Blockchain technology for supply

chains—A must or a maybe?

Blockchain’s buzz makes it sound like a panacea. Our supply- September 2017
chain experts evaluate its real potential.

by Knut Alicke, Alan Davies, Markus Leopoldseder, and Alex Niemeyer

Another day, another new technology to consider. This time it’s

blockchain, the technology that was created to support bitcoin
transactions. According to its cheerleaders, especially in the financial
sector, blockchain technology has the potential to turbocharge the
effectiveness and profitability of most (if not all) businesses—or even
upend business as we know it. In fact, say these early adopters,
businesses that ignore blockchain technology do so at their peril.
Strong words, but how true are they? Does blockchain technology really
apply to the supply-chain world? Can it solve your supply--chain
problems and increase your profitability? These are some of the very
practical questions we’ve been asked by supply-chain executives. Our
goals are to give you a clearer understanding of what blockchain
technology is all about, and to save you the time of studying, testing,
and assessing its value to your operations.

Understanding blockchain technology

Blockchain is an internet-based technology that is prized for its ability
to publicly validate, record, and distribute transactions in immutable,
encrypted ledgers. The technology was invented to support transactions
in bitcoin, a digital cryptocurrency that operates independently from a
central bank. In essence, blockchain technology provides the platform
for creating and distributing the ledger, or record, of every bitcoin
transaction to thousands, if not millions, of computers linked to
networks in all parts of the world.
Because the transactions and ledgers are encrypted, blockchain
technology offers more security than the banking model, and its
instantaneous transmission via the internet eliminates banks’ two- to
three-day clearing process and accompanying costs for transferring
money from one account to another. The term “blockchain” is derived
from the “blocks” of validated and immutable transactions and how they
link together in chronological order to form a chain (exhibit). Hence the
term “blockchain.”

1 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com
September 2017

Exhibit

In essence, blockchains come in two dominant types. “Permissionless”

distributed ledgers, such as bitcoin, reside in the public domain, while
“permissioned” ledgers are centralized and governed by “actors,”
“nodes,” or “miners,” and are held outside the public domain. This
distinction has important consequences in the supply-chain context.

Blockchain’s value in today’s supply chains

In most cases, today’s supply chains operate at-scale without blockchain
technology. Even so, the technology has excited the IT and supply-chain
worlds. It has also inspired many articles and prompted established IT
players and start-ups to initiate promising pilot projects, including:
 Walmart tested an application that traces pork in China and
produce in the US, to authenticate transactions and the accuracy
and efficiency of record keeping.
 Maersk and IBM are working on cross-border, cross-party
transactions that use blockchain technology to help improve
process efficiency.
 BHP is introducing a blockchain solution that replaces
spreadsheets for tracking samples internally and externally from
a range of providers.
 Provenance, a UK start-up, just raised $800,000 to adapt
blockchain technology to trace food. It previously piloted tracing
tuna in the Southeast Asian supply chain.
Yet to date, the authors are not aware of any at-scale applications to the
supply chain, raising an essential question: Can blockchain technology
add value to supply chains?
Let’s start with a reality check: As most practitioners know, many of
today’s supply chains have good data, which they are able to transfer
across supply chain tiers at close to real time speed. To assess
blockchain technology’s value at stake for the supply chain world, we
looked at three areas where it could add value:

