Connect with us

Non classé

Supplier Onboarding is Core to a Digital Supply Chain Transformation

Published

on

Supplier Onboarding Is Core To A Digital Supply Chain Transformation

When you talk to companies that have implemented enterprise or supply chain applications, executives will usually admit that they have under-invested in training and preparing users to use the new technology. People issues are always challenging. But change management is significantly more difficult when the technology deployed is used not just internally, but also by key trading partners.

Molex implemented a multi-enterprise supply chain network platform from SAP called SAP Business Network. Molex’s story is interesting because they excelled at overcoming these cultural issues.

MESN is a solution built on a many-to-many architecture that supports a community of trading partners. The most common form of trading partner collaboration is purchase order collaboration. With PO collaboration, buyers send digital purchase orders over the network to suppliers or other trading partners. They gain visibility into whether a supplier can fulfill the complete order in the requested time frame or not. Once the order amount and timeline are agreed upon between the parties, advanced shipping notices are used to track delivery. This collaboration allows for better optimization of the supply chain, ensuring the right products are available at the right time.

Molex is a private company headquartered in Lisle, IL in the US. Molex is a global electronics manufacturer that makes and sells over 100,000 distinct products – connectors, cable assemblies, and a wide variety of other products. They sell to the automotive, data communications, medical, industrial, consumer electronics, and other industries. The company generates over $7 billion in revenue based on a presence in more than 40 countries. 18,000 suppliers ship 70,000 different types of parts to 72 Molex manufacturing plants across the globe.

Tony Gainsford, a supply chain director at Molex, said that before implementing SAP Business Network, 70% of their purchase orders were not confirmed. For goods associated with those POs, they did not know when a shipment would arrive or whether it would be complete. “We needed assurance of supply,” Mr. Gainsford said. Since implementing SAP Business Network, the confirmation rate has gone from 30% to 88% for those on the Network. But getting there was not easy.

Molex began in October of 2022. They started by focusing on the largest and most important suppliers. They explained that they were digitizing their end-to-end requisition to payment process. Mr. Gainsford pointed out that the existing method, with PDFs attached to emails, was cumbersome not just for them but for their suppliers. “It took 7 days on average for a supplier to get a PO.” With a digital process, Mr. Gainsford explained, “we chopped that down by 4 to 5 days.”

Change management was not solely focused on suppliers, buyers, and material managers all had to change how they operated. Change management goes much easier if you can answer the question, “what is in it for me?” There were 65 material managers included in the initial rollout. He painstakingly spoke to each of them to get their buy-in. For material managers, he made the case that they would be much more likely to get their inbound supplies on time.

The buyers don’t report to Mr. Gainsford. He needed to influence them. Getting the buy-in of the material managers helped with this. The task management in SAP Business Network also helps. The application sends reminders to the buyers about actions they need to take. For example, the application sends three auto reminders to a buyer if a PO they cut does not have a corresponding purchase order confirmation associated with it. If no confirmation is received promptly, the buyer must press the supplier to send it.

Suppliers understand that the amount of future business they do with Molex is contingent upon participation. “We have not fired any supplier yet,” Mr. Gainsford said. “But the chief procurement officer has been made aware of the 10% of suppliers not participating. It will certainly be a subject of conversation” before the next contract is cut.

Training is critical. “We took a YouTube approach. We created bite-sized videos. And we had visibility to who took training and who did not.” Those who had ot viewed the videos, Mr. Gainsford explained, were told, “You did not take the training; this will be difficult for you.”

The overall impression one gains from talking to Mr. Gainsford is a systematic and methodical approach to change management. Molex knew that success with the SAP Business Network application was contingent on the successful onboarding of suppliers. The company onboarded suppliers at twice the rate they expected. Molex’s change management program is also one based on continuous improvement. The company continues to refine supplier onboarding; what used to take 6 months now takes 3 weeks.

