Does your extended supply chain suffer from extreme seasonal variability? Does this situation challenge your ability to meet service level commitments to your customers? I have grappled with this at Rev-A-Shelf, addressing unusual conditions created by Chinese New Year and other global events, and would like to share the experience and a few things I learned along the way.

First, let me explain our situation. We import 60% of the parts we use to build our kitchen and bath accessories from China and Europe. Most of the year we were able to plan our inventory needs using a spreadsheet-based min/max approach. But not during Chinese New Year, which drives the planet’s greatest annual population migration. Chinese New Year shuts down production for up to two months, creating significant supply risk as we strive to meet our three day order fulfillment commitment.

We solved our problem, introducing statistical demand forecasting with the flexibility to extend lead times when necessary, the ability to reliably establish safety stocks that achieve our required service levels and a continuous reporting system that lets everyone know exactly where we stand. However, success required much more than a new piece of software. We needed to change the way we view future demand, supply risk and safety stock. Here are a few key things we did that made all the difference.

Stakeholder education and buy-in

Regardless of the project, it’s always best to enlist the buy-in of all stakeholders. We knew we had to do something to solve our problem, but there was bound to be resistance. Senior managers, for example, had developed a healthy distrust of software and wondered whether demand forecasting software could help. Our buyers had developed their own perspectives and procurement methods, and felt personally at risk as we considered new approaches.

People came around as they developed a common understanding of the problem and how we would address it. Education was a big part of the solution. We explained how forecasting works and key factors we should all understand: how to analyze trends, how to use “what if” scenarios, impact of shifting lead times, how to relate service levels to supply risk and safety stock and key performance indicators like inventory turns. Going through this process together, we all became stakeholders in the solution.

Use the Right software

When you have lots of part numbers and any sort of supply or demand variability, you just cannot forecast effectively with a spreadsheet. With our min/max forecasting system, we were planning to an average, and it wasn’t working. Average usage has inherent flaws for planning purposes—it’s always looking backward!

You need software that looks ahead, recognizes seasonal patterns and enables you to determine how much stock you’ll need to meet required service levels over varying lead times.

Fine-tune processes

When the old ways don’t work, you need to be open to adjusting your assumptions. Think less about where you’ve been, and more about where you want to be. Take a look at your lead times and plan to your desired service level. Last year’s history may not be the best predictor of this year’s demand. The same forecast horizon may not be appropriate for all products or certain time of the year.

Make the Forecast Actionable

It’s not enough to produce an accurate forecast and estimated inventory stocking levels. You’ve got to develop a way to make the information actionable for those tasked with using it. We developed a set of reports that enabled buyers to leverage better forecast and safety stock information. Now, at the end of every month, we produce a forecast report that provides a clear picture of current inventory, safety stock, past usage, forecasted usage, incoming deliveries (PO’s) and recommended order quantities.

Validate Results

You can, and we did, test our new methods against our own demand history. Still, an authoritative outsider can make acceptance easier. We commissioned a study by a professor at Louisville University’s College of Business who set one of her graduate students to the task. Through them we were able to reinforce what we saw happening from our results, and feel comfortable that we were on a good path.

All of these factors helped Rev-A-Shelf transform its demand planning process, to great effect. Today we are exceeding our service level targets, and our fill rate, based on a three day ship cycle, is showing steady improvement, and trending up. Overall, units-in-stock have stayed flat while supporting a 13% increase in sales.

John Engelhardt is currently Director of Purchasing and Asian Operations for Rev-a-Shelf, LLC in Louisville, KY. He has held a variety of management positions both in private business and public organizations. At Rev-A-Shelf he held the position of International Sales Manager and Director of Sales Support before assuming his current position. He can be reached at johne at rev-a-shelf dot com.

At year’s end, we are often caught up in thinking and planning for the coming year. Did 2013 turn out the way you expected? Will 2014 be dramatically different? Are there other factors—things we are planning to do; things we think our competitors might do; outside forces like changing taste, demographics or economics—that might change the course of business in the coming year?

Most companies that do a formal forecast start out with a statistical projection of past sales patterns into the future. Your forecast model should detect and characterize any seasonality inherent in your markets and include that in the projection. But that’s just the first step.

The next thing to consider is product lifecycle. Nearly all products go through a predictable cycle of introduction, acceptance and growth, maturity (demand levels off) and finally decline to obsolescence. These cycles can be as short as weeks or as long as decades. Clothing fashions and consumer electronics would be on the shorter end of the scale, while products like plumbing fixtures and construction equipment would experience longer cycles. In specialized situations like bus fleet management, entire fleets may be replaced over defined transition periods. In any case, the demand forecast should be adjusted to reflect increasing or decreasing demand according to the product’s position in its lifecycle.

