Category Archives: Best Practices

The 39 Steps … err … The 39 Clues … err … The 39 Part Series to Help You Figure Out Where to Start with Source-to-Pay

Figuring out where to start is not easy, and often never where the majority of vendors or consultants say you should start. They’ll have great reasons for their recommendations, which will typically be true, but they will be the subset of reasons that most benefits them (as it will sell their solution), and not necessarily the subset of reasons that most benefits you now. While you will likely need every module there is in the long run, you can often only start with one or two, and you need to focus on what’s the greatest ROI now to prove the investment and help you acquire funds to get more capability later, when you are ready for it. But figuring out how much you can handle, what the greatest needs are, and the necessary starting points aren’t easy, and that’s why SI dove into this topic, with arguments and explanations and module overviews, both broader and deeper than any analyst firm or blogger has done before. Enjoy!

Introductory Posts:
Part 1: Where Do You Start?
Part 2: Where Should You Start?
Part 3: You Start with …
Part 4: e-Procurement, and Here’s Why.

e-Procurement
Part 5: Defining an e-Procurement Baseline
Part 6: There are Barriers to Selecting an e-Procurement Solution (and they are not what you think)
Part 7: Over 70 e-Procurement Companies to Check Out

Interlude 1
Part 8: What Comes Next?

Spend Analysis
Part 9: Time for Spend Analysis
Part 10: What Do You Need for A Spend Analysis Baseline, I
Part 11: What Do You Need for A Spend Analysis Baseline, II
Part 12: Over 40 Spend Analysis Vendors to Check Out

Interlude 2
Part 13: But I Can’t Touch the Sacred Cows!
(including Over 20 SaaS, 10 Legal, and 5 Marketing Spend Management / Analysis Companies to Check Out)
Part 14: Do Not Stop At Spend Analysis!

Supplier Management
Part 15: Supplier Management is a CORNED QUIP Mash
Part 16: Supplier Management A-Side
Part 17: Supplier Management B-Side
Part 18: Supplier Management C-Side
Part 19: Supplier Management D-Side
Part 20: Over 90 Supplier Management Companies to Check Out

Contract Management
Part 21: Time for Contract Management
Part 22: Contract Management is a NAG: Let’s Start with Negotiation
Part 23: Contract Management is a NAG: Let’s Continue with [Contract]Analytics
Part 24: Contract Management is a NAG: Let’s End with [Contract] Governance
Part 25: Over 80 Contract Management Vendors to Check Out

e-Sourcing
Part 26: Time for e-Sourcing
Part 27: Breaking Down the ORA of Sourcing Starting With RFX
Part 28: Breaking Down the ORA of Sourcing Continuing with e-Auctions
Part 29: Breaking Down the ORA of Sourcing Ending with [Strategic Sourcing Decision] Optimization
Part 30: Over 75 e-Sourcing Vendors to Check Out!

Invoice-to-Pay (I2P):
Part 31: Time for Invoice-to-Pay
Part 32: Breaking Down the Invoice-to-Pay Core
Part 33: Over 75 Invoice-to-Pay Companies to Check Out

Orchestration:
Part 34: How Do I Orchestrate Everything?
Part 35: Do I Intake, Manage, or Orchestrate?
Part 36: Over 20 Intake, [Procurement] [Project] Management, and/or Orchestration Companies to Check Out
Part 37: Investigating Intake By Diving In to the Details
Part 38: Prettying Up the Project with Procurement Project Management
Part 39: Deobfuscating the Orchestration and Fitting it All Together

Per Year, How Much Should You Outlay for ADVANCED Source to Pay? 250K to 500K, MAX!!!

That’s right! Continuing last week’s post, we are again putting a stake in the ground on a real, actual, number! (With similar caveats, of course, but still, a real number!)

Why? Because, at least in North America, the one question everyone asks but no one wants to answer, is,

how much for that product on the SaaS cloud
the one with the advanced software
how much for that product on the SaaS cloud
I do hope that software’s priced fair!