The tool Molex used to drive adherence to the new process was, without a doubt, a major contributor to the success of this program. The company uses a process monitoring tool called Celonis. With the tool, visibility is gained when the POs are sent out, and again when the confirmations come back in. This tool helped increase supplier delivery performance by double digits. There is a dashboard that shows suppliers lit up as green – performance is good, orange, or red – there are major problems.

But it is not just the performance of suppliers that matters, the performance of their 400 buyers also matters. Mr. Gainsford explained that there is a way the PO collaboration process is supposed to work – there is a “happy path.” Participants in the process must do a series of tasks, often in a defined manner.

The tool provides visibility of what percentage of orders were confirmed, and beyond that, when there are issues, where those issues occurred. Where and how often, for example, did a buyer deviate from the happy path? The tool provides visibility to conformance by plant, supplier, and buyer. With Celonis you can view how long each step took and compare it to how long it was supposed to take. For example, once a PO is confirmed, a tender to carriers should occur within 24 hours? Did that happen? There is a digital thread with the date of the tender confirmation and the time stamp.

Every day at 7 am, the supply chain team looks at supplier scorecards. They can view overall performance and then drill down and look at problems purchase order by purchase order. They might tell a supplier, “Only 30% of purchase orders are confirmed because you are not creating them. This is actionable intelligence,” Mr. Gainsford commented. Celonis accelerated Molex’s “time to value” – their ability to get payback for their investment in SAP Business Network.

Molex has also used the tool to reduce supplier lead times. Long and variable lead times are the bane of a manufacturing supply chain. They lead to poor customer fulfillment, higher inventory, and higher shipping costs. With this tool, a supplier can be told, “Your lead time was supposed to take 10 days. You took 30 days.” Molex has an active lead time program, and they continue to work on reducing them.

Over 900 suppliers – representing $1 billion in spend, are now on the Network. But the work continues. And the benefits from the network will continue to increase with increased supplier involvement.

The post Supplier Onboarding is Core to a Digital Supply Chain Transformation appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

India–U.S. Trade Announcement Creates Strategic Options, Not Executable Change

Published

on

By

India–u.s. Trade Announcement Creates Strategic Options, Not Executable Change

The announcement by Donald Trump and Narendra Modi of an India–U.S. “trade deal” has drawn immediate attention from global markets. From a supply chain and logistics perspective, however, the more important observation is not the scale of the claims, but the lack of formal detail required for execution.

At this stage, what exists is a political statement rather than a completed trade agreement. For companies managing sourcing, manufacturing, transportation, and compliance across India–U.S. trade lanes, uncertainty remains the defining condition.

What Has Been Announced So Far

Based on public statements from the U.S. administration and reporting by CNBC and Al Jazeera, several points have been asserted:

U.S. tariffs on Indian goods would be reduced from an effective 50 percent to 18 percent

India would reduce tariffs and non tariff barriers on U.S. goods, potentially to zero

India would stop purchasing Russian oil and increase energy purchases from the United States

India would significantly increase purchases of U.S. goods across energy, agriculture, technology, and industrial sectors

Statements from the Indian government have been more limited. New Delhi confirmed that U.S. tariffs on Indian exports would be reduced to 18 percent, but it did not publicly confirm commitments related to Russian oil, agricultural market access, or large scale procurement from U.S. suppliers.

This divergence matters. In supply chain planning, commitments only become relevant when they are documented, scoped, and enforceable.

Why This Is Not Yet a Trade Agreement

From an operational standpoint, the announcement lacks several elements required to support planning and execution:

No published tariff schedules by HS code

No clarification on rules of origin

No definition of non tariff barrier reductions

No implementation timelines

No enforcement or dispute resolution mechanisms

Without these components, companies cannot reliably model landed cost, supplier risk, or network design changes.

By comparison, India’s recently announced trade agreement with the European Union includes detailed provisions covering market access, regulatory alignment, and investment protections. Those provisions are what allow supply chain leaders to translate trade policy into operational decisions. The U.S. announcement does not yet meet that threshold.

