|
RIDING THAT CHAIN
Disillusioned about your supply-chain
management system? There may be relief on the way, in the
form of smaller, nimbler third-party service providers.
By Arthur Clennam
Here's something that Liam Casey knows
about logistics in China that you probably don't. The People's
Republic is the only country in the world where customs officials
want to know precisely the quantity of raw materials used
in that component you are trying to export. Manufacturers
on the mainland beware. If there's a discrepancy in inputs
versus outputs - i.e. the amount of raw material bought by
the company versus the amount of goods estimated to be made
from that same amount - then customs agents will halt the
shipment of the finished goods until the discrepancy is cleared
up.
The purpose is to stanch the flow of goods
transferred out of China to avoid tax and royalties. While
this is a perfectly reasonable activity for a government,
it's hell on the supply chain if you're a just-in-time manufacturer.
Suppose you're Taiwanese designer who's
using a factory in Dongguan province to meet an order for
components to be delivered to your largest European client,
and suppose there's a discrepancy in that factory's records.
The result is that your shipment will languish for days. Meanwhile,
your nail-biting customer in Prague is in danger of missing
his on-sale date.
That hold-up is what's known in the supply-chain
management business as a "pain point". And that's where Casey
comes in. His company, PCH, eases aches that naturally emerge
when goods move through a synchronized pipeline from one manufacturer
to another, and, eventually, to market. PCH is small, earning
US$2.8 million in profits on revenues of US$30 million. What's
interesting about Casey and his crew is that PCH is offering
value-added services that go beyond logistics, mimicing companies
50 times its size. PCH's service package includes sourcing,
software tracking, and even risk management. Giants like UPS
and Exel are trying to provide this end-to-end type of service
as well. The difference is they're struggling with massive
cost pressures plus new PCH-style competitors.
"The tools of globalization," says Casey,
"such as real-time internet tracking systems, discount air
travel, and mobile phone technology are just as available
to a small, low-cost provider as they are to giant organizations."
Casey and his operatives keep costs down by flying economy
class, keeping an office in Shenzhen rather than pricey Hong
Kong, and travelling with a battery of mobile phones - one
for each market - in order to avoid steep roaming charges.
He projects a 9 percent profit margin this year.
"In China, the only way to compete is
to promise no surprises," he says. He adds: "That's a promise
not easily delivered, but we can anticipate problems and undo
the knots as well as anyone.".
Pain on the Chain
There's been a lot of talk about supply-chain
knots lately, as evidenced by two studies released in May.
One, by Booz Allen Hamilton, the New York research firm, found
that despite a $19 billion worldwide market for supply-chain
system "solutions" - a buzzword meaning software investments
- 45 percent of the respondents were dissatisfied with the
level of performance of their investments against expectations.
The study polled senior executives who make the spending decisions
- CFOs, CIOs and commodity supply officers - at companies
that sold more than US$1 billion annually and had operations
on a global scale. The respondents said that the most common
reason for disappointment was an inability to forecast effectively
(56 percent). Other reasons include implementation issues
and delays (48 percent), and unrealistic expectations about
the impact of technology (44 percent) (see "Five Telltale
Signs of Supply Chain Pain").
Another technology research group, International
Data Corp (IDC), based in Massachusetts, released a study
with complementary findings last month. This study says that
buyers of supply-chain management services had increased by
9.5 percent in 2002, but that buyers were less receptive to
large-scale supply-chain management investments that required
complex and lengthy implementations and internal change. Instead,
the market demonstrated a clear preference for smaller-scale
projects that addressed the immediate "pain points" with up-front
return-on-investment and some clear "show-me" milestones.
The underlying theme, to be sure, is squeezing
dollar value out of supply chain systems that, not too long
ago, were predicted by consultants to be cost savers themselves
on a massive scale. Harry Lee, the managing director of Hong
Kong-based TAL Apparel, is an example of an Asian executive
looking hard for those "show-me" milestones cited by IDC.
