Category Archives: Guest Author

The next evolutionary phase of e-invoicing

Today’s guest post, which originally aired on Purchasing Insight, is courtesy of Pete Loughlin, Managing Editor at Purchasing Insight and a global expert on purchase-to-pay who could once be found on Twitter at @peteloughlin.

When it comes to electronic trading, the Latin Americans, most notably Brazil, Mexico, Argentina and Chile, put the so-called developed countries to shame in terms of their ambition. While the Europeans continue to support business processes hardly changed since they were developed by the spice merchants of Venice during the Renaissance, South American governments are building business and tax collection infrastructures that many of us would never have dreamt possible.

It’s absolutely true. Many of the business conventions that are employed in the west today are based on the methods of trade developed by Italian bankers in the 16th century. The way we trade including systems of banking and credit were all fine-tuned to meet the needs of merchants trading in the far east. And while many aspect have been modernized some of the core principles remain the same. Old habits die hard and today, despite our delusion that we are part of a digital economy, about 80% of the B2B invoices in Europe are pieces of paper.

For over 20 years, the lawmakers in Europe have grappled with the growth of e-business and it’s is only recently that the European Union has developed something which comes close to a common understanding of what an electronic invoice is. You could sympathize. It’s not possible to simple throw away centuries of convention and legislation. Starting from scratch and reinventing trading rules from 1st principles to take into account modern technology is no easy task – impossible perhaps. But that’s what the Brazilians and the Mexicans have managed to achieve. The have reinvented the business of invoicing and tax collection.

Today in Brazil, the tax authorities know about every business transaction before it happens. They know about every delivery of goods and services and the tax due. Law enforcement agencies including customs officers and police have the power and the tools to check on goods in transit to make sure that all the documentation is in order and that tax is being collected properly. Whereas in Europe and North America, electronic invoicing is about efficiency, in Latin America it’s about maximizing tax revenue.

All a bit heavy handed some might think. A level of government interference in business that is going a step too far maybe. But to those – especially those in Europe – who think that there’s no need to further police tax collection, let me say one thing. Greece.

Whereas the taxman in Latin America is proactively monitoring trade in real-time, ensuring it is calculated correctly and ensuring it’s paid, the taxman in the UK is looking retrospectively at the accounts of the likes of Google and Starbucks, scratching his head and asking “Why don’t you pay tax?”

All respect to Latin America. This is the way we’d do it if we were starting with a blank sheet of paper. But let’s take a look into the future and to some of the fastest growing economies in the world. Because that’s exactly what they have got – a clean sheet. They have virtually no physical infrastructure and even less business infrastructure. No embedded rules or conventions to hold them back. Could they build something even more sophisticated and ambitious? They can and they will.

When it comes to looking for the next evolutionary phase in e-invoicing, don’t look to the United States or Europe. Don’t even look to Brazil or Mexico. Look to Africa.

Thanks for letting SI reprint this awesome post, Pete!

Scandinavian and The Netherlands in the Creative Top Ten. Why?


Today’s guest post is from Gert van der Heijden, the Executive editor of Spendmatters.nl.

I just read the doctor‘s post on Sourcing Innovation (which I translated and posted on SpendMatters.nl) which noted that Scandinavia and The Netherlands are leading the world in creativity. The post, which referenced The Global Creativity Index, ranked 82 nations on their alignment between Technology, Talent and Tolerance to determine that Sweden was first, Finland was third, Denmark was fourth, Norway was eighth, and The Netherlands were tenth. While I have to admit that (being a Dutch bloke), as The Netherlands only came in tenth while the real Scandinavian countries were three of the top four, I shouldn’t be too proud of the Dutch, the next thought that came to my mind was the question of whether or not I believed the conclusions were right. So I looked at my field of expertise, the (small) world of sourcing and procurement and discovered these facts:

  • Science: In the Netherlands there are 6 professors in Supply Management
  • Publishing: A significant percentage of the scientific papers for the world wide IPSERA conference on Sourcing & Procurement were from individuals with a Nordic/Dutch background
  • Software: In Europe there are a lot of (e-)Sourcing Software providers, but some of the main players, like Basware and Tradeshift, come from the Nordics
  • Associations: Nevi is the third largest Professional Procurement Organization (after ISM and CIPS) in the world

Does this prove anything? I don’t think it really proves anything, but I have to admit that there should be a good reason why, for instance, our professional development is high in relatively small countries (Sweden 8.9 million, Norway 4.4 million, Finland 5.2 million and Netherlands 16.2 million), compared to surrounding countries that are much bigger (Germany 80 million, France 60 million, Spain 40 million, and UK 60 million).

