Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • World
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Brite
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (Cyborg)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

CIRCLE WITH A DOT

  1. Home
  2. Uncategorized
  3. What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Uncategorized
57 Posts 41 Posters 292 Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • jt_rebelo@ciberlandia.ptJ jt_rebelo@ciberlandia.pt

    @masek and the consequences of AI. Once the knowledge is gone, it's probably gone for good or, at least, for a long time.

    aaribaud@mastodon.artA This user is from outside of this forum
    aaribaud@mastodon.artA This user is from outside of this forum
    aaribaud@mastodon.art
    wrote last edited by
    #10

    @jt_rebelo @masek AI certainly does not help, but from the "end" side of my career, I can tell that, even without AI, very few companies, and indeed very few people in those few companies, know how important it is to *preserve and transmit knowledge* within the company.

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
      felipe@social.treehouse.systemsF This user is from outside of this forum
      felipe@social.treehouse.systems
      wrote last edited by
      #11

      @futzle @masek what do you manufacture?

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

        What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

        Setup

        Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

        Everything is fine

        Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

        Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

        Crisis

        Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

        Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

        The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

        If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

        Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

        The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

        Recovery

        A few years later, demand picks up again.

        The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

        Now someone decides to restart production.

        The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

        They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

        Now they try to get it working again.

        But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

        But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

        Bottlenecks

        And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

        Very few businesses survive this phase.

        There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

        Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

        At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

        Summary

        This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

        And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

        forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF This user is from outside of this forum
        forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF This user is from outside of this forum
        forthy42@mastodon.net2o.de
        wrote last edited by
        #12

        @masek Counter-example: In early 2020, there was a lot of demand for FFP2 masks, exceeding production capacity by a large margin. BYD's management decided that they go into this business quickly, but had no experience whatsoever with FFP2 masks. They did have ample experience with batteries, and spare machines for just about anything you might need for battery or car production. And a huge team of skilled workers to reconfigure machinery of that kind.

        They built machines to produce FFP2 masks within a week, and within months, they were the world's leading FFP2 mask producer. Actually, the machines they had were much higher quality than the machines they needed. They managed to assemble new face mask production machines at a rate of 5-10 new machines per day (!).

        Link Preview Image
        BYD now produces also face-masks. Giant plant created to tackle COVID-19 outbreak - Sustainable Bus

        BYD has announced the creation of the world’s largest mass-produced face-mask production plant. The move by BYD comes as demand for hygiene products

        favicon

        Sustainable Bus (www.sustainable-bus.com)

        Unlike the story you told, this was not an uphill battle task, but it was downhill: The requirements to make face masks are easy compared to what BYD regularly does.

        masek@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
        0
        • atm0spheric@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
          atm0spheric@mastodon.socialA This user is from outside of this forum
          atm0spheric@mastodon.social
          wrote last edited by
          #13

          @af @kritzelkatze @masek

          😉

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF forthy42@mastodon.net2o.de

            @masek Counter-example: In early 2020, there was a lot of demand for FFP2 masks, exceeding production capacity by a large margin. BYD's management decided that they go into this business quickly, but had no experience whatsoever with FFP2 masks. They did have ample experience with batteries, and spare machines for just about anything you might need for battery or car production. And a huge team of skilled workers to reconfigure machinery of that kind.

            They built machines to produce FFP2 masks within a week, and within months, they were the world's leading FFP2 mask producer. Actually, the machines they had were much higher quality than the machines they needed. They managed to assemble new face mask production machines at a rate of 5-10 new machines per day (!).

            Link Preview Image
            BYD now produces also face-masks. Giant plant created to tackle COVID-19 outbreak - Sustainable Bus

            BYD has announced the creation of the world’s largest mass-produced face-mask production plant. The move by BYD comes as demand for hygiene products

            favicon

            Sustainable Bus (www.sustainable-bus.com)

            Unlike the story you told, this was not an uphill battle task, but it was downhill: The requirements to make face masks are easy compared to what BYD regularly does.

            masek@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
            masek@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
            masek@infosec.exchange
            wrote last edited by
            #14

            @forthy42 Sometimes you can transfer KnowHow and in the end an even better product emerges. But I see enough cases where things go wrong.

