Supply Chain leadership and succession planning progress

Five years ago, I formally began exploring leadership and succession planning within healthcare supply chain management as a necessary and useful developmental topic for the benefit of the industry. Much of the intelligence I shared centered on my professional experiences and the responses and data gleaned from an industry-wide survey of healthcare supply chain leaders I conducted.

By the way, the 2020 edition of the Leadership and Success Planning survey remains open if you would like to participate and share your insights. The survey not only gauges the thinking and actions of supply chain leaders who are practitioners, but also reflects how they deal with the real world versus observation and theory.

The first four installments of the Leadership and Succession Planning-focused Periscopes covered the foundations: Definition of terms, applications of principals, skills and characteristics of successful leaders in today’s world, and even a real story about how a strong leader used the most frequently recognized and required skills and characteristics of leaders to lead his team to success. One of the many lessons learned about – and from – leaders is that almost all of them share a similar mix of skills and characteristics, regardless of their profession and/or industry. That includes anything from retail and grocery company leaders to leaders of sports teams, such as rugby.

Each installment also explored a data element or two from one of surveys’ results, which fomented an “Ah-ha!” moment, adding more depth and emphasizing what successful leaders need and use.

Now, looking at some of the preliminary results of the 2020 survey and comparing selected elements also covered in an earlier edition, we learn that, unfortunately, some things in healthcare supply chain leadership have not progressed, while, other aspects have definitely progressed.

Here are some to consider:

• The total number of years a supply chain leader has served in the highest leader position increased to 15 in 2020 from 10 in 2016. It’s likely a mere result of the 2016 survey preceding the 2020 survey by almost five years.
• Time before supply chain leaders expect to retire, remains at four to six years.
• In 2016, only 44 percent of the leaders reported having produced a written Supply Chain Strategic Plan. That number in 2020 has leapt to 67.4 percent. That is quite impressive, yet, there still is a long way to go before it becomes universal. Given the current state of chaos in healthcare, universality must be the least supply chain leaders achieve.
• Regarding succession, 61 percent of today’s supply chain leaders believe there are adequate numbers of candidates needed to replace those retiring soon, compared to 47 percent in 2016.
• Here are a couple of oddities:
• ◦ Universities with supply chain curriculum leading to multiple levels of degrees were recognized as the best source of education about supply chain by 76 percent of supply chain leaders in 2020, while only 32.8 percent thought so in 2016.
• ◦ Back in 2016, 64 percent of supply chain leaders felt that current candidates for the top SC position needed one to three more years of mentoring and gaining experience before being ready for the “Chief Supply Chain Officer” position. In 2020, only 33.4 percent felt that way.
• Current supply chain leaders and those aspiring to become one should take note; respondents in both surveys stated that today’s candidates for the top leader position need strong leader skills to be successful, more so than strong supply chain knowledge and skills. There was virtually no difference in percentage of those that said so. It was 100 percent in 2020 to 96.6 percent in 2016.
• And, (according to both surveys) the executives who supply chain leaders report to are so confident that they will be able to find solid candidates to take the reins of the supply chain leader, from in-house candidates to outside sources, that virtually 100 percent stated they would not even consider outsourcing as a source to find a solid candidate.
• Remember, that at press time, the numbers in the 2020 survey responses have been culled from a much smaller sample than that for the 2016 survey, with a participation rate of just under 15 percent. However, in context, other healthcare industry publications that do some of their own surveys, accept a response rate of 10 percent to 15 percent as providing a reliable indication of the views of those from whom responses are sought.

Finally, the 2020 survey included questions associated with the coronavirus pandemic. Many media outlets and politicians made statements about the “brokenness” and lack of performance of the “healthcare supply chain.” The healthcare supply chain took many hits and much of the blame for the shortage of key items needed to care for the unfortunate people who acquired the virus. Rather than just ask if the criticisms by many that do not have much knowledge and understanding of the supply chain were either accurate or fair, the survey questions focused on what should or could be done to avoid this disaster from happening again; what knowledge and skills are needed, what players must be engaged to handle the aspects of the supply chain for which they are the best sources, and who should be held accountable.

The survey responses provide a picture of progression, but more work needs to be done to achieve the levels of leadership that such an important part of our lives, our economy and the healthcare system, must have. Nothing less can be accepted.