Scan barcode
A review by _walter_
How the World Ran Out of Everything: Inside the Global Supply Chain by Peter S. Goodman
3.0
"How the World Ran Out of Everything" is a truly sobering account of the shortcomings of the global supply-chain as seen through the eyes of a decidedly biased and one-sided economic reporter. There, I said it.
Don't get me wrong, there's lots to like about this book, which at times, totally consumed me. If you were not totally aware of the risks, complexity, reach, and major players of the global supply chain, then rest assured that you have come to the right place. Goodman does a stellar job in crafting his narrative to underscore the importance of each component, while lionizing the efforts of the everyday men and women who keep the whole thing running. Nothing to knock down here.
But the problems start almost right away. Let's just focus on two of the main villains in Goodman's story: Lean Manufacturing (a.k.a. "just-in-time" manufacturing) and Containerization (as in the large steel boxes that are moved on giant cargo ships and that truck drivers haul around to the final destination).
According to the author, Lean Manufacturing was the primary culprit in the shortage of goods that just about everyone experienced during the global pandemic. Why? Because Lean Manufacturing seeks to reduce waste and optimize inventory by keeping just enough capital goods/raw materials to meet the demands of the market. No more, no less. This manufacturing philosophy was taken to its artful extreme by the likes of McKinsey, Bain & Co., and other consulting firms who often took a cut of the savings after implementing these techniques for their clients.
The advent of Lean Manufacturing mean that, yes, the supply chain did become more brittle and susceptible to large, unforeseen, exogenous shocks, such as a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. So we get lots of pages of preaching the evils of optimization while completely disregarding the other, equally important side of the story.
Lean Manufacturing was born in post-war Japan as way to ensure factories could keep producing valuable goods in a world that was still recovering from the effects of the war. When it was brought to the US somewhere in the 1970's, companies from all walks picked it up and ran with it, to great success.
Now, what the author just couldn't be bothered to contemplate is what the alternative could have been. Lean Manufacturing eliminates a lot of waste and pollution by ensuring that just the right amount goods are produced/inventoried. It is one of the main reasons why goods are more affordable and why there's more variety of them, since presumably the better use of resources ensures they can put to use where need or demand arises (or by redirecting capital to R&D to make better, more efficient machines, etc.). Sometimes this demand has to be forecasted, and as we all know, forecasts are oftentimes wrong, but this is no reason to lambast "just-in-time" techniques wholesale. So that was strike one for me.
Strike two comes in the way of his critique of "containerization" as force that disrupted the honest and hardworking lives of longshoremen, truck drivers, warehouse workers, and producers, just to name a few. If Lean Manufacturing gave us more variety of goods, of greater quality, faster, at better prices, then containerization is what ensured that it could get to our doors.
The market will converge to and reward the solution that best meets its demands, and the fact that containers caught on like wildfire tells us something important about the pivotal role of said technology in getting us to this unprecedented level of prosperity the world over. Don't take my word for it, just read [b:Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think|34890015|Factfulness Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think|Hans Rosling|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1544963815l/34890015._SY75_.jpg|56144100].
But the author's stance on these two technologies is pretty much the same - it's all about greed, creating stakeholder value, massive profits, and optimization for its own sake. Damned be the small fries working their fingers to the bone, eh? YEAH, OK! As if consumers are blameless in their pursuit of lower prices, better quality, and faster shipping. I thought economics was his thing...
To top it all off, he has the audacity to quote Barbara Ehrenreich (of [b:Nickel and Dimed|1869|Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting By in America|Barbara Ehrenreich|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1442378091l/1869._SY75_.jpg|1840613] fame, who famously pretended to be poor for a bit...) in a last-ditch attempt to vilify the technologies and industries that got us into, and more pointedly, out of this condition:
Is the above really true? Do they really do it out of the goodness of their own heart? Sacrifice so much so that others might consume and live happily? Do they really endure privation for stock prices? Methinks they would not if given half a chance. And that's precisely the problem, they don't have a half a chance, and lacking opportunities must take what they can get. But that's an entirely different issue that should not be so barefacedly conflated. But this is precisely the type of stuff the author resorts to make a point.
At the very end, the biggest irony in this book is that the very structures and systems Goodman criticizes for failing during the COVID-19 pandemic, are the ones that facilitated the production and distribution of PPEs, vaccines, baby formula, and other goods needed to get the world back to some semblance or normality. Things could have been much, much worse.
