Author

Fraser Robinson

Published

10 April 2026

Estimated Read time

5Mins

Fraser Robinson, CEO of Beacon, digs into three of the biggest challenges facing supply chain this year

For supply chain leaders, ‘business as usual’ means one thing: ever-increasing unpredictability. It only took the first month of the year for a fresh round of Trump tariffs to land against a backdrop of ongoing geopolitical instability worldwide. While previously framed as ‘unprecedented’, this level of volatility has become routine. Month after month, year after year, uncertainty is the job.

While this uncertainty can make it hard to make specific predictions, what are some of the broader trends we can expect to shape the sector in the year ahead? And how can supply chain leaders prepare?

Targets

Supply chain targets are expected to be higher this year. Finance teams are demanding cost reductions, operations need faster delivery times and sales require guaranteed stock availability – often simultaneously. This means supply chain leaders are being asked to do more with less, while also navigating carrier on-time delivery rates that hit historic lows in 2025. 

Competition is incredibly high and it’s becoming even more commonplace for companies to lose customers and contracts due to late or unreliable deliveries. In particular, heightened volatility has placed greater pressure on supply chain leaders to diversify the range of suppliers they use in order to reduce reliance on a single provider and the risk this carries.

Supply chain leaders therefore need a robust understanding of carrier options, trade routes and market trends to inform how they can achieve hitting these targets. But driving tangible improvements rests on having supply chain data that is independent, unified, standardized and accurate. This allows supply chain leaders to see where money is being left on the table and where the risk lies, like what containers are regularly at risk of demurrage fees, and what business decisions can be made to improve margins and service levels. 

Tariffs

Tariffs have already been a major talking point this year. And whether by Trump (very likely) or other countries, they will be a theme we see much more of in the coming year. McKinsey’s annual survey of global supply chain leaders from December 2025 revealed that the one issue “top-of-mind” was “the potential impact of tariffs on many of the world’s most significant trade flows”, with 82% saying that their supply chains are affected by new tariffs. 

Not only are tariffs impacting trade to and from the US, but other countries and regions are striking their own set of deals to manage the change. And even when deals are struck, tariffs can suddenly change again once a goal has been met or a new dispute arises. 

In this ever-changing landscape, being one step ahead can feel like an uphill battle. But better control and insight into aggregated supply chain data, including carrier performance connected to your freight contracts, can ease this pressure by driving more informed decisions and providing supply chain leaders with confidence in their operation – you know exactly what happened. This confidence enables leaders to make decisions faster and with more clarity over tariffs. It also builds a sense of belief that they can adapt to situations and find solutions to abrupt changes. 

Conversely, if you can’t access insights such as where shipments were at what point, or the various costs of different suppliers compared against their performance history, then maintaining this confidence becomes difficult. You’re making decisions blindfolded, and that’s when tariffs can become even more of a problem. 

Technology

Supply chain leaders face a paradox – the choice of technology platforms on the market is abundant, yet procuring the wrong solution can set operations back years. With lengthy implementation timelines, high costs and integration complexity, the stakes of technology decisions have never been higher. The question isn’t whether to adopt new tech, but how to identify solutions that deliver measurable value without consuming years of implementation effort or disrupting existing operations.

The potential decision paralysis from dealing with these choices is perhaps a factor as to why tech investments are stalling (another finding from the McKinsey survey). For supply chain leaders already managing stretched teams and ongoing system implementations, the risk isn’t just the choice of the wrong platform, but also the opportunity cost of time and resources. A 12-month implementation that pulls key personnel away from daily operations can be more disruptive than the manual processes it’s meant to replace. The question becomes: what technology can integrate without requiring operational upheaval?

Most supply chains weren’t built for the power of AI. Data sits in silos, it is not standardised, technology is not connected, data isn’t kept up to date, and the infrastructure just isn’t there to take advantage of what’s now possible.

Agentic AI and advanced automation promise significant value, but if companies don’t have adequate supply chain technology that effectively unifies data and provides real-time data analytics, then new advancements like AI agents won’t. They need to be incorporated into an already highly functioning system. 

Easing the pressure

Uncertainty and disruption are part and parcel of supply chains. In the year ahead, pressure to hit supply chain targets, navigate fluctuating tariffs and invest in technology that will produce value – not further disruption – will be the key trends facing the sector. What separates leaders who navigate these pressures successfully from those who struggle isn’t necessarily budget size or team capacity. It’s decision-making speed, backed by real-time, unified data.

Can you answer critical questions in minutes rather than days? When tariffs shift, can you immediately assess the impact on in-transit inventory? When targets tighten, can you identify which suppliers or carriers are underperforming? When evaluating new technology, can you distinguish platforms that integrate quickly from those requiring multi-year implementations?

This doesn’t require ripping out existing systems or embarking on transformation projects that consume years. Instead, it requires connecting the data that already exists but currently lives across fragmented carrier portals, forwarder spreadsheets, and email threads. The pressures aren’t going away – but the clarity needed to navigate them is achievable.

  • Risk & Resilience

Author

Andrew Woods

Published

8 April 2026

Estimated Read time

10Mins

CPO Strategy & SupplyChain Strategy was honoured to attend ethica26, a summit dedicated to eradicating human rights violations in Supply…

CPO Strategy & SupplyChain Strategy was honoured to attend ethica26, a summit dedicated to eradicating human rights violations in Supply Chains. The day provided valuable, relevant and shocking insights for leaders investing in ethical supply chains...

At ethica26, in London, produced by Slave-Free Alliance, Hope for Justice and sponsored by Exiger, one point was clear: human rights in supply chains define corporate credibility, resilience and long-term value. Ethica26’s packed agenda focused on action, not just rhetoric. Speeches and debates highlighted the urgency of making supply chains more ethical, resilient, and strategic.

The era of voluntary action is ending. New UK laws and the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive (CSDDD) increase pressure on businesses from regulators, investors, and customers. ethica26 logically looked beyond compliance.

This one-day summit brought together over 300 senior leaders from legal, procurement, policy, compliance, NGOs, and survivor advocacy. The main takeaway: embedding justice in supply chain governance is crucial for transforming risk into resilience.

Co-chaired by Tim Nelson, CEO of Hope for Justice and Slave-Free Alliance and human slavery expert, Dr Laura Murphy, and moderated by experienced business transformation leader, Maria Villablanca, the programme combined policy briefings, executive panels, case studies, and survivor perspectives with practical tools for measuring risk, building resilience and creating long-term business advantage.

Nelson opened proceedings, joined by Dr. Laura Murphy, Professor of Human Rights and Contemporary Slavery at Sheffield Hallam University. “We decided to organise ethica26 because we knew that gathering high‑profile, passionate leaders and businesses into the same room, people who are genuinely committed to driving human rights forward in global supply chains, would spark inspiring conversations and create its own momentum,” Nelson told the hushed crowd.

Nelson then reminded the audience that St Patrick himself (for it was March 17th) was trafficked to a foreign country in the Fifth Century – shipped over the Irish Sea from Britain and forced into slavery. Slavery that still exists worldwide today.

​

A stark opening: the cost of inaction

From the outset, the calibre and diversity of speakers set the tone. Leaders from global organisations – including AstraZeneca, Novartis, Schneider Electric, Tony’s Chocolonely, and Exiger – joined representatives from the Ethical Trading Initiative, UN Global Compact UK, Principles for Responsible Investment, BSI, and NGOs such as Unseen and Footprint to Freedom. During the breaks, the Supply Chain Strategy team spoke with these senior leaders, campaigners, and practitioners active in modern slavery, due diligence and responsible sourcing.

​

Inaction won’t be tolerated

​Caroline Haughey, OBE KC, is a top UK expert on modern slavery. Her message was direct: “Corporate responsibility is not, ‘I did nothing wrong,’” she said. “Corporate responsibility is, ‘What did I do right? How can I prove that?’” Citing her experience in high-profile cases, she warned that inaction is a major risk. “Invest in improvement now, or face an uncertain future,” she said.

That urgency carried into the policy briefing from Alex Chalk KC, who outlined the direction of travel for legislation across the UK, EU and beyond, signalling increasing scrutiny on boards and executives. The conversation then quickly moved from regulation to capital markets.

In the panel on Human Rights as a Material Investment Risk, moderated by Matt Crossman, Stewardship Director, Rathbones, speakers, including Dame Sara Thornton of CCLA, Thomas Abrams of the Principles for Responsible Investment and Peter Nestor, Global Head of Human Rights, Novartis, explored how human rights performance is now directly tied to investment decisions. “Human rights due diligence is an extremely effective tool for staying ahead of financial risk,” Abrams explained, adding, “because the impacts materialise before the risks show up in the numbers.” 

Human rights are now recognised by the investment community as a material risk, the audience heard, underlining the shift from ethical considerations to a financial imperative. A view echoed by Thornton: “There is emerging evidence that taking human rights seriously is linked to long-term value creation and competitiveness,” she declared. “This isn’t just about compliance. It’s about strategic advantage and value creation.”

Moving beyond compliance

A recurring theme throughout the day was the gap between policy and practice. This was explored in a fireside chat moderated by Maria Villablanca, where Robert Williams, Senior Director Sustainable Procurement at AstraZeneca and Kanishk Negi, Director of Sustainable Procurement at Schneider Electric, discussed the challenge of embedding accountability beyond compliance. Panelists agreed: policies alone are now insufficient. Organisations must make human rights an integral part of procurement, governance, and everyday decision-making.

The agenda brought this to life through a series of case studies. Kitty Pandya, Partnerships Manager at Tony’s Chocolonely, shared lessons from its Open Chain model, demonstrating how responsible sourcing (in this case, cocoa sourcing) can be embedded commercially rather than treated as a bolt-on.

AstraZeneca’s Case Study featured Robert Williams, Tanya Murphy, Associate Director at AstraZeneca, and Rachel Hartley, who outlined how the company’s human rights risk assessments are shaping tangible projects and cross-functional collaboration. Meanwhile, Peter Nestor detailed the evolution of its Labour Rights 2.0 approach, translating strategy into operational reality across global supply chains.

​

When things go wrong

The complexity of implementation was matched by the challenge of response in the panel When Things Go Wrong, moderated by Giles Bolton, including speakers: Andrew Wallis, CEO at Unseen, Malaika Oringo, Executive Director at Footprint to Freedom, Dame Sara Thornton, Consultant, Modern Slavery, CCLA​ and Julia Black, Group Sustainability & Ethics Senior Manager, Hilton Food Group of Hilton Food Group. Together, they examined how organisations need premeditated responses to serious human rights allegations, the discussion highlighting that response quality – from escalation to remediation – can determine positive outcomes for workers, investors and the business itself. 

Andrew Wallis posited: “Ask yourself this question about your company: are you in the when camp or the if camp? In other words, when it happens, ‘we’re going to have to act fast and do it really well’ – or if it happens, ‘we’ll get around to thinking about it’. If you’re in the ‘if’ camp, you are not in a good place.” 

Oringo highlighted the need to transform the culture of the business to ‘on the ground’ to shine a greater spotlight onto injustices. “Instead of expecting someone to say, ‘Hello, I’m being exploited,’ you need to create trauma-informed spaces where people feel safe enough to come forward,” she said.

​

The evolving reality of forced labour

One of the most powerful contributions came from Dr Laura Murphy, Professor of Human Rights and Contemporary Slavery at Sheffield Hallam University, whose session on state-imposed forced labour cut through assumptions about visibility and progress. “What I’m here to tell you today is that the system of oppression hasn’t ended. It has changed. It has evolved,” she said, explaining how exploitation has shifted from internment camps into factories, farms and supply chains.

