Monthly Archives: September 2008

Sourcing Innovation: Where Thought Leaders Converge

The following is a complete* list of authors who have submitted a guest post on Sourcing Innovation or who have contributed to one or more of the Sourcing Innovation Series on their blog. There are a large number of truly great posts in this collection — which will increase in size with the next cross-blog series that starts next week on The Seven Grand Challenges for Supply & Spend Management.

A Buyer and Not a Cutter
Canadian Medical Purchasing is Only Just Average

Anonymous Author
GPOs and the Health Care Industry of Tomorrow

Alan Buxton, e-Sourcing Place and Trading Partners
The Future of e-Sourcing – Less is More
Two Sides to the CSR/Sustainability Argument
Auctions and Sustainability
What I Learned From Conference Season

Andy Monin, Vendor Compliance and VendorMate
Why do Hospitals Struggle to Run like a Business?
Leading the Sustainability Charge

Ashton Udall, Product Global and Global Sourcing Specialists
Best Cost Country Sourcing and the Concept of “Riskturn”

Bernard Gunther, Lexington Analytics
How much do you know about your spending?
Do You Have A Plan

Bob Derocher, Per Blomquist, Katie Boord, Archstone Consulting
Expanding Procurement’s Role in a Financial Services Company

Brian Daniels, Spend Radar
Supply risk – Seize the Initiative!

Brian Sommer, Services Safari and Azul Partners
Sourcing: A Sustainability Case Study
Sourcing: Sustainability or Durability?
Traveling During Conference Season
Ready to Drink the Kool-Aid?

Charles Dominick, Purchasing Certification Blog and Next Level Purchasing
Sourcing Innovation for Single-Customer Contracts
Sourcing Innovation for Enterprise-Wide Contracts
The Future of Sourcing: Results-Based Process Specialization
Measurement, Benchmarking, and Skills
Procurement Transformation

Chris Jacob Abraham, @ Supply Chain Management and ILOG
Forward: SCM 2.0
Supply Chain Talent
Closed Loop Supply Chain Management and Supply Chain Collaboration
A Brief Background on Sustainability Issues
Sustainability – Solutions in Search of Problems

Christopher Sciacca, Who Said Supply Chains are Boring? and IBM
Putting reduced packaging into a bigger supply chain perspective

Dave Kuketz, Global Content Works
Sustainability

Dave M, Buyer Analytics
Defining Sustainable Procurement
The Cornerstone of Sustainable Procurement – Ethical Sourcing
A Model of Sustainable Sourcing Transparency

Dave Stephens, Business and Technology Nexus and Coupa
The Future of Sourcing
The Top Three: Cost, Complexity, and Compartmentalization
The Battle Over Efficiency vs. Quality vs. Cost in Hospitals and Clinics

David Bush, e-Sourcing Forum and Iasta
The Future of Sourcing?
Sourcing Innovation Series
The Top Three: Adoption, Adoption, Adoption
Carbon-Neutral Blogging

Dick Locke, Global Procurement Group and author of Global Supply Management
Musings on Talent Management
Are Your International Procurement Skills Up to Snuff?

Don Dougherty, Denali Consulting and SupplyStaff
The “Talent” Game

Doug Hudgeon, Vendor Management
Rogers and Hammerstein: The Future of Sourcing
The Top Three: Dale Earnhardt

Doug Smock, Design News and co-author of Straight to the Bottom Line
The Top Three: Straight to the Bottom Line

Eric Hiller, Cost Cents and Apriori
Design for … What?
Sustainability, Granola Definition

Eric Strovink, BIQ
The Future of Sourcing
Spend Analysis: What Purchasing.com Got Wrong
Aberdeen on Spend Analysis: Lost in the Trees
The Future of Spend Analysis
Integrating Contract Management and Spend Analysis
Screwing up the Screw-Ups in BI
Sustainable Savings
A Quick Start to e-Sourcing
Spend Analysis Meme Busting, Part I
Spend Analysis Meme Busting, Part II
Spend Analysis I: The Value Curve
Spend Analysis II: The Psychology of Analysis
Spend Analysis III: Common Sense Cleansing
Spend Analysis IV: Defining “Analysis”
Spend Analysis V: New Horizons (Part 1)
Spend Analysis VI: New Horizons (Part 2)

Harvey Chan, Ethical Sourcing Blog and Mountain Equipment Co-op
Pollution, Social Ills & The Developing World

