The five-year-old is now six, and getting sophisticated. The other night at dinner, a pan-Asian cuisine spectacular, he confidently announced, "You know, you have to use chapsticks to eat this kind of food." Taken aback, I dropped my chapsticks on the floor, occasioning grumbling from his grandmother and shrieks of laughter from the munchkins assembled, who thought it was all part of the act.
Reflecting on the incident later, I contemplated the dangers involved in applying close, but not quite right, tools to supply chain planning and operations. They often sound like the right thing to do, the right way to go. But, without closer examination, they could prove to be not as useful as hoped, or worse, downright harmful. The difference between chapsticks and chopsticks is minimal in print, noticeable upon inspection, and catastrophic in mis-application.
Whomever is selling either solution, is usually confident, and persuasive, though. It's up to you to discover when you need - and can benefit from - trying to use one or the other.
Note: ChapStick is a registered trademark of Wyeth Consumer Healthcare, which is being acquired by Pfizer Inc.
Softair Ag's CEO, Gabriel Weisskopf has hit another one out of the park. In a recent parable from his Opinion column in Air Cargo World, he recounted the tale of an uncommon service provider, led by its CEO, Hugo First.
In contrast with the parade of usual suspects who took PowerPoint and bombast to new lows, glazing the eyes and numbing the senses of the selection committee, Hugo brought only a flip chart and a bizarre attitude. After writing, "I am not here today to sell you anything," Mr. First admitted that he had really come "to find out what kind of buyer" he was dealing with.
Horror ensued. No brochures, no testimonials, no incomprehensible "value propositions." What was going on?
Actually, the approach is one that might signal bright prospects in a budding business relationship. After all, what kind of business partner is interested only in: 1) itself, and 2) how to get you to buy something, and soon?
Maybe the the right kind of service provider is one who's interested in the longer term, and how good the fit is between it and you. Or art least, wants to take the time tom understand you and your people before crafting approaches and solutions designed to actually solve real business problems in the supply chain.
Is this tactic sheer insolence on the part of a service provider, or an intelligent means of beginning to build the foundation of something sustainable - and valuable?
About a month ago, John Trentacosta wrote about a subject that no one wants to talk about (mhmonline.com). Fact is, an otherwise phenomenal supply chain can be brought to its knees when one partner in the chain runs into financial trouble. A business relationship with a pauper is not sustainable.
Some early warning signals - the canaries in the coal mine - include: requests for price increases, early payments, accelerated terms, or even financing support; late deliveries or quality degradation; failures to appropriately invest in IT and/or other assets; maintaining spend during downturns; delinquent taxes, deteriorating receivables, and extended payables; and bad press, among others.
Due duiligence on the front end can help prevent problems on the back end, but sometimes bad things happen to good people. That's when an early response team reaction to early warnings can pay off. Sometimes, you've got to pull the plug. But, often you can mutually develop work-out plans to let the troubled partner survive long enough to prosper -and to keep your supply chain humming in an unrelentingly competitive marketplace.
A good friend of many years was recently bemoaning what he sees as the continuing decline of manufacturing in the US. His biggest complaint was that, every time a plant closes, its engineers hit the streets newly badged as "lean" consultants.
"Lean" indeed - a larger population trying to capture bigger pieces of a shrinking pie.
I don't have the data to challenge his contentions. Clearly, a lot of manufacturiung has left our shores over the past couple of decades. But, we still manufacture many things, although perhaps not on the scale of what General Motors plants used to look like. Certainly not at the employment and production levels of twenty years ago. That said, we're still in the early stages of in-shoring and right-shoring movements, and productivity - if not production - continues to climb throughout the sector.
It's possible that my morose amigo has seen his consulting and training business shrink because, at least in part, of other factors. More and better-educated and better-trained engineers and operators. Radical shifts in learning and knowledge transfer paradigms. Tired branding and terminology.
And maybe - just maybe - more companies are learning from one another in close relationships, and have focused, targeted, and empathetic partners to help them improve performance. Or perhaps they are getting help from subject matter experts with different styles, with different kinds of client relationships, and with different approaches to salvation that go beyond traditional projects and programs.
Seems to me that part of staying in the game - and ahead of the pack - in the 21st century is continual reinvention . . . within a supply chain, within a company, within a product, and within oneself. I'm just sayin' . . .
