Posts Tagged ‘global risk’

Beyond Outsourcing Post #2: 10 Global Trends and Implications for OEMs

CBA is publishing a series of articles based on our ground-breaking study, Beyond Outsourcing, released to Outsourcing Navigator Members late last year.

The first introductory article can be accessed here>>>

The second article in the series describes the 10 global trends OEMs are currently facing as they redesign their global supply solution.

1. EMS/ODM Prices Are Converging.

For the OEM, using an Original Design Manufacturer (ODM) model historically delivered a cost benefit over an EMS because ODMs provided an off-the-shelf design and fewer ancillary services.  OEMs that used the ODM approach gained something in time to market, but arguably lost something in competitive advantage due to innovation. However, the cost advantage for OEMs who use this approach is disappearing as ODM costs have been driven up by the OEM community’s expectations over the past decade (especially from the supply-chain and SG&A perspective.)

IMPLICATION: If you are depending on an ODM model you should be actively exploring other options.

2. Regionalization Is Gaining Momentum.

What started as a trickle has become a stream. It is not a torrential river yet, but substantially more than a trickle and momentum is building. With rising transportation and global labor costs, combined with increasing global risk, OEMs in the midmarket have come to understand that a cross-hemispheric supply solution is not cost effective.

IMPLICATION: More OEMs are designing a supply solution where they build in the region for the region.

3.  Global Capacity Utilization Is Increasing

While outsourcing began as a way for OEMs to convert fixed cost (e.g. plant equipment, buildings, etc.) to a variable basis, as EMS capacity increased, OEMs became focused on securing continuous cost reductions. Today, hardware manufacturing has become a commodity and OEMs rely on continuous cost reductions for manufacturing to stay competitive.

EMS companies were able to accommodate ongoing cost reductions for many years as they had underutilized factories they needed to fill (including over a hundred OEM divestitures). That reality is changing. In short, perhaps the biggest risk facing OEMs is the fact that available global capacity is now reaching full utilization and prices are not likely to continue on their downward trajectory.

Our data shows a significant reduction in the supply of EMS capacity and we have forecasted that if additional capacity doesn’t come on-line within the next two-three years demand will exceed supply.

IMPLICATION: While overall capacity may not change, more of the available capacity may be going offline due to changing business models and other trends. With demand exceeding supply, prices must rise for EMS services.

4.  Labor Costs in China Are Rising Far Faster than Anyone Predicted.

Our data indicates that for electronics manufacturing, there is not an unlimited supply of low cost labor in China, in spite of the huge population. Pressure from human rights organizations; rising middle class expectations, and government regulation to avoid social unrest have contributed to the rapid rise in wages. CBA forecasts that labor costs will continue to rise for at least the next two to three years.

IMPLICATION: Does this mean OEMs should exit China immediately? Probably not; but a thoughtful well-developed alternative solution that is fully congruent with an OEM’s immediate and long-term needs should already be in development.

5.  Slower Rate of Growth of Electronics Outsourcing

The EMS penetration rate is the percentage of electronics total available market (TAM) that has taken the plunge to outsourcing to an outside entity for manufacturing services. This measure is the baseline upon which the industry has historically based its growth forecasts. CBA has watched the rate of growth of the EMS industry slow.

IMPLICATION: Finally the industry is realizing that outsourcing is not one size fits all and the heady days of double digit, year-on-year sequential growth in outsourcing are behind this industry.

6.  Risk in the Supply-chain Has Reached Unprecedented Levels

The risks involved in global electronics hardware manufacturing are increasing. Few would argue that statement. Yet many would argue that these risks, including geopolitical instability, turmoil in the financial system, and certainly natural disasters, are beyond the control of most strategic planners, so why even worry about them? Thankfully most front-line managers understand that even in the best of times outsourcing is an inherently risky proposition best controlled with careful planning and thoughtful execution; unfortunately this insight seldom reaches the C-Suite.