            Yesterday evening a friend was complaining: for their work they need measurement instruments. They have 30 year old ones which work. But they have only so many to go around. They ordered new ones. The original manufacturer has now three times in a row failed to deliver a functional one.

            forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF 1 Reply Last reply
            0
            • datenwolf@chaos.socialD datenwolf@chaos.social

              @lobingera @masek

              You know what company I hold a fiece grudge on? Analog Devices.

              They've been gobbling most if not all of my second source suppliers for precision electronics circuits.

              These days I rather spend weeks designing circuits from discrete parts, around wide operational ranges, and if I really have to put an IC in there, it's going to be a part that has hundreds of similar performing replacements.

              vp9kf@mastodon.socialV This user is from outside of this forum
              vp9kf@mastodon.socialV This user is from outside of this forum
              vp9kf@mastodon.social
              wrote last edited by
              #15

              @datenwolf @lobingera @masek "You know what company I hold a fiece grudge on? Analog Devices." That's very worrying because a huge swath of products is held together by their products! Audio, RF, SDR, etc., etc. My least-favourite is Qualcomm for many of the same reasons.

              datenwolf@chaos.socialD 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • vp9kf@mastodon.socialV vp9kf@mastodon.social

                @datenwolf @lobingera @masek "You know what company I hold a fiece grudge on? Analog Devices." That's very worrying because a huge swath of products is held together by their products! Audio, RF, SDR, etc., etc. My least-favourite is Qualcomm for many of the same reasons.

                datenwolf@chaos.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                datenwolf@chaos.socialD This user is from outside of this forum
                datenwolf@chaos.social
                wrote last edited by
                #16

                @vp9kf @lobingera @masek

                Yes, I know. ADI's actions over the past decade (and a half) should have triggered several cartel regulation authorities (FTC, etc.) to spring into action.

                ADI is already holding monopolies on several key component classes. There might be a couple of Chinese replacements in existence, but they're more or less invisible to the western markets.

                The EU is asleep at the wheel. They should have incentivized creation of European counterparts decades ago.

                raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                  What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                  Setup

                  Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                  Everything is fine

                  Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                  Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                  Crisis

                  Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                  Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                  The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                  If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                  Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                  The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                  Recovery

                  A few years later, demand picks up again.

                  The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                  Now someone decides to restart production.

                  The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                  They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                  Now they try to get it working again.

                  But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                  But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                  Bottlenecks

                  And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                  Very few businesses survive this phase.

                  There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                  Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                  At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                  Summary

                  This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                  And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                  S This user is from outside of this forum
                  S This user is from outside of this forum
                  stinson_108@mastodon.social
                  wrote last edited by
                  #17

                  @masek
                  A similar scenario. In happy days, the world came to depend on a particular part. Three companies in one country learned to make it better, faster and cheaper than anyone else. They competed, guaranteeing the lowest price. The world bought from them to their satisfaction.

                  Then one day, in a fit of pique, one country applied huge tariffs, in hopes of moving production home. Soon the world had two standards and two prices. Everyone was worse off.

                  It's happening today in WiFi routers

                  masek@infosec.exchangeM 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • S stinson_108@mastodon.social

                    @masek
                    A similar scenario. In happy days, the world came to depend on a particular part. Three companies in one country learned to make it better, faster and cheaper than anyone else. They competed, guaranteeing the lowest price. The world bought from them to their satisfaction.

                    Then one day, in a fit of pique, one country applied huge tariffs, in hopes of moving production home. Soon the world had two standards and two prices. Everyone was worse off.

                    It's happening today in WiFi routers

                    masek@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    masek@infosec.exchangeM This user is from outside of this forum
                    masek@infosec.exchange
                    wrote last edited by
                    #18

                    @Stinson_108 Disturbances for supply systems are many: tariffs is one of them, pandemics are another, we also had natural disasters, political upheaval.