Murphy specifically focused on the forced labour of Uyghur and other Turkic and Muslim majority peoples that has emerged in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region (Uyghur Region) of China. The 2023 Global Slavery Index (GSI) estimates that 5.8 million people were living in modern slavery across China on any given day in 2021.

“There’s no sense. There’s no understanding of how the Chinese government treats the Uyghur region as a colonial outpost or recognises its independence and ongoing rights abuses,” she explained. “But as you know, today is a quick catch-up. About a million to a million and a half people were put into internment camps where they received re-education, were separated from families, and suffered torture, rape, and sterilisation. Genocidal acts were inflicted on this group, about 12 million people; Turkic by origin, a minority in China, but a majority in their region. People have started to get a false sense that, since they’re not hearing about it much, it’s no longer happening,” she warned, highlighting the deliberate removal of visible signs of abuse to create an illusion of compliance.

Murphy brought the issue to a human scale by citing real cases. She described individuals forced into factory work against their will, despite clear resistance. “They say, ‘I don’t want to go,’” she noted, showing how pressure and intimidation override refusal. Her message for CPOs and supply chain leaders was direct: exposure to these risks is broader than assumed. Audits and supplier engagement are often ineffective under tightly controlled systems.

​Technology and the shift to action

If visibility is key in tackling human rights abuses, then technology has emerged as a critical enabler of that new approach. Lauren Elliott, Global Head of Client Delivery at Exiger, demonstrated how AI is transforming forced labour detection, enabling companies to map supply chains, identify risk and act in real time. “AI technology enables a shift to action,” she said. That shift to action enabled through AI’s parsing of unimaginable volumes of data, thus laying bare the risk for all to see. A crucial game-changer as organisations move beyond static audits towards dynamic, intelligence-led decision-making. 

Elliott was also a contributor to the Horizon Scanning panel that brought together a wide range of perspectives. Moderated by Tim Nelson, the discussion also featured Eleanor Lyons, the UK’s Independent Anti-Slavery Commissioner, Kanishk Negi and Tahseen Anam of BSI. Together, they explored how regulation, investor expectations, technology and corporate practice are converging to reshape the future of supply chains. Murphy’s warning underscored the urgency of that shift with the likelihood of increased enforcement and global scrutiny. Murphy captured the urgency succinctly. “This is about to get much bigger… this is about to go viral,” she said, pointing to a likely wave of global enforcement and forced labour import bans.

From conversation to change

Ethica26 succeeded in bridging the gap between discussion and delivery. By convening policymakers, corporates, investors and campaigners in one room, it created a space where difficult truths were confronted and practical solutions shared. For supply chain leaders, the takeaway was clear. Human rights are no longer a compliance exercise or reputational safeguard. They are central to resilience, governance and competitive advantage. The question is no longer whether to act, but how quickly organisations can move from awareness to action – and whether they are ready for what comes next.

​Let’s leave the closing words to Tim Nelson, CEO of Hope for Justice and Slave-Free Alliance: “The energy, openness and shared purpose throughout the day were remarkable, across sectors and industries. This conference showed us that when businesses, investors, innovators and advocates come together, real progress follows.”

​Hope for Justice

Hope for Justice, headquartered in Manchester, is a charity working to bring freedom from human trafficking and modern slavery with an effective and proven multi-disciplinary model. Its programmes and training initiatives in the UK, USA, Ethiopia and Uganda reach just under 150,000 adults and children each year. Its wholly owned social enterprise, Slave-Free Alliance, provides services to companies and public bodies in countries including the UK, USA and Australia that are seeking to protect their operations and supply chains against the risks of modern slavery and labour exploitation. It offers a pioneering membership programme as well as training, consultancy, site assessments and more.

​

Special thanks from Tim Nelson: “I am so grateful to Marc Stanton, Rachel Hartley, Maria Villablanca and everyone else who helped organise the day and make the event such a major success, and to our lead sponsor, Exiger, for making it possible.”

