AI May Be All Around Us, But Our Supply Chains Are Still Manual
Supply chains: a still-untapped AI frontier
Nothing is more vulnerable than supply chains – everything and anything can rock them without notice. Tariffs, weather events, political disruptions, economic issues, worker shortages, and epidemics will always disrupt even the smoothest-flowing chains. Let's not even get started on the 2020 Covid toilet-paper crisis. And we're seeing the potential pain Apple is facing with tariffs on its manufacturing operations in China.
Could self-managing, autonomous supply chains help companies rapidly adjust to such disruptions? Should they? A new survey of 1,000 C-suite executives out of Accenture says supply chains are the new untamed frontier for artificial intelligence.
'Today, companies operate their supply chains mostly manually,' the Accenture report's co-authors, Max Blanchet, Chris McDivitt, and Stephen Meyer, stated. 'Such supply chains aren't prepared to handle sudden disruption such as the recent tariff announcements.'
Of course, no AI can predict political actions or natural disasters. But it can play a role in making it easier to switch off one supply route and switch on another. At this time, few executives in the Accenture's survey currently have autonomy built into their supply chains – the average company's supply chain is only 21% autonomous. 'Few companies use AI to adjust sourcing strategies, reroute logistics and recalibrate inventory positions with minimal human intervention," the report states.
Only 25% of companies indicated that autonomous supply chains were a key priority for them. Only a very small fraction, four percent, aspired to reach full autonomy. Advancing autonomy in supply chains is 'held back by concerns like data privacy, poor data quality, immature processes, and low trust in AI.'
There are two tall orders for achieving greater autonomy in supply chains. First, start with shattering functional silos, the researchers advise. 'Autonomous decision-making requires unprecedented transparency across functions, processes and dependencies. Without end-to-end visibility, even the most sophisticated AI systems will fail to deliver meaningful value.'
Processes also need to be simplified. 'Companies that streamline operations and standardize processes will scale technology faster, adapt more quickly and accelerate AI learning cycles.'
We're likely not likely to see significant progress in supply-chain autonomy for at least 10 years, the researchers predict. By then, approximately 40% aspire to achieve a higher degree of autonomy where the system handles most operational decisions.
What does an autonomous AI-powered supply chain look like? Current automated systems "follow pre-set instructions and require human oversight – think of the cruise control function in a typical car," the Accenture team explained. 'Autonomous systems include a degree of automation but go beyond it. They are enabled by AI agents that make decisions and perform tasks without human intervention.'
Most executives agree that autonomous supply chains can deliver tangible advantages. Survey respondents expect a 5% increase in net income and 7% improvement in return on capital employed. Operationally, companies could slash order lead times by 27%, and boost productivity by 25%
Survey respondents believe autonomous supply chains to shorten the time it takes them to react to shocks by at least 62%, and recover from disruption 60% faster compared to today's existing networks.
The Accenture team advises business leaders to 'build solid data foundations through a secure digital core, which standardizes platforms and governance frameworks.' Companies should also 'invest strategically in AI-enabling technologies, starting with targeted pilots before scaling proven solutions.'
Most importantly, they need to 'restructure how people and technology collaborate, shifting human roles from routine execution to strategic guidance and oversight.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
43 minutes ago
- Forbes
I Am Very Curious To See What The Mad Men Will Do To Attract Agents
USA - 2011: Jennifer Pritchard illustration of "Mad Men" character Don Draper. (Tribune News Service ... More via Getty Images) When I stopped by MIT's Dome at Davos this year, I sat in on a very interesting panel about international AI development that included Sir Demis Hassabis, the Nobel-prize winning co-founder of DeepMind, discussing (amongst other things) the dangers of 'rogue' AI. Sir Demis said that he was 'cautiously optimistic' about the future, which actually left me feeling pretty good as I wandered back out into the Swiss mountain air. So if agents aren't going to kill us, what are they going to do for us? In a recent podcast discussion with the New York Times, Sir Demis talked about the near future for AI. Naturally, as the guy is a genius, it is all worth listening to. But one thing he said in particular caught my attention. He was talking about what truly useful AI assistants might look like and he said that if a personal agent knows you well then you could teach it to "protect your attention'. He went on to explain what this means, by talking about how social media is vying for your attention and how an AI could defend your attention from "being assaulted by other algorithms' that want to capture (and, indeed, overrun) it. To protect your attention. What a succinct and evocative phrase to describe what AI can do for you. When it comes down to it, your attention is a very valuable resource, so protecting and managing that resource is really important. This is such an interesting way of thinking and just one example of why he has a Nobel prize and I do not. His vision of a digital assistant that could pan the media to get what you need, to get the 'nuggets' (as he calls them), so that you could avoid polluting your mind and your mood by dipping into the raging torrent to find the valuable piece of information that you wanted. I rather like the metaphor of my agent diligently exploring for gold in a raging river of lies, nonsense, manipulative tripe and propaganda while I get on with other things. Now, as Joe Marhese notes, our entire online economy is built on top of systems trying to capture and optimize our time and attention. Advertising promises to deliver a message in return for this attention. Performance marketing promises outcomes, which has an entirely different meaning when it comes to agents and the models behind them. This makes me reflect further on something that Ken Mandel wrote about how marketing is going to be disrupted because while humans are the target of advertisements, in the near future the kind of agents that Sir Demis is predicting will filter everything including the advertisements. He talks about the emerging 'AdTech' world where brands, agencies and agents will use structured data to communicate and to exchange data about wants, needs, preferences and offers. Or, as he rather neatly puts it, the future of advertising is 'code, not copy'. Bot motivation. This is where financial services are going. When my agent wants to open a savings account, it will negotiate with the agents of financial services providers. But how will it choose which one to select? Assuming that it is going choose on something more than price, that is. Service providers may need to start thinking about reshaping some surfaces towards agent preferences, which might differ from human preferences. I can imagine that agents might prioritise factors like the speed of response, uptime, data accuracy and so on. Optimising for these non-human factors could provide banks a competitive edge, so they should probably begin to assess their strategies for the medium term. (But I can also imagine asking my agent about some softer factors. That is, agents might be programmed to optimise for value, not just cost. They might weigh a variety of other factors such as long-term reliability, risk-adjusted returns, compliance and alignment with ethical frameworks. For example, an agent might recommend a slightly more expensive investment product if it offers superior risk management or aligns better with a user's ethical preferencesI might choose a Gretabot that prioritises 'green' investments or I might choose an Elonbot that invests in space or a Dimonbot or whatever else. That is, different people will be panning for different nuggets in the same stream.) When it comes to choosing between two similarly-ranked choices though, I rather suspect that Ken is right to point to what he calls 'trust signals" as the key because agents will prioritise trusted brands not based on our human and emotional version of trust but on a more measured version based on reputation, verified reviews and sustainability metrics instead of traditional advertising. This reinforces my view about the priority of establishing standard ways for extend identification, authentication and authorisation services to agents. I actually see this within Sir Demis' cautiously optimistic context, because I think that it will be much harder to 'game' trust in an AI world. Imagine, for example, that when your AI pays the bill at a restaurant, the restaurant bot gives your bot a cryptographic token, some form of zero-knowledge or blinded proof that you ate at the restaurant. Then in order to submit a review of the restaurant on some online service your agent would have to provide that proof. The restaurant would not know who you are, but it would know for sure that you had dined there. As it happens, I am organising a trip to Boston in a few weeks time. For such a trip, I don't want to presented with 30 different hotel options: even the most rudimentary agents ought to be able to narrow that down to three to show. I do not have time to search restaurant reviews or go back through my calendar to see where I invited guests last time, my agent can do that and show me three it chooses for me. I don't know whether to book a midweek supersaver fare or a roundtrip Wednesdays only carry on bag fare, I'll the agent choose - it already knows I prioritise punctuality over online meal choices. It was impossible to escape AI at Davos this year, since every conversation touched on the shift toward agentic AI. To be honest, I'm looking forward to this new life. While the agents work tirelessly to protest my attention from data assault and battery—ranging from impossible to assess offers to sell me hotel points to endless solicitation for new credit cards—I can get on and carry out more useful (and certainly more creative) activities.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
SpaceX, Palantir, Anduril Power The Golden Dome Defense Push
Potential Golden Dome Space Initiative A new kind of arms race is underway—not for nuclear stockpiles or territorial conquest, but in the contested domains of artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, and space-based defense. With rising threats ranging from hypersonic missiles to rogue-state satellite programs, the United States is laying the foundation for what could be the most ambitious defense upgrade in decades: a next-generation missile shield known informally as the 'Golden Dome.' This emerging infrastructure—designed to detect and intercept airborne threats in real time using a constellation of satellites and AI-driven command platforms—is being shaped by a growing coalition of public and private innovators. Among the most prominent are SpaceX and Anduril Industries—both privately held—along with Palantir Technologies, a public company. Together, this triad is helping to define the future of national security architecture. The presence of such influential yet privately controlled firms underscores a key challenge: much of the groundbreaking innovation in defense is now happening outside the reach of traditional public markets. Historically, retail investors have been excluded from participating in the private companies driving these breakthroughs—despite the fact that many of these firms experience their most significant growth while still private. This raises an important structural question: how can individual investors gain exposure to these