This Week on SCDigest:
State of the Supply Chain Software Union
Supply Chain Graphic of the Week and Supply Chain by the Numbers
New Cartoon Caption Contest Winner Announced
SCDigest On-Target e-Magazine
Expert Insight: Ushering In The 2nd Generations Of SaaS
This Week on "Distribution Digest"
Trivia  Feedback

Become a Sponsor
SCDigest Home Page  
  Newsletter Archives May 21, 2010 - Supply Chain Digest Newsletter

Featured Sponsor:  FedEx


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

Part 3 - Bridging The Gap Between Fleet And Common Carrier: Optimizing The Multi-Modal Mix

Featuring Adrian Gonzalez of ARC Advisory Group and Mona McFadden of RedPrairie

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!


Includes SCDigest Letter on On-Demand Software and New Total Cost of Ownership Calculator



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

Supply Chain Graphic of the Week: Automated Case Picking Solution Drivers


This Week’s Supply Chain by the Numbers for May 21, 2010: Samsung Puts Money where its Forecast is; Cap and Trade Reveals Real Dollars; SKU Reductions in Retail Continue; Factory Capacity Drops in Recovery


Cartoon Caption Contest Winner Announced for May 10 Cartoon!

See This Week's Winner!

New Contest Begins May 24, 2010

Each Week:

Global Supply Chain
Trends and Issues

By Greg Johnsen ,
EVP Marketing & Co-Founder,

GT Nexus

Ushering In The 2nd Generation Of


HolsteHolste's Blog: Squeeze 20% More Performance Out Of Your Existing Sliding Shoe Sorter

Top Story: Warehouse Education and Research Council (WERC) 2010 Day 1 and 2 Video Review
Vendor News: RedPrairie Acquires On-Demand WMS Vendor SmartTurn
Top Story: Kellogg's Sees Many Advantages to AGVs in Distribution, but Says Getting Operation Right Takes Forethought and On-Going Effort

Visit Distribution Digest



Where did the unusual term "product martialing and handling systems" come from or refer to?

Click to find the answer below
State of the Supply Chain Software Union

Well, I think I am actually in town for a few days here after a number of weeks on the road.


That included stops at the user conferences of Manhattan Associates, RedPrairie, and JDA Software, all large and well known companies, as well as a smaller but interesting company called Datalliance that focuses – very well, it appears - on vendor managed inventory solutions.


I put together video reviews of the Manhattan Momentum conference and RedPrairie’s RedShift event, which you may find of interest whether or not you are a customer of either company, as I tried to focus on more general trends and issues rather than vendor specific topics. My review of the JDA Focus conference will be on our web site on Monday.


Attending a string of events like that back to back gives you a pretty good sense of what is going on in the supply chain software market and how companies are thinking about these tools, so I thought I would offer some overall observations.

Gilmore Says:

"The big drivers of competitive advantage will really now be in the skill companies have in best using those tools, and avoiding getting stuck in one place for very long."

What do you say?

Send us
your Feedback here

First, it was simply nice to be at these events in 2010 versus this same period a year ago, when there was a bit of a pall cast over everything as we were near the bottom of the Great Recession. This year, attendance was up substantially at all of the events, the vendors were in very positive moods as the enjoy the growing surge in demand, and attendees overall clearly were back in the market for technology.


This technology interest of course comes from many quarters, but I think I can characterize several main vectors: 

  • The incredible Lean-ness with which companies need to run their ships today from a human capital perspective has them looking for tools that frankly can keep the head count low while they re-grow the top line. More software, fewer planners for inventory or transportation, fewer associates in the distribution center, etc.
  • Companies really do believe now, in a way that we haven’t seen before, that it is possible to build to a truly demand-driven supply chain that makes a step change improvement in inventory management performance. But you need some new tools to get there.
  • As we noted a few weeks ago, “on-demand” supply chain software is rapidly becoming the rage, and companies are seeing the opportunity to acquire tools with much less pain, risk and upfront cost than they might have experienced in the past. That potential is creating demand.