Costco continues to amuse and amaze by offering more than the usual products to pile in the cart. The Costco Connection magazine for June (www.costco.com, "connection") has a page devoted to "Fresh Views," with mini-features on: Wally "Famous" Amos (who has moved on to found Wally's Muffin Company),brainstorming techniques, and a quick summary of a 2009 book, Extraordinary Groups: How Ordinary Teams Achieve Amazing Results.
My big takeaways this month, aside from a hankering for a muffin or a chocolate chip cookie, were from Extraordinary Groups. One - not quite an aha! moment - was that a group dynamic can hinder, rather than stimulate, group productivity. The other was that "exceptional experiences can be thoughtfully nurtured and intentionally encouraged."
Good stuff, but the authors may have missed the larger point, which is that transporting tools and techniques for elevating group performance, to the operation of business relationships involving entire companies, can magnify and multiply the consequences of what might be accomplished.
Maybe an even greater message, though, lies in how Costco works at a fuller customer relationship by providing unexpected value, beyond the nuts and bolts of selling them tires and tube steaks.
I read an interview with the former editor-in-chief of a successful magazine in which she says that one of her proudest career achievements was creating the team she worked with.
She assembled a team she calls, 'a collection of the most talented, wonderful, kind and hilarious people ever,' and she is proud she 'never made room for someone who might have been gifted but was tricky or difficult.' Bear in mind that this is a woman honored by Advertising Age as an A-List Top 10 under 50 person-to-watch.
This reminds me of KWilson's blog post on teams.
It is another example of how a team that is a dream to work with has the potential to out-perform a team with an all-star lineup.
CSCMP's game-changing CEO Rick Blasgen really nailed it in his latest Direct Connection segment in the Q2 issue of Supply Chain Quarterly (www.supplychainquarterly.com). The general point emphasized the value of face-to-face human-level communications in an age of instantaneous electronic communication via numerous media.
Even the Millennial Generation, btw, recognizes this value, despite its fondness for electronic access to all manner of information (and entertainment). My deep suspicion is that way too many people of all ages like to hide behind the impersonal facade of email, texting, tweeting, twittering, flittering - anything that buffers them from interactive personal contact. But, that reflects a personality disorder rather than a generational "preference."
Rick went on to promote the idea that communications leads to collaboration, which can be transported from individual application to organizational relationships. I take heart - when our profession's leaders get the picture this clearly, there's hope that the profession itself will follow.
Things get tricky at this point. Organizational collaboration can't really be - as in the George Gershwin song from Porgy and Bess - "a sometime thing," done when it's convenient for one supply chain partner or another. It needs to be part of day-to-day, and everyday, transaction execution within business relationships.
Now, the hard part. Collaboration doesn't just happen; relationships don't blossom just because they're planted and watered occasionally. All this is part of conscious investment of time and resources in creating the right kind of relationships with the right kind of partners, and all with a business purpose.
The investment, consuming as it may be, is where the big payoff in supply chain management is, though. It transcends momentary gains and losses when designed to deliver sustainable end-to-end marketplace advantage. And, the wunderkind at the end of the table who's texting while you're talking is part of that set of organized relationships.
Stadia emptied, vuvuzelas silenced, the Netherlands team has four years to contemplate what might have been in their resurgent prominence in the world of World Cup soccer. FIFA has a shorter time to assess the salutory effects of public hanging for sight-challenged and judgement-impaired referees. In the meantime, we'll don our colors and pull for Ajax, the pride of Amsterdam.
Back in the real world, the good news is that our universe of supply chain management is making headlines. That's also the bad news. USA Today's July 8 Money section carried a top-of-the-fold feature on shipping bottlenecks and their negative impacts on cost and timeliness. Our friend Rosalyn Wilson was cited (but CSCMP's production of her annual State of Logistics study was not mentioned - another rant for another day).
The problem was blamed on recession-driven capacity cutbacks in air cargo, ocean shipments, and truck transport. Adding container shortages to the mix makes marine transport the most severe manifestation of the problem, with shipping volumes increasing while Chinese container manufacturing has been seriously curtailed.