Haydn Jones, European Leaders Blog and A.T. Kearney
Sustainability, Sustainability, Sustainability

Jason Busch, Spend Matters and Azul Partners
Sourcing Innovation: Securitizing Direct Materials
Sourcing Innovation: Next Generation On-Demand
Evaluating Spend Visibility and Analytics Providers
Sourcing Innovation Series: Wither Procurement as Strategist in 2008?
How Will Green / Sustainable Procurement Play in a Recession
Sustainability Wins Because of the Market – Not Regulation
Three Lessons From Conference Season

Jason Rushin, Nextance
Promoting Sustainability Throughout Your Ecosystem

Jean-Philippe Massin, Strategic Sourcing | Europe and Capgemini
Future Purchasing: The Extended-Enterprise Connector
The Top Three: Live Spend Analysis, Best-in-Class Suppliers, and Change and Culture Management

Jim Lawton, D&B
Winning the Battle on Risk: Information and Technology

John Martin, Building SaaS  
The Future of Sourcing … for Services
Services Sustainability

John Miller, Gemba Panta Rei and Gemba Research
The Top Three: Slow is the New Fast, The 90-mile Rule, DIYS
What We Can Learn Form Boeing’s Lean Supply Chain

Jon Hansen, Procurement Insights
Procurement’s Expanding Role and the Executive of the Future
Yes Virginia! There is more to e-procurement than software! (Part 1)
Yes Virginia! There is more to e-procurement than software! (Part 2)
The FOSS(ilization) of the supply chain: The risks of a strategy centered on Free Open Source Software

Kevin Brooks, True Demand
The Future of Sourcing Commentary
The Top Three: Learning to Communicate

Lisa Reisman, Metal Miner and Aptium Global
Quantifying Quality in Lean Sourcing Initiatives
The Top Three: Global Sourcing Savings Maximization, Volatile Commodities Management, and Savings Implementation

Mark Usher, 1 Procurement Place and Treya Partners
A State Gets Smart

Matt Gersper, Global Data Mining
GDM & AQPC Launch Ground Breaking Study of Global Trade Metrics
10+2 Readiness … Beware! It’s strategic, not tactical …

Norman Katz, Katzscan
Some Examples of Supply Chain Fraud

Paul Martyn, Track Management Group
Some Thoughts on Sustainability

Randy Littleson, Kinaxis
The Top Three: Strategy, Strategy, and People
Sustainability and the Impact on Supply Chain Responsiveness

Rick Ankrum, SCM Pulse
CDP Initiative Aims to Establish Carbon Reporting Across the Supply Chain

Rob Parish
Rob Parrish: Sourcing Innovation Blog Swarm

Robert A. Rudzki, Transformation Leadership, Greybeard Advisors, and co-author of Straight to the Bottom Line
Don’t Wait for the Burning Platform

Ron Southard, Safe Sourcing
Twenty Reasons Why All Retailers Should Use e-Procurement Tools Now

Tim Albinson, 2sustain and Aravo
Report from DC: Good News, Bad News

Tim Minahan, Supply Excellence and Ariba
Sourcing Innovation: Predictions for the Future of Strategic Sourcing
Predictions for the Future of Strategic Sourcing: Part II
What’s Next According to Busch: Supply Skills Networks
What’s Next In Purchasing: Ask Your Supply Management System
Open Season (Part One): It’s Time to Negotiate Best Value Events
Open Season (Part Two): Best Practices for Event Management Spend

Vinnie Mirchandani, Deal Architect and New Florence. New Renaissance
Healthcare – Three Way Matching
Green – or Guilt – Selling?
What I Learned From Conference Season

* Hopefully I didn’t miss anyone. If I did, please accept my sincere apologies, send me an e-mail, and I’ll rectify the problem. Please note that I did not include any posts that were contributed to the Sourcing 2007 series as all of the contributors were bloggers who would have likely wrote those posts even in the absence of that particular cross-blog series, because bloggers love to pontificate on the year ahead every time a new year rolls around.

Reminder: (e-Sourcing, e-Procurement, and e-Supply Chain) RFP Help Is Here

I wanted to remind you that, I as indicated last month during the summer slumber, you can find RFP Help Here. When trying to piece together an RFP for your new e-sourcing, e-procurement, or e-supply chain solution, you’ll need to navigate a minefield filled with fine-print, unnecessary and useless features, maintenance and upgrade charges, and extraneous user licenses (thrown in to produce an artificially-low “per license” price) — not to mention enticing offers involving long-term commitments that you absolutely should not be making. As outlined in What Does the doctor Do … For You, one of the services I offer is RFx Construction Help, including, if necessary, a full blown Needs Assessment.

As I have indicated many times in my X-emplification series, my X-asperation series, and in various RFx posts, including Don’t Put the Cart Before the Horse, you should never — ever — use an RFI or RFP “template” from a vendor when going out to bid, regardless of what the solution is for. This isn’t to say that you shouldn’t download them and look at them, but it’s unwise to use them or base your RFx upon them. For example, the Ariba RFP template for an RFx solution consists of page after page of feature-focused questions like “does the product integrate with Business Objects”, “please list your best practice event templates”, and “does the product qualify new suppliers” — the answers to which are most likely of no use to you. Not everyone uses Business Objects, and, more importantly, if the product is good, shouldn’t it be self-contained? If you’re in food service, you don’t give a hoot about best practice templates for petro-chemical manufacturing. Furthermore, an automated tool can never qualify a supplier — only an intelligent human can.

The usefulness of a vendor RFP template for a software solution is usually limited to the headings on the functionality pages, which can help you to identify features commonly found in that solution category. For example, looking at Ariba’s proposed RFP for an RFx solution, you can be pretty confident that RFx solutions might have some type of navigation, integration support for third party systems, project management capability, supplier tracking, survey creation, reporting, RFx creation, and auction event-management capabilities — and, more specifically, that the features available from Ariba will match the questions perfectly! But that’s all you can tell. You don’t know if the features mesh in such a way to provide the actual functionality you need, or whether the whole RFP is completely off base with respect to what you’re trying to accomplish. You need to ask use-case-based questions that reflect your business and your normal operating procedures. For example, is the reporting module included with the RFx system, or is it an added-cost item? Is the solution a tar baby of interrelated modules, such that you can’t really buy one without springing for all the others, in order to get the “complete” functionality? Has the vendor focused on eye-candy gee-whiz features, to the detriment of core functionality that you’ll really need?

RFx software itself is great example of what should be a mature, smoothly-working technology. eRFx has been around for 10+ years — so it’s easy to reason that surely every vendor has to have gotten it right by now. None of the analysts or major commentators in our space even question this point. Yet, I’m aware of recent RFx efforts using “mature” technology that have nearly failed due to very basic software limitations.

As per my last post, I believe that I am in a unique position to help, given my dual background in technology and sourcing/procurement. I am able to work with you to:

  • understand what you need and do a proper Needs Assessment
  • put together an RFx that outlines the important functionality you really need, not simply produce an exhaustive list of useless features
  • review the initial RFx responses and help you identify the follow-up questions that you need to ask
  • review a potential contract in order to identify:
    • unnecessary modules
    • missing functionality
    • missing cost definitions (so you don’t get burned later on)
    • and other potential weaknesses
  • if necessary, help you select a third party to assist with implementation or associated services

So if you need help with that needs assessment, RFx, or contract, e-mail me at any time at thedoctor <at> sourcinginnovation <dot> com.

Note to anyone who doesn’t understand category tagging: yes, this is an advertisement.

A Savings Template to Save Money Now with Green IT

During the summer slumber, I brought you two posts on how to green your data centers and keep more green in your bank acount and how to green your desktops and keep even more green in your bank account where I told you Green IT would save you bags upon bags of money. If you missed these posts while on vacation, I’d highly recommend getting to them sooner rather than later because, depending on the size of your business, you’re IT is likely costing you anywhere from thousands a month to hundreds of thousands a month more than it needs to – money you can start recapturing tomorrow by switching to Green IT today.

The simple truths of the matter are the following:

  • it costs more to power your average workstation or server over its useful life than it costs to buy it
  • your average workstation and server needs to be replaced every three years, or, at the very least, downgraded to supporting lesser intensity tasks

but, when you switch to Green IT:

  • power becomes a fraction of the cost, as a Green IT solution will normally be 60% to 90% more power efficient, depending on your needs
  • your hardware lasts twice as long – and ends up costing you much less on an annual basis (especially since green thin clients are cheaper than workstations!)

So how much will you save? It depends on how big you are and how many machines you have. The more machines, the more you save. Fortunately, it’s not that hard to come up with a high-level rough estimate. All we need to do is roughly calculate your current annual hardware and energy costs and your expected annual hardware and energy costs with a Green IT solution and calculate the difference.

We can estimate your current annual costs as follows:

  • regular_workstation_costs + regular_workstation_energy_costs +
    high-end_workstation_costs + high-end_workstation_energy_costs +
    server_costs + server_energy_costs

And we can estimate your expected annual Green IT costs as follows:

  • sunray_costs + sunray_energy_costs +
    CP20_costs + CP20_energy_costs +
    server_costs + server_energy_costs

Based on this, we can make some realistic assumptions and calculate a potential savings for an organization of 100 people with an IT staff of 20.

We’ll start by assuming we’re talking a traditional office, such as an insurance firm, where their IT needs are moderate. We’ll assume that only IT needs high-end workstations, that they are able to get by on 12 servers (which is on the low-end as some organizations have up to 2 servers per employee), and that they are located somewhere where energy is relatively cheap, at 10c/kWh (roughly the national average in the US as of June, 2008). We’ll assume that they can buy lower-end hardware and get regular workstations for 600 with low-end 10,000 hour 17″ LCD monitors for 200, higher-end IT workstations for 1,200 with mid-range 10,000 hour 21″ LCD monitors for 400, and get by on mid-range Dell servers at 3,000 a pop. Furthermore, we’ll assume more-or-less industry-average power requirements of 124 watts per hour per regular workstation, 372 watts per hour per higher-end workstation, and 638 watts per hour per mid-range server. We’ll also assume that these are good corporate citizens that turn their workstations off every night when they go home, that energy costs are only going to increase 7% per year, and that the organization gets three years of useful life out of a machine and four out of a monitor.

We’ll then assume that each regular workstation can be replaced with a SunRay thin client, and that each core on the virtualized server can support five clients; that each high-end workstation can be replaced with a CP20 thin client, and that each dual-core on the virtualized server can support five clients; and that there is a 6:1 consolidation ratio using virtualization technology. Making these assumptions, we calculate that this organization is overspending on IT by over 40,000 a year! Greening their IT would allow them to hire another office administrator or sales agent! Plus, they’re unnecessarily harming the environment! The energy used by 100 workstations in 1 year is equivalent to 88 barrels of oil or 4,318 gallons of gasoline and it’s production results in 38 tons of CO2 and 13 tons of landfill waste!

If we extend the calculation out over 3, 5, and 10 year time horizons, we see that the numbers become very significant very fast.

Years 1 3 5 10
Traditional IT Cost 61601 187642 314096 632442
Green IT Cost 21371 64654 108014 216837
Green IT Savings 40230 122989 206081 415605

And this is a low-end estimate! If the organization needs higher-end, and costlier, workstations that suck up even more energy, and its employees never turn them off, and if they can achieve an 8:1 ratio on the SunRay’s (which is obtainable if all the workstations are used for the majority of the time is word-processing and e-mail) and a 5:1 ratio on the CP20’s (which is obtainable with the right server configuration), the cost savings double to over 80,000 a year, and to almost 1,000,000 over 11 years! That’s an awful lot of green for your average small business with only 100 employees!

Years 1 3 5 10
Traditional IT Cost 107661 329552 552395 1114620
Green IT Cost 21987 66403 110883 222425
Green IT Savings 85674 263149 441512 892195

And these might even be lowball estimates for your organization, depending on your true IT needs and optimal configuration. A recent implementation by the Green Data Center reduced the total IT energy costs for a small company by 93% a year (which, for a company with 250 machines, translates into roughly 29,000 a year in energy savings)! Another study found that a local college could replace 500 machines and save 300,000 in hardware and energy costs per year! And since the implementation cost was estimated at 303,000, this organization had an ROI of only 12 months!

So how do you save money? Like I said before, you start with a green audit that results in an executable action plan that will allow you to save money as soon as you CFO gives you the green light. One company you can call is NCS Network, operators of the Green Data Center who have significant experience with Green IT and who have helped clients across North America.

Furthermore, if you call NCS Network and mention that you heard about them on Sourcing Innovation, not only will you get 10% off their standard audit quotes if you book before September 30, 2008, but they’ve guaranteed me that the first 10 callers who mention Sourcing Innovation will receive a free Green IT consultation. You can call them toll free at 1-877-GREEN-60 or send them an e-mail.

