Q&A: GXS’ Nick Parnaby on Supplier Communications

Josh Green | December 21, 2011

As part of Panjiva’s commitment to providing the best intelligence on all-things global trade, we’ve decided to enlist the insight of some of the world’s most forward thinkers on trade data, supplier management, overseas sourcing and related topics to share their insights. We recently had the pleasure of speaking with Nick Parnaby, VP of Supply Chain and B2B Community Management with GXS, a leading integration services provider that helps companies extend their partner networks, automate receiving processes, manage electronic payments and improve supply chain visibility.

Nick had some interesting thoughts on supplier communication, which we’ve shared below.

Q.    We hear a lot about challenges US companies face communicating with overseas suppliers. Do you hear the same, and why do you think—especially in today’s digitally-connected world—this is still such a big hurdle?

Yes. It is a topic that cannot be avoided because it really comes down to dealing with the realities of the world. The way people communicate is just not the same everywhere. There are eight or nine common languages spoken, plus countless others that serve as a barrier in more remote areas. Language, though, is just the basic layer.

The process for communicating is also different. Email, fax, phone and Excel are still the preferred technologies of many organizations – spreadsheets are still the most commonly used B2B collaboration and information exchange format, despite decades of advancement of EDI and XML. This leads to latency and process synchronization issues that require time and patience to fix. You have to slowly wean people on to new ways of communicating. Because communications will always revert to the path of least resistance, the easiest way for people to engage – so we have to cater to human nature.

Q.    Would you agree that information sharing—or a lack of it—is just as challenging? Does it go hand-in-hand with the communication issue, or is it a separate problem that needs to be addressed in the supply chain? 

They do go hand-in-hand and both are a challenge. Consider a recent statistic I heard that said a company’s trading partner master data changes every eight seconds on average. How are these changes communicated, from the supplier to the company, and then internally across the company, to the stakeholders who rely on this information to conduct commerce? Then how are the changes synchronized in internal systems, so we are all looking at the same supplier profile consistently?

People will try to get by with whatever tools they have at their disposal, leaving massive productivity and efficiency gains on the table very frequently, because they don’t have adequate information management tools on hand.  Information sharing amongst trading partners still has a long way to go, to be even close to good.

In a recent conversation with a CEO from a big technology company, he complained that he didn’t think he could send a greeting card to all of his suppliers even if he wanted to because they don’t have up-to-date addresses, emails or fax numbers for each of them. If it’s impossible for his team to achieve something that simple, then how can they be expected to orchestrate a product recall, manage spend, enforce product safety, deal with a supply chain emergency, or even just better engage them more profitably day to day? Something needs to change.

Q.    Social networking has certainly won over the mainstream public. But is the supply chain industry really ready to embrace it?  What’s the role of companies like Panjiva and GXS in making this a reality?

 There is no reason to go social in the supply chain just for the sake of it. That said, there are tangible values for social networking and technologies depending on which departments are using it and who they are trying to engage.

Gartner once told us that ‘suppliers aren’t your friends’, and ‘we’re not going to share pictures of our cats with our suppliers’.  And they have a point.  Commerce isn’t social for the sake of social; it’s about structured collaboration and for many its arm’s length.  However, social collaboration tools ARE bleeding into the supply chain.

Buyers are like the mirror image of sales people, and so why don’t we empower them with the same tools we give to sales people, to more effectively manage relationships – after all, procurement in the new economy is ALL about relationships.  Buyer support teams don’t need to get social with supplier finance and supply chain operations departments, but couldn’t we make the tools that they use every day to eradicate issues, deal with discrepancies, recover over-payments and manage performance more collaborative – more BUSINESS social?

Q.    GXS acquired RollStream in March of 2011. Can you tell us about the deal and how it’s helping to solve communications and supplier management issues?

RollStream was a new technology acquisition we completed in April 2011, after a rewarding two year partnership.  This technology is exciting, because it moves GXS beyond systems-to-systems integration, and delivers a new layer of human-to-human integration.

