Jump to content
  • Detailed search options are for members only and depend on your membership level.

  • Popular Tags

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'ibp-sop'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Discussions & Forums

  • Recent Discussions & Forums
    • Strategy & change
    • Data & analytics
    • Integrated planning
    • E2E orchestration
    • Member Q&A

Calendars

  • Strategy & change
  • Data & analytics
  • Integrated planning
  • E2E orchestration
  • INTENT Live Meetings

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Found 19 results

  1. until
    The disconnect between plans and reality often undermine confidence in the effectiveness of planning processes. One of the main causes of this disconnect is latency in decision-making: the time between an event being detected (or predicted) and action being taken. This discussion will explore how this gap can be closed using an integrated business planning and execution framework which can realise value from investments in IoT and AI. Discussion Partner: AGENDA IBPX: closing the gap between planning and execution Identifying principle causes of latency, including l
  2. Although there continue to be many challenges in arriving at a robust plan in the first place, this discussion focused on how to close the gap with execution or, in other words, reduce time lag or latency of deviations from plan being predicted and detected to being successfully managed. Latency definition: how quickly can you predict something is going to happen? How quickly can it be filtered in the hierarchy? It’s fundamental to how the SC and finance are organised. Latency is a combination of data availability and process Latency -1 (predictive) Scenario planni
  3. until
    A dial in discussion with a small group of senior leaders who play a strategic role in the S&OP / IBP process. We'll share ideas around best practice, but also experience around how things have best been adapted or transformed to cope with volatility. AGENDA Disrupted supply chain: how to manage volatility and execution in challenging environments Understand how to manage supply planning with scenarios, capacity, capability, and buffers Discover the key aspects of the supply execution process Recognise how to embed supply execution learnings into the medium-te
  4. Summary of discussions hosted by Dawn Dent, Lucy Jacobs and Neil Hill of Oliver Wight with members from Novocure, Johnson & Johnson, Solvay, Cummins, Atlas Copco, Axalta Coating Systems, Coca-Cola European Partners, Unilever, Henkel, PZ Cussons, Pentland Brands, Marks & Spencer, Diageo, JCB, Arla Foods, Animalcare, Tupperware Brands and Sony Pictures Entertainment. Not losing sight of the bigger picture - integrating S&OE with S&OP It has been easy to become fixated on forecasting demand and so lose sight of end to end capacity and constraints. It's vital to take a
  5. SCHEDULED: 29TH APRIL A dial in discussion with a small group of senior leaders who play a strategic role in the S&OP / IBP process. We'll share ideas around best practice, but also experience around how things have best been adapted or transformed to cope with volatility. AGENDA Managing supply chain volatility & execution Understand how to manage supply planning with scenarios, capacity, capability, and buffers Discover the key aspects of the supply execution process Recognise how to embed supply execution learnings into the medium-term planning pr
  6. until
    The disconnect between plans and reality often undermine confidence in the effectiveness of planning processes. One of the main causes of this disconnect is latency in decision-making: the time between an event being detected (or predicted) and action being taken. This discussion will explore how this gap can be closed using an integrated business planning and execution framework which can realise value from investments in IoT and AI. Discussion Partner: AGENDA IBPX: closing the gap between planning and execution Identifying principle causes of latency, including l
  7. until
    The Covid experience has underlined the importance of agility and being able to adapt to changing circumstances. In many cases, existing S&OP / IBP processes have struggled with a much higher demand for scenarios, cycles having to begin before the previous cycle is finished and a highly unusual operating context requiring decisions to be escalated or reviewed more frequently. How has a concurrent (as opposed to linear or sequential) planning approach helped and what was the journey to from business case to implementation? AGENDA Concurrent planning in practice - selection,
  8. JP Doggett

    Measuring 'true' cost-to-serve

    until
    SKU rationalisation driven by volatile demand during the pandemic has brought greater focus on cost-to-serve analysis at an increasingly granular level. In tandem with IBP processes that forecast and plan by value as well as volume to enable better decision-making and reduced costs, cost-to-serve analysis must be able to pinpoint where efficiencies and opportunities can be found. Moreover, shareholders are increasingly demanding a 'triple bottom line' view of costs which include ESG / sustainability metrics. AGENDA Measuring 'true' cost-to-serve How to do cost-to-serve analys
  9. until
    A dial in discussion with a small group of senior leaders who play a strategic role in the S&OP / IBP process. We'll share ideas around best practice, but also experience around how things have best been adapted or transformed to cope with volatility. AGENDA Disrupted supply chain: how to manage volatility and execution in challenging environments Understand how to manage supply planning with scenarios, capacity, capability, and buffers Discover the key aspects of the supply execution process Recognise how to embed supply execution learnings into the medium-te
  10. DRAFT AGENDA From S&OP to IBP: integrating other finance & commercial Forecasting and planning by volume AND value Adapting roles and processes Who should own the forecast? How and when to escalate contested decisions? ABOUT INTENT DISCUSSIONS All discussions are private, held under the Chatham House Rule and moderated by INTENT with approx. 6-8 participants for 45-90 mins of candid, interactive discussion (not a passive webinar) Some discussions include subject matter experts from member-recommende
  11. DRAFT AGENDA S&OE - S&OP: balancing short- and longer-term planning horizons What works best in terms of synchronising cycles and managing information exchange between them? Best practice for roles & responsibilities, inc. when not possible to have distinct teams ABOUT INTENT DISCUSSIONS All discussions are private, held under the Chatham House Rule and moderated by INTENT with approx. 6-8 participants for 45-90 mins of candid, interactive discussion (not a passive webinar) Some discussions include subject matter experts fr
  12. DRAFT AGENDA Continuous / concurrent / non-sequential planning Volatility driving the need for shorter planning cycles and greater agility Aligning data so that a change in one attribute cascades across the rest of the supply chain in real time On demand scenario modelling Closing planning & execution gaps ABOUT INTENT DISCUSSIONS All discussions are private, held under the Chatham House Rule and moderated by INTENT with approx. 6-8 participants for 45-90 mins of candid, interactive discussion (not a passive w
  13. Summary of a practitioner only discussion held on 3rd February 2021 with members from Unilever, Kraft Heinz, General Mills, Corbion, Tate & Lyle and O-I: What has worked to manage the balance between S&OE & S&OP? Dedicated focus on reinforcing S&OE, often by centralising and formalising roles and escalation / de-escalation processes and triggers; Demand managers aggregate the demand but product managers (with P&L) responsibility decide which segments, customers and products to prioritise; S&OP meetings sometimes had longer horizons up to ten y
  14. JP Doggett

    Concurrent planning

    until
    Concurrent planning in the age of volatility & disruption The Covid experience has underlined the importance of agility and being able to adapt to changing circumstances. In many cases, existing S&OP / IBP processes have struggled with a much higher demand for scenarios, cycles having to begin before the previous cycle is finished and a highly unusual operating context requiring decisions to be escalated or reviewed more frequently. Can a concurrent (as opposed to linear or sequential) planning approach help? How? We aim for 5-8 active discussion participants. Others ma
  15. until
    Balancing short-term & long-term planning horizons (S&OE & S&OP) What works best in terms of synchronising cycles and managing information exchange between them? Best practice for roles & responsibilities, inc. when not possible to have distinct teams Moderated by Intent, this is an interactive discussion for practitioners to share experience and ideas. It is shaped by participants' input with opportunities to continue conversations with individual participants afterwards. Request to join* Would like to join but can't make the date? *we may ad
  16. Handling volatility: tuning up S&OP and demand execution Supply Chain INTENT Virtual Boardroom Discussion 26th November 2020 Discussion Leaders Lucy Jacobs, Oliver Wight Dawn Dent, Oliver Wight Discussion Summary Oliver Wight best practice is to have distinct processes to manage the Medium/ Long terms versus Short term Key elements discussed Establishing your Time Fence - where the cost to respond to change in demand is significant Long term – Demand planning and supply planning, supply meets demand Short term – Demand and supply execution, Priori
  17. Takeaways and Key Points Participants Chair, JP Doggett, Intent Group Host: Claire Milner, Kinaxis Host; Dave Platt, Kinaxis Intro Volatility is not new. We need a new way to think about SC that enables us to be more agile. Being agile enough to deal with uncertainty is the goal. Is Covid a one off? We don’t know. It's about being ready for what comes. Agile tech, good process, all help prepare companies for what comes. What are the obstacles to dealing with volatility? Being target driven: facing up to the reality. Nobody wants to bring bad news. Pushing f
  18. IBP: zero latency for availability & working capital An online, virtual boardroom discussion with SC Leaders, run under the Chatham House Rule by Intent Group on 09/06/20. With thanks to Vikram Singla of Oracle and David Lechleiter for leading the discussion. Chaired by JP Doggett, Intent Group. Key takeaways Trust: there must be trust in the forecast. To have trust in the plan it must be simple and quick to interpret. A forecast should be a plan, not an output from a model. Speed of scenario modelling, S&OP process, is a key challenge, otherwise the busines
  19. Covid has highlighted for some that they must be able to to react quickly - clear need for greater agility. Fast moving times - business strategy can move on before plans can be modelled
×
×
  • Create New...