SUPPLY CHAIN RESOURCE COOPERATIVE

Applying Porter Five Forces Analysis to Drive Category Management Insights

June 15, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Category Management, Commodities forecasting, Global Supply Chain, Strategic Sourcing, Supplier Relationship Management, Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Strategy

In the past two or three weeks, I’ve had the opportunity to work with a number of organizations seeking to drive insights into their supply markets, as they attempt to navigate the choppy waters of global economic change.  One of the tools that we’ve used in these engagements is a trusted standby, the Porter Five Forces analysis tool.

Developed by a Harvard Business school academic, Michael Porter, in his seminal book Competitive Strategy, published in 1980, the framework has proven to be one of the most important tools in the category management toolbox.   This tool is used to describe competitive forces in a market economy.  The application of this tool involves evaluating the relative position of buyers and suppliers in the market, as well as the other forces including substitution, industry rivalry, and new potential market entrants.  The approach is a useful format in which to engage the category team to take a “10,000 foot view” of the market place and evaluate what our company’s relative negotiating position is.

Data used to conduct  a Five Forces Analysis requires a wide array of different inputs, including a spend analysis, supplier analysis, market intelligence, and third party industry reports.  A typical approach is to provide an overview of these data to the team, and use this as a basis for an open and frank discussion in a workshop format with the stakeholders.  During this workshop, the goal should be to list relevant criteria for each of the five forces as a basis for stimulating critical thinking and debate. The end result of this approach will be a high level overview of the market that can help to predict supplier and buyer outcomes from a particular category strategy approach.  It is also a helpful educational tool to lead stakeholders to understand current supply market conditions.

The five forces are:

1.  Internal market rivalry that creates more options for buyers. Factors include:

  • Speed of industry growth
  • Capacity utilization
  • Exit barriers
  • Product differences
  • Switching costs
  • Diversity of competitors

 

2. The threat of entrants. Examples here might be the new set of Chinese and Low Cost Country manufacturers who are entering many of the traditional US manufacturing strongholds such as electronics, automobiles, etc. This is impacted by:

  • Capital markets
  • Availability of skilled workers
  • Access to critical technologies, inputs or distribution
  • Product life cycles
  • Brand equity/customer loyalty
  • Government deregulation
  • Risk of switching
  • Economies of scale

3. The threat of substitute products and services. For example, there are a new set of growing composites, thermosets, and carbon fibers that are replacing traditional elements such as steel. Factors influencing this include:

  • relative performance of substitutes
  • relative price of substitutes
  • switching costs
  • buyer propensity to substitute

4. The power of buyers. For example, as buyers begin to consolidate specifications and develop industry standards, increasing power is created over suppliers in the marketplace. Factors include:

  • Buyer concentration
  • Buyer volume
  • Buyer switching costs
  • Price sensitivity
  • Product differences
  • Brand identify
  • Impact on quality or performance
  • Buyer profits
  • Availability of substitutes

5. The power of suppliers. As many supply markets begin to consolidate, fewer suppliers means that a greater amount of supplier power exists in markets. Factors include:

  • Prices of major inputs
  • Ability to pass on price increases
  • Availability of key technologies or other resources
  • Threat of forward or backward integration
  • Industry capacity utilization
  • Supplier concentration
  • Importance of volume to supplier

In the workshops I’ve been running, I have challenged sourcing executives to use the tool to take a hard look at their markets, and really evaluate how much power they have as a buyer in the context of global change.  For example, working with a uranium mining company, we assessed how the impact of the Japanese tsunami has scared off many nuclear power projects, especially in markets like Germany, making their business more challenged and focused on cost savings than in the past.  in another case, utilizing the tool to evaluate the tire market for a manufacturer has produced insights that is driving the category team to consider major changes in their sourcing strategy, given the constraints and bottlenecks in the tire market.

The Five Forces analysis, provides a comprehensive framework for people to question how realistic planned strategies are and whether they will be successful given the conditions in the global market place.  I recommend that every sourcing manager take the time to use the tool with their team to draw inferences that may drive strategic planning for the future.

