Why do so many Supply Chain experts persistently focus on the OTIF performance indicator — On Time In Full — whether to assess a subcontractor, a supplier, or even their own plant?
Because OTIF is seductive. It reassures. It offers the illusion of simplicity, a single truth, and total control. At first glance, it seems to represent the promise of a satisfied customer: deliver on time, deliver the right quantity, deliver what was ordered. The industrial dream summed up in four letters. The real key indicator of any Supply Chain’s health, however, remains the level of Service to the Customers who keep us alive.

You can easily spot the OTIF believers. They speak in percentages, swear by their dashboards, and treat any deviation from target as a mortal sin. The world around them may be falling apart — shortages, overstocks, runaway costs, exasperated customers — it doesn’t matter: as long as the OTIF looks good, everything’s fine.

Yet OTIF is nothing more than the GPS of the blind — version 4.0 of magical thinking. We stop trying to understand the system; we just rate it. We no longer manage the flow; we evaluate it. We follow the voice of the GPS, even when we’re clearly getting lost.

Behind the apparent simplicity of OTIF lies a worrying intellectual poverty. Relying only on that indicator means confusing consequence with cause, result with control, measurement with understanding.

True Supply Chain professionals know that OTIF is just a thermometer. The performance of a supply network, a factory, or a major CMO cannot be reduced to delivery punctuality. It lies in process robustness, variability control, flow synchronization, quality of decision-making, and the ability to respond intelligently to the unexpected.

But of course, measuring these dimensions requires discernment, method, and above all, a management culture based on causes rather than symptoms. It’s far less “sexy” than waving a percentage in an executive committee meeting.

In many companies, OTIF has become the fig leaf covering a deep misunderstanding of how Supply Chains actually work. It’s brandished like a totem, discussed religiously every month, yet rarely questioned for what it truly reveals. A 98% OTIF can easily conceal an organization under stress, bloated inventories, absurd trade-offs, and frustrated customers.

The ignorant will settle for it, as OTIF gives them the illusion of rigor. The others — those who truly understand Supply Chain — see it for what it is: a useful signal, yes, but only when read within a systemic framework, connected to indicators of reliability, flexibility, collaboration, and governance.

OTIF should never be a goal. It’s a symptom. And as long as we confuse fever with disease, the Supply Chain will remain a fragile mechanism observed from afar, rather than a living system we understand, nurture, and help grow.

Emmanuel de Ryckel