IMPLICATION: Many OEMs are reconsidering their entire supply solution to mitigate risk and thereby reduce their true costs.  The question is whether or not these insights will be embraced by executive management in time?

7.  The Demand Cycle Has Shortened

Most OEMs simply don’t know what they need until something is sold; and then they need it from their manufacturers within days not weeks. And further complicating the situation, most refuse to maintain finished goods inventories or operate in-house manufacturing capabilities in parallel to their outsourcing suppliers which would dramatically improve their response times.

For a few years, ‘Lean Manufacturing’ looked like it would provide an answer, but Western industry simply could not bring itself to fully embrace the approach with its many operational disciplines.

What we are left with is a dysfunctional system where OEMs refuse to place firm commitments, where forecasts are meaningless, where the outsourcing industry is afraid to order anything until the last possible minute and the downstream supply chain routinely labels everything as non-cancelable/non-returnable. Meanwhile the ‘express delivery’ service industry reaps the rewards of the industry being behind the demand curve.

IMPLICATION: The expectation is that, just like in the virtual world, an almost infinite array of choices of physical products should be available instantly. This trend is unlikely to reverse.

8.  Fewer Resources at OEMs

As the so-called ‘outsourcing dividend’ has finally begun to dry up, OEM top-level executives have begun squeezing every internal element of their own enterprises in an attempt to preserve profits.

Beyond general cost-cutting in travel, internal support activities and miscellaneous expenses/benefits we’ve also noticed an even more unsettling trend:  elimination of the outsourcers themselves. These are the operations managers and supply chain specialists who understand manufacturing well enough to manage a complex cross-enterprise supply solution.

IMPLICATION: There are far too few people within most OEM organizations with ‘tribal knowledge’ about manufacturing; almost no one is left that truly understands the real risks and costs, or appreciates the value.

9.  EMS Are Trying to Diversify Their Revenue Streams

The EMS industry has been actively expanding their services offering deeper into the product lifecycle as a means of diversifying their revenue stream in pursuit of margin improvement. In spite of a significant effort on the part of the EMS community, during the past decade the acceptance rate for these life-cycle services has not been particularly high. The most probable reason that OEMs haven’t embraced these new services is they’ve become so conditioned to commodity based pricing for PCB & Box Build that they don’t want to pay for the actual costs of these extras. In fact, many OEMs have started moving in the other direction, exerting more control internally over several stages of the product lifecycle.

IMPLICATION: The EMS industry’s efforts to improve financial performance are not working.

10.  The Global Market Is Not What Was Expected

Capturing global demand is a potential opportunity for nearly any type of business, electronics being no exception. With demand in the developed world slackening due to the continuing hangover from years of excess spending on both the public and private level, emerging markets have become nearly everyone’s best hope for growth.  Yet demand for OEM products in emerging markets for the most part requires a middle class willing and able to spend on imports. Simply manufacturing a product in an emerging market is not a guarantee that local buyers for that product will magically appear, contrary to what many OEMs believed.

IMPLICATION: The opportunities of a truly global marketplace have proven irresistible, yet elusive.

Next month:  Beyond Outsourcing Post #3: OEM Risk Ranking of EMS Service Offerings.

EMS companies have expanded their service offerings to include such things as design services and aftermarket support in an effort to improve margins. Our next article reveals what OEMs really think about the risk to them of engaging with their EMS in these arenas.

Next Evolution for Outsourcing

How We Got Here

The global outsourcing phenomenon is entering a new phase. EMS prices are rising; geopolitical risk and uncertainty are increasing, and many OEMs are reconsidering their global solution, including abandoning outsourcing altogether for certain segments of the product lifecycle. The relationship between OEMs and their EMS providers is worse than it has ever been. The level of mistrust is very high. EMS are disengaging with unprofitable customers at the same time that OEMs are demanding increasingly draconic cost reductions and onerous terms and conditions.

Something has got to give.

And when it does, global capacity shifts will impact all end markets and sizes of companies, from the Goliath fringe to the most regional.

