Category Archives: Event

We Need Better Events!

This will probably get me blacklisted by half the events in the space, but I don’t care … especially since I have no interest in going to half the events in our space anyway. (Now, are both sets the same? Probably Not. Am I blacklisting myself from events that might be worthwhile? Probably. Do I care? Well, if you’ve been reading the doctor‘s rants for eighteen (18) years, you know the answer … it’s getting to the truth that matters!)

This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while, but a recent article by Gaurav Sharma on how his buyer’s mindset is bugging him on a point, along with recent conversations on LinkedIn, have convinced me it’s time to write it.

Most of today’s big events are a complete waste of time and money for practitioners and vendors alike! And I’m dead serious.

Why?

Vendor: You’re paying 50K to 100K for that event. When you consider the cost of the booth display materials (5K to 10K); the booth, equipment and services rental (30K+); giveaways and fancy dinners (5K to 10K+); getting and housing a small team there (20K to 40K); etc., it’s a lot of money. And for what? A chance to hock your wares to a small (less than 50%) set of attendees who are also being shouted out by 50 to 100 other vendors? At least half of whom have no decision or spending authority at the end of the day? Besides the ability to say for three (3) days: “look at us, we made it“?, what do you get? Maybe a handful of leads if you’re lucky? With each of those leads costing you 10K+. And nothing if you aren’t so lucky!

For each 10K you spend, you could have an expert write a piece of content that could be part of a year-long educational campaign that could be used to generate real leads through sign-up downloads, webinar sign-ups, follow-up conversations and downloads (when someone contacts you to learn more, and thanks you for educating them vs. just shouting marketing soundbites at them), etc. For the 80K you would spend on a glitzy event, you could get 4 custom pieces of content, 4 webinars, and a year-long educationally oriented marketing campaign that you’d be thanked for.

Practitioner Organization: It will cost you 7.5K to 10K for each senior lead, director, and CPO you send to a 3-day event. You’re probably budgeting 25K to 30K to send a small team. And what are you getting for it? A bunch of high-level presentations on various topics by a bunch of people you don’t know, usually not much different than the presentations you saw two years ago on the same topics by different people you don’t know, which aren’t deep enough to teach you anything (except re-emphasize important areas you need to drill down deep on).

A bunch of discussions with random vendors, many of whom won’t be relevant to you, while you completely miss the chance to talk to those vendors who would be because there was no way you could get to them all and without good pre-vetting and education, you were just rolling the bones and engaging randomly (or, if you were hungry, with whatever vendor rep offered you the most tantalizing dinner option).

For that same 25K, you could have an expert from a niche mid-sized consultancy come in and give your team a 1 to 2-day course on a specific problem or area of relevance — i.e. what do modern e-Procurement systems do, how do you select the right one, and who are five vendors that are commonly used by your peers; what regulatory changes are coming in global e-Invoicing requirements over the next two years, and what will we have to do to keep up; how can we address carbon accounting reporting requirements while embedding better carbon management into our supplier development and supply change management; etc. And let me repeat — your whole team, not just 3 people where 2 of them are responsible for multiple areas (or everything) and have no time to train anyone else or oversee the process, program, or technology that needs to be put in place.

The only people who get their money’s worth at these events are:

1. Consultants who don’t sponsor, don’t stay at the overpriced event hotel, but just go and spend their entire time talking to vendors they don’t know (to engage with them firsthand on fact-finding and relationship building) and Directors/CPOs (to find out what the common themes are that they should market too) and come away with verified/renewed focus and new options to sell to their clients.

2. The Organizers who get the fame and the fortune (as they collect a cut of all money coming in).

But does this mean all events are, or have to be, bad?

No. An event would be very worthwhile if:

  • it didn’t try to be everything to everyone (and ended up being nothing to anyone),
  • instead focussed on a market niche (market size – geography – problem or process), and
  • kept the size down, the balance appropriate, and the value up.

Let’s dive into this.

