Category Archives: Market Intelligence

Good Data Will Not Guarantee Good Decisions … But Informed Skeptics Increase the Odds

In our last post, we noted how great it was to see this recent article in the Harvard Business Review on how Good Data Won’t Guarantee Good Decisions because investments in analytics can be useless, even harmful, unless employees can incorporate that data into complex decision making and only 38% of employees and 50% of senior managers, on average, are equipped to make good decisions given good data. As pointed out by the authors, there are too many “unquestioning empiricists” and “visceral decision makers” and not enough “informed skeptics” who can effectively balance judgment and analysis with strong analytic skills and a willingness to listen to others’ opinions, but dissent if necessary.

As a result, organizations need to do whatever they can to increase the number of informed skeptics within their four walls. So what can they do? According to the authors, they can:

  • Train workers to increase data literacy
    and more efficiently incorporate information into decision making so they can make better decisions and
  • Give the workers the right tools
    to turn the data into information.

With respect to training, the authors recommend workshops and coaching. Workshops can teach them that they must understand the factors and calculations behind the numbers and learn to think critically about the accuracy, sample sizes, biases, and quality of their data. Even people who took statistics in college could probably use a refresher to help them apply what they learned then to their current jobs … especially since most people, analysts included, don’t understand statistics. (Remember that there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.) Coaching by people-oriented data experts can provide informal, ongoing training to employees that can gradually improve their skills. Given that surveys indicate that only 25% of all knowledge workers receive effective training in information analysis and use, this is a good start.

With respect to tools, there is a vital need to interpret data displays in a manner that allows them to deduce the information the data contains. Just because most executives choose to go with good-enough data now vs. perfect data later doesn’t mean it’s the right thing, not because perfect data is always a useful goal (as sometimes good enough is good enough), but because, without the right tools and understanding, it’s not always clear if good enough is good enough.

But is this enough?

No.

Three factors are always required for success: technology (tools), talent (training), and transition (change management of the process). Overlooking how the training is to be applied, the technology is to be used, how the results are going to be interpreted, and how the change from dumb data to intelligent information is going to be implemented so that it sticks, the training takes hold, the technology gets used, and the results get repeated is very important. Otherwise, a few moderate wins will be made, but as pressure mounts to get things done, the talent will revert to the old ways and the tools and training will be for nought.

Good Data Will Not Guarantee Good Decisions

It was great to see this recent article in the Harvard Business Review on how “Good Data Won’t Guarantee Good Decisions” now that we are in the age of “Big Data” (which, in business, is Bullshit in Guise) and everyone is diving into their OLAP and reporting tools without even a clue as to what they are (or should be) looking for. There’s data. There’s information. There’s knowledge. There’s the intelligence required to understand it. And then there’s the wisdom to choose the right course of action.

As the authors state, investments in analytics can be useless, even harmful, unless employees can incorporate that data into complex decision making.

In the article, the authors summarized the result of a study by the Corporate Executive Board that evaluated 5,000 employees at 22 global companies. The study separated the employees into three groups:

  • Unquestioning Empiricists
    who trust analysis over judgment
  • Visceral Decision Makers
    that go exclusively with their gut and
  • Informed Skeptics
    who effectively balance judgment and analysis with their strong analytic skills and willingness to listen to others’ opinions but dissent.

Only the latter group are equipped to make good decisions, and, not unexpectedly, only 38% of employees and 50% of senior managers fall into this group.

And when you consider that their analysis also found that the functions where the employees had the highest average scores performed 24% better than other functions across a wide range of metrics (including effectiveness, productivity, employee engagement, and market-share growth), this is not a good thing.

Why is this the case? The researchers identified the following four problems that prevent organizations from realizing better returns on their data investment:

  • analytic skills are concentrated in too few employees
    just because you have a few experts doesn’t mean that the analytics skills will trickle down
  • IT spends too much time on “T” and not enough on “I”
    IT is used to working with functions where business needs are clearly defined, stable, and relatively consistent … when the needs become less defined, IT becomes less able to support them
  • reliable information is hard to locate
    many organizations lack a coherent, accessible structure for the data they’ve collected; the authors found in their survey that fewer than 44% of employees say they know where to find the information they need for their day-to-day work
  • business executives don’t manage information well
    (at least when compared to capital and brand) — they focus on more physical or traditional assets

While not addressed, and possibly not covered, by the study, I’d also add the following to the list:

  • No Good Roadmaps Exist
    Analytics skills are not enough — a guide on how to find the needle in the haystack is also required; take Spend Analysis for example … how many practical guides exist? (At least one.)
  • Lack of EQ
    as an employee needs to not only understand where to look, but when something is worthwhile to chase and when it’s not as there is a need to understand the business impact of what the data might be suggesting which requires understanding the business needs as well as the data

So what can an organization do to get more informed skeptics?

Avoiding the 88 Million Dollar Fine

In our last post, we pointed out how the likelihood of a multi-million dollar fine, which could range from the $3.1 Million recently paid by Maersk to the $88.3 Million recently paid by JP Morgan, is increasing almost daily for an average mid-size multi-national that is importing and exporting regularly as more sanctions, specially designated nationals (SDN), and denied parties are being added to the OFAC (Office of Foreign Asset Control) and BIS (Bureau of Industry and Security) lists.

