In a recent webinar hosted by Procurement Pro and sponsored by Flip Electronics, I led a panel of senior industry leaders through an in‑depth discussion on how procurement teams can future‑proof their supply chains in 2026 and beyond.
The panel brought together perspectives from technology providers, distributors, and supply chain specialists:
- Simon Thompson – VP Sales Northern Europe, JAGGAER
- Bill Bradford – President, Flip Electronics
- Margaret Cunha – Senior Director, Supply Chain Solutions, DigiKey
- Rob Picken – SVP Digital & Partnerships, Sourceability
- Frank Cavallaro – CEO, A2 Global Electronics + Solutions
Across the session, several consistent themes emerged: geopolitical volatility is now an operational reality; data and analytics are becoming the decisive competitive weapon; AI and capacity constraints are reshaping component availability; and ‘resilience’ now means proactive diversification, not just more suppliers on a list.
Geopolitics: from background noise to daily constraint
The conversation opened with how procurement teams should interpret current geopolitical tensions when planning sourcing strategies.
Thompson stressed that variability and risk are now built into the operating environment: “There’s a lot going on in the world … It’s really about robustness, and it’s about pace. It’s about speed. It’s about making sure we’ve got visibility of the future pipeline.”
He underlined that procurement is being asked to “do more with less” – more regulation, more compliance, tighter budgets – often on legacy tools like spreadsheets. For him, technology is now non‑negotiable: “You simply can’t do more with less without investing in the right technology in the right way.”
Bradford framed geopolitics as part of a broader structural shift: “This geopolitical volatility is not just a passing trend … it’s really a fundamental directional shift in de‑globalisation.”
Procurement, he argued, must “embed risk” into every sourcing decision – locations, trade policy exposure, and contingency strategies.
Cavallaro captured how dramatically the risk profile has changed: “The geopolitical environment, historically, has been background noise, and now it’s operational reality.”
He warned that traditional cost‑reduction logic – aggregating volume and standardising technologies – can now backfire. Correlated products, suppliers, or geographies may maximise savings, but they also maximise vulnerability when tariffs or politics shift.
Regionalisation, near‑shoring, and the hidden costs
Moving to regionalisation and reshoring, the panel agreed that “onshoring” is no longer as simple as bringing production closer to headquarters.
Picken noted a shift towards where customers actually are: “We’re actually seeing a shift away from onshoring … to actually where my customers need the equipment at the end of the day.”
He cautioned that new manufacturing locations come with hidden risks: certification, labour reliability, infrastructure, and port capacity.
Bradford pointed to Mexico as an increasingly important near‑shore option for US firms, but stressed it’s not just about “Plan B on paper”: “It’s important to not just have a plan B in the wings, but to really actively be developing a plan B, because if you have to implement a plan B from scratch, it could very much be too late.”
Capacity, AI, and the “perfect storm” for components
A major thread throughout the discussion was the capacity crunch driven by AI and overlapping demand cycles in multiple sectors.
Cavallaro described today’s market as “multi‑parametric”, where multiple cycles layer on top of each other rather than moving in neat, linear booms and busts. Memory has become the “canary in the coal mine,” but the dynamics are broader: “It used to be you could get away with a China plus one strategy … but now … tariff changes, whose friends and who are no longer friends change … It’s no longer a price and location [problem]. There’s a lot going on … the only way to do that is to implement some type of data analytic AI strategy.”
But Cunha warned that digital tools alone are not enough unless organisations are willing to change how they work: “Getting our internal procurement teams to lean into different ways of doing business with data, but also understanding and feeling comfortable with doing their job a slightly different way, I think, is going to be the biggest challenge going into ’26 and beyond.”
Bradford warned that AI demand is masking the resurgence of other sectors: “Medical devices are strong, defence, industrial is coming back … It’s not often in these semiconductor cycles that you’ve got multiple drivers … all cylinders are starting to click, which is going to cause some severe disruption.”