Focus

For an event to be truly valuable, it has to address a relevant problem or technology for a (similar) group of organizations which have a similar problem or need. By this, I typically mean market size (small to mid-market, mid-market and above, large mid-market through global enterprise), region(s) with similar market dynamics (North America and Western Europe, Central and South America, India, China, etc.), and a focus on a technology (Procure to Pay, e-Procurement, I2P/AP, Supplier Management, Direct Sourcing, etc.) or problem (Carbon Regulation and Accounting, Data Management and Predictive Analytics, etc.). This allows organizations to self select as being interested, or needing insight, in this problem or technology, vendors with appropriate technology to come forward (and be vetted by the event organizers as relevant), and the event to ensure value will be received by all attendees — practitioners will get relevant talks and panels (as all the sessions will be appropriately oriented) as well as a chance to learn about solution providers who provide solutions relevant to their peers (and possibly them) and vendors will know that the practitioners are actually interested in the type of technology they are offering, and leads will be real (and more plentiful).

Balance

There should be considerably more practitioners than vendor reps. At least 2 to 1, and preferably 3 to 1. The event organizer can limit vendor registrations based on attendees, as well as the number of reps a vendor can send. This helps the vendors (by ensuring there are more than enough practitioners to go around, which means they will spend more time talking to practitioners than each other) as well as the practitioners (by not only ensuring they aren’t overloaded by irrelevant vendors but by ensuring they have a lot of peers to talk to for insights as well).

Size

A good event is big enough to ensure there is enough variety in vendors and in peers to talk to, but not so big you get lost in a sea of people. In the doctor‘s view, it’s 50 to 500-ish, depending on whether:

  • you’re narrowly focused on one specific (emerging) problem and want to only talk to senior peers: in which case you’re looking for a round table event, 50-ish senior practitioners, 3 to 5 vendors with 2 reps each, and a single large meeting room at a hotel
  • you’re focused on acquiring or upgrading a best-of-breed module to solve a small set of problems such as data analytics, supplier management, or strategic sourcing: then you will want 200 to 300 people, 5 to 10 vendors with 2-3 reps each, a lot of common sessions, and a few breakout sessions on particular problem types or advanced solution features (predictive demand modelling, sourcing optimization, supplier development program implementation, etc.)
  • you’re interested in upgrading your sourcing or procurement capability across the board and/or learning about the current advancements, best practices, and issues in the space in which case you’d want a slightly larger event focused on your market size and geography, with maybe two to three dozen vendors with 3-4 reps each, 500+ (but < 1000) participants, and multiple tracks … still capable of being held at a large, but affordable, hotel

And since all of these events are smaller, it shouldn’t cost an attendee more than 5K in the worst case for 3 days of valuable information and vendor discovery or a vendor more than 20K for a low-cost booth and valuable leads (+ rep costs). And while this is still a sizeable amount of coin for a smaller procurement organization to send 3 people or a vendor to have a both and send 3 reps, it’s still less than half the cost of a bigger event for both parties for considerably more value.

This was the direction I’d hope a certain new event organizer would take when it started a few years ago as a smaller event focused on smaller players and newer tech, and the direction I’m hoping the next new event org will take. Not one big event that tries to be everything to everyone and instead ends up being just a sea of noise, but a series of smaller events across the Americas and Europe that are focused, give more affordable opportunities to more smaller, relevant players, and much more value to the attendees.

Will it happen? History has repeatedly shown it won’t, but if it ever does, the value will be unparalleled to all the attendees.

 

For those curious, the doctor‘s original response to Gaurav on “better events” was the following:

Instead of oversized, overpriced, events pretending to be everything to everyone we need smaller, more focused events that focus on particular problems or technologies for particular markets for (dedicated) Senior Leads, Directors and CPOs only.

T: Sourcing for the Mid-Market in North America and Western Europe
(Primarily EN business, similar processes)
T: e-Procurement for Mid-Market and Large Enterprise in Central and South America
(lots of e-Invoicing Regs, all Spanish or Portuguese)
T: Supply Chain Logistics for India and China
(where we’re still buying everything from)
P: Carbon Management for the modern LMM or Large enterprise in the Americas or Europe
(relevant supply management, carbon accounting, etc. tech for enterprises facing regulations)
P: Procurement Maturity for the growing Mid-Market
(focusing on maturity models, emerging best practices, and new category / knowledge management tech)

Then, when a CPO spends her 5K to go and discuss, she’s focused on a relevant topic, learning something, and seeing demos from vendors with appropriately focused solutions on one or more aspects of the problem (vetted by the organizer). Everything is relevant. For 10K, she can take the lead or director who will be charged with the program and system implementation. Money well spent.