Now comes the hardest part—predicting the unpredictable. In general, the future is likely to look a lot like the recent past in a similarity to Newton’s first law of motion: a body in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an external force. But it’s those external forces that can send your carefully calculated forecast right into the gutter. A competitor might slash their prices to take away some of your market share. New technologies might obsolete your product before the end of its expected life span. Changing tastes or new regulations might stop sales in their tracks.

But good things might happen as well. You might be the one to slash prices or improve your product and take away a competitor’s business. Your product may catch the fancy of the market and sales will skyrocket. A competitor may abandon the business or go bankrupt, leaving you with more opportunity.

Should you plan for these kinds of things? Certainly, to the extent that you can. You may know when you’ll run promotions or phase in the next product line. But the future, by nature, is uncertain. History and your business knowledge of the past lay the foundation for your view of the future. Statistically-based tools can help you create a risk-adjusted forecast, with safety stock recommendations that correspond with the level of risk you are willing to take. Beyond this, your key to success is agility—the ability to adapt to changing conditions. Prepare the best forecast you can, build your plans around that forecast—then monitor sales and market conditions closely and continuously. Look for early warning that things may be going in a direction other than you predicted.

You must be willing to recognize and adapt to changing conditions—in other words, don’t fall in love with your forecast and ignore evidence that it may be wrong. Pride of authorship in this case can be deadly to the business.

It is also important to have contingency plans in place so you will be prepared to make the necessary changes to procurement, production and inventory to respond to the new estimate of demand. The best tools for this are the shortest possible lead times (both production and supplier), good supplier relationships and a clear view of the world and your markets.

Forecasting is difficult mainly because people know it is likely to be wrong and nobody likes to be publicly and visibly wrong. Nevertheless, a good forecast is necessary to position the resources necessary to satisfy customer demands. Just be open to the first signs of change and be prepared to react quickly and decisively.

Dave Turbide, CFPIM, CIRM, CSCP, CMfgE is a New Hampshire-based independent consultant and freelance writer. He can be reached via e-mail at dave at daveturbide dot com.

As we approach the midpoint in 2013, there is still a lot of economic uncertainty complicating your supply chain planning processes. Some look at this shaky economy and postpone needed investments that can position their organizations for a strong future.

However, this is not the time to retreat from your supply chain improvement initiatives. Rather, it’s a time to double-down on your efforts to prepare for the inevitable business opportunities that lie ahead.

Economic recovery is a time of sales opportunities. You want to make sure that you’re prepared to take advantage of them. Good demand and inventory planning can help.With the right software and planning processes, you can achieve a sound statistical basis for decision-making going forward while making informed adjustments as circumstances dictate. You can improve your ability to read demand signals, spot trends, model future events, and bring your inventory into balance with demand.

Here are six areas of demand and inventory planning where changes you make now can lead to big payoffs when new opportunities arise:

1. Optimize your inventories

When the customer calls, you want to be able to ship. At the same time, you want to control your costs. The surest way to meet that goal is to find the inventory “sweet spot.” That’s where you have the minimum amount of inventory required to satisfy product demand over a specified lead time and at a desired service level.

The ability to accurately set safety stock and inventory levels can set you apart from the competition, and make a difference in your bottom line. However, getting to that point requires a shift in your planning focus from just forecasting future demand to optimizing stocking levels to fill future orders.

If you’d like to know more about achieving the “sweet spot,” you can find a good article published in APICS Magazine here.

2. Implement intermittent demand forecasting solutions

Companies in the service parts, auto aftermarket, and capital goods industries commonly experience intermittent, “slow moving” demand for a large percentage of their inventory items. Accurately forecasting demand and estimating safety stock levels for these types of items is probably the toughest challenge demand planners face. If you can accurately forecast your intermittently demanded parts and products, and have the correct amount of inventory and safety stock on the shelf, you’ve got most of the competition beat!

The reason for this is that items that have intermittent demand do not have normal demand patterns or distributions, making them difficult to forecast using traditional forecasting methods (see the diagram below).

Bar chart illustrating intermittent demand

So, if you have an accurate means of forecasting intermittent demand and estimating safety stock requirements, you’ll be ahead of your competitors that don’t.

If you’d like to know more about forecasting and planning items with intermittent demand, you can find an informative white paper here.

3. Improve lead times

The economic downturn has forced companies to rethink their sourcing strategies because of uncertain demand back home, long lead times to obtain their goods, rising labor costs abroad, and increasing transportation costs. Shortening replenishment lead times can reduce the time required to get the products you need and helps make your supply chain more efficient. It also makes it easier to react to changes in demand when recovery comes.

4. Prioritize service levels

Prioritizing service levels for your products can help insure that the items important to your sales are given the attention they need. For items that are highly demanded, consider setting service levels higher than for those with less demand. Also try doing a revenue-based ABC analysis of your company’s stock-keeping units (SKUs) and set service levels accordingly in your software planning solution.

For example, you might set the service levels for your “bread and butter” items at 95-99% or higher, while setting service levels much lower (at 70-80% or even less) for other items. In this way, you may find that you need much less stock for some of your SKUs and more stock for others to effectively achieve your overall service level goals.

5. Use more recent demand history in creating your forecasts

Because the economy has been changing so fast, it may be time to shorten the demand history used in generating your forecasts so more emphasis is placed on recent trends and demand patterns—reflecting the “new normal”—rather than those contained in outdated history from 3 or 4 years ago. This, of course, should be done in consultation with your management team and preferably as part of an organized S&OP process that thoroughly evaluates both the risks and benefits of adopting this strategy.

6. Invest in technologies and resources that help you capitalize on opportunities

Investing in the right tools and processes increases your competitive advantage. If you aren’t doing so already, here are some valuable things to consider:

• Start an S&OP process, or fine tune your current process, to include key stakeholders in the supply chain and also ensure that demand forecasting and inventory planning provide key inputs in that planning process.

• If your forecasting software is not good at picking up trends, or cannot handle the portion of your inventory with intermittent demand, find software that’s up to the task.

• Find software that will take your forecast results and generate accurate inventory stocking levels to satisfy demand for your products, components or raw materials over specified lead times and at service levels you desire.

• Look for software solutions that are scalable, yet have a relatively low total cost of ownership, fast payback and high ROI.

• Finally, don’t scrimp on training; get all the training and consulting you need to get the “biggest bang” from your software investments.

Do you have anything to add? What are you doing to prepare for the economic recovery? Please leave a comment.

Charles Smart is the founding President of Smart Software. He currently serves as Vice Chairman, on Smart Software’s Board of Directors, as a company spokesman and in development of strategic business relationships. Prior to founding Smart Software, he was a management consultant at the Stanford Research Institute (SRI International) and Policy Analysis, Inc., and served as a Lieutenant in the U.S. Navy.

Fluctuations in an inventory supply chain are inevitable. Randomness, which can be a source of confusion and frustration, guarantees it. A ship carrying goods from China may be delayed by a storm at sea. A sudden upswing in demand one day can wipe out inventory in a single day, leaving you unable to meet the next day’s demand. Randomness creates frictions that make it hard to do your job.

At first blush, it sometimes seems best to respond to randomness with the ostrich approach: head buried in the sand. You can settle on a prediction and proceed on the assumption that the prediction will always be spot on. The flaw in that approach is that it ignores statistical methods that allow us to make use of a wealth of knowledge about our knowledge itself—how confident we can be in our predictions, and what breadth of possibilities confront us. The efficient approach to tackling the problems that stem from randomness is not to ignore uncertainty, but to embrace it with eyes open.

As a fundamental tenet of Smart Software’s approach to forecasting, we will always provide you with an assessment of the level of uncertainty in forecasts. If you are expecting nothing more than an absolute figure—the demand for widgets in February will be 120 units—you may dismiss the added element of uncertainty as a negative, or lose faith in a forecast you had hoped would be definite. But we argue for what we consider the adult approach; you need to know what you are risking when you commit to a forecast and premise your decision-making upon it.

Your forecasts can have big consequences that go beyond inventory stocking levels. They can determine your raw materials needs or staffing levels—forecasts drive many important resource allocation decisions. If you have too much faith in the most likely outcome, without also specifically considering just how likely it is, you aren’t really understanding the risks you face, and you may put yourself in a precarious position.

The need to make fully informed decisions forces us to see, in a forecast, the plus/minus range of results with a certain likelihood of occurring. In the specific case of forecasts that are going into inventory systems, this is an important part of deliberately planning for contingencies. This is how you determine not only the inventory you need to maintain in order to satisfy typical demand, but also the additional inventory you need on hand to deal with most unexpected outcomes.

This importance only increases when you are trying to maintain a reliable store of critical spare parts. Between the cost of stocking additional inventory, and accounting for the degree of reliability in your forecasts, there is a balance that crystallizes when an airplane that you need in the air is grounded—because you don’t have the replacement for a damaged part.

(While stocking extra inventory relies on the high end of the uncertainty range, if cash flow is tight, it’s the low end of the range that becomes important. Treasury-minded users find value in this other side of uncertainty in scenarios where even minimal overstocking can be more of a problem than a missed sales opportunity, for example. Reliable information about the lowest likely outcomes pays off at this time.)

Inventory theory says that you need to think about the outer ends of likely possibilities and prepare to cope with more scenarios than just what is most likely. Randomness is a reality that can’t be ignored. The average is not the answer.

Thomas Willemain, PhD, co-founded Smart Software and currently serves as Senior Vice President for Research. Dr. Willemain also serves as Professor Emeritus of Industrial and Systems Engineering at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute and as a member of the research staff at the Center for Computing Sciences, Institute for Defense Analyses.

Contributed to The Smart Forecaster by Dr. Greg Parlier (Colonel, U.S. Army, retired). Details on Dr. Parlier’s background conclude the post.

For over two decades, the General Accounting Office (GAO) has indicated that the Defense Department’s logistics management has been ineffective and wasteful, and that the Services lack strategic plans to improve overall inventory management and supply chain performance.

For the US Army, this problem is directly related to a persistent inability to link inventory investment levels and policies with supply chain effectiveness to achieve combat equipment readiness objectives required for globally deployed forces. This shortcoming has been attributed to numerous complexities associated with managing geographically dispersed, independently operating organizations, further compounded by a lack of visibility, authority and accountability across this vast global enterprise.

Unlike the corporate world, where powerful forces encourage innovation to drive competitiveness and efficiency, the Army is not a revenue generating organization focused on “quarterly earnings” and profitability. Certainly, the Army wants to be an efficient consumer of resources—but unlike the private sector’s focus on profit as a bottom line, the surrogate motivator for the Army is ‘force readiness’. This includes equipment availability and weapon system readiness for current operations in Afghanistan, as well as future capability requirements directed by the National Command Authority.

To sustain that equipment availability, the Army must synchronize disparate organizational components using myriad processes with disconnected legacy management information systems across numerous supply support activities which frequently relocate to support deploying forces.

Today, while still engaged in Afghanistan, the Army is also committed to a comprehensive and ongoing transformation. Central to this effort is recognition that dramatic improvements must be achieved in logistics operations and supply chain management. Owning one of the world’s largest and most complex supply chains, the Army is now investing in historically unprecedented efforts to fully capitalize on the promises offered by new information-based technologies. For example, the “Single Army Logistics Enterprise” is believed to be the most ambitious and expensive Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) implementation project ever undertaken.

These ERP implementation projects have met with very mixed results. While the evidence suggests that dramatic performance improvements for competitive advantage can be achieved in the commercial sector, this has occurred only where so called “IT solutions” are applied to an underlying foundation of mature, efficient and appropriate business processes.

The reality of most cases in recent years, however, has not been this success. Rather, attempts have been made to “bolt on” a solution (like an ERP system, for example) to existing business processes, in misguided efforts to replicate legacy management practices. Such efforts to automate existing processes have, all too often, simply created chaos. In fact, these attempts have not only failed to achieve anticipated improvements, but have actually resulted in reduced performance.

The general pattern has been: the greater the IT investment and organizational scope, the more likely “failure” occurs, in the form of cost overruns, missed schedules, and even project failure—where the effort has finally been abandoned.

We believe the way to enable a coordinated, comprehensive approach for logistics transformation is by creating an “engine for innovation” to accelerate and sustain continuous performance improvement for Army logistics and supply chain management. We are developing a ‘Center for Innovation in Logistics Systems’ to systematically evaluate major organizational components, conduct root cause analyses, diagnose structural disorders and prescribe integrated solutions. We have now identified several ‘catalysts for innovation’ to reduce supply side variability and demand uncertainty—the proximate causes of the notorious ‘bull whip effect’. These include what we refer to as the ‘readiness equation’, ‘mission-based forecasting’, ‘readiness-based sparing’ and ‘readiness responsive retrograde’.

Our goal is to develop a comprehensive modeling capacity to generate and test these innovation catalysts along with several other initiatives in order to estimate cost effective approaches before they are adopted as policy and implemented in practice. We are looking at performance analysis, organizational design, management information and decision support concepts, enterprise systems engineering and workforce considerations including human capital investment needs.

Examining the ‘catalysts’ in isolation, we have seen significant potential for improvement which could yield hundreds of millions of dollars in savings. When combined into new, integrated management practices, however, the potential magnitude for improvement is truly dramatic—billions of dollars in further savings are likely. More importantly, it becomes possible to relate investment levels to current readiness and future capabilities.

The center is capable of developing ‘management innovation as a strategic technology’ by integrating advanced analytics with transformational strategic planning. By harnessing, focusing and applying the power of analysis, we are promoting both qualitative and quantitative common sense—the compelling analytical arguments for necessary change to pursue a common vision. With this power, we are beginning to educate the Army’s leadership, motivate logistics managers to action and provide a source for innovation the culture can embrace. During our journey, we have certainly adapted and applied much from both academic domains and the corporate sector. They, in turn, might now benefit from what we have been able to learn and achieve as well.

Prior to his retirement, Colonel Parlier was the Army’s senior, most experienced operations research analyst and served as Army Aviation and Missile Command’s (AMCOM) Deputy Commander for Transformation. He is the author of Transforming U.S. Army Supply Chains: Strategies for Management Innovation, describing the analytical framework of a multi-year Army Materiel Command (AMC) research and development project providing operations research insights for use by the Army and Department of Defense.