Late last year, CBA published an Outsourcing Navigator Council Report, ‘Beyond Outsourcing’ that outlined some of the characteristics of the next phase in global electronics manufacturing. We looked at the industry’s past; did a deep dive into our database of case studies, and conducted in-depth interviews with the industry’s key players. The results are a guide for OEMs on how to move forward into this next evolution, learning from the mistakes of the past. What is that quote? ‘Those who refuse to study the past are doomed to repeat it.’

Today we launch a series of articles to discuss the key findings from the Beyond Outsourcing Report. There will be five articles, released on the first of the month:

1. Introduction and Background: How We Got Here

2. 10 Macro Trends Driving Outsourcing

3. OEM Risk Ranking of EMS Service Offerings

4. Outsourcing Alternatives

5. Buy or Build?

This article will start the series by briefly describing how we got to this point. Originally, OEMs designed, developed, and manufactured most —if not everything—that went into their products, hence the name ‘Original Equipment Manufacturer’. Then as technology evolved and became more pre-packaged and ubiquitous (e.g. integrated replaced discrete logic and modular construction supplanted elemental designs) product differentiation shifted from a matter of functionality to an issue of cost-versus-performance.

This created a high-degree of ‘product churn’ in the market place and life-cycles began to shrink. As a result, sales forecasts became increasingly unreliable due to demand fluidity brought about by shifting user preference. In reaction, OEMs looked for methods to shift their fixed-costs to a variable basis, as utilization rates in their internal factories became progressively more difficult to predict and control.

The outsourcing industry, initially on a consigned basis, began as a means by which to ‘buffer’ these peaks and valleys in the OEM’s manufacturing requirement, but these companies soon gained greater responsibility as their service offerings expanded. OEMs continued to shrink investment in internal capabilities and outsourced more functions, more often. Eventually they began to dismantle their internal operations and launch large scale divestiture programs.

These actions, coupled with the impact of globalization, and an unprecedented economic downturn post Y2K, created a supply-demand imbalance in the EMS industry (favoring the OEM) and prices for manufacturing services dropped precipitously.

This advantage was embraced broadly by OEMs who quickly came to rely upon this recurring windfall to prop up their eroding margins. So when EMS pricing ultimately hit the bottom of the pricing curve, they saw little choice but to abandon their existing supply-base and transfer their outsourcing requirements to lower-cost solutions such as China.

This left many midmarket OEMs without a supportive, low-cost, local alternative for the early and late stage elements of their product life-cycle, and many simply resigned themselves to off-shoring these requirement to suppliers whose value-proposition was little more than a high-volume producer of low-cost goods in some regionally remote geography.

In many if not most cases, this provenance resulted in a cumbersome, expensive, and ineffectual solution that still plagues many of these OEMs, who continue to struggle with a cascading set of requirements that remain inadequately or totally unfulfilled. In short, the “baby was thrown out with the bathwater” a consequence certainly not intended but very real indeed. And while a sea-level change in outsourcing now appears inevitable, the question remains – will these shifting tides ultimately solve the issues that have resulted?

Clearly, in-sourcing much of the product life-cycle including; prototyping, NPI, EOL and on-going support (if not the full production requirement) would not be free, but neither would it be as expensive as many people believe. High quality, well maintained equipment of all types is in surplus throughout North America and Western Europe, as are the human resources necessary to perform these tasks. And for a midmarket OEM with an outsourcing spend of as little as $50-100 million per year, a persuasive financial argument can easily be made for in-sourcing.

As each OEM’s situation is different, each OEM’s solution will be unique. This series of articles is intended to stimulate a discussion of how OEMs can re-think outsourcing starting with a clean slate. So use these suggestions only as a starting-point and aggressively seek out or craft a wholly custom solution that complements and harmonizes with your requirements. What is most important is not which option you choose, but rather that you choose an option that integrates a life-cycle based solution into your manufacturing strategy.