Implications for Supply Chains

Tariff Reduction Could Be Material if Formalized

An 18 percent tariff rate would improve India’s competitive position relative to regional peers such as Vietnam, Bangladesh, and Pakistan. If implemented and sustained, this could support incremental sourcing from India in sectors such as textiles, pharmaceuticals, and light manufacturing.

For now, however, this remains a scenario rather than a planning assumption.

Energy Commitments Are the Largest Unknown

The claim that India would halt purchases of Russian oil has significant implications across energy, chemical, and manufacturing supply chains. Russian crude has been a key input for Indian refineries and downstream industrial production.

A shift away from that supply would affect energy input costs, tanker routing, port utilization, and U.S.–India crude and LNG trade volumes. None of these impacts can be assessed with confidence without confirmation from Indian regulators and implementing agencies.

Agriculture Remains Politically and Operationally Sensitive

U.S. officials have suggested expanded access for American agricultural exports. Historically, agriculture has been one of the most protected and politically sensitive sectors in India.

Any meaningful liberalization would raise questions around cold chain capacity, port infrastructure, domestic political resistance, and regulatory compliance. These factors introduce execution risk that supply chain leaders should consider carefully.

Compliance and Digital Trade Issues Are Unresolved

Several areas remain undefined:

Whether India will adjust pharmaceutical patent protections

Whether U.S. technology firms will receive exemptions from digital services taxes

Whether labor and environmental standards will be linked to market access

Each of these issues influences sourcing strategies, contract terms, and long term cost structures.

Practical Guidance for Supply Chain Leaders

Until formal documentation is released, a measured approach is warranted:

Avoid making structural network changes based on political announcements

Model tariff exposure using multiple scenarios rather than a single assumed outcome

Monitor customs and regulatory guidance rather than headline statements

Assess exposure to potential energy cost changes in Indian operations

Track implementation of the India–EU agreement as a near term reference point

Bottom Line

This announcement suggests a potential shift in the direction of India–U.S. trade relations, but it does not yet provide the clarity required for operational decision making.

For now, it creates strategic optionality rather than executable change.

Until tariff schedules, regulatory commitments, and enforcement mechanisms are formally published, supply chain and logistics leaders should treat this development as informational rather than actionable. In trade, execution begins only when the documentation exists.

The post India–U.S. Trade Announcement Creates Strategic Options, Not Executable Change appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Winter weather challenges, trade deals and more tariff threats – February 3, 2026 Update

Published

on

By

Winter weather challenges, trade deals and more tariff threats – February 3, 2026 Update

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Published: February 3, 2026

Blog

Weekly highlights

Ocean rates – Freightos Baltic Index

Asia-US West Coast prices (FBX01 Weekly) decreased 10% to $2,418/FEU.

Asia-US East Coast prices (FBX03 Weekly) decreased 2% to $3,859/FEU.

Asia-N. Europe prices (FBX11 Weekly) decreased 5% to $2,779/FEU.

Asia-Mediterranean prices(FBX13 Weekly) decreased 5% to $4,179/FEU.

Air rates – Freightos Air Index

China – N. America weekly prices increased 8% to $6.74/kg.

China – N. Europe weekly prices decreased 4% to $3.44/kg.

N. Europe – N. America weekly prices increased 10% to $2.53/kg.

Analysis

Winter weather is complicating logistics on both sides of the Atlantic. Affected areas in the US, especially the southeast and southern midwest are still recovering from last week’s major storm and cold.

Storms in the North Atlantic slowed vessel traffic and disrupted or shutdown operations at several container ports across Western Europe and into the Mediterranean late last week. Transits resumed and West Med ports restarted operations earlier this week, but the disruptions have already caused significant delays, and weather is expected to worsen again mid-week.

The resulting delays and disruptions could increase congestion levels at N. Europe ports, but ocean rates from Asia to both N. Europe and the Mediterranean nonetheless dipped 5% last week as the pre-Lunar New Year rush comes to an end. Daily rates this week are sliding further with prices to N. Europe now down to about $2,600/FEU and $3,800/FEU to the Mediterranean – from respective highs of $3,000/FEU and $4,900/FEU in January.

Transpacific rates likewise slipped last week as LNY nears, with West Coast prices easing 10% to about $2,400/FEU and East Coast rates down 5% to $3,850/FEU. West Coast daily prices have continued to slide so far this week, with rates dropping to almost $1,900/FEU as of Monday, a level last seen in mid-December.

Prices across these lanes are significantly lower than this time last year due partly to fleet growth. ONE identified overcapacity as one driver of Q3 losses last year, with lower volumes due to trade war frontloading the other culprit.

And trade war uncertainty has persisted into 2026.

India – US container volumes have slumped since August when the US introduced 50% tariffs on many Indian exports. Just this week though, the US and India announced a breakthrough in negotiations that will lower tariffs to 18% in exchange for a reduction in India’s Russian oil purchases among other commitments. President Trump has yet to sign an executive order lowering tariffs, and the sides have not released details of the agreement, but once implemented, container demand is expected to rebound on this lane.

Recent steps in the other direction include Trump issuing an executive order that enables the US to impose tariffs on countries that sell oil to Cuba, and threatening tariffs and other punitive steps targeting Canada’s aviation manufacturing.

The recent volatility of and increasing barriers to trade with the US since Trump took office last year are major drivers of the warmer relations and increased and diversified trade developing between other major economies. The EU signed a major free trade agreement with India last week just after finalizing a deal with a group of South American countries, and other countries like the UK are exploring improved ties with China as well.

In a final recent geopolitical development, Panama’s Supreme Court nullified Hutchinson Port rights to operate its terminals at either end of the Panama Canal. The Hong Kong company was in stalled negotiations to sell those ports following Trump’s objection to a China-related presence in the canal. Maersk’s APMTP was appointed to take over operations in the interim.

In air cargo, pre-LNY demand may be one factor in China-US rates continuing to rebound to $6.74/kg last week from about $5.50/kg in early January. Post the new year slump, South East Asia – US prices are climbing as well, up to almost $5.00/kg last week from $4.00/kg just a few weeks ago.

China – Europe rates dipped 4% to $3.44/kg last week, with SEA – Europe prices up 7% to more than $3.20/kg, and transatlantic rates up 10% to more than $2.50/kg, a level 25% higher than early this year.

Discover Freightos Enterprise

Freightos Terminal: Real-time pricing dashboards to benchmark rates and track market trends.

Procure: Streamlined procurement and cost savings with digital rate management and automated workflows.

Rate, Book, & Manage: Real-time rate comparison, instant booking, and easy tracking at every shipment stage.

Judah Levine

Head of Research, Freightos Group

Judah is an experienced market research manager, using data-driven analytics to deliver market-based insights. Judah produces the Freightos Group’s FBX Weekly Freight Update and other research on what’s happening in the industry from shipper behaviors to the latest in logistics technology and digitization.

Put the Data in Data-Backed Decision Making

Freightos Terminal helps tens of thousands of freight pros stay informed across all their ports and lanes

The post Winter weather challenges, trade deals and more tariff threats – February 3, 2026 Update appeared first on Freightos.

Continue Reading

Non classé

Microsoft and the Operationalization of AI: Why Platform Strategy Is Colliding with Execution Reality

Published

on

By

Microsoft And The Operationalization Of Ai: Why Platform Strategy Is Colliding With Execution Reality

Microsoft has positioned itself as one of the central platforms for enterprise AI. Through Azure, Copilot, Fabric, and a rapidly expanding ecosystem of AI services, the company is not merely offering tools, it is proposing an operating model for how intelligence should be embedded across enterprise workflows.

For supply chain and logistics leaders, the significance of Microsoft’s strategy is less about individual features and more about how platform decisions increasingly shape where AI lives, how it is governed, and which decisions it ultimately influences.

