Category Archives: Market Intelligence

RIP to the Big Idea!

This post appeared in its original form almost 5 years ago on August 31, 2011 when it was titled What’s the Big Idea. Since nothing has changed, we’re knocking it up a knotch with our borrowed spice weasel.

Seriously, like your predecessor’s Procurement, it’s dead and Buried! Inquiring (not enquiring) minds are in mourning. Because, as far as any of us can tell, there aren’t any big ideas any more. As Neal Gabler said in the New York Times article on the elusive big idea, we live in a society that no longer thinks big. And that’s bad. Why? In many fields of technology, there have been no big ideas for decades. Sure, we see new and better devices every year and sure the iPad Air Mini just came out and now you can chase Pokemon in the real world with your Pokemon Go app, but, let’s face it, the iPad Air Mini is a netbook with a touchscreen. A netbook is just a miniaturized laptop, and a laptop is just a miniaturized portable computer, and portable computers have been around for over 35 years. (Yes, you read that right, over thirty years, with the first portable computer manufactured in 1979.) And touch-screens have been around almost as long (with the first commercial touchscreen computer released back in 1983). Apple just took the technology to the next generation, while making sure it was easier to use than all of its competitors products. And as for virtual Pokemon tracking, let us remind you geo-location technology has been around for civilian use since the 1980s.

The cloud? Well, I hate to burst your bubble (actually, not true, I love to burst that bubble), but the cloud is just a return to the fundamental concept of mainframe computing with dumb terminals — one big shared computer that services a whole bunch of users who are remote and don’t want, or need, to know how the big computer works. Except this time the big computer is a whole bunch of smaller computers networked together and, since the network is very big (and, in fact, global), the computers can reside anywhere. I could go on, but, even in computing theory, almost everything traces back twenty to thirty five years (or more).

I’m almost ready to agree with the author of a recent Forbes opinion article on the New York Times article that asked why did big ideas die when he said that we live in a post-idea society where people don’t think at all. With exceptions fewer and further between by the day, most people don’t think [deep] anymore.

Why is this? As Gabler says, we are living in an increasingly post-idea world — a world in which big, thought-provoking ideas that can’t instantly be monetized are of so little intrinsic value that fewer people are generating them and fewer outlets are disseminating them.

Who’s to blame? Gabler blames the usual suspects — the web, Twitter, and everything else that, instead of facilitating a lively intellectual life, instead drowns us in information. And while some of these suspects, like Twitter, are indeed a problem, the reality is that they are a symptom and not the root cause. (Even though it was demonstrated back in 2010 that excessive use of Twitter and similar real-time communication platforms makes you dumber than a Pothead.)

The problem lies with Wall Street and VCs. They’ve convinced the business world that nothing matters beyond the current quarter and any idea that can’t be brought to market overnight isn’t worth it. We did not come further in the last 100 years than in all of human history by only focussing on products that could get to market quickly. (We have to remember that the first cross-Atlantic transmission did not occur until 1902. This transmission, and all major computational and communication advances since, did not happen in a quarter. Most of the advancements took years of research and decades to perfect.) If you’re trying to change a market — to go from a Model-T to a Jaguar — that takes years, but VCs won’t support anything that can’t be done in more than a few months. As a result all we get are small incremental improvements, with significantly diminishing returns as time goes on, as no one is investing to take the big leap forward.

And, despite claims to the contrary, we haven’t really reinvented the organization (as telecommuting and outsourcing have been common for at least a couple of decades), education, health care, or ownership. We’ve simply redefined management and, in some cases, who foots the bill. I’d like to see some fundamentally new big ideas, but unless someone from a parallel universe where they invented time travel finds away to break into this one and give me a time travel machine to go back in time, I may not live to see that day.

DirectWorks: SaaSifying Co-exprise

Co-exprise was founded back in 2004 with a goal of building a new-type of direct sourcing solution not yet available in the North American marketplace. The goal was to integrate the new sourcing tools of the day — namely RFx, auctions, project management, collaboration, product information management [PIM], dashboards — with bill of materials, supplier engagement and management, and workflow management — capabilities not found in standard sourcing tools but desperately needed by manufacturers to handle their direct sourcing needs. In fact, it was so revolutionary that the doctor described it in 2007 as the first solution on the [North American] market to make a serious, honest, effort to address the complex direct sourcing problems that other systems cannot handle because these types of problems are unique and require a distinct solution.