Author

Andrew Woods

Published

1 October 2025

Estimated Read time

10Mins

For most of their careers, procurement and supply chain leaders have operated in what might be termed “peacetime conditions” –…

For most of their careers, procurement and supply chain leaders have operated in what might be termed “peacetime conditions” – globalised markets, relatively stable politics and just-in-time models optimised for efficiency. Well, that era is well and truly over. To that end, we were honoured to be invited to September’s Exiger Executive Forum in London, a gathering of procurement leaders, financiers and politicians to see how procurement leaders can navigate a new phase of supply chain revolution: ‘war-time readiness’… 

18/9/2025. The scheduling of the Exiger Executive Forum couldn’t have been more timely. Just a week ago, NATO planes downed Russian drones over Poland. Saturday will see three Russian fighter aircraft enter Estonia’s airspace without permission. Sunday will see fighter jets from Germany and Sweden scrambling over the Baltic Sea to intercept and track an unidentified Russian surveillance plane. These are perilous times. 

The Re-Arm Europe programme, backed by more than €800bn in funding and EU initiatives such as EDIP and ASAP, is addressing these concerns by placing the EU onto a wartime footing. However, this is not simply about tanks, jets and missiles – its impact will ripple far beyond defence primes. From chemicals to chips, logistics to software, sectors once peripheral are now central to Europe’s security as their supply chains edge towards the frontline. 

From efficiency to fragility 

September’s Exiger Executive Forum is made up of three exceptional leaders: Tobias Ellwood, former MP, soldier and Chair of the Defence Select Committee from 2020 to 2023, who brings a defence and policymaker’s view of Europe’s readiness; Faysal Rahman, Head of Defence at Deutsche Bank AG, who is strategically placed regarding the unprecedented EU defence spend and Koray Köse, Chief Analyst and Founder of KOSE Advisory, senior fellow with GLOBSEC, futurist, technology and AI evangelist and former Gartner Analyst and Supply Chain Executive, who connects geopolitics, AI and supply chain resilience at the sharpest edge of disruption with his massive global audience. Their host is Exiger’s Tim Fowler. 

At the latest Exiger Executive Forum, the group tackles how wartime economics redraws supply networks, creates new critical suppliers and redefines what resilience and readiness mean for global supply chains already under significant pressure, where the impact of the Re-Arm Europe programme is but another stress test. After all, if your suppliers are suddenly required as part of the war effort, or are considered security risks due to their location, how will you replace them?  

Be prepared

“You should definitely prepare,” Ellwood reveals. “What would happen, if say London didn’t have water or electricity for 72 hours? Who would you turn to? These are the questions we need to be asking ourselves. And once you get your mindset around those sorts of things, you can start preparing yourselves more widely for being able to procure in these difficult environments. Where are your supply chains leading? If they all go to China, then where’s your plan B?” he posits. “That might take you to Canada who are ready with a lot of the minerals, say, but the processing capabilities there are woefully behind. So there needs to be some direction, some vision, certainly some strategy to say we need to think of these things were the proverbial to happen. These are very difficult, but important questions and I think it’s really very wise for us to now consider them, however dark.” 

War-time readiness is going to massively impact supply chains across all sectors, but are procurement leaders ready to respond when wartime economics collide with fragile, globalised supply chains? Köse, expert supply chain and technology strategist, pulls no punches. “No, they’re not, and it’s not only their fault, it’s the fault of the economy. We work in a way where you look at quarterly reports and three-year plans because the worst thing for a CFO is for uncertainty to be built into the budget. They hate that. So, what they minimise is that uncertainty in the budget that then reflects into stiff procurement and supply chain targets, which reflects into savings targets. However, targets should always be focused on value maximisation and if you don’t get that, you should get out of procurement and supply chain.” 

Procurement’s historic back-office status, Köse argues, has left organisations exposed. Risk has been a KPI, but not fragility or resilience. “We’ve always measured cost, quantity, quality,” he details. “Never fragility or resilience. That must change.” 

