On Sunday, December 5, the New York Times published online: How the Supply Chain Crisis Unfolded. Lazaro Gamio and Peter S. Goodman heroically provide a cause-and-effect overview. It is a helpful and constructive contribution. Anything written (other than λόγος (logos)?) is reductionist. I would have added a bit more related to congestion in China and friction in various freight functions after imports are discharged from ports. But given their achievement, this is a narcissism of small differences.
The New York Times has self-critically confessed that before 2021 it did not give much attention to supply chains. It has done a good job playing catch-up. Competitors at the Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg, Financial Times, and Reuters (among others) have a better bench and more depth of perspective. I have noticed, though, that the NYT often gives attention to fundamentals and key relationships that others (myself included) can take for granted, but are new to many general readers.
To see supply chains given sustained and serious editorial attention by all the business journals, Times, Post, Politico, The Hill, and even the New York Review of Books has — appropriately — altered expectations of the network’s performance and the supply chain profession.