The Co-exprise platform was relatively unique in its day in that it was built on a number of basic building blocks, including workflow management, business process rules, collaboration technologies, a centralized repository, project management, cBOMs (collaborative Bills of Material), cost models, and analytics, that were inherent to, and invasive across, the platform. This meant that all of the technologies were integrated into one collaborative workflow where all of the common data required by a direct sourcing professional was always accessible and analyzable. But, fast forward a few years, the platform had one failing — and that was that it wasn’t designed to be multi-tenant SaaS from the ground up.

Why? Back in the early 2000s, fast internet wasn’t pervasive, third party data center and application management was expensive and, most important, manufacturers wanted to keep their proprietary data in-house and valued deep security over remote manageability. But now that cost is paramount (and SaaS is always cheaper than in-house for non-IT enterprises), the cloud is accepted, and multi-tenant SaaS managed by professionals is often more secure than the corporate intranet, the playing field has changed and modern manufacturers want a SaaS platform.

So, shortly after a regime change, Co-express decided that it needed to go true multi-tenant SaaS, and that it would re-build from the ground up … as DirectWorks. Doing this would allow them to take advantage of new web development capabilities, such as better UI and distributed processing, that might not be doable if they just tried to do a straight port. So was this the right thing to do?

Yes and No. The new platform has a very easy to use and clean UI. Is extremely simple for the mid-size manufacturers that still use a traditional BoM sourcing approach that it was designed for. It allows manufacturers to organize items into products and products into programs so that sourcing and management can be done at the appropriate level. It still has good RFQ capabilities and a supplier repository. And a graphical dashboard with reporting capability.

But it still doesn’t have many of the features in the original Co-exprise product. There are no auctions. They may not be common, but sometimes it’s the fastest way to source commodity raw materials and items at market prices. Co-exprise had a fair amount of configurability and a workflow manager with some capabilities to customize the application to the buying organization, and the new SaaS product doesn’t really have either yet. The BoM structure and sourcing process is very inflexible, and there are no hints of true SRM.

However, while the indirect sourcing platform space is quite large, the direct sourcing space is quite small. The only players are DirectWorks, Pool4Tool, and SupplyOn — the last of which is mainly oriented around electronic interfaces and document exchange (but which also includes proposal, auction, and contract management capability). And while Pool4Tool, which used to lag in usability and integration among its modules, has now caught up and surpassed DirectWorks, Directworks has managed to port over half of the capabilities they built over ten years in two years, so it’s conceivable in two more they could be back to their glory days and a major fighting force on the market. Time will tell. And SI will be watching.

For a much deeper dive into the new DirectWorks, watch out for the upcoming Pro series by the doctor, the prophet, and the maverick over on Spend Matters Pro!

Procurement Sustentation 73: Individual Consumers

As we said in our damnation post, of course individual consumers are a consumer damnation. They are the consumer damnation. From your point of view, corporations (which will soon rule the world) are bad, governments are worse, but individual consumers take the cake, especially considering most of them bring their views to corporate and government purchases. And you are left trying to deal with the inanity and the insanity. When dealing with consumers, damnations are plenty.

Why are they so damn damning?

  • Consumers are fickle.
  • Consumers are demanding.
  • Consumers are impatient.
  • And some are outright vindictive!

So what do you do?

1. Insist on Third Party Marketing Research jointly overseen by Procurement.

Do you really need feature X or function Y? Does it really have to be blue? Does the schedule really have to be moved ahead 3 months at the cost of quality and reliability? Make sure all demands come out of a well designed survey that truly captures, objectively, consumers’ true desires. And make sure you understand what they are willing to pay, when, and why. Don’t let marketing force their assumptions on you at the expense of quality, reliability, and safety.

2. Make sure you clarify the value delivered, and the trade-offs associated with altering that value.

Make sure marketing understands what they can promote, Sales what they can sell, and all departments understand what the value is — and how that value will be altered if specifications are changed. Make sure Sales and Marketing understands how costs change, quality changes, and value delivered change if anything changes so that changes are not promised, and then mandated on high too late into the NPD process to allow the organization to keep costs low and value high.

3. Make sure all products are worth the weight.

If you can demonstrate that the value delivered will be more than your competitors, whether with new features, better (streamlined) functionality, or a lower cost for a higher quality products, then most consumers will be willing to wait.

4. Demonstrate a responsible supply chain.

You’re going to get sued, even if you did nothing wrong. So make good and damn sure you took every precaution to do everything right.

5. Implement a truly hassle-free return and replacement process.

You can minimize complaints and associated costs by making it easy for unhappy consumers, regardless of the reason, to get a replacement or a refund as fast as possible.

In other words, by making sure decisions are objective, and planning is done ahead, you can minimize the damnation that is going to come your way.

State of Flux: The Flux Capacitor is being designed for the Future … of SRM!

State of Flux is a provider of Supplier Relationship Management (SRM) software and services that was founded in London (England) in 2004 to focus on an overlooked area of supply management, supplier relationship management. When it was founded back in 2004, most companies were just starting to offer supplier information management (SIM) solutions, which were a pre-cursor to the KPI / scorecard-based supplier performance management (SPM) solutions that followed. Only a few companies had SRM in their mind’s eyes, and State of Flux was one. What started as a very simple system for supplier information, performance, and supplier (corrective) action planning and development has grown into a full fledged supplier relationship management solution that encapsulates supplier information management, performance management, risk management, governance and relationship management, CSR (corporate social responsibility), contract, and innovation management.

In addition to their SRM services, focussed around consulting and executive staffing/managed services, and software (which was branded Statess), they have also been producing the Global SRM research report (which was covered in State of Flux has the Treatment for your SRM Ailments Part I: The Need and Part IV: The Business of Supplier Relationships) for the last seven years which provides very deep insights into the state of supplier relationship management and what the top performers do. (Last year’s report was focussed on the customer of choice, and companies that are their suppliers’ customer of choice get [significantly] more value than their peers and this year’s report will be focussed on technology, and the value it can provide, and the annual survey will be out soon.)

As we have covered the platform fairly extensively in the past (in Statess Part I, Part II, and Part III and State of Flux Part I and Part II), this post will simply focus on major improvements since the last series.

In our last series, we discussed the developments in progress, namely:

  • Prospective Suppliers
  • Contract Management Enhancements
  • KPI Templates and Drillable Scorecards

Since then, State of Flux has completed these enhancements.

  • The prospective supplier module is based on questionnaires with dynamic workflows that ensure a supplier only provides the information that is required, and cannot participate in open challenges until all necessary information has been provided.
  • Contract data and meta-data definition is now highly granular, and the version comparison feature allows a buyer to quickly identify any changes between versions.
  • The KPI templates have been completed and augmented with a wizard that makes it really easy to replicate KPIs across suppliers and organizational units, and make the minor tweaks and modifications (to the weightings, data fields, etc.) that are necessary to have the most accurate and meaningful supply possible.

In addition to this functionality, State of Flux has also added:

  • Single Sign On: that integrates with the organization’s native LDAP (or other single-sign on mechanism) to allow a user to sign-in with an existing account
  • Deep CreditSafe Integration: that integrates all of the credit safe financial and risk data across the application (including the risk and performance modules) with quick access to a supplier rating from the supplier screens
  • Automatic Risk (Severity) Calculation: that automatically computes the severity (and RAG — red, amber, green — status) of a risk as soon as the probability and potential impact of a risk are defined
  • Excel Export which enables every piece of data in the application to be exported to well-formatted Excel spreadsheets and workbooks (for import into other systems and analysis/reporting tools)

The system gets better each year, and when you combine it’s end to end completeness with the fact that there are only a handful of providers focussing on best-practice SRM, State of Flux is definitely a provider to consider. For a deeper dive on State of Flux and their platform, watch out for the upcoming Spend Matters Pro piece (membership required) co-authored by the doctor and the prophet that will take a deep dive into the platform, it’s strengths, and its opportunities for improvement.

