM design - and for awhile that gave it some huge advantages.
 
So, I think this is really big news. As I said to someone else, I doubt we will see any more How Dell Does It (real book) any time soon. And that ends an era.
 
Dan Gilmore

Response back from Subscriber:

When I said tweak (as opposed to plain tweak) it was meant to imply a a fairly major change.  Keep in mind, however, that Mike Cannon, as part of his MoC effort, needs to beat the drum loudly.  Dell is suffering badly in the marketplace and rapidly losing analyst mindshare on Wall Street.  If Mike Cannon, Michael Dell, and the rest of the Dell mgmt team do not impart to the world they are doing something major to fix things this slide will become even more rapid.  Mike has to position this as a blow-up.  The fact that their BTO model was so lauded only makes this harder.  From inside the company I can only imagine...it is a blow-up.  Step back, however, and I do not see this as a blow-up.  Yes, it is a major change for Dell.
 
Other manufacturers did get there, by the way, doing so in a different way all the while preserving one of our biggest assets...the channel.  As it turns out this channel model is a whole lot harder to deploy effectively than a BTO model. 
 
You are right, it really is big news....news that many of us in the industry have been predicting.  No new How Dell Does It books in the near future.  Perhaps How Dell Did It with the subtitle ...And Why This Does Not Work Anymore
 
Yes, that ends an era.


April 10, 2008
 
I am not so sure the term blown up is the best description of the changes being made in the Dell supply chain model. To me it is more like they have learned to do the Michael Jackson moonwalk and although appearing to be going forward they are actually going back in time to realign. 
 
Many practioners working in mass customization have posited for over a decade that in most cases one supply chain archetype simply cannot deliver all products that are offered by a global enterprise. Marshall Fisher wrote a very good article published in Harvard Business Review in the March-April 1997 edition entitled What is the right supply chain for your product?.
 
The message is simple but profound. In it he describes two basic supply chain archetypes - Responsive and Efficient. He states that the primary determinant of which type a company should use is based primarily on how predictable customer demand is for the product. What many assumed is that you had to choose one archetype or the other. That is a bad assumption.
 
Most, if not all, companies offer products through various channels where some have stable demand and others do not. In the Dell case, the fixed configuration, low cost models (which I assume have been a reality at Dell for quite some time) are much more predictable than the high end custom configured ones. I agree with Mr. Cannon that for this situation the best course of action is to disaggregate the single supply chain and redesign it into two delivery mechanisms based on the nature of demand for each product. I would assume that the goal would be to supply stable products having integral product architectures on efficient supply chains and to supply unpredictable products having modular product architectures on responsive supply chains (either with postponement at the dealer location or build-to-order at manufacturing).
 
Historically, the misuse of the responsive supply chain delivery model to supply steady, fixed configuration, low cost products has always created a dilemma. By trying to make it efficient you end up making it non-responsive. When you try to make it responsive, it becomes inefficient. When you try to make it both, it is neither. Perhaps this epiphany is what finally hit Dell and led to these salutary changes.
 
Art Brown
Big Canoe, GA

April 10, 2008

Dell was the model Supply Chain company not for its business model, but for its performance.  Whether you do retail direct, on make to order, or all Internet does not matter.  What matters is how well you do it.

 

1. They were the only one measuring the factories in seconds.

 

2. They were superb in managing details.

 

3. They were the best at the cash conversion cycle.

 

4. They were the best at global sourcing.

 

5. They were the best at lowest cost logistics.

 

Again, it is about how you manage your supply chains, not what they are.

 

Sure, everyone knows it is better to assemble-to-order" because then you do not have make-to-stock (forecast).  We have always pushed companies to work to increase that percent wherever possible. I did that with 50 companies. 

 

But, if your market changes, and you cannot get orders in advance, then you make to forecast or stock.

Gene Tyndall
SCDigest Contributing Editor



April 10, 2008

Perhaps this is a reminder to all of us:  Inventory is an effective tool when optimizing supply chain costs. The challenge is to find the sweet spot. 

Sue Makarov
General Mills



April 10, 2008

 I have been using the Dell supply chain model in several classes that I teach at the Illinois Institute of Technology.  This will cause me, and I hope, other teachers of supply chain best practices to re-think some of our material.  Big news indeed.  Thanks for the insight.

  
Herb Shields, CMC
HCS Consulting


 
Related Videos Related News & Videos
Coming soon
Supply Chain Graphic of the Week - SCM Priorities 2008
Strategic Supply Chain always Just Around the Corner?
Global Supply Chain News: Wal-Mart Toughens Up Asian Suppliers' Requirements, Sets Path for "Zero Defects" Product Supply Chain
Supply Chain News: Recession and Supply Chain Transformation
Global Supply Chain News: Will there Turn out to be a "China Import Bubble" Too?
Supply Chain News: Interesting Inventory Times
   
Keywords
Global supply chain   High tech/electronics industry supply chain   Outsourcing/offshoring   Supply chain strategy   Global supply chain   High tech/electronics industry supply chain   Outsourcing/offshoring   Supply chain strategy




Supply Chain Digest Home | Contact Us | Advertise With Us | Sitemap
© 2006-2007 Supply Chain Digest - All Rights Reserved