high-growth sectors before an IPO? One example of a fund aiming to address this gap is the XOVR ETF, which includes both public and select private companies in its portfolio. Managed by ERShares, the fund holds positions in SpaceX—currently its largest private holding—and, more recently, Anduril. While access to private firms remains limited, structures like this offer a new approach to bridging the divide between public markets and early-stage innovation. Unlike legacy missile defense systems, which rely heavily on ground-based radars and static interceptor platforms, the Golden Dome is designed for mobility, scale, and rapid response. The concept involves deploying hundreds of low-Earth orbit satellites, backed by terrestrial and edge-based AI systems, to form a real-time surveillance and defense grid capable of neutralizing threats in seconds. Estimates suggest this system could command over $175 billion in long-term defense spending. With the U.S. Department of Defense emphasizing rapid procurement and modernization, the initiative has shifted from concept to reality far faster than previous military-industrial efforts. Anduril Industries, founded by Oculus VR creator Palmer Luckey, exemplifies the next wave of defense tech startups. Combining Silicon Valley speed with mission-first hardware development, Anduril has quickly grown into a major defense player through its Lattice OS platform—an integrated operating system that fuses sensor data across drones, towers, and autonomous vehicles in real time. Less visibly, Anduril also reflects a broader trend: the emergence of a 'Palantir diaspora' in the national security ecosystem. Several of Anduril's co-founders and early engineers previously worked at Palantir, and the company continues to attract top-tier talent from its orbit. This growing network of Palantir alumni has seeded a dense cluster of growth-stage firms across aerospace, cyber, and battlefield AI—contributing to a broader acceleration in U.S. defense innovation. Anduril is currently involved in multiple high-priority U.S. military initiatives, including the Army's TITAN program and the space-based Golden Dome framework. Its role in edge computing and autonomous threat identification is expected to grow in parallel with rising defense procurement in AI and robotics. Palantir Technologies (NYSE: PLTR) has quietly become one of the most critical software providers to the U.S. government. Its Gotham and Foundry platforms are now embedded across intelligence agencies, defense contractors, and frontline military units, enabling everything from logistics coordination to real-time battlefield analytics. In both the TITAN and Golden Dome initiatives, Palantir is providing the core artificial intelligence models used to ingest, organize, and act upon vast data flows. These systems are not just reactive—they are predictive, capable of flagging anomalies and modeling threat trajectories before they materialize. Palantir's strategic value has not gone unnoticed in financial markets. Since the end of 2022, it has been one of the top performers in the Russell 1000 Growth Index, with its stock rising more than 1,950%—second only to Applovin (+3600%), another key AI-driven firm that has also seen substantial gains over that period. The surge in these names underscores investor conviction in the long-term role of software intelligence in both defense and commercial sectors. Perhaps no company is better positioned to deliver the orbital backbone of the Golden Dome than SpaceX. With its reusable Falcon launch system and Starlink satellite network, SpaceX has the technological and logistical capabilities to deploy and maintain the hundreds of satellites envisioned in the program's first phase. What makes SpaceX's involvement especially noteworthy is the shift in its strategic identity—from a private aerospace firm to a core U.S. defense asset. The company's satellites are expected to provide not only persistent surveillance but also secure, encrypted communications and early warning detection across global theaters. SpaceX remains privately held, but its impact on both commercial and government space sectors has been transformative. Its expanding role in U.S. national defense is now considered as critical as its launch dominance. The convergence of public equities like Palantir and Nvidia with private firms such as Anduril and SpaceX reflects a broader shift in U.S. industrial policy. No longer confined to traditional contractors, the innovation engine in defense now runs through a hybrid pipeline of startups, growth-stage firms, and crossover investment vehicles. Retail investors, until recently, have had almost no ability to access firms like SpaceX and Anduril prior to their IPOs. That paradigm is beginning to shift. With new vehicles such as crossover ETFs, there is a growing effort to offer partial access to companies that have historically been out of reach. These developments mark a potential turning point in how retail capital intersects with national security innovation. The Golden Dome is more than a missile defense system. It is a test case for how national security, technological innovation, and capital markets can align in a new era of geopolitical competition. As companies like Anduril, Palantir, and SpaceX help define this frontier, they are not only reshaping defense—they are also redefining how innovation is capitalized, scaled, and accessed by the broader investing public. -------------------------------------- Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Please refer to the following link for additional disclosures: Additional Disclosure Note: The author has an affiliation with ERShares and the XOVR ETF. The intent of this article is to provide objective information; however, readers should be aware that the author may have a financial interest in the subject matter discussed. As with all equity investments, investors should carefully evaluate all options with a qualified investment professional before making any investment decision. Private equity investments, such as those held in XOVR, may carry additional risks—including limited liquidity—compared to traditional publicly traded securities. It is important to consider these factors and consult a trained professional when assessing suitability and risk tolerance.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Poll: How tariffs are tanking Trump's approval rating
