Executive Summary No two supply chains are alike. While business is changing quickly, the supply chain processes are evolving slowly. The average supply chain organization is 14-years old, and as is shown in Figure 2, one out of three companies state that there is room for improvement in their supply chain. Figure 2. Descriptors Used by Supply Chain Leaders to Describe Their Supply Chains While companies desire a supply chain that is more aligned, fast, agile, and proactive, today the supply chain is controlled and becoming more global. In the building of today’s supply chain, as will be seen in this report, the tightly integrated IT infrastructure defined in the last two decades is an impediment to building an agile, proactive and aligned supply chain. In Figure 3 we contrast the current state of the supply chain with the desired state of supply chain leaders.   Figure 3. Supply Chain Descriptors: Current State versus Desired Operation As shown in Figure 3, while supply chain leaders desire a more proactive, aligned and faster supply chain, these are areas for improvement. The current supply chain is controlled and global, but with significant opportunity for improvement. Ironically, despite the gaps in overall performance, many supply chain leaders term current practices as “best practices.” In this report we challenge the status quo. We do this by teasing out the data to understand business drivers. For example, in Table 1 we can see that a company which rates itself as “having a supply chain working well” is more likely to be in the process industry, and have a supply chain organization where manufacturing reports to the overall supply chain leader. In addition, within the organization there is a greater understanding of the supply chain by the executive leadership team, stronger alignment of metrics cross-functionally, stronger capabilities in supply chain visibility, and the organization is better at managing change. The companies that outperform are also better at accessing and using data. It is also significant to note that we do not find a correlation between “working well” and the presence of a Supply Chain Center of Excellence, fewer ERP instances, or maturity in Sales and Operations planning. The reason? These processes and practices are evolving.

1. In Search of Supply Chain Excellence
Insights from Four Years of Quantitative Research
03/18/2016
By Lora Cecere
Founder and CEO
Supply Chain Insights LLC

2. Page 2
Contents
Research Methodology
Disclosure
Executive Summary
Supply Chain Strategy and the
Definition of Supply Chain Excellence
Alignment
Agility
Supply Chain Visibility
Sales and Operations Planning
Supply Chain Talent and Building Core Capabilities
Data and IT Strategies
Recommendations and Insights
Conclusion
Terms to Know
Appendix
Additional Reading
About Supply Chain Insights LLC
About Lora Cecere
Endnotes
3
4
5
7
8
10
12
17
20
22
24
25
26
28
33
34
34
35

3. Page 3
Research Methodology
Research is our business. As a group, we triangulate data from multiple sources, analyze for insights,
and share with supply chain leaders to drive continuous learning. This sharing takes different forms:
webinars; roundtables; formal networking sessions; and private strategy days. We archive these
results and drive discussions in our public community Beet Fusion.
We are committed to delivering thought-leading content for the supply chain leader. Our goal is to be
the first place for visionaries to turn to gain unique insights. The research for this report is consistent
with delivering on this commitment.
This is a summary report. Consistent with principles of the Central Limit Theorem, we are trying hard
to understand the trends of the larger supply chain population over this period of time. To build the
insights for this analysis we mined data from identical questions asked in 28 quantitative studies from
2147 respondents. The surveys were tendered over the course of the past four years. The details of
these studies are shared in Figure 1, and the relevant demographic data is included in the Appendix
at the end of the report.
Figure 1. Overview of Research Used to Drive the Insights for this Report

4. Page 4
To ensure clarity of the research, each finding is presented as an image. At the bottom of each image
the reader will find the question asked in the research and the number of respondents answering the
studies. Since each survey had a different number of respondents, the number of completed surveys
by question will vary.
In this report we attempt to define not only the ‘What’, but also the ‘So what’. For example, we report
progress on supply chain characteristics like agility, S&OP maturity, alignment, and IT project
success. However, as we study each area, we not only report on the data of the survey responses,
but we also attempt to use the research to define the characteristics of successful companies. The
report is organized into four research areas—Process/Strategy, Building Supply Chain Talent,
Organizational Core Competency, and Success with IT Infrastructure—where we had sufficient data.
When analyzing the data please keep in mind that this data has a bias for large companies (average
of $5 billion in annual revenues) with supply chain teams in Europe and North America. The data is
more representative of more mature supply chain organizations and less applicable to teams evolving
in the emerging economies of Africa, Asia, the Middle East, and South and Central America.
Disclosure
Your trust is important to us. In our business we are open and transparent about our financial
relationships. In this research process we never share the names of respondents and/or give
attribution to open-ended comments collected in the research.
Our philosophy is “You give to us, and we give to you.” We collect data from a private network of
qualified participants and openly share the results. Each participant in the research is carefully
screened against demographic and qualifying criteria.
To drive participation, each respondent of the research always receives the final reports; and, if
interested, we share insights from the studies in a complimentary one-hour phone call with supply
chain teams or group virtual roundtable discussions.
This report is written and shared using the principles of Open Content research. It is intended for you
to read and share freely with your colleagues and through social channels like LinkedIn, Facebook
and Twitter. When you use the report, or the embedded graphics, all we ask for in return is attribution.
We publish under the Creative Commons License Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United
States and our citation policy is outlined on the Supply Chain Insights Website.

5. Page 5
Executive Summary
No two supply chains are alike. While business is changing quickly, the supply chain processes are
evolving slowly. The average supply chain organization is 14-years old, and as is shown in Figure 2,
one out of three companies state that there is room for improvement in their supply chain.
Figure 2. Descriptors Used by Supply Chain Leaders to Describe Their Supply Chains
While companies desire a supply chain that is more aligned, fast, agile, and proactive, today the
supply chain is controlled and becoming more global. In the building of today’s supply chain, as will
be seen in this report, the tightly integrated IT infrastructure defined in the last two decades is an
impediment to building an agile, proactive and aligned supply chain. In Figure 3 we contrast the
current state of the supply chain with the desired state of supply chain leaders.

6. Page 6
Figure 3. Supply Chain Descriptors: Current State versus Desired Operation
As shown in Figure 3, while supply chain leaders desire a more proactive, aligned and faster supply
chain, these are areas for improvement. The current supply chain is controlled and global, but with
significant opportunity for improvement. Ironically, despite the gaps in overall performance, many
supply chain leaders term current practices as “best practices.” In this report we challenge the status
quo. We do this by teasing out the data to understand business drivers. For example, in Table 1 we
can see that a company which rates itself as “having a supply chain working well” is more likely to be
in the process industry, and have a supply chain organization where manufacturing reports to the
overall supply chain leader. In addition, within the organization there is a greater understanding of the
supply chain by the executive leadership team, stronger alignment of metrics cross-functionally,
stronger capabilities in supply chain visibility, and the organization is better at managing change. The
companies that outperform are also better at accessing and using data.
It is also significant to note that we do not find a correlation between “working well” and the presence
of a Supply Chain Center of Excellence, fewer ERP instances, or maturity in Sales and Operations
planning. The reason? These processes and practices are evolving.

7. Page 7
Table 1. Characteristics of Companies with Supply Chains Working Well
To make this report actionable for the business executive, in a similar pattern as this analysis, in each
section we dig deep. To do this we first describe the current state of the market and then provide
research findings from leaders that are outperforming. At the end of the report we share
recommendations and insights for implementation.
Supply Chain Strategy and the Definition of
Supply Chain Excellence
Driving supply chain excellence is easier said than done. The first step is a clear definition. The
second is managing the supply chain as a complex system with a set of complex, nonlinear
relationships. The third is driving organizational alignment, and the fourth is the implementation of
strategies to improve agility. (To drive agility, companies need to realize that the efficient supply chain
may not be the most effective.)
While clarity of strategy does not rank as one of the top areas of business pain in Figure 4, many of
the top issues in the chart are symptoms of the lack of a clear strategy. This includes cross-functional

