Optimizing Inventory around Suppliers´ Minimum Order Quantities

Recently, I had an interesting conversation with an inventory manager and the VP Finance. We were discussing the benefits of being able to automatically optimize both reorder points and order quantities. The VP Finance was concerned that given their large supplier required minimum order quantities, they would not be able to benefit.  He said his suppliers held all the power, forcing him to accept massive minimum order quantities and tying his hands. While he felt bad about this, he saw a silver lining: He didn’t have to do any planning. He would accept a large inventory investment, but his customer service levels would be exceptional.  Perhaps the large inventory investment was assumed to be the cost of doing business.

I pushed back and pointed out that he was not as powerless as he felt. He still had control of the other half of the procurement process: while he couldn’t control how much to order, he could control when to order by adjusting the reorder point. In other words, there is always room for careful quantitative analysis in inventory management, even when you have one hand tied behind your back.

An Example

To put some numbers behind my argument, I created a scenario then analyzed it using our methodology to show how consequential it can be to use inventory optimization software even in constrained situations. In this scenario, item demand averages 2.2 units per day but varies significantly by day of week. Let’s say the imaginary supplier insists on a minimum order quantity of 500 units (way out of proportion to demand) and fills replenishment orders in either three days or ten days in equal proportions (quite inconsistent). To spread the blame around, let’s also suppose that the imaginary supplier’s imaginary customer uses a foolish rule that the reorder point should be 10% of the minimum order quantity. (Why this rule? Too many companies use simple/simplistic rules of thumb in lieu of proper analysis.)

So, we have a base case in which the order quantity is 500 units, and the reorder point is 50 units. In this case, the fill rate is 100%, but the average number of units on hand is a whopping 330. If the customer would simply lower the reorder point from 50 to 15, the fill rate would still be 99.5%, but the average stock on hand would drop by 11% to 295 units. Using the one hand not tied behind his back, the inventory manager could cut his inventory investment by more than 10%, which would be a noticeable win.

Incidentally, if the minimum order quantity were abolished, the customer would be free to arrive at a new and much better solution. Setting the order quantity to 45 and the reorder point to 25 would achieve a 99% fill rate at the cost of a daily on-hand level of only 35 units: nearly a 90% reduction in inventory investment: a major improvement over the status quo.

Postscript

These calculations are possible using our software, which can make visible the otherwise unknown relationships between inventory system design choices (e.g., order quantity and reorder point) and key performance indicators (e.g., average units on hand and fill rate).  Armed with this ability to conduct these calculations, alternative arrangements with the supplier may now be considered. For example, what if, in exchange for paying a higher price per unit, the supplier agreed to a lower MOQ. Using the software to conduct an analysis of the key performance indicators using the “what if” costs and MOQs would reveal the cost per unit and MOQ that would be needed to develop a more profitable deal.   Once identified, all parties stand to benefit.  The supplier now generates a better margin on sales of its products, and the buyer holds considerably less inventory yielding a holding cost reduction that dwarfs the added cost per unit.  Everyone wins.

 

 

A CFO’s Perspective on Demand Planning – “More Strategic Than You Think”

The Smart Forecaster

Pursuing best practices in demand planning,

forecasting and inventory optimization

Bud Schultz, CPA, Vice President of Finance for NKK Switches, presented his company’s experience with demand planning during a recent webinar. The following is a brief summary of Bud’s key points; view the complete webinar by clicking here.

Q: Tell us about NKK’s business and demand planning challenges.

NKK Switches, based in Scottsdale, Arizona, is a leading manufacturer and supplier of electromechanical switches. The business involves many different switch types—toggles, push-button, rotary, even some programmable switch types. We are known for our high quality, and for our ability to meet an exceptionally broad range of customer requirements on a turnkey (custom configuration) basis. NKK Switches produces customized solutions from component parts sourced exclusively from manufacturing facilities in Japan and China.

There are literally millions of possible switch configurations, and we never know what configured solutions our customers will order. This makes our demand highly intermittent and exceptionally difficult to forecast. In fact, until fairly recently we considered our demand unforecastable. We operated on a build-to-order basis, which meant that customer orders could not be fulfilled until their component parts were produced and then fashioned into finished goods by NKK. This resulted in long lead-times, painful for our customers and a competitive challenge for our sales organization.