The numbers he cites are sobering. In Germany, it would take until 2121 to rebuild stockpiles of ammunition back to 2004 levels. “Nothing works without security,” he tells the room. “And nothing works without supply chains. Procurement is no longer about buying things at the lowest cost. It’s about national resilience.” 

“Most organisations only invest in resilience after the last shock,” offers one audience member. “The problem is that resilience looks like an insurance policy. Nobody wants to pay for it until it’s too late,” he continues. “Resilience also means securing skills, not just materials,” declares another. Both perspectives reinforcing a central theme: procurement must expand its definition of resilience, from materials to people, from efficiency to adaptability. 

No one will escape

The forum is clear that wartime economics will not stay within the defence silo. Energy, pharmaceuticals, FMCG and tech will all feel the squeeze. Köse cites the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act, which sets ambitious targets for mining, processing and recycling within Europe. “If you’re a CPO in pharma or FMCG, don’t think this won’t touch you,” he cautions. “Aluminium, cobalt, lithium – these are not just defence issues. Inflationary pressures, resource competition and talent shortages will hit everyone.”  

According to Köse you first need to establish security and the visibility into supply tiers, to be able to control your supply chain. “Because supply chains define your economic success, which then bolsters the social fabric and so on. The ripple effect. “And when we’re thinking about supply chain, we have always underestimated the role that we played in this because we have always been pushed in the back office. But now it’s the flip side. Why? Because of those unprecedented events such as COVID. ‘Supply chain, can you please help us? We need PPE, we need availability of vials for the vaccine.’ And then Ukraine happened, and then inflation happened, and then AI. Suddenly, the CPO and the CSCO are both under pressure and the focal points. This is the time to act and not to sit and wait.” 

Procurement’s new KPIs: fragility, resilience and agility 

So, what does resilience look like in practice? Köse suggests that the three converging levers: people, process, and technology are now complemented with integrating politics and economics – without the amplification resilience remains an illusion. He also warns against procurement’s obsession with cost. “It’s not cost management anymore. It’s revenue protection and maximisation,” he argues. “That means funding hidden champions, backing innovative startups and leveraging the financial sector and banks to unlock capital.” 

The technological revolution is creating both the problems and the possible solutions when reshaping procurement and increasing resilience. “We are still coming to terms with unmanned warfare,” Ellwood explains. “Simple drones costing a few hundred pounds are neutralising tanks worth millions. That changes procurement priorities overnight. It’s about volume, adaptability and speed. The lesson for corporate procurement? Traditional innovation cycles are collapsing. From 3D printers producing drone parts on the Ukrainian frontline, to Boston Dynamics’ robotic “dogs” potentially repurposed as weapons, procurement leaders must think beyond cost and consider adaptability as a strategic metric.”   

Even with capital and innovation, Europe also faces a coordination problem. Faysal Rahman, Head of Defence at Deutsche Bank notes that “27 countries, 27 defence ministers, 27 bespoke tanks are creating inefficiencies. Soft EU guidance on joint procurement has yet to deliver real standardisation”. Ellwood illustrates the absurdity with examples: British artillery pieces unable to fire Lithuanian shells; aircraft unable to use interchangeable refuelling systems. “There is no commonality in NATO beyond small-calibre bullets,” he warns. “That is madness in this day and age.” For procurement leaders in every sector, the takeaway is simple: fragmentation kills resilience. Standardisation, interoperability and collaboration must be procurement priorities. 

Mind the gap

So, how do we bridge the gap between the governments involved in these programmes and the commercial organisations? What advice can we give commercial organisations when they’re talking to government and vice versa? How can government help? “I think collectively you need to work out yourselves what you’d like to see happen rather than waiting for it,” Ellwood explains. “I’ve spent 20 years in parliament and in government and there’s an awful lot of reaction and ‘working the day’, not looking at the bigger picture, not looking at long term.