8. Page 8
alignment, the lack of skilled people to perform the job, and an understanding of the supply chain by
the executive team.
In addition, as will be seen in this report, the issues of demand and supply visibility, coupled with the
lack of supply chain visibility and availability to get to data, are symptoms of strategic decisions on IT
spending. While increasing volatility is an issue, you will see in this report that it is also a galvanizing
force for alignment and IT success.
Figure 4. Areas of Supply Chain Pain for the Supply Chain Leader
Alignment
Companies that report organizational alignment as one of the top five areas of business pain are
more likely to describe their supply chains as cautious and inside-out. Ironically, companies with
greater demand and supply volatility have greater alignment. The reason? It is necessary to survive.
As shown in Figure 5, the largest gap within the organization is between the commercial teams of
sales and marketing, and operations. The gap between operations and IT is the second largest area
for improvement.

9. Page 9
Figure 5. Overview of Organizational Alignment
As shown in Table 2, when the organization has experienced higher levels of demand and supply
volatility, and has invested in strong S&OP capabilities, the organization is more aligned.
Table 2. Characteristics of Companies by Degree of Alignment between Sales and Operations

10. Page 10
Alignment does not just happen. It requires change management and leadership. Organizations align
more easily when there is clarity on customer priorities and requirements, and incentives are jointly
held by the functions within the organization. When companies have experienced substantial pain
due to market shifts, or inventory write-offs due to demand fluctuations, the organization is more likely
to build alignment across the commercial teams and operations.
Agility
Within a corporation the term ‘agility’ can have many different meanings. For the purpose of this
report, we define ‘supply chain agility’ as the ability of the organization to have the same cost, quality
and customer service given the level of demand and supply volatility. In the definition of supply chain
strategy, companies must define agility very carefully.
We also find in the research that companies that have greater maturity with S&OP within the
organization also have made better progress in building an agile supply chain. It is a case of when the
going gets tough, the tough get going.
Agility does not just happen. It requires careful design and execution of a supply chain strategy. The
design of the agile supply chain requires a redefinition of supply chain strategy. By definition, the
efficient supply chain is not the most agile. One of the issues in driving organizational agility is the
alignment of the finance group on the optimal supply chain outcome. The finance group has a natural
bias to push for the efficient supply chain with the lowest cost per unit.
If the finance group, in the face of extreme demand and supply volatility, insists on the delivery of the
lowest cost per unit, the organization will never be agile or aligned. The two characteristics go hand-
in-hand.
Within the company, inventory is a battleground. To combat this bias, inventory policy is important—
implementation of postponement strategies, form and function of inventory, pre-purchase of raw
materials, and definition of decoupling points—to delivering the agile supply chain. Companies
subject to monthly changes in inventory targets—with an ever-changing goal at the end of the quarter
to meet financial targets—struggle to deliver the agile supply chain.
Despite this barrier with cross-functional alignment with finance, companies have made impressive
progress. As shown in Figure 6, the rate of improvement in agility is greater when viewed through a
five-year lens than one-year view.

11. Page 11
Figure 6. Changes in Supply Chain Agility Over Time
Companies with higher levels of agility and alignment are more likely to have a successful Supply
Chain Center of Excellence. While there is only a 50% probability that the Supply Chain Center of
Excellence will be successful, it is worth the gamblei
. The difference is leadership. When companies
clearly define supply chain strategy, and focus against the goals cross-functionally, there is a higher
probability of success by the Supply Chain Center of Excellence.
How can a Supply Chain Center of Excellence help? The use of network design technologies, along
with “what-if” analysis in supply chain planning, helps to drive alignment with finance and define a
more agile supply chain. In Figure 7, while companies rate the use of supply chain planning in the
Center of Excellence as mature, the practices for network design and inventory strategies are
important but less mature. To improve agility companies should focus in these areas.

