SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 10
Download to read offline
Supply Chain Survey Report 
       March 2010
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                                                         March 2010
 
Contents 
Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 3 
Method ......................................................................................................................................................... 3 
Profile of our respondents ............................................................................................................................ 4 
    Industries .................................................................................................................................................. 4 
    Annual Revenue ........................................................................................................................................ 4 
    Production Facilities.................................................................................................................................. 5 
    Distribution Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 5 
    Supply Chain Employees ........................................................................................................................... 6 
    Domestics versus International ................................................................................................................ 6 
    Transportation Modes .............................................................................................................................. 7 
Most Significant Goal .................................................................................................................................... 7 
Detailed Questions Summary ....................................................................................................................... 8 
Detailed Questions Cross References ........................................................................................................... 9 
    Responses by Industry .............................................................................................................................. 9 
    Responses by Revenue.............................................................................................................................. 9 
    Responses by Production Facilities ........................................................................................................... 9 
    Responses by Distribution Facilities........................................................................................................ 10 
 




 
                                                                           Page    2 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                           March 2010
 
 


Executive Summary 
Due to the extraordinary economic climate of the past few years, it is our belief that supply
chain priorities have shifted in response. By directly surveying supply chain managers and
executives at companies across numerous industries, our goal is to provide an analysis of
these shifts in management behavior.

As such, the Supply Chain Survey was commissioned by Ultra Logistics in early 2010 to
gauge the supply chain priorities of US companies. While we strive to maintain the highest
level of accuracy and objectivity from the data gathered and analyzed, this report should be
considered general guidance rather than a definitive interpretation of current market
conditions.

As the US economy recovers from the worst recession in decades, we have found that
companies have generally opted to maintain focus on increasing operational efficiency.
Our analysis indicates that 44% of companies surveyed view improving Supply Chain
management as their number one priority. A further 39% of our respondents view cost
cutting as the most important goal for 2010.

Exploring these goals further, our data indicates that improving flexibility, improving
inventory management and optimizing shipping and routes are the three most critical
areas of focus for many of the respondents.

It is important to note that while much of the attention is paid towards tactical
improvements, mid to longer term activities such as strategic sourcing, network
restructuring and strategic balancing of in-source vs out-sourcing are also on many Supply
Chain managers’ minds today.

Through this report, we will show what supply chain managers have identified as prioritized
objectives as well as provide insight on opportunities in our time ahead.



Method 
This survey was distributed to over 3,000 select supply chain managers and executives
across industries ranging from the service sector to heavy manufacturing. The survey was
conducted entirely online between January 5- 26, 2010.

All responses were kept anonymous and confidential. The survey consisted of 22 optional
questions with 9 questions relating to the general characteristics of the respondent’s
organization. For the remaining 13 questions we asked our participants to rate on a scale of
1 to 5 the importance of each stated supply chain related objectives.

The results were thoroughly analyzed for error and duplication. If a respondent did not
provide an answer for a particular question, the results are identified as a “no-response”.




 
                                            Page   3 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                          March 2010
 
 


Profile of our respondents 
Industries 
Of the companies that responded, Consumer Goods Manufacturers represent 42% of the
total. Other industries represented are Food and Beverage, Home Furnishings, Service,
Consumer Packaging, Retail, Sporting Goods and Construction Material.




Annual Revenue 
Ultra Logistics wanted to target a wide range of supply chain needs with an emphasis in
high volume shippers for this survey. Up to 40% of the companies we surveyed reported
annual revenue of over one billion dollars. The other heavy concentration of respondents
(34%) is between $11M-$100M in annual revenue.




 
                                           Page   4 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                          March 2010
 
 

Production Facilities 
The vast majority of our respondents have fewer than 50 production facilities. We made no
distinction between domestically or internationally located facilities.




Distribution Facilities 
Over 50% of our respondents reported 5 or fewer distribution facilities. We made no
distinction between domestically or internationally located facilities.




 
                                           Page   5 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                          March 2010
 
 

Supply Chain Employees 
Roughly two-thirds of the companies surveyed have fewer than 100 total supply chain
employees. This result was somewhat surprising considering the distribution of responses
by revenue. It indicates through the use of technologies such as TMS, WMS, Labor
Management, etc. and general process improvements, companies are finding ever more
creative ways to do more with less.




