PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE

I want to take this

opportunity to invite all

members to attend the

upcoming general

meeting on May 28. Our

speaker will be Tim

Nowak, Director - World

Trade Center St Louis.

Tim will update us on the

status of the St Louis

Cargo Hub Initiative and

discuss other issues of

international trade.

Other activities for the

evening include the

installation of the newly

elected Board for the

upcoming year and

recognition of our past

presidents.

I look forward to seeing

everyone on the 28th.

Larry

HAPPY SPRING!

Ss we prepare for our Spring Supply Chain season, whether your cyclical or not, it’s a refreshing season a-buzz with new topics, new annual agendas and the next thing we know - it’s summer. Time flies by, just like our Supply Chains. In this issue, we focus on demand planning, new sourcing strategies and industry highlights. While we’re all busy every season, we hope you’ll have some time to glean some new thoughts and ideas from these BUYlines. In addition, feel free to contact us with any thoughts or ideas about your needs for next year’s seminars and programs. As, supply managers, you can assume, the BUYlines is already planning ahead!

IN THIS ISSUE:

The Manufacturing Renaissance in the U.S. There Is No Magic Number for Demand Forecasting How Much Inventory Do You Really Need? 'Conflict-Free' Supply Chain, HP Trust & Collaboration in the Supply Chain

Save the Dates! Tue, May 21, 2013

Sustainable Procurement Seminar

Professional Development Event

Tue, May 28, 2013

St Louis International Strategies - Cargo Hub Initiative

Update

General Membership Meeting

The Manufacturing Renaissance in the

U.S. and What's Driving It By: June Ruby, Motorola Solutions A manufacturing renaissance is taking place in the United States. According to a recent MIT study, 14 percent of manufacturers have made definite plans to move some of their currently offshore production back stateside. An additional 30 percent are considering it. The common term being used for this is reshoring. The reshoring trend is growing and can garner goodwill with domestic customers, consumers and even legislators. But any careful decision to reshore or expand domestic manufacturing capacity will be predicated on goodwill benefits and growing profitability. What factors are driving the revitalization of domestic manufacturing? There are several benefits increased domestic manufacturing capacity can bring, ranging from political to economic. Offshore plants and factories may struggle today with a lack of visibility in their upstream and downstream supply chains, and reshoring may bring additional control and insight. Over the last decade, the cost of transportation of goods has risen with higher gasoline prices. So while pure manufacturing costs may still be lower for offshore plants, the total landed cost may not be lower. International labor costs have grown enough to reduce the savings that were previously realized when manufacturing was originally sent overseas. The cost of disruption of work due to labor issues is another consideration, as well as the risks associated with loss of intellectual property or nationalization of local subsidiaries of multinational companies. Additionally, failure to meet an evolving multitude of stringent quality controls and regulations can further trigger an analysis to relocate manufacturing operations that are currently overseas. But do the potential benefits outweigh the potential cost increase of reshoring or expanding production in the U.S.? Your organization needs to find out if it can equalize cost benefit in its favor. For any domestic manufacturing plant, profitability will ultimately be tied to how efficiently it can be run. Often, that focus on efficiency translates into a larger opportunity for technology to play a role in optimizing performance for domestic plants than in their international counterparts. Today’s technologically equipped plants will require the automation and mechanization investments of the past decade along with the ability to scale and multiply those technological forces through mobility tools for the skilled workforce. Mobility can act as a force multiplier for a manufacturer. However, a comprehensive mobility strategy requires more than just one radio, one mobile computer, one wireless network, or one barcode scanner. An integrated suite of solutions can dramatically transform your plant floor and increase its efficiency, enhancing the profitability of your reshored or expanded domestic capacity. There are three main elements of a modern manufacturing plant that can benefit from a comprehensive mobility strategy: assets, people and materials.

