From bean to cup: How Starbucks transformed its supply chain
With operational costs rising and sales declining, the global coffee purveyor implemented a three-step plan to improve supply chain performance, cut costs, and prepare for the future.
It takes a well-run supply chain to ensure that a barista pours a good cup of Starbucks coffee. That's because the journey from bean to cup is a complicated one. Coffee and other merchandise must be sourced from around the globe and then successfully delivered to the Starbucks Corporation's 16,700 retail stores, which serve some 50 million customers in 51 countries each week.
But in 2008, Starbucks wasn't sure that its supply chain was meeting that goal. One clue that things were not quite right: the company's operational costs were rising even though sales were cooling. Between October 2007 and October 2008, for example, supply chain expenses in the United States rose from US $750 million to more than US $825 million, yet sales for U.S. stores that had been open for at least one year dropped by 10 percent during that same period.
In part, Starbucks was a victim of its own success. Because the company was opening stores around the world at a rapid pace, the supply chain organization had to focus on keeping up with that expansion. "We had been growing so fast that we had not done a good enough job of getting the [supply chain] fundamentals in place," says Peter D. Gibbons, executive vice president of global supply chain operations. As a result, he says, "the costs of running the supply chain—the operating expenses—were rising very steeply."
To hold those expenses in check and achieve a balance between cost and performance, Starbucks would have to make significant changes to its operations. Here is a look at the steps Gibbons and his colleagues took and the results they achieved.
A plan for reorganization
Starbucks' supply chain transformation had support from the very top. In 2008, Chairman, President, and Chief Executive Officer Howard Schultz tapped Gibbons, who was then senior vice president of global manufacturing operations, to run the company's supply chain. This was a familiar role for Gibbons; prior to joining Starbucks in 2007, he had been executive vice president of supply chain for The Glidden Co., a subsidiary of ICI Americas Inc.
The first two things Gibbons did in his new position were assess how well the supply chain was serving stores, and find out where costs were coming from. He soon learned that less than half of store deliveries were arriving on time. "My quick diagnosis was ... that we were not spending enough attention on how good we were at delivering service to stores," he recalls. Following that assessment, Gibbons began visiting Starbucks' retail stores to see the situation for himself and get input from employees. "The visits were made to confirm that our supply chain could improve significantly," he explains. "The best people to judge the need for change were those at the customer-facing part of our business."
A cost analysis revealed excessive outlays for outsourcing; 65 to 70 percent of Starbucks' supply chain operating expenses were tied to outsourcing agreements for transportation, third-party logistics, and contract manufacturing. "Outsourcing had been used to allow the supply chain to expand rapidly to keep up with store openings, but outsourcing had also led to significant cost inflation," Gibbons observes.
In response to those findings, Gibbons and his leadership team devised a three-step supply chain transformation plan and presented it to Starbucks' board of directors. Under that plan, the company would first reorganize its supply chain organization, simplifying its structure and more clearly defining functional roles. Next, Starbucks would focus on reducing the cost to serve its stores while improving its day-to-day supply chain execution. Once these supply chain fundamentals were firmly under control, the company could then lay the foundation for improved supply chain capability for the future.
Simplifying the complex
The first step of the transformation plan, reorganizing Starbucks' supply chain organization, got under way in late 2008. According to Gibbons, that involved taking a complex structure and simplifying it so that every job fell into one of the four basic supply chain functions: plan, source, make, and deliver. For instance, anybody involved in planning—be it production planning, replenishment, or new product launches—was placed in the planning group. Sourcing activities were grouped into two areas: coffee and "non-coffee" procurement. (Starbucks spends US $600 million on coffee each year. Purchases of other items, such as dairy products, baked goods, store furniture, and paper goods, total US $2.5 billion annually.) All manufacturing, whether done in-house or by contract manufacturers, was assigned to the "make" functional unit. And finally, all personnel working in transportation, distribution, and customer service were assigned to the "deliver" group.
