I was intrigued because no one had explained what E2E Supply Chain Planning was, or what it covered. How did anyone know whether to be interested? I suppose the words are topical jargon, but what did the delegates think it meant? My discussions with many people over the three days illustrated to me that there is a whole range of different ideas.
Defining End-to-End (E2E) Supply Chain Planning
I have since spent a great deal of time defining the term in such a way that any industry sector and any size company can easily understand it. The place to start was to define a supply chain. Largely, everyone is in agreement with the theory. Take the food chain as an illustration. We, the consumer, order a meal in a restaurant. In truth, this is demand for a variety of items, but let's just take one. Our order puts demand on the kitchen, the chef places the order with, say, the butcher. He orders his Raw Material from the abattoir, who is supplied by the farmer, who in turn is being supplied with animal feed. This is an End-to-End Supply Chain. (Let's not go down the Value Chain route yet).
So, if we now ask who plans this E2E supply chain, it is rare to find anyone who controls the whole chain (the extended chain). Each link in the chain controls its own area and influences adjacent links, up- and down-stream. One day, probably sooner than we think, there will be a process to plan the entire chain, but for now we should look at Supply Chain Planning as being the planning of as much of the chain as we can directly influence, the base functions being Integrated Business Planning, Sales & Operations Planning, Demand Management and Forecasting, Inventory Planning and Sourcing, Production Planning, Production Scheduling and Materials Planning.
The Chess Analogy
Perhaps we can use an analogy to explain Supply Chain Planning further. Take, for example, a game of chess and compare it to the task of supply chain planning.
In chess, we all know how the pieces move, that there are two colors, black and white; they start opposite each other. At any point in the game, we know where each piece can move and where they all are. This is all information on HOW to play the game. The question is: How do you WIN at chess? There are two ways to play chess. One way to play is like most amateur chess players. There is a clear objective but we do not have a clear plan on how we are going to achieve it, so we take small steps. We respond to the other player's moves; we react and maybe we are thinking one or two moves ahead. Grandmasters and good chess players, on the other hand, also know the objective, but they have a bagful of strategies and tactics, which they will use to get there. They even have special names for them. They are forecasting their opponent's moves several moves ahead and monitoring to spot patterns in play.
Applying it to Real Life
So how is this analogy useful? In our organizations, we too know how to play the game. We know where the pieces are and how they move. For example, we know the orders placed on us and the delivery destination. We know where our warehouses are, how many pallet spaces we have, how much stock is in them. We know about our machines, people, production rates, bills of material and stock. We know our suppliers lead times and prices. We know a great deal of information in addition. In fact, one of today's areas of focus in Supply Chain Visibility, designed to tell us even more about where the pieces are. This is information on How to Play the game. But whenever we visit companies, we hear words like fire-fighting, shortages, stock-outs, expeditors, unplanned overtime, and many other similar issues. Knowing how all the parts move and where they are does not seem to help. It sounds like the way amateurs play chess, not the way the Grandmasters play.
So, knowing how to PLAY the game is important but it is not enough. We need to understand how to WIN the game. E2E Supply Chain Planning is a mechanism for deciding how to win the game.
How to Play the Game
Every company has strategies on how it will win the game. Typically, these will cover which products it will make and sell, which markets it will sell to, and how it will distribute its products to those markets. Whatever a company chooses to do, the strategies will determine which techniques and tools are relevant. Let us briefly mention some of those.
Almost every company with whom we work is about to start, or is in the middle of, some kind of project to improve what they are doing. Sales Forecasting and Demand Management is a common one, often explained by the sentence, "If we could just improve our forecast of what the customer wants…." There is also a great movement, even more so since Covid, in projects such as Supplier Relationship Management (SRM), Co-Managed and Vendor Managed Inventories, and projects on how to include suppliers in our supply chain in a better way than just pushing for low prices.
One of the most common tactics being chosen by companies revolves around systems and digitalization, and a trawl around web sites will reveal the wealth of applications available. The systems available today fall into two categories. There are those, which are referred to as decision support and those known as enterprise-wide transaction systems. The demarcation lines, however, can get a bit blurred - it is possible to find forecasting and scheduling modules (with AI and Machine Learning) in some of the transaction-based systems. But maybe this is where our chess analogy comes in again, to help us understand the differences.
In our analogy, we concluded that what we need to do is to learn how to WIN the game. Knowing how all the pieces move any better will not help us in this. MRP*/ERP systems are referred to as transaction systems. They place major emphasis on the base of data that they hold. They cater for the order intake, the movement of inventories, shop floor data, where the products are, etc. This is information on how to play the game, not how to win the game.