Page 8 - Hafen Hamburg | Port of Hamburg Magazine 4.2021
P. 8

 ■ WORLD TRADE
MCKINSEY HAS SURVEYED COMPANIES ABOUT SUPPLY CHAIN PROBLEMS AND EN- QUIRED WHAT MEASURES HAVE ENSUED. HERE ARE THEIR REPLIES
COVID-19 surfaced several issues in current supply chains* ...
73 % 42 % 98 % 89 %
Encountered problems in their footprint that require changes
Experienced delays in planning decisions i n the remote setting
Lack sufficient in-house talent to implement digital ways of working
Realized they needed to increase their overall SC resilience
... that led to first transformative actions since March 2020
92 % Increased footprint resilience by 61% Increasing critical inventory
55% Dual sourcing raw materials
Invested in digital planning for 80%77% Supply chain visibility
76% Point solutions
Increased their digital talent by 85%55% Reskilling labor force 52% Acquiring new talent
Proactively managed SC risks by 95 % 63% Monitoring supplier risks 48% Monitoring demand risks
*in Prozent der Antworten Quelle: McKinsey & Company
08 | Port of Hamburg Magazine | December 2021
company that had good supply chain planning before the pandemic, succeeds in setting up business con- tinuity management. This makes it easier to forecast disruptive events. At the same time, they succeed in understanding the impact, then taking appropriate ac- tion, such as building up stock to remain capable of deliveries.
What can shippers learn from the crisis?
The catastrophe in Fukushima provides one good example. It was albeit only a local incident, but it had a global impact. At that time, we developed a lot of instruments that we in principle could use again during the pandemic. In many companies these in- struments and the knowledge of how to apply them have disappeared again. As long as the incident is ongoing, the tools are used, but then in three to nine months after the end of a crisis, these things are quickly forgotten again. This should no longer hap- pen. Rather, regular monitoring of all critical process- es is indispensable.
Why are companies so willing to take risks in this regard?
Companies quickly get the feeling that they are keep- ing processes running that really are no longer of use and cost a lot of money. So, that’s when they are shut down. And yet, this is precisely the wrong approach, since with each and every new crisis, these process- es have to be set up again from scratch, even though they already once existed.
Are there other areas that surprised you during the course of the survey?
The answer can be learned from what we experi- enced during the course of the study. As we know, there was the toilet paper effect among consumers. Demand went up 300 percent, even though it was absolutely unnecessary. What came out of our survey was that exactly the same phenomenon happened in many companies: Because of anxiety about bottle- necks and a poor share of distribution from the suppli- ers, companies ordered so much, without having the possibility of using it in production. This phenomenon is known as ‘shortage gaming‘, that became known as part of the horsewhip effect in the Sixties. Precise- ly this happened even among experienced planners: I hadn’t expected that.
That means, in your opinion, that companies far too frequently think short-term, while neglecting risk management.
In principle, yes. However, this is going to change in the next few years. The current focus on just-in-time









































































   6   7   8   9   10