Adapting Demand Forecasting to Changing Consumer Behavior

𝗛𝗮𝗿𝗱 𝘁𝗿𝘂𝘁𝗵: 𝗶𝗻𝘃𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗼𝗿𝘆 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗶𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝗮 𝘀𝗽𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗱𝘀𝗵𝗲𝗲𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗯𝗹𝗲𝗺. It’s a signals → decisions problem. Most teams chase a single number. Winners design a system that stays right when the world wiggles. Here’s my playbook for GenAI-driven demand + inventory, built for CIO/CTO and Ops leaders: 𝗦𝟯 𝗙𝗼𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 — 𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘀 → 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀 → 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀.  𝟭. 𝗦𝗶𝗴𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘀. Unify sell-through, returns, promos, weather, lead times, supplier risk. Use GenAI to convert messy text into structured features. Pull from sales notes and vendor emails.  𝟮. 𝗦𝗰𝗲𝗻𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗼𝘀. Stop point forecasts. Run probabilistic demand curves with clear explanations. Ask: “What if lead time slips 10 days?” Then see SKU-level impact.  𝟯. 𝗦𝗲𝗿𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗹𝘀. Optimize for cash and customer promise, not vanity accuracy. Respect constraints: MOQ, capacity, holding cost, spoilage. GenAI recommends reorder points; humans own overrides. 𝗤𝘂𝗶𝗰𝗸 𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗲: A seasonal SKU with promo spikes. We fed signals and constraints. Weekly S&OP dropped from 8 hours to 20 minutes. Stockouts fell, dead stock shrank, and finance liked the cash delta. 𝗕𝘂𝗶𝗹𝗱 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝗼𝗿𝗱𝗲𝗿:  • Data contract for signals.  • GenAI reasoning layer for “why” and “what-if”.  • Optimizer for service levels and working capital.  • Feedback loop: accept or override, then learn. New rule for 2025: Don’t optimize forecasts. Optimize decisions. Your model can be “wrong” and your business still wins. Save this. 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 “𝗣𝗟𝗔𝗬𝗕𝗢𝗢𝗞” 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗜’𝗹𝗹 𝘀𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗦𝟯 𝗰𝗵𝗲𝗰𝗸𝗹𝗶𝘀𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗺𝗽𝘁𝘀 𝘄𝗲 𝘂𝘀𝗲. #ThinkAI #SupplyChain #Inventory #AI

Forecasting is a common application of data science, and it's crucial for businesses to manage their inventory, especially those with perishable items effectively. In a recent tech blog, the data science team from Afresh shared an innovative approach to accurately predict demand, incorporating non-traditional factors such as in-store promotions. Promotions are common in grocery stores, helping customers discover and purchase discounted items. However, these promotions can significantly alter customer behavior, making traditional forecasting methods less reliable. Traditional models struggle to incorporate these factors, often leading to higher prediction errors. To address this challenge, Afresh’s data science team developed a deep learning forecasting model that integrates various features, including promotional activities tied to specific products. The model's performance was evaluated using a normalized quantile loss metric, showing an 80% reduction in loss during promotion periods. This example highlights the superior performance of this solution and showcases the power of deep learning in solving a critical issue for the grocery industry. #machinelearning #datascience #forecasting #inventory #prediction – – –  Check out the "Snacks Weekly on Data Science" podcast and subscribe, where I explain in more detail the concepts discussed in this and future posts:    -- Spotify: https://lnkd.in/gKgaMvbh   -- Apple Podcast: https://lnkd.in/gj6aPBBY    -- Youtube: https://lnkd.in/gcwPeBmR https://lnkd.in/gWRgTJ2Q 

Forecasting solutions touting the use of AI/ML models are hard to avoid these days. But there is a hidden risk that most companies tend to ignore. The latest models are great but I worry these are being applied in a way that will only amplify “the bullwhip effect”. What do I mean? Bull whip effect is the distortion of the demand signal as it travels from the consumption end of the supply chain to the production end, while traversing multiple physical and informational nodes along the way. As a result, the demand signal at the production end could be orders of magnitude variable than actual consumption. This is nothing new and we have known about this effect for two decades plus. As we apply algorithms to forecasts, unless we account for the bullwhip effect, we are bound to amplify distortion despite best intentions. Now, this is not about outlier elimination which I believe algorithms do a pretty good job of eliminating. I am talking about misinterpreting noise as signal, over-interpreting variability and causing inventory gyrations that ultimately hurt customers. A classic example is using order/shipment data at Distribution Centers for forecasting or worse yet, factory shipments as a proxy for demand. Most S&OP plans only focus on order and shipment data without systematically factoring in channel inventory and demand. So what is the fix? In my opinion, if you are a consumer company (CPG, Hi-Tech, Retail, Pharma/Healthcare, and even manufacturing), build the capability to forecast a demand signal that is as close to the final consumption point. For example, a CPG brand could forecast retail/e-commerce sell-through demand, normalize it for channel inventory and then propagate that signal up into the supply chain. And the best part - those same AI/ML models will work much better for you. To be honest, B2B and industrial companies also benefit from a similar approach by getting closer to end customer demand. Better yet, this unlocks better demand intelligence which fuels better S&OP judgements, new product forecasting quality, lifecycle management, capacity planning and more. If you are looking for a 10x transformation, this is one of them. It’s bizarre to me when I see companies side-stepping this fundamental step and then complain about forecast accuracy, or data cleanliness or something else hurting their supply chain service levels and costs. Leaders who are pursuing unlocking growth from their supply chains while reducing cost-to-serve need to lead from the front in championing this capability.