Failed supply chain initiative

Lessons from a Failed Supply Chain Initiative... 

The political requirement within Europe, that the industry should be responsible for the assessment of the 30,000 substances currently on the market and their applications is in line with the voluntary commitment of responsible care by the chemicals industry. Implementation of this -commitment has so far failed because many users of chemical products have not complied with it. The REACH system proposed by the EU Commission would create a regulative framework for structuring responsibility and information flow along the supply chain, in a binding marmer for the first time. The commercial institutions should respond to this state initiative. 

Finally, if the registrant can prove that all risks are under control and the substance can be safely manufactured and used, the corresponding initial exposure scenario is defined as the final exposure scenario. In the end, the final exposure scenario is communicated within the framework of extended safety data sheets in order to ensure the safe use of the substance down the supply chain (Caveat The legal text of REACH usually refers to the term exposure scenario while in reality speaking of the final exposure scenario.) By contrast, if the registrant fails to lower the risk characterization ratio below 1, despite the aforementioned refinements and modifications, he must prevent the use of the substance under circumstances where the risks are not controlled. 

Companies will need to summon courage to question what is believed to be supply chain best practices. It is time. Nearly 60 percent of all corporate quality and process improvement initiatives have failed to meet their stated objectives. The satisfaction rate with current supply chain technologies has never been lower. The failure rates are too high. Yet, companies continue in the same patterns. We do not have "best practices." Instead, we have "evolving practices" that must be shaped and molded by the leadership team. 

Actual case 2.4 In 1999, a massive earthquake devastated Taiwan. Initially, 80 % of the islands power failed. Companies such as Hewlett-Packard and DeU, most of whose spare parts were from Taiwan manufacturers, were impacted by supply interruptions. Similarly, the snow disaster occurred in 2008 in China also resulted in paralysis of supply chain, and therefore many enterprises suffered heavy losses [9]. 

Once this is in place individual parties within any supply chain can initiate their own IPP. However it may be necessary to juggle a variety of factors such as regional legislation, international standardisation, any economic measures or incentives, perhaps some voluntary measures and, arguably most importantly for a commercially sustainable product, the expectations of the consumer to demand IPP sensitive products. IPP necessarily passes the cost for a more environmentally friendly product throughout the supply chain and for the consumer this means an increased product price. The consumer needs to buy into the idea as well, otherwise a product will fail once placed within the market place. 

Some studies demonstrate increased emissions at increased ventilation rates, while others fail to do so. Oxidants in the supply air may initiate chains of reactions between the oxidants and otherwise stable chemicals on the inner surfaces or in the indoor air. Partial pressure of VOCs in the air may reduce their emission. When ventilation is increased, the result may be less reduction of air pollution than expected, since the emission rates may increase at the resulting lower VOC concentrations and the increased oxidant concentration may promote secondary emissions. 

---