12. Page 12
Figure 7. Characteristics of Supply Chain Centers of Excellence: Importance versus Performance
Unfortunately, only 1/3 of companies today have these capabilities to align with finance on building an
agile supply chainii
.
Supply Chain Visibility
The winds of a recession are whipping. Trade winds are changing. Globalization and localization are
happening simultaneously. Growth is slowing. Despite these market trends, the supply chain
organization cannot see. The supply chain is safely tucked behind the firewall, operating on data that
is late and out of sync with the market.
Companies without supply chain visibility have a higher probability of not believing their supply chains
perform well. The majority of manufacturing and retail companies want better performing supply
chains. The desire is to drive alignment, proactive processes, and agility. Visibility is essential to this
vision. The current state is reactive, slow, and inside-out.
The vision of the tightly integrated, efficient enterprise supply chain has failed. The focus needs to be
on data synchronization between trading partners using technologies which are designed to support
the flows within the value network.

13. Page 13
The statement of, "Doing the same thing over and over and expecting new and different results is
insanity" is attributed to both Franklin and Einstein, but I think is relevant to this discussion.
Today, as can be seen from one of our prior studies, the supply chain is a value network. As shown in
Figure 8, companies are more dependent on third-party relationshipsiii
. Outsourcing is a way of life.
On average, companies outsource 32% of manufacturing and 44% of logistics. The current focus on
supply chain automation enables enterprise efficiency, not value network effectiveness. To be
effective the flows between these trading partners need to be automated with bidirectional,
collaborative technologies in many-to-many architectures (many parties to many parties).
Figure 8. Outsourcing of Manufacturing and Logistics
Most companies cannot see beyond their firewalls. In our research, discrete industries—aerospace,
automotive, high-tech, and semiconductor—are more mature on supply chain visibility. Process
industry leaders—chemical, consumer packaged goods, food/beverage—have greater issues using
data, with software usability, and building effective connections to align and build effective
relationships with trading partners

14. Page 14
Table 3. Characteristics of Companies by Industry
Figure 9. Current State of Supply Chain Network Visibility

15. Page 15
Since most companies invested in the automation of the enterprise, not the value network, visibility
within the company and the transportation network is a strength. However, visibility of channel
relationships—customer orders and consumption/purchase—in the demand network, or the use and
consumption of materials in the extended supplier network, is an ongoing issue. Consequently the
supply chain is out of step with the market. The processes are largely batch, using data with great
latency (orders and purchase orders). We have automated the enterprise, but not the network. As a
result we have induced and exaggerated the Bullwhip Effect in the value chain: there is great waste
and opportunity for automation of effective value networks.
Despite two decades of enterprise solutions, companies today are only good at email, fax, or postal
mail, but not in the automation of the extended network. Figure 10 is a sad statement for the evolution
of supply chain visibility. Companies only feel that they are good at sharing emails and spreadsheets.
Figure 10. Current State of B2B Connectivity
Many companies that have depended on the extension of ERP architectures to build value networks
are dependent on ERP messaging and portals; but, this form of B2B automation lacks bidirectional
communication and an inter-enterprise system of record. Let’s explain the issue using two examples:

16. Page 16
• Inadequacy of Portals. Macy's, the North American retailer, is under market attack. They are
pushing back on suppliers. It is a brutal environment. The changes for supplier trade are ever-
changing with greater punitive implications. However, Macy's communicates to suppliers
through portals. The information changes daily. As a result, without a persistence layer, it is
tough for suppliers to work through issues and track needs. Macy's feels good about their
portal strategy, but it is ineffective for supplier coordination. As a result, out-of-stocks reign and
supplier teams spend endless hours debating deductions.
• Need for Bidirectional Communication. Let’s take another example: I was speaking to a
supplier critical to delivering materials to the Caterpillar heavy loader division last week. The
supplier commented that it was impossible to know what Caterpillar needs for direct materials
requirements at their factories. Why? They get over 5000 spreadsheets daily with each plant
changing the requirements multiple times a day. The issue? There is no system of record with
bidirectional agreements on supply.
Strong value networks and strong relationships go hand-in-hand. In the building of global supply
chains in the last decade, across value networks, outsourcing to third-party logistics, and contract
manufacturing, accelerated. While the leaders that forged these relationships promised innovation
and acceleration of B2B networks, what happened was quite different.
In the building of the contract manufacturing model, brand owners in the high-tech value chain
pushed cost and waste backward into the value network, creating issues with fair labor and social
responsibility. They did not automate the value network or take ownership for their demand signal.
The low margins, the transactional nature of the relationships, and the lack of innovation are barriers
for the high-tech value network to move forward. The process industry's reliance on the 3PL
transportation model is a similar dilemma.
• Lesson #1. Use Value Network Solutions. Enterprise solutions are not designed to automate
the value chain. Select a solution with the characteristics of bidirectional flows and a system of
record to support decision support applications.
• Lesson #2. Enterprise Applications’ Lack of Adaptors for the Extended Value
Chain. The enterprise definitions of CRM and SRM do not enable the natural connection of
value networks. To drive success in value networks, build multi-tier capabilities in channel and
sourcing relationships, sidestepping the use of both traditional CRM and SRM concepts.
• Lesson #3. Build Strong Relationships in the Value Network with Strong Bridges. Own

17. Page 17
the network and build win-win relationships. We have spent the last decade building win/lose
transactional data models. Supplier viability is an issue, and currently companies give lip
service to social responsibility. Over 90% of companies have a social responsibility statement,
more than 70% have marketing claims on managing social issues (recycled, lower energy, less
waste), but only 22% of companies are automating and owning the value network where there
is consumption of 65% of nonrenewable resourcesiv
. Change the dynamic by owning the value
network and automating bidirectional flows and enabling systems of record between trading
partners. Make the world a better place. Reduce risk. Don't just talk about reducing risk and
improving collaboration. It starts with defining a win/win business model and automating
network flows.
Sales and Operations Planning
In the evolution of supply chain excellence, Sales and Operations Planning (S&OP) grows in
importance. But, as shown in Figure 11, only four companies out of ten report successes in S&OP.
Figure 11. Success in Sales and Operations Planning
While there is no correlation between companies that rate their supply chains as effective and S&OP,
we do see a relationship between S&OP maturity and alignment and agility.

18. Page 18
Delivering successful S&OP is dependent on the right combination of technology, process and
leadership. For the respondents of our surveys, the lack of the right technology is a major hurdle.
S&OP is not a new process. It is over 40 years old. The goal of Sales and Operations Planning is to
drive organizational alignment and improve balance sheet results. It is a monthly process that most
companies struggle to implement.
As can be seen in Figure 12, the gap in technology capabilities is the largest barrier currently to drive
improvement. Why is this? To successfully implement S&OP, companies need role-based views,
“what-if” analysis, and the ability to determine the profitability of plan alternatives. For most
organizations this is an issue.
Figure 12. Organizational Gaps in Building a Mature Sales and Operations Planning Process
Only 1/3 of companies surveyed have what they need to be successful with S&OP. The issue is
twofold. The traditional definition of supply chain advanced planning did not include the requirements
for S&OP; and as a result, most companies are using Excel spreadsheets, which are inadequate.

19. Page 19
Figure 13. Gaps in S&OP Technology Capabilities
Next steps? The answer is simple. Don't misconstrue S&OP technology as an extension of
conventional supply chain planning. When selecting a technology for S&OP, be sure to list the
requirements for these three areas (in Figure 13) on your technology check-list for the selection team.
While some may argue that S&OP is not a technology implementation, we both agree and disagree.
Clearly organizations must align towards the business goals, and this is the first step. In small
regional implementations the technology is not as important; however, for global and multinational
supply chains, as shown here, to sustain S&OP progress they must find the right technologies.
Unfortunately, too few have what it takes to drive S&OP processes to the highest level.
As seen in Table 5, companies with mature S&OP processes are more likely to have had a supply
chain organization for a longer period of time and have experienced demand and supply volatility.
There is also a correlation to the design of the supply chain organization. When customer service and
inventory management report to supply chain there is greater progress in delivering a mature S&OP.

