• 图案背景
  • 纯色背景
  •   |  注册
  • /
  • 批注本地保存成功,开通会员云端永久保存 去开通
  • Ericsson’s proactive supply chainsu:爱立信的主动供应chainsu


    内容提示: Ericsson’s proactive supply chainrisk management approach aftera serious sub-supplier accidentAndreas NorrmanDepartment ofIndustrial Management and Logistics, Lund University,Lund, Sweden, andUlf JanssonEricsson AB, Sweden, Core Unit Supply, Stockholm, SwedenKeywords Supply chain management, Risk management, Business continuity, InsuranceAbstractSupply chain risk management (SCRM) is ofgrowing importance, as the vulnerabilityofsupply chains increases. The main thrustofthis article is to describe how Erics...

    亚博足球app下载格式:PDF| 浏览次数:11| 上传日期:2015-03-14 15:29:57| 亚博足球app下载星级:
    Ericsson’s proactive supply chainrisk management approach aftera serious sub-supplier accidentAndreas NorrmanDepartment ofIndustrial Management and Logistics, Lund University,Lund, Sweden, andUlf JanssonEricsson AB, Sweden, Core Unit Supply, Stockholm, SwedenKeywords Supply chain management, Risk management, Business continuity, InsuranceAbstractSupply chain risk management (SCRM) is ofgrowing importance, as the vulnerabilityofsupply chains increases. The main thrustofthis article is to describe how Ericsson, aftera fire ata sub-supplier, with a huge impact on Ericsson, has implemented a new organization, and newprocesses and tools for SCRM. The approach described tries to analyze, assess and manage risksources along the supply chain, partly by working close with suppliers but also by placing formalrequirements on them. This explorative study also indicates that insurance companies might be adriving force for improved SCRM, as they now start to understand the vulnerability ofmodernsupply chains. The article concludes with a discussion ofrisk relatedto traditionallogistics concepts(time, cost, quality, agility and leanness) by arguing that supply chain risks should also be put intothe trade-offanalysis when evaluating new logistics solutions – not with the purpose to minimizerisks, however, but to find the efficient level ofrisk and prevention.IntroductionBackgroundIn industry, especially those industries moving towards longer supply chains (e.g. dueto outsourcing) and facing increasingly uncertain demand as well as supply, the issueof risk handling and risk sharing along the supply chain is an important topic. Theleaner and more integrated supply chains get, the more likely uncertainties, dynamicsand accidents in one link affect the other links in the chain. Hence, the supply chainvulnerability (Svensson, 2000; Christopher et al., 2002) increases, and it will increaseeven more if companies, by outsourcing, have become dependent on otherorganizations. A number of current business trends that increase the vulnerabilityto risks in supply chains are:increased use of outsourcing of manufacturing and R&D to suppliers;globalization of supply chains;reduction of supplier base;more intertwined and integrated processes between companies;reduced buffers, e.g. inventory and lead time;increased demand for on-time deliveries in shorter time windows, and shorterlead times;shorter product life cycles and compressed time-to-market;.......The Emerald Research Register for this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/researchregisterThe current issue and full text archive of this journal is available atwww.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.htmIJPDLM34,5434Received July 2003Revised February 2004Accepted March 2004International Journal of PhysicalDistribution & Logistics ManagementVol. 34 No. 5, 2004pp. 434-456q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0960-0035DOI 10.1108/09600030410545463 .fast and heavy ramp-up of demand early in product life cycles; andcapacity limitation of key components..Souter (2000) stresses that companies should not only focus on their own risks: theymust also focus on risks in other links in their supply chain. According to Lambert andCooper (2000) and Mentzer et al. (2001), for example, a key component for supply chainmanagement (SCM) is sharing both risks and rewards between the members of thesupply chain. This is often mentioned, but not further elaborated on, in traditional SCMliterature. The focus of supply chain risk management (SCRM) is to understand, andtry to avoid, the devastating ripple effects that disasters or even minor businessdisruptions can have in a supply chain. Some examples of risk sources and such“supply chain rippling effects” from the last few years are:Hurricanes. Hurricane Floyd flooded a Daimler-Chrysler plant producingsuspension parts in Greenville, North Carolina (USA). As a result, seven of thecompany’s other plants across North America had to be shut down for sevendays.Diseases. The foot-and-mouth disease in the UK in 