From Cloud Infrastructure to Operating Layer

Historically, Microsoft’s role in supply chain technology centered on infrastructure and productivity software. Azure provided scalable compute and storage, while Office and collaboration tools supported planning and coordination. That boundary has shifted.

Microsoft is now positioning AI as a horizontal operating layer that spans data management, analytics, decision support, and execution. Azure AI services, Microsoft Fabric, and Copilot are designed to work together, reducing friction between data ingestion, model development, and business consumption.

The implication for operations leaders is subtle but important: AI is no longer something added to systems; it is increasingly embedded into the platforms those systems rely on.

Copilot and the Question of Decision Proximity

Copilot has become a focal point of Microsoft’s AI narrative. Positioned as an assistive layer across applications, Copilot aims to surface insights, generate recommendations, and automate routine tasks.

For supply chain use cases, the key question is not whether Copilot can generate answers, but where those answers appear in the decision chain. Insights delivered inside productivity tools can improve awareness and coordination, but operational value depends on whether recommendations are connected to execution systems.

This highlights a broader pattern: AI that remains advisory improves efficiency; AI that is embedded into workflows influences outcomes. Microsoft’s challenge is bridging that gap consistently across heterogeneous enterprise environments.

Microsoft Fabric and the Data Foundation Problem

Microsoft Fabric represents an attempt to simplify and unify the enterprise data landscape. By combining data engineering, analytics, and governance into a single platform, Microsoft is addressing one of the most persistent barriers to AI adoption: fragmented and inconsistent data.

For supply chain organizations, Fabric’s value lies in its potential to standardize event data across planning, execution, and visibility systems. However, unification does not eliminate the need for data discipline. Event quality, latency, and ownership remain operational issues, not platform features.

Fabric reduces friction, but it does not resolve governance by itself.

Integration with Existing Enterprise Systems

Microsoft’s AI strategy assumes coexistence with existing ERP, WMS, TMS, and planning platforms. Integration, rather than replacement, is the dominant pattern.

This creates both opportunity and risk. On one hand, Microsoft can act as a connective tissue across systems that were never designed to work together. On the other, loosely coupled integration increases dependence on interface stability and data consistency.

In execution-heavy environments, even small integration failures can cascade quickly. As AI becomes more embedded, integration reliability becomes a strategic concern.

Where AI Is Delivering Value, and Where It Isn’t

AI deployments tend to deliver value fastest in areas such as demand sensing, scenario analysis, reporting automation, and exception identification. These use cases align well with Microsoft’s strengths in analytics, collaboration, and scalable infrastructure.

Where value is harder to realize is in autonomous execution. Closed-loop decision-making that directly triggers operational action requires tighter coupling with execution systems and clearer decision ownership.

This reinforces a recurring theme: platform AI accelerates insight, but execution still depends on operating model design.

Constraints That Still Apply

Despite the breadth of Microsoft’s AI portfolio, familiar constraints remain. Data quality, security, compliance, and organizational readiness continue to limit outcomes. AI platforms do not eliminate the need for process clarity or decision accountability.

In some cases, the ease of deploying AI services can outpace an organization’s ability to absorb them operationally. This creates a risk of insight saturation without action.

Why Microsoft Matters to Supply Chain Leaders

Microsoft’s relevance lies in its ability to shape the default environment in which enterprise AI operates. Platform decisions made today influence data architectures, governance models, and user expectations for years.

For supply chain leaders, the key takeaway is not to adopt Microsoft’s AI stack wholesale, but to understand how platform-level AI affects where intelligence sits, how it flows, and who ultimately acts on it.

The next phase of AI adoption will not be defined solely by model performance. It will be defined by how effectively platforms like Microsoft’s translate intelligence into operational decisions under real-world constraints.

The post Microsoft and the Operationalization of AI: Why Platform Strategy Is Colliding with Execution Reality appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending