| |
|
When is a Next-Generation Forecasting and Planning System Required? |
By Dr. J. Thomas Mentzer, Distinguished Professor of Marketing and Logistics at the University of Tennessee.
|
It is a sad fact of life, but most Demand Forecasting and Planning[1] systems cannot do everything you would like them to do. The question is, does the planning system effectively address your most important business issues? This article discusses some of those important business issues, including the cost of ignoring or over-simplifying them.
Options
Realizing there are short-comings in existing Demand Forecasting and Planning system(s), decision makers have these options:
a) Ignore the issues
b) Perform analysis outside of existing systems, e.g., offline analysis in Excel
c) Upgrade existing planning systems
d) Invest in a next-generation Demand Forecasting and Planning System designed to deal with specific issues. A next-generation Demand Forecasting and Planning System:
- Incorporates and manages key inputs from all relevant data sources,
- Enables different functions and users to see data from their perspective,
- Manages information in an internally consistent framework,
- Provides transparency across functional silos,
- Uses Enterprise Enabled Excel which combines the flexibility of Excel with the power of an Enterprise Application,
- Enables management by exception,
- Provides right-time data any time,
- Supports executive management by providing dashboards and scorecards with powerful drill-down capabilities,
- Enables plans to be analyzed and updated in minutes, not days or weeks,
- Enables users to do ad-hoc analysis or create scenarios, and
- Is designed to support any business process - instead of building business processes around the system.
Which option to choose depends on the issue its business complexity and perceived business value:
Business Complexity, in this context, is about the amount and intricacy of the underlying data, the sophistication of the analytics, how often the analysis is performed, and the degree of cross-functional collaboration needed.
Business Value is the impact on operational performance - vaguely defined as anything that helps improve the bottom line, shorten time-cycles, or present greater opportunities to do things better in the future.
The following diagram compares the options in a decision framework:
If the perceived business value is low and the analysis is simple, i.e., does not require complex data collection, and/or is done infrequently, then doing the analysis in Excel may suffice. However, if the business complexity is high, then a more thorough cost/benefit analysis can be undertaken to see if it makes sense to do this analysis at all, or use Excel or other tools with simplified assumptions.
If the perceived business value is high, then using a more sophisticated planning system is warranted. With low business complexity particularly with regards to simple analytics then upgrading existing systems may do the job. However, with increasing business complexity, a more specialized tool, like a next-generation Demand Forecasting and Planning system can be a good investment. The next section outlines symptoms that point toward the need for a more advanced planning system.
The Case for a Next-generation Planning System
Next-generation Planning Systems are advanced planning tools built to solve specific business problems. Traditionally viewed as exceedingly expensive and difficult to implement, a new generation of Advanced Forecasting and Planning Systems have emerged that are very price competitive and do not impose more implementation risk than upgrading existing systems.
The following table can help you diagnose whether or not your company may benefit from a next-generation Forecasting and Planning System:
If the answer to some of the above questions is "Yes" and the following problems are experienced, then a next-generation planning system should be considered:
Continually missed revenue projections
Exceedingly high forecast errors
Too much inventory
Too low fill rates
A Case Study
A Fortune 500 company[2] in the semi-conductor industry came battered out of the dot com boom. Sales dropped sharply, and demand patterns shifted between product lines. As a result, their mix was off, with excessive inventory for some product lines, and low fill-rates for other lines. Customers were unhappy, revenue projections were off, and profits tumbled, as did their stock price. The company needed change, and fast. Management realized that in order to turn things around, one of the first things they needed was better planning systems that could tackle these complex business issues:
- Shorter planning cycles moving from quarterly to monthly planning cycles.
- More agile planning process that would allow for frequent updates and quick turnaround time.
- Improve forecast system to incorporate (1) sales funnel data and (2) dynamically changing product configurations.
- Better visibility into the planning process at all levels including executive management.
- Exception alerts triggered when forecasts, sales opportunities, actual shipments or backlogs change.
- Effectively include sales and finance in the planning process.
- Better performance measurement.
The company has two major product lines, A and B, with annual revenues of $500 million. Profit margin is 10%, or $50 million. Prior to implementing a next-generation Forecasting and Planning system the two product lines had the following performance:
Product A was over-forecast, and Product B had a low fill-rate and was (consequently) under-forecast. The company had, overall, a planning error (MAPE) of 17-18%.
After 4 months of implementing a next-generation Forecasting and Planning system, the companys MAPE improved by 2%. This improvement in planning accuracy produced the following results:
- Happier customers.
- Over $500K in reduced annual inventory costs of which all went to the bottom line.
- Over $5 million per year in increased revenue, of which 10% went to the bottom line.
- As a result the company recorded an additional $1 million in increased profits, or a 2% increase in profit margin.
- Their investment in a next-generation Forecasting and Planning system paid for itself within a few months.
Conclusions
The decision of whether or not to invest in a next-generation Forecasting and Planning System boils down to the following considerations:
- Can the company dramatically improve performance through organizational alignment?
- Would improvements in fill rates bring competitive advantages?
- Do excess inventory costs have a significant impact on the bottom line?
- Is current staffing level required to support manual spreadsheet manipulations and processing too high?
- In comparing different solutions, what issues do different solutions address, and how do they solve them?
- What are the perceived risks and costs of new system implementation versus upgrading?
Armed with the above information corporate decision makers should be able to make an informed decision about how to improve Demand Forecasting and Planning.
Footnotes:
[1] Demand Forecasting and Planning constitute all tasks and processes to collect demand data, project future demand, enable user-interaction with forecasts and plans, perform analysis, measure performance, and publish results to stake-holders including executive management, sales management, operations management, product management, marketing management, and finance management.
[2] The company, any numbers, and product lines have been altered, but the general discussion and conclusions remain valid.
About the Author
Dr. J. Thomas Mentzer, Distinguished Professor of Marketing and Logistics at the University of Tennessee is the former President of the Council of Logistics Management (CLM) a 15,000 member industry organization whose members are primarily executives in the manufacturing and distribution industries.
He is also the author of Sales Forecasting Management, the leading textbook on forecasting, as well as hundreds of papers on the topic of Enterprise Planning. Dr. Mentzer also founded the UTK Sales Forecasting Management Forum, which includes over 200 executives from Fortune 1000 such as P&G, Coke, Tellabs, Lucent, Eastman Chemical, and Michelin.
|
|