A widening gap between supply chain ambitions and operational confidence is emerging as one of the most consequential business trends heading into 2026. New research from Sage, the enterprise technology firm, reveals that while companies continue to pour money into supply chain modernization, their leaders are growing less certain that these investments will shield them from the disruptions that have defined the post-pandemic era.
The findings, published in Sage’s latest research report, paint a picture of an industry caught between the promise of digital transformation and the stubborn realities of global commerce. According to the study, supply chain confidence among business decision-makers has declined measurably compared to prior years, even as spending on supply chain technology has increased. The paradox is striking: companies are doing more than ever to fortify their supply chains, yet they feel less prepared for what lies ahead.
The Numbers Behind the Growing Unease
According to reporting by ERP News, the Sage research surveyed hundreds of business leaders across multiple industries and geographies, finding that the “confidence gap” — the distance between how important leaders say supply chain resilience is and how confident they are in their own supply chain performance — has widened significantly. A majority of respondents identified supply chain management as a top strategic priority, yet fewer than half expressed strong confidence in their organization’s ability to manage supply chain risks effectively over the next 12 to 18 months.
The data points to several contributing factors. Geopolitical instability, including ongoing trade tensions between the United States and China, the effects of the war in Ukraine on European supply routes, and new tariff regimes being implemented or threatened across multiple trading blocs, has created an environment of persistent uncertainty. Leaders report that the pace of change in trade policy has outstripped their organizations’ ability to adapt procurement and logistics strategies accordingly.
Technology Investment Alone Isn’t Closing the Gap
One of the most revealing aspects of the Sage research is the disconnect between technology adoption and operational confidence. Companies have invested heavily in enterprise resource planning systems, supply chain visibility platforms, and AI-driven demand forecasting tools. Yet the confidence gap continues to widen. The research suggests that technology, while necessary, is insufficient on its own. Many organizations have implemented new systems without fundamentally rethinking the processes and organizational structures that govern supply chain decision-making.
As ERP News reported, Sage’s findings indicate that companies with the highest levels of supply chain confidence share several characteristics beyond technology adoption: they have cross-functional teams dedicated to supply chain risk management, they maintain diversified supplier bases, and they conduct regular scenario planning exercises. In other words, the organizations that feel most prepared are those that have paired their technology investments with structural and cultural changes.
The Tariff Factor: A New Layer of Complexity
The timing of the Sage research coincides with a period of extraordinary trade policy volatility. The United States has implemented or proposed significant tariff increases on goods from China and other nations, while retaliatory measures from trading partners have further complicated sourcing decisions. For mid-market companies — the segment Sage primarily serves — these shifts are particularly destabilizing. Unlike multinational giants with dedicated trade compliance teams and diversified global operations, mid-sized firms often lack the resources to quickly pivot their supply chains in response to policy changes.
Recent reporting across financial and trade publications has highlighted the strain that tariff uncertainty is placing on businesses. Companies that had begun shifting production to Southeast Asia to reduce dependence on Chinese manufacturing now face questions about whether those alternative sources will also become targets of trade actions. The result is a kind of strategic paralysis, where the cost of making the wrong long-term sourcing decision feels almost as dangerous as making no decision at all.
Inventory Strategy Is Being Rethought From the Ground Up
The Sage research also sheds light on how companies are rethinking inventory management. The just-in-time inventory model, which dominated supply chain thinking for decades, has given way to a more cautious approach. Many firms are now carrying higher levels of safety stock, particularly for critical components and raw materials. But this shift carries its own risks: excess inventory ties up working capital, increases warehousing costs, and can lead to write-downs if demand shifts unexpectedly.
According to the findings highlighted by ERP News, a significant portion of surveyed businesses reported that they have increased inventory buffers over the past year. However, many also acknowledged that they lack the analytical tools to optimize these higher inventory levels effectively. The challenge is not simply holding more stock — it is knowing which items to stockpile, in what quantities, and at which points in the supply chain. This is an area where advanced analytics and AI-powered planning tools should, in theory, provide an advantage, but the Sage data suggests that many companies have yet to fully realize these capabilities.
Visibility Remains the Elusive Prize
End-to-end supply chain visibility — the ability to track materials, components, and finished goods from origin to delivery — has been a stated goal for companies across virtually every sector. Yet the Sage research confirms what many industry observers have long suspected: true visibility remains rare. Most organizations have reasonable visibility into their Tier 1 suppliers but limited insight into the operations of sub-tier suppliers, where many of the most consequential disruptions originate.
The challenge is both technological and relational. Building visibility into deeper tiers of the supply chain requires not only sophisticated data integration capabilities but also cooperative relationships with suppliers who may be reluctant to share operational data. Smaller suppliers, in particular, may lack the digital infrastructure to provide real-time information about production status, inventory levels, or potential disruptions. The Sage findings suggest that companies are making progress on this front, but slowly — and not quickly enough to keep pace with the rate at which new risks are emerging.
The Human Capital Dimension
Beyond technology and process, the Sage research points to a growing concern about talent. Supply chain management has become dramatically more complex in recent years, requiring skills that span data analytics, geopolitical risk assessment, regulatory compliance, and strategic planning. Yet many companies report difficulty attracting and retaining professionals with this breadth of expertise. The talent shortage is particularly acute in the mid-market, where compensation packages and career development opportunities may not match those offered by larger enterprises.
This human capital challenge compounds the confidence gap. Even when companies have the right technology and processes in place, they may lack the skilled personnel needed to operate these systems effectively and make sound decisions under conditions of uncertainty. The Sage data indicates that organizations investing in workforce development alongside technology are seeing better outcomes, but such integrated approaches remain the exception rather than the rule.
What the Confidence Gap Means for Strategic Planning
The widening confidence gap identified by Sage has practical implications for how companies approach strategic planning in 2026 and beyond. Leaders who acknowledge the gap are more likely to take proactive steps: diversifying supplier bases, investing in scenario planning, building cross-functional risk management teams, and developing contingency plans for a range of disruption scenarios. Those who ignore it — or who assume that technology investments alone will provide adequate protection — may find themselves caught off guard by the next major disruption.
The research also carries a message for technology vendors: selling tools is not enough. Companies need implementation support, change management guidance, and ongoing optimization services to translate technology investments into genuine supply chain resilience. The gap between buying software and achieving the outcomes that software promises is one of the central themes of the Sage findings, and it is a gap that the vendor community has a clear interest in helping to close.
A Warning That Deserves Attention
The Sage research arrives at a moment when supply chain risk is not an abstract concern but a daily operational reality for businesses of all sizes. From tariff volatility and geopolitical tensions to climate-related disruptions and ongoing logistics bottlenecks, the threats facing global supply chains are numerous and interconnected. The fact that business confidence is declining even as investment is rising should serve as a signal — not of failure, but of the need for a more holistic approach to supply chain resilience.
Companies that treat supply chain management as a purely technical problem will likely continue to see their confidence erode. Those that combine technology with organizational change, talent development, and strategic foresight stand the best chance of closing the confidence gap and building supply chains capable of withstanding whatever 2026 and beyond may bring. The Sage data makes clear that the gap is real, it is growing, and it demands a response that goes well beyond the next software upgrade.
WebProNews is an iEntry Publication