The breadth of offerings from these big supply chain “suite” vendors is becoming almost breath-taking. In fact, half the battle is figuring out what exactly all the piece parts are and which can be best applied to your situation. That takes some real work.


And, while not perfect, in general the stuff really does work together in increasingly leveraged ways. JDA, Manhattan and RedPrairie all now have a “process platform” of some kind (JDA is smartly adopting the Agile Supply Chain Process Platform that came with the i2 acquisition earlier in the year) that take advantage of Software Oriented Architecture (SOA) to enable, in theory at least, highly flexible capabilities to build tailored workflows and processes much more rapidly and consistently than in the past.


Attendance Up Big at Most Conferences this Year

What this means in part is that you will be able to gain competitive advantage from something that feels a bit like “customization” but really isn’t. We’re on the journey, not at the destination, but we weren’t really on this road at all until very recently.


My sense that we are at a bit of a stand-off in terms of “ERP versus best-of-breed” software. More on this soon from SCDigest, but certainly the best-of-breed folks do not seemed consumed with SAP/Oracle worry as they were five years ago or so. Don’t get me wrong, the ERP vendors are still getting their share, but for the moment, we’re at something of a point of stability in this on-going battle.


However, as the scope of the offerings from the largest supply chain software players (including some not specifically referenced here), the message from them about the advantages that a large, well-integrated suite can bring (i.e., 1+1+1 = 5) starts to take on an almost ERP-like quality to the story. Walking this line successfully – comprehensive supply chain suite, but focused just on supply chain – will be the key challenge for many of these vendors.


Overall quality of the software is simply better. There are still “bugs,” but their scope and severity is simply a shadow of the kinds of problems you could run into in the not too distance past. Indeed, the worry about the “software not working” has dramatically shifted from poor software quality to highly complex configuration requirements coming from more and more capabilities – making it very tough on users to get it right.


I think the vendors all have some work to do in making this process easier to understand and execute – an opinion supported by several casual conversations I had with attendees at all these events. “Give us some help to manage set-up and configuration,” they are saying.


Upgrades are an issue still, and users want the vendors to make the process much easier and less expensive.  There is still work to do here for sure – and it becomes one of the appeals of on-demand, where in general you would be continually upgraded to the current version without any real technical headaches – or need to justify the upgrade costs. Users realize they are in this bad place where it is hard to justify upgrades or they just don’t have the bandwidth to do them, but then they later look up and find themselves years behind the technology curve.


Georgia-Pacific, as just one example, went from 2001 to 2009 without upgrading its planning systems. A lot changed in that time. Some combination of on-demand and better approaches to upgrades from traditional deployments will solve this problem soon, I believe.


Kind of relatedly, I spoke with or attended sessions with several companies which had recently acted on technology-related initiatives that they had known they should have done for years but just had not pulled the trigger. What’s interesting is that in several cases they had no real good answer for why the delay.


I am of course not saying companies should be some sort of perpetual-motion supply chain software adopters, and everyone has bandwidth constraints today even if they have the dollars. That said, I do think companies need some way to keep these opportunities more front and center so they get less lost amidst the day-to-day and you wake up and five years have gone by without action in an area where there was clearly ROI. The “Important but not Urgent” opportunities, as Stephen Covey would say.

The bottom line for me: we have simply entered a new era of supply chain software maturity, being shaken up a bit by the on-demand movement, and the big drivers of competitive advantage will really now be in the skill companies have in best using those tools, and avoiding getting stuck in one place for very long.


I have a few sentences left, and just want to say that the recently introduced Senate climate bill has the potential if passed to dramatically impact supply chain practice. We spent a lot of time trying to understand the bill, and created an excellent summary that you can find in our On-Target newsletter that is linked nearby under the Green Supply Chain section. I encourage you to do so.  BTW, you will also find a video review of the Warehouse Education and Research Council (WERC) event there as well. I was just in to give a presentation, but was ably assisted in the review by Doug Sampson of Acme Distribution Centers and Jack Ampuja of Supply Chain Optimizers - I think you will enjoy their comments. Supply Chain Digest readers are always above average!


