MMH    Topics     Blogs

Risk events are everywhere

A new survey from Supply Chain Management Review and ASCM looks at how our readers and members are experiencing risk


When the Supply Chain Risk Management Consortium was formed 10 years ago, Greg Schlegel, one of the founders of the organization, remembers that just four or five attendees out of 20 to 25 raised their hands when asked if they’d experienced a supply chain risk event. Now, Schlegel says the Consortium has stopped asking the question at its events because all of the attendees raise their hands.

Risk is everywhere: According to Resilinc’s Annual EventWatch Report, global supply chain risk events increased 36% in 2018. The company issued 2,696 event notices—an average of about seven per day. They range from fires and explosions at plants and warehouses to natural disasters to cyberthreats to governmental events (think tariffs) to quality issues and recalls to demographic shifts, to name a few.

Companies in a major crisis take a 5 to 50% hit to their stock price. These, of course, could extend beyond a supply chain crisis, such as a scandal in the executive ranks. Here’s another stat – 20% of all companies that experience a moderate to severe natural disaster in their regions are out of business in 15 to 18 months, and another 15% go out of business within three years of the event, according to the Supply Chain Risk Management Consortium.

Earlier this summer, ASCM and Supply Chain Management Review teamed up to survey our respective members on the first of what we expect to be several projects to understand how companies experience risk, and more importantly, how a risk event – or supply chain disruption - impacts shareholder value. “The motivation for this came from the top, explains Peter Bolstorff, executive ASCM’s vice president of corporate development, who says that it was a major topic of discussion at ASCM’s executive summit last February.

For this first survey, we kept it simple and looked to see what types of events our respondents were experiencing, when they experienced them and how long it took to recover. Note that we presented our findings at the 2019 ASCM conference in Las Vegas. Here’s what we learned.

Nearly one third of respondents identified an issue related to quality control, or the quality of the product they were producing, as the most recent risk event to impact their companies, followed by Geo-political events (27%), the loss of a supplier (15%), a natural disaster (8%), or a financial or legal issue (tied at 4%). In the other category, respondents identified the loss of a carrier and issues related to raw materials from a supplier, tariffs and issues related to a new ERP system implementation.

Asked in what year did the most recent event occur, nearly 75% of respondents noted that a supply chain disruption had occurred this year. Eighteen percent said the most recent event had been in 2018, followed by just 2% reporting that an event had occurred in 2017, and 1% of respondents saying an event had occurred in 2008, 2014 2015 and 2016.

While supply chain disruptions occurred in every quarter, 42% occurred in the first quarter of the year, with 32% occurring in Q2, 22% occurring in Q3 and the remainder in Q4.

How long did it take to recover from the most recent event? Nearly 32% said it took less than a month while 26% recovered in 1 to 3 months and 13% recovered in 3 to 6 months and 10% said it took 6 to 9 months. But, remember: 75% said their most recent event was this year, which means that nearly a fourth of respondents are just now recovering from this year’s event. Nearly 20% of respondents noted that it took from 9 to 12 months (4%) to more than a year (15.7%) to recover from a risk related event.

So, what are the impacts on a company from a supply chain disruption? A hit to the bottom line (34%) and customer dissatisfaction – which probably contributed to a loss of profit – at nearly 30% led the pack followed by reputational damage (13%), the failure of a project or product (11%), employee turnover (3%) and fines (2%).

In the other category, respondents noted that customers waited longer for their products, there was a loss of productivity, they were forced to change suppliers, faced increased costs for insurance, new duties impacted the bottom line, potential tariffs (remember that geo-political events were a major source of disruption) created substantial uncertainty as a potential financial impact, and they had an out of stock because there was no warning that a supplier’s product was being discontinued.

Remember that old Scout Motto: Be prepared? One respondent said there was no effect because “we have contingency plans to combat the loss of a supplier.” Plan ahead!


Article Topics

Blogs
ASCM
Peter Bolstorff
Risk Management
   All topics

Blogs News & Resources

Learn from lift truck service history
Two voices of reason on pallet materials
60 Seconds with Bob Trebilcock, outgoing executive editor, Modern Materials Handling
The reBound Podcast: How Pitney-Bowes is innovating with autonomous vehicles.
Packaging Corner: Be open to change
60 Seconds with Robert Martichenko of American Logistics Aid Network
The reBound Podcast: Looking for talent in all the right places: How Essendant is revolutionizing recruitment
More Blogs

Latest in Materials Handling

Hyster-Yale Group provides students with real-world AI experience in 2024 Kellogg Design Challenge
KION Group’s board extends CEO Rob Smith’s contract by five years
UniCarriers Forklift joins Quality Equipment in opening celebration of new location
Largest Automate on record opens in Chicago on Monday May 6th
April manufacturing output recedes after growing in March
Carolina Handling celebrates anniversary with 58 for 58 giveaway
Q1 sees a solid finish with strong U.S.-bound import growth, notes S&P Global Market Intelligence
More Materials Handling

About the Author

Bob Trebilcock's avatar
Bob Trebilcock
Bob Trebilcock is the executive editor for Modern Materials Handling and an editorial advisor to Supply Chain Management Review. He has covered materials handling, technology, logistics, and supply chain topics for nearly 30 years. He is a graduate of Bowling Green State University. He lives in Chicago and can be reached at 603-852-8976.
Follow Modern Materials Handling on FaceBook

Subscribe to Materials Handling Magazine

Subscribe today!
Not a subscriber? Sign up today!
Subscribe today. It's FREE.
Find out what the world's most innovative companies are doing to improve productivity in their plants and distribution centers.
Start your FREE subscription today.

Latest Resources

Materials Handling Robotics: The new world of heterogeneous robotic integration
In this Special Digital Edition, the editorial staff of Modern curates the best robotics coverage over the past year to help track the evolution of this piping hot market.
Case study: Optimizing warehouse space, performance and sustainability
Optimize Parcel Packing to Reduce Costs
More resources

Latest Resources

2023 Automation Study: Usage & Implementation of Warehouse/DC Automation Solutions
2023 Automation Study: Usage & Implementation of Warehouse/DC Automation Solutions
This research was conducted by Peerless Research Group on behalf of Modern Materials Handling to assess usage and purchase intentions forautomation systems...
How Your Storage Practices Can Affect Your Pest Control Program
How Your Storage Practices Can Affect Your Pest Control Program
Discover how your storage practices could be affecting your pest control program and how to prevent pest infestations in your business. Join...

Warehousing Outlook 2023
Warehousing Outlook 2023
2023 is here, and so are new warehousing trends.
Extend the Life of Brownfield Warehouses
Extend the Life of Brownfield Warehouses
Today’s robotic and data-driven automation systems can minimize disruptions and improve the life and productivity of warehouse operations.
Power Supply in Overhead Cranes: Energy Chains vs. Festoons
Power Supply in Overhead Cranes: Energy Chains vs. Festoons
Download this white paper to learn more about how both systems compare.