'You' have become the most prized asset for firms

This is the headline of an article in the Mumbai edition of Economic times, 29th Dec 2009, page 8. Companies like Google, Yahoo!, DoCoMo, Lays, Kurkure, etc. are trying to involve the customers in designing the product. Early involvement of customers is supposed to 'hook' them. It becomes easier to get more customers and retain the existing ones by giving them the exact product that they want.

The only issue in doing this is the lead time from the time the customer expresses the desire to have the product to the time when she actually has it. High lead times could offset all the gains of giving a highly customised product. While a customer would love a personalised product, she might hate to wait to receive it. The key would be speed up the product / service delivery process and make it seem 'fun'.

It is close to impossible to allow the customers to completely design the products they want from scratch. 'Modularisation' works out here. As Yahoo!, I allow my customers to use certain modules on their home page, allow them to locate it on the home page and then probably configure a background. This is exactly how a Volkswagen Beetle is custom designed. Again, exactly how a Boeing Jumbo is made specifically for an airline company.

Manufacturing skill development

Check this article

http://blog.seattlepi.com/gettowork/archives/188875.asp

All major factories for industrial tooling have closed down in the United States. Now, obviously with no demand of technicians, the technical schools offering these trades would close down also. So in a way the complete supply chain of a particular skill type would come to a halt. This is a huge risk as restarting this supply chain would be very very difficult.

At a business level, we routinely keep at least two vendors alive for most items. It is a risk management strategy. Surprisingly this fact seems to have been ignored at the national level. Countries spend billions of dollars in creating oil reservoirs to de risk oil shortages. I guess somewhere a similar investment is needed to ensure the basic level of technical skill. The risk of losing out on these skills is just too high.

The Chicken and egg story in Logistics

What come first - setting up a good logistics network and then starting the business or starting the business and then setting up a logistics network to support the requirements that crop up? A lay man answer would be to say 'business' comes first. But sometimes the cost of such rear guard action may be prohibitive and in fact cause the business to shut shop.

The US government committed additional combat troops to Afghanistan. As per a report in today's Wall Street journal, the supplies necessary for this deployment are just not here. The building material (concrete blocks - to be procured from Pakistan), fuel (Afghanistan is land locked) and blast resistant trucks ( to be imported from US) have all to reach Afghanistan before the troops actually arrive.

I am not questioning if the troops should be sent or not. Obama already has a Nobel prize for peace so I will keep my personal views away from this. The issue is of planning the logistics and sequencing the deployment of troops in sync with logistics deployment. We certainly not want troops to be in war zone without the necessary equipment and logistics support.

It is easy to take a 'consultant' position and advice the armed forces. In our businesses however the logistics side of business is totally ignored. The modern trade in India has set up retail shops and are now, at a much later stage, thinking of logistics optimisation. New products are being designed without too much thinking of the increase in component SKUs and thee corresponding affect on inventory related costs.

It is a simple proposition that I am trying to put forward - Business requirements have to be met. There is no question of this. This, however can not be done at the cost of ignoring the constraints of logistics. For every step of business growth and change, the corresponding logistics resources should be planned also. And, this logistics planning must be done in the same forum that does the business planning and not by a department head.

Adidas shifting NBA jerseys out of USA

Adidas is planning to move the manufacturing of NBA jerseys from American Classic Outfitter (ACO)- a firm based in Wyoming, USA to Thailand. Check this article here

http://buffalo.bizjournals.com/buffalo/stories/2009/11/30/daily4.html

There are a number of issues here. First is the Adidas side of the story. NBA happens every year and unlike the Soccer world cup, the uniforms do not change very often. Though every year some new stars are created, the older players definitely do their job. The point of the two sentences is that the demand for the jerseys is more or less stable and obsolescence low. Given these parameters, outsourcing to Thailand would definitely make a lot of sense. "Moving manufacturing closer to the source of raw materials", as Adidas says, surely makes sense.

Adidas plans to continue making jerseys for college and amateur teams in the United States. Given the unstable demand in this sector, again this makes sense. However an increasing price differential between the US and Thailand (plus the cost of transporting bulky raw material instead of finished goods), Adidas may be forced to revisit this decision also.

Another issue is the statement that Adidas had promised ACO a five year deal based on which ACO had invested USD 1 million in new machines. At this point it would be difficult to say if this was true. It could be a political hype being created to force Adidas to reverse its decision.

In case it is true, it is again not something that has never been done. Companies are known to treat their vendors with disdain. Buyers of large firms limit their reach to the sales personnel of the vendors. Contracts are short term and the changes in schedules are high. While this may reduce the 'price' the firm pays its vendors, the 'cost' incurred by the vendor increases. The vendor has to compensate the drop in his profits. This is where the the vendor may resort to means that are not exactly ethical. He / she would definitely cut service levels to the customers in some form.

In some cases it is very easy for the buyer to shift vendors, but relatively difficult for the vendors to find new buyers. If the vendors in such cases do not have long term contracts they try to recover all their costs of capital and process changes in the first period of the contract. this would mean substantially higher prices for the buyer.

The message here is very simple. Toyota has been doing this for ages. The point is in continuation to my last post. Resorting to pressure tactics and changing vendors may create a mirage of reducing prices. However the increase of cost is sure to reflect somewhere. Unreliability (meaning increased inventory and lost capacity) and the increased firefighting efforts that we see in our firms are a reflection of these very unhealthy practices that we are following.