Assets

Your assets are the significant capital investment that keeps your business running. From the machines along your production line to your lift trucks, each plant floor has numerous assets to keep track of and maintain. Delays to repair or replace equipment can lengthen unplanned downtime, and greatly affect your bottom line as production slows or even stops. A recent study by Coleman Parkes Research Ltd, on behalf of Computer Associates, pegged the average cost of unplanned downtime as high as $196,000 per hour, but this will vary greatly based on the capacity of the plant and the specific segment of manufacturing. Also, domestic manufacturers are faced with a significant shortage of skilled technicians that can serve and support their production equipment. A large number of current technicians are increasingly entering or nearing retirement. Thus, the focus turns to ensuring new maintenance and production employees have what is needed at the point of work to make the right decisions and do the job required of them, so that your production equipment can perform at the level you require in order to meet performance targets for profitability and growth. To help facilitate these real-time decisions, deeply integrating mobile technology and automation is a major key to getting the most out of your equipment. Devices such as mobile handheld computers or enterprise-grade tablets keep operators connected to operations throughout the plant floor. They are provided immediate access to critical information, alarms, alerts and automation control with mobile human-machine interfaces for monitoring and troubleshooting. For example, let’s say there is a fault with a piece of equipment on the plant floor. An operations manager will receive an alert on his mobile device indicating the specific problem and dispatch the appropriate technician to make an immediate repair. The technicians are enabled by mobile devices or two-way radios to inform them of the malfunction and the urgency to repair the machine. The technician now has enough information to arrive at the fault location with the proper tools and parts. Downtime is reduced, production can go on and efficiency continues to increase as not just any technician, but the right technician, is sent to fix the problem before it cascades and expands into other areas of operations in the plant. For less experienced maintenance technicians, video collaboration with remote experts on the mobile device at the point of activity provides real-time support and training. Whether you depend on reactive maintenance, scheduled maintenance, or predictive maintenance to keep your assets up and running, providing mobile access and extensions to your human-machine interface, operator rounds, and maintenance records can help your domestic plants run more efficiently and increase profitability.

People Your people are what make your plant floor work. The manpower and level of skilled labor you need on the plant floor is specific to your operations, and that manpower is in very high demand. According to a Oct. 15, 2012 USA Today article, a Boston Consulting Group report found that globally, 58 percent of high-skill manufacturing and engineering job openings remain unfilled for at least three to six months, and there is also a mild skills gap in the United States. Some manufacturers have noted that the cost of labor overseas is increasing and conformance to heightened and evolving regulations is difficult to ensure from abroad. More regulations mean greater attention to detail, and that drives costs up overseas. In other words, global manufacturers who in the past enjoyed lower wage costs from labor arbitrage overseas may now find the gap between salaries and compensation has diminished and potentially been negated.

Reshoring means more manufacturing jobs for U.S. and Canadian citizens. Same goes for expanding current domestic production. The goodwill that can be cultivated from this is significant, driving up your brand equity. But manufacturers remain capitalistic by nature and measure success by focusing on top- and bottom-line growth. That requires workers in existing or net-new domestic manufacturing jobs to be as effective, efficient and productive as possible. As with the assets example above, mobile technology can ensure the right people are dispatched to the right tasks all the time. Their time is more efficiently spent as they can receive or send alerts from anywhere in the plant floor. Getting operators out of the control room and away from wired workstations lets them handle additional tasks. They can access schematics for a machine on their head-mounted computer or ruggedized tablet. A single worker equipped with enterprise-grade mobile tools can cover more area on the plant floor than one without access to those same tools.