2001 affected the agricultureindustry more than its last outbreak 25 years ago. The reason for this was thatformer local and regional supply networks had become national andinternational, and that the industry was much more consolidated (Ju ¨ttner et al.,2002). But many other industries were also affected: luxury car manufacturerslike Volvo and Jaguar had to stop deliveries due to lack ofquality leather supply.Fires. Toyota was forced to shut down 18 plants for almost two weeks followinga fire in February 1997 at its brake-fluid proportioning valve supplier (AisinSeiki). Costs caused by the disruption were estimated to be $195 million and salesloss was estimated to 70,000 vehicles (, $325 million) (Converium, 2001).Demand. Rapidly weakening demand coupled with locked-in supply agreementsmade Cisco take a $2.5 billion inventory write-off in Q2 2001.Supply. Inaccurate supply planning led Nike to an inventory shortage of “hot”footwear models and the sales for Q3 2001 were $100 million off target.Supply chain capacity risks. In a situation where demand is very uncertain, andthe capacity bottleneck is far upstream from the market place, the risk ofinvesting in more capacity could be a joint issue for the whole supply chain, anddifferent instruments for supply chain risk sharing can be used.......PurposeRecently, the interest of supply chain risk management has increased in purchasing,logistics and supply chain management research (e.g. Smeltzer and Siferd, 1998;Zsidisin and Ellram, 1999; Hallikas et al., 2000; Ritchie et al., 2000; Lindroth andNorrman, 2001; Johnson, 2001; Lamming et al., 2001; Christopher et al., 2002). Thisarticle aims to extend current SCRM knowledge by describing and sharing insights ofa company’s new organization, processes and tools focused on SCRM. The company isEricsson, a leading telecom company seriously affected by a fire at a sub-supplier someyears ago, an accident which has been widely reported (e.g. TheWall Street Journal,2001).Ericsson’sproactiveapproach435 The remainder of the paper is structured as follows. First, literature related tosupply chain risk management and business continuity planning in a supply chainperspective will be summarized to give a background ofthe topic. Then there is a shortdiscussion of the methodology. Next, the case is introduced by a short description ofthe ”Albuquerque incident” that increased Ericsson’s focus on supply chain riskmanagement. The following section describes Ericsson’s current approach to SCRM,and the paper ends with a concluding discussion.Supply chain risk managementThe underlying definition of SCRM in this article is:Supply chain risk management is to [collaborate] with partners in a supply chain apply riskmanagement process tools to deal with risks and uncertainties caused by, or impacting on,logistics related activities or resources (Norrman and Lindroth, 2002).Supply chain risk management could ofcourse deal with risks for a single company, oreven with the impact on a single logistics activity. But following the definition, the unitanalyzed should represent a buyer-seller relationship (a dyad) or, preferably, a supplychain of three or more companies. Two important dimensions in the definition are riskand uncertainties and the risk management process, which will now be furtherelaborated on.Risk and uncertaintyDeloach (2000) defines business risk as “the level of exposure to uncertainties that theenterprise must understand and effectively manage as it executes its strategies toachieve its business objectives and create value”. A more standard definition of risk is“risk is the chance, in quantitative terms, of a defined hazard occurring. It thereforecombines a probabilistic measure of the occurrence of the primary event(s) with ameasure of the consequences of that/those event(s)” (The Royal Society, 1992, p. 4).Hence, risk is a quality that reflects both the range of possible outcomes and thedistribution of respective probabilities for each of the outcomes. This “quantitativedefinition” could be expressed: Risk ¼ Probability (of the event) * Business Impact (orseverity) of the event, often illustrated in a risk map or matrix (Figure 1). While riskscan be calculated, uncertainties are genuinely unknown.But as soon as the “quantitative definition” is left for a broader and more businessoriented perspective, the term also gets fuzzier. Ju ¨ttner et al. (2002) have also observedthat the use of the term “risk” can be confusing, and they argue that risk should beseparated from “risk (and uncertainty) sources” and “risk consequences” (equal to theterm risk impact). Risk sources are the environmental, organizational or supply chainrelated variables that cannot be predicted with certainty and that affect the supplychain-outcome variables. Ju ¨ttner et al. (2002) suggest organizing risk sources relevantfor supply chains into three categories:(1) Numbers: external to the supply chain.