Collaboration Concepts for Comodality From CO to...
12
1‐11‐2011 1 Collaboration Concepts for Comodality From CO 2 to CO 3 Sergio Barbarino, MBA, M. Sc. P&G R&D Principal Engineer, EGCI , EIRAC P&G at a Glance • Net Sales $82.6 (billion) • Number of Employees 127,000 • Countries of Operations 80 • Countries Where Our Brands Are Sold 180 • Consumers Served by Our Brands 4.5 billion • R&D organization 9,000 • R&D spending $2.0 (billion) 2 R&D spending $2.0 (billion) (Approximate)
Transcript of Collaboration Concepts for Comodality From CO to...
1‐11‐2011
1
Collaboration Concepts for Comodality
From CO2 to CO3
Sergio Barbarino, MBA, M. Sc.
P&G R&D Principal Engineer, EGCI , EIRAC
P&G at a Glance• Net Sales $82.6 (billion)
• Number of Employees 127,000
• Countries of Operations 80
• Countries Where Our Brands Are Sold 180
• Consumers Served by Our Brands 4.5 billion
• R&D organization 9,000
• R&D spending $2.0 (billion)
2
R&D spending $2.0 (billion)
(Approximate)
1‐11‐2011
2
P&G Business in Tons per year
Year Tons
2007 22 Millions
2010 24 Millions
2011 23 Millions
(22 millions tons= 1 million trucks)….but, we buy 3 millions loads!
4
1‐11‐2011
3
long-term vision
Powering our Designing products that Using 100% renewable materials or Having zero consumer
5
owe g ouplants with 100% renewable energy
es g g p oducts t atdelight consumers while
maximizing the conservation of resources
Us g 00% e ewab e ate a s orecyclate for
all our productsand packaging
av g e o co su eor manufacturing waste going to
landfills
Sustainable innovation is about considering the full life cycle
1‐11‐2011
4
Sustainability ‐> Innovation in Supply Chains
More t i bl
Less Lower t t l t
Transport burden = Volume shipped X KM travelled X “Cost” of 1 Km
COMPACTIONSUPPLY NETWORK
SHORTERSUPPLY NETWORK EFFICIENCY
sustainable resources total cost
decentralizedproduction
intermodal
transport collaboration
product compaction
vehicle fill home delivery
control tower
What & Why
Comodality
Collaboration
Competition
Concepts
1‐11‐2011
5
Decarbonisation of the Supply Chain: Why an EU Priority?
CO2 emissions by sector (1990=100)
90
100
110
120
130
140
CO2 emissions by sectorin the EU27 in 2007
Energy Industries
36%
Other2%
Transport (incl. intl
bunkers)
28%
70
80
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Transport (incl. intl bunkers) Energy IndustriesTotal IndustryHouseholds Services etc.Other
2%
Services etc.4% House-
holds9%
Industry21%
Road is issue #1
CO2 emissions from transport in the EU27 by mode(1990=100)
100
125
150
175
200
CO2 emissions from transport in the EU27 in 2007 by mode
Road
Railways1%Other
modes1%
Air (incl. intl
bunkers)
50
75
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Road IWW and Maritime (incl. intl bunkers)
Air (incl. intl bunkers) Other Transportation
Railways Total Transport
71%12%
IWW and Maritime
(incl. intl
bunkers)
15%
1‐11‐2011
6
Sustainable Decarbonization Strategies
Slowing down product flow2
Clean vehicle technology1Slowing down product flow2
Clean vehicle technology1World Economic Forum identified
Training and communications8
Enable low carbon production7
Improved packaging design6
Increased energy efficiency of buildings5
Optimisation of logistics networks4
Localised sourcing of agricultural produce3
Slowing down product flow2
Training and communications8
Enable low carbon production7
Improved packaging design6
Increased energy efficiency of buildings5
Optimisation of logistics networks4
Localised sourcing of agricultural produce3
Slowing down product flow213 big opportunities to “decarbonize the supply chain”.
Reduction in congestion13
Increased home delivery12
Near-shoring / relocalisation11
Reverse logistics / recycling10
Freight modal shift9
Reduction in congestion13
Increased home delivery12
Near-shoring / relocalisation11
Reverse logistics / recycling10
Freight modal shift9
Optimization of LogisticsNetworks!
• 24% of freight vehicles in the24% of freight vehicles in the EU run empty
• Average loading of the rest is only 57%
• Overall efficiency = 43%!!! Overall efficiency = 43%!!! • If route is taken into account
efficiency goes down to <20%(Prof .Ballot, EDM Paris)
1‐11‐2011
7
Collaborate to research solutions for the future
Three pillars:
Roadmaps to Green Transport in Europe
13
(1) Passenger cars and LCV(2) Trucks and Busses efficiency improvement (3) Logistics: better efficiency of goods transport
Green Hubs and Green Corridors
Current Scenario, Opportunities and Key Performance Indicators
New Business Models for Green Hubs and Green Corridors
M. I
M. II
M. III
Milestone I (to 2015)Setting the Targets
Milestone II (to 2020)Building the Partnerships
Mil t III (t 2030)
EGCI ROADMAP
Full interoperability across modes and networks, down to last km
Networks Integration
Milestone III (to 2030)Roll‐out
M. I
M. II
M. III
1‐11‐2011
8
P j TINA
Long term sustainable alternativeto complement road transport
A SUCCESS STORY: P&G INTERMODAL EUROPE
Lyon
Project TINA2008 Aim: rail transport from 10% to 30% by 2015
We are at 30% today!!!
Klippan
MoscowRiga
Tallinn
TINA 2015 MASTERPLAN
Mechelen
London
Amiens
Skelmersdale
Euskirchen
Gross Gerau
Crailsheim
Blois
Gattatico
Coevorden
Timisoara
Chisinau
Targowek
Rakona
Kiev
Minsk
Vilnius
Csomor
Zagreb
Lodz
E. Laenens ‐ April '09
Pomezia
Athens
Mataro
Tirana
Gebze
Sofia
Belgrade
1‐11‐2011
9
P&G Cube Fill Initiative
• Today we are looking for Partners for both our TINA project and our Cube Fill Initiative, but 3 years ago that was not the case!
• Old P&G mentality…
• …but WE are the biggest, Why should we collaborate?
1‐11‐2011
10
Rules of cost/benefits sharingShapley value is easy to calculate…;‐)
•It is based on a company’s marginal contribution to groups of other companies:•Shapley value is the only gain sharing concept that satisfies all the following fairness properties:
Efficiency: The complete savings of collaboration are distributedMonotonicity: If player A adds more value to every coalition than player B, player A will get a higher payoffDummy: A player that adds no value to any coalitionDummy: A player that adds no value to any coalition, will receive no payoffSymmetry: If two players add exactly the same value to every other coalition, they will get the same payoffIndividual fairness: No player will suffer from collaboration (cost level after collaboration is not higher then individually, i.e. without collaboration)
1‐11‐2011
11
A competitive advantage!
Shapley solution? The new Passenger should pay 50% of the costs
1) The single passenger is now paying as if he has another passengers to share the costs.
2) The group of 3 are now paying as if they were 6 passengers sharing the costs !
Note that: a scale of 6 is physically IMPOSSIBLE if you do not COLLABORATE
A final note on Competition…