An easy and informative read, nonetheless - 2.5 stars (rounded to 3)
Don't get me wrong, there's lots to like about this book, which at times, totally consumed me. If you were not totally aware of the risks, complexity, reach, and major players of the global supply chain, then rest assured that you have come to the right place. Goodman does a stellar job in crafting his narrative to underscore the importance of each component, while lionizing the efforts of the everyday men and women who keep the whole thing running. Nothing to knock down here.
But the problems start almost right away. Let's just focus on two of the main villains in Goodman's story: Lean Manufacturing (a.k.a. "just-in-time" manufacturing) and Containerization (as in the large steel boxes that are moved on giant cargo ships and that truck drivers haul around to the final destination).
According to the author, Lean Manufacturing was the primary culprit in the shortage of goods that just about everyone experienced during the global pandemic. Why? Because Lean Manufacturing seeks to reduce waste and optimize inventory by keeping just enough capital goods/raw materials to meet the demands of the market. No more, no less. This manufacturing philosophy was taken to its artful extreme by the likes of McKinsey, Bain & Co., and other consulting firms who often took a cut of the savings after implementing these techniques for their clients.
The advent of Lean Manufacturing mean that, yes, the supply chain did become more brittle and susceptible to large, unforeseen, exogenous shocks, such as a GLOBAL PANDEMIC. So we get lots of pages of preaching the evils of optimization while completely disregarding the other, equally important side of the story.
Lean Manufacturing was born in post-war Japan as way to ensure factories could keep producing valuable goods in a world that was still recovering from the effects of the war. When it was brought to the US somewhere in the 1970's, companies from all walks picked it up and ran with it, to great success.
Now, what the author just couldn't be bothered to contemplate is what the alternative could have been. Lean Manufacturing eliminates a lot of waste and pollution by ensuring that just the right amount goods are produced/inventoried. It is one of the main reasons why goods are more affordable and why there's more variety of them, since presumably the better use of resources ensures they can put to use where need or demand arises (or by redirecting capital to R&D to make better, more efficient machines, etc.). Sometimes this demand has to be forecasted, and as we all know, forecasts are oftentimes wrong, but this is no reason to lambast "just-in-time" techniques wholesale. So that was strike one for me.
Strike two comes in the way of his critique of "containerization" as force that disrupted the honest and hardworking lives of longshoremen, truck drivers, warehouse workers, and producers, just to name a few. If Lean Manufacturing gave us more variety of goods, of greater quality, faster, at better prices, then containerization is what ensured that it could get to our doors.
The market will converge to and reward the solution that best meets its demands, and the fact that containers caught on like wildfire tells us something important about the pivotal role of said technology in getting us to this unprecedented level of prosperity the world over. Don't take my word for it, just read [b:Factfulness: Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think|34890015|Factfulness Ten Reasons We're Wrong About the World – and Why Things Are Better Than You Think|Hans Rosling|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1544963815l/34890015._SY75_.jpg|56144100].
But the author's stance on these two technologies is pretty much the same - it's all about greed, creating stakeholder value, massive profits, and optimization for its own sake. Damned be the small fries working their fingers to the bone, eh? YEAH, OK! As if consumers are blameless in their pursuit of lower prices, better quality, and faster shipping. I thought economics was his thing...
To top it all off, he has the audacity to quote Barbara Ehrenreich (of [b:Nickel and Dimed|1869|Nickel and Dimed On (Not) Getting By in America|Barbara Ehrenreich|https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1442378091l/1869._SY75_.jpg|1840613] fame, who famously pretended to be poor for a bit...) in a last-ditch attempt to vilify the technologies and industries that got us into, and more pointedly, out of this condition:
“The working poor,” as they are approvingly termed, are in fact the major philanthropists of our society. They neglect their own children so that the children of others will be cared for; they live in substandard housing so that other homes will be shiny and perfect; they endure privation so that inflation will be low and stock prices high. To be a member of the working poor is to be an anonymous donor, a nameless benefactor, to everyone else. As Gail, one of my restaurant coworkers put it, “you give and you give.
Is the above really true? Do they really do it out of the goodness of their own heart? Sacrifice so much so that others might consume and live happily? Do they really endure privation for stock prices? Methinks they would not if given half a chance. And that's precisely the problem, they don't have a half a chance, and lacking opportunities must take what they can get. But that's an entirely different issue that should not be so barefacedly conflated. But this is precisely the type of stuff the author resorts to make a point.
At the very end, the biggest irony in this book is that the very structures and systems Goodman criticizes for failing during the COVID-19 pandemic, are the ones that facilitated the production and distribution of PPEs, vaccines, baby formula, and other goods needed to get the world back to some semblance or normality. Things could have been much, much worse.
An easy and informative read, nonetheless - 2.5 stars (rounded to 3)