(2) Internal to the supply chain.(3) Network related.External risk sources are exemplified by “political risks”, “natural risks”, “social risks”,“industry/market risks” (e.g. volatility of customer demand). Internal risk sourcesIJPDLM34,5436 range from labor (strikes) or production (e.g. machine failure) to IT systemuncertainties. Network-related risks arise from interaction between organizationswithin the supply chain, e.g. due to insufficient interaction and cooperation. Riskconsequences/impacts are the focused supply chain outcome variables like costs orquality (but also health and safety), i.e. the different forms in which the variancebecomes manifest. Other authors discussing similar types of risks are Johnson (2001)and Zsidisin (2001). Johnson (2001) divides supply chains risks between supply risks(e.g. capacity limitations, currency fluctuations and supply disruptions) and demandrisks (e.g. seasonal imbalances, volatility of fads, new products). Zsidisin et al. (e.g.2000) focuses on supply risks related to design, quality, cost, availability,manufacturability, supplier, legal, and environmental, health and safety.We find supply chain risks to be related to the logistics activities in companies’flows of material and information. Consequently, it is only a part of all business risks.(But, on the other hand, the supply chain perspective also implies a perspective notonly including your own company, but a chain of at least three entities: customers,suppliers, sub-suppliers, etc.)The stages ofthe risk management processRisk management is the making of decisions regarding risks and their subsequentimplementation, and flows from risk estimation and risk evaluation (The RoyalSociety, 1992, p. 3). The risk management process is focused on understanding therisks, and minimizing their impact by addressing, e.g. probability and direct impact.The stages of the risk management process discussed can vary from riskidentification/analysis (or estimation) via risk assessment (or evaluation) to differentways of risk management (labels differ among authors although the steps are similar).Parallel to risk management is the issue of how to mitigate the consequences of anaccident if it does happen: to deal with the situation in a way that minimizes businessimpact. This is normally referred to as business continuity management (BCM) andrelates to those management disciplines, processes and techniques, which seek toprovide the means for continuous operations of essential functions under allcircumstances (Hiles and Barnes, 2001, p. 379). BCM aims at getting interruptedFigure 1.Risk map/matrixEricsson’sproactiveapproach437 businesses restarted. In many ways, risk management and BCM are overlapping, andsome argue that business continuity plans development is the risk management actionto take for risks of low probability (such as fires and floods), but whose potentialimpact is a business failure.Supply chain risk analysis and assessmentRisk analysis/identification is an important stage in the risk management process.Consequently, by identifying a risk, decision-makers become aware of events that maycause disturbances. To assess supply chain risk exposures, the company must identifynot only direct risks to its operations, but also the potential causes or sources of thoserisks at every significant link along the supply chain (Christopher et al., 2002). Hence,the main focus of supply chain risk analysis is to recognize future uncertainties toenable proactive management of risk-related issues.There are many methods for risk identification and analysis. One important tool isrisk mapping, i.e. using a structured approach and mapping risk sources and therebyunderstanding their potential consequences. Two commonly used techniques forresearching factors and causes contributing to accidental events are the “fault treeanalysis” (FTA) and the “event tree analysis” (ETA). Both are logic diagrams thatrepresent the sequences of failures that may propagate through a complex system.FTA examines all potential events leading up to the critical event and is a graphicaldiagram that shows how a system can fail. The analysis starts with top events, thenthe necessary and sufficiently hazardous events, the causes and contributing factors ofwhich are identified together with their logical relationships by way of a “backwardlogic”. The ETA is also a graphical logic diagram, but goes the other way. It focuses onevents that could occur after a critical event and identifies and quantifies possibleoutcomes following initiating events by looking at potential consequences (e.g. Mullaiand Paulsson, 2002). For both