Editor’s Note: With the focus of the upcoming Point-Counterpoint segment on winning business versus successful implementations, revisiting my post on the Ford AutoXchange seems appropriate.
Similar to GM’s TradeXchange, Ford’s version of an “an automotive ebusiness integrated supply chain” was launched with great fanfare.
Unfortunately, and like so many other similar-type initiatives, the Oracle-based platform crashed and burned.
This raises the question . . . why does the market herald contract wins, while ultimately ignoring the pile-up of failures?
Thursday’s segment with Buyers Meeting Point’s Kelly Barner should be very interesting.
Here is the link to tune in to both the live and on-demand broadcast on Blog Talk Radio: http://bit.ly/1XWrOk3
In an excerpt from my March 18, 2008 post titled Optimization Modeling and the Modern Supply Chain I made the following statement:
“The key starting point is to recognize that the term supply chain is a misnomer in that it implies a sequential order of events (in the spirit of your question, a non-deterministic set of algorithms which aligns with the equation-based modeling used by most software vendors).
In reality however we operate in a world in which synchronization between diverse (and now global) stakeholders have to exchange and quantify disparate data on a real-time basis, and therefore the term supply practice would be a more appropriate description.
Once again, when you recognize this elemental difference you will then take the first steps towards building an effective optimization model.”
What I am talking about of course is the Metaprise platform or centralized private hub, where there is a real-time synchronization of key…
View original post 650 more words