I see a lot of similarity between the people in these countries in the way we approach our colleagues, our superiors and others. We like to discuss everything and our goal is to get consensus before we act. We like to do things, because we want to and not because our superiors are telling us to. The open, direct and confronting way of doing business and having meetings takes us a lot of time. This really differentiates us from the more hierarchic Germans and the more polite Brits. Therein might lie the difference. The Nordics do not think hierarchically and are more tolerant. So yes, I do believe that a lot of creativity can be found here, but I also believe we need the people in North America to get the work done, otherwise we will just keep on talking in an effort to be more creative.


Thanks, Gert.

Getting a Grip on Multi-Tier Supply Chain Risk – A Resilinc Commentary


Today’s commentary guest post is from Jon Bovit, Chief Marketing Officer of Resilinc, a provider of supply chain resiliency solutions for industries including high-tech, medical devices, and automotive manufacturers. SI recently covered Resilinc in detail in Do You Know What’s At Risk? Resilinc Does! and Will Resilinc Resonate with Your Supply Chain.

Today’s supply chains are complex, global, and highly dependent on
sub-tier suppliers. Long term sustained success of companies is hugely dependent on the resiliency of their suppliers. Despite this, most supply chain leaders are unable to readily access critical supplier information necessary in order to manage business effectively. Supply chain leaders need a solution that maps the global supply chain across multiple tiers, identifies critical supply chain dependencies, exposes critical vulnerabilities and single points of failure, manages risk mitigation across the organization, and optimizes resiliency practices throughout the organization.

Despite popular opinion to the contrary, the harsh reality is that measuring supply chain risk at the supplier, or even the location, level is inadequate for today’s global and complex supply chains. In order to properly managing supply chain risk, a company must start by mapping its global supply chain down to the individual products, parts, sites, and revenue across each of the multiple tiers. Once the multi-tier supply chain is mapped down to the product and part level, with the proper methodology, the company can calculate risk scores based on (multiple measures of) financial risk, location (economic and geopolitical) risk, and recovery risk (recovery time and BCP). By evaluating supply chain elements based on inherent financial, location and recovery risks (which align well with the risks identified in the recent World Economic Forum Global Risks report), supply chain practitioners can choose the most effective mitigation
strategies.

As an example, by utilizing the above methodology, the Resilinc platform is able to quickly identify high risk, high revenue, single sourced parts for a high-revenue producing business unit. The high risk may come from long recovery times from a specific supplier manufacturing site in Malaysia or Japan. The customer can then come up with specific risk mitigations strategies for those specific high risk, high revenue single sourced parts before a disruption occurs, which could save the company millions in losses and unmeasurable damage to its brand. If risk was measured at the supplier level, these details would have been missed completely.

Customers should not only focus on assessing and mapping risks based on their supplier global footprint and site locations, but also should capture sub-contractor and sub-tier supplier dependencies, site activities, part origin, alternate sites, recovery times, emergency
contacts, and business continuity planning (BCP) information. By focusing on identifying critical vulnerabilities and the highest risk exposures using quantitative scores and impact analysis at the product, part, and site level, leaders can direct limited budget and resources into the right areas for optimal protection against future supply chain disruptions.

Thanks, Jon!

Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation

Over on the Old St Labs blog, Mark Perara recently penned a great post on “Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation” in homage to a post by Rosabeth Moss Kanter on the HBR blogs on “Nine Rules to Stifling Innovation”. I thought Mark’s post was so awesome that I asked to share it with you, and he graciously agreed. So, without further ado, here are Mark’s Nine Rules.

1. Be suspicious of ideas that come from your suppliers – your strategy, innovation and R&D teams know your business better than anyone externally.

2. Keep suppliers really busy. Change your requirements and staff regularly so suppliers have no time to focus on innovation. Their account managers will be too busy to try and second guess what your business needs as well as not knowing who to speak to.

3. In the name of excellence, encourage cut-throat competition. If a new idea comes in from a supplier, immediately put it out to the rest of your suppliers to see if they can provide it cheaper. Even better run a RFX and auction.

4. Don’t share any information with your suppliers. Sharing product roadmaps, demand and organization charts will only encourage them to come up with ideas on how to help. Knowledge is power!

5. Sit on ideas for as long as possible. If a supplier does find the time to share some innovation, ensure not to get back to them in a timely manner. Let the idea bounce around the different areas of the business with no ownership until it fizzle’s out and the supplier stops asking for an update.

6. Ensure quarterly reviews don’t happen. Make sure the procurement team are so busy that they don’t have the time to hold their quarterly meetings with top suppliers. Having a face to face meeting with suppliers on a regular basis may provide a sign that you care about the relationship.

