Category Archives: Best Practices

Addressing Tail-End Spend Management

Today’s guest post, which is part two of a two-part series, is from Gonzague de Thieulloy, a Managing Director at Xchanging Procurement who manages tail-end spend management programs at Xchanging’s largest European customers.

In yesterday’s post, we defined tail-end spend, which is the 20% or so of spend with the organization’s non-strategic suppliers that, due to its complexity, is typically left unmanaged and which, unaddressed, presents the company with significant risks of the financial and brand variety. In today’s post, we discuss the solution for tail-end spend management which will address the complexity, reduce the risk, and present the organization with an additional savings opportunity.

The Tail-End Spend Solution

Because of the high degree of complexity and risk involved with tail-end spend, companies are increasingly looking at support from specialist external providers to manage their 20%. It’s more efficient to subcontract the management of this tail-end spend rather than to manage it internally and, due to economies of scale, it makes more financial sense.

Key Success Factors when Managing Tail-End Spend

There are several success factors to consider when managing your tail-end spend. Here are three primary ones to consider:

  1. C-suite buy-in — Senior buy in and support is imperative to the successful implementation of a tail spend management program;
  2. Visibility and collaboration — The team responsible for implementing the change management process needs to ensure the new strategy is communicated clearly to the rest of the business, as well as ensuring the team is visible and on-site at least 50% of the time to help with any queries. In order to increase the success and adoption of the new processes put in place, they need to advocate it;
  3. Utilizing procurement expertise and technology solutions as an integrated and managed service — The level of procurement support given to customers throughout the change management process is critical to ensure procurement and processes are fully connected.

Reaping the Benefits

When rolled out properly, a tail-end spend management solution can generate 15-17% savings, which can make a huge addition to the 5-10% savings typically generated from managing traditional spend. But the benefits go much further than just cost savings. Tail-end spend solutions typically:

  • Improve supplier management – A large supply base can be paired down to a few approved suppliers, with improved terms and associated cost savings, as well as reduced risk of working with unknown companies;
  • Increase spend visibility – Expanding the range of spend under management helps to create transparency around where the money is spent and what it is spent on, and results in new spend rules that strengthen the overall business;
  • Enhance spend efficiencies – Although categories of tail-end spend are often low value/high frequency transactions, they also always include high value transactions; managing this spend creates opportunities for companies to effectively allocate and control budget spend from previously unmanaged areas;
  • Streamline procurement processes – The key value-add of a tail-end spend management solution is it streamlines the entire tactical buying process associated with low-value spend.

It took more than ten years for leading companies to get the majority of their strategic 80% spend fully under control. We’re just in the early days with tail-end spend management, but by understanding the unique challenges of this 20%, it will take far less than ten years to have 100% of external spend under management.

More information on Tail-End Spend Management can be found on Xchanging’s Tail-End Spend Management page.

Thanks, Gonzague!

The Importance of Tail-End Spend Management


Today’s guest post, which is part one of a two-part series, is from Gonzague de Thieulloy, a Managing Director at Xchanging Procurement who manages tail-end spend management programs at Xchanging’s largest European customers.

Tail-end spend management is finally becoming a procurement priority, and for good reason. Historically, procurement organizations have been focused on trying to manage their strategic spend, the 80% of spend that represents around 20% of their suppliers. While companies have been striving to manage those strategic suppliers, they’ve left the myriad of smaller suppliers — the ‘tail-end’ of the spend — unmanaged. But that is starting to change.

Until recently, you would have been hard pressed to find any company managing their full strategic spend properly. Ten years ago, most organizations were only confidently managing 40-60% of that spend, at best. Now, due to procurement’s increased visibility and greater strategic role, many companies are managing their entire strategic spend effectively — the full 80%. This has left more than a few companies wondering what they can do with the remaining 20%, not least because of the financial benefits. Everest Group suggests that inclusion of tail-end spend increases procurement outsourcing savings potential by 1.5 times. But this is just one reason to manage tail-end spend.

Complexities of Tail-End Spend

However companies are discovering that they can’t use the same procurement methodologies for tail-end spend as they have for their strategic spend. For one thing, tail-end spend is far more complex than strategic spend: there are many more suppliers, the spend is very fragmented, and there are a lot more individuals buying. Tail-end spend “buyers” are end-users: people in HR, marketing, finance, IT, and so on — ordering goods and services as needed. They are not professional buyers, in the traditional procurement sense, which means trying to manage this spend requires change management — an added layer of process. As long as the total cost is less than the agreed threshold for tail-end spend, then these “buyers” can place orders with whomever and however they want.

Tail-End Spend Risks

Not only is the 20% tail-end spend complex, it can also be very risky, which is another reason organizations are now starting to pay attention to it. With the 80% spend, companies typically have an experienced buyer managing key suppliers and auditing those suppliers on a number of different aspects. The company that is on the ball knows everything there is to know about their strategic suppliers: whom they work with, their values, their practices, their working conditions, who their suppliers are, etc. With unmanaged tail-end spend, nobody is looking after these suppliers. Companies have no idea who they are buying from, making them susceptible to a number of risks.

One such risk is the potential damage to a company’s reputation. With all of the corporate sustainability issues now in the spotlight, unmanaged spend means companies may be doing business with suppliers that violate their own CSR principles. Imagine the harm it would do to your brand if it were discovered that one of your suppliers was using child labor or heavily polluting the environment. The damage could be irreparable. Beyond brand damage, you would also be responsible for supporting companies carrying out these practices. The reputational impact alone could put your company into a tail-spin.

Another type of risk that is common of unmanaged tail-end spend is a best practice risk. When companies let people from across the business buy from whomever they want, there is a chance that they will just buy from a personal connection, or from a supplier with whom they have a historic relationship. This often results in individuals overpaying for what they are buying which is, of course, financially damaging to the company. But more seriously, they may be in breach of fair practice regulations, putting the company at risk of being sued.

Companies that fail to address this complexity and risk are leaving a lot more on the table than they think. In tomorrow’s post, we will discuss the tail-end spend solution.

More information on Tail-End Spend Management can be found on Xchanging’s Tail-End Spend Management page.

Thanks, Gonzague!

“Best” Procurement Organization? What “Best” Procurement Organization?

A recent post by the maverick over on Spend Matters asks “Does the “Best” Procurement Organization in the World Exist”? There’s the long answer, which the maverick gives, and the short answer, which the doctor will give.

Question: Does the “Best” Procurement Organization Exist?
Answer: No!

There is no best, at least, as the maverick explains, as a whole.

The reasons for this, as detailed by the maverick, include, but are not limited to:

  • direct vs. indirect
    there are organizations “best” in direct, “best” in indirect, but typically not “best” in both
  • categories
    there are organizations that excel in certain categories, direct or indirect, but not other direct or indirect categories
  • trade secret
    organizations that are, or at least believe they are, truly ahead of their peers tend to keep quiet, thinking this provides them a competitive advantage
  • inbound vs outbound vs omni-channel retail
    most organizations tend to excel in one of these supply chains
  • operational efficiency
    which allows an organization to attack more categories than their peers

But also include the following:

  • market intelligence
    detailed supply market and pricing knowledge that can be used to the organization’s advantage
  • modelling capability
    to build accurate should-cost models using raw material, labour, energy, and overhead data to understand the gap between market pricing and actual costs and whether or not it is a fair profit margin
  • optimization-based negotiation
    to get the truly best price during the organization’s sourcing exercise

There are a host of factors that make a “best” Procurement organization, and all of them need to be met for an organization to be “best”. And since no organization is best in all of them, there is no “best”. But the good news is that not only is there room for improvement, but it’s easy to identify where the improvement needs to happen, to make the improvement, and surpass your peers. Fortunately, to win the game, you don’t have to be “best”, just “better” than your peers. Improve on each of these eight dimensions, and your organization will be on the fast track to getting there.

3 Best Practices in Supply Risk Management That You Are Likely Overlooking

SI has written about risk management and best practices quite a lot in the past, and a lot has been written on the subject, but when it comes to a successful risk management program, there are a few key elements that cannot be overlooked or the success of the entire program can be compromised in an instant.

Three of these core elements are very nicely summarized in a recent piece by the maverick that he published on Spend Matters last month in Part 2 of “Supply Risk Management 2015: Best Practices”. And while the doctor has seen each of these issues addressed to various levels of competency separately, he’s never seen them addressed so succinctly in unison, and that’s why he’s pointing out this particular piece. With the exception of the 2×2 best practice, which is really not that critical if you frame and approach supply risk management correctly (but that’s a point for future discussion), the piece is superbly written.

This post will briefly discuss the three elements, but the doctor strongly encourages you to download the full piece and read it in its entirety. These lessons could just save your supply chain from a major disruption.

Supply Risk Management is an Embedded Process

Risk is continuous, not a point-based event that can be addressed with a one-off program at various points along the supply chain. Natural disasters cannot be predicted, strikes can happen with very little warning, and equipment can break down for any number of reasons. Monitoring must be continuous — and this only happens if risk monitoring, mitigation, and management is embedded into all supply chain processes. Not sure how to do this? The paper has some tips to get you started.

Risk Includes Variation and Volatility

Risk is not binary, not restricted to complex categories or supply chains, and not an-all-or-nothing event. An extra 1% defect rate presents a major risk if quality assurance and pre-delivery testing is not stepped up. Bad weather that destroyed 20% of expected crop yield is a major risk if the organization was counting on a full yield to meet demand. The products are still delivered and a crop is still harvested, but it’s a disruption all the same.

Risk Scoring Must Show Business Impact

One of the biggest mistakes that the average Procurement organization makes, if not the biggest, is evaluating the impact of a risk against purchasing, and not the business as a whole. A low dollar spend could be critical if the bus cannot roll off the lot without that Grade 8 bolt. An impact on an unmanaged category, not critical to Procurement, could be devastating to Marketing. And so on. The needs of the business must come before the needs of Procurement.

For more details on these best practices and tips to get you started, check out the maverick‘s second paper on “Supply Risk Management 2015: Best Practices”. It will be worth your while.

Maverick Spend is Good. Wait, What?

For years and years and years the doctor, the maverick, and every other thought leader in Procurement have collectively been telling you that maverick spend is bad. It erodes negotiated savings, builds mistrust in the supply base, and underlies your Procurement processes. It encourages rogue behaviour and increases the organization’s exposure to risk and liability. Good Procurement is not accomplished by loner hot-shots, but an integrated, dedicated team that manages the supply chain end-to-end and makes sure the entire chain is strong, not just one link.

But, sometimes, if approached in the proper manner, Maverick spend can be good. Maverick spend can help you identify weak processes, better products and services, preferred suppliers, and even poor definitions of on-contract and off-contract spend. Even though it’s still bad if the buyer is buying off-contract, paying more than needed, risking good supplier relationships, and potentially exposing the organization to compliance and liability issues, maverick spend still presents an opportunity to improve Procurement processes, procured products, and even personnel.

How? Check out the new Spend Matters Pro Piece in the maverick‘s 50 Shades of Pay series that was co-authored by the doctor on “Maverick Spend Analysis: How to Re-Plumb Your Spend and Savings Flow” and find out how you can knock your spend analysis success up a notch, even if you don’t have a spice weasel.