|
You might recall the Container ship mishap during March 2021, when the 220 000 tons EVER GIVEN mega container ship got stuck in the Suez Canal was a serious incident for a number of reasons:
1. The various possibilities that caused / contributed to the accident 2. The effect it had on the backed up sea traffic through the canal in both directions 3. The vulnerability of this strategic route in the case of a war, sabotage or terrorist attack (or the weather as we have seen) 4. The consequences on the supply lines and on the economies of a number of countries. This let me wonder if Just in Time, or JIT should, in the planning of some industries, not be replaced by a Just in Case, or JIC philosophy. Even in our personal and business lives in an age of high levels of efficiency, precision, fast response and timing it may be worth to reconsider that under some circumstances JIC is to be preferred or at least be considered in parallel to JIT. As a Strategic Intent in a very turbulent world the fine-tuning of supply lines to prevent stoppages due to material flow are vulnerable to very risky assumptions. They should possibly at least be re-considered. Just in Case. There were many ships with live-stock and limited water and food on board, exactly calculated for the trip with a small buffer for minor contingencies. That also caused separate calamities. The degree of economic upset as a result of the incident in the Canal was already serious enough, but imagine if the ship could not have been freed within a month or longer, the cargo could not be unloaded in the middle of the desert without real cranes not being an option, or some other unforeseen consequence occurred compounding the accident? My point? When you plan your own day / week / month or year, privately or in a business context, maybe the JIC approach is a better one than the JIT - at least when considering strategy in the context of logistics or other scenarios and assumptions. Think about it. Just in Case. t
0 Comments
|
Dietmar Winzker?
|
RSS Feed