Materials Raw material needs to be accurately traced, processed and managed for quality control. According to March 4, 2011 BBC News report, consumers are 12 percent more likely to purchase a product with materials that can be traced. Vendor management, regulatory compliance, batch and lot traceability, deep supply chain collaboration with all partners: all of these elements come into play when optimizing the flow of raw materials into your plant, as well as the flow of finished goods out of your plants. Increased domestic production capacity can help manufacturers better realize the benefits that can come from greater visibility and control over these materials, but often this requires investment in new technology. Devices such as radio frequency identification (RFID) tags and barcode scanners can allow for better tracking and data capture throughout your supply chain: from your suppliers into your raw materials warehouses, to a replenishment order from your plant, to adding those materials to a batch or lot, and to a finished product which conforms with your own quality standards and external regulations. In the case of a supplier issue or recall, employees can be easily dispatched through radios or mobile computers with the data in their hands to make an immediate change, increasing efficiency, quality and safety and limiting the impact of the issue. This potentially can be a major cost savings for your operations, as errors will be reduced and agility to respond to rapidly changing market conditions can be enhanced. In addition, with mobile technology, an operator or a quality technician can examine work in process or finished goods and easily compare them to specifications on a ruggedized mobile tablet. They can make adjustments to the process to ensure conformance to quality specifications in order to minimize scrap losses and maintain customer satisfaction. Reshoring or expanding current domestic production may be the right choice for your manufacturing operations. You need to carefully consider how it would affect your assets, people and materials and perform a cost-benefit analysis to see if it makes sense for your organization. Mobile technology and the industrial wireless network to support the applications can help improve the profitability of reshoring production capacity back stateside or expanding existing domestic capacity by minimizing unplanned downtime, enhancing worker productivity, and improving control over goods and materials within your supply chain. No matter where you fall on the reshoring discussion, the manufacturing renaissance is very real. Mobility is an integral part of this exciting new era of profitable production.

There Is No Magic Number for Demand

Forecasting By: Robert J. Bowman, SupplyChainBrain

Take a close look at any supply chain - even a single entity within it - and

you're likely to uncover a hodgepodge of disciplines, each with its own

method for forecasting demand, and each convinced of its superiority

over everyone else's. So it only makes sense that companies would

dream of coming up with a single forecast upon which all departments

could agree. If only that were possible – or even desirable. The notion of one-number forecasting has been bandied about for a number of years, as the key to managing global supply chains. A simple answer to a complex problem: irresistible. But is it really an answer? Or just a trendy concept with imperfect application to the real world? Without question, companies need to align their various departments to ensure that all are working from some kind of consensus-based plan. The effort falters, however, when they attempt to impose one invariable demand forecast across sales, marketing, finance, procurement, manufacturing and logistics. Each area is likely to tweak that number to square with its own expectations. Often a departmental calculation will deliberately veer from reality, in order to maximize resources or incentivize a sales force. The result: too much product chasing too little demand. And a carefully crafted forecast that nobody takes seriously. Still, companies need to have some kind of a starting point. That’s what sales and operations planning (S&OP) is all about. It incorporates input from multiple disciplines as a means of synchronizing and unifying the organization. Nestle USA spent three and a half years implementing S&OP, an effort that successfully drove it from a six-number plan to a consensus figure, according to Geoffrey Fisher, director of demand and supply planning. Still, when it came time to execute against that number, there was a certain amount of “wink-wink” behavior among the supply team. “There’s a lot of value to using one number as a battle cry, but don’t forget the actual work [that’s required] to get it done,” Fisher said at a recent conference of the Institute of Business Forecasting & Planning in Scottsdale, Ariz. IBF panelist Patrick Bower, senior director of corporate planning and customer service with Combe Inc., called the one-number concept “a bit of a misnomer. You need to have one agreed-upon plan as a baseline ... for supply planning and budget. But it’s kind of defined poorly.” What companies ought to be doing, Bower said, is “banding” around a consensus number, with high and low parameters that acknowledge the uncertainties of customer demand. Jonathon P. Karelse, president of Syncro Distribution Inc., agreed. The debate over one-number planning