Domestics versus International 
Based on the responses received, we observed an imbalance in the percentage of domestic
versus international moves between inbound and outbound transportation. According to our
analysis, 64% of our respondents ship up to 100% of their outbound volume domestically.
In contrast, 44% of our respondents receive up to 100% of their inbound volume
domestically.




 
                                           Page   6 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                           March 2010
 
 

Transportation Modes 
LTL shipments are by far the most common shipment method utilized by our survey
respondents at 94%. Truckload and ocean shipments are also very common among the
survey takers. Please note the survey only allowed for yes/no answers, therefore the
analysis does not reflect shipment volumes.




Most Significant Goal 
When we asked our survey participants what their most significant goal is, the responses
clearly gravitated towards two categories: Supply Chain Cost Cutting (39%) and Improved
Management of your Supply Chain (44%). The remaining two categories “Supply Chain
Risk Planning” and “Better Alignment of your Strategic Goals” combined accounted for 17%
of total responses.

This is an indication that companies are currently more focused on short to medium term
operational/financial control rather than longer term strategic planning. It is our thought
that this notion is also supported in the Detailed Questions section below.




 
                                            Page   7 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                                       March 2010
 
Detailed Questions Summary 
We asked our survey participants to rate the following categories according to the
importance of each statement:

         Category     Description
            Speed     Speed of adaptability and flexibility of your current supply chain in the event of a necessary
                      increase or decrease in volume
         Shipping     Optimal setup of shipping and routes to respond to today's volatile market conditions
        Inventory     Actively managing inventory at different points of your supply chain based on timing and
                      product flow characteristics
         Fuel Flux    Managing your transportation resources adequately to manage fluctuations in fuel prices
         Sourcing     Optimize sourcing strategy to provide the lowest cost solution while minimizing time delivery
                      risks
    Restructuring     Restructure your network based on changing cost and service requirements
       Outsource      Right balance of in-source and/or outsource operations, allowing you to focus on your core
                      strategies
        Allocating    Accurately allocating supply chain costs at a SKU level
      Distribution    Optimizing number, size, and location of distribution facilities
         Simulate     Ability to simulate changes in network setup via software to gauge the effects
    Benchmarking      Benchmarking current network against industry norms
    Manufacturing     Optimizing number, size, and location of manufacturing facilities

                                             Not       Somewhat                     Very       Extremely Weighted
Category             Rank No Response     Important    Important     Important    Important    Important  Score
Speed                  1      0%             3%           3%           11%          33%           50%      4.25
Shipping               2      0%             0%          11%            8%          28%           53%      4.22
Inventory              3      6%             6%           6%            6%          29%           53%      4.18
FuelFlux               4      0%             3%          14%           25%          17%           42%      3.81
Sourcing               5      9%             0%           3%           18%          42%           36%      4.12
Restructuring          5      6%             0%           6%           15%          53%           26%      4.00
Outsource              7      0%             8%           3%           44%          25%           19%      3.44
Allocating             8      6%             6%          15%           12%          50%           18%      3.59
Distribution           9      3%            17%          14%           14%          23%           31%      3.37
Simulate              10      6%             6%          24%           26%          21%           24%      3.32
Benchmarking          11      3%             9%          17%           29%          37%            9%      3.20
Manufacturing         12      6%            29%          15%           15%          18%           24%      2.91

Based on our survey results, Speed of Adaptability and Flexibility is the most important
factor in our respondents’ supply chain with 50% rating this category extremely important.
This is unsurprising given the current economic climate and associated volume changes
experience in many industries.

Along with Flexibility and Adaptability, our survey participants also indicated to us that
inventory management and optimal routing play a big factor in where they are currently
focusing their efforts.

We believe the trend in supply chain management in 2010 falls heavily towards tactical
objectives such as improving execution, reducing operating costs, improving working capital
efficiency and better managing short term risks.

Long term goals are not ignored however as companies that operate in less volatile markets
maintain strong interest in categories such as Strategic Sourcing, Network Planning, and
Benchmarking, etc.

 

 
                                                        Page   8 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                                                                       March 2010
 
 


Detailed Questions Cross References 
The following section illustrates importance broken down by Industry, Revenue and Number
of Facilities. Importance in categories are indicated a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most
importance. Each metric is derived by averaging the set of numbers matching both the
category and the noted variables.

Responses by Industry 




                                                                                                                                                        ri ng




                                                                                                                                                                                             i ng




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  g
                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ct urin
                                                                                                                                    uti on




                                                                                                                                                                                        ma rk
                                                           urce




                                                                                                                                                      fa ctu




                                                                                                                                                                                                             ati ng
                                                                                                                                                                        tory
                                                                            F l ux
                                         pi ng




                                                                                                                ci ng
                                                                                              la te




                                                                                                                                       ib




                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ru
                                                                                                                                                                                         h
                             d




                                                              o




                                                                                                                                                     Manu


                                                                                                                                                                      I nven


                                                                                                                                                                                    Be nc


                                                                                                                                                                                                       Al loc
                                                                                          S im u
                        S pee




                                                                                                              S ou r


                                                                                                                               Di st r
                                                         Outs




                                                                                                                                                                                                                          Re st
                                      S hip




                                                                           Fuel
Industry
Construction Material   5.0         5.0              5.0               3.0              4.0                0.0                 3.0               4.0                 4.0           4.0               4.0                4.0
Consumer Goods          4.1         4.1              3.3               3.6              3.4                4.0                 3.5               2.8                 3.9           2.9               3.2                3.7
Consumer Packaging      4.7         4.7              3.3               3.7              3.3                3.5                 4.5               4.0                 4.0           3.7               3.0                4.7
Food/Bev                4.4         4.4              3.6               4.8              4.4                4.6                 4.4               4.2                 5.0           4.0               4.6                4.6
Home Furnishings        4.3         3.8              3.0               3.3              2.3                4.0                 2.3               2.0                 4.0           2.5               4.7                4.0
Retail                  4.3         4.0              2.7               3.3              1.7                4.7                 2.0               1.0                 3.7           2.7               2.7                3.3
Sporting Goods          3.5         4.5              4.5               5.0              4.0                3.5                 5.0               4.5                 4.5           3.5               4.5                5.0
Service                 4.7         4.3              4.0               4.0              3.3                4.3                 2.3               2.3                 4.7           3.7               3.3                3.7
Total                   4.3         4.2              3.4               3.8              3.3                4.1                 3.4               2.9                 4.2           3.2               3.6                4.0


Responses by Revenue                                                                                                                                           ring




                                                                                                                                                                                                ing




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     g
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ct urin
                                                                                                                                            uti on




                                                                                                                                                                                           ma rk
                                                                    urce




                                                                                                                                                            fa ctu




                                                                                                                                                                                                               ati ng
                                                                                                                                                                           tory
                                                                                     Fl u x
                                                  pi ng




                                                                                                                       ci ng
                                                                                                      la te




                                                                                                                                         ib




                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ru
                                                                                                                                                                                          h
                                     d




                                                                       o




                                                                                                                                                      Manu

                                                                                                                                                                        Inven

                                                                                                                                                                                     Be nc

                                                                                                                                                                                                         All oc
                                                                                                   Sim u
                                 Spee




                                                                                                                  S our

                                                                                                                                   Dist r
                                                                  Outs




                                                                                                                                                                                                                            Re st
                                              Ship




                                                                                  Fuel




Revenue
$1.1M-$10M                    4.3             5.0             4.3              4.7              3.7              4.7             4.0                  3.3             5.0          3.7                 3.3                3.7
$11M-$100M                    3.9             3.6             2.7              3.3              2.8              3.9             2.3                  2.1             3.8          2.3                 3.3                3.7
$101M-$1B                     4.5             4.5             3.8              3.7              3.5              3.5             4.2                  4.0             3.8          3.7                 3.8                4.3
$1B+                          4.4             4.4             3.6              4.1              3.5              4.3             3.7                  2.9             4.4          3.7                 3.8                4.1

Responses by Production Facilities 
                                                                                                                                                         ri n g




                                                                                                                                                                                         i ng




                                                                                                                                                                                                                               g
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           ct urin
                                                                                                                                     ution




                                                                                                                                                                                    ma rk
                                                                   urce




                                                                                                                                                      fa ctu




                                                                                                                                                                                                          ati ng
                                                                                                                                                                       tory
                                                                                  Fl ux
                                                 pi ng




                                                                                                                     ci ng
                                                                                                   la te




                                                                                                                                     ib




                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ru
                                                                                                                                                                                       h
                                  d




                                                                  o




                                                                                                                                                     Manu

                                                                                                                                                                     Inven

                                                                                                                                                                                  Be nc

                                                                                                                                                                                                    All oc
                                                                                               Sim u
                              Spee




