This Week on SCDigest:
Coming Dominance of On-Demand Supply Chain Software
Supply Chain Graphic of the Week and Supply Chain by the Numbers
New Cartoon Caption Contest Winner Announced
SCDigest On-Target e-Magazine
This Week on "Distribution Digest"
Trivia  Feedback

Become a Sponsor
SCDigest Home Page  
  Newsletter Archives May 7, 2010 - Supply Chain Digest Newsletter

Featured Sponsor:  Seegrid

Why Seegrid? Why Now?


Videocast Series: The Evolution of the 21st Century Supply Chain: Balancing Inventory, Workforce and Transportation

Part 2 - The Visible Product: End-to-End Inventory Management From Supplier to Store Shelf

Featuring GNC Case Study

New Date! May 18, 2010

Register Now!


VVideocast Series: Making Retail Smarter

Part II: How to reduce transportation costs by 30% with a better supply chain network strategy

Featuring Dr. Michael Watson of IBM

Register Now!


VVideocast Series: Videocast Series: Retail Supply Chain Best Practices

Part 1: Visibility and Performance Management

Featuring Dr. Brian Gibson, Professor of Supply Chain Management at Auburn University

Register Now!


Videocast Series: Making Retail Smarter

Part 1: Achieving Shelf Space Optimization

Featuring Dr. Michael S. Watson, IBM

Learn How To Optimize Every Square Foot Of Retail Space To Maximize Sales

This Week's Supply Chain News Bites
  - Only from SCDigest

Supply Chain Graphic of the Week: In What Areas of of Performance have US Manufacturers Improved Most Since 2006?


This Week’s Supply Chain by the Numbers for May 7, 2010: Sony Reduces Suppliers; Truckload Miles Still 36% Below Peak; Steel Mill Capacity Utilization Continues To Rise; Quality Is Job #1


Cartoon Caption Contest Winners Announced!

See This Week's Winners

New Contest Begins May 10, 2010

Each Week:

Global Supply Chain
Trends and Issues
New Industry Report

AMR Industry Report


HolsteHolste's Blog: Auto Labeling System Enhances Crossdocking Solution

Top Story: DSC Logistics gets End-to-End Workforce Management Right
Top Stories: North American Material Handling Show 2010 Day 1 and 2 Video Reviews

Visit Distribution Digest

New! Supply Chain Vendor Profiles

Epicor is a leader in ERP and Supply Chain Software for Mid-Market Companies

Learn More at our New
Vendor Profile Feature

Concise Summary, Videos

Case Studies, Brochures

New SCDigest White Paper

Re-Staple Your Self to a Multi-Channel Order

Next Generation Order Management is Critical to Supply Chain Success



Textile manufacturer Milliken led the charge for what supply chain initiative in the late 1980s, with ultimately delivered very mixed results at best?

Click to find the answer below
Coming Dominance of On-Demand Supply Chain Software

The On-Demand supply chain software world is really coming.

I must admit I have been until recently a bit of a skeptic. Why? Well, many of the early On-Demand solutions simply were not that robust in terms of functionality. Second, I wasn’t convinced that in many cases that the economics made sense – why pay for something forever when you can pay for it once? Third, in many cases, especially with Transportation Management Systems (TMS), I have seen a tendency for implementations to be “dumbed down,” for a number of reasons, simply meaning they tended to be much less ambitious than traditional deployments.

But I am changing my tune. In my 10 predictions for Supply Chain 2015 late last year, I had as one of them that On-Demand Supply Chain software would come to dominate the market by that time, and in subsequent presentations I have given on the 2015 supply chain, I have told audiences that I am as confident in that prediction as I am any of the other nine on my list.

That doesn’t mean the thousands of traditionally deployed software applications are going to go away any time soon, but it does mean the preponderance of new software implementations by that time will be of the on-demand variety – and that this will have a profound impact on technology vendors and their customers.

We explore all this and more in our just released Supply Chain Digest Letter focused on On-Demand Supply Chain Software. Many of you should have received a copy in the mail. For others, as always, you can download the full electronic copy of the Letter and access a wealth of other information on the Resources page associated with the Letter. You will find it here: On-Demand Supply Chain Software Resources Page.

