Monthly Archives: May 2023

Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive (P17) … Time to Break Down the CORNED QUIP of Supplier Management, B-Side

Having identified Supplier Management as the next solution after Spend Analysis, we quickly realized that identifying the right Supplier Management solution would be difficult as supplier management has as many aspects on its own as Source-to-Pay has. Not only do we have to decide which core capabilities in the CORNED QUIP mash are important to our organization, but we have to make sure that the solution covers the baseline requirements for each capability that is important.

In our last post, Part 16, we reviewed three (3) classic features of Supplier Management. Today we will look at the next three (3) in the hopes that when we provide you a list of vendors later in this series, you will have the basic information you need to properly evaluate the vendors that choose to return the RFP that you send to them. Let’s get to it.

Compliance Management. (GRC)

Supplier Compliance Management (SCM) address the compliance, and often the Governance-Regulatory_Risk-Compliance, aspects of the supply base in an effort to ensure compliance from the source. In today’s ultra-complicated global regulatory environment, it’s hard to keep on top of everything a company has to be in compliance with from a product and operational perspective, especially when it produces goods in one country, transports through intermediate countries (which require strict compliance with ALL local laws if you are not transporting through a FTZ), and then sells the product in ten other countries. This is where you either need a huge amount of manpower, or technology. Plus, while some violations amount to nothing more than a small fine (which is often cheaper than hiring the manpower to dot the i’s and cross the t’s), violating anti-trust, human trafficking, banned substance, or debarred/prohibited/banned companies can land an organization, and in some countries its C-Suite, in major trouble. For many companies, this is one of the most overlooked, but critical, elements of supplier management.

Integrated Regulatory Requirements & Guidance
The entire point of a compliance solution is to ensure that the suppliers are complying with appropriate government regulations to ensure that the organization doesn’t get in trouble for something a supplier did (which the organization can get in trouble for if the supplier has slavery or human trafficking in their supply chain, uses banned substances in the product, engages in bribery, and so on). The providers of the solution should be extremely familiar with the regulations in each country their solution supports, should encode all of the information that needs to be tracked and checked, and should capture all of the information needed to ensure the suppliers are being compliant with the necessary regulations, based upon the buyer’s geography, the supplier’s geography, and the products the supplier is making on behalf of its buyers.
Automated Tracking and Alerts on (Potential) Non-Compliance
A buyer doesn’t have time to log in to a system everyday to check what’s going on with current suppliers and current projects, nor should they have to manually update reports and status checks. The system should automatically be pulling in all necessary data for monitoring from both internal and external systems at the frequency those systems are updated (although more often then daily is typically not necessary if the system the data is being pulled from updates the public / available data more than once a day), updating the affected models and status checks at each pull, and immediately alerting the buyer through email, messaging service, and/or any internal project management system the buyer logs into daily (through an API integration) if a supplier is in non-compliance with a critical regulatory requirement (that could get the buying organization into hot water).
Custom Regulatory Requirement Support
No SCM solution is going to support every regulation out of the box, especially if it is both industry and locale specific to just one country that the majority of the provider’s client base doesn’t do business in. However, if your organization does business in that country and is subjected to that regulation, you need to ensure compliance, and you don’t want to use another tool to do so. Thus, it’s critical that the platform support the definition of additional regulations, the requirements that need to be tracked, the data that will indicate compliance or non-compliance, and where that data will come from. Then, the platform can be extended to meet all of the organization’s compliance needs.

Quality Management.

If all a company (like a retailer) is buying is commodity goods or fixed services, and one supplier can quickly be switched out for another, quality management may not be that important. However, if a company is reliant on selling custom, or customized, manufactured goods or systems, quality is critical. If the organization gets a reputation for selling products that don’t work, or if the warranty costs skyrocket, the company could be in serious financial trouble. Internal Supplier Quality Management (SQM), vs relying on a supplier or a third party, is critical.

Support for at least one major PIP: Six Sigma, Kaizen, PDCA etc. (PIP: Process Improvement Paradigm)
Quality doesn’t just happen, it’s the result of a best-practice manufacturing process such as Six Sigma, Lean, Kaizen, or PDCA (Plan, Do, Check, Act). (There are more.) A good quality management platform will support at least one of these process improvement paradigms, and preferably support the PIP typically used by your organization and/or your preferred suppliers. (It should support multiple paradigms, but no one platform will do everything.) It should be easy to instantiate instances of the process and customize it for the project at hand.
Support for at least one major vertical specific Quality process: APQP, DFSS, 8D, etc.
In some verticals, and/or for some suppliers, you will need to use very specific quality-based manufacturing processes such as Advanced Quality Product Planning, Design for Six Sigma, or Eight Disciplines. These processes are used for particular products and need to be supported for the design, or analysis post-design / prototype manufacturing, to try and discover what didn’t work as planned. The processes should also be customizable for variances used by the organization.
Quality Specific Metric Based Tracking and Benchmarks
It should allow for the definition and tracking of metrics specific to quality, as well as the creation of organizational benchmarks by supplier and category, and pull in any necessary data from other systems — the user should not have to punch out to a performance management application just for this. If you can’t track quality improvements, or lack thereof, then you can’t actually manage quality.

Uncertainty Management. (Risk)

Supplier Uncertainty Management (SUM) is the next generation of a supplier risk management solution. Why uncertainty? Firstly, by the time you detect a “risk“, it could be too late. If you don’t see that iceberg until it’s too late to steer the ship, you’re going down. The key to success in risk management is to identify uncertainty, detect leading indicators, investigate, and, if necessary, initiate action early. And while you may get a lot of warnings that don’t require any (immediate action), it’s better than not getting that one warning that the one critical control chip that can only be made by that one supplier is not going to materialize in six weeks because the supplier’s plant was just shut down by a fire (that they decided against telling you about). In this situation, you’re going to need every single day you can get to identify substitute designs and chips you can order from other suppliers to create alternate, acceptable, products to fulfill your orders or risk losing customers. Secondly, SRM is already taken as an acronym. (Note that, over time, a good solution will allow you to adjust the thresholds and the warnings the solution produces so that the majority of alerts you get actually need some sort of [immediate] action.)

Low-Code/No-Code Open API Based Data Integration
The old age that you can’t manage what you can’t measure is true, and it’s doubly so where risk or uncertainty is involved. You need a lot of data, metrics on that data, benchmarks and historical trends to compare against to detect uncertainty before it becomes certain disruption. And it doesn’t matter how many data feeds are “out-of-the-box” because they will never, ever, cover everything you need now and definitely will never, ever, ever cover everything you will need as new regulations arise, new suppliers enter the picture, new software products enter your corporate ecosystem, new events happen in the world, and so forth. You need to be able to quickly and easily integrate the data you need when you need it, dynamically extending the schema as necessary to support it and altering the uncertainty detection models as needed to take the new data into account.
Built-In and Custom Metric-Based Risk Models
It’s hard to detect a potential issue before it occurs without a lot of data, and models that appropriately process that data to identify trends or patterns that have typically (with reasonably high probability) led to disruptions in the past when those trends or patterns emerged. And it’s harder still to create those models if you just don’t have the expertise in risk-based modelling. As a result, the platform should come with a number of standard, built-in, models for the industry you’re in relevant to you and your tier 1 suppliers. However, every organization’s situation is slightly different in terms of its geographic location, size, primary customer market, primary supply market, reliance on certain products or manufacturers, reliance on certain raw materials, and so on. So, while each company in an industry will generally face the same risks, the probability of a specific event occurring, or risk materializing, will be different. As a result, many of the models will need to be tweaked. Furthermore, if the company is introducing a new product type or line of business, that could come with unique risks, the organization may need a custom model built from scratch. Plus, as new regulatory requirements, good and bad, rear their ugly heads, it’s important to identify which suppliers could be at risk of not being able to meet them in time so that the organization can either proactively work with those suppliers to address the new regulatory requirements or find new suppliers. Flexible modelling is everything.
Semantic and Sentimental News and Event Monitoring (Integration)
Not all relevant data for identifying uncertainty in the supply chain, or supply base, is numeric. Some of it is semantic, and contained in news stories about events that directly impact the supplier or indirectly impact its customers in other countries. If a flood takes out the local power station, it’s out of operation until the flood subsides and the power station is repaired. If that’s two weeks, and it takes the supplier two weeks to minimally repair its plant and start production again, the supplier is out for a month. If you were expecting your order in five weeks, it’s not happening. A border closure for political reasons will cut off your supply, and if you’re the only foreign customer in your country, the supplier may not be aware until it tries to ship. Semantic news and event monitoring is critical, either internal to the product or through a subscription service. Also, if sales are highly dependent on brand perception, semantic monitoring of social media is highly critical because if brand perception drops, sales will drop, and the organization will have to quickly reduce future orders or get stuck with excess inventory, which it will lose out on when it has to fire-sale that inventory to avoid (environmentally damaging) dumping.
Customizable Alerts and Triggers
The models need to be continuously re-run as relevant data enters the system (which should be daily) and the user alerted to a change that is significant or exceeds a threshold. Rush fans have known for forty (40) years that a distant early warning is key because that’s just the tip of the disaster iceberg. Moreover, the organization should be able to define it’s own thresholds and change tolerance as its experienced engineers and product managers will know when they should at least be taking a quick look behind the curtain to see if it’s just a temporary loop or the beginning of a downward spiral that needs to be intercepted and prevented.

In our next instalment, Part 18, we’ll move on to some of the newer, or at least broader, capabilities emerging in the Supplier Management landscape.

Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive (P16) … Time to Break Down the CORNED QUIP of Supplier Management, A-Side

So, we’ve implemented e-Procurement, adopted Spend Analysis, and identified Supplier Management as the next Source-to-Pay solution to implement. But it has as many aspects on its own as Source-to-Pay has, so finding the right solution is going to be tough. First we have to decide which aspects of the CORNED QUIP, as identified in Part 15, the organization needs, and then we need to make sure that the solution has the necessary features for each aspect the organization needs. What are those features? Let’s take the aspects one by one, starting with some of the classic capabilities first.

Information Management.

Supplier Information Management (SIM) is where it all began back in the early 2000s. Some would even argue that it began with the formation and launch of Aravo, one of the first pure Supplier Management solutions, and possibly the last surviving great granddaddy in the Supplier Management space. (Aravo was among the first to get big name clients, including Google, using a pure-play SIM platform.)

Almost every Supplier Management solution does basic Supplier Information Management because you can’t really do any supplier management without tracking basic information. (However, these solutions are not all equal in terms of depth and breadth, and the degree of differentiation is quite large.) The core, and the point, of a SIM solution was the centralization of all supplier information for tracking, access, and reporting purposes, which, long ago, was seen as the foundation for management. As a result, the core capabilities required are both limited and fairly obvious:

Extensible Schema
If the schema is fixed or has very limited extensibility, it’s not a modern SIM solution — every S2P system can store the supplier information the S2P system needs to function in a fixed, or limited extensibility, schema. A modern SIM solution has to support unlimited extensibility so that an organization can use it as the supplier master data management (SMDM) solution.
Fuzzy Search
More technically, full reg-ex (regular expression) search across all data fields for partial/like matches as well as weighted rankings (using customized similarity models) for finding the right suppliers (with existing relationships) to meet buyers’ needs.
Customizable Approval Flows
Just like every S2P solution contains a fixed schema that captures the supplier information it needs to function, any that require supplier interaction have a basic onboarding flow. As such, a modern SIM solution needs to have customizable onboarding flows with customizable approval rules.
Customizable Alerting
The platform should support configurable rule-based alerts that can be defined on any field, dimension, or derived dimension to alert a user when a threshold is reached or a value is detected, especially as a modern SIM solution should be the foundation for SMDM. This sounds vague, but the capability has to be very generic and flexible because neither a relationship, performance, compliance, or uncertainty solution will be able to detect everything on their own.
A relationship system that tracks active supplier relationships may not detect that a person just entered into the system as a rep is one that you dealt with in the past (at another supplier that consistently performed poor when you needed to interact with that rep). A performance solution will only detect performance for projects and suppliers actively being tracked, and may not be able to compare that to full historical benchmarks (or realize that the increase in performance correlated to a decrease in ESG activity). A compliance solution will detect compliance with regulations, but not necessarily with corporate goals designed to meet anticipated regulations, or how the compliance affects performance. The uncertainty solution will only be able to identify risks based on the integrated data sources and the integrated models, which won’t cover everything. Nor will it be useful to build risk models for situations that are currently irrelevant for the organization. However, the organization should be detecting whether it may need to build new, or augment, existing models — and that will often be if a value in the database exceeds a threshold. (E.g. The organization is not currently doing a detailed risk of financial failure predictions, but an OTD KPI dropping below a threshold is a signal to start, and that data is currently only tracked in the inventory management solution, and pushed to the SIM, serving as the SMDM, in the weekly cross-enterprise system synch.)

Relationship Management.

What’s the point of tracking information if you don’t do anything with it? The next major solution to hit the scene was Supplier Relationship Management (SRM), where the data was used to help manage the supplier relationship. The majority of modern supplier management solutions claim to be SRM platforms, even though they have wildly different definitions of what SRM is and wildly different functions. Most definitions considerably overlap with SIM and SPM, but we don’t agree with this. While such a system needs extensive data to be effective, and must track performance, it needs to focus on managing the relationship, not the data or the numbers.

A Supplier Relationship Management solution must provide functionality geared around managing and improving the supplier relationship. This must include functionality geared towards helping a buyer identify and implement best practices to manage and improve supplier performance and, in addition to functionality geared towards helping the supplier interact with the buyer, collaborate with the buyer to proactively identify and improve processes to improve future performance.

Synchronous and Asynchronous Messaging
In addition to the standard asynchronous messaging supported by every platform with collaborative elements, it must also support synchronous messaging and real-time discussion and collaboration through voice (with auto-transcript and storage) and screen-sharing and support saving, search, and semi-automatic/assisted work/change order creation from these sessions.
Collaborative Project and/or Product Plans
The system must allow for the collaborative creation of (improvement) project plans — with milestones, tasks, and owners — as well as checks, balances, notes, and sign-offs. If the solution is for direct/manufacturing, it should also support the creation, possibly through integration hooks to CAD/CAM systems, approval, and management of product (production) plans.
Integrated Best Practice Guides
A modern solution should contain a large library of standard improvement plans for common situations, as well as automated best-practice plan selection and guidance when key metrics (either computed internally or imported from an SPM solution) exceed threshholds or predictive metrics indicate likely problems. If the platform does not provide insight, at the end of the day, it’s no better than a SIM.

Performance Management.

At the end of the day, relationships are important, but you, as a buyer, get measured on performance, and you need that from your suppliers too. Relationship management should be the foundation for improved performance management. However, performance management is more than just relationship management. It’s measurable process, and product, management, and that’s the focus of a Supplier Performance Management (SPM) capability.

KPIs and Custom KPIs
Performance is all about improving KPIs, so it should be obvious that the platform should track KPIs. But not just a small set of standard “canned” KPIs! The platform should track standard, customized, and any specific KPIs you can think of to identify potential issues or opportunities for improvement. Just like there is no one set of reports that can uncover everything of relevance in a spend analytics project, there is no one set of KPIs that can guarantee everything is running smooth and that there are no opportunities for improvement. While the standard KPIs are critical, and display major issues that need to be addressed, you want to discover those KPIs that present leading indicators that allow you to sniff out, and deal with, a problem early (before it becomes significant enough to make a noticeable difference in a standard KPI).
Internal and External Benchmarks
KPIs are good, but only measuring against your own benchmarks only tells you how good each supplier is doing against the best supplier for your business, not the average performance other businesses in your industry get from their suppliers, or their best suppliers; you want those external benchmarks built from anonymized data for deeper insight from the KPIs you calculate.
Easy Data Ingestion
Product quality is going to be in the quality / PLM system. OTD (On-Time Delivery) is going to require promised dates from the contract/PO system and receipt dates from the inventory system, etc. It’s going to be critical to get lots of data from related systems to make the maximum use of the supplier performance management module.
Performance Improvement Management
Once you detect an issue from a KPI or a benchmark, you need to do something about it. It might be as simple as contacting a supplier to find out that the root cause was force majeure and outside of their control (a flood prevented transport for three days) or just the result of a miscommunication or it might be that the supplier is repeatedly delivering defective units and there is obviously an issue with their quality control. In the latter case, you will need to start a supplier development project, and the platform should allow you to define it, track it, and, hopefully, manage the interactions (possibly through the relationship management functionality).

In our next post, we’ll move onto the next set of the more classic capabilities: Compliance, Quality, and Uncertainty Management when we flip it to the B-Side in Part 17.

Tealbook: Laying the Groundwork for the Supplier Data Foundations

It wasn’t that long ago that we asked you if you had a data foundation because a procurement management platform, should you be lucky enough to get one (which is much more than a suite), generally only supports the data it needs for Procurement to function and doesn’t support the rest of the organization. Furthermore, when you look across the Source-to-Pay and Supply Chain spectrums, there are a lot of different applications that support a lot of different processes that have a lot of different data requirements that need to be maintained as different data types in different encoding formats.

Furthermore, as we noted in the aforementioned post, it’s rare enough to find MDM capability that will even support procurement. This is because most suites are built on transactions, most supplier networks on relational supplier data records, and contracts on documents and simple, hierarchical, meta-data indexes. But you also need models, meta-models, semi-structured, unstructured, and media support. And more. The need is broad, and even if you restrict the need to supplier data, it’s quite broad.

As you will soon garner from our ongoing Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive series, in which we just started tackling Supplier Management in Part XV, the supplier data an organization needs is extremely varied and extensive. Given that Supplier Management is a CORNED QUIP mash with ten (10) major areas of functionality, not counting broader enterprise needs around ESG, innovation, product design / manufacturing management, and other needs tied to operations management, engineering, and enterprise risk management, among other functions, it’s easy to see just how difficult even Supplier Master Data Management can be.

Considering not a single Supplier Management solution vendor (as you will come to understand as we progress through the Source-to-Pay is Extensive series) covers all of the basic functions we’re outlining, it’s obviously that not a single vendor can effectively do Supplier Master Data Management today. However, Tealbook, which has realized this since their exception, is aiming to be the first to fix this problem. As of the first release of their open API next month, they are transitioning to a Supplier Data Platform and will no longer focus on being just a supplier discovery platform or diversity data enrichment platform. (They will still offer those services, and will be upgrading them in Q4 with general release expected by the end of 2023, but their primary focus will be on the supplier data foundation that enables this.)

This is significant, and illustrates how far they’ve come in the nine (9) years since their founding when their original focus was on building a community supplier intelligence platform that was reliable, scalable, extensible, and appropriate for new supplier discovery (via a large database of verified suppliers with community reviews). From these humble beginnings, where they didn’t even have a million suppliers in their platform after their third year of existence, they grew into the largest supplier network with over 5 Million detailed supplier profiles that is integrated with the largest S2P suites out there (Ariba, GEP, Ivalua, Jaggaer, and Workday, to name a few) and powers some of the largest organizations on the planet. As part of this empowerment, they can take in an organization’s entire supplier data ecosystem, transform it into their standard formats, match to their records, verify or correct existing data, and then enrich the organization’s supplier records before sending them back. In addition, they integrate with a multitude of BI tools, databases / lakes / warehouses (including ERPs), digital platforms, and so on.

To summarize, that’s a ten fold increase in suppliers and an explosion in global utilization and usage. At the same time, the platform has been augmented with over 2.3M supplier certifications, global diversity data, and the ability to track an organization’s tier 2 supplier diversity data. Quite impressive.

And while this meets most of an organization’s discovery needs, Tealbook knew that it didn’t meet all of an organization’s supplier data needs, especially when you think about all of the regulatory, financial, compliance, performance, sustainability, risk, contract, product/service, relationship, quality, and enablement/innovation data an organization needs to maintain on a supplier. As a result, they have been aggressively working on two key pieces of functionality. An extended universal supplier profile and a fully open, extensible, API that an organization can use to do supplier master data management across their enterprise with the Tealbook Supplier Data Platform. An organization can use the Tealbook Supplier Data Platform to classify, cleanse, and enrich supplier records; augment those records with third party data for sustainability, compliance, and risk; find new suppliers in the network; and so on.

In short, Tealbook is on a mission to be the organization’s trusted supplier data source, and to constantly improve their data offering both with their own ML/AI enabled technology that monitors over 400M+ public websites for supplier-related data (supplier web sites, business registries, certification providers, supplier data providers, etc. etc. etc.), maintains data provenance (when was it last updated, by what/who, etc.), and provides trust scores (in their proprietary framework that indicates Tealbook’s confidence in accuracy and correctness).

The real mission begins next month when they release their new Open API that will allow an organization to integrate, and interact with, Tealbook the way it needs to across its enterprise applications. Congruent with this release, they will also start releasing their enrichment data-packs that will, within the next year, allow the organization to plug-and-play the data they need to confirm firmographics, contact channels and key information, diversity, supplier offerings, financials, certifications, and basic risk data (which Tealbook will offer through partnerships with specialty supplier data providers, giving an organization a one-stop shop vs. having to license with multiple providers separately to build its 360-degree supplier profile).

Then, over the next year, Tealbook will enhance the usability of their data platform by first rebuilding their diversity and discovery applications and then building out new applications around sustainability, risk, benchmarking, and other areas that their customers would rather a data platform handle for them.

For all I care, they can ban all the Social Media Platforms!

For those who haven’t heard, Montana is the first state to try and ban TikTok, presumably because it’s owned by China that is harvesting the data. Following that logic, shouldn’t they ban every platform that has Chinese investment?

… and then every social media platform that has a presence in China and, as such, must adhere to Chinese law?

Of course, if the real reason they want to ban Social Media platforms is because they realize the damage that social media platforms have been doing to us (and are using the Chinese ownership as an excuse), they can ban them all — including their home-grown American platforms. After all, Twitter made us dumber than a doornail and Facebook is a Toilet so please feel free to take them away too.

Remember, even if you overlook the fact that Facebook is primarily used for sharing conspiracy theories and information that is NOT fact-checked, seeking attention, cyber-stalking your favourite celebrities, and other uses besides the good, wholesome, community aspects they tirelessly promote, if you acted in real life like you acted on Facebook, as the image below suggests, you’d be the subject of multiple psychological assessments and suspicious individual #1 at your local precinct. (Credit to the original source, which I wish I knew!)

Don’t Cheat Yourself with Cheat Sheets, Kid Yourself with KPI Quick Lists, or Rip Yourself Off with Bad RFPs!

In an effort to quickly catch up on the parts of S2P the doctor hasn’t been covering as much in the past few years, when he was focussed primarily on Analytics, Optimization, Modelling, and advanced tech in S2P (inc. RPI, ML, “AI”, etc.), he’s been paying more attention to LinkedIn. Probably too much, even though he can (speed) read very fast and skim a semi-infinite scroll page in a minute. Why? Because a lot of what he’s been seeing is troubling him, and as per last Friday’s post, sometimes angering him when predatory sales-people and consultants are giving other sales-people and consultants bad advice (presumably to increase their follower count or coaching sales or whatever) that will not only hurt what could be a well-intentioned sales-person or consultant (they still exist, though sometimes it seems they are fewer by the year as more sales people bleed into our space from enterprise software, looking for the next hot software solution and the next big payday), but also the individuals, and companies, those influenced sales people sell to in the thoughtless, emotionless, uncaring aggressive style the predatory sales coaches are mandating. (Not to say that a sales person shouldn’t be aggressive about getting a sale, just that they should be focussed on the companies they can actually help and be focussed on getting the customer all the information and insight that customer needs to make the right choice, feel comfortable about it, and feel prepared to defend it. The aggression should be channeled into making sure their company does everything it can to properly educate the potential client before that client commits to a long term relationship.)

A few of the things that have been repeatedly troubling him is

  1. all the cheat sheets he’s been seeing for those looking to get a better grip on Procurement and how it integrates into the rest of the business, that supposedly summarize everything you need to know about accounting, finance, payments / accounts payable, etc. to help you make good choices about Procurement in general;
  2. all the 10/20/50 Procurement, Spend, Manufacturing, etc. KPIs that you need to keep tabs on your Procurement, cashflow plan, product lifecycle, etc.; and
  3. all the RFP outlines or guidances that are being made available, sometimes by leaving your email, to help buyers acquire a certain technology.

And it’s not because they’re bad. They’re not. Some of them are actually quite good. A few are even excellent. Some of the cheat sheets and KPI lists the doctor has seen are incredibly well thought out, incredibly clear, and incredibly useful to you. Some are so good that, as a buyer, likely with little support from your organization and even less of a training budget, you should be profusely thanking whomever was so kind to create this for you and give it away for free.

Nor is it because the doctor suspects any ill intent or malice behind the efforts (in the vast majority of the cases). Many of these people giving away the cheat sheets or the KPI lists are generally trying to help their fellow humans get better at the job and improve the profession overall. And when the RFP outline is coming from a former practitioner, it’s also the case that they are typically trying to help you out (and maybe sell their services as a consultant, but they are providing proof of value up-front).

So why has it been troubling the doctor so? It took a while and some thought to put his finger on it, and the answer is, surprisingly, one of the reasons [but not the obvious one] that the doctor hates software vendor RFPs and despises any vendor that gives you one.

Now, the primary reason the doctor despises those RFPs, which became popular when Procuri started doing it en-masse in the mid-to-late 2000s (before being acquired by Ariba and quietly sunsetted as the integration never finished by the time Ariba sold to SAP, for those of you who remember the APE circus), is that these RFIPs are always written to be entirely one sided and ensure the vendor giving them away ALWAYS comes out on top. The feature list is exactly what the vendor offers, the weightings correspond exactly to the vendor core strengths, etc. etc. etc. And don’t tell me you can start with a vendor RFP and alter it to suit other vendors, because you can’t. You’d have to know all the features as the vendor focussed on point features, not integrated functions, and you, as a buyer who’s never used a modern system, have no knowledge of how to equate features (when vendor specific terminology is used), or how to determine if one feature is more advanced than another. (That was the reason the doctor co-developed Solution Map, to help rate and evaluate technology, which is the one thing most buying organizations can’t do well. Not the things they can do well, and better than most analyst firms, like rate the appropriateness of services to them, assess whether or not the vendor has a culture that will be a good fit, define their business needs and goals, etc.)

But the primary reason doesn’t apply here. So what’s the secondary reason? When an average, overworked, underpaid, and overstressed buyer got their hands on one of these free vendor RFPs, especially when the RFP was thick, heavy, and professionally edited and prepared to look polished and ready for use, and was more detailed than what the buyer could do, they thought they had their answer and could run with it. They thought it was all they needed to know, for now, and that they could send it out, collect the responses, and get back to fire-fighting. They were lulled into a false sense of security.

And that’s why these cheat sheets and KPI guides and former buyer/consultant RFPs are so troubling. When you’ve been struggling without even the basics, and these are so good that they teach you all the basics, and more, it seems like they have all the answers you need and that when you learn those basics, encapsulate them in the tool, and start running your business against them, things will be better. Then you configure your tool to respect the basics, encode the KPIs, and things are better. Significantly better, and for once processes start going smoothly. And then you believe you know everything you need to in that area (that’s not your primary area) to interface with those functions and that those KPIs will be enough to keep you on the Procurement track and let you know if there are any issues to be addressed. And you start operating like that’s the case. But it’s not.

And that’s the problem — these cheat sheet, guides, and templates, which are much better than what you’d get in the past, can make such a drastic difference when you first learn and implement them that they instill a false sense of security. You get complacent with your integrations, reports, and KPI monitors, not recognizing that they only capture and catch what they were encoded to capture and catch. However, real world conditions are constantly changing, the supply base is constantly changing, and external events such as natural disasters, political squabbles, and endemics are coming fast and furious. If the risk metric doesn’t take into account external events, real-time slips in OTD (as it is based on risk profiles upon onboarding, and updates upon contract completion), or past regulatory compliance violations (as an indicator of potential violations in the future), the organization could be blindsided by a disruption the buyer thought the KPI would prevent. Similarly, the wrong cash-flow related KPIS can give a false sense of liquidity and financial security and the wrong inventory metrics can lead to the wrong forecasts in outlier categories (very fast moving, very slow moving, or recently promoted).

In other words, by giving you the answers, without the rationale behind them, or deep insight into how appropriate those answers are to your situation, you will cheat yourself, kid yourself, or, even worse, rip yourself off. And that’s worrisome. So please, please, please remember what these are — learning aids and starting points only — not the end result. (Especially if it’s an RFP template.)