Total supply chain integration is not only about systems any more.  To release the next level of gains in our supply chain, we need to align the people, process and information flow that happen around the transactions.  That’s what RollStream is all about.

RollStream offers totally net new return on investment options for our customers.  By streamlining how we communicate, share information with suppliers, onboard them faster and deal with issues more rapidly, we are seeing huge returns.

Q.    What needs to happen for the different players in the supply chain—buyers, suppliers, technology vendors, etc—to come together and make social communication an everyday part of supply chain management?

At an industry level, this is going to require standards and consistent ways to define what a company is, and numbering systems that we already have (e.g. Duns Numbers, GS1 GLNs etc.).

At a company level it is just a simple realization that the key 8 or 9 departments who manage suppliers are looking at fragmented and siloed information about suppliers.  Yes, there’s a supplier master file, and master data, but master data just got fatter in the last 25 years and this has gotten out of control.   Internal departments need to come together and be on the same page, around a single view (profile) about each and every trading partner, and that view includes every piece of information they may need to know about the company, including risk data, spend data, credentials and quality certifications, relationship history, time sensitive materials etc. This kind of central information profile has the power to become the cornerstone of all supplier communications, and in my opinion that is where we are headed.

Once you have this kind of profile, all the other tools can be built on top of it. Think of it as a digital filing cabinet where information is constantly added and available to anyone with access. I’m excited to be at GXS because we’re helping the supply chain do this and as a result, are taking communication to the next level.

November Trade Data: No Red Flags

Josh Green | December 15, 2011

The word from the Panjiva research team: trade activity was essentially level (again) from October to November.  Specifically, the number of waterborne shipments coming into the U.S. experienced a 0.2% month-over-month increase from October to November.  Typically, we see declines from October to November: -2% in 2010, -6% in 2009, -7% in 2008, and -5% in 2007.

The number of global manufacturers shipping to the U.S. increased 3% from October to November.  October-to-November changes in previous years: +4% in 2010, -1% in 2009, flat in 2008, and -1% in 2007.

Additional notes:

  • The percentage of significant manufacturers on the Panjiva Watch List decreased slightly from 21% to 20%.
  • The percentage of significant buyers having done business with a Panjiva Watch List supplier in the preceding three months also decreased slightly from 29% to 28%.

Methodological notes:

  • Manufacturers that have suffered a 50% or greater decline in volume shipped to American customers in the most recent three month period, versus the same period a year ago, are on the Panjiva Watch List.
  • “Significant manufacturers” are companies that have sent 10 or more shipments to American customers within the last year. As of the end of November, there were 94,628 significant manufacturers.
  • “Significant buyers” are U.S. companies that have received 10 or more shipments from overseas manufacturers within the last year. As of the end of November, there were 81,075 significant buyers.

2011 Holiday Trade Trends – Barbie Reigns (again)

emily |

As we’ve tracked a decrease in shipments of high-end items like cashmere sweaters and video game consols, we’ve tracked an increase in shipments of less expensive, classic children’s toys.  This season, shipments of Barbie dolls have been 17% higher than shipments in the 2010 season.  One influence is retailers importing fewer toys overall – see the 9.8% decrease in shipments reported in our previous post –  and the toys they are importing this year are known, classic toys that they’re confident they can sell this holiday season.

Imports of Barbie 2008 - 2011

Want more detail?  Take a look at Panjiva import trends for Barbie.

 

 

2011 Holiday Trade Trends – Fewer Expensive Gifts on Shelves

emily | December 13, 2011

In early November, we took a look at imports of toys into the US and noticed an interesting trend:  overall imports were down by 9.8% year over year.  Another look at our data showed that some categories of high-end gifts were even further off 2010 levels, showing retailers anticipation of conservative consumer spending this holiday season:

shipments high end gifts - 2011 v 2010

Trendspotting: The Q3 Report is Now Available

Josh Green | November 23, 2011

The latest Quarterly Trendspotting Report is now available!  The report contains a quantitative analysis of the macro trends shaping global trade during Q3.  This report draws on Trendspotting, our intelligence tool which helps sourcing executives figure out which geographies are trending “hot” for the products they seek across the globe.

