How Technology Can Make Your Company Conflict-Minerals Compliant

by on

Thomas Kase, third from left, enlightened the audience on what technology can do for them at Conflict Minerals EDGE.

Spend Matters and MetalMiner research suggests that technology should be key in assessing and managing conflict minerals compliance. But the landscape – and noise generated by a number of providers – can be quite confusing.

This post was originally published on Spend Matters.

Thomas Kase shared during his presentation yesterday that there are several categories and classes of solution that can help drive conflict minerals compliance, including the following types of tools: contract management, sales/order management, supplier management, product/product lifecycle management, sourcing, and third-party data enrichment.

Thomas noted that supplier management tools (combined with third-party data enrichment) will be central to most conflict minerals compliance efforts, yet at the same time, many companies may need multiple solutions depending on specific requirements, industries, and customer expectations.

He suggests that at its core, technology can help assess and manage 3T/G exposure for companies.

This includes informing, training, and documenting information across all areas of the business and the supply chain. It also can help bridge the visibility and compliance gap by directly addressing requirements focused on end customer reporting, contracts, suppliers (including locations, parents, and subsidiaries), products and sourcing-specific activity to provide early and full visibility to the sourcing process and team to enable early upstream correction.

The Technology and Solutions Landscape: Addressing Conflict Minerals Compliance

Source: Spend Matters/MetalMiner

This post is based on a presentation during Conflict Minerals EDGE delivered by Spend Matters’ Thomas Kase titled “Conflict Minerals: Let Technology Do The Heavy Lifting.”

Spend Matters PRO subscribers (annual full subscribers or corporate members) can download the entire presentation here.

 

Comments (2)

  1. William Quam says:

    This is all fine and good but currently accourding to the UN Group of Experts and others there is NO “upstream” method to keep “conflict minerals” from entering the 3TG minerals supply chain.

    The ITRI “bag and tag” has never kept out “conflict minerals” and never will. What is needed is a more scientifically based system to provide real traceability. If the “upstream” portion of the supply chain is corrupted then no amount of “downstream” technology will ever help companies comply with the “reasonable country of origin” of ANY of the 3TG minerals in the global supply chain.

  2. Interesting points, William. I doubt anyone is arguing against fully implementing “real traceability” systems on the upstream end of things – that would certainly help. Our research and viewpoints indicate that downstream technologies are necessary, even as a starting point, to simplify compliance efforts for suppliers and producers who may have no way of actually finding out if they’re sourcing 100% conflict-free material.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *