Monthly Archives: July 2010

Forget the Champagne – The Real Gift is the Visionary White Paper

In conjunction with the IFPSM (International Federation of Purchasing & Supply Management), BravoSolution just released a brief 18-question survey determined to deduce the current state of sourcing and procurement initiatives globally. If you take just a few minutes of your time to fill out the survey and define the priorities driving your organization’s initiatives, the level of integration that currently exists between your organization’s procurement/sourcing and ERP systems, the applications you currently use, the services you currently use, the benefits you have seen, and the level of value you expect to see, you get entered into a draw to win a free bottle of champagne.

And if you are also willing to fill out an 8-box registration form, you can get exclusive access to the new Sourcing Innovation white-paper on The Future of Optimization!

Even if you are a visionary early adopter who is leading the way in the use of decision optimization who thinks she has a firm handle on where optimization is going, I guarantee you’ll learn a lot from this paper. Even though decision optimization in strategic sourcing has been around for ten years, which would make it a mature technology, in many ways it is still in its infancy. Most solutions barely meet the four pillars that define the basic requirements. Despite the increasing number of players who have started using the term “optimization” in recent years, the doctor still only recognizes six providers as having true strategic sourcing decision optimization solutions. Furthermore, the average solution doesn’t handle complex Bills of Materials, multi-variate trade-off objectives, or true make-vs-buy analysis, which would now seem to be a basic requirement for complex (outsourced) manufacturing. But even this is just the tip of the opportunities iceberg.

So take the survey, fill out the form, get your copy of The Future Optimization, and be the first to get some groundbreaking insight on eight directions that strategic sourcing decision optimization is likely to take in the decade ahead!

Another Reason to Use Plain English in Your Contracts

In addition to the fact that you will have an entire state on your side, as Dick Locke points out, and the fact that not using plain english can land you in some dire consequences, as Tim Cummins points out over on “Commitment Matters”, there is the fact that obscure language increases the risk of failure. If no one understands what they are meant to be doing, a dispute is more likely. Contracts need to be clear, so write them in plain English.

A Hitchhiker’s Guide to e-Procurement: An Introduction

Mostly Harmless, Part I

e-Procurement, while commonly used, is often misunderstood and confused with e-Purchasing, EIPP (Electronic Invoice Presentation and Payment), P2P (Procure-to-Pay), and even e-Sourcing. Thus, this brief guide will define what e-Procurement is, isn’t, and how it relates, or fails to relate, to e-Purchasing, EIPP, P2P, and e-Sourcing.

This guide will start with a definition of e-Procurement and then go on to cover the basic cycle. Along the way, it will discuss some benefits, challenges, and best practices while differentiating between the procurement of goods and services in the public and private sector when required. Finally, it will end with some advice on how to accurately cost a solution and determine the potential value such a solution offers.

Simply put, as per the e-Procurement Primer, eProcurement is the counterpart to eSourcing, starting where eSourcing ends and ending where eSourcing begins. It is the “e” implementation of the procurement cycle which is concerned with the requisitioning, receiving, and reconciliation of the received goods and services as opposed to the analysis, auction, and award that takes place in the (e-)sourcing cycle. It is essentially the automation of the non-strategic and transactional activities that consume the majority of a buyer’s time (that should be spent on more strategic value-generating activities), but one that comes with increased enterprise level visibility of all purchases.

The e-Procurement cycle, which can consist of up to nine steps (as defined in the doctor wants to remind you it’s sourcing and procurement), starts where there sourcing cycle ends and ends where the sourcing cycle begins. At a bare minimum, it will generally consist of an order, an invoice, and a payment. However, the process can also include authorization, goods receipt generation, reconciliation, tax reclamation, and analysis. Depending on the purchase in question, the (e-)Procurement cycle will generally contain three or more of the following nine steps:

  1. Requisition (& SOW)
  2. Approval
  3. Purchase Order
  4. Goods Receipt
  5. Invoice
  6. Reconciliation
  7. Payment
  8. Tax Reclamation
  9. Analysis

In addition, the e-Procurement process may also involve some regular catalog or contract management to keep catalogs and pricing schedules up to date between sourcing cycles.

The next set of posts in this series will explore each stage of the procurement cycle and the requirements that are placed upon any solution that claims to be e-Procurement.

Next Post: Requisitions, Part I

Share This on Linked In

The Enterprise 2.0 Emperor Has Nice Looking Threads …

… but they might not keep you dry and warm if a storm blows in!

Allow me to explain. Intelligent Enterprise recently asked if “the enterprise 2.0 emperor has no clothes” because, when it comes to collaboration:

  1. it’s already going on in enterprises, just as it always has and
  2. it’s not that interesting if it doesn’t impact the core business processes of the intended users.

The new tools may look great, and may streamline the processes with their aerodynamic properties, but the fundamental fact remains that if the users aren’t using them regularly with the intent to collaborate, then the tools won’t help when it comes to identifying small problems that can quickly escalate into full blown supply disruptions, or when it comes to working together to make sure the disruptions never happen. Just like a stylish polyester jumpsuit isn’t much help when a cold, heavy, rainstorm blows your way.

So before you go buying an Enterprise 2.0 solution (like those offered by Hiperos, Rollstream, etc.), make sure you have your processes and culture in order. Otherwise, you’ll never realize the benefits that these systems have to offer (which, if you’ve read the SI reviews, can be numerous) and are better off sticking with your tin-can communication system as modern technology is useless if you aren’t ready for it and won’t use it properly.

Share This on Linked In

Why Aren’t Reverse Auctions More Commonly Used?

A recent blog post over on Procurement Excellence asked “why aren’t reverse auctions used more by procurement people”? According to the article, it’s usually because:

  • procurement people sometimes lack the confidence to run them
  • procurement people are often scared of running auctions because they might expose how badly they are currently buying

Fair enough. They do require confidence and if you’re really doing poorly, they’ll expose that. But these aren’t the only reasons, and, I’d bet, not even the most common reasons. What about:

  • procurement people are scared suppliers won’t participate

Suppliers can be as scared of, or more scared, of an auction as a buyer. And for many reasons. They might be the incumbent with a history of overcharging. They might be a first-time invitee and have the perception it is only being run to drive down incumbent pricing. They might feel that it won’t capture the full value of their offering. And so on.

And these reasons only really apply to procurement people who probably haven’t run reverse auctions (or at least those who haven’t run a reverse auction successfully). There’s also:

  • experienced procurement people know that sometimes a reverse auction can increase prices and
  • smart procurement people know that it’s not always the right option

For a reverse auction to be successful, a number of conditions have to be right. There have to be enough suppliers willing to participate who want the business. The current pricing has to be above market average. The buyer has to be willing to award to the bidder with the lowest (weighted) bid and the suppliers have to perceive that. Either the majority of the cost has to be landed cost or the true cost needs to be easily defined as a weighted multiple of a (supplier’s) bid. If these conditions aren’t met, not only could costs not decrease, but they could increase. For example, if there were only three suppliers, in collusion, in a supplier’s market where demand exceeded supply and the current market price exceeded the price the buyer was currently paying, costs might increase substantially!

Furthermore, a truly smart buyer knows that reverse auctions aren’t always the answer, especially for strategic materials, components, or services. Not only are there some things that you can’t auction, but there are some things you shouldn’t auction, especially if your spend is high enough where you have leverage with your preferred suppliers. If you do a spend analysis and find out you’re spending 50M with your preferred temp labor supplier, it’s pretty easy to get at least 10%, if not 20%, savings if you show them the numbers and threaten to take your business elsewhere. Who’s going to give up 30M to 40M worth of business in a down economy? And if you’re primarily contracting security guards, janitorial services, and seasonal warehouse packers, should there really be a salary bell curve? In these situations, someone making above the mean is not going to be more effective than someone making below the mean.

Finally, a good procurement pro knows that there are only two technologies in the tool-kit that consistently give double digit returns on average, regardless of the economy — and those tools are spend analysis (which can enable leveraged negotiations) and decision optimization. While it’s true that a reverse auction can generate double digit savings in the right situation, that situation is not nearly as common as some vendors will have you believe. And that’s why more procurement pros aren’t running reverse auctions. They’re not always the right choice.

Share This on Linked In