Most vendors, especially in the enterprise software space, want to get as much as possible (as failing to do so, especially if they are public or owned by a PE Firm with a tight timeline to enhanced profitability, gets them a “bad” rating), and, thus, obscure their (true) pricing. Their (big) analyst clients want them to get as much as possible (as they all dream of the day they get that Million-Dollar PO from a vendor in exchange for simply keeping the vendor at the top of the charts). Clients who think they got a deal don’t want you to underpay (and then have their renewal prices hiked up as the vendor seeks to maintain it’s profit margins) … and clients who think they’ve overpaid don’t want to tell you. And when some of the bigger vendors won’t even talk to you unless they think you’re good for seven (7) figures (i.e. One Million Dollars) a year or more, you might be tempted to think good (DIY) suites are out of your grasp.

However, as per our last installment, they’re not! And, if you’re smart, they can be quite affordable (especially for baseline end-to-end functionality with some advanced functionality sprinkled here and there) and lead to not just an identified, but realized, ROI in a short time frame.

But sometimes the base is not enough! What if you need advanced features such as:

  • strategic sourcing decision optimization (SSDO)
  • enhanced analytics with market intelligence (commodity pricing, GPO/anonymized community pricing), ESG data, project tracking
  • supplier development with orchestration, network management, discovery, enablement, etc.
  • CLM with analytics or enhanced authoring with augmented intelligence
  • I2P with smart OCR/Free-Form Processing and partial m-way match

These, and other advanced features, are going to pump up the price. How much? It varies. For the list above,

  • the most advanced commercial solvers, which most of the SSDO offerings are built on, charge 5K+/month for their solver to be embedded in a third party application, and that’s one of the reasons this software is not cheap (and the other is that these models require extremely skilled and experienced PhDs to build and deploy; but considering it is the only application that, when you’re ready, will consistently identify 10%+ savings on categories that have never been optimized, it can be worth it)
  • you can get the most powerful analytics solution on the market for 2K/month, but if you want market intelligence, you’re either going with a company that has a large enough install base to build that (and paying a lot more for the company to collate, anonymize, and offer that) or multiple third party market feeds; this will cost you another 3K to 5K a month (but you don’t understand your should cost without this data, and can’t identify the true opportunities in some categories without this data, so it can be worth it)
  • networks seem easy enough (all the big vendors have one), but you need a lot of suppliers, and true networks are multi-tier (meaning every supplier is a buyer in a sub-network), orchestration requires a lot of different data of a lot of different types and sometimes requires complex graph algorithms to get right, discovery isn’t easy if you need specific capabilities and not just commodity products, and enablement, well, as you can tell if you go back and review the CORNED QUIP mash of vendors, there really aren’t that many that do true enablement for the supplier
  • core semantic tech seems pretty cheap with a lot of open source models, but well tuned and well trained semantic tech on appropriate data is not (because training it on social media garbage produces the electronic equivalent of hazardous waste as output, as per a piror/upcoming article), so you’re going to pay for this, especially if you want technology finely tuned to analyzing your contracts, auto-building suggested templates appropriate for your business, guiding you on where legal focus needs to be (due to low confidence or ambiguity), etc.
  • if the invoice comes in as a PO-flip or using an EDI/XML standard, any platform can process that efficiently and cheaply; but if you’re tying to process PDFs, even if a supplier sticks to a template, that’s work; you not only have to train models, but build customized models to each invoice type; that’s a lot of manpower on the vendor’s part to build those for you (or on the vendor’s part to build tools you can use to define those templates for the software using WSIWYG low-code or no-code interfaces)

The reality is that any advanced application you need/want is going to triple to quintuple the price you’re paying for that module, depending on how advanced the functionality is, how much expertise is needed to build and maintain it, and how much the vendor itself has to pay in SaaS/license fees to third parties for advanced models/capabilities it is building off of or appropriate, reliable, human vetted data sources. What was a 2K module is now going to be 6K to 10K a month (or, if you have to augment what you have with a third party application, an additional 6K to 10K a month).

Not cheap, but when advanced technology, properly applied on the right categories / problems in the right circumstances can deliver 2X to 3X the cost reductions, it becomes very affordable. For example, let’s say you have a 100M components category in electronics and all a well-constructed RFP and analytics manages to find is a 3% cost reduction opportunity. That’s 3M, if captured, but what if there’s really a 6% opportunity through non-obvious re-allocations when logistics, tariffs, FTZs, and volume breaks are taken into account. That’s 6M, or an extra 3M. If the SSDO module cost you an extra 60K per year, even if used ONLY on that one category, that’s a 50X return! Similarly, if advanced contracted analytics with augmented intelligence allowed your legal team to dynamically build up clause libraries and templates on the fly, reducing contract preparation time by 70% on every category, that’s going to greatly increase your sourcing cycle velocity, allowing you to get through more events, and compound cost reduction opportunities. The manpower savings will likely be 10X the extra 60K a year.

