主要ポイント
- Map to the producing plant, not to the selling company.
- Shared chokepoints across different suppliers are hidden concentration risk.
- A map is only useful if it is maintained after supplier changes.
What to record per node
Identity and location, function, capacity, alternatives available, and lead time contribution. Nodes with no alternative and material lead time are the ones that determine your true supply resilience.
Finding hidden concentration
Two suppliers can look independent while depending on the same port, the same processing plant or the same shipping lane. Mapping surfaces this; a supplier list never will.
Keeping the map alive
Review after each supplier or route change and at a fixed periodic cadence. An outdated map produces false confidence, which is worse than having no map.
確認事項
- Producing plant identified for every critical ingredient
- Shared nodes across suppliers highlighted
- Map review date and owner recorded
管理すべきリスク
- Apparent supplier diversity masking a single physical chokepoint
- Unknown sub-suppliers introducing unmanaged quality risk
- Map maintained once and never updated
よくある誤り
- Mapping only tier-one commercial counterparties
- Omitting storage and transhipment nodes
- Treating mapping as a one-off compliance exercise
よくある質問
How deep should mapping go?
At minimum to the producing plant and the physical route. For high-risk ingredients, extend to the raw material source, since that is where contamination and origin issues arise.
What is the fastest way to start?
Map the three ingredients whose loss would stop production soonest, rather than attempting the entire ingredient list at once.