Apple’s efforts on conflict free tantalum procurement

An article published by the Financial Times titled “Apple to name and shame suppliers of conflict minerals” (February 13, 2014) describes Apple’s “supplier responsibility” report. Given the Dodd-Frank bill’s requirement to track use of conflict materials, Apple plans to use the electronics industry companies that use around 50% of the tantalum mined, to drive supplier compliance. Rather than source from a couple of certified suppliers, the company claims that it wants to increase compliance in the smelter supply base by listing compliance certified suppliers. Given that the electronics industry is a much smaller user of gold, tungsten etc, do you expect the approach used for tantalum can be expanded to other minerals ? Will Apple’s reports generate spillover benefits for other competitors or will it increase Apple’s negotiating power by having more possible suppliers ? Will the need to track supply sources increase costs to the point that smaller smelters will be uncompetitive ?

About aviyer2010

Professor
This entry was posted in Global Contexts, Operations Management, Supply Chain Issues and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s