gets caught up in semantics, he said. What’s more, companies need to realize that any number they devise is going to be wrong. “The important thing is that there’s a confidence interval around that number,” Karelse said. “You need to plan appropriately for the high side and the low side.” Companies can allow sales and marketing to assume the best possible scenario, he added, as long as they “allow for the worst and are prepared.” Coming up with some magic number is an attractive idea, said Bower, but the effort has to be “reality-based.” If sales and marketing is setting a “stretch objective,” there needs to be a means of determining how the sales plan will dovetail with actual production runs. For better or worse, the real world trumps business objectives every time. Randy Wilp, leader of global commercial forecasting with Merck & Co., Inc., sounded even more existential. “In my mind, there is no one version of the truth,” he said, dashing the hopes of supply chain executives the world over. At one point, Merck tried the one-number approach to forecasting. “Luckily,” said Wilp, “that’s been abandoned.” Today, the company runs its operation on forecasts, but it works hard to understand the varying demand signals within its own organization, as well as among its supply-chain partners. The trick lies in achieving “complete transparency” between functional units of a company, said panel moderator Seema Phull of North Find Partners. Lack of that essential element “is what creates the multiple versions of misaligned plans.” So what are the key metrics that a company can use to drive change and coherence in its forecasting efforts? And how can it ensure that it’s getting the most valuable input from each function? When Karelse headed up the consumer products division of Yokohama Tire (Canada), he helped launch a company-wide planning effort that included the formation of a Forecast Council. Dream met cold reality when Karelse realized that most of the people on the council didn’t want to be there. He began analyzing the net benefit of each contributor’s input, “so we could identify whose time we were wasting, and what was causing degradation of the plan.” What Karelse was doing, without knowing its formal name, was engaging in forecast value-add (FVA) analysis, a means of identifying waste in the forecasting process. The lesson was clear: “when you begin measuring it, you can improve it.” The initiative known as Collaborative Planning, Forecasting and Replenishment (CPFR) is widely considered to be a valuable tool for gauging customer demand in retail promotions and other special marketing efforts. But FVA allows a company to scrutinize “the maturity levels of the people you’re engaging with downstream, and measure forecasting horizons,” said Karelse. “If you just starting rolling in customer forecasts because the customer ‘knows,’ it’s going to cost you a lot of money.” One fixed number for forecasting? Forget about it. But companies can still achieve internal and external alignment of the planning process through proper measuring, and an understanding of the natural biases that each function holds. As Fisher put it, “You replace one number with one plan.”

How Much Inventory Do You Really

Need? By: Robert J. Bowman, SupplyChainBrain

Inventory is evil. Inventory is essential. The two statements aren't

necessarily contradictory. Not if companies can figure out a way to

determine the absolute minimum amount of stock needed to keep

customers happy, while maintaining a tight lid on costs. There’s a more sophisticated way of expressing the problem: the science of theoretical minimum inventories. It’s essentially a new gloss on an old problem, but it promises to help supply chains draw closer to the goal of zero waste in their operations. Think of it as applying Lean manufacturing principles to the information flow that governs inventory levels. An academic effort to explore the science is underway. It’s being spearheaded by supply-chain software vendor One Network Enterprises, in cooperation with the University of North Texas (UNT). One Network is funding the research, which is intended to “determine the theoretical minimum inventories in any supply chain ecosystem, presuming all information latency is eliminated, while asset availability and performance are optimized.” That, of course, is a bold presumption, given the glaring lack of efficiency in the way that information moves through most global supply chains. Still, the initiative could turn out to yield valuable insights, provided researchers can get their arms around the issue of “informational lead time” – in other words, how quickly critical data is conveyed to all of the trading partners in a supply-chain “ecosystem.” Long lead times have been shown to be a major reason why companies find themselves suffering from low inventory turns and unacceptably high “safety” stocks. Some of the best minds in supply-chain management are behind the effort. According to Richard Dean, chief marketing officer with One Network, it had its genesis in conversations between company founder and chief executive officer Greg Brady and chief scientist Hau Lee, who is also the Thoma Professor of Operations, Information and Technology at the Stanford Graduate School of Business. They approached UNT’s faculty about working on a problem that would identify the various levers that drive minimum inventories. In a sense, the subject is an outgrowth of the familiar just-in-time production and inventory strategy. JIT has taken some blows in recent years, with manufacturers forced to build buffer stock back into their supply chains to guard against unanticipated disasters, and offset the effects of longer supply lines caused by outsourcing to Asia. It’s still a valid concept, though, and a noble goal to pursue. Perhaps the theory of theoretical minimum inventories can inject it with new life. Of course, information latency is everywhere in the supply chain, lurking wherever there’s a link between partners or even the departments of a single company. David Nowicki, associate professor of