Next month: 10 Macrotrends Driving Outsourcing

For more information about the full report, contact Jennifer Read, Jennifer@charliebarnhart.com; Eric Miscoll, eric@charliebarnhart.com

CBA and ITM Consulting Join Forces

Together the two firms offer comprehensive electronics manufacturing data and research, strategic planning and training programs for global decision-making

February 11, 2013, Maui, Hawaii. Charlie Barnhart & Associates LLC (CBA) and ITM Consulting announce a joint venture to provide a full range of consulting services to electronics manufacturers. As the electronics industry evolves beyond outsourcing to other more complex manufacturing supply solutions, there is a need for business and operations consulting services that are seamless and well aligned. The joint venture is designed to provide such services.

CBA is focused exclusively on the outsourced electronics manufacturing relationship, providing data and analysis to support global strategic decision-making. ITM Consulting helps companies set up, improve, certify and validate the electronics assembly operations themselves. Together, the two organizations can offer a well coordinated fast track to designing a global, cross enterprise, lean and efficient manufacturing supply solution that delivers substantial innovation and competitive advantage.

“Our research has identified a number of significant sea-changes occurring now in global high tech manufacturing,” explained Charlie Barnhart. “We see global shifts occurring: in the slower growth of outsourcing; in the way companies are managing their product life-cycles, and a return to a regional approach, e.g. building in the region where the product is sold. Many OEMs are starting with a clean slate and looking at every aspect of their manufacturing strategy, including whether to outsource or not. By teaming up with ITMConsulting, we can help clients add manufacturing capability or bring new competitiveness to existing processes, for example through Lean implementation. ITM has an excellent track record in solving problems and cost-effective training and process engineering. We look forward to working with them.”

“We believe this offering will help companies that are re-designing their manufacturing supply solution and moving from one region to another, or bringing manufacturing in-house,” added Phil Zarrow, president of ITM Consulting. “Where CBA advises the business side of electronic assembly, ITM helps with the technological side of it – processes, procedures, equipment, materials, quality and lean six sigma manufacturing. If clients are setting up a new line or modifying an existing facility, we help them get it right- the first time.”

For more information, see www.charliebarnhart.com; www.itmconsulting.com

The True Cost of Labor: An Insider’s Insight

When we talk to OEMs about the fully burdened cost of labor in geographies around the world they often are in disbelief of the numbers we present. This is true whether we are talking to OEMs in North America, Europe, the Middle East, or Asia. “That’s not what I pay.” Well, on average, actually it is!

How can we so certain? Two reasons:

1. We have an unprecedented level of insight into this calculation from running and advising EMS companies (both large and small) for over a third of a century.

2. Our client list and therefore our data base is one of the largest in the industry thus providing us with a constant and reliable stream of industry comparables during both good times and bad.

Admittedly, the labor rate that appears on EMS/ODM quotes (or is provided to OEMs in discussion) can have very little relation to what’s actually included in a contractor’s quotation as the quoting process is as much an art as it is a science. This is true because there isn’t any accounting “rule” related to quotations and a contractor can present whatever number they wish for whatever question asked as long as they report their actual internal numbers in compliance with local taxing and securities regulations.

Which begs the question: do you as an OEM share your internal cost-accounting data with your customers?

Never forget that both EMS and ODM companies are for-profit enterprises and therefore have to:

1. Fully recover all their costs,

2. Include sufficient margin in their price to produce a profit.

And if they don’t they will go out of business.

For an EMS or ODM the simple truth is that the more they tell an OEM about their internal numbers the more the OEM will pick-away at their price. It’s just the way business works. We get what we negotiate, so handing the person you are “negotiating” with a loaded gun is a really, really bad idea.

So why does CBA calculate and publish the Fully Burdened Cost of Labor for over 20 international geographies for its Outsourcing Navigator Council (ONC) members quarterly?

Because, as it says on our website:

“Myths, misconceptions and financial gamesmanship have made rational decision-making relative to the Electronics Manufacturing Services industry virtually impossible. Our data reveals just how dissatisfied the OEM community has become with outsourcing. The level of mistrust between the parties is astounding, and wholly unique to this industry. Therefore we have constructed the Outsourcing Navigator Council as a venue where Outsourcing Professionals can get real data-based answers to their questions.”

