@Risk

Counterfeit products are a threat to everyone’s health and safety. Plus, they extract an enormous economic toll, as well. Analysts now estimate that counterfeiting costs US companies alone $250 billion and results in the annual loss of 750,000 American jobs.

What can your company do to combat this growing global concern?

For starters, I suggest you read through a free report recently published by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).

This report, Best Practices in the Fight against Global Counterfeiting: An Action Guide to Strengthen Cooperation and Collaboration across Industry Sectors and among Global Supply Chains,  is the product of a 2010 ANSI workshop and conference on anti-counterfeiting, and it includes insights from industry representatives and professionals from trade organizations and associations, academia, consumer groups, law enforcement, and government agencies.

The report also outlines several recommendations to assess and address counterfeiting across industry sectors. These suggestions include: (more…)

“Conflict minerals” – minerals that are sourced from unstable regions of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) and surrounding countries –continue to threaten a variety of manufacturing supply chains.

Over the past several years, mines and trading routes for tin, tantalum, tungsten and gold have become illegally controlled by rebel groups, which are profiting financially even as they inflict suffering on the local populations.

However, recent shifts in the control of eastern DRC may represent opportunities to begin reversing that trend.

Congo’s mineral trade in the balance: opportunities and obstacles to demilitarization, a new report from Global Witness, concludes that even though much of eastern Congo’s mineral trade remains under armed control, the recent departure of the Congolese army from Bisle –the region’s largest mine –is a promising development.

According to the report: (more…)

It looks as though the tide is turning for the automotive industry.

A new study released last week by A.T. Kearney paints a rosy picture for the future, forecasting:

• 13.2 million new autos will be sold in the US this year and

• an upward trend toward pre-recession levels of about 16 million units by 2013.

According to the study, over the past four years, total new and used pent-up demand has accumulated to 32 million units, of which more than nine million will materialize in the new vehicle market over the next five to seven years. The remaining 23 million units will sell in the used-car market.
But, as A.T. Kearney is quick to point out, there are a handful of significant variables that could, potentially, change these projections. This list includes:

• overall economic growth

• credit availability (The recession created 15 million “new sub-prime consumers,” of which approximately 530,000 customers would be locked out of the new vehicle market without help from auto lenders.)

• consumer prices

• consumer confidence

• parts shortages in the aftermath of the earthquake and tsunami in Japan

What can OEMs and suppliers do to prepare for the anticipated upswing in sales –even as they accept the possibility of market volatility? A.T. Kearney suggests that OEMs and suppliers: (more…)

No one wants to deal with a product recall.

But, for those in the medical device and life sciences industries, the challenges are more intense than ever before. Globalization has created elongated supply chains, and that elongation has decreased visibility and complicated communication. Obviously, that’s not a desirable combination at all, considering that delays in handling a medical device recall can literally mean the difference between life and death.

Fortunately, many medical device and diagnostic manufacturers are now taking a hard look at their existing processes so that they can improve the way they manage product recalls.

Denise Odenkirk and Tom Kozenski explore these issues in detail in their recent article, How to Handle a Medical Device Recall, at Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry Online.

I was pleased to see that Odenkirk and Kozenski recognize that both automation and integration have become critical components for effective supply chain management. They write: (more…)

Over the past three years of the financial crisis, there’s no doubt that C-Suite expectations of the risk management function have grown.

What’s more, I’ve also seen a growing appreciation for the integration of risk management

But, how do risk managers feel about these trends? Are their expectations simpatico with those of C-level execs?

A new survey by Marsh and RIMS looked for answers to those questions and found some agreement –and some disconnect, too.

The eighth annual Excellence in Risk Management study, which polled 1,022 risk managers and C-suite, finance, and other executives involved in risk-related functions, revealed that the vast majority (80 percent) agreed that senior leadership’s expectations of their organization’s risk management departments have grown over the past three years. They also agreed that companies expect there to be deeper integration of risk management across the enterprise.

However, when asked about specific action steps to reach these goals, the study detected some areas of disconnect.

The C-suite expects risk managers to step up and take a more active role in integrating enterprise-wide risk management with their organizations’ broader strategic goals. Specifically, C-suite executives polled said they want risk managers to: (more…)