TAL is midway through installing a new ERP supply-chain management
system using software by Intentia, the US-based company software
solutions company. TAL makes men's dress shirts for manufacturers
such as Calvin Klein and Brooks Brothers, with annual sales
of US$500 million, and needs the system to better monitor
the progress of orders through the supply chain. The cost
for the software and for consultants to help TAL connect it
to warehouses and shipping facilities and customer databases,
was initially priced at US$5 million. Lee, with palpable frustration,
says it will "come in well over US$10 million". The doubled
price tag is due to the extensive nature of the integration
needed at TAL, which already had an antiquated system that
ran on an IBM mainframe and was developed 20 years ago.
"The old system was not much worse than
what we're installing now," says Lee. "But the trouble is
that when you want to get anything done, you have to pull
data from all over the place. We've grown too big to run the
operation this way." So he and his board decided it was time
to invest in "comprehensive integration that would allow more
adaptability." One of the elements of this adaptability is
that the Intentia system can be web-based, and incorporate
such add-ons as TradeCard, which allows for electronic transactions
that take the place of traditional letter-of-credit instruments,
speeding up payments and the flow of goods.
While Lee has money to spend, many CFOs
are desperate to smooth the supply chain without adding cost.
Jake Vigoda, the finance chief of KR Precision, a US$45 million
business in Bangkok that makes computer components, began
overhauling his supply-chain management system in 2001 during
a period when the company was losing money rapidly. For Vigoda,
clearing up the problems in the company's supply-chain management
system was crucial. KR Precision had been hit by a downswing
in computer sales and exports and needed to squeeze costs
in order to return to profitability. Vigoda says. "I wanted
significant improvement in working capital, and greater flexibility
to meet changing demand, and improving the supply-chain process
was the best place to do it." He adds, "And I didn't want
to spend any more money."
Vigoda says that KR Precision installed
an ERP system in 1997, but that the really aggressive efforts
to improve supply-chain management came when the company set
up a just-in-time (JIT) hub systems 18 months ago. "We give
our suppliers stock level targets," says Vigoda, "based on
our forecasting of customer's needs. We look each day at the
inventory levels, and have a tight control of the flow of
what we produce and ship into our JIT hub." The success factor?
"Instead of having to keep three to five days of finished
goods as a backup for changes in customer demands, we've been
able, without any failure rate, to eliminate one whole level
of buffer stock."
Vigoda is keeping his fingers crossed.
Revenues grew 50 percent year-over-year in 2002 from 2001.
He's predicting that KR Precision will return to profitability
this year - if the newly fine-tuned JIT hub is able to deliver
lower costs despite the growth in sales volume..
The Third Party Option
CFOs of bigger companies have more leverage
to squeeze cost out of the supply chain, particularly if they've
opted for a complete outsourcing solution. Yet when they do
so, they can put pressure on their logistics provider - and
the supply chain itself.
Take, for example, Singapore-based National
Semiconductor, a company which has always struggled to optimize
supply-chain management. Like the much smaller KR Precision,
National Semiconductor has been hit hard by the decline in
technology exports from Southeast Asia. So, in 1999, in an
effort to bring down distribution costs and packing and shipping
time, it opted to outsource its whole operation to a global
distribution center in Singapore and switched contracts from
Federal Express to UPS.
To get the business, UPS took on the overheads
of the center itself and the staff, estimating, according
to Ong Jun Tak, the UPS country operations manager, that the
volume shipped from the semiconductor maker would make it
a profitable investment. But the collaboration has taken years
of work - and considerable sweat. First off, National Semiconductor
and UPS decided to invest in a warehouse management system
dubbed PKMS, developed by Manhattan Associates based in Atlanta.
Ong would not disclose the cost of the implementation but
its goal was to take cost out of the process by keeping better
track of inventory. In warehouse operations, Ong explains,
there's a lot of duplication of actions like double packing
- once at the warehouse and once again at the airport. The
Singapore facility handles about 90 percent of National Semiconductor's
inventory flow around the world, processing more than 400,000
semiconductor orders per year.