What is you sense about the supply chain software market now? Do you agree or disagree with Dan’s perspectives?  What other major trends do you see? 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.

OK, we are really behind, and promise to catch up soon. Below, you will find some great reader feedback on two topics. The first comes from guest column by Trevor Miles of Kinaxis S&OP at Risk, where he argued that companies need to make much progress at managing planning and execution between monthly S&OP cycles.


That generated several letters of general agreement from our readers, including our Feedback of the Week from our friend Bob Nardone, a former Unilever supply chain executive and now independent consultant.


We also publish a few letters from a Supply Chain Graphic of the Week on the Three Phases of Supply Chain, where former CVS supply chain exec Kevin Smith says companies must manage cycles of evolution, devolution, and revolution, and that evolution isn’t enough if you are behind.


See these and more below.

Feedback of the Week: On S&OP at Risk



Trevor makes some very good points in this article.


The balancing of the sales demand and the production and inventory plan needs ongoing attention throughout the monthly cycle (and adjustments) but many supply chains are not nimble enough to continuously react to change. (e.g. capacity constraints or long global supply chains).


So while end to end connectivity and real time visibility are worthy objectives, for many supply chains they may not be a reality or all that effective.


In addition to the suggestions included, I would add this checklist:


  • Does your organization have a ongoing program to drive demand planning excellence.  Are you monitoring the correct forecasting metrics (like Bias and Weekly Error by distribution point)?


  • Is the S&OP process owned by the top executive in the business?


  • Is the reporting process linked to financial performance and other key business metrics ?


  • Is there broad visibility to business and supply chain performance with analytical tools to assess gaps and problems?

Robert Nardone

Supply Chain Guidance LLC

More on S&OP at Risk:



This makes sense to me, given the expectation of continuous adjustment to continuous change.


My question would be how much flexibility can be built into a supply chain design without making the operation non-competitive on cost?


For example, if imports are 50% cheaper than domestic goods on a price basis, can’t you live with more inventory and hence a major buffer against continuous adjustment? 


And since imports always carry some risk of unusual delay, can you expect an import driven chain to be flexible to unusual demand?  If so, how often?  100% of the time?  98%?


Arnie Maltz

Arizona State University

I agree.


We use a mini-SIOP process during the month that allows any demand changes to be reviewed by Sales/Ops /SC and make a group decision on implementing the change or keeping as is.


Rod R. Benton, CPIM

Master Scheduler


I would tend to agree on the information presented except when it comes to system!


The true keys points are process and ownership! Systems can make it easier but many companies make it work with excel spreadsheets! Our different transactional systems hold the data and we pull it together with the help off excel.  


Scott Roy

Collaboration Planning Manager

Wells Dairy, Inc

On Supply Chain Evolution versus Revolution:


I have an interesting tidbit that I would like to share. I worked many years for a Japanese automaker from which I learned  that evolution or continuous improvement creates a consistent upward trend that in the long run will surpass the short term benefit burst  of revolution.


Joan M. Thompson
Sr. Supply Chain Optimization Analyst

ConAgra Foods

Devolution cannot be so short.  While there would be improvement programs in Devolution stage it would be disparate and staggered due to the casualness arising from pioneering and enterprise prosperity (from the evolution stage).


As with above, if the length of the strokes indicate period as well as effort, the revolution phase cannot be in two plateaus.  If it takes so long to pull ones socks to revert to restructuring and innovations, the revolution stage might never arise.


Joseph George

Agility Logistics


Where did the unusual term "product martialing and handling systems" come from or refer to?


In about 1996, the analysts at Gartner tried to promote the odd term as a replacement for Warehouse Management Systems (WMS), because they felt the level of complexity in DCs was going to make most installed WMSs obsolete. They were largely right on that count, but the term never took off, thankfully.