And so on. The value is there, but, as per our S2P series, only if you have a need for it AND are ready for it. (That’s why we suggested implementing one module at a time, and starting with baseline capability so you can get your spend under management, get the data for a proper spend analysis, determine where the true opportunities are, determine what you need to address the true opportunities, and then upgrade to the advanced offerings of the vendor (or augment with third party modules).

But, at the end of the day, based on our knowledge of what provider offerings with best-in-class opportunities start at, average multiples over baseline, and just how much a mid-size organization will need across source to pay, we’re putting a stake in the ground that an advanced S2P offering with advanced capabilities across all 6 core modules should top out at 500K, and, in fact, we’re betting that an average organization, which will only need advanced capabilities in half the modules, should only need to pay 240K to 300K a year — or the cost of 2 FTEs, which is peanuts compared to the efficiency improvements the organization will realize and the cost reductions they will see. Even if a smaller organization (500M-ish in revenue with 250M-ish external spend that Procurement can influence) only gets 30% of their addressable spend under management (75M-ish) and only sees a reduction of 3%, that’s still 2.25M, which is 8X+ the cost, and definitely worth it!

However, all the same caveats from our last installment hold.

[01] You are a true mid-market company, which we’re defining as a company more-or-less between 500 Million and One Billion in Revenues and an addressable spend of 250 Million to 500 Million (as you can’t address payroll, government controlled utilities, mortgages/long term lease rates, etc.).

[02] You have an average sized procurement team of under 30 people. (In a 2019 Benchmark, average organizations had 33.5 Procurement personnel per 1 Billion in revenue.)

[03] You’re doing an average number of projects per year for those people (and likely maxing out at addressing 20% to 30% of the addressable spend per year).

[04] As you have (next to) nothing in terms of modern source-to-pay technology, your primary focus is the baseline capabilities (as defined in our Source-to-Pay series). You might want a few of the more advanced capabilities, but right now, getting the baseline (which will likely provide 80% of the value by allowing you to get all of your processes, and costs, under control) is the primary goal.

[05] This does not include integration costs, training costs beyond access to all of the online-training materials/virtual academy, and the implementation costs are limited to flicking the switch to activate the license and any necessary setup configuration. (Unless you are buying an advanced module, in which case the vendor will include more setup, configuration, and additional data load support.)

[06] The sales cycle is mostly virtual (web demos, video conference meetings, etc.). You won’t get to meet the sales rep in person more than once during the sales cycle (and that’s only if you’re buying a mini-suite or multi-year deal; these vendors stay affordable by keeping their costs down, and multiple on-site demos and meetings do nothing but drive up overhead and costs).

[07] Most vendors will help you with the initial data load (provided you are loading data from a supported system in a supported format), but refreshes will typically not be included in the ongoing support, which will mainly be limited to online help and workaround support for identified bugs while the bugs are being fixed.

[08] With the exception of some market intelligence from anonymized customer data or free public data sources, this will typically not include any data enrichment offerings also offered by the vendor, especially if those data enrichments are coming from third parties, but these will be pre-integrated and you will only pay the third party fee if you want to turn them on.

But what if you’re a borderline/true multi-national enterprise? Or a small company / borderline “small” mid-market? What should you pay then?

To be continued.

Get it Together! Good Data Ain’t That Hard!

A few weeks ago, the Supply Chain Management Review published a short piece on
Procurement’s Data Problem that noted recent surveys from Globality and SpendHQ had some appalling statistics, including the findings that 82% of leaders are not managing indirect spend well, 79% don’t have dedicated software to track and manage performance, and 75% doubted the accuracy of the data they present. What The Hell? It’s not 2003 anymore. It’s 2023. And this is easy stuff. Get it together people!

The data problem is easy. (At least at a basic level.)