The facility receives chips from National's
final assembly plants, separates them into individual orders,
and vacuum packs the orders for customer shipment, usually
within 24 to 48 hours. From receiving goods to shoving them
out the door under the old system, it took 20 steps, requiring
a 24-hour shift to supervise the process. Now automation has
whittled down the number of steps to 12, says Ong, allowing
UPS to eliminate one whole shift, but still ship the same
volume. That, and a multi-tier pricing system, allowed National
Semiconductor to cut back on supply-chain costs by 15 percent,
says Ong.
But the implementation was not without
its bumps. In order to save costs from the outset, UPS decided
to set its server in Atlanta, the idea being that the Atlanta
server already had a tech staff who knew the system. Why duplicate
it in Singapore? But, Ong admits: "It felt very insecure at
first having the server so far away - and there were problems."
First off, they didn't supply enough bandwidth to handle the
data traffic between Singapore and Atlanta and the fancy PKMS
database had trouble running. It took them about a year to
work through the glitches.
The model is working at last, and now
National Semiconductor has floated a request for proposal
for third-party outsourcing of its new manufacturing facility
outside Shanghai. While UPS is not exactly a shoo-in for the
new business, it is in the running. Competition in China is
stiff these days. The Logistics Institute-Asia Pacific, a
think tank funded by the Singapore government, released a
2002 "China Logistics Provider Study" in January. The study
found that revenue growth had averaged 40 percent for a group
of the 29 largest logistics providers in China over the past
three years. Growth is estimated to level out at about 50
percent for the next three years.
In order to succeed in China's market,
UPS will have to compete at a lower cost. A look at the company's
financials shows that this won't be easy. UPS's total revenues
for 2002 were US$31.3 billion, while it's operating expense
amounted to US$27.2 billion, or 87 percent of sales. Following
taxes and extraordinary items, net income amounted US$3.2
billion, up 33 percent over the previous year. That looks
good on paper, but while net income has increased owing to
the odd windfall, such as a tax reassessment and investment
income, net income as a percent of revenue has been eroding
- to 7.7 percent in 2002 from 8 percent in 2001 and 9.5 percent
in 2000.
Operating expense is up 21 percent since
2000, outpacing revenue growth. Companies like UPS have hit
a cost barrier. They need to produce growth to stay alive
and stay in the business, and yet still cut down on costs
dramatically. Their clients, like National Semiconductor,
have cash-flow problems, too, and will bargain hard on price.
Casey at the Bat
So where does Liam Casey stand amid all
this? His PCH is small, able to underbid the competition,
and he's not going away. At the moment, he's a niche player,
offering a complete supply-chain management solution between
Taiwan customers, 50 factories in China who make goods for
them, and, ultimately, the customers in Europe, the US and
Mexico that install these components into their finished products.
But it won't be long before Lee in Hong Kong, Vigoda in Thailand
and maybe even National Semiconductor in China start saying
yes to his pitches.
What's interesting about his business
is the range of service he's supplying, despite the relatively
small size of his business. PCH does more than just schlep
goods. It buys the freight when its in transit, underwrites
the risk of the shipment, earning a fee for managing the risk.
Casey has invested in the design of a propriety software supply-chain
tracking program - available online - that mimics sophisticated
programs but looks alarmingly simple. And he hops on a plane
himself to clear up those points of pain that, inevitably,
threaten to clog supply chains in Asia. The fact that a small
company can gain a foothold in this business quickly - Casey
started out cold eight years ago with a US$20,000 bank loan
and billed US$30 million in revenues last year - shows just
how up-for-grabs this business can be.
Casey's home is in Ireland, although
it's hard to tell whether he really lives there. Check out
where he's been over the last two months: Shenzhen, Taipei,
Shanghai, San Jose, Seattle, Houston, Austin, Guadalajara,
Tampa, Nashville, Dublin, Edinburgh, Vienna, Budapest, Prague,
and Shenzhen. Ask him what color his apartment is painted,
and he probably won't know. But he knows how to move components
from point A to point B, and he's about to give the biggest
logistics players a run for their money. 
|