Gilmore Says:

"Increasingly, you will be able to try the software before you buy it! What a dramatic, game changing impact that will have."

What do you say?

Send us
your Feedback here

First, as I have in the past, let me note that there are several dimensions to “On-Demand,” and that many companies don’t always well think this through.

The classic “On-Demand” model means that someone else physically hosts the application, and that rather than buying the software upfront, as has historically been done, the software is paid for through some kind of transaction and/or subscription fees. Conversely, traditional software meant paying for the license upfront, and having it installed on a server within the four walls of the enterprise and managing that system yourself.

But there are permutations, such as potentially installing the software within your enterprise, but paying for it on a transaction/subscription basis, or buying it upfront, but having some other party host the application for you.

The key point is that you have to think through what you are really trying to achieve.

You can add to that decisions about who is really going to run the software; for example, it is common in TMS selections processes for 3PLs to be also bidding along with software vendors for the business and saying they will not only provide the TMS (usually one of the ones also being separately bid) but manage some or all of the transportation process as well.

This last point is actually important, because I believe that it is inevitable that the combination of the On-Demand model and the mega-trend towards outsourcing will increasingly lead to on-demand software vendors and/or their partners offering both a solution and a managed service, or what is often called Business Process Outsourcing. The line between supply chain software and services will become increasingly blurred.

Which brings up all the terms, and there are a bunch of them here: Hosted, On-Demand, Software as a Service (SaaS), Cloud Computing, each somehow connected to this new approach to software delivery.

Do the terms matter? A bit. SaaS is often said to imply “multi-tenancy” (as in a tenant), meaning multiple companies are running on one “instance” of the software. That can significantly reduce management costs, which can lower prices for users. Of course, getting an application to securely support running perhaps dozens of different companies with their own database, configurations, etc, on one piece of software is a challenging technical feat – which is in part why the On-Demand model has been slow to come.

“Cloud Computing,” while very techie sounding, will also be important. The basic idea is that a software provider or hoster will have a farm of servers, each of which can be called on to provide processing power to a given application. In short, what that means is that rather than needing to acquire an expensive server that will easily meet your peak processing requirements but be well underutilized most of the time, you can tap into the power of the farm as needed, and just pay for that.

As we note in the Letter, it’s similar to installing a sorter in a distribution center that is scaled for peak days but is well underutilized most of the year. What if you could install a much smaller sorter that meets baseline needs, and have it magically expand just on heavy days? You would save a lot of money, and that in a sense is what Cloud Computing can offer on the hardware side.

I believe that On-Demand supply chain software is becoming a disruptive technology. Current vendors from ERP to planning to execution will be effected differently; some will make a good transition and thrive, while others will find themselves under assault from a new wave of On-Demand vendors built with that model from the get-go.

Why do I think the On-Demand model will take over? For one, it’s the Google generation moving up the management ranks. Everything else they access will increasingly be coming from an on-line provider – why should enterprise apps be any different?

Second, in the end, it is a better financial model for vendors. In the Great Recession, it was a lot better to be receiving a steady stream of subscription or transaction revenues, even if down some 20%, than having a tough time selling any new licenses for several quarters.

The challenge comes in the transition, from the software vendor’s basic financial model to how sale people are compensated. But here is the bottom line truth: once the traditional providers make their On-Demand offerings what they lead with, rather than as the fall back offering as is generally true today, then the percent of On-Demand sales for new deployments will take off like a rocket. That day is not too far away.

Think of some of the other changes we will see. Increasingly, you will be able to try the software before you buy it! What a dramatic, game changing impact that will have. No more trying to guess what the software really does through mind-numbing RFPs and software demos, but by accessing a version of the software on-line and seeing for yourself. It will certainly put the buyer in more control.

Of course, there are pros and cons as with everything, and today, you need to consider lots of factors. We cover that and more in the Letter, and on Monday on the Resources page will have a Total Cost of Ownership calculator that will allow you to compare On-Demand versus traditional solutions. The ability or lack thereof to build competitive advantage through a unique software solution is certainly one concern that has to be considered.

But On-Demand is the future. And 2015 is not that far away.

Do you agree that the On-Demand software approach will become dominant within about 5 years? Why or why not? How does your company think about this? Let us know your thoughts at the Feedback button below.


