TORONTO, Ont.–From June 1 to 4, fourteen supply chain logistics practitioners and professionals participated in the first delivery of the Logistics Institute’s Supply Chain Resilience Certification Program. They came from across Canada and parts of the USA, and represented a wide spectrum of industry and business acumen [military, government, healthcare, 3PL, oil and gas, chemicals, consulting, merchandizing, education and even cattle ranching], the Institute said in a release.
Led by Greg Schlegel, CPIM, CSP, Jonah, and Irv Varkonyi, CSCP, P.Log., both members of the Supply Chain Risk Management Consortium, the program took participants through a four-stage process: identify, assess, mitigate, manage.
Day 1 focused on identifying issues faced by 21st Century Supply Chain Logistics. How do you transition from efficient to robust and responsive global supply chains?
Taking it up a notch, Day 2 introduced various assessment tools, with a special focus on risk appetite capabilities: do companies have an appetite to identify, handle, manage, and even embrace risk? If so, how can they do that? As a professional, what is your appetite for risk: are you a pragmatist? A conservator? A manager? Or a maximizer?
Day 3 was about mitigation: what mitigation tools can you add to your toolbox? ERM? SRPP? GRC? S&OP? Beyond the acronyms, what is the value-add?
Working collaboratively on Day 4, teams presented their risk analysis of Zara Fashion case: what is its appetite for risk? What are its risk hot-spots? Teams applied the supply chain maturity risk assessment tool [SCMRAT] to the case and created a heat map. Then they made recommendations to develop a resilience strategy.
This program was intentionally disruptive – after all, people have to earn a professional designation; it is not simply awarded for attending. Coming out of the APICS manufacturing tradition, the SCMRAT dealt with supply-inventory-production issues. Participants had to think analogously, transferring and applying concepts and ideas from inventory-production control to their own service contexts.
And then they had to analyze issues facing Zara Fashion, identifying its appetite for risk, charting its supply chain maturity using the SCMRAT, and making recommendations on how to be resilient going into the future. Why Zara?
None of the participants were in the fashion industry; none designed clothes; none produced clothing; none sold fashion in retail stores; only one was in the fashion merchandizing sector, which is all about branding, but not about supply chain sourcing and logistics.
According to the release, Zara was chosen precisely because it is extreme; even in the fashion industry, it has set a new benchmark called “fast fashion”. On the one hand, fast fashion is so simple as to be deceptive; on the other hand, it is so complex as to be impossible to emulate.
The challenge of handling Zara’s issues is comparable to playing extreme sports – unique, unusual, lacking anything akin to standard industry practice, having absolutely no connection to the usual supply chain logistics sectors that participants are generally familiar with. There are no protective helmets, shin guards, or padding. Zara is beyond an out-of-the-box challenge, and was chosen for that reason.
Indeed, participants earned the SC-R professional designation; no one slouched their way through it.
So successful was this first delivery that demand has risen in the logistics practitioner and professional community for a second delivery. To meet that demand, the Institute is scheduling a second delivery in late autumn just before Christmas 2016, it said.