Typical assignments in Purchasing and Inventory Management:

· For a multi-billion aircraft manufacturer, developed basic forecasting and inventory/production decision rules for the management of the inventory of high-value critical spare parts. Decision rules involved (1) determining how much to produce for spares, (2) where to stock these spares, and (3) designing a guarantee program that guaranteed various percentage availabilities and minimized "AOG" (Airplane-on-ground) problems.

· Performed a stock keeping units (SKU) rationalization project for a multi-billion dollar distributor that reduced total stocked SKUs from 20,000 to 12,000 with little reduction in revenues or customer service. Process used was an extensive "ABC" analysis using (1) dollars of revenues, (2) gross profits generated, (3) "ties" to sales of other more profitable, faster-moving items, and (4) substitutability by other similar SKUs

· For a $12 billion pharmaceutical distributor, built and managed a world-class Purchasing/Inventory Management organization with (1) $10 billion in annual purchases, (2) 45 separate warehouses with 30,000 SKUs each, (3) $1+ billion in total inventory investment, (4) a new state-of-the art computer system, and (5) the highest fill-rate in the company’s history. Increased service levels to mid-90percent from high 80%’s while improving turns by 2.5. The majority of improvements came from a complete BPR (Business Process Reengineering) of the Purchasing/Inventory Management function and by achieving the full potential of the new computer system (e.g., using improved tools to do things more intelligently).

· For a $6 billion computer hardware and software distributor performed a turnaround of the Purchasing department (the department had been without a VP for the prior two years). Reorganized the department to focus on product categories (rather the just a random list of suppliers), and combined product marketing personnel, product management personnel and purchasing buyers into teams with common goals and common incentives. Developed and implemented specialized “stocking logic” for (1) slow moving items (including when to get rid of "dead items"), (2) high-value SKU’s, (3) problem items and customer unique SKU’s -- that determined which warehouse(s) should source these SKU’s. Developed and implemented department, team and individual work-performance “metrics” to provide direction, set priorities and to measure actual employee performance against specific goals and to balance trade-off between such things as customer service level and inventory investment. Metrics increased the awareness of a JWD (Job-Well-Done), the sense of competition amongst the teams, and the overall quality of job execution. Inventory turns improved to 10 from 6 while service levels increased from the mid 60%’s to the low 90%’s. Specific methods used and results achieved are chronicled in one of the articles that may be downloaded from this web site.

· For a large distributor, managed purchasing, physical distribution, warehousing, pricing and selling of specially priced “sideways,” or “diverted” products. These activities accounted for approximately 25% of the distributor’s overall PBT.

· For an $18 billion financial company, lead a “strategic sourcing” project that identified ways to save money on the corporate-wide purchases of items ranging from office supplies to legal services. Savings ranged from 10% to 25% in various categories. Project also involved training company personal to be able to identify, achieve and manage these kinds of savings on an on-going basis. Finally, designed a new a Corporate Sourcing Organization, defined all roles and responsibilities, including the creation of a Chief Procurement Officer position. Specific methods used and results achieved are chronicled in one of the articles that may be downloaded from this web site.

· Implemented a “state-of-the-art” purchasing and inventory management system for a $10 billion distributor which purchased and managed approximately 30,000 items in each of the firms 45 warehouses using a central staff of only 12 buyers (because the system made 98.5% of the buyers without manual review)