logistics at UNT, says the new project can help to shine a light on the problem. In particular, it can draw a direct correlation between delays in information transmittal and the financial performance of a company. Science becomes everyday reality, when you can remove five days of inventory because you were able to speed up the flow of your data. Companies might think they’re doing multi-echelon JIT, but they’re often stymied by the failure of all parties to share critical intelligence on a timely basis. Never mind the often-stated belief that information replaces inventory. Many companies have yet to translate that bromide into reality. “There’s a tremendous amount of waste,” says UNT assistant professor of logistics Wesley Randall. “We can actually [generate] a number showing the cost of latency.” It all boils down to looking at key supply-chain processes “and saying how much wealth you are leaving on the table,” says Randall. First step is for a consumer products manufacturer to calculate how long it’s taking to transform raw materials into finished product, and get it into the hands of the customer. The researchers then break down that map into its various elements, and determine how long the entire process should actually be. They deploy a framework that figures the average variability of elements such as demand, lead time and data conveyance. In the end, they should be able to show a company an optimal number for a specific class of SKUs. It’s important that the conclusion not be influenced by the prejudices or assumptions of the manufacturer, Randall says. As inspiration, he cites The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Thomas S. Kuhn’s landmark 1962 work on what drives major advances in science. The answer isn’t always slow, steady progress – it’s sudden leaps in thought. The theory of theoretical minimums, he says, “allows you to look at the world differently.” Overselling? Perhaps. But organizations do have a tendency to insist that the traditional way of doing things is the only way. If a new way of thinking comes along, causing them to reevaluate every aspect of their supply chain, why not go with it? And if talking to supply-chain managers doesn’t work, “I’d have the conversation with shareholders,” says Randall. In any case, he says, “the model isn’t forcing you to adapt to its business processes. It’s forcing you to map your supply chain and understand what your drivers are.”

One caveat: there’s no single number that applies to all companies. (Where have we heard that before?) On the contrary, it will depend on the characteristics of each product and manufacturer. Fast-moving goods with steady demand require a different approach than those with less predictable patterns of consumption. But the researchers are convinced that their work can create a model that comes closer than ever to a perfect world of physical distribution driven by zero information latency – and they’re currently putting it to the test with a select number of manufacturers. “We were able to demonstrate that it’s utterly possible,” says Dean. And utterly necessary, if the UNT researchers are to be believed. “If you don’t do this, somebody else will,” says Randall. “One of your competitors is going to figure this out, and they’re going to crush you.”

In an Effort to Achieve 'Conflict-Free'

Supply Chain, HP Releases List of Its

Mineral Smelters By: HP | April 17, 2013

HP has published a list of the 195 smelters that have been identified within its supply chain. The move is designed to achieve a conflict-free supply chain for itself and to encourage the entire industry to move toward greater utilization of conflict-free smelters and refiners. For more than a decade, the mining of minerals used to produce tantalum, tin, tungsten and gold (3TG) in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) has been linked to the funding of armed groups waging a civil war in the country. These metals are widely used in many industries and are commonly found in electronic products. HP says it has played a leading role in international efforts to achieve conflict-free sources within the DRC, and it helped launch the Electronics Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC) and Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) Extractives work group. This work group has established the CFS Program. "We approached this issue with the same rigor as other complex operating challenges and have achieved something notable," said Tony Prophet, senior vice president, Supply Chain Operations, Printers and Personal Systems Group, HP. "We are committed to collaborating across our supply chain as well as with NGOs and industry organizations to drive responsible sourcing within the Democratic Republic of the Congo and achieve a conflict-free supply chain." As part of its commitment to work toward solutions in the DRC and neighboring countries, HP has been active with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), industry organizations and government entities, including the Enough Project, the U.S. State Department and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. "HP has shown leadership throughout the past four years around addressing conflict minerals within its supply chain. Publishing its list of smelters is another significant step in the right direction, because it puts pressure on smelters to be audited as conflict free," said Sasha Lezhnev, senior policy analyst, the Enough Project. "Just a year ago, companies were afraid of publishing lists of smelters, but this added layer of transparency can help get our consumer products to be conflict free." HP is committed to providing an increased level of supply chain transparency for its customers and other external stakeholders. In 2008, HP was the first IT company to begin to publish its first-tier supplier names -- representing approximately 95 percent of HP supplier spend. Along with the smelter list publication, HP today also is publishing the factory street addresses and product types of its product final assembly suppliers. These initiatives are a part of HP's larger Supply Chain Social and Environmental Responsibility program. HP has one of the industry's most extensive supply chains, comprising more than 1,000 production suppliers and tens of thousands of non-production suppliers, and spanning more than 45 countries and territories.