techniques, quantitative data, such as probabilities forevents, could be used to get an idea of the final probability. Deloach (2000) proposes asimilar tool called risk driver map, where potential threats are mapped.After the risk analysis, it is important to assess and prioritize risks to be able tochoose management actions appropriate to the situation. One common method is tocompare events by assessing their probabilities and consequences and put them in arisk map/matrix (Figure 1). In theory, and when historical events are assessed, thiscould be quite a straightforward and quantitative task, but in business this could be asubjective process relying on specialists’ judgements. Hallikas et al. (2000), show anexample of this in a supply context. In practice, other risk assessment tools are alsoused, which are not consistent with the theory of probability and impact but cover abroader perspective instead. Zsidisin and Ellram (1999) summarize the supply riskassessment process of a Fortune 500 high-tech company, and propose a ten-stepapproach to risk assessment (Figure 2). Primarily, they are concerned withmaterial-related risks that could affect timely and cost-effective delivery of qualityproducts and services.Risk managementRisk management is the process whereby decisions are made to accept a known orassessed risk and/or the implementation of actions to reduce the consequences orprobability of occurrence. Generally used actions for risk management are to avoid,IJPDLM34,5438 reduce, transfer, share or even take the risk. To avoid is to eliminate the types of eventthat could trigger the risk. To reduce applies both to reduction of probability andconsequence. Examples of how to reduce the impact could be to have an extrainventory, multiple sources, back-up sites/resources identified, sprinklers in buildings,having risk managers and emergency teams appointed, parallel systems or todiversify. Probability could be reduced by improving risky operational processes, bothinternally and in cooperation with suppliers, and to improve related processes, e.g.supplier selection. Risk could also be transferred to insurance companies – but also tosupply chain partners by moving inventory liability, changing delivery times ofsuppliers (just-in-time deliveries) and to customers (make-to-order manufacturing), orby outsourcing activities. Furthermore, contracts can be used to transfer commercialrisks. Finally, risks could be shared, both by contractual mechanisms (e.g. Tsay et al.(1998) or Cachon (2002), for a review on supply chain contracts) and by improvedcollaboration.Business continuity managementBusiness continuity management (BCM) is defined as:. . . the development of strategies, plans and actions which provide protection or alternativemodes of operation for those activities or business processes which, if they were to beinterrupted, might otherwise bring about a seriously damaging or potentially fatal loss to theenterprise” (Hiles and Barnes, 2001).Business continuity management includes crisis management (overall processes tomanage the incident), disaster recovery (recovery ofcritical systems, applications, dataand networks), business recovery (recovery of critical business processes) andcontingency planning (recovery from impact external to the organization) (CMI, 2002).Developing action plans is important in BCM, and business continuity planning(BCP) is a term often used. BCP is planning to ensure continued operations in case of acatastrophic event. But it goes beyond disaster-recovery planning, since it includes theactions to be taken, resources required, and procedures to be followed to ensure thecontinued availability of essential services, programs and operations in the event ofunexpected interruptions. BCP has previously been mostly related to computers andinformation technology-related disasters, especially before Y2K, but since then theapproach has moved towards more applications in other business contexts. However,according to a study by CMI (2002), only about 30 percent of all companies studieddeveloped BCP jointly with suppliers. Only 9 percent of companies that haveoutsourced activities (not only logistics) insist on their outsource suppliers havingbusiness continuity plans.Figure 2.Supply risk assessmentprocess based on Zsidisinand Ellram (1999)Ericsson’sproactiveapproach439 The first activities in developing business continuity plans are identifying the risksand assessing their probability and impact – the steps are hence identical to riskmanagement. Part of this is to understand what will be affected (damage potentialanalysis). Then, strategies and recovery plans should be developed that could beimplemented both before the incident (similar to risk management strategies) and afterthe incident. Post-incident strategies are implemented to maintain partial or totalproduct supply and could for manufacturing and logistics include (Musson, 2001):use of spare capacity within the organization;shutdown of marginal product lines and transfer of key products to thoseproduction facilities;assistance from competition;outsourcing to sub-contractors, job shops, etc.;re-labeling of competitors’ products (after consideration of all legal implications);andestablishment of temporary facilities when production capabilities can beestablished with “off-the-shelf” or second-hand equipment.......MethodologySince only limited empirical research on how companies deal with supply chain riskmanagement has been found, an explorative approach has been chosen. Examples ofearlier case studies in the area are those of Zsidisin (2001), Zsidisin and Ellram (1999)and Zsidisin etal. (2000), but they have focused more on purchasing and “supply” thana “supply-chain approach”, consisting of the idea to work with risks along multiplecompanies in a chain. In our study, a single case is used, which is an appropriate way ofestablishing the field at the early stages of an emerging topic (Eisenhardt, 1989). Tocapture and examine contemporary events, the case study approach is normallypreferred (Yin, 1994). The single case could give good enough insights on the breadthof issues and a better opportunity to penetrate important issues. Ericsson has beenchosen for several different reasons: It is in a volatile industry that faces many of thebusiness trends described in the introduction; it has recently had a major supply chainincident that has been widely reported; lately, it has worked hard to improve its supplychain risk management; and, finally, the company has been willing to openly share itsexperiences and has given good access to information and data.Empirical data have initially been collected through semi-structured and openinterviews done by the academic co-author with about ten representatives from variousfunctions within Ericsson: corporate risk management, core unit supply (a bothstrategic and operational SCM-function), sourcing, and supply chain risk management(industry co-author). In addition, supplementary documents showing processes,organizational structures and risk management tools were collected by the academicco-author to verify and more detailed illustrate the findings from the interviews. Byusing multiple sources of evidence and interviewees, construct validity improves (Yin,1994). The joint writing process started with a structured synopsis developed by theacademic researcher, comparable with an interview guide, which was then filled withfacts and descriptions in a collaborative writing and analysis process. (The “industryco-author” had of course meetings and written communication with colleagues to getsupplementary data and opinions). By this collaborative writing and analysis processIJPDLM34,5440 between an academic and industry co-author, we think that the richness of the casestudy description can be improved as well as the construct validity increased (Yin,1994, pp. 32-4). Further the final paper has been returned for comments and correctionto the other functions interviewed. As this research is an explorative single case study,external validity and broad generalizability are difficult to address. One purpose hasbeen to describe “pioneering practice” for other practioneers to make it possible tobenchmark, and for academics to start a process of “analytical generalization” (Yin,1994) by first doing replicate studies and “pattern matching-analysis”. Hence externalvalidity and generalizability could increase over time with more cases.Ericsson and the sub-supplier accidentEricsson is the largest supplier of mobile telecom systems in the world, activeworldwide since 1876 and currently employing approximately 61,000 people in morethan 140 countries. The world’s ten largest mobile-phone operators are among theircustomers and some 40 percent of all mobile phone calls are made through Ericssonsystems. For the last ten years, Ericsson has outsourced a great deal of its assemblyand production to contract manufacturers and sub-suppliers. With Sony Ericsson(including Ericsson’s old cellular phone business) it is also a top supplier of completemobile multi-media products. Like most companies, Ericsson has been exposed to anumber of risks and incidents in the last few years:, e.g. suppliers having quality anddelivery problem, industries’ general lack of capacity, and power disruption lasting afew days. We will shortly describe the accident that can be seen as the major trigger forEricsson to improve its supply chain risk management.The Albuquerque accidentA major accident from an Ericsson perspective was a fire on 18 March 2000 in a verysmall production cell (small as a conference room for ten people) at a sub-supplier’splant in Albuquerque, New Mexico (USA). The ten-minute fire was an effect of alightning bolt hitting an electric line in New Mexico, causing power fluctuationsthroughout the state. The problem was that when the power was out, there was nospare diesel motor to supply the fans with power, so the fans stopped. From a plantperspective, the resulting fire was almost negligible, and when the fire brigadearrived it was sent home as the fire already was out (The Wall Street Journal). But forEricsson, the impact was huge. In the spring of 2001, when the annual report fromEricsson was announced, a major loss of about $400 million was indicated, primarilydue to gaps in the supply of radio-frequency chips from this supplier. The reason wasthat the fire occurred in one of the plant’s “clean rooms”, where absolutely no dust istolerated. Due to the fire, and especially the smoke and sprinkler water, it took almostthree weeks until the production was up and running. After six months, the yield wasonly 50 percent, and it would take years to get new equipment delivered andinstalled. As this plant was Ericsson’s only source for this chip, Ericsson was not ableto sell and deliver one of its key consumer products during its booming “marketwindow”. The company lost many months of mobile phone production, and theaccident finally had a great impact on Ericsson’s decision to withdraw from themobile phone terminal business.Later, Ericsson’s business interruption costs were calculated as approximately $200million, which was compensated by insurance companies. This was one of the biggestEricsson’sproactiveapproach441 insurance payments that year (after the 9/11 disaster). The accident made Ericssonrealize the importance of not only understanding and managing risks internally – butalso trying to better analyze, assess and manage risk along the supply chain and totake immediate action when incidents are indicated. In a widespread analysis, TheWall Street Journal argued that Ericsson did not take action quickly and powerfullyenough after the “Albuquerque accident”, and that it took too long before highermanagement was aware of the incident. Further, Ericsson neither had alternativesources nor was prepared for this kind of accident. Now, actions have been taken:During the last few years, a formal SCRM organization has been put in place, andmany SCRM processes and tools have been developed and implemented. Today’sphilosophy at Ericsson is that “everyone is a risk manager”.Ericsson’s current supply chain risk management approachIn the last few years (after the “Albuquerque accident” and before the renewal of itsinsurance), Ericsson has further developed and implemented processes and tools forsupply chain risk management. The purpose is “minimizing risk exposure in thesupply chain”. Its approach for this (Figure 3) is based on a process withfeedback-loops between the sub-processes. The risk management process includes riskidentification (similar to risk analysis), risk assessment, risk treatment (similar to riskmanagement) as previously discussed in theory, but it has also added a process step forrisk monitoring. In parallel (and central) to this, the company has put incident handlingand contingency planning.Organizational principles and responsibilityPreviously, risk management was handled by a corporate function, mostly dealingwith insurance companies (and later also security). In the last few years theorganisation for supply chain risk management has been developed and many peopleand functions are involved. On a high level, the corporate function for riskmanagement, the SCM/logistics function (in Ericsson called the core unit supply) andthe purchasing function (core unit sourcing) are involved, as well as (Figure 4) the unitsresponsible for the different business areas (SBAs). They are working together in aFigure 3.Ericsson’s basic approachto SCRMIJPDLM34,5442 matrix-oriented way, for example with a risk management council with representativesfrom the different units. The roles of the main functions involved are:corporate risk management has the overall responsibility for risk management intheEricssongroupandhascontactwiththeinsurancecompaniesandco-ordinatesrisk management activities in the whole group, also developing directives;core unit supply (CSUP) is responsible for the operative work and daily interfacewith suppliers;system business area (SBA) has the business perspective and owns the product;andcore unit sourcing is responsible for the commercial interfaces with the supplierand is therefore involved in evaluation of suppliers and when incidents occur.....A matrix approach is taken (Figure 5) on a more operational level within theSCM/logistics function (CSUP), as well. A supply chain risk manager, placed withincore unit supply, is responsible for development and implementation of SCRM. He isworking closely together with corporate risk management, as well as with the “linepeople” (supply chain managers), responsible for different supply chains and hencealso for the supply chains risks. Supply chain managers are also part of CSUP, butinterfacing the SBAs. Supply chain managers should use the tools and processesdeveloped by the SCR manager to analyze, assess and manage risk in their supplychains. In this work purchasers are involved in the assessments of and contacts withsuppliers. The roles of the operational people involved in SCRM are:Supply chain risk manager (SCR manager) at core unit supply runs andcoordinates the work to maintain an optimal balance between risk exposures andcosts for damages versus protection activities.Supply chain managers (SCM) within CSUP are the interface to SBAs and havefull responsibility for the respective SBA’s supply chain. They are responsiblefor risk management as regards securing the reliability of supply chains andtheir ability to deliver.Core production: supports SCM with risk management issues....Figure 4.Organization of riskmanagement on acorporate levelEricsson’sproactiveapproach443 The matrix approach means that many different players are involved in and sharingresponsibility for implementing and maintaining information regarding riskmanagement. This could make roles unclear, and hence responsibility grids(Figure 6) are defined. However, the key responsibility lies with the SCMs thatshould run the risk management work in their respective supply chain.Risk identification processInitially, Ericsson identifies and analyzes its supply chain risks by mapping thesupply chain upstream, looking at suppliers as well as products/services (Figure 7).Figure 5.Organization of SCRMwithin the SCM/logisticsfunction “core unit supply”Figure 6.Part of responsibility gridIJPDLM34,5444 The purpose of this is verifying the business flow between Ericsson and thesupplier/service provider and defining the critical parts and risk sources in theprocess, i.e. products, components, sites, etc. The goal is to get a betterunderstanding of what the probability and impact of the risks are. So far, more than10,000 components have been analyzed, mainly of first and second tier suppliers.First, each component is classified into four different classes depending on thenumber of sources:(1) The product is currently sourced from more than one approved source (e.g. twoor more manufacturers or one manufacturer with two or more sites).(2) The product is currently sourced from one approved source; other sources areapproved and available but not used.(3) The product is currently sourced from one approved source; other sources areavailable and approved but no tools, masks or other equipment needed are inplace.(4) The product is currently sourced from one supplier. No additional manufactureris available.Ericsson then tries to understand the impact by looking at how long an accident willaffect deliveries. This is expressed by “business recovery time” (BRT). Components areput into four different classes:(1) It takes less than three months to get deliveries from an alternative source.(2) Three to eight months to get approval and deliveries from an alternative source.(3) Nine to 12 months, re-design the only alternative.(4) 12 months, re-design of a unit/product of high complexity.Risk assessment processThen, an in-depth analysis is carried out of the suppliers and sub-suppliers of criticalproducts. For this, Ericsson has developed a tool called Ericsson risk managementevaluation tool (ERMET). ERMET (Figure 8) evaluates many different issues in detail,e.g. business control, financial issues, hazards in the surroundings (external as well asFigure 7.Supply chain risk andstructure mapEricsson’sproactiveapproach445 man-made); hazards at the site; and business-interruption handling. The tool is used toanalyze both internal and external suppliers. Internally, the tool will be used incombination with contingency planning.When using ERMET, corporate risk managers and SCR managers often worktogether, as the tool is complex and requires knowledge to use. Often, a representativefrom sourcing is brought in, who is responsible for the supplier contacts. Each sub-areain ERMET is thoroughly evaluated by looking into different aspects (see Figure 9),trying to quantify the risk by looking at impact (consequence) and probability. Thesuppliers’ total risk situation, and their forecasted development, is then summarizedinto spider-web diagrams. Those ...


  • 新浪微博
  • 关注微信公众号

  • 打印亚博足球app下载
  • 复制文本
  • 下载Ericsson’s proactive supply chainsu:爱立信的主动供应chainsu.XDF
  • 您选择了以下内容