HFS Research’s July 2024 report argues that enterprises are increasing supply-chain investment and relying more on service providers as networks become more complex and strategically important. Its strongest figures are that more than one-third of enterprises planned to increase supply-chain expenditure by 6%–20% over the following two years, while 63% of companies used service providers for supply-chain management. Those figures describe HFS’s 2024 research—not a 2026 market forecast—and the report’s main example, Neo Tangent, is a featured commercial participant rather than neutral proof that one model suits every company.
The underlying report, Navigating the labyrinth: Neo Tangent’s blueprint for collaborative supply chains, is dated July 14, 2024. HFS published the related press release on July 16, 2024. The report page identifies Ashish Chaturvedi and Krupa KS as authors and provides an executive summary; the complete report is offered through a registration form.
What HFS actually published
The report and press release are related but different publications. The report presents HFS’s analysis of collaborative supply-chain models, using Neo Tangent as its principal example. The press release summarizes the investment findings, recommendations and Neo Tangent’s service description.
- Report: “Navigating the labyrinth: Neo Tangent’s blueprint for collaborative supply chains”, dated July 14, 2024.
- Press release: Published July 16, 2024, with the headline about enterprise investment, transformation and future supply-chain trends: HFS release.
HFS does not publicly disclose on the report page the complete sample construction, survey questions, geographic distribution, industry mix or statistical limitations. The percentages therefore should not be treated as universally representative.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute#1 Best Overall
The three findings that matter most
| Finding | Proper interpretation |
|---|---|
| Planned spending | More than one-third of enterprises planned to raise supply-chain expenditure by 6%–20% over the next two years from the 2024 study period. HFS did not present this as an average increase. |
| Provider use | HFS reported that 63% of companies engaged service providers for supply-chain management, making it the leading function for provider use in the cited research. |
| Changing provider role | Providers were described as moving beyond process execution and technology enablement toward strategic partnership, ecosystem coordination and shared value creation. |
None of these findings proves that outsourcing is always better than internal operations, that spending produces better performance, or that the numbers describe all companies globally.
Why supply chains moved into the boardroom
HFS attributes the investment pressure to a more difficult operating environment. Enterprises increasingly use multi-country and multi-supplier strategies, seek to reduce dependence on China, and face changing border and shipping regulations, including rules affecting U.S. coastal trade routes. The pandemic also elevated supply-chain continuity from an operational concern to a board-level business issue.
“Investment” is broader than buying software. It can include:
- Network redesign and supplier diversification.
- Demand planning, forecasting and inventory visibility.
- Transportation, warehousing, customs and compliance.
- Sustainability measurement and supplier-risk management.
- Data, analytics and event-management capabilities.
- Outsourced operations, organizational change and process redesign.
- Working-capital and trade-finance capabilities.
The business case is not simply lower procurement cost. A disruption can damage revenue, customer service, working capital and regulatory standing, so executives increasingly evaluate resilience and responsiveness alongside efficiency.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
What a collaborative supply chain means
In HFS’s framing, suppliers, manufacturers, logistics providers, technology vendors and customers share relevant information and coordinate decisions around business outcomes rather than isolated transactions. A provider may contribute domain expertise, infrastructure, data and execution capacity while the enterprise manages the wider ecosystem.
An integrated network is intended to improve efficiency, resilience, innovation, customer responsiveness, end-to-end visibility and shared value creation. Collaboration is not indiscriminate data sharing or automatic dependence on one provider. It requires:
- Defined decision rights and accountability.
- Common data standards and interoperable systems.
- Cybersecurity, privacy and intellectual-property controls.
- Performance measures tied to commercial outcomes.
- Usable data-export rights and a credible exit option.
Neo Tangent’s role—and the limits of the example
Neo Tangent is the featured business-services provider in the report. HFS describes its model as ecosystem-driven synergy, strategic value partnering and end-to-end supply-chain service strength. The press release says Neo Tangent operates within the Li & Fung ecosystem and works with organizations including VOICES, LFX Digital, LFX-Data and Global Freight Services.
Services associated with the model include product development, sourcing, warehousing, transportation, customs management, sustainability, supplier-network support, regulatory compliance, trade financing, global freight forwarding, technology and analytics. These capabilities are descriptions attributed to HFS and the provider; the public materials do not give independently verified percentages for cost, inventory or delivery improvements, nor do they provide a neutral comparison with named competitors.
Neo Tangent is therefore best read as a case example of the operating model HFS is discussing—not as evidence that every enterprise should adopt one integrated ecosystem.
HFS’s recommendations for service providers
Align with client goals
Providers should understand a client’s commercial objectives, operating constraints, market conditions and transformation priorities before proposing a solution.
