@Risk

Over the past few years, social media has evolved into an essential component of the marketing toolbox.

But, most companies have failed to keep pace with the necessary compliance and risk policies and procedures.

A recent study conducted by Grant Thornton LLP and Financial Executives Research Foundation illustrates the problem. The survey responses from 141 senior financial executives from public and private companies showed that: (more…)

Scientists at the Joint Research Centre (JRC), the European Commission’s in-house science service, have identified five metals that are both essential for manufacturing low-carbon technologies and at high risk of shortage.

These five metals are: neodymium, dysprosium, indium, tellurium and gallium.

According to the report, titled Critical Metals in Strategic Energy Technologies, the risk of shortage stems from:

• Europe’s dependency on imports (as in the US, virtually the entire European supply of these metals comes from China),
• increasing global demand,
• supply concentration and
• geopolitical issues.

Furthermore, these metals are not easily recyclable or substitutable. (more…)

Recent drug shortages in the US underscore the complexities, interdependencies and volatility of modern global supplier networks.

According to an IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics study released last week, most of the 168 products on the drug shortage lists compiled by the US Food and Drug Administration and American Society of Health-System Pharmacists have only one or two manufacturers. Thirteen companies have stopped supplying products on the shortages lists within the past two years. As Murray Aitken, executive director, IMS Institute for Healthcare Informatics, points out, this leaves a growing number of products open to possible production disruptions that cannot be offset rapidly by other manufacturers.

“Patients throughout the US, including hundreds of thousands being treated for cancer, may be at risk of treatment disruption due to drug shortages,” Aitken said. “Understanding the nature of these medicines, their suppliers and the supply volume dynamics – and focusing sharply on the market and supply chains that are most impacted – are essential to formulating meaningful solutions to this complex, and often misunderstood, issue.”

The new study, Drug Shortages: A Closer Look at Products, Suppliers and Volume Volatility, also found that: (more…)

Most companies have tightened up their internal due diligence procedures over the past few years, but many remain unclear about how to test and evaluate the due diligence of potential suppliers.

That’s a big concern because, as research from the international legal practice Norton Rose Group shows, suppliers and their customers can often have very different perceptions of risk.

For example, the Norton Rose Group’s new survey found that customers rate reputational damage as a primary risk, but suppliers rank it only a secondary risk. On the other hand, suppliers see service performance failure as a primary risk, while their customers view it as a secondary risk.

In addition, nearly half (49 percent) of the customers polled felt suppliers should manage political/jurisdiction risk. But, only 8 percent of suppliers consider it their responsibility.

This disconnect leaves customers exposed to risk. And yet, the majority (65 percent) of companies in the study admitted that they do not conduct detailed due diligence on the incoming key personnel provided by their supplier.

“As many organizations have found to their cost, there is no ‘one-size-fits-all’ solution for risk management and it should never be seen as a box-ticking exercise – customers need to visit a potential supplier, test their technology and speak to other customers of that supplier,” Mike Rebeiro, group head of technology and innovation at Norton Rose Group, explained. “The majority of customers assume that their suppliers will have done the necessary due diligence on their own staff and do not see the need to repeat the exercise. This is surprising given the impact a single rogue employee can have on the reputation of a business and all associated organizations, as underlined by the scope of the Bribery Act 2010.”

The survey, which analyzed a wide range of current outsourcing practices and trends, also revealed that: (more…)

In the second annual Carbon Disclosure Project (CDP) Water Disclosure Global Report released last week, more than half (59 percent) of the companies surveyed said they are exposed to water-related risks such as flooding, scarcity and reputational damage.

What’s more, almost four in 10 (38 percent) already have experienced water-related business impacts, including disruption to operations from severe weather events (e.g., flooding) and water shortages.

And companies described most of their water risks as near- term. Nearly two-thirds (66 percent) of risks in the supply chain and 64 percent of risks in direct operations were identified as occurring between now and 2016.

But even so, the report also found that only 57 percent of the 190 publicly listed organizations that participated in the survey implement board-level oversight of water policies, strategies or plans. By comparison, a report released by CDP in September 2011 showed that 94 percent of Global 500 companies report board-level oversight of climate change.

Why the gap? While it’s encouraging to see that awareness about water risks is on the rise, it’s also clear that companies need to strengthen their oversight of water-related issues –particularly in the supply chain. The CDP report revealed that more than one-third of companies (38 percent) are unaware of whether they are exposed to water risk in their supply chains. In the Consumer Discretionary sector, which is dominated by industries that are particularly exposed to supply chain risk (e.g., retailers, hotels, resorts, and automobile manufacturers), that percentage rose to 41 percent.

The report also found that: (more…)