Sue Welch is the Founder and CEO of Bamboo Rose, a collaborative B2B platform that combines intelligent product life-cycle management, sourcing, and global trade management.
Before a product reaches a customer's door, there are countless factors that could affect its cost. Even when these variables are relatively predictable, it's still a complicated equation, as organizations need to weigh the cost of everything from product manufacture to packaging to tariffs. Mix in the unpredictable nature of the real world, and companies can lose millions of dollars due to unanticipated elements that impact the landed cost of a product.
The global business community is more closely connected now than ever, thanks to technologies that enable buyers in California to quickly communicate with manufacturers in Bangladesh, customs officials in Saudi Arabia, and designers in Madrid. In this intertwined ecosystem, it's easy for the proverbial flap of a butterfly's wings at a point in the value chain halfway across the world to cause some destructive winds elsewhere. In other words, in today's supply chains, the smallest, seemingly insignificant event could have very important consequences. Even in the face of uncertainty caused by changing trade policy, shifting geopolitical landscapes, natural disasters, and more, companies must continue to meet the demands of their customers. Whether a labor strike makes it twice as expensive to source from a specific country or a mudslide ruins a factory that is critical to production, consumer demand doesn't let up, and business leaders must be prepared to make quick decisions to keep the wheels turning.
For most organizations, it's likely that actual landed costs will fluctuate (sometimes greatly) due to circumstances beyond their control. But that doesn't mean they are helpless when it comes to dealing with uncertainty. In fact, they can mitigate cost-related risk by more effectively planning for the unexpected.
Risk factors: Beyond natural disasters
Businesses around the world are more reliant on foreign partnerships than ever before, and the entangled network of buyers, suppliers, and customers further magnifies exposure to risks and the potential effect of the shockwaves crises could send through the supply chain. Industries that rely on speed—like retail—are particularly vulnerable to the impacts of unpredictability. It might be easier for retailers to respond to changes if they could somehow silo, or isolate, themselves, but there are too many participants and stakeholders that depend on each other to bring a product to market. From sourcers and designers to manufacturers and distributors, there's a complex network that is vulnerable to disruptions at every stage. According to a recent survey we conducted, 93 percent of major retailers work with more than 500 new vendors a year, including new suppliers in each department.1 The idea of siloing oneself to minimize risk simply isn't feasible with this much supply chain connectivity.
Disaster can strike at any time, so retailers must be ready to shift strategy at a moment's notice. In 2013, for example, a building that housed a garment factory collapsed in Savar, Bangladesh, killing more than 1,000 people. A gas leak in a manufacturing complex killed more than 8,000 people over two weeks in Bhopal, India, in 1984. Tragedies like this have happened since the beginning of industrialization, yet too many companies still fail to grasp the importance of preparing for the worst.
Retailers must also be prepared to address risks associated with economic and political change. Highlighting the growing degree of uncertainty, the professional services firm Deloitte recently reported that the U.S. economy is "heading into unknown territory with a new party in control of the White House, putting regulatory reform, trade policy, and the tax system on the table." Deloitte's analysts also pointed to slowdowns in international economies, thanks to the United Kingdom's planned departure from the European Union (popularly known as "Brexit") and negative interest rates in some countries, as additional sources of risk.2 Indeed, Brexit has already thrown a wrench into economic, political, and social systems across the globe, even though the U.K.'s departure from the EU won't be final until April 2019. While the full impact of Brexit remains to be seen, the possible outcomes—including changes in consumer behavior and as yet unknown trade agreements—have retailers struggling to accurately navigate uncharted waters and assess any need for change to mitigate risk before it occurs.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) cited similar concerns around uncertainty in the United States that could impact businesses both at home and abroad. Among the risks that have the potential to harm companies in the near future, according to the IMF's July 2017 "World Economic Outlook Update," are a more protracted period of policy uncertainty, financial tensions with emerging economies, and inward-looking policies that could lead to disrupted global supply chains, lower global productivity, and less-affordable tradable consumer goods. "Despite a decline in election-related risks, policy uncertainty remains at a high level and could well rise further, reflecting—for example—difficult-to-predict U.S. regulatory and fiscal policies, negotiations of post-Brexit arrangements, or geopolitical risks," the IMF report said.3
Risk assessment done right: "What-if" costing
The sources of risk cited above are just some of the issues retailers must prepare for; the list of potential scenarios that can impact the landed cost of a product is too lengthy to fully cover here. This makes the idea of accounting for every possible situation seem like a task too monumental to tackle. However, it's critical that businesses not be put off by the scale of the challenge and decide to take only cursory steps to combat uncertainty, or to not do anything at all. There are some tempting reasons to take a "do nothing" approach. For instance, even with all the variables in play that could impact a company, it's possible that none of them will happen. A chief executive who plans for the best-case scenario will be very successful if everything plays out exactly as expected. This approach, however, simply increases risk that could introduce cost uncertainty across international supply chains.