                                                                                                                S our

                                                                                                                               Dist r
                                                             Outs




                                                                                                                                                                                                                        Re st
                                              Ship




                                                                              Fuel




Production Facilities
0                             4.3         4.0               2.7              3.7              1.7              4.7             2.0               1.0              4.0             3.0           3.7                   3.3
1-50                          4.2         4.2               3.4              3.7              3.4              3.9             3.4               2.9              4.1             3.1           3.5                   4.0
51-100                        4.0         5.0               3.0              5.0              5.0              5.0             5.0               5.0              5.0             5.0           5.0                   5.0
101-200                       4.0         4.0               4.0              4.0              3.0              5.0             5.0               5.0              5.0             3.0           4.0                   4.0
201-500                       5.0         4.0               4.5              5.0              3.5              5.0             3.5               3.5              4.5             4.5           3.5                   4.0




 
                                                                                          Page          9 
Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey
                                                       March 2010
 
 

Responses by Distribution Facilities 




                                                                                                       ring




                                                                                                                              ing




                                                                                                                                                        g  n
                                                                                         ution




                                                                                                                         ma rk




                                                                                                                                                     ct uri
                                              urce




                                                                                                  fa ctu




                                                                                                                                         ati ng
                                                                                                                tory
                                                      Fl u x
                                   pi n g




                                                                               cing
                                                                 la te




                                                                                            ib




                                                                                                                                                       ru
                                                                                                                            h
                              d




                                                 o




                                                                                                 Manu

                                                                                                              Inven

                                                                                                                       Be nc

                                                                                                                                    Alloc
                                                               Sim u
                          Spee




                                                                         S ou r

                                                                                      Dist r
                                            Outs




                                                                                                                                                  Re st
                                  Ship




                                                     Fuel
Distribution Facilities
1-5                       4.2     4.0       3.2      3.5       2.8       4.2          2.8        2.6          3.9      2.8          3.2           3.7
6-10                      3.5     4.5       3.5      4.3       3.8       3.5          4.3        3.5          4.0      3.3          4.0           4.5
11-20                     4.4     4.6       3.4      3.9       3.6       4.3          3.9        2.6          4.4      4.1          4.3           4.3
21-50                     4.5     4.0       4.0      5.0       4.5       3.5          4.5        3.5          5.0      3.0          3.0           4.5
51+                       5.0     5.0       5.0      5.0       5.0       5.0          5.0        5.0          5.0      5.0          5.0           5.0




 
                                                           Page   10 

More Related Content

More from BillStankiewicz

Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper Report 20012 Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper  Report 20012 WebBill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper  Report 20012 Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper Report 20012 WebBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U Ti
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U TiBill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U Ti
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U TiBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 Pl
Bill Stankiewicz Copy  State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 PlBill Stankiewicz Copy  State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 Pl
Bill Stankiewicz Copy State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 PlBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc V2
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc  V2Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc  V2
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc V2BillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For WebBill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For WebBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown Nfi
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown NfiBill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown Nfi
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown NfiBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram Micro
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram MicroBill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram Micro
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram MicroBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media Report
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media ReportBill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media Report
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media ReportBillStankiewicz
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is Certain
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is CertainBill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is Certain
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is CertainBillStankiewicz
 
2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail
2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail
2 5 2011 Mobile In RetailBillStankiewicz
 
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of RetailingBillStankiewicz
 
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater FlexibilityBillStankiewicz
 
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European RetailBillStankiewicz
 
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of TraceabilityBillStankiewicz
 
2009 Phil Herr Presentation
2009 Phil Herr Presentation2009 Phil Herr Presentation
2009 Phil Herr PresentationBillStankiewicz
 
2010 Fsa Change Panel V2
2010 Fsa Change Panel V22010 Fsa Change Panel V2
2010 Fsa Change Panel V2BillStankiewicz
 

More from BillStankiewicz (20)

Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper Report 20012 Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper  Report 20012 WebBill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper  Report 20012 Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy American Shipper Report 20012 Web
 
Clg Overview
Clg OverviewClg Overview
Clg Overview
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U Ti
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U TiBill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U Ti
Bill Stankiewicz Copy William Gates U Ti
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 Pl
Bill Stankiewicz Copy  State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 PlBill Stankiewicz Copy  State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 Pl
Bill Stankiewicz Copy State Of Logistics Study For Web 3 Pl
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc V2
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc  V2Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc  V2
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Adrian Gonzalez, Arc V2
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For WebBill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For Web
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Greg Smith Oracle For Web
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown Nfi
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown NfiBill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown Nfi
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Sid Brown Nfi
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram Micro
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram MicroBill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram Micro
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Keith Bradley Ingram Micro
 
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media Report
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media ReportBill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media Report
Bill Stankiiewicz Copy 4 2011 Social Media Report
 
The Spirit April 2011
The Spirit April 2011The Spirit April 2011
The Spirit April 2011
 
March2011,Breeze
March2011,BreezeMarch2011,Breeze
March2011,Breeze
 
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is Certain
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is CertainBill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is Certain
Bill Stankiewicz Copy Jan. 2011 Uncertainty Is Certain
 
2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail
2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail
2 5 2011 Mobile In Retail
 
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing
2 5 2011 Global Powers Of Retailing
 
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility
2 5 2011 Exel And Dhl Seek Greater Flexibility
 
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Sustainability Trends European Retail
 
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability
2 5 2011 Bill Stankiewicz Copy Of Traceability
 
2009 Phil Herr Presentation
2009 Phil Herr Presentation2009 Phil Herr Presentation
2009 Phil Herr Presentation
 
2010 Fsa Change Panel V2
2010 Fsa Change Panel V22010 Fsa Change Panel V2
2010 Fsa Change Panel V2
 
2010 Jay Bush
2010 Jay Bush2010 Jay Bush
2010 Jay Bush
 

Ultra Logistics Bill Stankiewicz Copy 2010 Scs 2010

  • 2. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010   Contents  Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 3  Method ......................................................................................................................................................... 3  Profile of our respondents ............................................................................................................................ 4  Industries .................................................................................................................................................. 4  Annual Revenue ........................................................................................................................................ 4  Production Facilities.................................................................................................................................. 5  Distribution Facilities ................................................................................................................................ 5  Supply Chain Employees ........................................................................................................................... 6  Domestics versus International ................................................................................................................ 6  Transportation Modes .............................................................................................................................. 7  Most Significant Goal .................................................................................................................................... 7  Detailed Questions Summary ....................................................................................................................... 8  Detailed Questions Cross References ........................................................................................................... 9  Responses by Industry .............................................................................................................................. 9  Responses by Revenue.............................................................................................................................. 9  Responses by Production Facilities ........................................................................................................... 9  Responses by Distribution Facilities........................................................................................................ 10      Page 2 
  • 3. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Executive Summary  Due to the extraordinary economic climate of the past few years, it is our belief that supply chain priorities have shifted in response. By directly surveying supply chain managers and executives at companies across numerous industries, our goal is to provide an analysis of these shifts in management behavior. As such, the Supply Chain Survey was commissioned by Ultra Logistics in early 2010 to gauge the supply chain priorities of US companies. While we strive to maintain the highest level of accuracy and objectivity from the data gathered and analyzed, this report should be considered general guidance rather than a definitive interpretation of current market conditions. As the US economy recovers from the worst recession in decades, we have found that companies have generally opted to maintain focus on increasing operational efficiency. Our analysis indicates that 44% of companies surveyed view