The report provides a clear view of how some of the most rapidly changing product categories performed relative to the same quarter one year prior.  Interestingly (and on two very different notes):

  • Toy imports to the U.S. are down
  • Guided missile exports from the U.S. are down

Geographic observations:

  • Trade with NAFTA countries is up
  • Trade with Libya and Egypt is down

Enjoy.

October Trade Data: Holding Steady

Josh Green | November 11, 2011

The word from the Panjiva research team: trade activity was essentially level from September to October.  Specifically, the number of waterborne shipments coming into the U.S. experienced a 0.2% month-over-month decrease from September to October.  September-to-October changes in previous years were in the same vicinity: -2% in 2010, +3% in 2009, +1% in 2008, and -1% in 2007.

The number of global manufacturers shipping to the U.S. increased a very slight 0.4% from September to October.  September-to-October changes in previous years: -2% in 2010, +3% in 2009, +1% in 2008, and +2% in 2007.

Additional notes:

  • The percentage of significant manufacturers on the Panjiva Watch List increased slightly from 20% to 21%.
  • The percentage of significant buyers having done business with a Panjiva Watch List supplier in the preceding three months also increased slightly from 28% to 29%.

Methodological notes:

  • Manufacturers that have suffered a 50% or greater decline in volume shipped to American customers in the most recent three month period, versus the same period a year ago, are on the Panjiva Watch List.
  • “Significant manufacturers” are companies that have sent 10 or more shipments to American customers within the last year. As of the end of October, there were 94,842 significant manufacturers.
  • “Significant buyers” are U.S. companies that have received 10 or more shipments from overseas manufacturers within the last year. As of the end of October, there were 81,273 significant buyers.

Thailand Supply Chain Impact, By The Numbers

Josh Green | October 28, 2011

It’s scary to watch what’s happening in Thailand.  Though it’s hard to look beyond the human tragedy, we’ve been getting questions about the impact on supply chains — and so we took a look at the numbers.

Bob Ferrari has a good analysis of the effect on the computer industry.  Sure enough, Thailand ships the lion’s share of hard drives.  Take a look at the Trendspotting report on HTS code 8471704065 (“Hard magnetic disk drive units”).  Note:

  • Through August, Thailand accounted for over 36% of U.S. hard drive imports.
  • And, in fact, they’ve been gaining share.  Compared to a year ago, they’ve gained 2.1 points in market share.*

It’s not just that Thailand’s hard drive business is important to the computer industry.  This business is a crucial part of Thailand’s economy.  By dollar value, hard drives are Thailand’s biggest export category to the United States — about $1.5 billion to-date.

But it’s not just the high tech world that will be affected.  We took a look at vessel shipments coming out of Thailand into the U.S.  Here are a few of the commodity terms that appear most frequently:

  • Rice: 52,891 shipments (~26% of all rice shipments coming into the U.S.)
  • Shrimp: 46,097 shipments (~27% of all shrimp shipments coming into the U.S.)
  • Coconut: 31,431 shipments (~32% of all coconut shipments coming into the U.S.)
  • Furniture: 24,580 shipments (~10% of all furniture shipments coming into the U.S.)
  • Pineapple: 23,209 shipments (~25% of all pineapple shipments coming into the U.S.)

The impact of the floods in Thailand will be felt by companies who sell or use these products  — because they will have to scramble for supply and likely pay higher prices — and also by consumers.

How big of an impact will we see?  Japan’s recent experience may provide some guide.  According to our analysis of Q2 data, in the wake of the tsunami Japan’s exports to the U.S. fell 7% on a year-over-year basis.  Sadly, poorer countries tend to be less resilient to natural disasters — because they have less resources to address the challenges that arise.

Thailand’s GDP is about 4% of Japan’s GDP.