  • Have a process that forces ALL spend through the e-Pro/AP system.
  • Make sure there are POs (Purchase Orders) for everything that’s not a recurring invoice such as a utility or lease payment, and VPOs (Virtual Purchase Orders) for these recurring invoices that define either agreed to amounts, hourly/usage rates, or expected ranges (that can then be corrected to the actual amount when the monthly bill arrives).
  • Make sure all invoices are imported into the e-Pro/AP system before any payment is made.
  • Make sure they match the PO before they are paid.
  • Make sure all payments are captured in the e-Pro/AP system.

Now you have an accurate, trustworthy, record of every single transaction from order, through approval, to payment. Now you have good spend data that you can trust. To extract insight and/or create reports, just use a good spend analysis tool. Basic, accurate, trustworthy data is easy.

Baseline Performance Management ain’t hard either.

Spend performance is just analyzing the average price per unit paid over time. If you don’t have a a performance management (sub) module, you can literally do this with a spend analysis tool where you create a report for every sourcing project you do that tracks spend over time against a baseline from which savings/cost avoidance over time can be created. Associate each with a user, a department, and a category and you can easily create performance reports by user or department or category.

Managing Indirect Spend is straight forward as well.

  1. Use your spend analysis tool to identify categories and spend level.
  2. For high spend categories, do strategic sourcing projects that are (multi-round) (hybrid) RFX and/or auctions.
  3. For low spend categories, do 3-bids-and-a-buy / approved catalog Procurements (through your e-Pro tool).

Sure, you might not realize the maximum opportunity, but this simple recipe will likely capture 90%, often without significant effort, and you go from losing 15% or more on the tail of the indirect spend and 5% to 15% on the higher volume indirect spend, to only losing a few points on the higher volume and less than five points on the tail. It’s simple. It works. It only needs an e-Pro tool and a cheap RFX/Auction tool, and there are examples of each of these tools that support mid-size enterprises with unlimited use for less than 2K a month. There’s just no excuse not to have the basic tools and not to use them. (As for spend analysis, Spendata Enterprise starts at 1,200 a month! And Anydata Solutions has mid-market pricing under 2,000/month as well! [Both require minimum commitments.])

Less than 60K solves these problems. That’s less than a fully burdened junior buyer. There’s no excuse for this situation anymore. Simply none. So get it together please.

Doubling Down on the Key Tech Selection Requirement: No Tech Should Be Forever!

Building on our recent post about The Sixth Mistake that most buyers make when buying tech, we want to double down on this concept. NO TECH SHOULD BE FOREVER!

Just like business processes evolve as businesses evolve, tech needs to evolve to meet those new process and business needs. And while the tech you select today may evolve tomorrow, and even the day after tomorrow, in a way that is appropriate for your organization, it may not be appropriate for your organization the day after the day after tomorrow. Why? The vendor could stop growing, at which point the investors decide to stop investing in R&D and just try to ride out the license and maintenance (i.e. bug fix) fees as long as possible. The business focus could shift directions in terms of product lines, services, etc. and what was the near-perfect solution may no longer be. The business could scale rapidly and need a broader / deeper enterprise solution. And so on. Time brings change, which means solutions need to change as new, or variant, problems arise.

This means that you should be selecting technology with augmentation and replacability in mind. This means that you are looking for tech that:

  • has 100% self-serve full data export capability (in case you need to get the data out)
  • has extensive self-serve configuration in terms of users, access, process flows, approval flows, terminology, templates, etc. etc. etc. (so that you can adapt it as your processes change in minor to moderate ways)
  • has a fully open API that supports
    • full data pull AND push requests
    • full programming and control of the workflow
    • full task execution capability to support augmentation and plugin
  • is accompanied by extensive documentation and education resources and partner training (in case the vendor is unable to support you with your service needs)
    This also means that you are likely looking for a vendor that:

        • is true SaaS (so you get all of their improvements as soon as they are available)
        • charges on a usage subscription with no hidden/termination/third party integration needs (so you can grow if you need to, or reallocate on a renewal)
        • allows you to start with a baseline user-base and then grow during the contract term (with prenegotiated addendums for additional modules / users)

    Moreover, when you approach solution selection with this in mind, you’re actually more likely to find the right solution as a vendor that builds a modern SaaS offering with a complete API, instant updates when new functionality is available, and offers extensive documentation and tools for partners is one that understands that the minute they stop innovating is the minute their competition will overtake them and be a more attractive offering to the market and their clients. A lack of lock-in really is a win-win for all parties. (Even if most vendors with the classic ERP mentality that a piece of software should be forever, and, thus, cost millions of dollars don’t get it.)