After the supply chain functions were reorganized, the various departments turned their attention to the second objective of the supply chain transformation: reducing costs and improving efficiencies. As part of that effort, the sourcing group worked on identifying the cost drivers that were pushing up prices. "We went out to understand the contracts we had, the prices we were paying, and the shipping costs, and we began breaking items down by ingredient rather than just purchase price," Gibbons says. "We built more effective 'should cost' models, including benchmarking ingredients and processes, which showed that we could negotiate better prices."
Meanwhile, the manufacturing group developed a more efficient model for delivering coffee beans to its processing plants, with the goal of manufacturing in the region where the product is sold. Starbucks already owned three coffee plants in the United States, in Kent, Washington; Minden, Nevada; and York, Pennsylvania. In 2009, the company added a fourth U.S. plant, in Columbia, South Carolina. The benefits of that approach were quickly apparent; regionalizing its coffee production allowed Starbucks to reduce its transportation costs and lead times, says Gibbons. Moreover, once the new facility was up and running, all of the U.S. coffee plants were able to switch from seven-day operations to five days.
In addition to the four coffee facilities it owns in the United States, Starbucks also operates a coffee plant in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and a processing plant for its Tazo Tea subsidiary in Portland, Oregon. The company also relies on 24 co-manufacturers, most of them in Europe, Asia, Latin America, and Canada.
Even though it spread production across a wide territory, transportation, distribution, and logistics made up the bulk of Starbucks' operating expenses because the company ships so many different products around the world. Getting that under control presented a daunting challenge for the supply chain group. "Whether coffee from Africa or merchandise from China, [our task was to integrate] that together into one global logistics system, the combined physical movement of all incoming and outgoing goods," says Gibbons. "It's a big deal because there's so much spend there, and so much of our service depends on that. ... With 70,000 to 80,000 deliveries per week plus all the inbound shipments from around the world, we want to manage these logistics in one system."
One world, one logistics system
The creation of a single, global logistics system was important for Starbucks because of its far-flung supply chain. The company generally brings coffee beans from Latin America, Africa, and Asia to the United States and Europe in ocean containers. From the port of entry, the "green" (unroasted) beans are trucked to six storage sites, either at a roasting plant or nearby. After the beans are roasted and packaged, the finished product is trucked to regional distribution centers, which range from 200,000 to 300,000 square feet in size. Starbucks runs five regional distribution centers (DCs) in the United States; two are company-owned and the other three are operated by third-party logistics companies (3PLs). It also has two distribution centers in Europe and two in Asia, all of which are managed by 3PLs. Coffee, however, is only one of many products held at these warehouses. They also handle other items required by Starbucks' retail outlets—everything from furniture to cappuccino mix.
Depending on their location, the stores are supplied by either the large, regional DCs or by smaller warehouses called central distribution centers (CDCs). Starbucks uses 33 such CDCs in the United States, seven in the Asia/Pacific region, five in Canada, and three in Europe; currently, all but one are operated by third-party logistics companies. The CDCs carry dairy products, baked goods, and paper items like cups and napkins. They combine the coffee with these other items to make frequent deliveries via dedicated truck fleets to Starbucks' own retail stores and to retail outlets that sell Starbucks-branded products.
Because delivery costs and execution are intertwined, Gibbons and his team set about improving both. One of their first steps was to build a global map of Starbucks' transportation expenditures—no easy task, because it involved gathering all supply chain costs by region and by customer, Gibbons says. An analysis of those expenditures allowed Starbucks to winnow its transportation carriers, retaining only those that provided the best service.
The logistics team also met with its 3PLs and reviewed productivity and contract rates. To aid the review process, the team created weekly scorecards for measuring those vendors. "There are very clear service metrics, clear cost metrics, and clear productivity metrics, and those were agreed with our partners," Gibbons notes.
The scorecard assessments of a 3PL's performance were based on a very simple system, using only two numbers: 0 and 1. For example, if a vendor operating a warehouse or DC picked a product accurately, it earned a "1" for that activity. If a shipment was missing even one pallet, the 3PL received a score of "0." As part of the scorecard initiative, Starbucks also began making service data by store, delivery lane, and stock-keeping unit (SKU) available to its supply chain partners. "The scorecard and the weekly rhythm (for review of the scorecard) ensured transparency in how we were improving the cost base while maintaining a focus on looking after our people and servicing our customers," Gibbons says.