But, some of the damage was self-inflicted, and some continued difficulty is a matter of choice - an investment in short-term pain in exchange for a payoff in longer-term financial pleasure. Carriers (of all types) embraced sharp price cuts in order to keep operating - even at a loss - when times got tough. Many shippers took advantage of a perceived desperation, and turned the screws even tighter.
Now, the carriers want to get well - and fast. The USA Today feature reports a 150% increase in transportation costs (following the historic decline of 2009). Significant additional increases lie ahead, with re-activated capacity lagging demand. Some observers maintain that the ocean carriers' recent practice of "slow steaming" is a faux green maneuver to mask a cynical manipulation that reduces effective capacity - and creates unholy pressures for further upward price movement.
Despite the fine words and high concepts coming from many players in the global supply chain community, this scenario reflects a sobering reality about talking the talk versus walking the walk.
How often must we repeat these cycles of adversarial win/lose (and lose/lose) industry-wide confrontation? At some point, the strategists among us will learn to think, like Bobby Fischer, four or five moves ahead and build long-term business relationships. Real relationships will insulate genuine partners from the debilitating skirmishes that perpetuate the paradigm of creating immediate transactional focus, short-term one-sided gains, and long-term supply chain underperformance.
We know better; now we've got to do better. But, doing better requires that everybody - shippers, carriers, service providers - gets in the game. And plays to win-win.
Ralph Roberts is the President of Worthington Industries Integrated Building Systems.
He took a moment to talk with Kathy Hoyt and discuss the role of business relationships in his success and the success of Worthington Industries.
Kathy: How has your approach evolved throughout your career?
Ralph: I’ve seen the full spectrum from concentrating on personal relations to company centered Value Propositions.
In the economic down turn in the 80’s the personal relationships were being limited due to less money being spent on entertainment. The shift went to B2B relationships and became more professional.
Relationships are being replaced by associations and event shows instead of a high concentration on “entertainment”.
Today it’s about how your business value systems are similar to your customer’s business relationships value system so you can work together.
Kathy: Who helped you develop these skills?
Ralph: When I first started Worthington Industries 37 yrs. ago the company was small so I had access to the Executives. These Executives had a strong customer focus and I saw them dealing with customers on a daily basis.
The WI Philosophy was already in play and was being demonstrated in the contacts with customers. The philosophical needle was very important in all areas of the company and an esprit de core was developed and lived.
Kathy: How have the skilled contributed to your success?
Ralph: The skills applied to all aspects of the business. The philosophy was driven throughout the organization.
You got put into situations and had to deal with it. There were no training programs so you had to figure things out for yourself. Some survived and some didn’t.
The common values were the deciding factor. When faced with a tough decision, I did the following steps:
The Philosophy card “taught” you the skills you needed.
(Note: When Tom Peters interviewed John H. McConnell there were no written policies in place – only the Philosophy card!)
Kathy: Can you think of a time when the relationship saved the customer?
Ralph: The Tenneco Company had had a relationship with Worthington that wasn’t so good. When we called on the purchasing manager he said he would never to do business with us again.
After repeated calls over a period of two years, we were finally able to rebuild the relationship by showing them we could add value to their company. It turned out to be one of our largest contracts.
Allen Bradley was a targeted account for us and when first contacted, the said “no.” The account manager was instructed to call on them every 6 weeks, develop the relationship, show how WI could add value.
Our reasoning was eventually they will get in trouble and when they do, we will be there to help. It worked.
Kathy: How is business relationships managed as a core competency?
Ralph: Today the Philosophy is formally introduced in the orientation program and is reinforced through all facets of training and interactions.
Look at the card to make a decision. We also use the TIPS process we learned through S4 to improve our listening skills and really understand our customer’s needs.
In 2008, we started a “Transformation” that brought teams together to become more efficient. Customers are seeing improved quality, service and cost effective solutions.
When customers tour the plant, an operator is able to talk to the customer and tell them exactly what they are making for that customer. Customers feel good that WI is doing all it can to improve quality, service and cost.
Kathy: When did the relationship cause you to lose a sale?
Ralph: I had a great relationship with a customer and thought he would never take away his business but he told me that we weren’t competitive with our pricing. Just because you have a great relationship you have to remain competitive.
He gave all his business to a competitor! A good business relationship is good to have but not enough to keep the business.
Kathy: What advice would you give about building relationships?
Ralph:
Kathy: If you could give one piece of advice, what would it be?
Ralph: How well do you know your top 10 accounts? Not the statistics and number but what is their growth plan, fears, and can you help them meet their business goals.
Can they articulate how Worthington Industries is helping them? There should never be any surprises in working with one of your top 10 customers.
Kathy: How has the economy effective business relationship?
Ralph: There is now a new normal. Employees are being cut from the work force and organizations have to go deeper than they would like just to stay in business.
Trust gets hurt and will take a long time to recapture it. Some companies have had to cut the number of suppliers they are using just for economy of scale – even if it was a good relationship.
In some cases, some of the preferred suppliers have gone out of business forcing them to buy from a company they might not like.
Companies are worried about the financial stability of the suppliers even if the relationship is good.
These are very trying times but it will come back. As the market comes back WI will be well positioned because we have quality products, a quality company and financial stability.
Ralph Roberts has been with Worthington Industries for 37 years. He currently serves as President of Worthington Industries Integrated Building Systems.
He serves on the Boards for Worthington Armstrong Venture (WAVE), ThyssenKrupp Steel and Worthington Industries (TWB) and Spartan Steel Coating for Worthington Industries.
All week I have been reflecting on an experience I had last Saturday that reminded me of the power of a team. My daughter and 7 of her lower school schoolmates decided, after several months of playing chess at lunch on Wednesdays, that they would enter an all-girls chess tournament. They formed a last minute team to represent their school in the beginner's category. There were 10 other teams from around the city and state, most of whom had coaches, more experience and official team attire. Through five rounds of games, we watched the scores come in, both individually and overall team rankings. By the end of the 3rd round, we were in 2nd place. By the end of the 4th round, we'd dropped to 4th. Between games, the girls got together and shared their game experiences, asked questions of teammates and practiced game strategies with each other. The encouragement these girls were giving each other was fun to watch.
After the 5th and final round, awards were given. Individual awards were handed out first. All of our girls received a medal for participants who earned at least 1 point. Many other girls got trophies for their higher individual scores (4 or 5). Our chance at ranking in the top 4 teams seems a distance dream since none of our girls received a trophy. As the team awards were announced, our girls began to feel discouraged. They had not won 4th place and were surely out of the game. As the next awards were announced, their lower school head kneeled down to give them words of praise for their willingness to jump in and give this tournament a try, never having done anything like this before. Suddenly, we listened to the 1st place announcement. We could hardly believe our ears when they named our team as the winning team! We all almost fell off our chairs, stunned and thrilled with the news! Who knew a chess tournament could be so exciting?
So how could this be, they asked? We had no "star" players, no individuals with perfect 5 scores or even 4 scores. It was not only exciting but a wonderful lesson on the power of team. Star players can't carry a weak team. Solid teamwork can win the game!
I've been glued to CNN this past week trying to comprehend the catastophe following the earthquake in Haiti. I've been impressed with many things, but one of the things that has impressed me the most has been the power of relationships. In a catastrophe - be it in Haiti or in business-- when everything you had counted on has failed, often the only currency we have left is the power of relationships. Our ability to quickly make connections, create trust and find a common ground can be the difference between life and death. Those in Haiti -- or in business--who are paralyzed by fear, full of self-doubt and want to isolate are really struggling. Those in Haiti --or in business--who have had strong relationships or know how to create them guickly are doing better. They are the resilient ones, and they are the ones most likely to thrive in the future.
The good news is that we can all learn how to be better at creating relationships. There are tools and practices to help us. There is no magic to it. Relationship building is a learned skill. The real challenge is to actively practice those skills before we need to depend on them in life or death situations. I think I need to keep practicing.
Last week Stanley McChrystal, in charge of the military in Afghanistan, was on Charlie Rose. Rose asked excellent questions and it soon became evident that McChrystal has based his military life on forming relationships, both in teams and in his strategic thinking. He argues forcibly that unless we win the hearts of the Afghans and provide them with security, there will be no chance of "winning" the war. Read McChristal talking about how he became an effective leader, why he now prefers teams instead of command and control, and how he will win the Adfghan conflict by building one relationship at a time with the Afghan people. Jsperry
http://www.charlierose.com/guest/view/6785