    In other words, you should immediately eliminate any vendor from your shortlist that doesn’t have an offering that meets these criteria. After all, as our S2P series is demonstrating, you will likely still have dozens of options that do. The only solution you’ll always need is a data store, but, as long as you use a standard database type and encoding format, you can even migrate that if you need to.

A Critical Sixth Mistake Most Tech Buyers Make — in Source-to-Pay and Beyond!

To infinity and beyond isn’t just the goal of Buzz Lightyear, it’s also an accurate description of how often tech buyers make this critical mistake. And what is this critical mistake?

Not negotiating an easy, full, self-serve, cost-free, 100% DATA OUT clause in the contract — and forcing the supplier to prove it works one third (or one half) of the way into the agreement.

Sure, buyers always ask “can we get our data out if we choose not to renew” and sure suppliers always say “of course you can get a full data dump“, but the supplier rep is always going to say yes after the developers say it’s possible (but that doesn’t mean it’s encoded in the product, and more often than not with older platforms it requires the tech team to do the data dump — which might be more difficult and take a lot longer than they expect because they are using a shared database, have data and files split across multiple databases / servers, or they can only extract data a few files / tables at a time — and it might even come at a huge cost for their time), even if it’s really not. (It’s not just whether or not the development team can extract the data, it’s whether or not they can do so in some sort of standard format that would allow you to at least load it into a standard database or file storage system.)

The most important thing to remember is that even if a solution is the perfect fit for you now, it does not mean it will be the perfect fir for you next year, and by the time renewal comes up, due to changing organizational needs, changing provider directions, or a combination of the two, it may no longer be appropriate at all. Should this happen, you need to be able to migrate to a new solution quickly and easily, and this will require being able to extract all of your data from the current platform, self-serve, in a standard format that you can then push into a new platform as soon as that new platform is identified.

The only way to ensure this is to insist on a clause in the contract along the lines of the following:

The platform will contain a self-serve feature that will allow a buyer administrator to export any and/or all data in _____-format (e.g. XML, flat-file) in accordance with standard _____ (e.g. cXML, SQL) in a format that will allow the data to be immediately loaded into _____ (e.g. SAP, mySQL) application by executing a single load control-file/script. Attachments, if not stored in the database, should be capable of being downloaded in a (multi-)part ZIP file, with names and relative directory paths matching any indexes in the database directory files. If still in development, this capability must be fully implemented before one third [or one half] of the subscription term has expired.

Furthermore, on or before YYYY-MMM-DD, the supplier will walk the buyer administrator through a test of the export process wherein the buyer will self-serve export all of the data and then load it into a test instance of the indicated backup system. Should the test fail, the supplier will be subject to a monthly subscription penalty of X% a month until the functionality is complete and the test succeeds. Should the functionality not be finished by the time two thirds [three quarters] of the subscription term has expired, the supplier will be subject to a monthly subscription penalty of 2X% a month (as the buyer will have to invest in manual effort to recreate critical data in backup systems).

Any supplier that objects to the first part of the clause is likely NOT one that you want to be considering as most modern platforms support full data import and export through APIs and are built on the principles of data sharing. Furthermore, if the platform still doesn’t support export in a standard format, but claims they are working on it, you should expect most of the capability within a year if the platform really is serious about joining the modern data sharing club (and, thus, should not balk too much at the second part of the clause if they truly are serious as it should only take a few months to figure out a good export module for even a large schema).

Depending on how much data you produce, and how much manual effort it would be to manually recreate a copy of the data you can’t extract, X=20% would not be unreasonable in our view.

Finally, note that this requirement not only protects you in the situation where the platform isn’t right for you, but also increases the chance the platform will be right for you, as a platform that supports open data integration can usually be augmented with ease if you need additional functionality in the future, but don’t necessarily need a whole new platform as the current platform still does what it was purchased to do just fine.