20. Page 20
Table 5. Characteristics of S&OP Effectiveness
Supply Chain Talent and Building Core
Capabilities
The shortage of supply chain talent—with the graying of the workforce and the explosion of
opportunities for supply chain leaders—is a risk for the supply chain. While most companies have
programs to focus on entry-level employees, and high-potential employees, most miss the need to
train and retain mid-management supply chain leaders (managers, senior managers and directors).
As shown in Figure 14, only 21% of companies feel that they manage talent better than their peers.
Forty percent feel that they are at parity with their peer group.

21. Page 21
Figure 14. Performance in Management of Supply Chain Talent
As shown in Table 6, in the management of talent there is no difference between process and
discrete companies. Instead, the differences lie with tenure of the supply chain team and the reporting
structure of the supply chain organization.
Table 6. Characteristics of Companies Managing Talent Same as or Better Than Peers

22. Page 22
Data and IT Strategies
Within the organization there is ongoing tension between IT and Operations. With many CIOs
reporting to the CFO, politics often reign within the organization. As shown in Figure 15, there is a
one- in-two success rate for a successful IT project.
Figure 15. Success Rate of IT Projects
Companies with more successful IT projects have higher pain with the changing speed of business.
This pressure aligns and galvanizes IT and Line of Business leaders to work together. While there is
no significance in IT success with the consolidation of ERP instances, as shown in Table 7 there is a
correlation between successful IT projects and supply chain visibility.

23. Page 23
Table 7. Characteristics of Companies with Higher Success Rate with IT Implementations
The consolidation of ERP instances has both a positive and a negative. As shown in Table 8, in the
consolidation of ERP instances there are serious change management issues. On the positive side,
with fewer instances, companies become more proactive; but, as the instances are consolidated,
there are serious issues with organizational alignment and the understanding of supply chain
excellence.
Table 8. Characteristics of Companies with ERP Consolidation

24. Page 24
Recommendations and Insights
The goal of this report is to understand the characteristics of companies who report their supply
chains are “working well.” Here are some recommendations from this research:
• Educate and Align. Supply chain management is new and many of the concepts in this report
are not well-understood in the global organization. To drive excellence, educate and train
teams cross-functionally on the principles of agility, and focus on building supply chain
alignment through a clear supply chain strategy. Be sure there is alignment with finance and
the commercial teams of sales and marketing, and continually market the results to pave the
road for success. The clearer the strategy aligns with business goals, the higher the probability
of success.
• Rethink Supply Chain Reporting Structures. Supply chain organizations are relatively
new—about 14 years old on average. In the analysis we find correlations to both the tenure of
the supply chain organization and the number of reporting relationships. Take time to build
supply chain talent, and concentrate reporting structures of source, make, and deliver to build
supply chain excellence.
• Embrace Demand and Supply Volatility. Higher volatility is today’s reality. Embrace volatility
and use it to unify the organization to drive action in building a legacy of supply chain
excellence. Don’t just measure forecast accuracy. Instead, use the probability of demand to
understand the impacts on inventory and supply chain strategies. Focus on inventory
strategies to buffer demand, and build strong supply chain solutions to enable visibility from the
customer’s customer to the supplier’s supplier.
• Focus on Building Supply Chain Visibility. Strong supply chain visibility capabilities have a
high correlation to a company’s ability to perform well in the delivery of supply chain
excellence. Work hard to connect to trading partners and build sustainable win/win
relationships.
• Sidestep Hype Cycles. While there are many consultants and technology firms hawking plans
for ERP instance consolidation and investment in enterprise applications, stabilize the
investments in enterprise technology and build value networks.

25. Page 25
Conclusion
There are many beliefs about what drives supply chain excellence. In this report we have tried to peel
back the research to understand “what makes a difference.” It is clear from the research that
companies that are better aligned, with a focus on agility, have higher levels of supply chain
satisfaction. The supply chain is a complex system with increasing complexity. As a result, we find
that it is not one, but many factors together which add up to drive improvement.
In this analysis we conclude it is about leadership. Supply chain excellence is defined by the sum of
the parts, driven by an enlightened leader. For example, S&OP and inventory strategies improve
agility, but they are not enough by themselves to drive supply chain excellence. The consolidation of
reporting structures and improving supply chain visibility are strong contributing factors, but they are
dependent on clear supply chain strategies and organizational alignment.
Supply chain excellence is not defined by a road map of successful projects or the definition of a
strong function within a functional organization. Instead, it is about the rethinking and execution of
strategy to deliver on the business goals cross-functionally through data-driven insights.

26. Page 26
Terms to Know
Getting clear on terms is often the first step to driving a supply chain transformation. To help teams,
here we provide the definitions of the terms used in this report and the supporting research:
• Agility. Given the level of demand and supply volatility, building the capability within the supply
chain to deliver the same cost, quality and customer service.
• Central Limit Theorem. By definition, the Central Limit Theorem states that, given certain
conditions, the arithmetic mean of a sufficiently large number of iterates of independent
random variables, each with a well-defined expected value and well-defined variance, will be
approximately normally distributed, regardless of the underlying distribution.v
• Concurrent Optimization. The use of technologies to solve optimization problems across
source, make, and deliver, in-memory together to rationalize cross-functional trade-offs.
• Demand Latency. The time it takes for order take-away at the point of consumption to
translate into an order for a manufacturer. The slower the velocity at the point of consumption,
the longer the demand latency.
• Efficient Supply Chain. A supply chain delivering the lowest cost per unit.
• Inventory Configuration. A focus on form and function of inventory, along with techniques
like postponement and risk pooling, to improve inventory buffers.
• Linear Optimization. The use of linear programming to drive insights for decision support
tools in supply chain planning. It is a mathematical model where an equation of linear
relationships is used to model the best outcome (such as maximum profit or lowest cost). The
assumption is that relationships in the model are linear. In the case of supply chain, many
relationships are nonlinear. The second fallacy is by definition, the optimization is based on
averages, and many as a result product an output that is an infeasible scenario.
• Multi-Tier Inventory Optimization. The use of inventory optimization—often a linear model--
to determine optimization levels at multiple nodes simultaneously.
• Operational Planning. The planning process that stretches over the horizon of the slush
period to the freeze duration in manufacturing planning.
• Push/Pull Decoupling Points. Some supply chains push inventory into the channel, while in
others, inventory is pulled into the channel based on orders. When push/pull decoupling points

27. Page 27
are defined it identifies the point at which inventory is decoupled on a push/pull boundary.
• Postponement. An inventory strategy to delay steps of the conversion process until the
demand for the final product is known.
• Responsive Supply Chain. A supply chain with short cycles.
• Revenue Management. Analyzing the impact of price, promotion and channel incentives on
demand lift and product profitability. Revenue management is the horizontal process that helps
companies rationalize the effectiveness of demand shaping programs.
• Sales and Operations Planning. The cross-functional process of matching demand and
supply plans to balance demand and orchestrate the market response.
• Supply Chain Operating Networks: The building of supply chain applications using many-to-
many architectures to connect multiple parties to multiple trading partners to improve multi-tier
supply chain visibility, planning, and execution to improve relationships in extended value
chains.
• Tactical Planning. The period of planning that stretches from the freeze duration in
manufacturing planning to 12-18 months in the future. (While it varies by industry, with
pharmaceutical companies planning for three years, and high-tech companies planning for six
to eight months, 12-18 months is the average planning duration for tactical planning.)