Picken highlighted a structural mismatch: most new fab capacity is focused on leading‑edge nodes, while core industries such as medical, defence, industrial, and power depend on legacy nodes: “Expanding production capacity, 3‑4‑5x, doesn’t necessarily mean it’s in the right place … Where are we going to get the older legacy node sizes particularly [for] high reliability industries?”
Cavallaro went further, agreeing with Picken’s “perfect storm” analogy: “If the early green shoots we’re seeing in [industrial] continue it will be the perfect storm from a capacity perspective … capacity is going to go to the highest dollar, and right now that highest dollar is AI and AI‑related infrastructure.”
From “more suppliers” to true resilience
The panel repeatedly distinguished between superficial resilience (longer supplier lists) and real resilience (designed‑in diversification and lifecycle awareness).
Cunha argued that resilience must start with a precise understanding of where the real risks lie: “What is your most critical component? What is that ecosystem, and what does that supply chain look like … understanding where your risks are, I think, is how you build out your resiliency planning.”
She emphasised robust supplier scorecards, including multi‑site manufacturing capabilities and planning maturity, and warned of accelerating end‑of‑life (EOL) risk: “Everyone will stop building certain product families to make more revenue and margin on other product families that are more in demand. So, I also am worried about some end-of-life increases coming for the year as well, which is going to make supply chain resiliency even more difficult.”
On obsolescence, Bradford urged teams to treat lifecycle management as a core discipline, not an afterthought: “Life cycle management is a critical skill … constantly monitoring the life cycle risk of components and then developing strategies, smart forecasting and investment in the last time buy, or partnering with a company like Flip that can continue to manufacture products well past their last time buy date.”
Cavallaro summarised the new economic logic: “Proactive diversification is cheaper than reactive buying … Yes, that may be a little bit more expensive in the short term, but it will be a lot cheaper than reactive buying in the longer term.”
Data, AI, and the evolving role of procurement
Throughout the webinar, data and analytics were presented as the deciding factor in who thrives through the next wave of disruption.
Cunha put it simply: “He who has the data first and knows what to do with it will win.”
Picken argued that the key is not isolated data points, but changes from baseline: “It’s not necessarily what the data itself says; it’s the change from baseline … None of these data points individually are problematic. They’re problematic once they cause you issues with late delivery time to market.”
He advised procurement teams to:
- Define precisely what success looks like for procurement (cost, OTIF, penalties, time‑to‑market)
- Quantify how much lead time, pricing, or supplier concentration can change before those goals become impossible
- Only then, qualify suppliers and geographies to proactively mitigate those quantified risks
Thompson closed by stressing that technology alone is not enough – it must be properly implemented, and people must be upskilled: “It’s not about using or implementing technology to make our lives better. It’s about using it properly and implementing it properly. The role of the procurement professional is changing … we have to adapt. We have to evolve.”
Cunha echoed that AI would redistribute, not replace, human work: “You can’t just blindly say, ‘AI’ – that’s like giving the Ferrari keys to a five‑year‑old … If you’re not going to change your internal processes to match the technology you haven’t really done anything at all.”
Conclusion: surviving – and winning – in 2026
By the end of the discussion, a clear playbook for 2026 had emerged:
- Treat geopolitics as a core operational constraint, not background noise
- Design resilience in at the engineering and lifecycle‑planning stages, not as a late‑stage sourcing patch
- Use data and AI to detect deviations from baseline early – and act before shortages spike prices
- Diversify proactively across technologies, geographies, and suppliers, even at a modest cost premium
- Invest in tools, but even more in how they’re implemented and in the people who use them
As I noted in closing, audience comments made it clear: procurement professionals are under pressure – but they are not alone. With the right mix of data, technology, and proactive strategy, the panel agreed that supply chains can not only survive the coming turbulence but emerge stronger and more resilient on the other side.
Watch the webinar on demand below:
