Business Problem Solving Case: How Supply Chain Management W

Business Problem Solving Case How Supply Chain Management Problems Kil

Target, a major retailer based in the United States, attempted to expand into the Canadian market in 2011 by acquiring leaseholds of 189 locations. The expansion aimed to open 124 stores by 2013, but the initiative failed catastrophically, culminating in bankruptcy protection for Target Canada by January 2015 and the closure of all stores. The failure was multifaceted, but key among the issues was the company’s flawed supply chain management, which was intricately connected to its broader business model and operational success.

Supply chain management (SCM) is crucial for retail operations, particularly for companies like Target that rely heavily on timely, efficient inventory turnover. Target’s business model depended on synchronized procurement, warehousing, and distribution systems to ensure shelves are stocked with the correct products and quantities to meet customer demand. In the U.S., Target’s SCM systems were well-oiled, supporting smooth operations. However, in Canada, the lack of adaptation of these systems resulted in severe disruptions. The Canadian operation’s inability to track and manage inventory effectively led to empty shelves, inventory surpluses, and inefficiencies that directly undermined its brand promise and customer satisfaction.

The supply chain problems in Target Canada stemmed from a combination of organizational, technological, and human factors. Technologically, Target relied on an enterprise resource planning (ERP) system from SAP, intended for global deployment but insufficiently customized for Canadian needs. This software failed to handle currency conversions, measurement differences, and product data inaccuracies, leading to errors in ordering, stocking, and replenishment processes. The initial data input was riddled with inaccuracies—product dimensions, prices, descriptions, and quantities—because of pressured vendor data entry and inadequate validation systems. These errors cascaded through the supply chain, creating mismatches between stock levels and customer demand, overburdened warehouses, and abandoned auto-replenishment systems.

People and organizational factors also played a significant role. Target’s management opted for a quick system implementation over a thorough, customized approach, aiming to minimize time and cost. This decision disregarded the complexity of internationalization, particularly in a new market with different currency, measurement systems, and consumer preferences. The staff responsible for data entry lacked experience or sufficient training to challenge vendors’ inaccuracies, contributing to poor data quality. Moreover, the existing organizational processes lacked checks and balances, such as effective data validation or oversight mechanisms, which could have mitigated errors.

Technologically, the integration between supply chain software, warehouse management systems, and point-of-sale (POS) systems was inadequate. For example, the warehouse management system from Manhattan did not communicate effectively with SAP, resulting in logistical errors like shipping incorrect quantities or packaging configurations. The POS system, purchased from Retalix, was unreliable, causing delays and incorrect transactions at the cash register, further diminishing customer trust. The auto-replenishment system, vital for maintaining stock levels, was rendered ineffective partly due to inaccurate data and intentional data manipulation by analysts to inflate stock performance metrics.

Overall, approximately 70-80% of Target Canada’s operational woes could be traced back to technological failures—incorrect data entry, system incompatibilities, inadequate testing, and poor integration—magnified by organizational decisions to rush implementation and undertrained staff. These issues exemplify how critical robust, well-planned, and adaptable supply chain systems are for retail success, especially in international markets. The failure underscores the importance of aligning technology capabilities with business processes, investing in staff training, and conducting comprehensive testing before going live.

Management bears significant responsibility in this failure. The decision to implement SAP quickly without adequate customization or testing was driven by a desire for rapid deployment rather than operational readiness. Management’s underestimation of the complexities involved in internationalizing their supply chain and IT systems led to major flaws. Furthermore, management’s oversight in failing to establish strong data governance and quality controls allowed inaccurate data to permeate the system. The strategic choice to prioritize speed over thoroughness reflects a poor understanding of supply chain risks and the importance of contingency planning, which contributed directly to the collapse.

To improve future outcomes, Target Canada should have adopted a more phased approach to system implementation, allowing for small-scale testing and correction of issues before a full launch. Investing in a thorough data cleansing process, collecting accurate baseline data, and training staff to verify vendor inputs would have mitigated many errors. Additionally, customizing existing systems or developing dedicated solutions for the Canadian market would have better addressed currency, measurement, and product variability issues. Continuous monitoring and process improvements post-launch would also have helped adapt operations to real-market conditions more effectively.

In the broader context of enterprise resource planning (ERP), companies implement such systems for three key reasons: to streamline and standardize business processes across various functions, improve data accuracy and accessibility, and enable better decision making through integrated analytics. Conversely, disadvantages include the high costs of implementation, lengthy deployment times, risks of operational disruptions during transition, and potential misfit between the ERP system and specific business needs, especially if customization is limited or poorly executed.

Finally, the sources of data for analytical Customer Relationship Management (CRM) include transactional data (sales, customer interactions), behavioral data (website browsing, purchasing patterns), and demographic data (age, income, location). Examples of outputs from analytical CRM systems are customer segmentation reports, churn prediction scores, and personalized marketing campaign recommendations. These tools assist businesses in targeted marketing, improving customer retention, and tailoring services to meet customer preferences more effectively.

References

• Bozarth, C., & Handfield, R. B. (2016). Introduction to Operations and Supply Chain Management (4th ed.). Prentice-Hall.
• D’Avanzo, R., von Lewinski, H., & van Wassenhove, L. N. (2003). The Link Between Supply Chain and Financial Performance. Supply Chain Management Review.
• Davenport, T. H. (2000). Mission Critical: Realizing the Promise of Enterprise Systems. Harvard Business School Press.
• Davenport, T. H., Mule, L. D., & Lucke, J. (2011). Know What Your Customers Want Before They Do. Harvard Business Review.
• Hitt, L., Wu, D. J., & Zhou, X. (2002). Investment in Enterprise Resource Planning: Business Impact and Productivity Measures. Journal of Management Information Systems.
• Hu, M., & Monahan, S. T. (2015). Sharing Supply Chain Data in the Digital Era. MIT Sloan Management Review.
• Kanaracus, C. (2013). ERP Software Project Woes Continue to Mount, Survey Says. IT World.
• Klein, R., & Rai, A. (2009). Interfirm Strategic Information Flows in Logistics Supply Chain Relationships. MIS Quarterly.
• Laudon, K. C. (2015). The Promise and Potential of Enterprise Systems and Industrial Networks. Working Paper.
• Lee, H. L., Padmanabhan, V., & Whang, Seung (1997). The Bullwhip Effect in Supply Chains. Sloan Management Review.