* Methodology on this…  We look at dollar value of U.S. imports for the most recent three months and compare it to the same period a year prior.  Note that, for those who aren’t Panjiva subscribers, you may not see in the public version of Trendspotting that Thailand is the country that’s gained 2.1 points in market share.

Trendspotting: The Q2 Report is Now Available

Josh Green | October 21, 2011

The latest Quarterly Trendspotting Report is now available!  The report contains a quantitative analysis of the macro trends shaping global trade during Q2.  This new initiative draws on Trendspotting, our intelligence tool which helps sourcing executives figure out which geographies are trending “hot” for the products they seek across the globe.

The report provides a clear view of how some of the most rapidly changing product categories performed relative to the same quarter one year prior.  It also provides a nice illustration of the link between world events and trade flows.  Note that, in Q2:

  • Imports from Japan dropped the most in dollar terms versus the same quarter a year prior.
  • Imports from Libya dropped the most in percentage terms versus the same quarter a year prior.

Enjoy.

September Trade Data: Significant Seasonal Drop

Josh Green | October 12, 2011

The word from the Panjiva research team: we experienced a significant seasonal drop in global trade activity in September.  Specifically, the number of waterborne shipments coming into the U.S. experienced a 8% month-over-month decrease from August to September.  This is sharper than August-to-September declines of years past (-7% in 2010, -5% in 2009, -5% in 2008, and flat in 2007).

The number of global manufacturers shipping to the U.S. also fell 8% from August to September.  This too is sharper than previous years’ August-to-September declines: -6% in 2010,  -5% in 2009, -7% in 2008, and -4% in 2007.

Additional notes:

  • The percentage of significant manufacturers on the Panjiva Watch List retreated slightly from 21% to 20%.
  • The percentage of significant buyers having done business with a Panjiva Watch List supplier in the preceding three months also retreated from 29% to 28%.

Methodological notes:

  • Manufacturers that have suffered a 50% or greater decline in volume shipped to American customers in the most recent three month period, versus the same period a year ago, are on the Panjiva Watch List.
  • “Significant manufacturers” are companies that have sent 10 or more shipments to American customers within the last year. As of the end of September, there were 95,191 significant manufacturers.
  • “Significant buyers” are U.S. companies that have received 10 or more shipments from overseas manufacturers within the last year. As of the end of September, there were 81,670 significant buyers.

On Trade, Congress Talks Out of Both Sides of Its Mouth

Josh Green |

This week, the U.S. Senate advanced three bills promoting free trade and passed another bill that could trigger a trade war.  Gotta give the Senate points for audacity, if not for consistency.

To be fair, there is a common thread — jobs.  Theoretically, trade deals with South Korea, Colombia, and Panama should open up new markets and create jobs.  And a change in Chinese currency policy would, according to most experts, make American goods more competitive in the global marketplace and increase Chinese demand for American goods — thereby creating jobs.

The problem is that all of these efforts ignore the big picture on trade with respect to jobs.

Specifically, the biggest opportunity for job creation in the realm of trade is through expansion of U.S. exports of services.  (Kudos to C. Fred Bergsten, an assistant Treasury secretary from 1977 to 1981, for making this point in a recent NYT op-ed.)  The best way to promote growth in services exports?  By helping U.S. service providers gain access  to the world’s important market — China.

In this sense, free trade agreements with South Korea and those two behemoths of global trade — Colombia and Panama — are nice-to-haves.  And, in fact, badgering the Chinese on currency likely moves us further away from the goal of increased market access, by inviting a protectionist response on the part of the Chinese.

Which brings us to part 2 of the big picture on trade with respect to jobs.  Trade wars are a well-known way to kill jobs.  Read this frightening write-up of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff Act — or just watch this clip from Ferris Bueller’s Day Off:

It’s not clear what, if anything, Congress can do to help U.S. service providers gain access to the Chinese market.  But, in the meantime, Congress should at least honor the Hippocratic maxim and abstain from doing harm.  Sadly, this week’s activity suggests that this may be too much to ask of the current Congress.

« Newer PostsOlder Posts »