Reliable, current data is particularly important today for both communities as capacity utilization rates, especially in key regions such as Mexico, S.E. Asia and the non-Euro regions of Eastern Europe, continue to rise while in geographies such as China labor costs are going up far faster than anyone predicted (remember when people were saying that China would never have a labor shortage? That was another myth about China that has proven false. See Industry Week Article)

Bottom-line, you can trust our data even when the numbers sound strange to your ear.

To gain access to our Outsourcing Navigator Council (ONC) data, contact Jennifer Read or Eric Miscoll.

CBA Industry Resolution for 2013

T’is the season for quiet reflection, taking stock of who’s been naughty and nice and so forth, so we recently began thinking about New Year’s resolutions for our family members. Some of us have young adults under our supervision; in fact, as we were sitting in the emergency room recently, where one of our young adults was being treated for a broken arm caused by an ATV accident, we realized that our advice should be short and sweet in order to be most effective.

So it is in that spirit that we submit CBA’s 2013 Electronics Industry New Year’s Resolution:

“Try not to do anything stupid next year!!!”

For the electronics industry, it’s no secret that 2013 is going to be challenging. Many global trends that have been percolating for a decade are likely to come to a boil. The sovereign debt problems of developed nations, the geopolitical unrest in emerging markets, the rising labor rates in ‘low cost regions’, as well as major market shifts around the world, will likely test the mettle of many managers of electronics companies as they guide their company’s manufacturing strategies.

Given this less than rosy outlook, the new buzz word we have been hearing – ‘re-shoring’ –gives us reason for pause, as in our opinion, this word echoes much of the nonsense that was bandied around during the recent electoral silly season. Political candidates curried favor by promising to bring manufacturing jobs back to the US. This is in contrast to what is actually happening within the global electronics manufacturing industry today, a return to ‘regionalization’ (or build in the region for the region.)

Make no mistake. Building in the region, for the demand from within that region, is a good idea and a trend we have been tracking for the past couple of years.  But the word ‘re-shoring’ implies something completely different. To us it sounds more like public relations amd plaques for corporate social responsibility than a viable means of reversing the knee-jerk reaction to the Groupthink that led to the wholesale transfer of work to China about 10 years ago.

If the decision is made to change the current manufacturing approach (always an expensive proposition), then first do a thorough buy vs. build analysis of your company’s unique situation, taking into account the entire product lifecycle and starting with a clean slate. Understand thoroughly the current costs of manufacturing, both internal and external, and then construct a global supply solution, embracing the capabilities and requirements of both your internal operations and your potential supply base. For large OEMs that probably means building in the region for the region, no matter which continent that happens to involve. But for smaller to mid-market OEMs,  that probably means in their home region, not around the world.

OEMs of all sizes that do this type of analysis can rest assured they will be keeping the CBA 2013 New Year’s Resolution for the Electronics industry in spades.

How Healthy Is the Electronics Manufacturing Industry?

CBA Global Electronics Manufacturing Wellness Rating

While improving slightly this quarter and forecast to improve again next quarter, when viewed historically, it would be hard to argue that the global electronics industry is very healthy (see chart below). If a human being’s health were described as functioning at 35%, that person would be dead.
What is driving the sad condition of this patient? There are a number of specific factors:

  • Distribution of global capacity is in the process of a dramatic restructuring
  • Projects that went to China for the wrong reasons are being repatriated in all three regions
  • Taiwanese ODMs are pushing back on OEMs and selling their technology directly to end users
  • Debt-ridden consumer countries are cutting back as the global financial crisis continues
  • Labor rates are rising, and skilled labor shortages are appearing in China, as growth slows there. This might be good news for exporters to China as the domestic market may be finally getting real.

Ultimately, this means that if you are an OEM, your current contract prices for EMS/ODM services have bottomed out. Be nice to your suppliers and push back on upper management when they say they want it cheaper. We can help with data to support you.

If you are an EMS/ODM, this means that margins are strengthening, and maybe you will stay in business after all.

And for all participants in the global electronic supply chain, we reiterate that risk is high and it remains likely that you will have some type of supply disruptions in the coming quarters, so stay alert.

Wellness Index

Note: This graph is an estimate of the overall health of the global electronics manufacturing industry and includes data on monetary exchange, economic forecasts, infrastructure scalability, cost & availability of resources (including energy), outstanding regulatory and geo-political issues, status of down-slope supply-chain, availability of up-slope services, cost & availability of capital, fixed asset utilization rates, book-to-bill ratios, current delivery trends, lead-time projections, a quality rating factor and the Geographic Constants from the Global Risk Module of the Outsourcing Navigator Series.

Five EMS Industry Trends You Can’t Afford to Misread

1. EMS/ODM prices are converging.

IMPLICATION: For the OEM, using an ODM model historically delivered a cost benefit over an EMS. This is no longer true because costs have been driven up by OEM demands. If you are depending on an ODM model you should be actively exploring other options.

2. Regionalization is gaining momentum.

IMPLICATION: More OEMs are designing a supply solution where they build in the region for the region. Are you?

3. Global capacity utilization is increasing

IMPLICATION: Our data shows dramatic reduction in the global supply of EMS capacity. What happens when demand exceeds supply?

4. Labor costs in China are rising far faster than anyone predicted 5 years ago.

IMPLICATION: Does that mean you should exit China immediately? Knee-jerk reactions rarely pay off.

5. Slower Rate of Growth of Electronics Outsourcing

IMPLICATION: Finally the industry is realizing that one size does not fit all; EMS and OEM companies must find new sources of value in the outsourcing relationship. Many OEMs are reconsidering their entire supply solution to mitigate risk and reduce cost.

Attend the EMS industry’s Most Important Event of 2012 to learn how to navigate these critical trends to optimize your outsourcing solution.

Our last Outsourcing Navigator Council members meeting  was a two-day event hosted by member company, Teradyne at their corporate facilities outside Boston in May.

(Check out our FAQs about the Council.)


APEX Interviews from EMSNow TV: Sparton, Promex, Hunter Technology, ATS Corporation, MC Assembly,Vario Systems

Phil Stoten interviews Charlie Barnhart at APEX 2012 in San Diego:

Charlie interviews Sparton CEO, Cary Wood

Eric Miscoll interviews Vario Systems’ Alicia Hamby at APEX 2012 in San Diego:

Charlie interviews Promex President Richard Otte

Charlie interviews Hunter Technology’s Joe O’Neill

Eric interviews MC Assembly’s Michael Cox

Eric interviews ATS Corporation’s Steve Canzano

It’s Time to Look Forward: Risk Factors #7-9

By Charlie Barnhart

In the closing paragraph of article number 6 of this Risk Series I mentioned that “Risk is not always a noun (i.e. a probability) as it can also be a transitive verb (an actual exposure) and in the world of business its many underlying elements tend to pile one on top of another.” When I wrote these words, in my mind’s eye, I saw a stack of irregularly shaped blocks struggling to remain vertical. The vision of a Jenga game where no one wins as each bock is so interdependently connected that if even one was removed the entire pile would topple.

Not a pretty picture but here’s what it looked like…

At the top of the stack was the destabilizing influence of price reductions during periods of increasing cost being wobbled by the reduction of internal resources at OEMS just below it, then in the middle a shrinking demand cycle struggling to counterbalance the ever increasing velocity of change in business, and on the bottom, the process of geographic concentration slowing crushing the principle of institutional continuity out of shape.

But it wasn’t this image that worried me the most, as we spend a great deal of time at CBA thinking about how these individual pieces interact AND how their shapes evolve over time.

