In the evolving landscape of supply chain planning, few discussions are as polarising—and yet as critical—as the question of how Sales and operations Planning (S&OP) and Sales and operations Execution (S&OE) should coexist. Should they remain distinct processes with separate ownership, cadence, and focus? Or should they be merged into a unified, agile planning capability that seamlessly bridges strategy and execution?
As organisations grapple with increasing volatility, compressed planning horizons, and rising customer expectations, the structure and interrelationship of S&OP and S&OE are more than academic concerns – they are strategic imperatives. At the heart of the debate lies a broader shift in how supply chains operate: from rigid, linear models to dynamic, interconnected ecosystems powered by digital technologies.
Let’s explore both sides of the argument and the powerful role that technology, especially supply chain planning platforms and digital twins, can play in reframing this discussion.
The Case for Keeping S&OP and S&OE Separate
Traditionally, S&OP and S&OE have served different purposes. S&OP focuses on mid-to-long-term planning, typically monthly, aligning demand and supply forecasts with financial and strategic objectives. It brings cross-functional stakeholders – sales, marketing, finance, operations – together to ensure the business moves in the right direction.
S&OE, on the other hand, operates in the present. It focuses on short-term adjustments—often weekly or even daily—to respond to real-time variability in demand, supply disruptions, or fulfilment issues.
Advocates of keeping the two separate point to the need for:
Clear accountability and governance, enabling strategic and tactical teams to focus on what they do best
Dedicated processes and cadence, ensuring S&OP isn’t distracted by operational noise while S&OE remains nimble and reactive
Specialised skillsets, recognising that scenario planning, financial alignment, and executive engagement require different capabilities from order expedites, truck routing, or replenishment responses.
In this view, separation avoids decision fatigue, reduces confusion, and helps mature both processes independently.
The Case for Merging S&OP and S&OE
But another school of thought is gaining traction in a post-COVID world of disruption and accelerated change. Advocates for integration argue that separating planning and execution is a luxury supply chains can no longer afford.
With increasing pressure to sense and respond in near real time, many organisations are looking to:
- Collapse silos, bridging the gap between strategic planning and operational execution to avoid disconnects and delays
- Accelerate decision-making, reducing latency between forecast changes and frontline action
- Foster continuous alignment, ensuring that short-term execution remains in sync with long-term goals, especially in volatile demand environments
In this model, S&OP and S&OE aren’t separate stages of a process but interconnected layers of a single, agile planning continuum. The boundaries blur, and planning becomes a living process—always on, always aware, always adaptive.
The Game Changer: Technology and the Rise of the Digital Twin
Whether organisations choose to separate or merge S&OP and S&OE, one thing is clear: technology is fundamentally changing the rules of engagement.
Modern supply chain planning platforms equipped with real-time data integration, advanced analytics, and AI-powered forecasting enable companies to compress the time between insight and action. Decisions are no longer gated by slow, sequential processes or manual handovers.
The digital supply chain twin is at the forefront of this transformation – a virtual replica of the physical supply chain that enables simulation, prediction, and rapid scenario analysis. With a digital twin in place, companies can:
- Model the impact of a late supplier delivery on customer service levels across channels
- Simulate inventory strategies before changes are rolled out
- Anticipate the ripple effects of a promotional campaign across the supply network
Crucially, a digital twin enables planning and execution to operate from the same data foundation, with shared assumptions and transparent trade-offs. It doesn’t force a choice between S&OP and S&OE – it unites them into a cohesive decision-making engine.
Striking the Right Balance
In practice, many leading organisations are not choosing between separation and integration – they’re building hybrid models. These frameworks retain the governance, discipline, and cross-functional alignment of traditional S&OP while incorporating the speed and responsiveness of modern S&OE processes.
Technology enables this hybrid approach by:
- Automating routine decisions to free up time for strategic focus
- Providing shared visibility to all stakeholders, from planners to plant managers
- Embedding analytics and alerts that surface exceptions before they become disruptions.
It’s less about structure and more about capability, less about meetings and more about moments of truth.
The Path Forward
There is no universal correct answer. The optimal design of S&OP and S&OE will depend on a company’s maturity, market volatility, and digital readiness. However, the conversation must go beyond tradition and embrace the opportunities presented by modern supply chain technology.
As digital transformation continues to reshape the way we plan, execute, and compete, supply chain leaders must ask themselves:
- Are our planning and execution teams working from the same truth?
- Can we respond to change faster than our competitors?
- Are we using technology to orchestrate the entire supply chain – not just pieces?
Because in the end, the goal isn’t to win a debate. It’s to build a supply chain that’s connected, collaborative, and capable of thriving in uncertainty.
About the Author –
Elton Brown is a Senior Business Consultant at Demand Management Systems (DMS).