Send an Email

Web Page/Printable Version of Column


Do you use an RSS reader? Do you have a MyYahoo! or personalized Google page?

For these and more you can have SCDigest delivered right to your personal pages, all week long.

You can subscribe to our RSS feeds in two ways:

  1. Copy our RSS link into your RSS reader - it's easy!

  2. Click on a button below to quickly add it to your favorite readers.

We received a number of letters on our First Thoughts piece on China - Friend or Foe? Frankly, many asked that there letters not be published, as they were working for companies with major China sourcing or market development efforts. But we print a few below.

That includes our Feedback of the Week from Rosemany Coates of Blue Silk Consulting, who agrees there are issues but says that global economic integration can't be stopped.

There are several others, including some who think we need to player tougher ball with China, and one reader who thinks we jumped too much into politics versus supply chain on this one.

You will find all these below.

Feedback of the Week - China Friend or Foe?:

You make many good points in your column, but I think you are missing the biggest point of all…the world is no longer a country-centric conglomeration.  We are all tied economically and in cause-and-effect relationships politically. Even informationally (Google or not) we are tied via the global Internet.  Because of all these integration points, we must consider the whole world when we make business Supply Chain decisions.  It’s pointless to keep looking at our own navel…heads up! The US is a significant part of the world economy, but not the only part, and soon, not the predominant part.  The economic center of the world is now shifting to Asia and it is time we start truly thinking globally. Instead of asking, “why are we losing US manufacturing jobs?” we should be asking, “where in the world is the best place to manufacture and sell products?” 


You are correct in tying low-cost China manufacturing to the market potential for selling products to the burgeoning Chinese middle class and industrial complex.  China represents the single largest potential market in the world.  We need to think strategically about operating where it makes the most sense for our businesses to source and sell.


I am biased, of course.  Much of my consulting business focuses on sourcing and manufacturing in China.  But I have traveled and worked on Supply Chain projects all over the world for the past 25 years and I can tell you there is no place that compares to China manufacturing.  It is the most amazing place you can imagine and it is improving (techniques, design, infrastructure and management) every single day.


Rosemary Coates

President, Blue Silk Consulting


More on China Friend or Foe?:

The problem: U.S. corporations do not have U.S. nationalism among their plans or agendas.  This is largely due to short term thinking and no long term awareness.  America is giving away all of it's resources, in every form, for short term gains only.  America's near economic collapse in 2008/2009 is the best example.  I fear for the legacy we are leaving future generations. The federal government is in a position to influence this problem but it is suffering from the same lack of understanding and vision.  

The solution: The federal government needs to require companies in critical resource industries to run trade and supply chain decisions through a long term planning assessment filter before contracts with countries like China (Saudi Arabia is another example of a two-faced regime) are approved.  

Charly Davis

Logistics Professional


I think you should send your article to all of the major newspapers across the country and ask them to reprint it.  My thanks to you (and Google) for acknowledging the elephant in the room.    This "hear no evil, see no evil" charade is not sustainable.   Google deserves great praise and respect for what they did. 

Now let's hope they aren't left twisting in the wind by our government and other companies that have a similar capacity for drawing a meaningful line in the sand and sending a unified message about the importance of ethics and integrity in a functioning free market.  

On the other hand, China neither has, nor appears to be interested in having, a truly open, free market.  So maybe it will simply be a matter of each company deciding for itself an appropriate level of compromise between ethics, integrity, Corporate Character.....and revenue growth.   

Name withheld by request

I agree in principle that the Chinese government's involvement in private enterprises is a cause for concern, although I'm less concerned about China's military at present. Counterfeits and seemingly state sanctioned espionage are also concerning, but I believe China is perusing all avenues to acquire resources in fear that rising commodity prices may ultimately starve their industries, lower their competitiveness and drive civil unrest.

At present, China is growing primarily due to exports and global consumption, so China needs the world much more than the world needs China. I think much of your article and your opinions are inappropriate for this forum.  

Peter Wilson




Textile manufacturer Milliken led the charge for what supply chain initiative in the late 1980s, with ultimately delivered very mixed results at best?


"Quick Response," which Millken hoped would revive/save US apparel manufacturing through more demand-driven supply chain processes.