What worried me was the platform they were sitting on, a three legged stool of:

  • Unpredictable capital markets
  • Geopolitical unrest and instability
  • Overtaxed infrastructure in low cost regions

Why are these three elements so worrisome? Because, in spite of what you might see or hear from your favorite news source, geopolitical and geo-economics outcomes are simply beyond anyone’s ability to forecast.

Meteorological analysis is a good comparable, as even after centuries of study and the development of very sophisticated modeling software running on the world’s best supercomputers the farther you go out in time with weather forecasts the broader the range of error becomes. Same-day forecasts are usually pretty good, five to seven day projections are a crap-shoot and beyond that it literally becomes a “guess”.  The reason is simple; there are just too many variables. A butterfly flaps its wings in Singapore and three weeks later a hurricane begins to form over the Atlantic Ocean.

So given this reality how do you deal with unmanageable risks?

Our recommendation is “change the game.”  Playing Jenga in business is a bad idea to start with but then doing it on an unstable, unpredictable platform makes it even worst. A better game would be one that eliminates the “vertical stacking” of risk variables so that when the platform does begin to shake (which it inevitably will even if we can’t predict when) the blocks might move around a bit but hopefully won’t all fall off the stool.

What’s better than Jenga?

How about going back to the basics, like the fundamental tenets of business that we all learned and have practiced for many years? I know you know them…

  • Create innovative products
  • Produce them to high standards
  • Sell them at competitive prices
  • Enrich the customer experience
  • Build lasting value for your stakeholders
  • Be a good corporate citizen

Obviously each of these objectives can be fulfilled in countless ways, which is exactly as it should be. Business is all about creativity and competition; no one deserves or is given a free-pass. Success is only granted to those who are the most creative and diligent and then only until they are replaced by someone who can play the game even better.

This means that winning isn’t easy and unfortunately, perhaps because of human nature – perhaps because we’ve lost our moral compass, it has become far too easy to drift off the highroad into a swampland composed of…

  • Me too solutions
  • Marginal quality
  • Pricing gamesmanship
  • Enriching yourself at your customers’ expense
  • Short term thinking
  • Exploitation

Which I believe is the poisoned well from which excessive risk springs.

In this series we have reviewed each of the nine elements of risk that have more than doubled our Composite Business Index over the past four years.

Including:

  1. Prices are down but costs are up
  2. Fewer resources at OEMs worldwide
  3. The demand cycle has shortened
  4. Businesses are operating at higher velocities
  5. Supply chain concentration in Asia
  6. Loss of institutional continuity
  7. Unpredictable capital markets
  8. Geopolitical unrest and instability
  9. Overtaxed infrastructure in low cost regions

Wherever possible we have offered suggestions and alternatives. Where options were few we have provided insights gained from watching this situation develop.  We have tried to be direct and unambiguous in our presentation of the facts.

We have already notified our Outsourcing Navigator Council membership that we have raised our risk advice to “LIKELY” meaning that on an industry average basis it is now likely that an OEM will experience a serious disruption in their supply-solution in CY2012.

Yes, the current situation is that bad.

Bottom-line, do yourself and your stakeholders a favor and do something – TODAY – to start mitigating risk. Looking over your shoulder is a waste time you can’t afford; the risk is directly in front of you!

Risk Factor #6: Loss of Institutional Continuity

By Charlie Barnhart

The issues surrounding this risk factor are subtle and difficult because they pertain to the fabric of the outsourcing rationale, and theoretically have been resolved ages ago. What we mean by institutional continuity could be confused with the concept of ‘core competency’. As most will recall, companies were advised to outsource all but those activities that were considered ‘core.’

I want to be crystal clear about this: institutional continuity is not related to the ‘core competency’ of an organization. I have always felt that the latter was a very misleading concept. Why is it useful to consider activities in this manner? Does it mean that a company has ‘core incompetencies’? Outsourcing something you can’t do very well is obviously very risky; and the current state of many of the outsourcing relationships we observe in our consulting practice proves how risky it is. Most OEMs are not satisfied with their EMS supply solution, in spite of the ‘master-slave’ power imbalance that exists.