Build a customized solution
Technology and services should address a defined problem instead of reproducing a generic outsourcing package. HFS cites examples such as cost-of-goods-sold optimization and AI-supported inventory optimization; these are solution examples, not reported results.
Keep improving after launch
Providers should gather feedback, monitor changing requirements and adjust the service rather than treating the contract as a fixed transaction.
Quantify outcomes
Useful measures can include cost savings, customer satisfaction, inventory performance, service levels, cycle time, forecast accuracy, recovery time and working-capital impact. The press release specifically mentions cost savings and customer satisfaction as key performance indicators.
Show evidence that travels
Providers should document successful engagements and explain how their approach applies across different industries, geographies and operating contexts.
How enterprise buyers can apply the findings
- Map the network. List suppliers, contract manufacturers, freight and logistics partners, warehouses, planning and enterprise-resource-planning platforms, customs providers and financing relationships.
- Locate the highest-value bottlenecks. Look for stockouts, excess inventory, poor demand visibility, long lead times, manual compliance, fragmented logistics data, supplier concentration and weak exception management.
- Set measurable outcomes. Choose targets such as lower total landed cost, better on-time delivery, reduced inventory, improved service levels, faster disruption response or greater supplier flexibility.
- Separate strategic work from suitable external work. Keep differentiated capabilities, sensitive data, customer relationships and critical decision-making under sufficient internal control. Consider partners for scale, specialist expertise, geographic reach, flexible capacity or technology that would be costly to build.
- Pilot a bounded use case. Start with one category, region, product line or logistics lane before redesigning the whole network.
- Write governance into the agreement. Specify service levels, data ownership, cybersecurity duties, audit rights, incentives, transition support and termination assistance.
Questions to ask a prospective provider
- Which business outcome—not merely activity volume—is the provider accountable for?
- How will savings, service improvements and resilience be calculated, and against what baseline?
- Who owns operational and derived data, and can it be exported in usable formats?
- Which integrations are required with planning, ERP, procurement, warehouse and logistics systems?
- Who has authority to act when an exception occurs?
- How will the provider perform during a disruption, and how will contingency plans be tested?
- Can the enterprise change providers or platforms without losing operational continuity?
Trade-offs and failure modes
Resilience versus efficiency
Redundant suppliers, alternate routes and extra inventory can absorb shocks but increase carrying and operating costs.
Rank #4
Integration versus concentration risk
A deeply integrated ecosystem can improve coordination while increasing switching costs and reducing negotiating leverage.
The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Customization versus scalability
Tailored services may fit the business better; standardized services are generally easier to scale, benchmark and replace.
Visibility versus data exposure
Broader partner access can improve planning and exception management while raising cybersecurity, privacy and intellectual-property risks.
Outsourcing versus internal capability
Delegating execution does not remove the need for internal governance, commercial expertise, data ownership and strategic leadership.
AI optimization versus data quality
Inventory and analytics recommendations depend on accurate master data, consistent supplier records and timely event data. Automation cannot repair missing or contradictory inputs.
PC Slower Than It Used to Be?
A free scan shows the junk files, broken settings and background clutter dragging Windows down - then fixes them in one click.Free scan · Windows 10 & 11Crashes, No Sound, or Screen Glitches?
Random freezes, missing sound and display glitches usually trace back to one bad driver. Find and replace yours safely.Free scan · under a minuteCommon implementation mistakes include treating a press release as an independently validated market study, equating higher spending with better performance, focusing on technology without operating-model redesign, measuring only procurement savings, launching collaboration without data standards, assigning responsibility without decision rights, building dashboards without an exception-response process, failing to test contingencies, assuming one provider fits every geography and category, and omitting transition and exit provisions.
What the report does—and does not—establish
HFS’s public materials support a clear 2024 thesis: complexity and strategic exposure are pushing enterprises to invest in supply-chain capabilities, and service providers are being asked to contribute more than labor or isolated technology. They do not establish a comprehensive ranked forecast of every future technology or trend, a universal case for outsourcing, or current 2026 spending behavior.
For readers evaluating HFS access, the report page says most research is available after free registration, while premium access includes the proprietary research library and analyst access. No public price is stated. Neo Tangent’s enterprise services are also described without public pricing, and the available materials do not provide an official buying URL.
Bottom line for decision-makers
The durable lesson is not to buy more technology or hand the entire network to one provider. A future-ready supply chain combines network redesign, reliable information flows, measurable partner accountability and enough internal capability and supplier optionality to manage concentration, cyber and exit risk. HFS’s figures make the shift toward investment and strategic providers visible; each enterprise still has to prove which capabilities should be built, partnered or retained.
Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