2 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com
September 2017

1. Replacing slow, manual processes. Although supply chains can

currently handle large, complex data sets, many of their
processes, especially those in the lower supply tiers, are slow and
rely entirely on paper—such as is still common in the shipping
industry.
2. Strengthening traceability. Increasing regulatory and consumer
demand for provenance information is already driving change.
Moreover, improving traceability also adds value by mitigating
the high costs of quality problems, such as recalls, reputational
damage, or the loss of revenue from black- or grey-market
products. Simplifying a complex supply base offers further
value-creation opportunities (see sidebar, “A complex supply
chain of unknown parties”).
3. Reducing supply-chain IT transaction costs. At this stage, this
benefit is more theoretical than actual. Bitcoin pays people to
validate each block or transaction, and requires people who
propose a new block to include a fee in their proposal. Such a
cost would likely be prohibitive in supply chains because their
scale can be staggering. For example, in a 90-day period, a single
auto manufacturer would typically issue approximately 10 billion
call-offs just to its tier-one suppliers. Also, together all of those
transactions would significantly raise demand for data storage,
an essential component of blockchain’s distributed-ledger
approach. In addition, creating and maintaining numerous
copies of data sets would be impractical in the supply-chain
environment, especially in permissionless blockchains.

A complex supply chain of unknown parties

Produce is a good example of a complex supply chain where, occasionally, the parties
are not always known, such as produce supply chains that source from thousands of
growers and farmers, and move goods through multiple distribution points before
they reach retail shelves. As the goods often change hands, a permissionless
blockchain is a valid solution for tracing and verifying the grower or farmer who
supplied the produce. Walmart’s pork traceability is a good example, with a huge
number of pig farmers at its lowest tier of supply. But, while Walmart may be one of a
handful of companies that can drive this at scale, most supply chains need to assess
the cost-benefits of investing in technology to collect and validate data from the lower
levels.

The biggest blockchain barrier: who would give

permission?
In adopting blockchain technology for its supply chain, a company must
first decide on the type of blockchain it would need to build. Recall that
the bitcoin approach is a permissionless blockchain populated with
parties that are not known or trusted. It resides in the public domain
and uses a consensus verification protocol to establish trust in each
block. There is no central database or central governance in these
blockchains.

3 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com
September 2017

A bias for privacy

Conversely, in most supply chains, the parties are known and trusted.
Moreover, the supply-chain world is unlikely to accept open access
because its users don’t want to reveal proprietary details, such as
demand, capacities, orders, prices, margins, at all points of the value
chain to unknown participants. This means most supply-chain
blockchains would need to be permissioned, with access governed
centrally and restricted to known parties who may be limited to certain
segments of data.
In theory, this approach allows public or private verification of each
proposed block. However, we believe it is unlikely that we will ever see
public verification of proposed blocks in the supply-chain world when
all the parties are known. In shipping, for example, there are only a few
known parties in the chain—including haulers, ports, customs, shipping
lines—that are responsible for validating each block. When the number
of trusted parties is small, the need to independently validate consensus
protocols used in the public domain is limited.

A good-enough solution without blockchain

In many cases, supply chains are already moving billions of transactions
and data, often in real time. The systems are not perfect, and many
supply chains have issues with data that is siloed, disparately formatted,
difficult to access, or hard to visualize or analyze in the context of big
data. Even so, well-managed central databases with good data
management, combined with supply-chain visualization and analytical
prowess, can be achieved at scale today.
These solutions do not carry the additional burden of some of the
technical complexities that blockchain can raise (see sidebar, “Getting
technical”). Thus, we maintain that when all parties in extended supply
chains are known and trusted, a blockchain solution is probably not
needed, as these known and trusted parties can be relied upon to
provide a single, real-time version of the truth. In such a situation,
centralized solutions like a cloud-portal, or decentralized peer-to-peer
connections would suffice.

4 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com
September 2017

Getting technical

Before blockchain becomes widespread in supply chains, several technical challenges