improving Supply Chain management as their number one priority. A further 39% of our respondents view cost cutting as the most important goal for 2010. Exploring these goals further, our data indicates that improving flexibility, improving inventory management and optimizing shipping and routes are the three most critical areas of focus for many of the respondents. It is important to note that while much of the attention is paid towards tactical improvements, mid to longer term activities such as strategic sourcing, network restructuring and strategic balancing of in-source vs out-sourcing are also on many Supply Chain managers’ minds today. Through this report, we will show what supply chain managers have identified as prioritized objectives as well as provide insight on opportunities in our time ahead. Method  This survey was distributed to over 3,000 select supply chain managers and executives across industries ranging from the service sector to heavy manufacturing. The survey was conducted entirely online between January 5- 26, 2010. All responses were kept anonymous and confidential. The survey consisted of 22 optional questions with 9 questions relating to the general characteristics of the respondent’s organization. For the remaining 13 questions we asked our participants to rate on a scale of 1 to 5 the importance of each stated supply chain related objectives. The results were thoroughly analyzed for error and duplication. If a respondent did not provide an answer for a particular question, the results are identified as a “no-response”.   Page 3 
  • 4. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Profile of our respondents  Industries  Of the companies that responded, Consumer Goods Manufacturers represent 42% of the total. Other industries represented are Food and Beverage, Home Furnishings, Service, Consumer Packaging, Retail, Sporting Goods and Construction Material. Annual Revenue  Ultra Logistics wanted to target a wide range of supply chain needs with an emphasis in high volume shippers for this survey. Up to 40% of the companies we surveyed reported annual revenue of over one billion dollars. The other heavy concentration of respondents (34%) is between $11M-$100M in annual revenue.   Page 4 
  • 5. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Production Facilities  The vast majority of our respondents have fewer than 50 production facilities. We made no distinction between domestically or internationally located facilities. Distribution Facilities  Over 50% of our respondents reported 5 or fewer distribution facilities. We made no distinction between domestically or internationally located facilities.   Page 5 
  • 6. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Supply Chain Employees  Roughly two-thirds of the companies surveyed have fewer than 100 total supply chain employees. This result was somewhat surprising considering the distribution of responses by revenue. It indicates through the use of technologies such as TMS, WMS, Labor Management, etc. and general process improvements, companies are finding ever more creative ways to do more with less. Domestics versus International  Based on the responses received, we observed an imbalance in the percentage of domestic versus international moves between inbound and outbound transportation. According to our analysis, 64% of our respondents ship up to 100% of their outbound volume domestically. In contrast, 44% of our respondents receive up to 100% of their inbound volume domestically.   Page 6 
  • 7. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Transportation Modes  LTL shipments are by far the most common shipment method utilized by our survey respondents at 94%. Truckload and ocean shipments are also very common among the survey takers. Please note the survey only allowed for yes/no answers, therefore the analysis does not reflect shipment volumes. Most Significant Goal  When we asked our survey participants what their most significant goal is, the responses clearly gravitated towards two categories: Supply Chain Cost Cutting (39%) and Improved Management of your Supply Chain (44%). The remaining two categories “Supply Chain Risk Planning” and “Better Alignment of your Strategic Goals” combined accounted for 17% of total responses. This is an indication that companies are currently more focused on short to medium term operational/financial control rather than longer term strategic planning. It is our thought that this notion is also supported in the Detailed Questions section below.   Page 7 