Trust & Collaboration in the Supply Chain

By Mitch Millstein, Supply Velocity

Collaboration is Supply Chain Management

Collaboration is a core component of supply chain management. I think it helps to clarify what supply chain management really is. Here is my definition:

"The coordination and management of materials, information and financial resources from suppliers through a firm's operations to customers with the purpose of maximizing customer service and

minimizing costs, thereby enabling the supply chain to profitably grow sales."

In order to make this definition a reality, you need to collaborate with partners; and in order to collaborate, you need to trust your partners and be trustworthy. Partners includes suppliers, service-providers such as third party logistics providers or information providers, your bank/lender and your customers.

Is Collaboration Really Happening?

There is a lot of evidence that supply chain management, as defined above, is not really happening. A study of buyers showed that they said that collaboration with suppliers is important, but not at the risk of paying anything more than the lowest price. In other words, supply chain management is fine, but what they really value is old-school negotiating. If buyers, who are probably at the fulcrum of supply chain management don't believe, then how can it happen? The answer is that there are some enlightened CEOs and Vice Presidents of Operations / Supply Chain that understand the strategic importance of collaboration for long-term profitability and organizational viability. So yes, collaboration is happening, but only when it is of strategic importance to the top levels of the organization.

Levels of Collaboration

Collaboration has levels. It is not all-or-nothing. At the lowest level it is sharing long-term forecasts with suppliers and customers. It could simply be vendor management inventory. At the highest level it includes short, medium and long term planning. This includes joint product development, agreed upon production forecasts that the entire supply chain will use, sharing of strategic initiatives such as geographic expansion or planned acquisitions. Now you can understand why collaboration requires trust. Sharing forecasts and strategic plans or doing joint product development requires absolute trust that this information will not be given to competitors. This leads us to why you may choose not to collaborate with certain supply chain partners.

Why Doesn't Collaboration Work?

There are both good and bad reasons why collaboration efforts don't work for all companies. Here are some common reasons: If your supply chain partners are part of your competitors supply chains, you may not want to share

sensitive data. It could be that you simply have too many customers, none of whom are a significant % of your

business. The benefits of collaboration must be greater than the costs. Usually benefits will only outweigh costs if you have a few significant strategic supply chain partners (customers and suppliers).

Your information technology systems are not capable of integrating with supply chain partners. The technologies that allow different systems to integrate are called Enterprise Application Integration (EAI). It may be that your technology support group is not capable of implementing EAI.

You have poor internal communications. If you cannot communicate with your internal supply chain, you will likely not succeed in collaborating with external partners.

There are too few points of communication. If there are only one or two champions of collaboration in your firm and at your suppliers and customers, and these people leave, often the collaboration leaves with them. Therefore, you need to make sure that there are multiple points of communications and that collaboration is supported by executive leadership, at your firm and your supply chain partners.

How to Successfully Collaborate

Supply chain researchers have outlined a few key methods that will help you be successful. First, map out your processes and the processes at your supply chain partners. Only by understanding formal and informal processes can you be sure that collaboration efforts don't breakdown because no one considered a key step in the process. The second, and much more difficult method, is to create a supply chain performance scorecard, that all supply chain partners use to measure success of their collaborative efforts. This is where the leadership of your company must lead. If a firm doesn't support the success of the supply chain, and is only looking out for its short-term interests, then collaboration will fail.

If you would like a printable version of this summary of Trust & Collaboration in the Supply

Chain, click on this link for our white-paper.

http://www.supplyvelocity.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Trust-and-Collaboration-in-the-

Supply-Chain.pdf

JOB POSTINGS MANAGER, PURCHASING CONTRACT SPECIALIST CONTRACTING OFFICER Express Scripts – St. Louis Magellan Health Services Metro St. Louis

For more information, visit https://ismstlouis.org/insidepages/jobs/index.cfm

WELCOME NEW MEMBERS

Theresa Johnson, Contract Officer, Metro

Marlene Gueldener, Buyer, Olin Corp

Get involved!

For Volunteer Opportunities

Contact our BOARD! In many survey's the membership have spoken of how much they like more pre-dinner sessions. Volunteering to teach a session helps to accomplish this. When you volunteer your time to teach a class or facilitate a workshop, you get a chance to polish your public speaking skills, and you get a nice credit to add to your résumé. Volunteering allows you to meet people who have similar interests. You may make new friends of the same professional background or a different one all together. Or you may make contacts that become important in the future. There are a variety of opportunities to get involved in our affiliate however let me encourage you to consider speaking at a pre-dinner meeting. Sharing your knowledge of purchasing or logistics topics is of vital importance to grow others in our field and the professional and personal rewards are abundant. If you have a passion for any aspect of purchasing please consider sharing that passion with the other members of your profession.

To volunteer or get more information please contact Larry Jackson, CPSM, C.P.M. at

PresidentElect@ismstlouis.org

UPCOMING MEETINGS and EVENTS

For more information and registration go to https://ismstlouis.org

Sustainable Procurement Seminar - Professional Development Event

Tue, May 21, 2013

9:00 AM - 4:00 Sustainable procurement incorporates extrinsic cost considerations into decisions alongside the conventional procurement criteria of price and quality, although in practice the sustainable impacts of a potential supplier's approach are often assessed as a form of quality consideration. These considerations are typically divided thus: environmental, economic and social (also known as the "triple bottom line") The seminar topics include:

Sustainability Defined and the Future The Manufacturing Impact Service Industries Sustainable Challenges How Can Organizations Meet Sustainable Objectives

The program will feature speakers from for profit and not-for-profit organizations.

May General Meeting – St. Louis International Strategies

Tim Nowak, Director, World Trade Center – St. Louis

Tue, May 28, 2013

5:30 PM , Spazio's Westport As Executive Director of the World Trade Center, Tim Nowak overseas a team of professionals and the delivery of valuable services to member companies. Under his direction, the World Trade Center provides customized trade research to identify global opportunities, trade focused events, key business contacts and introductions, and training and educational programs. Nowak brings years of experience in business development, domestic and international sales, and management. He has extensive international working experience in Europe, Asia-Pacific, the Middle East, South America, and Africa. Nowak has managed and directed international sales organizations in the medical industry including distribution and direct sales strategies. His expertise includes analyzing international markets, determining business models, and executing sales and profit growth plans. He possesses solid experience in establishing international subsidiary organizations, managing legal and regulatory issues, and contract negotiations.

For More ISM - ST. LOUIS AFFILIATE Information and

Volunteer Opportunities, feel free to contact our

BOARD!

President

Larry B. Jackson, CPSM, C.P.M.

President@ismstlouis.org

Vice President

Melissa Orlando, CPSM, C.P.M

VicePresident@ismstlouis.org

Director of Finance

Max Merz III, CPSM, C.P.M.

Finance@ismstlouis.org

Secretary

Jill Willhite

Secretary@ismstlouis.org

President Elect

Patrick C. Williamson, C.P.M.

PresidentElect@ismstlouis.org

Director of Education

Dawn Fadler, CPSM

Education@ismstlouis.org

Director of Professional Development

Paula Matousek Pro-D@ismstlouis.org

Director of Membership

Patricia Greathouse Members@ismstlouis.org Director of Marketing

Christine Wojak

Marketing@ismstlouis.org