must be overcome:
 Generating standards. Despite the emergence of platforms such
as Hyperledger (used by IBM, Walmart, and Maersk) and Ethereum
(used by BHP), no comprehensive supply-chain standards are in
place for blockchain solutions or providers. This means there are no
definitive answers to questions like how to solve for consensus
(immutability) on blocks, and which encryption technology to use;
the absence of such standards would add complexities that could
hinder, not help, the supply-chain world.
 Increasing data accuracy. Better data is essential, but
problematic in supply chains. The bitcoin blockchain is
comparatively simple. To verify a proposed bitcoin block, the parties
need only view a few previous blocks to determine if there are
sufficient funds. In a supply chain, actions often involve significant
processing, with each step involving the collection and monitoring
of fairly big data sets.
 Offering more than just speed in verification. Years ago, it
took five to seven calendar days to confirm a purchase order from
an Asian vendor, a delay that impacted plans for weeks. E-
commerce makes it possible to take an order, process and pass it to
a distribution center in close to real time. That progress leaves less
room for blockchain technology to prove its value in verification.
 Managing volume. In bitcoin, validating blocks and storing the
ledger requires huge amounts of computing power and energy. But
even a large, public network can process only around 450 trillion
transactions per second. This is actually minuscule compared to the
projected transaction workload that supply chains require. And
permissioned blockchains’ capabilities still lag those of centralized
databases, raising important questions about whether the scope of
the data elements that permissioned blockchains can capture will be
limited by available throughput capacity—which may not grow at
the same pace as big data.
 Deciding who will pay? Bitcoin pays “miners” to validate blocks,
at a fee that is much lower than the typical bank’s clearing charge.
For blockchain technology to spread to supply chains, the value-at-
stake must be able to fund the technology, its further development,
and the distribution teams it requires. Moreover, realizing value is
complex; it’s not a single, linear usage at each point in the chain. It’s
useful to remember that ocean freighters today continue to use
manual, paper-based processes in part because they serve many
purposes beyond those required for blockchain transactions.

Consider the facts before you jump on the

blockchain bandwagon
Our research suggests that blockchain technology may ultimately be a
good solution for some types of supply chains, but it is not yet ready for
mass adoption. We base this view on the following:

5 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com
September 2017

 Blockchain pilots run to date have not proven the technology’s

unique value to the supply-chain sector
 Blockchain technology is not yet able to capture data across a
high number of untrusted parties
 Delivering full transparency or traceability can be solved in other
ways, not just by blockchain
 The cost of developing and running a blockchain is not yet clear,
with few standards now in place
 The gap between blockchain’s current capacity and the capacity
that supply chains will need is enormous
For supply chains where participants are not known or trusted,
blockchain technology can add trust, transparency, and traceability.
Almost by definition, these supply chains are complex, multi-tiered,
involve many parties, and they operate in a regulated environment that
demands a higher level of traceability.
However, for supply chains with known and trusted players, a
centralized database approach is generally more than adequate. This
does not mean that all these supply chains currently follow a true end-
to-end approach, and in fact, many of them use siloed databases that
contain data with only limited traceability. Thus, many of these supply
chains do not need blockchain technology to solve such issues, as they
can leverage existing technologies that are better suited to their high-
volume transactions, either on their own or with partners.
It’s too early to estimate the costs of operating blockchain technology in
the supply-chain world, and compare them with other technologies. No
doubt, IT companies will be at the ready to provide this information.
However, the value proposition must be clear. What are the internal
transactional efficiencies? What is the potential cost in end-product
failures, recalls and litigation? Would a consumer pay more for a
product that offers transparency throughout its supply chain? These
types of questions should be asked when considering blockchain for use
in supply chains.
□ □ □
A number of companies are exploring the benefits of leveraging
blockchain technology in adjacent areas, such as introducing smart
contracts, bringing more rigor to purchase order payments or demand
chains where “real demand” signals can propagate the upstream supply
chain faster. While we salute the power and the promise of blockchain
technology, we advise the supply-chain world to take the time to
measure its suitability against other, possibly simpler, and less costly
technologies■
Knut Alicke is a partner in McKinsey’s Stuttgart office, Alan
Davies is a senior expert in the Houston office, Markus
Leopoldseder, based in the Vienna office, is a practice director
of knowledge, and Alex Niemeyer is a senior partner in the
Miami office.

Copyright © 2017 McKinsey & Company, Inc. All rights reserved

6 https://operations-extranet.mckinsey.com