  • 8. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010   Detailed Questions Summary  We asked our survey participants to rate the following categories according to the importance of each statement: Category Description Speed Speed of adaptability and flexibility of your current supply chain in the event of a necessary increase or decrease in volume Shipping Optimal setup of shipping and routes to respond to today's volatile market conditions Inventory Actively managing inventory at different points of your supply chain based on timing and product flow characteristics Fuel Flux Managing your transportation resources adequately to manage fluctuations in fuel prices Sourcing Optimize sourcing strategy to provide the lowest cost solution while minimizing time delivery risks Restructuring Restructure your network based on changing cost and service requirements Outsource Right balance of in-source and/or outsource operations, allowing you to focus on your core strategies Allocating Accurately allocating supply chain costs at a SKU level Distribution Optimizing number, size, and location of distribution facilities Simulate Ability to simulate changes in network setup via software to gauge the effects Benchmarking Benchmarking current network against industry norms Manufacturing Optimizing number, size, and location of manufacturing facilities Not Somewhat Very Extremely Weighted Category Rank No Response Important Important Important Important Important Score Speed 1 0% 3% 3% 11% 33% 50% 4.25 Shipping 2 0% 0% 11% 8% 28% 53% 4.22 Inventory 3 6% 6% 6% 6% 29% 53% 4.18 FuelFlux 4 0% 3% 14% 25% 17% 42% 3.81 Sourcing 5 9% 0% 3% 18% 42% 36% 4.12 Restructuring 5 6% 0% 6% 15% 53% 26% 4.00 Outsource 7 0% 8% 3% 44% 25% 19% 3.44 Allocating 8 6% 6% 15% 12% 50% 18% 3.59 Distribution 9 3% 17% 14% 14% 23% 31% 3.37 Simulate 10 6% 6% 24% 26% 21% 24% 3.32 Benchmarking 11 3% 9% 17% 29% 37% 9% 3.20 Manufacturing 12 6% 29% 15% 15% 18% 24% 2.91 Based on our survey results, Speed of Adaptability and Flexibility is the most important factor in our respondents’ supply chain with 50% rating this category extremely important. This is unsurprising given the current economic climate and associated volume changes experience in many industries. Along with Flexibility and Adaptability, our survey participants also indicated to us that inventory management and optimal routing play a big factor in where they are currently focusing their efforts. We believe the trend in supply chain management in 2010 falls heavily towards tactical objectives such as improving execution, reducing operating costs, improving working capital efficiency and better managing short term risks. Long term goals are not ignored however as companies that operate in less volatile markets maintain strong interest in categories such as Strategic Sourcing, Network Planning, and Benchmarking, etc.     Page 8 
  • 9. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Detailed Questions Cross References  The following section illustrates importance broken down by Industry, Revenue and Number of Facilities. Importance in categories are indicated a scale of 1 to 5 with 5 being the most importance. Each metric is derived by averaging the set of numbers matching both the category and the noted variables. Responses by Industry  ri ng i ng g ct urin uti on ma rk urce fa ctu ati ng tory F l ux pi ng ci ng la te ib ru h d o Manu I nven Be nc Al loc S im u S pee S ou r Di st r Outs Re st S hip Fuel Industry Construction Material 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 0.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Consumer Goods 4.1 4.1 3.3 3.6 3.4 4.0 3.5 2.8 3.9 2.9 3.2 3.7 Consumer Packaging 4.7 4.7 3.3 3.7 3.3 3.5 4.5 4.0 4.0 3.7 3.0 4.7 Food/Bev 4.4 4.4 3.6 4.8 4.4 4.6 4.4 4.2 5.0 4.0 4.6 4.6 Home Furnishings 4.3 3.8 3.0 3.3 2.3 4.0 2.3 2.0 4.0 2.5 4.7 4.0 Retail 4.3 4.0 2.7 3.3 1.7 4.7 2.0 1.0 3.7 2.7 2.7 3.3 Sporting Goods 3.5 4.5 4.5 5.0 4.0 3.5 5.0 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.5 5.0 Service 4.7 4.3 4.0 4.0 3.3 4.3 2.3 2.3 4.7 3.7 3.3 3.7 Total 4.3 4.2 3.4 3.8 3.3 4.1 3.4 2.9 4.2 3.2 3.6 4.0 Responses by Revenue  ring ing g ct urin uti on ma rk urce fa ctu ati ng tory Fl u x pi ng ci ng la te ib ru h d o Manu Inven Be nc All oc Sim u Spee S our Dist r Outs Re st Ship Fuel Revenue $1.1M-$10M 4.3 5.0 4.3 4.7 3.7 4.7 4.0 3.3 5.0 3.7 3.3 3.7 $11M-$100M 3.9 3.6 2.7 3.3 2.8 3.9 2.3 2.1 3.8 2.3 3.3 3.7 $101M-$1B 4.5 4.5 3.8 3.7 3.5 3.5 4.2 4.0 3.8 3.7 3.8 4.3 $1B+ 4.4 4.4 3.6 4.1 3.5 4.3 3.7 2.9 4.4 3.7 3.8 4.1 Responses by Production Facilities  ri n g i ng g ct urin ution ma rk urce fa ctu ati ng tory Fl ux pi ng ci ng la te ib ru h d o Manu Inven Be nc All oc Sim u Spee S our Dist r Outs Re st Ship Fuel Production Facilities 0 4.3 4.0 2.7 3.7 1.7 4.7 2.0 1.0 4.0 3.0 3.7 3.3 1-50 4.2 4.2 3.4 3.7 3.4 3.9 3.4 2.9 4.1 3.1 3.5 4.0 51-100 4.0 5.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 101-200 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 201-500 5.0 4.0 4.5 5.0 3.5 5.0 3.5 3.5 4.5 4.5 3.5 4.0   Page 9 
  • 10. Ultra Logistics Supply Chain Survey March 2010     Responses by Distribution Facilities  ring ing g n ution ma rk ct uri urce fa ctu ati ng tory Fl u x pi n g cing la te ib ru h d o Manu Inven Be nc Alloc Sim u Spee S ou r Dist r Outs Re st Ship Fuel Distribution Facilities 1-5 4.2 4.0 3.2 3.5 2.8 4.2 2.8 2.6 3.9 2.8 3.2 3.7 6-10 3.5 4.5 3.5 4.3 3.8 3.5 4.3 3.5 4.0 3.3 4.0 4.5 11-20 4.4 4.6 3.4 3.9 3.6 4.3 3.9 2.6 4.4 4.1 4.3 4.3 21-50 4.5 4.0 4.0 5.0 4.5 3.5 4.5 3.5 5.0 3.0 3.0 4.5 51+ 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0   Page 10