“Half the problems we’ve got now, including recognising where our rare minerals should come from is because China is very good at looking ahead 34 years. It’s always a lot easier if you are the dictator and you’re going to still be in power in 34 years, but for a parliamentarian, for a government and for a minister, you’re actually looking at the electoral cycle. My advice would be collectively work out your recommendations and then seek good advice from the people that can influence the decision-making. The ones that when all the meetings are finished, stay up late around the fire with the prime minister and work out what we should actually do. When you want thoughts to be shared it’s more powerful and has more clout, if collectively you work out what your recommendations are, slightly ‘across the table’.” 

Financing resilience: banks stepping in 

If fragility is a major problem for war-time supply chains, finance is certainly part of the solution. For procurement leaders, the implication is clear: access to finance is becoming a core enabler of supply chain resilience, hence the €800bn Re-Arm Europe fund. But agility is also essential. Unlike slow governmental RFP processes, banks are innovating with guarantees and bespoke lending models to get cash where it’s most urgently needed.

Rahman explains how capital is now being redirected to strengthen the supply chain itself – not just the primes at the top. “It’s not only large corporates that need capital,” he reveals. “It’s the smaller suppliers who are critical to the ecosystem. If one of Lockheed Martin’s 1,050 suppliers fails to deliver, the entire F-35 programme is affected. That’s why we struck a €500mn deal with the European Investment Bank specifically to fund SMEs in defence supply chains. Demand has been overwhelming. We closed that deal just months ago,” he notes. “And already 70% of the capital is gone.” 

Conclusion: preparing for the next shock 

From finance to fragility, drones to data engineers, one theme echoed through the Exiger Executive Forum: resilience is now procurement’s ultimate KPI. Rahman illustrates: “We’re starting to factor in these black swan events that are unlikely to happen in theory, but are becoming more and more common in practice.

The one thing that is extremely challenging is the uncertainty. If you look at any deal-making, whether it’s acquiring a company or giving a loan, the number one ingredient for making a deal is confidence. If you don’t have confidence, you can’t make that deal. That’s what we’ve started grappling with because the last three to five years have seen a lot of unprecedented events. How you manage that is really important. We’re also looking at issues around cybersecurity becoming a lot more prominent in the defence industry. If a missile or a satellite gets hijacked, how do you manage that risk?” 

For procurement leaders, the war-time readiness challenge needs us to prepare not just for yesterday’s disruptions but for tomorrow’s ‘unthinkable’. As we’ve discussed, that means rethinking metrics, partnering with finance, investing in innovation, and engaging with government. Because in an era where geopolitics and economics collide, procurement isn’t just about sourcing. It’s about securing the future. 

COMING UP: https://www.exiger.com/perspectives/exiger-executive-forum-false-security-the-illusion-of-control-in-modern-day-value-chains

  • Events
  • Risk & Resilience

Author

Andrew Woods

Published

18 August 2025

Estimated Read time

4Mins

Financing searches surged by up to 130% before august tariff implementation, according to new research from Crux Analytics.

American businesses showed striking levels of financial anxiety in the final weeks before new tariffs took effect on major trade partners, including Canada, Mexico, Japan, and the EU, according to a comprehensive analysis of Google search data across all 50 U.S. states by business relationship intelligence platform Crux Analytics.

The data reveals a clear geographic pattern of pre-implementation business distress, with port states, border regions, and manufacturing centers showing the most severe spikes in financial stress indicators as companies braced for supply chain disruptions.

Nationally, business loan-related searches increased an average of 23%, but border states averaged 32% increases. Cash flow-related searches rose 28% on average nationwide, with port states showing 98% average increases.