So Go Green today and save!


For you number crunching types, you can download the spreadsheet I used to do the calculations, which I’ve outlined below, and plug in your own estimates to get a ball-park of your savings potential.

The full calculation for each element of your current IT costs are:

  • regular_workstation_costs = number_of_regular_workstations * (cost_per_regular_workstation /useful_workstation_life + monitor_cost / useful_monitor_life)
  • regular_workstation_energy_costs = number_of_regular_workstations * avg_watt_per_hour * avg_hours_per_day * avg_days_per_year * avg_cost_watt_hour
  • high-end_workstation_costs = number_of_high-end_workstations * (cost_per_high-end_workstation / useful_workstation_life + monitor_cost / useful_monitor_life)
  • high-end_workstation_energy_costs = number_of_high-end_workstations * avg_watt_per_hour * avg_hours_per_day * avg_days_per_year * avg_cost_watt_hour
  • server_costs = number_of_servers * (avg_server_cost / server_lifespan)
  • server_energy_cost = number_of_servers * avg_watt_per_hour * 24_hours_per_day * 365_days_per_year * 2.22_data_center_energy_overhead_factor1 * avg_cost_watt_hour

The full calculation for each element of the green IT costs are:

  • sunray_costs = number_of_sunrays * (300_per_sunray / 7_years_useful_life + monitor_cost / monitor_useful_life)
  • sunray_energy_costs = number_of_sunrays * 7_watts_per_hour * avg_hours_per_day * avg_days_per_year * avg_cost_watt_hour
  • cp20_costs = number_of_cp20s * (600_per_cp20 / 7_years_useful_life + monitor_cost / monitor_useful_life)
  • cp20_energy_costs = number_of_cp20s * 25_watts_per_hour * avg_hours_per_day * avg_days_per_year * avg_cost_watt_hour
  • server_costs = number_server_cores * avg_cost_per_core / server_lifespan
  • server_energy_costs = number_of_server_cores * avg_watt_per_hour * 24_hours_per_day * 365_days_per_year * 2.22_data_center_energy_overhead_factor1 * avg_cost_watt_hour

When estimating server cores in your Green IT solution, use the following calculation:

  • server_cores = sunrays/clients_per_core + cp20s/clients_per_core + current_servers/consolidation_factor

where SunRay clients per core will usually be between 4 and 8,
where CP20 clients per core will usually be between 2 and 5,
and where consolidation_factor will usually be between 5 and 10.

Note that power for workstations can be as high as 1,000w/h, with low-end typically between 120w/h and 180w/h, mid-end between 300w/h and 500w/h, and maxed-out development or gamer machines requiring as much as 1,000w/h. Note that server power requirements generally start at around 500w/h for low end servers, 700w/h for mid-range servers, and typically go up to 1,500w/h (or more) for high-end servers. In comparison, depending on what type of processor the blade uses, and whether or not you have a rack-mount cooling solution, power requirements per core can go as low as 32w/h (using a Xeon-chip and rack-mounted water cooling).

1 In an average data center, 55% of the power utilization is due to overhead from lighting, air-conditioners, UPS, etc.

The Importance of the Job Description to your Talent Management Strategy

A few months ago I brought you a post on Purchasing Certification as a Savings Strategy that described the significant ROI that a company can expect to obtain by getting their entire purchasing department trained and certified. A department-wide certification ensures consistent processes and results across your purchasing team and insures that your overall performance, and, more importantly, whether or not you meet you savings targets, does not rely solely on a handful of star performers. Although it’s true that a star purchaser will often save three, five, or even ten times as much as an average purchaser, just like your star salesperson will often sell three, five, or even ten times as much as your average performer, betting the company on a single individual is akin to betting on a horse to win at the track. Not a strategy I’d bet my company on.

The post served as another example of how critical talent management is to today’s company, and today’s purchasing / procurement / supply management department in particular with commodity, raw material, and energy prices rising across the board in a stagnant economy where even holding prices steady might not be enough to keep a company in the black. Talent management, which starts with the acquisition process and extends to the eventual retirement of your talent, is a complicated topic and includes the marketing strategy you use to convince people to consider you as an employer.

Part of the marketing strategy you use to attract new talent is the job description, and even though you might not give it much thought, it turns out that getting this job description right is extremely important. As pointed out in a recent Next Level Purchasing white-paper, an outdated purchasing job description can have undesirable effects on a company’s talent management strategy. According to Next Level Purchasing, there are two severe consequences associated with using outdated purchasing job descriptions:

  • an outdated purchasing job description is likely to attract a purchaser who possessed the skills necessary for succeeding in previous years, but who does not possess the skills necessary for success today
  • an outdated purchasing job description can set the bar too low for the standard skill levels to which your current professionals will aspire

As a former R&D director, I can attest to the importance of a good job description. Without one, your probability of attracting the right candidate are low. For instance, although I can remember having to sift through fifty to one hundred applications on a regular basis just to find three to five candidates worth an interview even with a good job description, I can also remember more than one occasion where I did not get to write the job description and where I could not identify one suitable candidate among dozens upon dozens of applications. So what did this tell me? A bad job description was very unlikely to yield good candidates and a good job description, which was much more likely to yield good candidates, also served as a good foundation for eliminating those candidates obviously inappropriate for the job without the need for a lengthy interview process.

The white-paper also outlined the important components of today’s purchasing job descriptions, and, like many of the articles that Next Level Purchasing makes available on its website, is worth at least a once-over.

Kiva: Can Micro-Finance Make a Macro-Difference?

A few months ago, I was tuned into Kiva by a fellow hoser. Kiva, the world’s first person-to-person micro-lending website, empowers individuals to lend directly to unique entrepreneurs in the developing world with the goal of alleviating poverty.

When you make a loan on Kiva, a (U.S. 501(c)3) non-profit orgainization, you are helping a real person make great strides towards economic independence and improve life for themselves, their family, and their community. In addition, through its data-rich, transparent lending platform, you not only get e-mail updates that inform you of the loan’s status and allow you to track repayments, but you get to see how money flows throughout the entire loan life-cycle and what effect it has on people and institutions lending it, borrowing it, and managing it along the way.

To keep overhead low, and insure that the full amount of your loan goes to the individual in need, Kiva partners with existing micro-finance institutions around the world that are experts in identifying qualified entrepreneurs and in helping them succeed in their business. To date they have made loans totaling $41,246,560 through 104 partner organizations at a total default rate of only 1.52%. If we restrict our analysis to the 82 partner organizations that are currently active or in a pilot stage, the rate drops to 0.56%. Furthermore, 74 of these organizations, which account for 93.67% of the loans, have a default rate of 0%. All I can is if the North American banks were this good at lending, maybe we wouldn’t be in the mess we’re currently in!

Needless to say, I decided to try it out. I’m all for sustainability initiatives, and it’s much more sustainable then simply giving to certain charities. (Even though, as evidenced by my recent sustainability challenge, I’m a big fan of certain charitable organizations, and, in particular, those that are researching sustainable causes and helping children who are unable to help themselves, there are certain charities that I have an absolute disdain for. Specifically, those that simply extend charity to those that, with the right help and support, would be perfectly capable of helping themselves. As the proverb goes, give a man a fish and he will eat for a day but teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.)

To date, the doctor has made six $25 Kiva loans:

As far as I can tell, it looks like it works great. Now it’s true, as the site clearly disclaims in the footer of every page, that lending to the working poor through Kiva involves risk of principal loss, but so does investing in the stock market, or, even worse, gambling at the local casino — but at least when you loan through Kiva, you’re making a difference, and, as I noted above, your chances of getting your money back, to re-lend to someone else in need, is much greater.

Thus, I would encourage everyone to take part of their discretionary funds and try lending through Kiva. Considering that you can start for $25, or the cost of one good bottle of wine (at the liquor store and not your local 300% mark-up restaurant), it’s an endeavor that the vast majority of us should be able to afford. And if even half of the 1.2B people in the developed world made even one loan a year, think of the sustainable difference it could make. That’s something worth aiming for. And if you do lend, tell them jeff <at> hosernews <dot> ca sent you (because I believe in giving credit where credit is due).

And yes, there is a supply chain lesson here for all of us. If a good supplier is in trouble in these hard financial times, key customers can band together to keep it financially solvent until times improve through faster payments, guaranteed orders, and low-interest loans. And, in addition to the good feeling these customers will get from knowing they did right, they will have also secured long-term capacity at a strategic supplier. Let’s face it — most business people want to do the right thing when given the choice. This means that if you stick by good supplier when it’s having a bad day, it’ll stick by you through thick and thin.