And if she’s in a larger organization, she can take that 10K she saved and invest it in a startup fund, which could also be present at the event, that is collecting funds to seed various startups in S2P+ disciplines and direct that the money be invested in a startup focused on tech to solve her biggest problem. (And this foreshadows an upcoming article.)

A New Year of Procurement Events Is Almost Upon Us. Time to Get Ready for the Next Round of …

Bullshit. (Cafe Press wants to sell you a cap. We have no affiliation, but we like their caps.)

SI has already logged over 50 Sourcing and Procurement events for 2020, and it hasn’t even tried to list them all! There is not that much new stuff to talk about every year (and, to be honest, it would be difficult in some years to fill just one 3-4 day event with all new material), so you know what that means. Either:

  1. Replay the skipping record. (The Bird is the Word, after all!)
  2. Resuscitate some long dead hype (which is probably a reality after a decade or two, but old news just the same).
  3. Talk about some “future” development that is so far off in the future that it’s totally useless to anyone who is attending the event.

In particular, get ready for a year of:

  • Community Themes: we know community intelligence is incredibly useful across S2P (market price intelligence, supplier performance, best practices, group buying, etc. etc. etc.), but we need more practical implementations today
  • Automation: after all, two decades old technology will likely get confused with AI if there are enough embedded rules, right?
  • Procurement 4.0: we only started the 3.0 journey about 3 years ago with the appearance of the first S2P suites … it will likely be at least 5 more years before we see the full realization of Procurement 3.0, and before anything appears with the first hints of 4.0 functionality (and there’s no way your C-Suite is waiting 5 years for a return on investment)

And now you know why the doctor doesn’t go to many events. As for you, the best events are, to be honest, typically vendor events that have multiple streams with educational material (from peers) appropriate to where you are in your Sourcing and Procurement Journey. There will be one or two decent events each year where a lot of the content will be relevant, new content, based on where we are now, but a lot will be the same old same old. So choose your events with care, unless you like the broken record (and still think The Bird is the Word!)

What is the Future of the Procurement Function? (Webinar)

In the beginning, there really wasn’t much of a Procurement function. When someone needed something, they either went to the local buyer (who was either the office manager or the designated purchaser) or the local boss and got permission to buy it themselves if it was small. Assuming it was large enough, then it would go through the buyer who than bought either from a catalog, a local vendor, or a contracted supplier for products he or she couldn’t get locally.

Volume leverage was small, time was short, and deals weren’t that great. It was typically the lowest price from some semblance of 3-bids and a buy. And any deal found by one location typically wasn’t shared with another.

As organizations grew and began to realize these inefficiencies, they decided to centralize the purchasing function to achieve volume leverage and better deals, at least for common categories, and in turn decrease the manpower needed for common buys. This also allowed best practices to be created and shared and archived in a knowledge center, but the centralization came with its own problems. Uncommon or unique categories to one or two locations were often sourced with worse results (as the centralized buyers couldn’t exploit volume and didn’t know the local market), local knowledge was lost, and manpower wasn’t reduced that much as inventory managers and designated “buyers” still needed to be at each location to order off of the master contracts and manage inventory.

So, these organizations moved to a center led model. Common, strategic, and/or high dollar categories were centralized, but uncommon, non-strategic, and/or low dollar were managed in a distributed fashion. This, presumably, would achieve the best of the decentalized and centralized procurement worlds with no disadvantages. Right? Wrong.

As center-led organizations matured, a number of cracks in the shiny new armor appeared. This model, like every model before, had its own disadvantages which leaders are now grappling with.

Another evolution is needed. What is that evolution?

A Virtual Procurement Center of Excellence.

What does that look like?

Join THIS THURSDAY’s free webinar (registration required), sponsored by Pool4Tool and featuring the doctor, and find out.

Procurement-as-a-Service: High Priority or HYPE HYPE HYPE!

Next month, the public defender will be hosting a webinar on the evolution of procurement: alignment, flexibility, and Procurement-as-a-Service where he will be discussing whether Procurement-as-a-Service (PaaS) is high priority for your Procurement organization or just hype. Guess which way SI is leaning?