The problem is that with dozens of major country sanctions in the Federal Register; hundreds of individual sanctions against countries for specified commodities, services, or financial transactions; and thousands of names on the SDN, denied persons, and denied entities list, it is impossible to keep on track of the situation manually — even if you have a team of clerks and lawyers reading around the clock. You need an automated solution. But not any solution will do.

Why? You can’t just do a(n) exact name match. First of all, the individual doing data entry could make a typo — and all of a sudden instead of AIR CESS HOLDINGS LTD, it’s AIR CHESS HOLDINGS LTD, and you’re shipping to a denied national in the UAE. Oops! Secondly, the individual placing the order could slightly alter his or her (company) name so that the local delivery person still knows the shipment is for him or her (since no illiterate American is going to spell Abdelwadoud Abou Mossaab correctly and Abdelwadod Abou Mosab is the best you can hope for) but so that it doesn’t match on a name search. You also have to check for close (mis)spellings.

But this isn’t enough. If the spelling is off enough, it will still be missed. You also have to check by address. If the address is an exact match and the name could be a match, then it’s probably a denied party. But even address isn’t enough. A smart denied party that is a corporate entity will just open a new PO Box and abbreviate their name enough so that a simple match algorithm will fail. However, you could argue that you can combat this with a greater than 80% success rate with some good AI and AR (automated reasoning) and then argue that if you do screw up once, you could have the fine minimized by working with the OFAC and/or BIS and demonstrating due diligence, but even this is not enough.

First of all, if the company knows it is on a denied party list and wants to get product from the US bad enough, and it is a “holding company”, or has a parent “holding company”, the first thing it’s going to do if it’s smart is open a new subsidiary or sister company at a new address with a new Director and then approach a new mid-sized supplier who will be thrilled at the opportunity to get new business and who will likely cease checking once there are no partial matches on the sanctions or denied parties lists. And then the minute the Federal Government marks the company as associated with denied (terrorist) entity, you pop up as supplying contraband and, to be blunt, you’re in boiling water.

Secondly, it might not be you that violates the sanction, but one of your first tier suppliers who violates it on your behalf, which, depending on what sanction is violated, could be just as bad. For example, your logistics carrier could decide to load perfectly fine Cargo destined to sanction-free Egypt (at least where your cargo is concerned), which is ok, but then stop at a Canadian port to pick up cargo for Saudi Arabia, and then, before it drops your cargo off in Egypt, stops at a Saudi port where your cargo is contraband under export requirements. Then, because of bad record keeping, it can’t prove that none of your cargo was off-loaded in Saudi Arabia, and that all of the cargo made it to Egypt, and, again, you are in hot water.

In other words, a first generation Trade Data Management Solution that automatically scans the sanctions and denied party lists is not enough. It also has to keep track of corporate relationships and verify that the company isn’t a shell or entity acting on behalf of a denied company or entity, and that it’s suppliers and services providers are not violating import and export restrictions on its behalf.

I’ve seen solutions that do a great job of applying AI and advanced analysis to detect denied parties on the lists that would not be spotted manually, and I’ve seen solutions that do a great job of providing visibility into first, and even second tier, supply chain in terms of what product is where, when, and where it’s going to go — but I haven’t seen a solution that does both superbly. To be honest, it’s been over a year since I have seen the best companies like Integration Point, TradeCard, CDC Tradebeam, QuestaWeb, and EcoVadis have to offer with respect to denied party / sanction screening, so I am issuing a challenge to all Global Trade Management (GTM) and SCV (Supply Chain Visibility) Providers. Show me a solution that can prevent OFAC and BIS violations and fines 100% when used properly, and I’ll give you a 3-part series.

Are You Revenue/Growth Enabled? Take This Hackett Group Survey and Find Out!

Today, the Hackett Group released their latest study — the Revenue Growth Enablement Study. The goals of this study are to determine in what ways a Procurement organization can enable revenue/growth scenarios for the organization as a whole, how far an average organization is down the revenue/growth enablement path, and what practices leading organizations are using to enable revenue/growth. Given the burning need for leading Procurement organizations to not only do more with less, but contribute to the top and bottom line in even more ways, this is an important study. For Procurement to earn, and keep, that seat in the C-Suite, it has to continue to deliver value year-over-year. And the best way to deliver that value, once it has trimmed costs, is to help the organization grow (with its expertise in operations management), globalize (with its expertise in foreign markets) and increase revenue (with its expertise in logistics, multi-stage and multi-channel inventory management, and new product introduction [NPI]).

Not only will this study give you ideas on how to identify growth priorities, tactics to support those priorities, metrics to measure success, NPI, and support sales and marketing, but it will qualify you for the full study results and final report when the study is complete. And in the meantime, you get one of the following five reports free upon survey completion:

  • 2012 Procurement Key Issues Study
  • Category Management – Beyond The “Strategic” in Strategic Sourcing
  • Supplier Relationship Management (Part I: Tapping the Power of Top Performance in SRM)
  • Defining & Expanding the Value Proposition of Purchase-to-Pay
  • A New Procurement for a New Normal

The 2012 Procurement Key Issues Study identifies the top 10 issues for Procurement organizations in the coming year, with the acceleration of revenue growth leading the way. (That’s why this study is so important.) It also discusses some key strategies for enabling profitable growth, including globalization — which will nearly triple within three years, as determined by the Hackett Group in their “Globalizing Procurement’s Service Delivery Model, Not Just the Supply Base”. (For some key stats, see SIs recent post on The Global Agenda — It’s Coming!.)

The study on Category Management, which attempted to go beyond the “strategic” in strategic sourcing, found that despite the additional savings opportunities that can come from category management (as chronicled by a number of Procurement leaders in Hackett’s conferences last year and by leading sourcing platform providers like BravoSolution), only 5% of companies have a category-focussed strategic sourcing process that is very well implemented or truly strategic. The majority of companies pursuing strategic sourcing (54%) are just average with a process that is fairly well implemented, but which does not push the boundaries. The report, which clearly defines the difference between a standard strategic sourcing approach and a category management approach, takes a deep dive into category management objectives and strategies, the supply management service line it enables, and provides a strategic category management framework that can jump-start an average organization looking to take it to the next level.

The study on Supplier Relationship Management, the first in a series, is extremely insightful on the importance of good SRM which is not just foundational for sourcing success, but transformational from a value viewpoint. It was found to increase cost savings / avoidance in top performers by almost 80% and growth-related benefits by 53%! SRM drives almost 45% of total Procurement value in top-performers! This is a level of improvement not achievable by any of the “Top 10 Technologies for Supply Management” on their own or even combined in a pair! Only collaborative sourcing, which embraces supplier relationships, can reach this level of value. The paper also identifies key differentiators of top performers and a model for SRM success that you can use to jump-start your organizational effort.

I haven’t reviewed the last two papers, but Sunday’s post pointed out how the UK Government expects to save £40 Million a year just by paying SME construction suppliers directly through P2P. P2P is full of opportunity, and I’m sure this paper will provide deep insights that can be used to jump-start an initiative. Finally, while There Is NO New Normal … Just the Old Normal Coming Back, there is a need for New Procurement Technology to cope with the return of an Old Normal that had passed before such technology hit the scene, and if any research organization is going to nail what that technology is going to be on the head, it’s the Hackett group.

To take the the Revenue Growth Enablement Study (enabled by their new, interactive, Qualtrics tool), and get your free research (and make your organization better for it), join the “World Class Procurement” LinkedIn Group.

GoTradeLive: A LinkedIn eBay on Steroids for Small Business Procurement to Groupon To.

GoTradeLive is launching its new, global, trading platform targeted at small and medium businesses in the US today. Its new free social commerce and commercial trading platform is poised to be as disruptive to the small business Procurement market as Coupa (Cabana) was when it was launched back in 2007 on Procurement Independence Day. This is not something the doctor says lightly.

So what is GoTradeLive? It is, simply put, a power-auction platform for small businesses on steroids. And what’s so great about that, you astutely ask because there are dozens, and dozens, of auction platforms out there ranging from free to seven figures in cost? It’s social. It’s networked. It’s mobile. It’s easy to use. It’s global (and multi-currency). It’s Free. It can be branded. And it’s proven — as it’s already been tested in Australia, New Zealand, China, and the UK, where they have offices.

Let’s take the benefits one-by-one.

  • It’s social
    You can create your own trading networks using a Facebook / Linked-In type interface and these can be public or private for public or private sales or trades.
  • It’s networked
    While the build-your-trading network ability of the Ariba or Ketera networks are not yet there, the building blocks are and you can see it’s coming. But the ability to define custom trading networks is unique.
  • It’s (a) mobile (platform)
    Like the consumer social networks and e-Commerce platforms, they have a mobile app that allows you to monitor your trades and bids from your mobile device.
  • It’s easy to use
    It’s as easy to use as Facebook, eBay, and other consumer sites.
  • It’s global.
    It has already been launched in Australasia and the UK and further global launches are already planned. It supports automatic currency translation for global buying and selling.
  • It’s Free.
    It’s using the Freemium model pioneered by sites like LinkedIn, DropBox, and BaseCamp. It literally costs nothing to use. No registration or account fees. No listing fees. No transaction fees. (However, if you don’t pay, you are subjected to ads and there is nothing to prevent an advertisement for a competitor’s product or auction appearing on your listing page.) Given that the cost of some platforms include transaction fees of up to 15%, this is a great deal.
  • It can be branded.
    For as little as $15 a month, which gives you one-user access, you can brand the site into your own trading platform (with your logo, colour scheme, etc.) and eliminate advertisements. Small Business Pricing is coming soon, and will start at less than $100 / month.

It’s a great social commerce platform for quickly moving slow, excess, or end-of life inventory and a great platform for many small businesses, especially those in retail, construction, and similar goods-based verticals, for spot-buying product needed at irregular intervals. And it has a lot of promise. This is one platform the doctor will be watching closely.