MalakarConsulting

Solutions

Pick the problem.
Get the real playbook.

This is a direct match, not a black box. Choose what you're seeing and you'll get the same framework we run in every engagement — the signals, the first move, and a real case where we ran it. Honestly: this isn't "AI" — it's our actual playbook, indexed for you to find fast.

Strategy & Planning

Signals you're seeing this

  • Sales has one demand number, Planning has a different one, and nobody reconciles them until the gap is already a problem.
  • The "gap to plan" metric gets shown every month and forgotten every month — no owner.
  • Sourcing receives the plan instead of shaping it.

What we'd do first

Unify demand and supply into one number everyone actually uses. Install a weekly gap-to-plan review with a named owner. Put sourcing in the room shaping the plan, not just receiving its output.

Real example: S&OP Rebuild Across a Five-Site Network — forecast accuracy rebuilt above 90%, inventory down 38%. See the case →
Procurement & Sourcing

Signals you're seeing this

  • Your EMS/assembly partner can name your board, but nobody's mapped the bare-component origin underneath.
  • Nearshoring is on the table without a rules-of-origin model.
  • Category strategy hasn't been re-tested since the original sourcing decision.

What we'd do first

Map bare-component origin separately from assembly location. Should-cost the top categories. Qualify regional capacity before you need it, not during the crisis.

Real example: Emergency PCBA Resourcing During the Global Semiconductor Shortage — relocated and requalified in 8 weeks, $68M in production restored. See the case →
Supplier Risk

Signals you're seeing this

  • One supplier carries 40%+ of a critical part's volume, with no qualified alternate.
  • No documented escalation trigger — you'd find out from a missed delivery, not a warning sign.
  • The last supply disruption was improvised, not run from a playbook.

What we'd do first

Rank the BOM by the revenue sitting behind each single-source part, not by part cost. Qualify the second source and build the escalation trigger before you need either.

Real example: Supply Continuity Recovery Following Tier-1 Supplier Bankruptcy — 90% of output restored in 9 months, zero line-down events. See the case →
Tariff & Duty

Signals you're seeing this

  • No Section 232 exposure model since the June 2026 full-customs-value rule change.
  • Duty drawback, first-sale valuation, and FTZ treatment have never been evaluated.
  • Tariff response so far has only meant squeezing suppliers.

What we'd do first

Quantify Section 232 exposure by HS code directly from public shipment data — before the first conversation. Then scope duty drawback, first-sale valuation, and FTZ feasibility against what's actually recoverable.

Real example: Section 232 Exposure Quantification & Duty Recovery Assessment — $86K–$147K in exposure quantified, recovery pathways identified. See the case →
Cost Reduction

Signals you're seeing this

  • Supplier price increases stick immediately; decreases never seem to come back.
  • No should-cost model exists on your top spend categories.
  • Cost-down campaigns run on a fixed calendar, regardless of where the market actually is.

What we'd do first

Build the should-cost teardown. Index contracts to published benchmarks so movement flows both ways. Time cost-down campaigns to index inflection points instead of the calendar.

Real example: Category Restructuring for Commercial Vehicle Powertrain — $28.65M annual savings, throughput up 23%. See the case →
Logistics & Freight

Signals you're seeing this

  • Landed-cost models are still built on pre-disruption shipping assumptions.
  • No visibility into which lanes ride on Chinese-built tonnage or surcharge-exposed carriers.
  • Freight surcharges keep showing up after the fact, never modeled in advance.

What we'd do first

Rebuild landed cost and lead time on the rerouted reality. Diversify carrier mix away from surcharge-exposed tonnage before it normalizes into base rates.

Real example: Lane-Level Freight Surcharge Exposure Remodel — landed-cost model realigned, surcharge pass-through renegotiated. See the case →
Team Building & Org Design

Signals you're seeing this

  • No dedicated sourcing leadership — category calls are made ad hoc by operations or finance.
  • No supplier qualification process or negotiation cadence exists.
  • You need senior sourcing judgment for a defined period, not a permanent headcount line.

What we'd do first

Embed as fractional sourcing leadership. Build the category strategy framework and supplier scorecard process. Train an internal owner so it runs without us at handoff.

Real example: Fractional Sourcing Leadership & Category Process Build-Out — sourcing function stood up from zero in one quarter. See the case →

Pick a problem above — the matching playbook opens here.

Ready to see your own numbers?

The playbook is the same one every time. Your snapshot is what makes it specific to you.

Get Your Free Snapshot