The Concern
A Pune-based manufacturer of automotive components supplied several domestic and international vehicle makers. Read More
What We Did
Mapped critical dependencies. With the client’s leadership and procurement teams, we identified the suppliers whose disruption would have the greatest operational and contractual impact. Read More
What We Found
The supplier was still performing well, but several developments pointed to rising risk. Read More
The Outcome
The client acted early, while it still had room to choose: Read More
The Concern
A Pune-based manufacturer of automotive components supplied several domestic and international vehicle makers. It was taking on larger production commitments under new long-term contracts.
One supplier provided a specialised component that made up a large share of the client’s production inputs. The relationship had run for more than six years without major quality or delivery issues, and no alternative supplier had been fully qualified.
The new contracts carried penalty clauses for late delivery, so leadership wanted to know whether any part of the supply chain carried risks that routine vendor reviews might miss. There was no problem to respond to yet. The question was whether one was forming.
What We Did
- Mapped critical dependencies. With the client’s leadership and procurement teams, we identified the suppliers whose disruption would have the greatest operational and contractual impact.
- Defined the signals to watch. The assessment covered financial health indicators, corporate and leadership changes, legal and regulatory exposure, and operational and environmental conditions in the supplier’s region.
- Gathered information lawfully. We used corporate and regulatory filings, court records, public notices, open-source intelligence, industry sources and adverse media, relying only on lawful, verifiable channels.
- Separated signals from noise. We told isolated events apart from patterns and assessed which developments, taken together, pointed to a credible risk of disruption.
- Made it actionable. Leadership received a clear risk assessment showing what was forming, how likely disruption was, and what options were still open.
What We Found
The supplier was still performing well, but several developments pointed to rising risk.
- Growing financial strain. New charges had been registered against the supplier’s assets over the previous year, and industry sources reported delays in payments to its own sub-suppliers.
- Regulatory pressure. The supplier’s main facility had received notices from the state pollution control authority, and a compliance deadline was approaching.
- Leadership instability. Two senior directors, including the person responsible for operations, had resigned within a short period.
- Dependency on a single facility. The supplier had no secondary production site, so regulatory action at the main facility could stop output entirely.
None of this meant failure was certain. Together, though, these developments made a serious disruption a realistic possibility within the client’s contract period.
The Outcome
The client acted early, while it still had room to choose:
- Alternative supplier qualified: Qualifying a second supplier was fast-tracked and completed within the following quarter.
- Buffer stock built: Inventory of the critical component was built up ahead of peak production.
- Supply terms strengthened: Terms with the existing supplier were reviewed to strengthen continuity commitments.
- Ongoing monitoring: Monitoring of this supplier and other critical vendors became part of the procurement risk framework.
Several months later, the supplier’s facility had a temporary operational shutdown. The client’s production carried on without missing a single delivery commitment.