One strategy that is better than doing nothing—but is still deeply flawed—is to implement a blanket markup that will help ease the burden of disruption should anything go awry. As it stands, retailers focus too much on the initial cost when purchasing goods from abroad, and as a result, they don't have visibility into the full cost until after the deal is done. Markups may prevent underpayment to suppliers, but initial estimates often don't match the actual costs. A markup will also achieve the goal of mitigating risk of loss, but the impact it eventually has on price accuracy could cause later problems—such as maximized budgets, incomplete future projections, and potential supplier distrust—that a more scientific approach would have avoided.
Each of the approaches discussed above has the potential to create problems rather than solve them. In the face of the rapid and successive geopolitical and economic changes we are seeing more regularly, a better choice for reducing cost-related risk is "what-if" costing that models the impact of numerous variables on landed costs by simulating various cost scenarios.
While many organizations appreciate the importance of what-if costing, they don't always implement it in the most effective ways. For example, they might try to set up formulas in Excel with the expectation that it will help them manage complex situations and flexibly simulate various scenarios. As useful a tool as Excel is to us every day, it's not the most effective way to calculate hundreds of thousands of variables at a moment's notice. Furthermore, some organizations only commit to reviewing cost data no more frequently than once a year. The problem is that cost factors can change quickly and unexpectedly, and while analyzing cost information once or twice per year might be convenient, it isn't practical to act only on historical data when dealing with massive uncertainty. Ideally, what-if costing should be refined in real time, but if that's not feasible, then at least every month or so is recommended.
The most effective way for retailers to conduct what-if costing is with cost-simulation software that helps to calculate accurate landed-cost estimates. The most robust what-if costing tools for U.S.-based retailers are integrated with the U.S. government's Harmonized Tariff Schedule (HTS) and are updated regularly with data inputs from third-party companies such as financial institutions and agencies like the U.S. International Trade Commission. These tools get updated information into the hands of retailers as soon as it's available.
Cost simulation allows retailers to view the financial impact of executing an assortment against a plan, and to calculate margins at the item, class, department, season, or channel level. A platform with what-if costing functions can aggregate the potential costs and margins and compare the results to original forecasts to ensure accuracy throughout the product life cycle. And by delving deeper into the link between merchandising and product development, what-if costing-capable software allows users to adjust schedules and timelines to achieve overall margin targets. All of this gives companies new access to insights that account for every conceivable contingency, allowing them to predict, control, and manage their risks. This predictive ability allows executives to make strategic business decisions by considering various cost-disruption scenarios, which can help them achieve greater accuracy, justification, and confidence in their decision-making.
What-if costing alleviates the pain of change for suppliers, buyers, manufacturers, and distributors because it offers a picture of the international distribution of demand and provides increased transparency. With all parties involved in the product-development process well-informed, suppliers are in a better position to provide recommendations to retailers and form a mutually beneficial relationship. Additionally, retailers that employ what-if costing will place more accurate orders, reducing errors and simplifying supplier relationships. At the same time, the ability to calculate and mitigate risks allows retailers to expand their supplier base; they can engage in relationships that previously were too risky because it was difficult to accurately predict an outcome.
What-if costing can offer additional savings for some retailers. With the data provided by a cost-simulation tool, retailers no longer need to rely solely on industry experts for analysis and in some cases could eliminate these middlemen and their expensive fees. By automating the analysis of information from past deals and transactions, retailers also minimize opportunities for human error and can reallocate funds toward more beneficial projects or processes.
No longer a luxury
Business leaders are much more likely to bank on an assumed outcome if they don't have good data to examine. Unfortunately, it often is difficult to cultivate and analyze the data that can identify what the most likely scenario might be. When that's the case, many might assume that it's not worth it to allocate financial and human resources to making complex, arduous costing contingency plans, especially if a company has been existing and even thriving without them for years. Even more shortsighted, retailers that are hyperfocused on bargaining for the purchase of goods across the globe might forget that profit doesn't come until after the product is on the shelf. By making assumptions about every step in between purchase and the shelf without the data to predict various scenarios, they may find themselves unable to make cost adjustments in the event of a disruption.
With today's complicated global economy and endless points of exposure to risk, what-if costing isn't a luxury. In fact, the retailers that seem most poised to weather any storm that arises and to gain advantages over their slower competition are those that are committed to consistent, comprehensive what-if costing. There are many benefits to be gained by taking innovative approaches to calculating landed costs based on fees, services, geographies, markets, and other unique conditions in real or near real time. Retailers that use this strategy to stay ahead of disruptions will be the ones that emerge as leaders in a changing global landscape.
Benefits for Amazon's customers--who include marketplace retailers and logistics services customers, as well as companies who use its Amazon Web Services (AWS) platform and the e-commerce shoppers who buy goods on the website--will include generative AI (Gen AI) solutions that offer real-world value, the company said.
The launch is based on “Amazon Nova,” the company’s new generation of foundation models, the company said in a blog post. Data scientists use foundation models (FMs) to develop machine learning (ML) platforms more quickly than starting from scratch, allowing them to create artificial intelligence applications capable of performing a wide variety of general tasks, since they were trained on a broad spectrum of generalized data, Amazon says.
The new models are integrated with Amazon Bedrock, a managed service that makes FMs from AI companies and Amazon available for use through a single API. Using Amazon Bedrock, customers can experiment with and evaluate Amazon Nova models, as well as other FMs, to determine the best model for an application.
Calling the launch “the next step in our AI journey,” the company says Amazon Nova has the ability to process text, image, and video as prompts, so customers can use Amazon Nova-powered generative AI applications to understand videos, charts, and documents, or to generate videos and other multimedia content.
“Inside Amazon, we have about 1,000 Gen AI applications in motion, and we’ve had a bird’s-eye view of what application builders are still grappling with,” Rohit Prasad, SVP of Amazon Artificial General Intelligence, said in a release. “Our new Amazon Nova models are intended to help with these challenges for internal and external builders, and provide compelling intelligence and content generation while also delivering meaningful progress on latency, cost-effectiveness, customization, information grounding, and agentic capabilities.”
The new Amazon Nova models available in Amazon Bedrock include:
Amazon Nova Micro, a text-only model that delivers the lowest latency responses at very low cost.
Amazon Nova Lite, a very low-cost multimodal model that is lightning fast for processing image, video, and text inputs.
Amazon Nova Pro, a highly capable multimodal model with the best combination of accuracy, speed, and cost for a wide range of tasks.
Amazon Nova Premier, the most capable of Amazon’s multimodal models for complex reasoning tasks and for use as the best teacher for distilling custom models
Amazon Nova Canvas, a state-of-the-art image generation model.
Amazon Nova Reel, a state-of-the-art video generation model that can transform a single image input into a brief video with the prompt: dolly forward.
Economic activity in the logistics industry expanded in November, continuing a steady growth pattern that began earlier this year and signaling a return to seasonality after several years of fluctuating conditions, according to the latest Logistics Managers’ Index report (LMI), released today.
The November LMI registered 58.4, down slightly from October’s reading of 58.9, which was the highest level in two years. The LMI is a monthly gauge of business conditions across warehousing and logistics markets; a reading above 50 indicates growth and a reading below 50 indicates contraction.
“The overall index has been very consistent in the past three months, with readings of 58.6, 58.9, and 58.4,” LMI analyst Zac Rogers, associate professor of supply chain management at Colorado State University, wrote in the November LMI report. “This plateau is slightly higher than a similar plateau of consistency earlier in the year when May to August saw four readings between 55.3 and 56.4. Seasonally speaking, it is consistent that this later year run of readings would be the highest all year.”
Separately, Rogers said the end-of-year growth reflects the return to a healthy holiday peak, which started when inventory levels expanded in late summer and early fall as retailers began stocking up to meet consumer demand. Pandemic-driven shifts in consumer buying behavior, inflation, and economic uncertainty contributed to volatile peak season conditions over the past four years, with the LMI swinging from record-high growth in late 2020 and 2021 to slower growth in 2022 and contraction in 2023.
“The LMI contracted at this time a year ago, so basically [there was] no peak season,” Rogers said, citing inflation as a drag on demand. “To have a normal November … [really] for the first time in five years, justifies what we’ve seen all these companies doing—building up inventory in a sustainable, seasonal way.
“Based on what we’re seeing, a lot of supply chains called it right and were ready for healthy holiday season, so far.”
The LMI has remained in the mid to high 50s range since January—with the exception of April, when the index dipped to 52.9—signaling strong and consistent demand for warehousing and transportation services.
The LMI is a monthly survey of logistics managers from across the country. It tracks industry growth overall and across eight areas: inventory levels and costs; warehousing capacity, utilization, and prices; and transportation capacity, utilization, and prices. The report is released monthly by researchers from Arizona State University, Colorado State University, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rutgers University, and the University of Nevada, Reno, in conjunction with the Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP).
Specifically, 48% of respondents identified rising tariffs and trade barriers as their top concern, followed by supply chain disruptions at 45% and geopolitical instability at 41%. Moreover, tariffs and trade barriers ranked as the priority issue regardless of company size, as respondents at companies with less than 250 employees, 251-500, 501-1,000, 1,001-50,000 and 50,000+ employees all cited it as the most significant issue they are currently facing.
“Evolving tariffs and trade policies are one of a number of complex issues requiring organizations to build more resilience into their supply chains through compliance, technology and strategic planning,” Jackson Wood, Director, Industry Strategy at Descartes, said in a release. “With the potential for the incoming U.S. administration to impose new and additional tariffs on a wide variety of goods and countries of origin, U.S. importers may need to significantly re-engineer their sourcing strategies to mitigate potentially higher costs.”
Freight transportation providers and maritime port operators are bracing for rough business impacts if the incoming Trump Administration follows through on its pledge to impose a 25% tariff on Mexico and Canada and an additional 10% tariff on China, analysts say.
Industry contacts say they fear that such heavy fees could prompt importers to “pull forward” a massive surge of goods before the new administration is seated on January 20, and then quickly cut back again once the hefty new fees are instituted, according to a report from TD Cowen.
As a measure of the potential economic impact of that uncertain scenario, transport company stocks were mostly trading down yesterday following Donald Trump’s social media post on Monday night announcing the proposed new policy, TD Cowen said in a note to investors.
But an alternative impact of the tariff jump could be that it doesn’t happen at all, but is merely a threat intended to force other nations to the table to strike new deals on trade, immigration, or drug smuggling. “Trump is perfectly comfortable being a policy paradox and pushing competing policies (and people); this ‘chaos premium’ only increases his leverage in negotiations,” the firm said.
However, if that truly is the new administration’s strategy, it could backfire by sparking a tit-for-tat trade war that includes retaliatory tariffs by other countries on U.S. exports, other analysts said. “The additional tariffs on China that the incoming US administration plans to impose will add to restrictions on China-made products, driving up their prices and fueling an already-under-way surge in efforts to beat the tariffs by importing products before the inauguration,” Andrei Quinn-Barabanov, Senior Director – Supplier Risk Management solutions at Moody’s, said in a statement. “The Mexico and Canada tariffs may be an invitation to negotiations with the U.S. on immigration and other issues. If implemented, they would also be challenging to maintain, because the two nations can threaten the U.S. with significant retaliation and because of a likely pressure from the American business community that would be greatly affected by the costs and supply chain obstacles resulting from the tariffs.”
New tariffs could also damage sensitive supply chains by triggering unintended consequences, according to a report by Matt Lekstutis, Director at Efficio, a global procurement and supply chain procurement consultancy. “While ultimate tariff policy will likely be implemented to achieve specific US re-industrialization and other political objectives, the responses of various nations, companies and trading partners is not easily predicted and companies that even have little or no exposure to Mexico, China or Canada could be impacted. New tariffs may disrupt supply chains dependent on just in time deliveries as they adjust to new trade flows. This could affect all industries dependent on distribution and logistics providers and result in supply shortages,” Lekstutis said.
Grocers and retailers are struggling to get their systems back online just before the winter holiday peak, following a software hack that hit the supply chain software provider Blue Yonder this week.
The ransomware attack is snarling inventory distribution patterns because of its impact on systems such as the employee scheduling system for coffee stalwart Starbucks, according to a published report. Scottsdale, Arizona-based Blue Yonder provides a wide range of supply chain software, including warehouse management system (WMS), transportation management system (TMS), order management and commerce, network and control tower, returns management, and others.
Blue Yonder today acknowledged the disruptions, saying they were the result of a ransomware incident affecting its managed services hosted environment. The company has established a dedicated cybersecurity incident update webpage to communicate its recovery progress, but it had not been updated for nearly two days as of Tuesday afternoon. “Since learning of the incident, the Blue Yonder team has been working diligently together with external cybersecurity firms to make progress in their recovery process. We have implemented several defensive and forensic protocols,” a Blue Yonder spokesperson said in an email.
The timing of the attack suggests that hackers may have targeted Blue Yonder in a calculated attack based on the upcoming Thanksgiving break, since many U.S. organizations downsize their security staffing on holidays and weekends, according to a statement from Dan Lattimer, VP of Semperis, a New Jersey-based computer and network security firm.
“While details on the specifics of the Blue Yonder attack are scant, it is yet another reminder how damaging supply chain disruptions become when suppliers are taken offline. Kudos to Blue Yonder for dealing with this cyberattack head on but we still don’t know how far reaching the business disruptions will be in the UK, U.S. and other countries,” Lattimer said. “Now is time for organizations to fight back against threat actors. Deciding whether or not to pay a ransom is a personal decision that each company has to make, but paying emboldens threat actors and throws more fuel onto an already burning inferno. Simply, it doesn’t pay-to-pay,” he said.
The incident closely followed an unrelated cybersecurity issue at the grocery giant Ahold Delhaize, which has been recovering from impacts to the Stop & Shop chain that it across the U.S. Northeast region. In a statement apologizing to customers for the inconvenience of the cybersecurity issue, Netherlands-based Ahold Delhaize said its top priority is the security of its customers, associates and partners, and that the company’s internal IT security staff was working with external cybersecurity experts and law enforcement to speed recovery. “Our teams are taking steps to assess and mitigate the issue. This includes taking some systems offline to help protect them. This issue and subsequent mitigating actions have affected certain Ahold Delhaize USA brands and services including a number of pharmacies and certain e-commerce operations,” the company said.
Editor's note:This article was revised on November 27 to indicate that the cybersecurity issue at Ahold Delhaize was unrelated to the Blue Yonder hack.