Although Starbucks has a raft of metrics for evaluating supply chain performance, it focuses on four high-level categories to create consistency and balance across the global supply chain team: safety in operations, service measured by on-time delivery and order fill rates, total end-to-end supply chain costs, and enterprise savings. This last refers to cost savings that come from areas outside logistics, such as procurement, marketing, or research and development.
In undertaking all of those steps to reduce operating costs and improve execution, Gibbons says, Starbucks was laying the foundation for future supply chain capabilities. "We tell the stores that we have got to get the fundamentals right—the things that give people confidence. ... We don't ship things that aren't right," he explains.
Earning the company's confidence
Since Starbucks began its supply chain transformation effort, it has curtailed costs worldwide without compromising service delivery. "As a company," Gibbons says, "we have talked publicly of over $500 million of savings in the last two years, and the supply chain has been a major contributor to that."
In Gibbons' eyes, the transformation effort has been a success. "Today there's a lot of confidence in our supply chain to execute every day, to make 70,000 deliveries a week, to get new products to market, and to manage product transitions, new product introductions, and promotions," he says. "There's a lot of confidence that we now are focused on service and quality to provide what our stores need and what our other business customers need."
To sustain that momentum for improvement and to ensure a future flow of talent into the organization, Starbucks recently began an initiative to recruit top graduates of supply chain education programs. (For more on this initiative, see the sidebar "Starbucks: The next generation.") Along with its recruiting program, the company plans to provide ongoing training for its existing employees to help them further develop their supply chain knowledge and skills. "We want to make sure we have thought leaders [in our supply chain organization]," Gibbons says. Starbucks considers this initiative to be so important, in fact, that Gibbons now spends 40 to 50 percent of his time on developing, hiring, and retaining supply chain talent.
The infusion of new recruits will allow Starbucks to stay focused on its supply chain mission of delivering products with a high level of service at the lowest possible cost to its stores in the United States and around the globe. As Gibbons observes, "No one is going to listen to us talking about supply chain strategy if we can't deliver service, quality, and cost on a daily basis."
Starbucks' Supply Chain Objectives
To transform its supply chain, the coffee retailer established three key objectives:
Reorganize its supply chain organization
Reduce its cost to serve stores and improve execution
Lay the foundation for future supply chain capability
Starbucks by the numbers
Headquarters: Seattle, Washington, USA Total net revenues in fiscal 2009: US $9.7 billion
Employees: 142,000 worldwide (as of September 2009)
Manufacturing:
5 company-owned coffee roasting plants (Nevada, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, and Washington, USA, and the Netherlands)
24 co-manufacturers (in the United States, Canada, Europe, Asia, and Latin America)
1 tea processing plant (Portland, Oregon, USA)
Distribution:
9 regional distribution centers
48 central distribution centers
6 "green coffee" warehouses
Deliveries: 2.7 million per year
Starbucks: The next generation
When Starbucks' supply chain transformation was first getting under way in 2008, the company brought in professionals from the outside to support its re-engineering program. But the coffee retailer is taking a different approach to recruitment these days. "Now, we want to grow our own talent to support the growth of our business, in North America and globally, and to support normal staff turnover," says Peter D. Gibbons, executive vice president of global supply chain operations. "Creating a strong pipeline at all levels is part of our core mission to improve service, lower cost, and develop talent."
The initial phase of the recruitment program will be aimed at building out the U.S. organization, followed by a similar staffing process for the company's international operations. After that, Starbucks will focus on creating an internship program with an eye toward recruiting underclassmen interested in a supply chain career with the company.
Throughout the fall of 2010, executives at Starbucks visited six universities to interview undergraduates and graduate students with backgrounds in logistics, engineering, and operations research. From this process will come a select group of young talent who, starting in July 2011 and continuing for an undetermined number of years, will be hired and groomed to head Starbucks' supply chain for perhaps as long as the next two decades.
The company will only consider the top 10 percent of the graduating class of the schools it partners with. The ideal candidates will have exposure to
Fortune 500 organizations either through prior work experience or through internships. In addition, they must demonstrate prior leadership experience and be willing to rotate between domestic and international positions.