7. Pay late and extend payment terms. By paying late your supplier will spend hours chasing your accounts payable team trying to get payment. Even better push out payment terms as far as possible. Your FD will thank you and the supplier can bear a little bit of pain for the grace of having you as a customer.

8. Act as though punishing failure motivates success. If a suppliers idea does somehow slip through the net, ensure the employee who championed it is aware that failure will be a direct reflection on their capability. A few public hangings will soon stop future cases arising.

9. Above all, never forget your the customer and you already know everything there is to know about your business.

Following these rules will ensure suppliers will never see you as a customer of choice and will take their innovation to your competitors. That said if you work for a dynamic business that wants to develop a competitive advantage, I would suggest creating a culture to embrace and nurture supplier innovation.

For each of these supplier innovation stiflers, innovation promoters can move to the opposite behaviours. So if you want to be a customer of choice, which suppliers invest in and bring innovation to, take a look at these behaviours and allow supplier innovation to flourish:

1. Encourage ideas from suppliers as they often know your business better than some of your own team.

2. Promote your commitment to the supplier innovation programme and ask your suppliers to invest time into providing new ideas. Respect their time by giving them as much notice of changes to requirements and key members of staff, so they can spend the time on innovation.

3. Nurture ideas with suppliers and establish a culture of trust, so suppliers know you respect their IP.

4. Share as much information as you can with your top suppliers. The earlier suppliers can see your product roadmap, the sooner they can provide ideas to improve it.

5. Make sure you have a defined supplier innovation workflow and let your suppliers know how their ideas are progressing on a regular basis. Assign an internal owner to each idea ensuring there is accountability.

6. Make sure your category managers hold their quarterly reviews with strategic suppliers, to share performance reviews and discuss innovations

7. Pay your suppliers as agreed and if at all possible don’t push out payment terms. It diminishes your position as a customer of choice and adds costs to the suppliers, as they have to find alternative financing to support your improved working capital position.

8. Motivate your employees to collaborate with suppliers on new innovations. Let them know there will be some projects that will not be as successful as others, but its okay to fail. Publicize and reward innovative suppliers at annual supplier awards ceremony.

9. Embrace your suppliers as an extension of your business. Learn from their ideas and build open and trusting relationships where innovation will thrive.

Thanks again to Rosabeth for the inspiration for this post and good luck with driving supplier innovation in your business.

Thanks again Mark for sharing “Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation”.

Vinnie Mirchandani on “The Costs of Software Renewal” (Repost)

This post was originally posted there years ago today on October 22, 2009. Given that three years is a typical mid-term renewal timeframe, I think it is important to review Vinnie’s advice as renewal season is now upon us!


Today’s guest post is from Vinnie Mirchandani of Deal Architect and New Florence. New Renaissance. Vinnie, a founding member of the Enterprise Advocates, is a tireless advocate of trends and technologies that can help buyers get more for less
.

Ray Wang gives us a timely reminder that “Labor Day (US & Canadian Holiday) traditionally marks the end of summer BBQ’s, the beginning of the fall conference season, and yes, the time to begin a review of your software maintenance contacts that expire at the end of the year.”

I would say start with that — and then keep going. Take a look at all of your contracts that renew through the end of 2010.

Several good reasons to this include:

  • Establishment of a savings target on the total maintenance spend for 2010.
    Have your staff focus on every software contract, especially those that have been “auto-renewed” for years now because they were “small” and fell under attention thresholds. If you make the overall target part of a compensation plan for key IT and procurement staff, you’ll quickly find that Thar’s gold in them yellowing software contract files.
  • Multi-year maintenance deals which looked good when signed may now be overpriced.
    Current market trends are driving the cost of maintenance down, especially through third party services. Don’t assume they cannot be re-opened. (See Marc Freeman’s tips for “renegotiating with integrity” on the ISM site.)
  • If you don’t start now, you might not finish the renegotiations in time.
    Don’t overestimate the ability of your team to get organized — or underestimate the ability of the vendor team to stall — beyond the end of the year. If maintenance expires, and something goes wrong, you could be at the vendor’s mercy in renegotiations. Formally document your new process and let the vendor know next year will be different. Furthermore, be sure to allow 6 months for the renewal negotiation next year.
  • Even if you are looking to migrate, you will still need incumbent vendor support until the cut-over occurs.
    This holds true whether you are looking to migrate away from the incumbent vendor to SaaS, or to third party maintenance, or to do-it-yourself support (and readers of Deal Architect will know I am a broken record on the subject of considering all of these options). This will likely push you into 2010 planning and funding.

So, use Ray’s call for intensity over the next 3 months and build momentum for another 12 months. The payback will be huge — software maintenance continues to be one of the items on the IT menu with the most “empty calories“.

Thanks, Vinnie!