It is 6 years since the Brexit vote and 3 years since the UK left the EU. Many think that Brexit was a self inflicted banana skin. It is one of those moments in history when a country decided to inflict pain on itself without good reason. The underlying memories for Brexit decisions will be seen as dishonesty, divisiveness, self-interest, misinformation, gross overstatement of claimed benefits, incompetence, prejudice and ill thought through consequences of what it meant for the country and its socioeconomic future, It could have all been so different. Today we learn it is costing the UK economy £100 billion a year. Exchange rates have consistently been 16-20 per cent lower and supply chain frictions between the UK and its leading EU trade partners has increased. It has also made Northern Ireland trading arrangements similar to those with EU countries adding unnecessary and expensive friction to supply chains.
So what is good about Brexit?
It was claimed by Boris Johnson and other prominent Brexiters that it would return sovereignty to the UK giving the right to make it’s own laws; it would release vast sums of money that the UK paid to the EU and return it to the NHS and other public services that we could invest in; It would remove the freedoms of labour mobility across Europe which would mean we could keep out foreign labour (only from the EU of course) and it would mean so much more. Unfortunately, most of these statements were not true in any sense. The UK could already make it’s own laws; it already had the right to remove undesirable people from the UK; the investment in many parts of the economy benefitted the many poorer parts of the UK and provided funding to regions that a Westminster Government has not. There was less friction in supply chains. The right to travel and reside in the EU was of benefit to many people not just EU citizens coming to Britain. Oh yes and we did not have to concern ourselves with the Northern Ireland Protocol. All in all we had a stronger currency, better trade arrangements, less supply chain friction, better laws and human rights. So was it a self inflicted banana skin by David Cameron’s Conservative Government? Yes. Was the decision taken on fact based reasoning? No.
So what can we do now?
There is little option but to get on with it but we need policies that are realistic to:
achieve growth,
increase trade,
do everything to eliminate friction in supply chains,
attract investment in industry,
free movement to encourage people to come to work in the UK in industries that require qualified employees in any sector,
create value in the economy,
build a fairer society where people are paid appropriately,
create opportunities for people to develop skills in demand,
incentivise and motivate people,
and most of all we need a Government with ability, integrity, honesty and fairness at the centre of its’ manifesto that is capable of making it happen.
Resilience is more than risk management. It is a capability to get to the future by limiting the impact of disruptions. Risk management is necessary to manage particular supply chains as well as the supply chain system. Anticipating risks from disruption is an important skill. Assessing risk and assigning probabilities to manage risk are parts of any risk management system. Beyond the immediate supply chain risks there are risks that threaten the total supply system. It is necessary to take a systems view of risk if you want to build resilience across the total system. An example would be energy supply chains which are made up of entity supply chains (e.g.extractors, refiners, generating companies) linked to buying organizations (re-sellers, business and consumer suppliers) which are linked to business supply chains and consumers at some point in the chain. The total supply system would consider risk at each node from source to consumption. This means not simply managing risk in the organization supply chain it means managing the risk in the system which has many supply chains. Resilience requires steps to manage beyond the immediate supply chain, beyond intra and interorganizational supply chains linked in the total system. Resilience capabilities have to be developed to manage systemic risk.
We cannot solve a problem with the same thinking that created it.
Albert Einstein
As John Maynard Keynes noted markets do not always work as expected when this happens it may be necessary for government to intervene to correct the problem. Governments have a responsibility to secure strategic assets that may include: energy, food, water, public utilities, banks, defense and other resources. These are the resources that are needed to maintain life and provide security for the population. Yergin and Stanislaw (1998) refer to these resources as the ‘Commanding Heights of the Economy‘ after Lenin and Marx.
RESILIENCE
Resilience is not a quick fix
Resilience is a long-term commitment
Resilience requires investment
Resilience requires trained and highly skilled personel
Resilience is the ability to bounce back from disruptions. In supply chains one thing is certain at some point there will be disruption. Something that knocks your plans off track. Those that plan often make plans resilient by adopting ‘what if?’ strategies. This means having plans to get back on track quickly when the unexpected happens.
Resilience is tested when goods being shipped in containers are held up or when there is a labor strike at a port or supplier production unit. It can be beyond supply disruption which is a symptom not a cause of something much bigger. For example, when a pandemic grips the world. This is systemic disruption. What makes for resilience in these circumstances is having the capacity to bounce back quickly. Capacity which has been built through planning and investment to ensure it is present when needed.
Securing strategic assets must be part of resilience. If we think about the needs of a nation state we could produce a list that would include: defense, energy, food, healthcare, materials and technology amongst other things. These are what Lennin and Marx referred to as the ‘commanding heights’ of the economy. We expect governments to secure strategic assets. One of the problems for some nation states is ‘short-termism’. In democratic states governments are elected for 4 or 5 year terms and commitments follow suit. The long-view has been something that eastern countries such as China and Japan have been admired for. Without such long-term views it is difficult to develop continuity for resilience.
In my discussion of the West’s dependency on China I drew attention to the long term planning to acquire rare earth minerals and strategic metals for battery technology. China has built resilience and continues to do so. Western economies have been wedded to the market to solve their problems. I mean that they see the price mechanism as a way to fix disruptions rather than build capacity through investment to achieve it. In essence you assess and balance risk through markets. This will become clearer as I discuss risk.
People and Technology
Creating the right culture is part of building resilience. Expectations have to be set and carefully managed. Developing people and teams to respond effectively when disruption strikes is critical and it requires a mix of people and technology to achieve results. Having data in the right form to signpost what is happening in the supply chain often gives advance warning. It may not always provide signals as soon as you would like but ensuring that teams are trained to interepret data and respond effectively is the key to minimising the impact.
Let me demonstrate using an analogy from Formula 1 racing. A driver may be the first to recognise a problem in the car and quickly signal to the pit team what is happening. Each person in the pit team has a role and knows exactly what to do in the particular circumstances reported. Quick response is necessary to effect a repair or adjustment that will get the car back on track immediaitely after the incident without delay. Supply chains have to become resilient in similar fashion with every team member knowing their role and having a skill set so that each member knows exactly what to do in the specific circumstances.
In ‘Competing for the Future’ Gary Hamel talked about everyone being a prisoner of their experience but this need not be the case if you can learn skills that stretch beyond that experience. You can learn from the best and from the mistakes of others as well as from your own experience.
RISK
Risk is managed through probabilities. This is a first step to map risks that may disrupt supply chains. Time is an important element of this assessment. What is the likelihood of something happening and how long will it last? This is more than probability, it is impact too measured through time. An example such as the Ever Given Container Vessel demonstrates both. If we were assessing the risk prior to occurrence the probability statistic might have been close to zero (.0001), since in the Suez Canal’s history over 100 years of past data there had been no such event. The impact was more than the 7 days the ship was stuck. It took months for ships and container traffic to bounce back to something near normal throughput. So how do you plan resilient strategies for unlikely but possible events? If you do not want to over invest in capacity you have to be agile. Agility depends on thoughts and action. Firstly, you must anticipate such an event. Secondly, you have to think through scenarios and cost the options. Thirdly, make the decision. Necessary but not easy because resilience costs but it will cost less if you anticipate and plan agile strategies.
In supply chains there are many risks which I summarized in my 7V Framework based on more than twenty years researching supply chain risk across different industrial sectors. The factors that create value are also those factors that carry risk. Volatility, Volume, Velocity, Visibility, Variability, Virtuality and Variety are the seven risk factors. The profile of risk is not the same for every organization but the factors are. The question for organizations to address is to identify how each of the factors contributes to that particular organization’s mix profile. Of course even inside organizations there will be different supply chains that are affected differently by the mix elements. A simple example might make this clear. Supposing we operate a supply chain that has regular demand patterns that lead to constant reorder patterns from a consistent supply base. This type of supply chain should not be affected by volume risk or variability. Whereas a supply chain where volumes are less predictable and sources of supply are more volatile will have a very different profile of risk.
Resilient strategies require investment in resources to build it. Examples include people, training, technology, systems, sourcing, procurement, operations, warehousing and distribution. Each element forms part of the mix. Resilience extends beyond a single supply chain which means investment in the network is necessary. Supply chains have to be thought of as service systems satisfying customers if we want to build resilience.
Analyzing systemic risk requires constant scanning for threats. In the process of doing so we may also find opportunities to enhance the system capabilities which increase resilience. A similar process can be implemented at organizational level or for a specific product supply chain with the aim of building resilience.
RESPONSIVE SYSTEMS
Supply chains are service systems. We should never lose sight of this fact. Service to customers however defined is central to the supply system. Building resilient supply chains means that customers can be served efficiently and effectively. Service means being responsive to customers at the time service is required. This responsiveness is common to public services and to private enterprise. Time is of the essence.
CONCLUSIONS
Resilience is important in any system. In supply chain systems it is paramount. Supply systems exist beyond immediate firm and intra-firm supply chains. Risk has to be anticipated, assessed and probable outcomes assigned to manage the risk for the system. Within the system organizations are responsible for managing their own intra and inter-organization supply networks. Agile strategies can be employed by firms inside their own supply networks. Responsiveness is an important capability to build. Resilience goes beyond agility and responsiveness by allocating resources to the total supply chain system proportionate to risks identified in that system.
ProfessorTony Hines PhD, writes and talks about supply chain strategies. He is author of Supply Chain Strategies published by Routledge. He presents the Chain Reaction Podcast all about supply chain advantage.
Listen also to the episode Reflections On Resilient Supply Chains which discussed the part geopolitics has played in moving supply chains towards resilient strategies.
TONY HINES BLOG 