First of all, let’s define what Procurement-as-a-Service (really) is. Procurement-as-a-Service is the new name for the service you get from a Managed Services Provider that combines technology, personnel, and expertise to take over part, or even all, of your Procurement operations in a transparent and effective way. They use technology to identify what you are spending on, what you need, and where savings likely are; choose categories for sourcing and assign category experts; modern technology to do the sourcing and procurement; and track the purchases and payments and do m-way matching to make sure you only pay for what you get and that you get what you are supposed to when you are supposed to. They also make the process visible through, at a minimum, a reporting and progress portal, and may even give you some access to the analytics and procurement tool to run your own reports, record inventory, and upload payments.

Second, let’s break it down.

1. Technology

Nothing new here. Given that MSPs are typically using someone else’s tech, there’s nothing new here. In fact, they’re probably using inferior tech as they are looking for something that works best at managing multiple client procurement portfolios and not at conducting that best sourcing event, bringing the best analytics or optimization solution to the table.

2. People

Note that we are using people here, not talent. MSPs have people. A lot of people. Because they have to fill a lot of seats, but not all are talented, or at least not talented with respect to your business. And this is key. Talent is appropriately educated, experienced, and relevant to your business. This brings us to:

3. Expertise

While there will likely be a number of people at the MSP with expertise in your categories, this number could be a dozen or two among thousands. And you won’t likely get them working your account, nor are you guaranteed to even get the results you would get from a GPO (Group Purchasing Organization).

Third, let’s analyze what we broke down. No guarantee of even best of breed technology. No guarantee of the right talent for your organization (based on your categories or industry). And no guarantee of the right expertise, or sufficient expertise to go around.

So what is PaaS? In SI’s view it’s a quick-fix band-aid for those organizations without enough tech, talent, or transition management capability to handle its own Procurement operations. But for any organization with any capability to acquire and manage even basic tech, attract talent, and acquire and employ expertise, what does a PaaS provider offer, especially when there are GPOs, niche consultancies, and SaaS solutions that have been offering the same, if not more, for quite some time now? The answer: so far, nothin’.

So, in SI’s view, it’s hype, hype, hype. But it will be interesting to see what the public defender has to say when he goes head to head with Comensura‘s Jon Milton on March 7, 11:00 EST, 16:00 GMT.

The Key to e-Sourcing Success (Free Webinar)

e-Sourcing has been touted as the key to Sourcing and Procurement success and savings for almost two decades, with many providers promising double digit ROIs from their platform. While it is possible for any organization to reach this level of savings with a good e-Sourcing process and platform, the reality is that only a fraction do. But why? Especially when this should be a mature technology, when over a dozen players seem to have all of the same foundation technology, and when the process is well known?

The answer: the platforms are bought, but not used. A little overlooked statistic is that even though close to half of modern Sourcing and Procurement organizations have some form of a modern platform, the average utilization of the platform is typically 25%. In other words, only 1 in 4 people are using it or only 1 in 4 events are being put through it. If the promised ROI depends on 90% utilization but the utilization is less than a third of that, of course the ROI will never materialize.

So why aren’t platforms adopted? It’s proven that they can deliver the savings, so they are effective. Their online nature means that you don’t need fax and e-mail, so there is some efficiency. So what’s the problem? Just because a platform checks the functional boxes, it doesn’t mean it meets the organizational need. And if a platform doesn’t meet the need, it will be avoided, not adopted.

The key to e-Sourcing success is platform adoption, which means that the most important characteristic in platform selection is adoptability — which is often the least evaluated characteristic when organizations are comparing feature function check lists, estimated ROI, value-add, etc. And the key to adoption is adoptability. What makes a platform adoptable? That’s what this webinar will focus on … because the reality is that even a mediocre platform that is adopted 100% will deliver a 3X return over a best of breed platform that is adopted 25%. So imagine the return your organization could see if it replaced its unused e-Sourcing with an adoptable best of breed platform. Curious? Join us next Tuesday, February 7, 2016 @ 10:30 Pacific, 12:30 Central, 13:30 Eastern, 18:30 GMT for our webinar on The Key to e-Sourcing Success.