Productivity: A lost science

There has been lots of press coverage and professional journal coverage of operational excellence, cost structure, organization, logistics and supply chain management over the last 5-7 years. What has been lost in the shuffle is how to evaluate, measure and improve productivity. Few organizations have the capacity to perform productivity analysis beyond the calculating production or service levels over consecutive time periods.

Alas, productivity is how organizations excel and how they are able to offer lower prices, better quality, and higher profitability. So what are the key activities to increase the capacity of organizations to bring productivity into the forefront of their operational and business reviews?

  1. Benchmark others. In my dissertation completed ten years, there was a 100% connection between benchmarking and organizational improvement.
  2. Develop a precise measure of productivity for the organization, and define each term used in common practice
  3. Construct simple tools and simulations to perform basic cause and effect analysis using standard input such as labor, material, equipment, systems, and environment.
  4. Add the measure and the ultimate evaluation of performance to the top management agenda and KPIs

Then you will be able to truly compare how your organization fares in the market, and the factors that stand in the way for higher operational performance.

Does Delta know more than the oil specialists?

By acquiring the oil refining facility from ConocoPhillips, Delta is replacing its fuel hedging strategy with backward integration but at the same time entering a particularly challenging market.

Oil RigThe refining business once was dominated by integrated oil companies, which both produced the oil and refined and sold the final product. But as refining and marketing became less profitable than production of crude oil, some big oil companies began spinning off and selling or shutting down refineries.

In 2011, Delta spent $11.7 billion on fuel, which accounted to 36% of its operating costs. In 2010 fuel accounted for 30% of Delta’s expenses. In a written statement, Richard Anderson, Delta Chief Executive said: “This modest investment, the equivalent of the list price of a new wide-body aircraft, will allow Delta to reduce its fuel expense by $300 million annually and ensure jet fuel availability in the Northeast.”

Since the amount of Jet fuel produced in this refinery is not large enough to cover its needs, Delta will exchange gasoline and other refined products from the complex for jet fuel from Phillips 66 and BP through multi-year agreements.

Two questions come to mind after reading all that has been said recently about Delta’s new business adventure.

  • Is the profit margin of a crude oil producer so much higher than the margin of an airline that a refinery can be interesting to an airline while the oil company wants to shut it down? If this is true what can we conclude about the price structure of crude oil?
  • Is there a synergetic value between a jet fuel producer and an airline company like Delta?

I must say that I don’t see it. I do not see how a specialized company with years of experience in the industry can be less profitable than a newbie. Can Delta utilize some of their underutilized assets or increase the efficiency of the supply chain to decrease the overall expenses of Jet Fuel production? Even if it does reduce the costs of refinement, Delta still has only a part of the Jet fuel production value chain under control. Volatility of crude oil price is still a significant factor that is out of their control since the refinement process only accounts for 12-18 percent of the Jet Fuel price. The focus should be on the total costs of ownership and the level of fuel supply control.

On the other hand investors seem to support Delta’s decision – the company’s shares went up by 10% since the rumor about the acquisition of the refinery started to spread.

I guess we will soon find out if this was the right decision but I am sure that other airline companies are very interested to see the outcome of this venture.

5S Techniques can be effectively applied to Procurement

After a number of Procurement System Reviews performed by Calyptus Consulting Group in the last six months and witnessing how many public sector companies (both large and small) struggle to standardize their work through policies and procedures to be compliant with the Government requirements, it is hard not to notice an overarching rule:

If a company relies on written policies and procedures that are collecting dust on the bookshelf and has no mechanism for ongoing accountability – the procurement process is not sustainable, and its deterioration becomes inevitable. All the deviations from the standardized work have to be corrected as soon as they appear because allowing a staff member to ignore a requirement is a signal to all others that that kind of behavior is acceptable. From that point on, you can only expect things to get worse.

Read more of this post

Value of Training and Human Resource Development

A few weeks ago I read an article about how companies that invested in human resource development activities before the downturn in 2007-2009 fared much better over the last two-three years. This seems right.

Now comes the latest edition of Training Magazine. In this edition, it details the top 125 firms in terms of training resources being expended. Verizon turns out to be ranked Number 1 followed by Farmers Insurance. Verizon did not publicly disclose its budget but Farmers spent $121 Million.

Are we learning our lesson now? How can we rely on trying to hire experienced staff to be productive? Customers and markets change so rapidly now that a learning organization is critical.

Our business is supply chain management. Investment in training is almost non-existent. We are falling very far behind as a profession and are not growing the staff. In Federal Acquisition, there is a massive exodus due to retirement. The message is that the profession, both represented by private and public sector participants, is not venturing forth with new ideas and trained/competent staff.

Who else is concerned??

Why Supply Chain Planning Matters

The current crisis in Japan underscores the need for proper contingency planning in supply chain management.  Far too often companies are unprepared for major supply disruptions, causing product and service shortages and leading to significant price spikes.  Supply chain managers should consider these risks, however remote they may be, and develop contingency plans that can be put into action quickly to reduce the impact of localized supply disruptions.

To be effective these back-up plans should consider the levels of impact that are possible depending on the scale of the emergency.  Additional sources of supply should be found in geographically separated locations.  It does no good to have alternative suppliers if they are all faced with the same natural disaster, as appears to be the case in the electronics industry at present.  It is also important to test your contingency plan in advance to ensure that it will be an effective response and adequately maintain your continuity of supply.

How your supply chain responds in moments of crisis and supply shortage can provide signifcant competitive advantage around price and availability.  It’s worth the long-term investment in  some emergency preparedness planning.

Need to adjust inventories

The article in the WSJ on Thursday, January 27, 2010, discussed the need to find the right level of stock to maximize profits. The article noted the strategies employed by Kimberly-Clark, Harley-Davidson, 3M, Monro Muffler Brake, and Union Pacific. The consensus was to carefully review inventory levels in the context of weak demand.

We would also recommend that the firms review the decision-making models around what inventory to stock and also the algorithm for establishing min-max levels. We have found that this analysis plus process value stream mapping will get firms to the right answers.

Different programs for sub-tier suppliers such as buy-back programs, JIT-type stocking plans, and vendor managed inventory could also spread the risks through the supply chain.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.