                    But I observe that we build every day longer, more complex supply chains and care less and less about redundancy.

                    This will cost us ...

                    S 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                      What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                      Setup

                      Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                      Everything is fine

                      Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                      Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                      Crisis

                      Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                      Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                      The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                      If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                      Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                      The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                      Recovery

                      A few years later, demand picks up again.

                      The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                      Now someone decides to restart production.

                      The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                      They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                      Now they try to get it working again.

                      But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                      But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                      Bottlenecks

                      And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                      Very few businesses survive this phase.

                      There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                      Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                      At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                      Summary

                      This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                      And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                      softicecreamlesley@famichiki.jpS This user is from outside of this forum
                      softicecreamlesley@famichiki.jpS This user is from outside of this forum
                      softicecreamlesley@famichiki.jp
                      wrote last edited by
                      #19

                      @masek There are a lot of small Japanese companies like this.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                        What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                        Setup

                        Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                        Everything is fine

                        Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                        Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                        Crisis

                        Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                        Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                        The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                        If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                        Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                        The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                        Recovery

                        A few years later, demand picks up again.

                        The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                        Now someone decides to restart production.

                        The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                        They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                        Now they try to get it working again.

                        But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                        But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                        Bottlenecks

                        And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                        Very few businesses survive this phase.

                        There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                        Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                        At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                        Summary

                        This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                        And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                        G This user is from outside of this forum
                        gwentlarry@mastodon.social
                        wrote last edited by
                        #20

                        @masek

                        Sounds a bit like the story of COBOL.

                        I wonder how many financial institutions still rely on COBOL somewhere in their systems and have nobody in-house who understands it?

                        Instead relying on outside contractors employing the few remaining and ageing COBOL specialists.

                        What happens when they finally retire and/or die?

                        artharg@mastodon.nlA 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                          @Stinson_108 Disturbances for supply systems are many: tariffs is one of them, pandemics are another, we also had natural disasters, political upheaval.

                          But I observe that we build every day longer, more complex supply chains and care less and less about redundancy.

                          This will cost us ...

                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                          S This user is from outside of this forum
                          stinson_108@mastodon.social
                          wrote last edited by
                          #21

                          @masek

                          As long as sea lanes remain open, #tariffs stable, and no currency restrictions, the market will figure out the proper complexity of supply chains. Pandemics and ships sideways in the #Suez can be overcome. Like everything else, it's the idiocy of our leaders we should fear.

                          raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR catha@masto.esC menos@todon.euM 3 Replies Last reply
                          0
                          • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                            @forthy42 Sometimes you can transfer KnowHow and in the end an even better product emerges. But I see enough cases where things go wrong.

                            Yesterday evening a friend was complaining: for their work they need measurement instruments. They have 30 year old ones which work. But they have only so many to go around. They ordered new ones. The original manufacturer has now three times in a row failed to deliver a functional one.

                            forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF This user is from outside of this forum
                            forthy42@mastodon.net2o.deF This user is from outside of this forum
                            forthy42@mastodon.net2o.de
                            wrote last edited by
                            #22

                            @masek Often, the whole product category moved over to some Chinese who cloned the functionality decades ago and sells it for a fraction of the price. The original manufacturer is broke, and therefore, don't buy there. Buy the clone.

                            Fierce competition can crush the original manufacturer, and it's what free market is about. Sometimes, the competition comes with degrading quality. Many hobbyist labs use Rigol scopes. Do they need to be as good as a Tektronix? Nope. They need to be good enough, which they are. Tektronix is fine, they survived by providing the Ferrari equivalent of scopes. If you need the multi-GHz, a Rigol is out of question. If you need to see if a signal is there, a Rigol is enough. And Rigol already expanded into the high end range…

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                              What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                              Setup

                              Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                              Everything is fine

                              Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                              Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                              Crisis

                              Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                              Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                              The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                              If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                              Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                              The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                              Recovery

                              A few years later, demand picks up again.

