Breakfast seminar Sales & Operations Planning Dan Schultz Håkan Espenkrona Peter Wahlgreen Tetra Pak
MYSIGMA welcomes customers and partners to this seminar
MYSIGMA BREAKFAST SEMINAR SERIES PROGRAM 2014-05-28 07:30 07:40 Grab a sandwich & coffee and find a seat 07:40 08:00 Sales & Operations Planning - much more than just another meeting 08:00 08:30 Case presentation. Alfa Laval and Tetra Pak - establishing a joint S&OP process 08:30 Q&A
Sales & Operations Planning Much more than just another meeting Presented by Dan Schultz- MYSIGMA
Background and need for collaboration A study on German pork production 100 years ago shows issues with planning Supply Demand 2 years is the approximate time it takes to breed a new pig stock S&OP is about balancing demand and supply on a regular and formal basis
Monthly process S&OP in general terms Sales forecasting Gather data on sales & quotations Demand planning Validate forecasts and sales plan Forecasting software Commitment to purchase 100% of quantity Commitmentto purchase 70% of quantity (pcs) Commitment to purchase 60% of quantity (kg) 0,8 1,1 0,9 1,2 1,3 1,2 1,1 1 0,8 0,7 0,9 1 Supply planning Pre-S&OP Reviewing available material and capacity to meet demand Match supply and demand plans with financial considerations (impact, constraints) Delivery schedule Annual Weght in Lead Article No demand May June July Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr period 6-12 time (pcs) [kg] 216240011 37 186 12 17 13 18 20 18 17 15 12 10 13 15 1 359 216240012 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-216240013 45 235 15 21 17 23 25 23 21 19 15 13 17 19 2 332 216240014 45 30 2 2 2 3 3 3 2 2 2 1 2 2 290 216240015 27 24 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 2 44 316240016 27 286 19 26 21 28 30 28 26 23 19 16 21 23 874 316240017 27 204 13 18 15 20 22 20 18 17 13 11 15 17 799 316240018 27 211 14 19 15 21 22 21 19 17 14 12 15 17 1 008 316240019 32 118 7 10 8 11 12 11 10 9 7 6 8 9 717 316240020 22 9,6 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0-316240021 22 12 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 28 316240022 22 120 8 11 9 12 13 12 11 10 8 7 9 10 844 316240023 22 175 11 16 13 17 18 17 16 14 11 10 13 14 1 501 9 795 Booked Capacity Material orders booking booking Freezing Point S&OP Meeting Agreed plan S&OP plan follow up
Supply Demand The conflict to solve The supply benefits from a leveled pace The market demand is volatile TAKT? Period Period Is it possible to meet the volatile demand and also have a levelled pace in the supply resources?
Three areas to focus on All supply chains can develop and implement a S&OP process. But to achieve real improvement three basic areas must be addressed: 1. Common targets in sales and supply organisations 2. Forecast quality Forecast quality 3. Supply flexibility S&OP Complexity Supply flexibility
Common targets
Profitability Profitability The S&OP environment needs to be balanced to avoid sub optimization Demand driven Supply driven Over sized production Lost sales Sales Operations - Inventory build - Excess capacity - Costs go up Low margins Sales Operations - Extra cost for overtime - Late shipments - Long lead time Lost sales S&OP needs to be driven from a holistic perspective where both supply and demand targets are considered
Example where supply driven S&OP creates a vicious cycle Risk for late orders and increased stock values Fictive demand allocate capacity 7 8 9 Lack of information Annual forecast from Sales 1 Lack of flexibility Operations make a smooth forecast distribution over coming 12 months 2 3 Supply chain is then dimensioned according to an even demand Increased forecasts / Speculation orders 6 Reduced competitiveness 5 4 Supply are forced to pro long delivery lead time Real demand is stochastic a supply challenge. Both flexibility and market information needs to be addressed
Forecast quality
Volume Volume Volume Understanding market forecasting errors Delay Order Forecast Period Future demand is based on the current situation and the forecast is therefore be set at the current pace with a time shifting factor. The effect is that the future is not in focus, the current state is. + = Manual estimation Order Forecast Forecast Order Period A sales manager with a low forecast will easily get criticized for not trying hard enough Forecasting on item level means many difficult decisions, especially on low frequent items Period Reduce complexity minimize the number of forecasts, e.g. - Product group instead of per item - Region instead of local - Decrease forecast frequency
ORDER INTAKE (MSEK) Forecasting Always a dilemma 26000 24000 22000 CEO comments based on quarterly reports from a major Swedish manufacturing company. Turnover ~90 Billion SEK. The demand is expected to remain at a high level. The total demand is expected to remain at the current high level.. 20000 18000 16000 14000 The aggregated demand is foreseen to remain at the current level. The combined demand of the groups products and services is expected to slightly increase. 12000 2007 Q1 2007 Q2 2007 Q3 2007 Q4 2008 Q1 2008 Q2 2008 Q3 2008 Q4 2009 Q1 2009 Q2 2009 Q3 2009 Q4 2010 Q1 2010 Q2 2010 Q3 2010 Q4 2011 Q1 2011 Q2 2011 Q3 2011 Q4 2012 Q1 2012 Q2 2012 Q3 2012 Q4 2013 Q1 Source: Quarterly reports
Example, too detailed forecasting is likely to hold many errors -A sales force of 300 persons -50 materials to forecast -Local forecasts summed up 300 persons * 50 materials *12 months = 180 000 decisions The above example is from a real case. Forecast accuracy for the 50 materials was +305%
Supply flexibility
Delivery quantity Production quantity How can flexibility be created with limited cost impact? Supply flexibility is needed to meet fluctuating demand, for example: Excess capacity Pro longed delivery lead time, see example below Reduced sourcing lead time Buffer stock Freezing point Max Capacity Delivery vs Production Lt = 5 w Delivery week 1 2 3 4 5 Production week Fixed delivery plan Example: A make to order flow with prolonged lead time gives the opportunity to pre pone manufacturing to maximize resource utilization Each supply chain is unique and suitable flexibility solution has to be evaluated from case to case
Push and pull in combination enables cost efficient flexibility Stock is used for high runners where demand is predictable. Periods where demand is lower than forecast, stock is used to ensure even pace in supply Periods where demand is higher than forecast stock is used to ensure deliveries 20% 80% Even pace in the production Flexibility offered with the finished goods stock Example of supply chain differentiation that supports both cost efficient supply and market demand
Three areas to focus on 1. Common targets in sales and supply organisations 2. Forecast quality 3. Supply flexibility
Case presentation - Alfa Laval and Tetra Pak establishing a joint S&OP process Peter Wahlgreen General Manager Tetra Pak Processing System Håkan Espenkrona MYSIGMA Mikael Tydén VP Operations Alfa Laval
The challenge was to enable short lead times without having a negative impact on product cost ALFA LAVAL HIGH SPEED SEPARATORS? Orders Deliveries? TETRA PAK PROCESSING COMPONENTS Background: Complex Bill-of-Material - Difficult to coordinate - Low inventory turnover rate In the ambition to be cost efficient all orders were make-to-order Low flexibility: Higher order intake means longer delivery lead time Low trust in Tetra Pak forecast Long delivery lead time (up to 36 w) High stock level to meet market demand Orders have been lost due to insufficient delivery performance Low trust in Alfa Laval delivery capability
12-Q4 13-Q1 13-Q2 13-Q3 13-Q4 14-Q1 14-Q2 14-Q3 14-Q4 Weeks Lead time reduction according to project plan 40 35 30 25 Project start Rapid implementation plan during 2013 20 15 10 Target: 12 weeks delivery time 5 0 Actual BII (2398) Plan
Implemented solution
To reach the goal of 12 weeks lead time a robust solution required several changes Business Plan Agree on a range of standard products Standard components can be used as a base for a large part of the total sales volume Sales & Operations planning Sales & Operations planning Improved visibility in the information flow removing need of pre-orders/speculation orders Operational planning Buffer Stock Components in front of assembly creating an Assemble-to- Order (ATO) flow Processes & Tools Support the Operations planning. (Capacity planning, Buffer planning and Inventory Control)
Sales & Operations Planning
VOLUME INDEX (2003) Speculation creates a bullwhip-effect in the supply chain 140 Tetra Pak experiences prolonged lead times Speculation orders (pre-orders) (~ 20 % 2008) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0-47% -73% YEAR 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Finished goods at Tetra Pak stock No orders to Alfa Laval increasing volatility Deliveries from Tetra Pak Deliveries from Alfa Laval A deal with no winners Alfa Laval: Increased Production cost & lead time Tetra Pak: Increased Tied up capital
Monthly process The S&OP process Sales forecasting Gather data on sales & quotations Demand planning Validate forecasts and sales plan Supply planning Pre-S&OP S&OP Meeting Access the ability to meet demand by reviewing available material and capacity Match supply and demand plans with financial considerations (impact, constraints) Finalize the plan
Demand planning hot prospects Information removed due to confidentiality
Dash board order intake vs. budget Information removed due to confidentiality
Quotations follow up Information removed due to confidentiality
Volume index Order intake per quarter last 4 years 180 160 140 Positive deviation vs average 120 Average 100 80 60 40 Negative deviation vs average 20 0
Volume index Where are we headed based on current quotations, other forecast input and historical pattern? 180 160 140 120 1 2 3 100 80 60 40 20 What demand should we plan for? 1. Growth 2. Equal to last quarter 3. Decline to average rate last years 0
The main purpose of the S&OP meeting is to finalize the agreed delivery plan Agenda Previous meeting minutes S&OP Planning - Delivery plan - Stock situation - Current delivery time KPI Market information - Potential projects (quotations) - Forecast changes Agreed delivery plan Decisions
Visibility Agreed delivery plan
1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 9 8 7 15 months ago Over 30 orders allocating capacity with no real demand 6 5 First available production slot 4 3 2 1 0 Phase 1 Fixed Period Phase 2 Flexible Period Phase 3 1 2 3 4 5 5 Reserved capacity slots Flexible Period
12-Q4 13-Q1 13-Q2 13-Q3 13-Q4 14-Q1 14-Q2 14-Q3 14-Q4 Weeks Result vs plan - Lead time reduction plan 40 35 30 25 20 35 30 25 20 15 15 10 10 5 5 0 0 Actual BII (2398) Actual Plan BII (2398) Plan
Hard facts Overall project result Customer orders won thanks to shorter lead time Lead time reduction to a third (from 36 to 12 weeks) supporting long term growth plan 100% Delivery on Time 12 months in a row! Reduced tied up capital Positive effect on cash conversion cycle Non-quantified benefits Improved communication and trust between Tetra Pak and Alfa Laval Rework almost disappeared Reduced administration (Re-planning of orders removed)
Turning Business Strategy into Supply Chain Excellence