> **来源：[研报客](https://pc.yanbaoke.cn)** # 2026 Supply Chain Risk Report Summary ## Core Content The 2026 Supply Chain Risk Report, based on Sphera's 2025 survey data, outlines the current state of supply chain risk readiness among organizations in the United States, United Kingdom, Germany, and Canada. It highlights a significant confidence gap between perceived maturity and actual risk exposure, emphasizing the need for foundational improvements in visibility, data integrity, and supplier engagement. ## Main Points - **Survey Overview**: Four quarterly surveys were conducted, gathering responses from 800 Chief Procurement Officers and Chief Supply Chain Officers. These surveys, combined with incident monitoring data, reveal a pattern of high confidence in risk intelligence despite ongoing disruptions and losses. - **Confidence Gap**: Leaders express high confidence in their ability to detect and manage supply chain risks, but this confidence does not align with the reality of frequent disruptions and rising key risks. This misalignment is due to limitations in data quality, supplier cooperation, and the ability to validate and integrate risk signals. - **Governance Pressure**: Supply chain risk decisions are now under continuous scrutiny from boards, CFOs, and senior executives. This reflects a shift towards defensible, traceable, and auditable risk management practices, where evidence-based decision-making is essential. - **Disruption Outcomes**: Despite confidence in early warning systems, 73% of organizations experienced financial or operational losses due to supply chain disruptions in the past 12 months. The mean number of material disruptions is 3.48, with only 5.5% reporting zero disruptions, indicating that disruption is a regular part of operations. - **Risk Materialisation**: Incident data shows that while leaders expect external shocks as the main risk sources, the most significant disruptions are actually stemming from internal supplier network stress, such as viability, ESG/compliance, and quality issues. These are rising and clustering, requiring more proactive and upstream interventions. - **Resilience Playbook Plateau**: Traditional resilience strategies like diversification, near-shoring, and buffer increases have been widely adopted but are not sufficient to address underlying structural risks. These measures are seen as reactive rather than proactive, and they do not resolve issues like supplier financial fragility or data integrity. - **Bottlenecks**: The report identifies four major bottlenecks that prevent effective risk management: - **N-Tier Visibility**: Organizations claim extensive visibility but often lack continuous, validated, and scalable data. - **Supplier Engagement**: Lack of cooperation and data sharing is a significant barrier to meaningful upstream visibility. - **Data Integrity**: Poor data quality and completeness beyond Tier 1 suppliers hinder effective risk assessment and defensibility. - **ROI and Budget Constraints**: CFO scrutiny and financial limitations are major barriers to further investment in resilience. - **Operating Tempo**: While leaders desire faster decision-making, actual pre-decision workflows remain slow, often taking more than a day to complete. Crisis response is faster, but organizations are not operating at that speed by default. - **AI Adoption**: AI is now widely adopted in supply chain risk management, with 94.5% of respondents using it. However, its impact is limited by weak data foundations, leading to improved speed and communication but not reduced exposure. ## Key Implications for 2026 1. **Visibility as Proof**: N-tier visibility must be verifiable, continuously updated, and auditable. 2. **Data Integrity as Priority**: Focus should shift to ensuring data completeness, timeliness, and consistency across systems. 3. **Investment in Structural Bottlenecks**: Organizations should prioritize upstream intelligence and targeted supplier interventions over traditional resilience measures. 4. **Speed of Decision-Making**: Real-time insight is not enough without validated data and integrated tooling. 5. **AI as a Tool, Not a Solution**: AI enhances detection and reporting but cannot replace foundational data quality and supplier engagement. 6. **Realignment of Risk Perception**: Leaders need to align their mental models with actual risk materialization to allocate resources effectively. 7. **Defensibility and Evidence**: Governance requires not just high-level assurance but clear, auditable evidence to support risk decisions. ## Conclusion The 2026 report underscores that while organizations are adopting advanced tools and strategies, the structural foundations of supply chain risk management are still weak. To achieve true resilience, there is a need for a shift from perceived maturity to demonstrable readiness, focusing on upstream visibility, data integrity, and supplier engagement.