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

Warehouse Orchestration: Solving the Daily Breakdown Between Plan and Execution

Published

on

By

Warehouse Orchestration: Solving The Daily Breakdown Between Plan And Execution

In most warehouses today, the problem is not whether work gets done; it is how much effort it takes to keep everything aligned and on track. Every day, there is a breakdown between the plan and executing the plan. Labor plans, inbound schedules, picking priorities, and automation all operate from valid assumptions, but not always the same ones. The gaps between them are filled in real time by supervisors and teams, making constant adjustments. That is what keeps operations running, but it is also what makes them fragile.

It is a challenge many operations recognize. Even with modern systems in place, execution still depends heavily on human coordination. Warehouse orchestration is the shift from managing tasks independently to coordinating the entire operation and ensuring decisions across the system stay aligned as conditions change. The best way to understand what that means in practice is not through a system diagram, but through the lens and experience of the people running the floor.

Consider Maria, a warehouse supervisor responsible for keeping a high-volume operation on track. She is experienced, practical, and steady under pressure, but what she is really managing is not just work; it is complexity.

At any given moment, she balances labor availability, work queues, inbound variability, equipment status, and shifting order priorities. Those inputs are not wrong. They are just not aligned. It is her job to bridge that gap in real time.

A shift that starts “normal” … until it does not

Maria arrives before the floor fully wakes up. Her first stop is not the dock or the pick module; it is yesterday’s reality. What shipped? What did not? Where did the backlog form? Which waves did not behave as the plan assumed? She is not looking for blame; she is looking for drift. Drift is what turns into firefighting later.

Demand shifted over the weekend, but the pick face still reflects last week’s reality. One area is short-staffed; another has idle labor. When the team built the labor plan, it made sense, but the day had already moved on. The team scheduled inbound; however, it is not predictable. Every ETA is a best guess, and how trailers show up rarely matches how they appear on a screen.

Individually, nothing here is catastrophic, but warehouses do not fail all at once. They gradually lose alignment between plan and execution. The team compensates in real time by moving people, reprioritizing work, working around automation delays, and making judgment calls. And the shift “works,” but there is a cost:

Overtime, which did not need to happen.

Detention fees, which show up later.

Service misses, driven by wrong priorities rather than a lack of effort.

Leaders who spend more time reacting than improving.

These challenges are the reality across many operations. Execution is strong, but coordination is fragile.

The real bottleneck: decisions are fragmented

Most warehouses are not short on tools. They have WMS, robotics systems, labor tools, and planning solutions. Each one does its job well, but they do not make decisions together. Each system optimizes its scope based on different priorities or timings. The gaps between them are filled manually by people like Maria. In an environment with less variability, that might work, but in most cases:

Demand changes faster and more frequently.

Labor is less predictable.

Automation introduces new dependencies.

Customer expectations continue to rise.

Under these conditions, static plans, especially labor plans and wave structures, can drift out of sync before the shift is halfway through. That is when the operation starts relying on “manual heroics.” Experienced supervisors keep things running. It is hard to scale, and even harder to sustain.

AI-driven warehouse orchestration: keeping the operation aligned

Warehouse orchestration and the power of AI address this gap. Because it is not just about executing tasks, it is about coordinating decisions across the operation and using intelligence to see, analyze, and recommend actions with full visibility to all the variables. Instead of managing isolated activities, intelligent orchestration continuously aligns:

Labor to demand.

Inbound and outbound priorities.

Work sequencing across zones.

Automation with human workflows.

It does this in real time, as conditions change. Variability is constant, and it is not realistic to eliminate. The goal is to see the risk earlier, respond faster and more consistently, and prevent disruption.

Back to Maria: when the system helps carry the load

Now imagine Maria running that same Monday, but operations now behave like a connected ecosystem, not a collection of islands. Before the shift even starts, she is not just reviewing what happened yesterday. She is looking at a forward-facing view that is already adjusting based on incoming signals. She is getting visibility into risk early before it is a problem. Inbound appointments are not just a schedule; they are a ranked set of trade-offs that balance urgency, detention risk, inventory needs, and outbound commitments. Her decisions are clearer because the system prioritizes them, reflecting business impact. Slotting does not rely on disruptive, periodic re-slot projects that leave the pick face to decay. Instead, optimization and learning continuously shape placement, folding the highest value moves into natural replenishment windows and explaining the “why” in business language.

And during the shift, when one area starts falling behind, Maria does not have to guess the best move. She can see the impact of her options:

Shifting labor.

Reprioritizing tasks.

Adjusting sequencing.

Instead of relying on instinct and experience alone, she has visibility into how decisions affect the entire operation. She is still in control, but the system is helping her avoid problems instead of chasing them. And that changes how the shift feels. It is not static; it is dynamic, but stable.

The key ingredients: unified data, SaaS, AI & ML, connected systems

Behind the scenes, this comes down to unified data, SaaS, AI, ML, and systems that work together. When you connect your warehouse systems, add real-time operational signals and visibility to systems outside of the warehouse, and apply AI and ML for speed and precision, you are working from a single source of truth and an interconnected ecosystem of systems. As a result, users make decisions with a broader context. Then the operation starts to learn; outcomes inform future decisions, improving how the system responds over time. And now, humans are not the only thing holding the performance together.

Why this matters right now

For supply chain leaders, this is not only about efficiency. It is about operating in a world where volatility is constant. Across industries, the specifics vary, but the challenges are consistent:

Handling demand swings without inflating labor costs

Scaling operations without scaling complexity

Maintaining service levels under pressure

The operations that succeed are the ones that do not just react faster; they are the ones that operate in alignment.

