Category Archives: Best Practices

“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.

When it Comes to Procurement, Don’t Forget Finance!

Surveys regularly ask Finance to rate Procurement effectiveness, but is this the right question to be asking? Maybe Procurement should be rating Finance effectiveness? After all, is it necessarily Procurement’s fault that there are usually noticeable gaps when the results of these surveys are published? Maybe, but maybe not.

The only way the gaps will close is if the root cause of the gaps is identified and addressed. Is Finance providing the necessary funding for the platforms, training, and resources that are required to effectively address all of the categories? Is the organization evaluating effectiveness against the right KPIs? Does the Procurement agenda align with the organizational agenda that Finance has a hand in shaping?

Now, I’m not saying it’s Finance’s fault, and I’m not saying it’s Procurement’s fault, but I’m saying there is a reason for the gap and the reason needs to be identified. Sometimes it will be a lack of effort or focus on Procurement’s part, sometimes it will be a lack of effort or focus on Finance’s part, but the doctor‘s guess is that more often than not it will not be anyone’s fault but be due to a lack of alignment.

As the maverick points out over on Spend Matters in his post on “What Does the CFO think of Procurement”, Procurement and Finance are misaligned in numerous ways, and this misalignment is costing companies a lot of money.

That’s why the maverick teamed up with ISM to conduct a new study on Procurement and Finance Alignment to help Procurement and Finance understand all the misalignment areas and the loss of value caused by this misalignment so that Procurement and Finance can work collaboratively to realign. the doctor had a chance to review, comment on, and contribute to the study before its release and can tell you that it’s well designed and well worth your time, especially since the average company will be able to complete the full study in about 15 minutes.

I strongly encourage every company, no matter how well they think their Procurement function is doing, to take this study which is designed not to assign blame but to detect areas of misalignment where Procurement and Finance can work together to improve performance.

Taking the study is easy. Simply e-mail the maverick at pierre (at) spendmatters (dot) com and you can get the study link and first access to the results.

Global Process Ownership: The Other GPO

As organizations seek to become more efficient and effective, one proven strategy is the ability to manage cross-functional processes using a global process ownership (not “group purchasing organization”) model.
the maverick, “Exploring Procurement’s Other GPO”, Spend Matters

GPO is harder than it looks. As the maverick points out, it’s ultimately about having both accountability for an end-to-end process and the ability to control the strategies and resources used for the process execution. If Procurement is made accountable, but Finance and the Engineering organization controls the financial and physical resources, then Procurement cannot control the global process. And this is another reason why the full extent of negotiated savings and identified value is never realized and end results are never as expected. Because, without control to go with the accountability, Procurement cannot execute. Planning, which is just another word for Knowing, is only half the battle. And it’s a shame the CFO and the rest of the C-suite don’t remember this single lesson that they should have been paying attention to when watching G.I. Joe every Saturday morning. (It was supposed to be about more than just blowing stuff up, even though that is what is perceived as the American way.)

Of course, this assumes that Procurement even knows what to do. As the maverick goes on to explain in his next piece on “the 3 dimensions of global process ownership”, global process ownership is more than just process breadth / scope. It’s also, as some of the leaders recognize, organizational breadth / scope as most Procurement-based processes have repercussions and effects throughout the organization, and, more importantly, category management breadth / scope. The organizations that understand, and effectively execute against, this third dimension are the organizations that truly excel and make their way into the Hackett Group top 8%. Different categories have to be managed in different ways. There is no one-size-fits-all process or organizational framework.

And that’s one of the many reasons sourcing must be strategic.