The loss I am talking about is deeper than the core competency discussion indicates.

Institutional continuity is what is elemental in an organization. It  relates to the way business is conducted, the company’s history and purpose; and how and why it exists. Does outsourcing in itself break institutional continuity? Not necessarily. But when you outsource everything – not just manufacturing, but design, logistics, customer service, accounting, IS/IT, and human resources – the system does break down, and I see that happening in some OEMs, especially in the past few years. So many pieces have been removed from the flow of the organization’s value stream that the value begins to leak out the holes.

To illustrate: in the US we have a Constitution, which has been the law of our land for nearly 230 years. Its power comes from the fact that it hasn’t changed much, so a body of law can be developed based on the expectation of continuity. Some people think certain parts are too flexible in fact, e.g. the Commerce Clause, originally meant to limit Federal power over the states, has been interpreted to allow most anything.

But what if we did change the Bill of Rights and other parts of actual Constitution itself every decade or so? What if, like at the state level, it was easier to amend? What if during some difficult times we threw out altogether the First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of speech, or the Fourth Amendment prohibiting unreasonable search and seizure. There would be far less stability in the courts, and among lawmakers and eventually the country would no doubt devolve into chaos.

This is the risk we are talking about related to loss of institutional continuity. It is why businesses fail — they lose their sense of purpose and some central competitive advantage slips away. This can happen at any size company, in any industry, and outsourcing too much, too often, can be a symptom, but it isn’t the disease itself.

In electronics companies, where innovative products are part of the institution’s DNA, outsourcing the manufacturing of those products can lead to a loss of the ability to find the competitive advantage in this skillset. I can’t tell you how many times we hear OEM outsourcing managers saying that all EMS companies are the same. Granted, the marketing departments in the EMS industry sometimes fail to communicate their company’s unique value. But the OEM has often lost the insights required to identify, understand, evaluate and, most importantly, leverage the unique and varied capabilities that exist in the EMS industry. CBA will be talking more about this in future blogs.

Look at Hewlett Packard. This company began when two EE’s, Bill Hewlett and David Packard, started building test equipment. The company’s history with these two men has always been part of the institutional continuity of HP. I remember visiting the company and seeing the two partners’ desks left intact since their retirement. Now, I wonder how potent that history is for HP — and if this isn’t a good example of the risks associated with loss of continuity as the company has considered abandoning hardware altogether. Certainly HP has faltered in the past 18 months.

In chasing “low cost” at any price, many electronics companies have taken their eye off the ball of their own businesses. And continue the sports analogy, it is similar to what happened to the San Francisco 49ers football team.  In the 1980’s the 49ers developed the most replicated model in professional football, the aptly named “West Coast Offense.”  This was the brainchild of legendary coach Bill Walsh, facilitated by owner Eddie DeBartolo, and executed by Hall of Fame quarterback Joe Montana.  Deploying this model, the 49ers won five Super Bowls and were named the “Team of the 80’s.”  Then in the late 1990’s things started to go wrong.  A new owner, a series of new coaches, and various quarterbacks thought they could easily continue the success of the franchise while also changing the underlying factors that had allowed the team to be successful.  The team was losing its institutional continuity. One coach, Hall of Fame linebacker Mike Singletary, even stated that the position of quarterback was not the most important position on the team.  How wrong he was!  The result was that the 49ers have been a sub-par team for over a decade and have not made the playoffs.  They are only now reclaiming some of their past glory,  by many accounts by going back to the principles and style that initially made them great.

Risk is not always a noun (i.e. a probability), it can also be a transitive verb (an actual exposure) and in the world of business its many underlying elements – including loss of institutional continuity – tend to pile one on top of another. Until ultimately, we see them show up as the 40% increase we’ve recorded over the past four year in the Composite Business Risk Index.

I think it’s time to say “enough is enough” and start thinking about how to recover what we have lost versus focusing on what else we can change.