Tara Buchler, Principal, Strategy at JBF Consulting, discusses why strategy – not software – determines whether supply chain technology investments actually deliver value.
- STARTING WITH A SYSTEM INSTEAD OF A BUSINESS OUTCOME
- TREATING TODAY’S PAIN AS THE REAL PROBLEM
- ASSUMING TECHNOLOGY WILL FIX BROKEN PROCESSES
- SKIPPING THE TARGET OPERATING MODEL
- LETTING ONE FUNCTION DRIVE THE RFP
- OVERLOADING FEATURE LISTS INSTEAD OF DECISION SUPPORT
- IGNORING CHANGE MANAGEMENT UNTIL AFTER SELECTION
- ASSUMING DATA IS “GOOD ENOUGH”
- TREATING THE RFP AS A DOCUMENTATION EXERCISE
- RUSHING TO “SHOW PROGRESS”
- THE BOTTOM LINE
Technology buying failures in supply chain operations rarely occur because a team selects the wrong software. They happen much earlier – when organizations enter the request for proposal (RFP) process without the strategic clarity, operational alignment, or long-term vision required to make effective technology decisions.
Today’s supply chains are more complex and interconnected than ever before. Global sourcing networks, volatile demand patterns, shifting transportation capacity, and rising customer expectations all require organizations to operate with greater agility and resilience. Technology platforms promise improved visibility, predictive insights, and automated decision-making – but those benefits only materialize when investments are guided by a clear strategy.
Most supply chain technology buyers only see a limited number of operating models over the course of their careers, often within a single company or industry. As a result, they may understand their own supply chain deeply but have limited exposure to alternative approaches or best practices across the broader logistics ecosystem.
Meanwhile, the technology landscape continues to expand rapidly. Transportation management systems, warehouse management platforms, planning solutions, and end-to-end visibility tools are evolving quickly, often accompanied by bold claims about artificial intelligence (AI), automation, and integrated planning capabilities.
Against this backdrop, many organizations treat the RFP as the starting point rather than the culmination of strategic planning. They focus heavily on documenting current processes and solving immediate operational pain points, which can lead to predictable and costly mistakes.
Below are ten common ways supply chain technology buyers get it wrong before the RFP even begins – and how a strategy-first approach produces stronger outcomes.
STARTING WITH A SYSTEM INSTEAD OF A BUSINESS OUTCOME
Many initiatives begin with a predetermined conclusion: “We need a new transportation management system (TMS),” “We need a visibility platform,” or “We need a planning system.”
When technology is treated as the objective, requirements focus on system capabilities rather than operational outcomes. Organizations spend time defining features instead of clarifying what they truly need to achieve – greater resilience, faster response to disruptions, lower cost-to-serve, or improved customer service.
A strategy-first approach begins with business goals and works backwards to determine the appropriate role of technology.
TREATING TODAY’S PAIN AS THE REAL PROBLEM
Operational frustrations such as manual workarounds, delayed shipments, spreadsheet-based planning, and poor reporting often dominate early conversations.
However, these challenges frequently reflect deeper structural issues such as fragmented processes, unclear decision ownership, or outdated operating models.
Selecting technology to address symptoms rather than root causes often embeds inefficiencies into new systems.
ASSUMING TECHNOLOGY WILL FIX BROKEN PROCESSES
Technology does not fix flawed supply chain processes – it accelerates them.
Automating inefficient workflows increases the speed at which those inefficiencies occur. Organizations may gain enhanced visibility but remain locked into ineffective operating practices.
Redesigning processes before implementing technology ensures systems support optimal performance.
SKIPPING THE TARGET OPERATING MODEL
Many organizations struggle to clearly define how they want their supply chains to operate in the future.
Without a defined target operating model, technology requirements often combine legacy behaviors with aspirational goals. Vendors are asked to reconcile conflicting expectations, such as centralized versus decentralized planning or automation versus human oversight.
Clarifying roles, decision rights, and performance expectations provides critical direction for technology investments.
LETTING ONE FUNCTION DRIVE THE RFP
Technology buying is often led by a single function – transportation, warehousing, procurement, or IT.
Optimizing from one perspective frequently creates unintended consequences elsewhere, undermining end-to-end supply chain performance.
Cross-functional collaboration ensures technology supports the entire supply chain ecosystem.
OVERLOADING FEATURE LISTS INSTEAD OF DECISION SUPPORT
Extensive feature checklists rarely improve decision quality.
Organizations may select systems capable of numerous functions but unable to materially improve planning accuracy, responsiveness to disruptions, or operational coordination.
Technology should be evaluated based on its ability to support better decision-making.
IGNORING CHANGE MANAGEMENT UNTIL AFTER SELECTION
Change management is often treated as an implementation detail rather than a strategic consideration.
New supply chain systems frequently require adjustments to workflows, planning behaviors, and organizational culture. Without adequate preparation, adoption can stall.
Aligning technology ambition with organizational readiness improves long-term success.
ASSUMING DATA IS “GOOD ENOUGH”
Supply chain systems rely heavily on accurate master data, consistent processes, and strong governance.
When data quality is poor, even advanced platforms struggle to deliver reliable insights or performance improvements.
Assessing data maturity early enables organizations to address gaps proactively.
TREATING THE RFP AS A DOCUMENTATION EXERCISE
RFPs often become static documentation exercises rather than strategic decision tools.
When organizations focus on gathering information instead of testing assumptions and clarifying priorities, they miss opportunities to strengthen their technology strategy.
Using the RFP process to challenge thinking leads to stronger decisions.
RUSHING TO “SHOW PROGRESS”
Pressure to demonstrate progress often leads organizations to issue RFPs before strategic alignment exists.
While this may create short-term momentum, shortcuts taken early frequently result in delays, rework, and missed performance expectations later.
Strategic alignment ultimately accelerates implementation success.
THE BOTTOM LINE
Most supply chain technology failures are not the result of poor vendor selection. They stem from organizations being unprepared to make strategic decisions in increasingly complex and rapidly evolving logistics environments.
A strategy-first approach ensures technology investments support long-term operational goals, strengthen supply chain resilience, and deliver sustainable value.
