Global Logistics and Supply Chain Strategies - June 2008 - (Page 36) A Passing Engagement: Measuring the Value of Supply Chain Consultants BY ROBERT J. BOWMAN They come, they go, they get paid—and sometimes their reports end up gathering dust on the shelf. Here’s how companies can derive the full value from a consulting engagement. H orror story #1: One of the big consumer-products companies that Joan Padduck used to work for hired a consultant to help it reduce order lead time. The consultant spent a lot of time gathering data and ideas, including from Padduck, who had earlier launched an internal effort to improve the company’s supply chain. In its recommendations to senior management, the consultant cited that initiative—but took credit for what Padduck had already started. The firm ended up getting fired by the client, which later hired a different consultant to do the whole project all over again. “The [original] consulting firm didn’t understand the workings of the company well enough at the outset,” says Padduck, who today serves as technical adviser to Global Trade Systems Inc. in Scituate, Mass. “The project kind of imploded.” Now on the consultant’s side of the fence, Padduck urges both parties to do their homework before entering into any engagement. That begins with a careful review of the candidates, followed by a process plan that lays out the details of the engagement. “Both sides must come to agreement on exactly what’s expected,” she says. There’s always the possibility of “scope creep,” as the consultant uncovers problems that weren’t evident at the outset. That can happen even when the mission is relatively limited in its goals, and the parties need to be prepared. Much of the work done by Global Trade Systems, for example, involves getting companies certified under the voluntary security program known as the CustomsTrade Partnership Against Terrorism (CTPAT). But that process can uncover deeper concerns. One company that engaged GTS for this purpose turned out to be ignorant of many key provisions of import procedures, resulting in some possible disclosure issues. So GTS referred the client to several Customs attorneys, and has put the C-TPAT project on the back burner for now. Compatibility is a two-way street; consultants must vet the client as well. Padduck recalls turning down one engagement when the company in question admitted that it was seeking C-TPAT certification solely for the sake of appearance. All it wanted was “a manual on the shelf,” she says. Such a situation can end up reflecting poorly on the consultant, even if its advice wasn’t heeded, says GTS president Philip Spayd. Same As It Ever Was Horror story #2: Jack T. Ampuja, executive director of the Center for Supply Chain Excellence at Niagara University, used to 36 JUNE 2008
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.