To help improve employees' skills and knowledge, the company has developed programs covering 30 supply chain capabilities, as well as training manuals for new hires, Gibbons says. "The point is to ensure that development plans cover skill-building and development for each individual," he explains. The company also is testing a supply chain training system that will "provide the bulk of our technical training and will add formal coaching and mentoring to round the process out," he adds.
If successful, the strategy will yield multiple benefits, according to Gibbons and his team. It will brand Starbucks as a bona fide supply chain organization within both academia and industry. It will ensure a seamless human resources transition over time as Gibbons and his team near retirement. And the company will reap the intellectual windfall of advanced concepts that graduates take out of school and into the workplace. Gibbons says Starbucks expects to learn as much from its new hires as they will learn from the company.
Shippers today are praising an 11th-hour contract agreement that has averted the threat of a strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf coast ports that could have frozen container imports and exports as soon as January 16.
The agreement came late last night between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) representing some 45,000 workers and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) that includes the operators of 14 port facilities up and down the coast.
Details of the new agreement on those issues have not yet been made public, but in the meantime, retailers and manufacturers are heaving sighs of relief that trade flows will continue.
“Providing certainty with a new contract and avoiding further disruptions is paramount to ensure retail goods arrive in a timely manner for consumers. The agreement will also pave the way for much-needed modernization efforts, which are essential for future growth at these ports and the overall resiliency of our nation’s supply chain,” Gold said.
The next step in the process is for both sides to ratify the tentative agreement, so negotiators have agreed to keep those details private in the meantime, according to identical statements released by the ILA and the USMX. In their joint statement, the groups called the six-year deal a “win-win,” saying: “This agreement protects current ILA jobs and establishes a framework for implementing technologies that will create more jobs while modernizing East and Gulf coasts ports – making them safer and more efficient, and creating the capacity they need to keep our supply chains strong. This is a win-win agreement that creates ILA jobs, supports American consumers and businesses, and keeps the American economy the key hub of the global marketplace.”
The breakthrough hints at broader supply chain trends, which will focus on the tension between operational efficiency and workforce job protection, not just at ports but across other sectors as well, according to a statement from Judah Levine, head of research at Freightos, a freight booking and payment platform. Port automation was the major sticking point leading up to this agreement, as the USMX pushed for technologies to make ports more efficient, while the ILA opposed automation or semi-automation that could threaten jobs.
"This is a six-year détente in the tech-versus-labor tug-of-war at U.S. ports," Levine said. “Automation remains a lightning rod—and likely one we’ll see in other industries—but this deal suggests a cautious path forward."
Maersk’s overall view of the coming year is that the global economy is expected to grow modestly, with the possibility of higher inflation caused by lingering supply chain issues, continued geopolitical tensions, and fiscal policies such as new tariffs. Geopolitical tensions and trade disruptions could threaten global stability, climate change action will continue to shape international cooperation, and the ongoing security issue in the Red Sea is expected to continue into 2025.
Those are difficult challenges, but according to Maersk, a vital part of logistics planning is understanding where risk and weak spots might be and finding ways to dampen the impact of inevitable hurdles.
They include:
1. Build a resilient supply chain As opposed to simply maintaining traditional network designs, Maersk says it is teaming with Hapag-Lloyd to implement a new East-West network called Gemini, beginning in February, 2025. The network will use leaner mainliners and shuttles together, allowing for isolation of port disruptions, minimizing the impact of disruptions to supply chains and routes. More broadly, companies should work with an integrated logistics partner that has multiple solutions—be they by air, truck, barge or rail—allowing supply chains to adapt around issues, while still meeting consumer demands.
2. Implementing technological advances
A key component in ensuring more resilience against disruptions is working with a supply chain supplier that offers advanced real-time tracking systems and AI-powered analytics to provide comprehensive visibility across supply chains. An AI-powered dashboard of analytics can provide end-to-end visibility of shipments, tasks, and updates, enabling efficient logistics management without the need to chase down data. Also, forecasting tools can give predictive analytics to optimize inventory, reduce waste, and enhance efficiency. And incorporating Internet of Things (IoT) into digital solutions can enable live tracking of containers to monitor shipments.