Q: What did you expect to get from improved product demand forecasting?

When we began to investigate the value of demand forecasting software (SmartForecasts from Smart Software), we tried to view the decision from a Return on Investment (ROI) point of view. We did some capital budgeting, making assumptions about potential reductions in inventory levels, reduced inventory carrying costs and other potential savings. Although the capital budgets returned positive returns on investment, we nevertheless were unable to move forward based on that information. We lacked confidence in our assumptions, and we were worried that we wouldn’t be able to justify the safety stock and inventory levels that the software would suggest.

What we didn’t expect was a challenge from our parent company. In light of the capabilities of a newly implemented ERP system, they would consider a new approach. If we could produce demonstrably reliable demand forecasts, they would consider procuring raw materials and producing switch components on a build-to-forecast rather than build-to-order basis. This opened the door to a much more profound impact. We tracked actuals against forecasts over a twelve-month period and found that our forecasts, particularly in aggregate, were exceptionally accurate: actual demand was within 3% of forecast. Once we were able to prove the validity of our forecasts, we were able to move forward with the parent company’s plan to manufacture product based on those forecasts.

Q: How did accurate forecasts of product lines with intermittent demand data transform NKK’s operations?

From the many different combinations we manufacture to order, individual switch parts can show very intermittent demand (long periods with zero orders and then seemingly random spikes), but we can identify more consistent patterns across switch series. All of the part numbers in a given series have common components and raw materials, such as plastic housing, brackets and other hardware, gold, silver and LEDs.

Providing our manufacturing facilities with reliable forecasts ended up allowing us to make dramatic changes. Our manufacturing plants could start procuring raw materials that in the aggregate would eventually be used in production of different part numbers within that series, even if the specific part numbers to be produced were unknown at the time the forecasts were made. And in many instances, despite the irregular demand history data, it was even possible for the suppliers to manufacture specific part numbers based on the forecast.

Once the program is fully implemented, we anticipate our leads times will be reduced to half the time or even less. Shorter lead times will result in lower reorder points, resulting in higher service levels while reducing our inventory requirements.

Bud Schultz leads all finance and accounting functions at NKK. His background as a Certified Public Accountant, attorney, engineer and pilot for the US Air Force provide unique perspective on finances for engineering and manufacturing operations.

Leave a Comment

Related Posts

Inventory Planning Becomes More Interesting

Inventory Planning Becomes More Interesting

Just-In-Time (JIT) ensures that a manufacturer produces only the necessary amount, and many companies ignore the risks inherent in reducing inventories. Combined with increased globalization and new risks of supply interruption, stock-outs have abounded. So how can you execute a real-world plan for JIT inventory amidst all this risk and uncertainty? The foundation of your response is your corporate data. Uncertainty has two sources: supply and demand. You need the facts for both.

Redefine Exceptions and Fine Tune Planning to Address Uncertainty

Redefine Exceptions and Fine Tune Planning to Address Uncertainty

In a perfect world, Just in Time (JIT) would be the appropriate solution for inventory management. But as the saying goes “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth.” One enormous punch in the mouth for the global supply chain was Suez Canal Blockage that held up $9.6B in trade costing an estimated $6.7M per minute.

Probabilistic Forecasting for Intermittent Demand

Probabilistic Forecasting for Intermittent Demand

The New Forecasting Technology derives from Probabilistic Forecasting, a statistical method that accurately forecasts both average product demand per period and customer service level inventory requirements.

Recent Posts

  • Smart Software CEO to present at Epicor Insights 2022Smart Software to Present at Epicor Insights 2022
    Smart Software CEO will present at this year's Epicor Insights event in Nashville. If you plan to attend this year, please join us at booth #9 and #705, and learn more about Epicor Smart Inventory Planning and Optimization. […]
  • Smart Software and Arizona Public Service to Present at WERC 2022
    Smart Software CEO and APS Inventory Manager to present WERC 2022 Studio Session on implementing Smart IP&O in 90 Days and achieve significant savings by optimizing reorder points and order quantities for over 250,000 spare parts. […]