**London**: As the supply chain sector grapples with evolving terminology and innovations like AI, industry leaders question their true value. A recent analysis by Supply Chain Shaman highlights the disparity in effectiveness and calls for a re-evaluation of strategies for tangible benefits and better decision-making.
The discourse surrounding the advancements and evolving terminology within supply chain management has reached a critical point: key players in the industry are increasingly questioning the tangible value offered by the latest innovations. This scrutiny has been illuminated in a recent analysis by Supply Chain Shaman, a publication that delves into the implications of trends and technologies in the supply chain landscape.
The author begins with a stark metaphorical representation of the industry’s dialogue—illustrated by recurring phrases such as “Industry 4.0”, “Big Data”, and “Digital Supply Chain”. These terms have become ubiquitous yet often feel diluted to the point of inducing an “allergy for word speak and hollow promises.” The underlying concern is whether these concepts translate into substantive benefits or merely serve as marketing jargon.
Historically, conferences and discussions tend to introduce new frameworks and “shiny objects” aimed at capturing attention. However, the author reflects on the reality that less than 3% of companies outperform their peers, as indicated by the Supply Chains to Admire analysis, while well-regarded rankings like Gartner’s Top 25 are critiqued as a “beauty contest for underperformers.” The commentary suggests that an obsession with optimizing functional metrics tends to create an imbalance within supply chains, underscoring that the most cost-efficient supply chain does not necessarily equate to the most effective.
A focal point of the analysis is the latest enthusiasm surrounding Artificial Intelligence (AI) within supply chain planning. The concept is dissected to reveal its various forms—ranging from generative AI to narrow AI and agentic AI. The author notes a shift in discourse from generative AI, which dominated conversations in the previous year, to a renewed spotlight on agentic AI in the current context. However, there is a sense of apprehension that the industry might be “doing AI stupid,” particularly in how these technologies are integrated into existing planning models without a re-examination of their foundational structures.
Central to this discussion is the role of planners in the contemporary landscape. Echoing thoughts from the 1980s, when planners were few and data handling was less sophisticated, the author articulates a pressing requirement to redefine the planner’s role to maximise the potential offered by new technological approaches. Citing the disparity in access to planning data that business leaders face today, the commentary indicates that the current planning systems are not tailored to serve the decision-makers, which hampers cross-functional collaboration. A call for an overhaul of traditional definitions of supply chain planning forms part of the argument for adjusting the planner’s functions from merely optimising efficiency to enhancing decision-making capabilities.
Additionally, the text introduces the concept of redefining organisational relationships with data. It advocates for a pragmatic approach to data utilisation, suggesting that imperfection in data should not be a deterrent to leveraging it for better insights. It encourages a shift away from foundational norms and prompts organisations to construct adaptive planning systems capable of responding dynamically to evolving market conditions.
In succinctly presenting metrics of success, the author asserts that value in the supply chain context is nebulous and lacks a definitive academic consensus. However, a collaborative initiative with Georgia Tech to analyse value gave rise to the introduction of the Supply Chain Fundamental Score, a forthcoming methodology aimed at re-engaging organisations in meaningful metrics that define value.
As the analysis concludes, the author warns against integrating AI into traditional supply chain processes without thorough reassessment, cautioning that such actions may perpetuate the downward trend indicated by the “drip, drip, drip of declining value.” This conclusion highlights the need for a broader re-evaluation of strategies and priorities for future success in supply chain management.
Source: Noah Wire Services
Subscribe to Industry Updates