3. Preparing for anything, instead of everything Contingency planning was a big theme for 2024, and remains so for 2025. That need is highlighted by geopolitical instability, climate change and volatility, and changes to tariffs and legislation. So in 2025, businesses should seek to partner with a logistics partner that offers risk and disruption navigation through pre-planned procedures, risk assessments, and alternative solutions.
4. Diversifying all aspects of the supply chain Supply chains have felt the impact of disruption throughout 2024, with the situation in the Red Sea resulting in all shipping having to avoid the Suez Canal, and instead going around the Cape of Good Hope. This has increased demand throughout the year, resulting in businesses trying to move cargo earlier to ensure they can meet customer needs, and even considering nearshoring. As regionalization has become more prevalent, businesses can use nearshoring to diversify suppliers and reduce their dependency on single sources. By ensuring that these suppliers and manufacturers are closer to the consumer market, businesses can keep production costs lower as well as have more ease of reaching markets and avoid delay-related risks from global disruptions. Utilizing options closer to market can also allow companies to better adapt to changes in consumer needs and behavior. Finally, some companies may also find it useful to stock critical materials for future, to act as a buffer against unexpected delays and/or issues relating to trade embargoes.
5. Understanding tariffs, legislation and regulations 2024 was year of customs regulations in EU. And tariffs are expected in the U.S. as well, once the new Trump Administration takes office. However, consistent with President-elect Trump’s first term, threats of increases are often used as a negotiating tool. So companies should take a wait and see approach to U.S. customs, even as they cope with the certainty that further EU customs are set to come into play.
For an island measuring a little less than 14,000 square miles (or about the size of Belgium), Taiwan plays a crucial role in global supply chains, making geopolitical concerns associated with it of keen interest to most major corporations.
Taiwan has essentially acted as an independent nation since 1949, when the nationalist government under Chiang Kai-shek retreated to the island following the communist takeover of mainland China. Yet China has made no secret of the fact that it wants to bring Taiwan back under its authority—ambitions that were brought to the fore in October when China launched military drills that simulated an attack on the island.
If China were to invade Taiwan, it could have serious political and social consequences that would ripple around the globe. And it would be particularly devastating to our supply chains, says consultant Ashray Lavsi, a principal at the global procurement and supply chain consultancy Efficio. He specializes in solving complex supply chain, operations, and procurement problems, with a special focus on resilience. Prior to joining Efficio’s London office in 2017, he worked at XPO Logistics in the U.S. and the Netherlands.
Lavsi spoke recently with David Maloney, Supply Chain Xchange’s group editorial director, about what might happen if China moves to annex Taiwan—what shortages would likely arise, the impact on shipping lanes and ocean freight costs, and what managers should be doing now to prepare for potential disruptions ahead.
It’s no secret that China has ambitions on Taiwan. If China were to attempt to seize control of Taiwan, how would that affect the world’s supply chains?
There would be wide-ranging disruptions around the world. The United States does a lot of trade with both China and Taiwan. For example, the U.S. imports about $470 billion worth of goods from China, while China imports about $124 billion from the U.S. Meanwhile, Taiwan is the No. 9 trading partner for the U.S. So all of this trade could come to a halt, depending on the level of conflict. Supplies would likely be disrupted, and trade routes could be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs.
Furthermore, there would likely be disruptions to trade not just between the U.S. and China, but also across the board. It could very well be that the NATO members get involved, that South Korea gets involved, that Japan gets involved, the Philippines get involved, so it could very quickly spiral into widespread disruptions.
We’ve seen big changes in the way businesses in Hong Kong operate since Britain handed control of Hong Kong over to China nearly 30 years ago. If China were to succeed in bringing Taiwan under its authority, would we see a similar outcome?
Indeed, I would expect so. I read recently that since around 2020, foreign direct investment in Hong Kong has dropped by nearly 50%, from $105 million to $54 million. The drop was primarily because of increased regulatory oversight. There are now a lot of restrictions on freedom of speech as well as tighter control over business operations. Something similar could very well happen in Taiwan if China were to succeed in taking over the island.
As you mentioned, the United States conducts a lot of trade with both Taiwan and China, and both countries have become strategic supply chain partners. Beyond the diplomatic considerations, what would a military or economic conflict mean for the United States?
There is a lot of trade in goods like agricultural products, aircraft, electronic components, and machinery, and our access to all of those items could be cut off. On top of that, China controls 70% of the world’s rare earth minerals [which are crucial for the production of a wide variety of electronic devices]. So any conflict in the region would almost certainly result in many disruptions, particularly in critical sectors like technology and electronics—disruptions that would lead to shortages and increased costs.
Trade routes would also be affected, resulting in delays and higher shipping costs. U.S. companies would need to seek out alternative suppliers for critical materials or components they currently source in China, if they haven’t already. And if they haven’t lined up alternative suppliers, any hostilities could result in a complete halt in production.
What effect would such a move have on the global economy?
It’s been quite a few years since economies have just been localized. Any disruption now has widespread ripple effects across the world. As we discussed, any conflict between the United States and China naturally pulls in countries like Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, and the NATO countries, and it can very quickly spiral out.
Look at the semiconductor, or chip, shortages. If you recall, back in 2021, those shortages led to almost a half-trillion-dollar loss for the automakers, who lost out on sales of 7.7 million vehicles because they couldn’t meet demand. We could see a repeat of that situation—maybe even on a larger scale.
I found this statistic interesting—we often talk about the semiconductor shortages during the pandemic, but if you look at true production numbers, the actual production of chips went up from 2020, to 2021, to 2022. The shortage was driven not by a drop in production, but rather, by a surge in demand for PCs from people working from home. That demand has since dwindled, but we’d still face a major semiconductor shortage if much of the production were halted. So that’s going to be a very big change, a very big disruption.
Of course, the United States, along with a number of other countries, has taken steps to reduce its exposure to risk by bringing some semiconductor production back to its own shores. But it will take time to get those operations up and running, and their output would still be just a drop in the bucket compared to what’s needed. So what would a takeover of Taiwan mean for the overall semiconductor flow?
It essentially stops, right? Let me paint a picture that illustrates the importance of the Taiwanese semiconductor industry to global manufacturing. Semiconductors go into everything from cars to military equipment to computers to data centers to microwaves—they are in everything around us. Taiwan produces 60% of the world’s semiconductors and more than 90% of the advanced chips. Just let that sink in: More than 90% of all the advanced chips produced worldwide come from Taiwan, primarily from a big fabrication company called TSMC.
So the complexity and the precision required to make advanced semiconductors, combined with the limited number of companies around the world, make Taiwan’s position unmatched. The second-largest producer after TSMC is South Korean-based Samsung, which produces 18%, so that’s the gap that we are talking about.
As you rightly said, there are efforts by governments across the world to reduce their reliance on Taiwan. For example, TSMC is building three fabrication facilities in Arizona—the third with funding from the U.S. government. The first plant is set to go live next year and the third by 2030. But even once all three plants are up and running, the production volumes won’t be close to what TSMC produces in Taiwan. It’s going to take years to reduce our reliance on production in Taiwan. If that supply is cut off, the ripple effect will be tremendous.
Setting aside the historical and political claims China has made on Taiwan, is Taiwan’s dominance in the semiconductor industry a main reason why China has set its sights on it?
It could be. China has been investing heavily in chip production—for instance, today, most, if not all, of the chips in the latest Huawei phones are locally produced in China. But China is still quite a few years behind TSMC. So that’s definitely going to be one of the big factors, right? One article that I found very interesting declared that chips are the new oil. If you control chip production, you control the global market.
Let’s talk about the implications for shipping lanes. If you take a look at the map, you realize that the Taiwan Strait is a very important shipping lane for containerized goods coming out of both China and Taiwan. If China were to institute a military blockade, how would that affect the world’s container flows?
That flow would be affected tremendously. The Taiwan Strait plays a crucial role in global shipping, particularly for goods moving between Asia and the rest of the world. It is one of the busiest shipping lanes, and any blockage would severely disrupt global container flows.
Now let me put that into perspective. Fifty percent of the world’s containerships pass through the Taiwan Strait—50%. That’s a huge number. By comparison, the Suez Canal handles about 20% of global trade. Or to use another measure: 88% of the world’s largest ships by tonnage passed through the Taiwan Strait in 2022.
I’ve been reading up on this in the past few months and it seems that a military blockage is a very likely scenario—one that would cripple Taiwan’s economy without a full-scale invasion. So instead of a mounting a full-on attack, China might just block the strait, which would lead to delays in the delivery of goods, affecting global supply chains and causing shortages across Asia and the U.S.
Given the escalating tensions between China and Taiwan, should shippers and manufacturers be preparing today for a potential conflict?
Businesses have to begin preparing today. If businesses were to say, “Okay, I’m going to wait until the conflict breaks out, and then figure out what I’ll do,” it will be too late. You’re done. Your production comes to halt. You can no longer satisfy your customer requirements. So proactive measures are an absolute requirement.
What should they do to prepare?
I would urge manufacturers and shippers to take what’s essentially a two-pronged approach.
First, you need to segment and identify your critical components, based on how crucial they are to your production operations and the risk associated with their sources, where they’re coming from. After you segment them, you list your top-priority items—the critical components that you absolutely cannot do without. You then split your supply chain into two, so that you have a much more redundant supply chain built for those critical items and then a second supply chain for everything else.
To build redundancy, you establish multiple suppliers and diversify them geographically. You also build in stringent contingency measures, which could include strategic stockpiling, nearshoring, and friendshoring, which is where you store inventory with an ally or in a friend consortium, as well as buying alternative components wherever possible. So all of those measures need to be put in place for the components that you’ve identified as absolutely critical for your production.
What is the second prong?
The second prong is the need to manage increased costs. There’s no getting away from higher costs, right? If you’re holding more inventory, you have higher inventory carrying costs. And if you’re diversifying your supply base, that means you don’t have as much leverage [with individual suppliers]. You’re also going to be managing multiple supply chains, which requires an increase in human capital because you’ll need more people to manage the more complex supply chains that you’re putting in place.
One way to manage costs could be by implementing strategic sourcing programs across the board that are aimed at mitigating some of the expenses. By taking these steps, manufacturers can safeguard their operations against potential disruptions and ensure continuity.
A lot of U.S. companies have been nearshoring to Mexico, which has now become the United States’ leading trade partner. Is that a simple solution for companies looking to reduce their reliance on Asia?
It is one of the solutions. But you won’t be able to replace your Asian supply base immediately—as with semiconductors, it may take a few years to build out that capacity.
So you need to start stockpiling essential components now—particularly if you won’t be able to find alternatives. You want to make sure that you’re holding the right amount of inventory of the components that you absolutely need. So nearshoring is an option, but you need to be careful what you move to Mexico.
Is that because moving production to Mexico will raise your costs compared to sourcing in Asia?
Yes, production costs will be higher compared to a place like Vietnam, where wages are currently lower than in Mexico. It might reduce the logistics cost, but I think there’s still a net increase overall because you’ll have higher expenses for things like regulatory compliance. Plus you’ll have the one-time cost of setting up the facilities.
Ideally, you’ll never have to face these problems we’ve been talking about, but it’s always better to be prepared.
Editor’s note:This article first appeared in the November 2024 issue of our sister publication DC Velocity.
As we look toward 2025, the logistics and transportation industry stands on the cusp of transformation. At the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), we’re committed to helping industry leaders navigate these changes with insight and strategy. Here are six trends that we believe will form the competitive landscape of tomorrow.
1. Digital transformation and data integration: Technology continues to reshape every facet of logistics. Advanced analytics, artificial intelligence, and machine learning are becoming increasingly integrated into supply chain operations, driving efficiency, reducing costs, and enabling proactive decision-making.
For companies to succeed, they must invest in technologies that enhance data accuracy and facilitate seamless information sharing. Those that do so will be able to better anticipate disruptions, optimize routes, and improve customer satisfaction.
2. Sustainability: As the global community continues to prioritize environmental responsibility, the logistics sector faces growing pressure to reduce its carbon footprint. The adoption of electric vehicles, alternative fuels, and optimized routes can reduce emissions significantly, and many organizations are setting ambitious targets to lower their environmental impact.