In 1992, Democratic political strategist James Carville famously distilled the presidential election down to one blunt catchphrase: 'It's the economy, stupid.' The results of a new Yahoo News/YouGov poll suggest that, more than three decades later, the start of President Trump's second term could be summed up the same way — particularly when it comes to tariffs and trade. The survey of 1,560 U.S. adults was conducted from May 22 to May 27, following months of global economic upheaval — all of it triggered by Trump. On-again off-again tariffs as high as 145%. Retaliatory measures from major allies and trading partners. Headlines about trade wars. Market nosedives. Market recoveries. Legal confusion. Stress among small-business owners. And rising prices for ordinary American consumers. At the same time, Trump's approval rating has steadily deteriorated. Before last November's election, a majority of Americans (51%) told Yahoo News and YouGov that they approved of the way Trump had handled his first term in office; fewer (43%) said they disapproved. But when asked again in March how they felt about the president's performance since returning to office, those numbers had flipped: more respondents now said they disapproved (50%) than said they approved (44%) of the job Trump had done during the first two months of his second term. A few weeks later, in April, the gap between Trump's disapproval (53%) and approval (42%) ratings had grown even wider (to 11 percentage points). And the latest Yahoo News/YouGov poll shows that gap is continuing to expand. Today only 41% of Americans approve of Trump's job performance, while 54% disapprove, putting him 13 points underwater. Those are some of the president's worst numbers since the latter stages of his first term. Digging deeper, more Americans disapprove than approve of how Trump is handling each major issue included in the survey: immigration (by a two-point margin); government spending (by an eight-point margin); the war between Russia and Ukraine (by an eight-point margin); diversity, equity and inclusion, or DEI (by a nine-point margin); and democracy (by a 13-point margin). But the biggest gaps between Trump's approval and disapproval ratings emerge when Americans are asked about economic issues. According to the new Yahoo News/YouGov poll, the president is now 19 points underwater on the economy in general (37% approve to 56% disapprove); 22 points underwater on trade and tariffs (35% approve to 57% disapprove); and 27 points underwater on the cost of living (32% approve to 59% disapprove). To put those numbers in perspective, Trump's average approval rating on the economy was 49% in the middle of 2020 — at the height of the COVID-19 crash. His average disapproval rating was 45%. Similarly, a full 57% of Americans think Trump has 'gone too far 'in "raising tariffs on imported goods' — significantly more than the share who think he's gone too far in 'cutting the federal workforce" (51%), 'arresting and deporting immigrants' (49%) or "investigating his political opponents" (45%). Just 4% of Americans say Trump's approach to raising tariffs has 'not gone far enough.' As a result, 40% of U.S. adults now rate the economy as 'poor' — a five-point increase since April. Among independents, that same number has jumped a full 10 points — from 35% to 45% — over the last month. All told, nearly three quarters of Americans (72%) now say the economy is either fair or poor. Just 25% consider it excellent or good. Earlier this month, House Republicans passed Trump's 'one big, beautiful bill' — a package of tax cuts, social safety net reductions and increased border and military spending meant to deliver the bulk of his legislative agenda. But assuming that some version of the bill survives the Senate — a big if at this point — it is unlikely to reverse the president's economic standing. In the new Yahoo News/YouGov poll, half of respondents were asked whether they 'approve or disapprove of the federal budget just passed by the U.S. House of Representatives' — with no additional information provided. Twenty-eight percent said they approved, 41% said they disapproved and 31% said they weren't sure. That's hardly a ringing endorsement. But what happens when Americans learn more about Trump's budget bill? To test this dynamic, the other half of respondents read a detailed description of the legislation before answering the same question: The U.S. House of Representatives just passed a federal budget that extends and expands the 2017 tax cuts for Americans of all incomes, at a cost of $3.8 trillion, while partially paying for those cuts by reducing Medicaid and food stamp benefits for lower-income Americans and ending some clean energy programs. The House budget also increases military and border spending and raises the debt ceiling from $36 trillion to $40 trillion. Among this second, more informed group of respondents, approval of Trump's budget bill stayed roughly the same (31%). But uncertainty fell by 17 points (to 14%) — and disapproval shot up by nearly as much (to 55%). __________________ The Yahoo News survey was conducted by YouGov using a nationally representative sample of 1,560 U.S. adults interviewed online from May 22 to May 27, 2025. The sample was weighted according to gender, age, race, education, 2024 election turnout and presidential vote, party identification and current voter registration status. Demographic weighting targets come from the 2019 American Community Survey. Party identification is weighted to the estimated distribution at the time of the election (31% Democratic, 32% Republican). Respondents were selected from YouGov's opt-in panel to be representative of all U.S. adults. The margin of error is approximately 2.9%.