Regional Economic Impact Patterns Emerge

The data reveals distinct regional responses to the approaching tariff deadline, including 42 of 50 states showing statistically significant increases in at least one category:

  • Port and Trade Gateway States showed the highest cash flow-related stress (Maryland up by 130%, California by 107%, Louisiana by 97%), suggesting immediate working capital concerns as import costs prepared to spike.
    • On average, port states showed 98% average increases in cash flow searches.
  • Manufacturing Belt States balanced between loan searches and closure planning (Pennsylvania had a 53% increase in business loan interest, and a 51% increase in searches related to going out of business), indicating companies weighing expansion financing against shutdown scenarios.
    • Manufacturing states averaged 27% increases in searches related to “going out of business”.
  • Interior Agricultural States showed more moderate but still significant increases (Minnesota had a 61% increase in searches for cash flow, Iowa a 41% increase), reflecting concerns about input costs for farming operations and food processing. Southern manufacturing states also demonstrated stress, with South Carolina showing a 32% increase in cash flow searches.
  • Border Manufacturing Regions demonstrated broad-spectrum anxiety across all financial stress indicators, suggesting the most comprehensive preparation for supply chain disruption.
    • Border states averaged 35% increases across all business stress indicators.

Border States Showed Highest Anticipatory Anxiety

States along the Mexican border showed consistent patterns of business stress across multiple indicators:

  • Texas:
    • Searches for “going out of business” increased by 51%
    • Business loan-related searches increased by 30%
    • Cash flow-related searches increased by 39%
  • California:
    • Emergency loan-related searches increased by 55%
    • Cash flow-related searches increased by 107%
    • Business loan-related searches increased by 28%
  • Arizona:
    • Business loan-related searches increased by 50%
    • Searches for “going out of business” increased by 47%
    • Cash flow-related searches increased by 44%
  • New Mexico:
    • Searches for business loans increased by 29%

Emergency Financing Surge in Major Economic Centers

Beyond border regions, major metropolitan areas showed sharp increases in urgent financing searches:

  • Illinois: Business loan-related searches increased by 56% (Chicago manufacturing hub)
  • Pennsylvania: Business loan-related searches increased by 53%, emergency loan-related searches increased by 38%
  • Ohio: Business loan-related searches increased by 47%, emergency loan-related searches increased by 10%
  • Maryland: Business loan-related searches increased by 89% (highest in the nation)
  • New York: Emergency loan-related searches increased by 37%
  • Louisiana: Cash flow-related searches increased by 97% (Port of New Orleans – Gulf Coast trade hub)

Maryland’s 89% surge in business loan-related searches – the highest increase recorded – likely reflects the Port of Baltimore’s role as a major East Coast import gateway, with businesses anticipating significant supply chain cost increases.

“Going Out of Business” Fears Peak in Manufacturing States

Perhaps most concerning, searches for “going out of business” spiked across manufacturing-heavy regions:

  • North Carolina: +52% (textile and furniture manufacturing)
  • Texas: +51% (largest Gulf Coast port and border manufacturing)
  • Pennsylvania: +51% (steel and manufacturing)
  • Arizona: +47% (border manufacturing)
  • New York: +33%
  • Ohio: +22%

The concentration of business closure fears in manufacturing states suggests companies that rely heavily on imported raw materials or components were actively calculating worst-case scenarios as input costs prepared to rise.

Cash Flow Crisis Indicators

“Cash flow” searches – indicating immediate operational funding concerns – show the most dramatic increases nationwide:

  • Maryland: +130% (Port of Baltimore handles significant international imports)
  • California: +107% (primary Pacific gateway for Mexican imports)
  • Louisiana: +97% (Port of New Orleans – Gulf Coast trade hub)
  • Pennsylvania: +62% (Manufacturing heartland)
  • Minnesota: +61% (Agricultural processing centre)
  • Virginia: +60% (Port of Norfolk operations)

“What we’re seeing in this data is essentially a real-time window into business sentiment that traditional economic indicators often miss,” said Jacob Bennett, Co-Founder of Crux Analytics. “While it’s true that tariffs can ultimately benefit certain domestic industries and strengthen supply chain resilience, the immediate anxiety we’re tracking reflects the reality that small businesses often lack the capital reserves and diversified supplier networks that the US’ biggest corporations use to weather trade transitions. Cash flow-related searches increasing up to 130% particularly concerns us, because it suggests many smaller operations were scrambling for working capital just to bridge the implementation period.”