3. Supply chain resilience and flexibility: The capacity to pivot quickly in response to disruptions, whether due to natural disasters, geopolitical tensions, or global pandemics, is no longer a luxury but a necessity. Companies are increasingly adopting flexible supply chain models and focusing on diversification to mitigate risk.
4. Nearshoring and reshoring: Bringing manufacturing closer to home—either by relocating it back to the country of origin (reshoring) or moving it to neighboring regions (nearshoring)—not only enhances supply chain agility but also reduces transportation costs, lowers emissions, and lessens exposure to global disruptions. Companies that embrace these approaches can strengthen their competitive positioning, helping them respond more effectively to fluctuations in demand while maintaining cost efficiency and meeting sustainability goals.
5. Workforce development: The logistics industry is facing a talent shortage, particularly in skilled labor and technology-focused roles. As we advance into a more digitalized landscape, we need a workforce proficient in tech and adaptable to change. Organizations must focus on upskilling and reskilling programs to equip their teams with the necessary knowledge.
6. E-commerce and last-mile solutions: E-commerce growth shows no signs of slowing, and with it comes the challenge of meeting rising consumer expectations for fast, reliable, and sustainable delivery. Last-mile logistics remains one of the most complex and costly segments of the supply chain. Innovative solutions, such as urban microfulfillment centers, autonomous delivery vehicles, and drone deliveries, are paving the way for more efficient last-mile solutions.
Looking Ahead
The future of global logistics and transportation holds both challenges and opportunities. At CSCMP, we are committed to supporting our members through these changes, fostering collaboration and sharing insights to navigate the path forward.
The landscape of 2025 may be unpredictable, but with strategic foresight and a commitment to adaptability, we can shape a prosperous future for logistics and transportation. Together, let’s continue to lead the way forward.
Keep ReadingShow less
Attendees visit the CSCMP EDGE 2024 Resource Center.
As I assume the role of Chair of the Board of Directors for the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP), I fondly reflect on the more than 10 years that I’ve had the privilege of being part of this extraordinary organization. I’ve seen firsthand the impact we have had on individuals, companies, and the entire supply chain profession.
CSCMP’s journey as an organization began back in 1963. It has since grown from a small, passionate community to the world’s premier association for supply chain professionals. Our mission—to connect, educate, and develop supply chain professionals throughout their careers—remains not only relevant, but vital in today’s world.
As we look ahead, the opportunities are vast. What stands out the most to me is simply this:We are stronger together. Every individual brings a unique perspective, and it’s through our collective wisdom and efforts that we will continue to advance the work we do. The road ahead is not one we travel alone. It’s a path we navigate as a community—one united in purpose and direction.
My vision for the year ahead centers around growth—growth in our global reach and, perhaps even more importantly, growth in how we engage and support each other. We have tremendous opportunities for international expansion, especially in Europe, the U.K., Mexico, Central and South America, and Canada. I’m happy to share that we're already seeing progress in our reach to these regions.
I'm incredibly excited about the potential for even more growth ahead. One of the initiatives I am most passionate about is our Centers of Excellence. These centers will provide members the space to engage deeply in key supply chain disciplines. I invite each of you to dive into these areas, share your experiences, and contribute to the innovative solutions we develop together. There will be plenty of opportunity to do so. These centers are not only academic spaces—they are hubs for innovation, where we can share best practices and work together to solve our industry’s biggest challenges.
Education and thought leadership will continue to be at the heart of what we do. By expanding our research capacity, we will offer cutting-edge insights that keep our members at the forefront of industry trends and innovation. Through our platforms, we will create even more opportunities for connection and collaboration—ensuring that every voice is heard. Your insights, curiosity, questions, and engagement will drive the transformation we seek. We all play a part in the advancement of our industry and our profession.
Our impact begins with membership. Expanding collaborations with public, private, and nonprofit sectors will give us new ways to drive progress. In a world where our ecosystem is even more interconnected than ever before, the ability to engage with diverse stakeholders will help us unlock new solutions and truly make a difference on a global scale. None of this would be possible without the strong foundation that has been built over the years by serving our supply chain community. Each of you holds the ability to shape the future of the supply chain, and I can’t wait to see what we will achieve together.