• Alumni

Activity Feed

On December 1, 2017, TOM commented on Coca-Cola: Sustainability Visionary or Villain? :

This is a fantastic article and an excellent example of a company launching a sustainability initiative that looks great on paper but actually has many unintended consequences for local populations. Since Coke’s model is largely predicated on local production, it will be very difficult to shut down local operations at this point. They must also weight the negative consequences of their water sustainability program with the negative economic consequences of shutting down local production, which may be far greater. As a result, they should not shut down local production, but rather focus on reducing negative consequences, especially now that they have been identified.

Great article. I was unaware that there was a legislative mandate to increase traceability of drugs as they move towards the consumer. While in the short term this will have drug prices down. For example, being able to more efficiently conduct post-mark surveillance on drug safety will improve drug safety, patient outcomes, and ultimately make the drug more efficient with fewer resources. Additionally, given the tremendous cost required to produce a drug over several years, the cost of supply chain digitization is likely a relatively small one compared to R&D and clinical testing. Even if there is an increase in the price of the drug, it will likely be minimal.

On December 1, 2017, TOM commented on Pfizer’s Prescription For A Digital Supply Chain :

I am stunned by the efforts Pfizer has taken to digitize its supply chain and the impact it has had on it’s ability to produce vaccines. Even though Pfizer is a very large pharmaceutical company, even it’s competitors are big and very complex companies. They all certainly have the ability to engage in supply digitization. I would argue that it may even be easier for them since their supply chain is likely significantly less complex that Pfizer’s. In order to achieve this, they should look to Pfizer for best practices and tailor those to their own internal processes.

I’m very impressed that to DoD has ben conducting consistent studies on the impact of climate change on US national security. I would have imagined that these studies come and go with changes in the administration. That being said, I do not believe, based on this article, that the measures being taken will be enough for the DoD to adapt to changing conditions. This is because they have primarily been focused on what the impact of climate change has been in the past and not what it will be in the future.

Also, the DoD is an agency of the Executive branch of the Federal government and as a result will align with whatever the President’s policies are. It is not in the place of any Federal agency to put pressure on the Legislative branch as that is what the President typically does.

On December 1, 2017, TOM commented on Supply Chain as Source of Competitive Advantage :

This is a terrific summary of P&G’s digital supply chain strategy. As supply chains are digitized, cyber security becomes a near top concern. This is a primary method by which terrorists can wage war to bring down infrastructure and even espionage can be conducted between competing firms. The best likely way to secure their severs is to bring in expert firms to help craft cyber security strategies. Given that it is not P&G’s core competency, this is unlikely to be something they do in-house.

While the developed world has adopted supply digitization, the developing world may still struggle. In order to have a digital supply chain, the tracking and analytics required must be advanced. While emerging markets will eventually reach a level of complexity with regards to their supply chain, this progress will likely lag countries in the developed world. With regards to cost, it is possible that after best practices are created in the developed world, developing countries can replicate these models to help reduce their costs.

Great article Rhonda! Given Boeing’s reliance on the Federal government, it has little option than to align with the government’s trade policies. Since a significant amount of Boeing’s revenue comes from defense contracts, they may jeopardize this income by pushing back against trade policy. Additionally, the US government does provide a significant subsidy to Boeing, thereby, making it a very valuable and supportive partner.

Boeing’s history has indicated a trend away from protectionism in instances where it has benefited their bottom line. For example, much of the 787 was manufactured abroad, likely due to cheaper manufacturing costs. Based on these practices it is clear that Boeing favors globalization when it benefits their profits and protectionism when necessary. This strategy makes sense since as a company Boeing has an obligation to it’s shareholders to maximize value. How policy affects that value will keep Boeing on it’s feet and likely away from any hardline policy positions.