Advertisement

May 24, 2013

Short on Supply, Long on Risk

Risk Management - RIMS

Since the global economy went into the tank in late 2008, many companies have significantly cut back their supply inventories. This was understandable -- logical even. Why pay for the extra storage when consumer demand was faltering?

Now, however, those businesses that cut costs on supply may be unable to adjust as customers start buying again. In fact, a recent study conducted jointly by researchers from MIT and Georgia Tech University suggests that companies that experience a supply chain disruption suffered between a 33% and 40% decline in stock price compared with industry peers over a three-year period.

"Historically, disruptions can lead to 7% lower sales and 11% higher costs," said Linda Conrad, director of strategic business risk at Zurich Global Corporate. "Combined with the increased costs of securing additional supply at the last minute, it's not surprising that approximately 40% of companies with extended disruptions never recover from supply chain disruption."

The lesson here? Much like it is hard to turn around a battleship midstream, it seems it is equally difficult to turn around the cargo ships that deliver goods. And it seems as though those companies that remain unprepared to adjust at the right time might be left out to sea.

____________

Jared Wade is senior editor of Risk Management.

Risk Management Magazine and Risk Management Monitor. Copyright 2013 Risk and Insurance Management Society, Inc. All rights reserved.

About the Author

Senior Editor

Jared Wade is the senior editor of Risk Management magazine and the Risk Management Monitor blog.

212-655-5919

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.