[No comments]

Using Should-Cost Analytics to Drive Supplier Relationships

June 5, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Supply Chain Management

I spoke at a meeting of Procurement Leaders in Boston today, and had the opportunity to share thoughts with a number of procurement professionals from organizations as diverse as Decker Shoes (producers of Uggs), MascoTech, TorontoDominion, Guardian Life, and AARP.  During the discussion, we spent a good deal of time discussing should-cost analysis as a tool to drive supplier negotiations, and establish a basis for building long-term contracts.

A should-cost model attempts to quantify and isolate all of the elements associated with the Price and Total Cost of Ownership of a finished good or service.   Part of the goal of an analytical approach is to uncover the elements of price, including profit.  Suppliers are entitled to profit, that is why they (and we) are in business.  We are not out to eliminate profit.  However, it is our job as procurement leaders to understand and manage reasonable profit as well as the other costs associated with the particular good or service.  In an ideal situation we can actually achieve lower prices and provide higher vendor profit by co-managing cost… and truly build a win-win relationship.

Several key points emerged in the discussion that ensued, including a role play focused on effective supplier performance measurement and the relationship of total cost of ownership:

- Many suppliers do not have a good grasp on the cost to produce a product or provide a service. They have always been able to “ballpark” the cost estimate, throwing in a lump sum percentage for overhead.  Many have also never been asked to provide such a breakdown – so asking for one will drive them to be more responsive and open to becoming more transparent and accurate on costs.

- Should cost models will never be 100% accurate – but they need to be directionally correct.  Utilizing a combination of supplier-provided information, comparisons of supplier to supplier responses to RFP’s, and an internally developed should-cost model constructed based on third party data will provide an upper and lower bound for cost analytics.  The model doesn’t have to be completely accurate – but needs to be accurate enough to drive the conversation and identify areas of cost that can be impacted.

- Not all costs are controllable.  As such, we need to identify areas of cost that we can impact.  Some of this may involve engagement of internal stakeholders who are driving specifications and who may be asked to provide rationale for doing so.  Over-specification of tolerances or service requirements is a major driver of cost.

- Should cost analysis can drive supplier innovation and ideas to take cost out of the product or service.  Suppliers should be encouraged to provide ideas for reducing total cost, which can also drive their operational efficiencies and reduce complexity.  This is one of the biggest untapped sources of cost savings, and one that is typically overlooked by traditional procurement organizations.

One of the participants emphasized – how do I get started?  I don’t know how to do this and have never done it before….my response is – there is no better time than now!  Jump in, and start to build it  - start with a simple cost model, with just a few categories.  Do your research with whatever information you can find internally or externally – then take it to your internal partners and suppliers.  You’ll be surprised how accurate it can be!

 

[No comments]

Creating an analytics organization for supply chain

May 31, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Supply chain analytics, Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Talent

I’ve been leading a few calls for the International Institute of Analytics, as a faculty lead for the manufacturing group.  We are preparing for the Chief Analytics Officer meeting coming up in Chicago in June.  One of the issues that comes up is where the analytics function should reside – in IT or in the business function?

We have heard from people on both sides.  The people in the business function complain that IT is “old school”, and that “we can’t rely on IT”.  They are saying “we need to down the analytics platform, and define the roles and responsibilities of that area.”

Another individual from a newly formed mfg. analytics group noted that a lot of what they had done was in constraint management and inventory and demand.  But most of the work that had been done was done internally – and not by IT.  IT “stores it in places, but doesn’t know how to create a good analytics foundation.”

I believe that IT organizations need to be viewed as a partner.    For instance, one IT analytics leader we spoke with noted that “we want to be partners with the business – and understand business needs and what drives the business.  We are focused on building an enterprise data warehouse, and providing the tools (in this case, in an Oracle environment) that allow people to click and drag and build their own reports, to get summary trends and detailed level data on what customers are ordering on a day by day basis for any product line at any region in the world.  It is viewed as “putting the platform out there and making it easy for people to create their own analytics.”

Another issue that comes up often is related to the process used to focus on an analytics problem and application.  This is an area where analytics can play an important role in leading the business function team to the right endpoint.  You need to be able to provide people with a “can-do” attitude.  This means being able to provide a definite process for engagement, which begins with identifying the problem, and building a set of hypotheses around what the relevant data are important that can provide insight into the problem.

One of the things that is important is being able to open up your ears and eyes to drive creative thinking into other types of data that might be available that are not currently in your standard database.  Is there proxy data that can be used to approximate other related variables that can provide good insights into the parameter of interest.   Are there other pieces of data that might be directly related but correlate to what we are trying to solve?  This could include public domain data or economic data.  Don’t just limit yourself to one or two data sources, but drive creating thinking.  This is what I mean by a process.

In the supply chain area, we are certainly seeing a strong need for analytics in areas like collaborative forecasting, inventory management, production planning, and logistics network design.  One of the big themes is the need to drive end to end integration – so that demand sensing algorithms can provide early warning of surges (or slowdowns) in demand, that can be tracked and driven back into the supply chain, beginning with improved warehouse and distribution management, transportation management, production planning, and supplier capacity and order collaboration.  People need to have metrics that drive transparency on events both in the short-term, but that also provide input into broader strategic decisions, such as longer-term needs for capacity, or even slowdowns that translate to postponing major capacity investments.

There is also a huge need for analytics in the area of talent management for supply chain and manufacturing.  We are working on a project looking at future talent requirements, and understanding what you need to be doing today that will translate into requirements for people and talent five to ten years from now.  We are working on building a talent management analytical tool that we believe is unique, and are looking for people to help validate it.

 

[4 comments]

For supply chain managers to become a trusted advisor, talent management is key

May 29, 2013
by: handfield
categories: MBA Supply Chain Programs, Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Talent, Supply Chain Talent Management

A CPO in the financial services industry also noted that a need to redefine procurement’s role in the enterprise is happening, driven by the recognition that a new type of procurement capability is needed:

Prior to our transformation, the ONLY metric by which our performance was measured is how much money we saved for the organization.  When people are compensated only on some of the money they save this drives some interesting behaviors.  Despite hitting home runs on our savings targets, procurement had higher attrition and mixed customer feedback.  We have since shifted our focus on returns on operating budget, taking operating cost out of the enterprise, and on becoming a TRUSTED ADVISOR to every part of the business.  And we now have a balanced scorecard to measure performance against a myriad of attributes, including our operational processes, our people, and consistent surveys of our customers.

The role of a trusted advisor is certainly aspirational, as it involves creating many capabilities that are new to procurement.  To move towards this vision, organizations will need to re-think their approach on talent management.

Collings and Mellahi (2009) defined strategic talent management as activities and processes that involve the systematic identification of key positions which differentially contribute to the organization’s sustainable competitive advantage, the development of a talent pool of high potential and high performing incumbents to fill these roles, and the development of a differentiated human resource architecture to facilitate filling these positions with competent incumbents and to ensure their continued commitment to the organization.

But if this is to happen – is the human resources group going to lead the charge?  Some believe that talent management is “too important” to be left to HR managers alone, who may not understand the critical needs of front-line supply chain managers, and the complex situations they are facing.  I believe that there needs to be a closer relationship between HR and supply chain executives, and that they need to go about this challenge as a team.  In this case, HR needs to become a “trusted advisor” to procurement, to help them apply the tools, methods, recruiting approaches, training and development methods, and talent metrics that will lead to a successful outcome.  This will involve teaming to create a multi-generational plan for talent management that extends at least five to ten years into the future.  This can help drive answers to the question of “what should we be doing today, that will ensure we have the right talent, to fill the gaps that we will have in five years, when our experienced managers begin to retire?”  These types of questions can be analytically modeled.  We are working on such a project at the SCRC over the project, and will be sure to provide updates on this fascinating area.

[No comments]

Why margin management is the ‘talk of the town’ in fast moving consumer product supply chains…

May 23, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Inventory Management, Logistics, Retail Logistics, Strategic Cost Management, Supply Chain Management

Recent discussions with consumer goods companies reveals that margin management is becoming an imperative that goes far beyond just taking out cost of goods sold, or using full truck loads on shipment.

CPG companies are seeking to continuously drive profit margins on the products they sell in retail stores – and the world of retail is continuing to become more complex as we speak.  One executive I spoke with recently talked about the  management  of multiple forms of data to make better decisions that can be driven back into supply chain planning and decisions.  For instance,  can you take Nielsen information on consumer preferences, demand information from regional store locations, and use this data to identify and create pools of need for specific types of products?  Can we see which consumers are out there  and then be able to interpret and build demand signal that drives availability to this pocket of consumers that will result in a full price purchase versus a discounted purchase?  And can we then be able to pull in this demand signal, and integrate it into our transportation, warehousing, and manufacturing/planning and control decisions to ensure the product is produced and delivered in time?

The real challenge for organizations is not just about pulling the data for these types of decisions, but to look at  the interaction of all the decisions companies make throughout the different silos of customer service, product promotion, distribution, transportation, inventory management, and production – as well as the supply base.  This in turn begins to identify sources of loss in the supply chain that are not valued by the customer – and being willing to make tough decisions regarding capacity changeovers at the plant that may be less than optimal for production runs, marketing practices that may be counterintuitive but make sense from a margin-driven perspective, product mix and allocation decisions by region that are more aligned to demand, and carrier models that impact the entire business, and may even drive collaboration with other CPGs to ensure fuller trucks and improved delivery.  This executive stated it quite nicely:     How come not all our kids go to college?  The answer is that  not all kids have the same margin structure.  We understand that but we don’t always use the same logic when we think about product decisions in the supply chain…

 

[No comments]

Easy steps for supply chain students to ensure they remain unemployed…

May 21, 2013
by: handfield
categories: MBA Supply Chain Programs, Supply Chain Management, Supply Chain Talent, Supply Chain Talent Management

I recently visited with a large services company, and learned a few things talking to their supply chain recruiters that provided some great insights for students to think about.

First, the managers I spoke with talked about things every student who is serious about finding a job should do before an interview:

-       Be prepared – know what our business is! If it is a financial institution, don’t ask about how the bank teller business is.  If it is a manufacturer, don’t tell them you hate the idea of an assembly line job.  A good idea is to pick up a paper, and see if the company is in the news today.  Come in prepared to talk about a current issue that is relevant to the company.  Read about their business on their website, and learn how they are structured and their lines of business.

-       Be able to articulate strengths or weaknesses on your resume.  Emphasize accomplishments you proud of , but also areas where are there notable gaps.  If you’ve worked on an analytics project, or have done a team project, talk about the experience and what you learned from it.  Or call it out as an area of opportunity where you would like to get more experience.

-       Be open to constructive criticism.  Recruiters love to see people who welcome 360 evaluations.  If they seek the knowledge to understand how they can improve – it is a good thing.

-       Think about how the courses and projects you’ve done will translate well into the employer’s environment.  Put yourself in their shoes – why would they want to consider you in the first place?

-       Walk in, look the recruiter straight in the eye, and shake his/her hand.  A simple thing, that means a lot.

–       Connect the dots between what you did in the past – and what you intend to be able to do at this company.

-       Write a thank you note – handwritten.  The note should thank the recruiter for the opportunity to speak to them.  This simple act lets them know that you know how to create a relationship, nurture it, and develop it.  That is a critical skill that is necessary for survival in today’s global supply chain environment.  People will remember it, and it is such a simple act that will pay dividends.  And if you get the offer, you will find this person will extend themselves on your behalf.

On the other hand, if you really DON”T WANT A JOB and wish to REMAIN UNEMPLOYED, follow these simple steps for your interview.  These are all true stories (believe it or not) that recruiters shared with me.

-       Show up for the interview 10 minutes late. The first thing out of your mouth should be “I’m not even a supply chain major.  But I signed up for this interview anyhow!”

-       Avoid looking the recruiter in the eye, slouch in your chair, and put on your best “cool, indifferent” attitude…

-       Start texting during the interview.

-       Even better, lean back in your chair, put your hands behind your head, and stare at the ceiling.  A sure way to get nixed right off the bat.

-       Name drop.  “My neighbor is a big shot in this company, and he told me I should interview and I’d get the job.”  Your name just went to the bottom of the list.  (It is okay to say that you had heard about a friend who worked there and really liked the environment, however.)

-       If you go to a company-sponsored event, take advantage of the open bar and get plowed.  While you’re at it, take the opportunity to hit on a member of the opposite sex in full view of the recruiter.  Guaranteed to put you on the black list.

-       Forget to write a thank you note.  Don’t even acknowledge it happened.  Help them forget you as quickly as possible.

-        If you do somehow manage to get a job offer – tell them they will have to hold on because you’re waiting on another offer for a job that you really want.  Don’t even pretend like you are remotely interested in the job.  Guaranteed that they won’t get back to you.

[No comments]

Do markets reward sustainable supply chains? The forces of social capital may change the rules…

May 13, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Procurement Sustainability, Supply Chain Management, Sustainability

In a recent dialogue with Barbara Grey, the author of new research on social capital today, we discovered an interesting anomaly.   It seems that companies who seek to identify problems and issues in their supply chain, and who intend to do the right thing, are not always rewarded by the markets for doing so.  In the series of sustainable supply chain assessments we’ve completed this year, our student teams assessed the extent to which codes of conduct were measured, audited, and rewarded/penalized by companies seeking to drive improved sustainable performance down the supply chain.  One would naturally assume that companies that are “doing the right thing” would be rewarded in the market…. but is it so?

Exhibit “A” is the apparel manufacturer, Lululemon.  In recent weeks, Lululemon’s stock went down 10% when it was announced  that they product issues.  The apparel maker pulled some of its yoga pants from store shelves for being too see-through, and their product officer fell on her sword taking the blame.  But they had the guts to do the recall…. and even though they took a hit, the company is fundamentally based on a strong culture of transparency and ethical behavior.  In the longer term their stock is going up.

Exhibit “B” is Apple…as I’ve noted in prior blogs, Apple has begun a campaign of audits, but has not made significant changes to its stable of manufacturing partners as a result. Its inspections have turned up serious violations at hundreds of plants, but only 15 suppliers have been terminated since 2007.  And their stock?  Taking a major hit, and dropped from a high of 700 to below 400…..that’s a lot of market cap to lose.  But was it because they were transparent – and if they do try to drive more change, will they be rewarded?

Barbara recently wrote an insight  on a new phenomenon called Social Capital, which is based on social media as a forum to drive change.  Social media has the power to influence, expose, and disseminate views (both positive and negative) on a company’s products and/or services, including how a company treats their suppliers and stakeholders, and how a company’s business activities impact society and the environment. This will enable parties in the supply chain to self-organize and join forces on a common cause to gain support from others and lobby for social and regulatory reform and change.  In the process, they will begin to create new communities to enable learning, collaboration, and co-creation.

In my opinion, organizations now have to make a tough decision.  To be transparent, or to hide their supply chain flaws.  I truly believe that those organizations that step up to the plate and make the tough calls, drive new measures into their supply base, and lift up the bar for the entire community will win in the longer term…. not the short term mind you – but the long term.  The forces of Social Capital are at work.

 

 

[No comments]

Supply chain talent management remains a priority at Lenovo

May 10, 2013
by: handfield
categories: China Supply Chain, Supply Chain Talent Management

I recently interviewed John Zapko at Lenovo, who talked to me about some of the issues Lenovo is facing globally around supply chain talent management.  John began our interview by commenting on the importance of this topic.

Zapko:  Without question, attracting talent, bringing it on board, being able to hire this talent and especially retaining talent around the world in some of our most important positions, not only at management levels, senior management levels, but also commodity management and the people that really focus on the procurement activity, driving the supplier-based management… negotiations, contracts. As we drive in this complex world, having that level of talent is really critical for us, and it is clearly the biggest challenge we have.

How do you create talent and why is it so important in a complex world? We’ve been hearing a lot about global complexity and the challenges in dealing with governments, with regulations. Why is talent so important in procurement as you work these issues?

Zapko …Global complexity is becoming more and more significant for us. As we drive our growth, in emerging markets especially, and as we drive our activity into those emerging markets, people that really understand the procurement role, with experience in delivering professional procurement activity… in a more complex environment in the merging market, where government regulations’ specific uniqueness is around contract.

New emerging suppliers and our ability to manage those emerging suppliers become key critical skills and key critical experiences that, if we don’t have, we’re seriously lacking. So we benefit from those greatly, and when we find those people, whether we build that town internally through activity and growth and development, or we hire it in — once we have it and once we’re driving the advantages with it — we really have to retain it. And so that becomes the major initiative for us as we work in this complex world.

[No comments]

Hey Mr. President, Why Can’t We Be More Like Germany?

May 8, 2013
by: handfield
categories: German supply chain, Global Distribution, Logistics, Supply Chain Talent

For those of you who follow international sports, you know that the king of sports is soccer, and the Superbowl of soccer tournaments is the European’s Champion League.  And what teams are playing in this year’s title game?  Germany vs. Germany.  Two German clubs, one from Dortmund in the Ruhr Valley and the other from Munich in deepest Bavaria, will face off for the European title, which means the nationality of the champion is already assured.

But soccer isn’t the only thing that Germany is admired for.  Recent statements from a New York Times article show that Germany is the envy of Europe for economic reasons as well.  Germany’s stock market is riding high, its unemployment rate has remained stubbornly low and the Continent’s best and brightest are moving here in droves. The article goes on to note that Germany, Europe’s largest economy, is viewed not only with resentment but with a mixture of apprehension, envy and admiration, informed by a belief that the Germans have cracked the code of how to compete in the globalized world, coupled with an uncertainty about whether their efficient, export-driven economic model can be replicated.

The secret sauce for Germany is related to a number of important policies, in my opinion.  First, the trade unions have established a strong relationship with business, wherein trades actually require certification and training to become a journeyman.  Government-influenced negotiations between unions and business ensure that high quality standards are put in place commensurate with high paying jobs for those who are willing to go through the years of training required to become a union member.

Second, the nature of Germany’s supply chain is focused on near-shoring.  German companies simply prefer to do business with local German suppliers.  When one executive was asked why, his response was simple.  ”Who else will buy from them if we don’t?”  This is a point that US companies should think about, instead of off-shoring from suppliers that do not directly support the economy.  If Germany is able to provide high quality, high technology products using local, more expensive suppliers, why can’t the US do so?

Finally, the government in Germany is strongly pro-business, unlike our current administration which seems to view big business as not only the enemy, but the source of all that is wrong with the economy.  There needs to be more collaboration between business and government on a multitude of issues that are impacting our competitive edge, including transportation and infrastructure, education, labor issues, trade laws, environmental regulations.  These are all issues that require smart people from both sides working together to solve, as there will be no easy answers here.

And finally, we need to have role models for young people that drive them towards careers in supply chain, not as NBA or NFL players.  One small step we will be talking about more on this blog will be the introduction of a new BVL chapter for logistics in the North Carolina region.  For those of you who don’t know, BVL International is a global supply chain and logistics organization, based in (you guessed it)… Germany.  So while we can’t replicate their soccer prowess, perhaps we can start to move more towards their business model.

[1 comment]

So Your Supply Chain is Banning Bangladesh….and Going to Cambodia?: “The Ugliest Race to the Bottom”

May 8, 2013
by: handfield
categories: Corporate Social Responsibility, Labor and Human Rights in the Supply Chain, Procurement Sustainability, Supply Chain Management, Sustainability

In our ongoing discussion of labor and human rights violations in the supply chain, we’ve discussed in prior posts the problems that occurred in Bangladesh resulting in over 700 dead.  Companies like Nike and Disney have publicly stated that they are not going to Bangladesh for apparel sourcing in the future.  But that leaves these companies with what other options?

As noted in a Wall Street Journal article today, low cost countries all have the same problems that factories in Bangladesh do.  Sanjiv Pandita, executive director of the Asia Monitor, called it “the ugliest race to the bottom, because the financial crisis in America and Europe means that people are scared of buying expensive things”.  But as any buying agent who has visited these countries knows, things aren’t much better when you visit factories in other parts of Asia, including Myanmar, Pakistan, China, Indonesia, or India.  The same unsafe working conditions prevail, and you are just as likely to encounter the problems with capacity and subcontracting that we’ve noted in other blogs.

According to the WSJ article, conditions in these other countries are just as horrific, although come in different varieties.  For instance, Puma’s factory in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, worked with the Fair Labor Association to discover a “strong possibility” that fainting workers in the factories was caused by chemical exposure and cited excessive overtime and insufficient drinking water as contributing factors.  In Thailand, workers at a factory producing Nike apparel were forced by military personnel allegedly hired by the manufacturer to sign a petition allowing them to be paid less than the minimum wage of $4 a day.  That’s considered high pay when you look at Myanmar, where people are paid as little as 40 cents to $1.10, but that’s only if they have perfect attendence, meaning coming in seven days a week.

This is nothing short of slave labor, and apparel companies are going to have to come together as a group and drive community-based changes.  They may have to increase wages by as much as 10 to 15%, and pass on the costs to the ever complaining Western consumer.  I think most of us can afford to pay $1 more for that “Mickey Mouse” or “Just Do It” t-shirt……

 

[No comments]