28. Page 28
Appendix
In this section we share the demographic information of survey respondents, along with research
findings, to support the key insights listed in this report. These study responses were limited to
retailers, manufacturers, distributors, and third-party logistics providers. Academics, consultants, and
technology providers were disqualified in the respondent process.
As an incentive to complete the survey, the companies responding to this survey received final results
and some had the option to discuss the results by phone, or participate in global roundtables to
discuss the results as a group and network with other supply chain leaders. At all times, the names
both of individual respondents and companies participating are held in confidence.
In this section, the demographics are shared to help the readers of this report gain a better
perspective on the results. The demographics and additional charts to support the findings are found
in Figures A–I and Table A. To help the reader, at the bottom of each image we list the specific
questions asked in the quantitative survey. For example, as shown in Figure A, the majority of the
respondents are from manufacturing companies.
Figure A. Revenue and Industry Groupings of the Respondents

29. Page 29
Figure B. Respondent Characterization by Industry
Table A. High-Level Characteristics of Respondents by Industry

30. Page 30
Figure C. Number of Functions Reporting to the Supply Chain Organization
Figure D. Number of Instances of Enterprise Resource Planning

31. Page 31
Figure E. Characteristics of the Supply Chain Organization
Figure F. Presence of a Supply Chain Center of Excellence

32. Page 32
Figure G. Success of a Supply Chain Center of Excellence
Figure H. Current State of Supply Chain Agility within the Supply Chain Organizations

33. Page 33
Figure I. B2B Solutions Currently Used
Additional Reading
If you have enjoyed this report, check out additional relevant reports available free of charge on
Supply Chain Insights website.
Driving Supply Chain Excellence through Supply Chain Centers of Excellence
Inventory Optimization in a Market-Driven World
Maximizing the ROI in Supply Chain Planning
Putting Together the Pieces: The S&OP Technology Landscape in 2015
Supply Chain Talent--A Missing Link in the Supply Chain
Supply Chains to Admire – 2015
What Is the Value Proposition of Sales and Operations Planning?
What Drives Inventory Effectiveness in a Market-Driven World?
Why Is S&OP So Hard?
Why is Supply Chain Planning So Hard?

34. Page 34
About Supply Chain Insights LLC
Founded in February, 2012 by Lora Cecere, Supply Chain Insights LLC is beginning its fifth year of
operation. The Company’s mission is to deliver independent, actionable, and objective advice for
supply chain leaders. If you need to know which practices and technologies make the biggest
difference to corporate performance, we want you to turn to us. We are a company dedicated to this
research. Our goal is to help leaders understand supply chain trends, evolving technologies and
which metrics matter.
About Lora Cecere
Lora Cecere (twitter ID @lcecere) is the Founder of Supply Chain Insights LLC and
the author of popular enterprise software blog Supply Chain Shaman currently read
by 5,000 supply chain professionals. She also writes as a Linkedin Influencer and
is a a contributor for Forbes. She has written four books. The first book, Bricks
Matter, (co-authored with Charlie Chase) published in 2012. The second book, The
Shaman’s Journal 2014, published in September 2014; the third book, Supply
Chain Metrics That Matter, published in December 2014; and the fourth book, The
Shaman’s Journal 2015, published in September 2015. She is currently working on a two new books:
a new edition of The Shaman’s Journal to publish in September 2016, and a book on supply chain
leadership to publish in 2018.
With over 12 years as a research analyst with AMR Research, Altimeter Group, and Gartner
Group, and now as the Founder of Supply Chain Insights, Lora understands supply chain. She has
worked with over 600 companies on their supply chain strategy and speaks at over 50 conferences a
year on the evolution of supply chain processes and technologies. Her research is designed for the
early adopter seeking first mover advantage.

35. Page 35
Endnotes
i
Defining Supply Chain Excellence, Supply Chain Insights, 03/18/2015, http://supplychaininsights.com/driving-supply-chain-
excellence/
ii
Defining Supply Chain Excellence, 03/18/2016, http://supplychaininsights.com/driving-supply-chain-excellence/
iii
Supply Chain Visibility in Business Networks, Supply Chain Insights, 03/16/2016, http://supplychaininsights.com/supply-chain-
visibility-in-business-networks/
iv
Building the Green Supply Chain, 3/18/2016, http://supplychaininsights.com/building-the-green-supply-chain/
v
Definition of Central Limit Theorem, Wikipedia, 3/12/2016, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_limit_theorem