I've been spending some time looking through job titles across the supply chain space, on platforms like LinkedIn and elsewhere, and the variation is quite striking.
We see titles such as Supply Chain Analyst, Manager, Lead, Head of Supply Chain, Director, and more. In some organisations, a "Supply Chain Manager" might focus solely on logistics, while in others, the role carries full end-to-end responsibility.
It got me thinking. Are these differences helpful, or are they starting to create confusion about how we define the profession?
A few questions:
- Should the term "Supply Chain" be reserved for integrated, end-to-end functions?
- Are we blurring the lines by applying it to functional roles such as procurement, logistics, or planning?
- Would a more consistent structure help strengthen career pathways and professional recognition?
One way to look at it could be:
- Functional roles (procurement, logistics, planning)
- Integrated supply chain roles
- Strategic/executive supply chain leadership
This is just my perspective. I'd be interested to hear how this is approached in your organisations or even in your own careers.
Do these titles clarify roles… or are they starting to dilute what "supply chain" really means?
------------------------------
Pieter Nagel
Chief Executive Officer Australasian Supply Chain Institute (ASCI)
------------------------------