Industry assessments forecast that many midmarket consumer brands will struggle to manage disruptions in 2026 due to fragmented technology landscapes and delayed visibility, emphasising the need for integrated, real-time data systems to improve resilience.
Many midmarket consumer brands enter 2026 exposed because their operations lack timely insight and tightly integrated systems, leaving them slow to see and respond to supply shocks, according to a new industry assessm...
Continue Reading This Article
Enjoy this article as well as all of our content, including reports, news, tips and more.
By registering or signing into your SRM Today account, you agree to SRM Today's Terms of Use and consent to the processing of your personal information as described in our Privacy Policy.
ent and related research.
According to Sage’s 2026 State of Supply Chain Report, only around half of consumer brands feel confident in their ability to manage disruptions, a shortfall the vendor links to weak early-stage visibility and fragmented technology landscapes. The report finds that delayed or incomplete information about production, supplier stock and shipments turns recognised risks, tariffs, transport delays, supplier failures, into operational surprises that drive downtime and margin erosion. The company said in a statement that preparedness tracks closely with how well data moves across ERP, supplier-management platforms and visibility tools.
Speaking to ERP Today, Rodney Manzo, Sage’s senior director of supply chain intelligence, said: “Confidence heading into 2026 is less about optimism and more about capability.” He added that organisations that can observe production progress, shipment status and cost exposure sooner “stop reacting late” because a common operational picture enables quicker decisions. Manzo warned, however, that the largest blind spots are typically further down the chain where supplier inventory, manufacturing status and in‑transit updates remain intermittent or delayed. He said: “When visibility is limited, exposure is easy to underestimate, and response slows when action is required.”
Industry research paints a consistent picture. A recent Sphera report found a striking mismatch between perceived and actual readiness: while nearly all leaders expressed confidence in their risk data, many still reported material losses from disruption. Sphera emphasises that verifiable, timely insight and faster decision cycles, paired with focused supplier engagement, are required to translate confidence into defensible resilience. ProcureCon’s state‑of‑procurement study similarly identifies disruption management as the top concern for 2026, noting widespread shortages and the growing impact of regulation and geopolitical friction over the prior 12 months.
The surveys also show a shifting approach to sourcing. Nearly half of operators say they intend to move production closer to home, with quality and compliance cited as stronger drivers than simple cost or lead‑time calculations. “Reliability and oversight matter more than geography alone,” Manzo observed, arguing that proximity without rigorous supplier governance does not reliably improve outcomes.
Technology adoption, particularly for advanced analytics and artificial intelligence, remains uneven. Sage and other industry commentators report that only a small minority of brands have AI embedded in live supply‑chain workflows today. Adoption is strongly correlated with how mature and clean an organisation’s data flows are; executives are reluctant to scale machine learning where inputs remain patchy. Manzo put it succinctly: scaling AI requires trustworthy, connected systems rather than piecemeal fixes.
Sage has itself been promoting a cloud‑native visibility platform it launched last year aimed at smaller brands, presenting it as a way to link procurement, operations and finance and to supply real‑time milestone tracking and alerts. The company claims the product reduces delays and helps protect margins for businesses that move away from spreadsheets and siloed communication. Reuters‑style caution applies: these are vendor assertions about product outcomes rather than independently verified results.
Cost pressures are intensifying the trade‑offs facing supply‑chain leaders. Many teams prioritise near‑term efficiency and margin protection over large transformation projects unless those investments demonstrate payback quickly. That dynamic, combined with persistent gaps in supplier management and data hygiene, means firms often strengthen fundamentals before adopting more sophisticated capabilities.
Taken together, the research suggests a practical roadmap for operators seeking to shift from reactive to resilient. Industry data shows that firms with centralised, interoperable systems, standardised supplier data and earlier sight of upstream milestones tend to make decisions faster and limit exposure. As Manzo put it: “Resilient brands stand out because of execution visibility, connected systems, and disciplined supplier management.”
For 2026, then, resilience looks less like a strategy headline and more like operational muscle: the routines, data connections and supplier oversight that enable teams to detect problems sooner and act with certainty.
Source: Noah Wire Services