Analytics8 SpendView: An Affordable New Mid-Market Spend Analysis Solution

While the analytics marketplace, like the e-Sourcing marketplace, might be well established with most Procurement organizations able to name half a dozen likely providers off the top of their heads and most analyst firms able to name two dozen, the fact remains that less than half of Procurement organizations use real analytics and only the leaders go beyond basic spend reporting to index tracking, what-if savings estimates, or predictive trending.

There are numerous reasons for this lack of adoption, but a big reason was that early analytics solutions often came with a hefty six figure price tag. And that was just for the initial project. Then there were quarterly data warehouse refresh fees, report update fees, maintenance fees, and consulting fees to help interpret the patterns and identify the biggest opportunities. Many early adopters ending up paying seven figures annually, often for a limited return. Why? Because by the time the warehouse was refreshed, the reports run, the analytics done, and the spend opportunities identified, the business demand changed, the market dynamics changed, the prices changed, and the analysis was of limited relevance.

However, as newer solutions, like Spend Radar and BIQ came on the scene, spend analytics became much more affordable, and useable, as analysts could refresh data on monthly, weekly, and daily basis and obtain the solution in the five figure range. Plus, they had a fair amount of control over what data was loaded, what cubes were built, and what reports were available — with the ability to generate their own cubes and reports, sometimes on the fly with solutions like BIQ. Analytics stated to take off. And so did the e-Sourcing suite providers that gobbled them up. As a result, there are now few analytics solutions that are affordable by the mid-market and fewer still targetted there.

This is where Analytics8 SpendView comes in, built on over a decade of big data analytics experience and over 15 years of spend analytics experience by the solution designers, SpendView is a new analytics offering designed to bring modern easy-to-use spend analysis capability to any organization with over 10M in annual spend at a price tag it can afford, but good enough to satisfy even large multi-nationals with unique needs. What kind of price tag? A price tag that starts in the low five figures for a perpetual license (with low annual maintenance fees). (This is a price tag that can allow an average mid-market organization to obtain at least a 10X ROI every year.)

The new Analytics8 SpendView suite is a set of 4 integrated modules that allows an analyst to family and normalize suppliers, identify preferred and manage suppliers, categorize spend, and create and drill into spend reports. The vendor normalization module allows the analyst reviews all supplier records and maps all duplicates to one master record. It’s got a very simple interface, search, filter, select, and associate with a single click. The supplier assignment allows the analyst can select all unmanaged or un-preferred vendors, choose whether or not to manage or prefer them, assign suppliers to parents, and quickly see what percentage of spend is with preferred and/or managed suppliers. The categorization module allows the analyst to categorize transactions to categories by defining rules. The interface, currently supplier or description driven (but which should also be department and / or GL-code driven), allows a user to drill into uncategorized transactions, filter for similarity, and define rules that map groups of transactions to categorized spend. The rule is added in numeric order, but can be re-ordered as needed. And the reporting module ontains a set of canned widget-based drill down reports that allow an analyst to drill down into spend data, by supplier, department, category, geography, or other attribute and extract a report on the data, and only the data, they want to see it — which could be invoice data, payment data, or purchase order data. It’s built on QlikView and has the full capabilities thereof.

It’s power and usefulness to the average organization is more-or-less on par with its more established primary competitors — which SI sees as Rosslyn Analytics, Sievo, Spend 360, and SpendHQ (especially since BIQ and Spend Radar, named above, were among the acquisitions of the previous generation of best-of-breed stand alone analytics providers) — and it is a quick entry into spend analytics for any enterprise already using QlikView for other analytics needs.

SI recommends you check out the deep dive on Analytics8 SpendView by the doctor and the prophet over on Spend Matters Pro [membership required] that goes deep into strengths and weaknesses, corporate SWOT analysis, and the market landscape. (Part I, Part II and Part III now available) You won’t be disappointed.