Launch of the Supply Chain Resilience Observatory: global vision, concrete actions

The study is based on well-known supply chain benchmarks, examining planning, purchasing, production and distribution functions, as well as surrounding functions such as information systems and sustainability. "Companies are assessed on a maturity scale of 1 to 4, where 4 represents a competitive advantage. Resilience starts at maturity 3," explains Philippe Armandon, Director of Sopra Steria Next's Industrial Operations and Supply Chain Excellence practice, and leader of the study. Of the 39 companies that responded to the questionnaire, only 26 completed all the maturity questions. This dual approach enables us to obtain a global sample of organizational practices, and a smaller sample for detailed maturity analysis.

The results show that the average maturity score is 2.59, with only 6 companies reaching level 3, the threshold at which resilience becomes a strategic lever. The most advanced companies in this field regularly address supply chain issues at COMEX level, demonstrating the importance of integrated governance. As a link to the rest of this article, it is interesting to note that only 10% of companies have visibility over several levels of their supply chain, with complexity increasing significantly with lower-ranking suppliers.

Before getting down to the nitty-gritty of the discussions, participants wanted to go back over the definition of these 2 terms. "Risk and resilience are notions that are a little different; there's an amalgam between the notions of risk and resilience. The essential distinction lies in the approach taken to events. When it comes to risk, the analysis focuses primarily on the events themselves and the vulnerability they may engender, whether in terms of climate risks, cybersecurity or other threats. This perspective emphasizes the identification and assessment of immediate threats likely to disrupt the business.

Resilience, on the other hand, is based on the assessment and strengthening of long-term capabilities. This approach includes in-depth consideration of capabilities in the broadest sense, encompassing planning, production, supply, distribution and communication.

Thierry Blein, GM Supply Chain Risks and Business Continuity Plan, began by describing the complexity of Renault's supply chain. Production reaches 15,000 vehicles a day, with each car made up of around 2,000 parts from 4,000 first-tier suppliers. In depth, Renault works with almost 60,000 suppliers. Downstream, 2,000 trucks or ships transport vehicles daily to 5,000 sales outlets in 130 countries. This global, interconnected organization makes exposure to disruptions inevitable: "in 2024, in 7 months, we suffered 10 floods that impacted operations".

"When you talk to people in the supply chain, they know what to do: they know where to invest, where to put flexibility, or strategic stocks. But there's a real difficulty in justifying these investments to top management." This observation highlights a fundamental paradox: investing in resilience means allocating resources to prevent events that we hope will never happen. In this context, conventional financial methods, such as return on investment (ROI) or net present value (NPV) analysis, often prove inadequate.

An alternative approach is to incorporate option theory, already used in technology sectors such as HP and Boeing. This theoretical framework introduces the principle of "the right and not the duty", offering the possibility of acting without immediate commitment. This method enhances the flexibility of decisions by taking future uncertainties into account. Adopting a logic of options enables companies to take preparatory measures (reservations, pre-actions) that facilitate a rapid response to crises when they occur. This approach reflects dynamic, adaptive risk management.