                              The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                              Now someone decides to restart production.

                              The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                              They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                              Now they try to get it working again.

                              But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                              But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                              Bottlenecks

                              And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                              Very few businesses survive this phase.

                              There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                              Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                              At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                              Summary

                              This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                              And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                              raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                              raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                              raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                              wrote last edited by
                              #23

                              @masek
                              Also the machine or part may be a design never patented, so as to keep it a trade secret. Or the patent only covers an earlier uneconomic version.
                              Text books, patents, Wikipedia etc only have general theory or descriptions. None have the exact "recipe" of Part X or the machine to make it.

                              This makes Musk's claim to be setting up a semi-fab production for ICs (GPUs, RAM, Flash, CPUs etc) in space somewhat dubious. He'd have to buy in existing machines & experts. It's not public info.

                              artharg@mastodon.nlA 1 Reply Last reply
                              0
                              • eckes@zusammenkunft.netE eckes@zusammenkunft.net

                                @jt_rebelo @masek and a few month later everybody has moved on to a better or cheaper process.. it’s not always good to rely on steam engine parts after their eol.

                                raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                                wrote last edited by
                                #24

                                @eckes @jt_rebelo @masek
                                Years or decades!
                                Not months!

                                1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                  raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                                  wrote last edited by
                                  #25

                                  @rcosta @eckes @jt_rebelo @masek
                                  Maybe for documented parts that can be 3D printed. The 3D printing is over-hyped. Esp. plastic printing ones even to replace plastic. You might need to get a mould made. Also easier.
                                  You're missing the point. The supply chain is as good as weakest link & replacement relies on docs & expertise that may not exist. It could take years to replace.
                                  There are products that are desired & no current equivalent exists because the parts not made. New design isn't viable.

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • S stinson_108@mastodon.social

                                    @masek

                                    As long as sea lanes remain open, #tariffs stable, and no currency restrictions, the market will figure out the proper complexity of supply chains. Pandemics and ships sideways in the #Suez can be overcome. Like everything else, it's the idiocy of our leaders we should fear.

                                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                    raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                                    wrote last edited by
                                    #26

                                    @Stinson_108 @masek
                                    No. Re-read OP.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    0
                                    • datenwolf@chaos.socialD datenwolf@chaos.social

                                      @vp9kf @lobingera @masek

                                      Yes, I know. ADI's actions over the past decade (and a half) should have triggered several cartel regulation authorities (FTC, etc.) to spring into action.

                                      ADI is already holding monopolies on several key component classes. There might be a couple of Chinese replacements in existence, but they're more or less invisible to the western markets.

                                      The EU is asleep at the wheel. They should have incentivized creation of European counterparts decades ago.

                                      raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                      raymaccarthy@mastodon.ieR This user is from outside of this forum
                                      raymaccarthy@mastodon.ie
                                      wrote last edited by
                                      #27

                                      @datenwolf @vp9kf @lobingera @masek
                                      See also Qualcomm and TI. Just as bad. Actually Qualcomm are worst.

                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                                        What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                                        Setup

                                        Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                                        Everything is fine

                                        Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                                        Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                                        Crisis

                                        Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                                        Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                                        The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                                        If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                                        Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                                        The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                                        Recovery

                                        A few years later, demand picks up again.

                                        The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                                        Now someone decides to restart production.

                                        The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                                        They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                                        Now they try to get it working again.

                                        But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                                        But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                                        Bottlenecks

                                        And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                                        Very few businesses survive this phase.

                                        There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                                        Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                                        At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                                        Summary

                                        This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                                        And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                                        mim54@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        mim54@mstdn.socialM This user is from outside of this forum
                                        mim54@mstdn.social
                                        wrote last edited by
                                        #28

                                        @masek so very true, all politicians seem to be so shortsighted on this matter, your explanation was spot on thank you

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • masek@infosec.exchangeM masek@infosec.exchange

                                          What a lot of people do not understand is the fragility of supply chains.

                                          Setup

                                          Let us assume there is a part X that is used by a large number of other companies. It is not glamorous, it is not expensive, and nobody outside a small circle of specialists ever thinks about it. But it is needed. Without it, other products cannot be finished.

                                          Everything is fine

                                          Part X is made by a small company with a few dozen employees and a machine that is several decades old.

                                          Everything runs smoothly. The company knows how to maintain the machine. They know how to operate it. They know its strange noises, its moods, its undocumented rituals. They know which lever needs a bit of persuasion on cold mornings and which replacement part must be machined by hand because nobody has made the original since 1987. They also know how to train new employees, because the knowledge still exists inside the company.

                                          Crisis

                                          Then, suddenly, a few large customers run into a crisis.

                                          Orders slow down. The warehouses fill up with part X. Prices fall.

                                          The company downsizes. Then it downsizes again. But nobody really notices, because stocks are still full. Customers are not yet affected. Purchasing departments can still get part X from inventory. Balance sheets still look fine. The problem has not yet reached the spreadsheet.

                                          If this goes on for long enough, the company goes broke.

                                          Again, nobody really notices. Stocks are still full. Some people may worry, but as long as no current production line is stopping and no quarterly number is visibly bleeding, nothing urgent is done.

                                          The employees move on. They retire, change industries, start new careers. The old machine is sold for scrap. The building is repurposed. The knowledge evaporates.

                                          Recovery

                                          A few years later, demand picks up again.

                                          The warehouses slowly empty. Stocks run low. People start ordering part X again, only to discover that nobody is offering it anymore.

                                          Now someone decides to restart production.

                                          The first thing they discover is that there is no machine. Building a new one would be prohibitively expensive, assuming anyone still knows how to build it properly. So they desperately search for an old one.

                                          They get lucky. In a scrapyard, they find a machine that used to produce part X. It is rusted, incomplete, and dysfunctional. Naturally, they buy it.

                                          Now they try to get it working again.

                                          But there is another problem. There are no people left who know how to maintain it. So they hire someone who understands industrial maintenance in general, but has never worked on this specific machine. That person does their best. They improvise. They read old manuals. They reverse-engineer undocumented fixes. They keep the machine alive with skill, patience, and increasing amounts of despair.

                                          But it breaks down every few hours. Output is abysmal.

                                          Bottlenecks

                                          And now that one poor maintenance person is overworked. They need help. But training help requires time, and the only person who can train others is the same person needed to keep the machine barely running. Every hour spent teaching is an hour not spent preventing the next failure.

                                          Very few businesses survive this phase.

                                          There is no institutional knowledge anymore. New people are hired, begin training, look at the state of the machine, the chaos of the process, and the constant emergency mode, and conclude that the business is doomed anyway. Then they quit.

                                          Churn becomes terrible. Even if the company survives financially, it remains fragile. It is always just one or two people quitting away from disaster.

                                          At the end the world decides it needs to get rid of part X as the supply is too fragile.

                                          Summary

                                          This is still very much simplified. The reality is more complex, more ugly.

                                          And that is the part many people miss: a supply chain is not just warehouses, contracts, prices, and transport routes. It is also people, habits, obsolete machines, informal knowledge, and boring little skills that nobody values until they are gone.

                                          kelvin0mql@mastodon.hams.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                                          kelvin0mql@mastodon.hams.socialK This user is from outside of this forum
                                          kelvin0mql@mastodon.hams.social
                                          wrote last edited by
                                          #29

                                          @masek
                                          This, 100%.

                                          But also, when the small company, shrunk a few rounds, founder old & retiring sells the company to a new owner/CEO, & that new CEO guzzles down the #AI Kool-Aid. Believes every promise. Mentally incapable of hearing any words of warning.

                                          Beyond manufacturing, there’s a disastrous trend of discounting #InstitutionalKnowledge that may well deepen the next #GreatDepression

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • World
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups