4 steps to rebuilding customer-supplier relationships
Many customer-supplier relationships were weakened or damaged during the economic downturn. To rescue them, both sides need to acknowledge past mistakes, identify the causes of those problems, take corrective action, and monitor the results.
As of this writing, all signs are pointing toward recovery, and economic indicators (take your pick) are suggesting a better ending to 2010 than we experienced in 2009. Optimistic whispers in the first few months of this year became clearly audible announcements when Quarter 1 earnings were released. Demand is on the rise, slashed capacity is beginning to fill up, and at many companies, earnings will exceed expectations.
Despite the fact that business is improving in most industries, companies will continue to struggle for some time to overcome the effects of the recession on their supply chains. This is especially true for those that made drastic decisions and acted in ways that altered their supply chain capacity and supplier services.
Customer-supplier relationships have been caught up in this turmoil and have often suffered as a result. The economic upheaval of the past 18 months has left many relationships weakened, damaged, or even severed. With demand increasing, now is the time for buyers and suppliers to assess the current state of their relationships and then address or resolve any concerns. This can be accomplished through a four-step process that includes acknowledging what has happened, identifying the causes of any problems, agreeing on and implementing corrective actions, and following up and maintaining the improved relationship.
These steps should be carried out within your company's supplier relationship management (SRM) program. SRM is a formalized process through which companies build strong, collaborative relationships with their vital suppliers to make improvements and achieve their mutual supply chain goals. If you do not already have a formal SRM program, then following these steps can serve as the foundation for this type of initiative. Customers and suppliers that adopt this process and commit to continuing it in the future will not only reaffirm and strengthen their partnerships but will also ensure that they create an effective, flexible supply chain.
Step 1: Acknowledge past mistakes
Start out by evaluating your current relationship with your most critical suppliers. This assumes that you have already segmented your supply base and identified your most important suppliers. You can follow this process for all suppliers, of course, but to maximize the value of your efforts, it's a good idea to address the most essential suppliers first. Once the top suppliers have been singled out, you can assess the current state of your relationship with each of them individually.
The most important part of this first step is to identify and acknowledge the mistakes that were made on both sides. Ask the following questions and examine your answers carefully: Is this relationship in turmoil? If so, what were the actions that created this tension, and why were those actions taken? What were the outcomes of those actions, and what position are you or your suppliers in now as a result? How does the supplier feel toward you, and how do you feel toward the supplier? Do you deem the relationship to be weakened, damaged, or severed? Is the relationship meaningful for your company, and will improving that relationship bring value to both parties? By answering these questions, you will define the roadmap toward reconciliation and improved effectiveness—or to accepting a separation, if that proves necessary.
Once you have determined that the relationship is worth repairing or saving, it is time to pursue open and honest communication with that supplier. Integrity and trust are the basis for any relationship, and addressing difficult topics in a frank and objective manner will be appreciated by everyone involved.
Coming to the table in an open manner is just the beginning, however. The magnitude of the strife in the relationship will dictate the level of effort required to address it. Weakened relationships, while still requiring direct and concerted effort, can be more easily repaired than those with damaged elements or those that have been severed. A special note on severed relationships: If you are not sincere about reconciliation, then do not waste your time or your supplier's time. The amount of time and patience required to rebuild a previously severed relationship can be substantial, and if either party lacks commitment, true reconciliation becomes doubtful.
Step 2: Find the real source of the problem
The most delicate part of this process involves identifying the root cause of the problems. Bringing in a neutral third party to help both sides review the current relationship and past experiences is one way to maintain objectivity during these discussions. In this type of conversation, emotions and personal involvement tend to rise to the surface, and the "effect" part of "cause and effect" often becomes the focal point. This is a situation you should strive to avoid. If participants fail to consider the root of a problem, only the symptom will be treated, and another one that may be even more harmful to the relationship will inevitably appear.
In reviewing the events of the last 18 months, many customers and suppliers may point to the economy and decreased demand as the cause of relationship strife and discontent. There's no denying that the economy was an underlying factor. As orders plummeted, original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) reduced capacities to attempt to match output and expenses to very weak demand. Many suppliers were unaware of the dramatic steps taken by OEMs and were left with buildup in their inventories of up to 50 percent—with no buyers for that stock in sight. These high inventory levels caused a variety of problems for suppliers and, in the worst cases, resulted in bankruptcy.
While the economy and declining demand clearly play a role here, poor customer-supplier relationships and the lack of strong communication channels appear to be a major cause of the devastating inventory buildup. This might have been avoided by improving forecasting tools or enhancing operational capabilities to more quickly respond to downward shifts in demand. Both are sound actions to pursue at any time, but neither will resolve the lack of customer- supplier communication that will continue to cause problems in the future.