The shift ahead

A single, modern technology will not define the future of warehouse management. It will be defined by how well operations coordinate across people, systems, and workflows in real time. That is what intelligent warehouse orchestration enables. It turns the warehouse from a collection of well-run processes into a connected system that can adjust continuously. Because in the end, the goal is not just to execute the plan. It is to keep the plan from breaking when the shift starts.

By Tammy Kulesa
Senior Director, Solution & Industry Marketing, Blue Yonder

Tammy is the Senior Director of Solution and Industry Marketing, leading go-to-market strategy and thought leadership for Blue Yonder Cognitive Solutions for Execution, and the LSP Industry. With over 20 years of experience in technology marketing and nearly a decade focused on retail, logistics, and supply chain, Tammy brings a deep understanding of the operational and strategic challenges facing today’s supply chain leaders. A passionate advocate for innovation and collaboration, Tammy has a proven track record of connecting market needs with transformative solutions.

The post Warehouse Orchestration: Solving the Daily Breakdown Between Plan and Execution appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

How Operational AI Turns Supply Chain Recommendations into Action

Published

on

By

Supply chain AI cannot stop at better insight. To create operational value, AI recommendations must connect to workflows, execution systems, approval paths, and measurable outcomes.

Artificial intelligence is quickly becoming part of the supply chain technology conversation. Vendors are adding copilots, recommendation engines, autonomous agents, and predictive analytics to planning, transportation, warehousing, procurement, and visibility applications. The promise is clear: better decisions, faster responses, and more adaptive operations.

But there is a critical distinction that supply chain leaders need to keep in view. An AI system that identifies a problem is not the same as an AI system that helps solve it.

A demand-planning model may identify a likely stockout. A transportation model may flag a lane disruption. A supplier-risk model may detect a deteriorating delivery pattern. Those are useful insights. But unless the system can connect that insight to an action pathway, the burden still falls on the planner, transportation manager, procurement team, or customer service group to decide what happens next.

That is where many AI deployments will either create real value or stall out.

For a deeper look at the architecture behind operational AI, including A2A, MCP, RAG, Graph RAG, and connected decision systems, download the full white paper: AI in the Supply Chain: From Architecture to Execution.

Insight Is Not Execution

Supply chains do not run on insight alone. They run on orders, shipments, purchase orders, inventory moves, carrier tenders, production schedules, warehouse labor plans, customer commitments, and exception workflows.

A recommendation that remains in a dashboard is not yet operational AI. It is decision support. Decision support can be valuable, but it does not fundamentally change the operating model unless it becomes part of the execution process.

The question is not simply, “Can the AI make a recommendation?” The better question is, “Can the organization act on that recommendation in a controlled, auditable, and timely way?”

For example, if an AI system predicts that a regional distribution center will run short of inventory, several action pathways may be available. The company might expedite inbound supply, rebalance inventory from another facility, substitute a product, modify customer allocation rules, or adjust promised delivery dates.

Each action has a cost, a service implication, and a governance requirement.

Operational AI must understand those pathways. It must also know which actions it can recommend, which it can execute automatically, and which require human approval.

The Execution Layer Matters

This is why integration with core execution systems is so important. AI cannot operate effectively if it sits outside the systems where work is actually performed.

For supply chain AI to become operational, it must connect to transportation management systems, warehouse management systems, order management systems, ERP, procurement platforms, supplier portals, customer service workflows, and control tower environments.

Without these connections, AI may diagnose problems faster, but it will not necessarily resolve them faster.

The difference is material. An AI assistant that says, “This shipment is likely to miss its delivery appointment,” is useful. An AI-enabled workflow that identifies the delay, calculates downstream service risk, recommends a carrier alternative, checks cost thresholds, initiates an approval workflow, and updates customer service is much more powerful.

That is the move from analytics to operational intelligence.

Human-in-the-Loop Still Matters

This does not mean every AI recommendation should become an automated action. Supply chain decisions often involve tradeoffs among cost, service, risk, inventory, and customer relationships. Many require judgment.

The more practical model is tiered autonomy.

Low-risk, high-frequency actions may be automated. Moderate-risk decisions may require planner approval. High-impact exceptions may require escalation to a manager or executive.

This is not a weakness. It is a design requirement.

A well-architected operational AI system should know when to act, when to recommend, and when to escalate. It should also capture the outcome so the system can learn whether the decision improved performance.

Closed-Loop Learning Is the Real Prize

The most important capability may not be the first recommendation. It may be the feedback loop that follows.

Did the expedited shipment prevent the stockout? Did the alternate supplier meet the delivery date? Did the inventory transfer protect service without creating a shortage elsewhere? Did the customer accept the revised promise date?

These outcomes should not disappear into operational noise. They should feed back into the intelligence layer.

That is how AI becomes more than a static recommendation tool. It becomes a learning system embedded in the daily operating rhythm of the supply chain.

What This Means for Buyers

Supply chain leaders evaluating AI-enabled software should press vendors on action pathways. The relevant questions are straightforward.

Can the system connect recommendations to execution workflows? Can it distinguish between automated, approved, and escalated actions? Can it operate across functions, not just inside one application? Can it create an audit trail? Can it learn from outcomes?

The vendors that answer these questions well will move beyond AI features. They will become part of the operating architecture.

The next phase of supply chain AI will not be won by the tool that produces the most impressive recommendation. It will be won by the systems that help companies act faster, with more control, better context, and measurable outcomes.

The post How Operational AI Turns Supply Chain Recommendations into Action appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Non classé

test

Published

on

By

The post test appeared first on Logistics Viewpoints.

Continue Reading

Trending