An important question to ask here is: "Were there warning signs before the problem occurred?" As both customer and supplier consider this question, they should reflect upon quantitative (on-time delivery, payment cycles, fill rate) and qualitative (quality, customer service, safety) measurements that may have signaled trouble ahead. Discussing these measurements or signals as well as the customer's and supplier's responses to those developments will help to establish where specific problems originated.
Step 3: Identify and implement corrective actions
Now that the root causes of relationship strife and their leading indicators have been identified, the next step is to define and implement corrective actions. These actions can include procedural changes, changes in safety stocks, increased communication requirements, or even changes in personnel. Observe the impact of these corrective actions on the original symptoms (the "effect") and ensure that the resulting improvements can be objectively measured and quantified. For example, a procedural change could reduce the amount of time required to process a transaction, therefore the number of transactions per hour will increase. Moreover, increasing safety stock and boosting communication requirements (such as sending status updates more frequently) may yield higher service levels, which can also be measured.
It's wise to avoid subjective measurements, which may invite interpretations that lead to more disagreements and conflicts. Be sure to incorporate these measurements into an existing customer-supplier scorecard process, or if none exists, take the opportunity to create one that can be reviewed periodically. The solutions you develop can and should vary based on the type of relationship you have with your supplier:
A strictly transaction-based relationship that focuses on only one or two activities is likely to be rekindled by focusing attention solely on improving those specific activities.
Tactical relationships may benefit from solutions that span both upstream and downstream from the basic operational transactions. These relationships may have multiple touch points, and resolving each relationship conflict at each touch point may be an extensive, time-consuming process.
Strategic partnerships call for the most complex activities and coordination to revive a distressed relationship. Moreover, strategic partnerships frequently span multiple organizations at all levels. So, although most efforts may start at the top of the organizational chart, it is important to address all levels when rebuilding trust and good will.
Carrying out the solutions you agree on most likely will involve increased sharing of operational and business information, such as supply inventory levels, point-of-sales data, and market trends that are beneficial for both customer and supplier. Frequently, an investment in information technology software can facilitate and enhance this kind of extensive data sharing.
Step 4: Monitor and maintain the relationship
After implementing corrective actions, you'll need to conduct management reviews in which progress is discussed, milestones are recognized, and changes to planned milestones are decided upon when necessary. It almost goes without saying that these reviews should be carried out in a timely fashion. The definition of "timeliness," however, depends upon what activities are being measured and on their inherent cycle times. The review should occur within a time frame that allows sufficient data points identifying change to be generated. A premature review will show lack of progress and can lower confidence levels. At the same time, a late review or prolonged periods between reviews can jeopardize momentum or even introduce confusion if environmental components have changed and/or new variables have been introduced since the previous review. Matching management reviews to meaningful data generation will help avoid these pitfalls and keep the momentum toward positive relationship change.
The successful repair of a customer-supplier relationship will heavily depend on the involvement of the leadership teams and the commitment of both sides to the process. If continuing the relationship will bring value to both parties, then their commitment to achieving success (and to maintaining the relationship) should be explicit. In other words, leadership's involvement in supplier relationship management demonstrates the importance of this activity to the organization.
Nevertheless, sustaining the relationship can be difficult even when there is great support from the leadership of both customer and supplier. It makes sense, therefore, to consider turning the relationship management activities that have been developed to address specific problems into a formalized program supporting continued improvement. Leverage the scheduled reviews, progress metrics, and milestones to shape the content of a formal customer- supplier management process. Expand team and individual involvement to other levels of the organization as appropriate.
Remember that a customer-supplier relationship is a two-way street— throughout the "monitor and maintain" phase, both sides should be openminded and go out of their way to learn from each other. For example, the customer can teach the supplier that it needs to provide more than just the right product at the right price, and the supplier can teach the customer that it requires more information than a basic forecast if it is to support the customer's supply chain success.
Relationships: The foundation of success
Now is the time to assess your customer-supplier relationships, as your company recovers from the Great Recession and prepares for an upturn in business. If those relationships are weakened, damaged, or severed, consider taking the following steps: Objectively acknowledge the past and open a clear communication channel with the sincere intent of building a mutually beneficial relationship. Discuss and discover the sources (the "cause") of the problems and develop corrective actions. Be careful not to fall into the trap of addressing symptoms (the "effects"). Follow through with corrective actions and continue to monitor and maintain the relationship. To improve the likelihood of success, ensure that there is leadership support from both customer and supplier.
Remember, solid, healthy customer-supplier relationships form the foundation of an enterprise's success. Companies that continue to suffer because of weakened, damaged, or severed relationships will surely lose to their competition.
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.