Category Archives: Market Intelligence

Get Your Metals Prices Under Control

AT Kearney recently released a short piece on “Driving Down the Cost of Raw Materials”: A four-pronged approach to managing input steel prices and commodity purchases that had some good tips for managing your metals spend. The report broke your opportunities down into four types:

  • Material Cost RecoveryUp to 30% of inputs are unused and considered a waste by-product of the manufacturing process, but can be sold as scrap, melted down, and reused again. In peak markets, this scrap can be worth hundreds of dollars a tonne.
  • Sourcing Power IncreaseGoing straight to the source and bypassing intermediaries can generate better prices and more power, especially if the metal needs (grades, gauges, sizes) etc. are bundled into a single buy.
  • Usage OptimizationReducing complexity (through standardization on gauges, grades, etc.) and segmenting suppliers (based on common needs) can lead to design and production cost decreases as well as unit cost decreases.
  • Supply Chain ManagementOptimizing the inbound (sourcing) and outbound (sale and delivery of scrap) can yield a number of process cost improvements.

Given the price volatility that follows every boom and bust in the economy, getting a good grip on total cost of ownership of organizational metal buys can save an organization 12% to 25%, which is well worth the effort. For more on how to save in specific metals categories, and when to lock in long term contracts, see the Metal Miner blog — the only blog focussed on helping organizations optimize their metals strategy.

Share This on Linked In

PPV is a Bad Measure of Procurement Performance

As noted in a recent brief from ChainLink Research, PPV (Purchase Price Variance) is a bad metric for Procurement, especially if your buyers’ performance is being based on it. Not only does this kind of metric encourage behaviour that may lower PPV but create a higher total cost, but it can cost your organization a bundle, and this goes for commodities that usually have low volatility as well as those that have high volatility. Here’s why.

Let’s say you were buying 10,000 barrels of crude oil in 2009 on a monthly basis. The OPEC basket price, which started the year at 40.44 on January 2 and ended the year at 77.16 on December 31, and which reached a low of 38.10 on February 18 and a high of 77.88 on December 1, varied, on average, by $7.20 a month, with a minimum variance of $2.91 in November and a maximum variance of $13.30 in May. If your buyers are being measured on PPV, and they are good at predicting annual pricing trends, chances are they are going to pay as close to $65.04 as possible, as this amount (and any amount between $64.00 and $66.08, to be precise) minimizes the average monthly PPV. (The PPV varies from 0 in July and September to $21.14 in February and averages out to $7.46.)

In this situation, your buyer would spend 7.34 Million dollars trying to minimize PPV, which would cost your organization 467,200. This is what your buyer would pay each month (buying on the day that was closest to the price point target):

Month Price Cost PPV
Jan 46.32 463200 14.82
Feb 43.90 439000 17.24
Mar 50.77 507700 10.37
Apr 52.26 522600 8.88
May 63.71 637100 2.57
Jun 66.08 660800 4.94
Jul 65.04 650400 3.90
Aug 68.04 680400 6.90
Sep 65.12 651200 3.98
Oct 66.81 668100 5.67
Nov 74.95 749500 13.81
Dec 70.64 706400 9.50
AVG 61.14 611367 8.55
SUM   7336400  

But if your buyer was focussed on cost avoidance, your buyer would only spend 6.87 Million dollars trying to minimize cost, saving your organization 467,200. If you ignored PPV, this is what your buyer would pay each month (buying on the day that allowed for the lowest purchase price):

Month Price Cost PPV
Jan 39.29 392900 21.85
Feb 38.10 381000 23.04
Mar 41.79 417900 19.35
Apr 47.15 471500 13.99
May 50.41 504100 10.73
Jun 66.08 660800 4.94
Jul 59.66 596600 1.48
Aug 68.04 680400 6.90
Sep 64.00 640000 2.86
Oct 66.81 668100 5.67
Nov 74.95 749500 13.81
Dec 70.64 706400 9.50
AVG 57.24 572433 11.18
SUM   6869200  

Still think minimization of PPV is a good idea?

Share This on Linked In

The Secrets to Successful Strategy Execution

As per this recent article on putting strategy into practice in Strategy+Business, which followed their article on the seven chapters of strategic wisdom (which inspired Sourcing Innovation’s recent series on What is Strategy? And How Is It Obtained? [parts I, II, III, and IV]), intent and execution must go hand in hand where strategy is concerned. So what are the foundations of a successful execution?

According to the article, the foundations are the four “building blocks” defined by Neilson, Martin, and Powers in their recent paper on “the secrets to successful strategy execution”. Specifically, decision rights, information flow (including metrics), motivators, and the organizational chart. The first two in particular are critical, as decision rights and information flows were found to have twice as much impact on strategy success as motivators and structure. So what does the organization have to do?

According to Neilson, Martin, and Powers the organization must start with decision rights — and specify who “owns” each decision and who must provide input, and information flows — and promote managers laterally so they build networks needed for cross-unit collaboration … and only then alter organizational structures and realign incentives to support the initial moves. For example, the organization might start by delegating accountability for profits unambiguously to the divisions (to prevent wasted man years on strategy development only to have a solid business case dismissed by a hand wave of an uninformed corporate VP after a five minute review) or delegate run-of-the-mill operational decisions (to prevent decision paralysis). Then it might institute regular business meetings where the C-suite and division / unit leaders meet to discuss a particular issue or action (to prevent information flows from being “censored”) or establish standardized back-office processes and analytical tools for deal customization (to prevent sales people from crafting customized one-off deals that cost the company more than it will make in revenue). These two actions will make sure everyone knows what decisions they are responsible for, when they’re supposed to provide input, how much leeway they have in interpretation and execution, and where they go for more information. Only then would organizational structures (to remove unnecessary layers or improve cross-organizational collaboration) and incentives (to drive greater performance and profitability) be altered, because, until the organization has its people working together and properly aligned to the strategy, it won’t know what the right structure and incentives are.

The reality is that, as Neilson, Martin, and Powers stated in their ground-breaking paper, while a brilliant strategy, blockbuster product, or breakthrough technology can put the organization on the competitive map, only solid execution can keep it there. Solid execution requires clear decision rights and unimpeded information flow because unclear decision rights not only paralyze decision making but also impede information flow which, in turn, results in poor decisions, limited career development, and a reinforcement of structural silos.

So how does the organization accomplish this? While Neilson et. al don’t address the how, it’s pretty obvious where the organization needs to start — Business Process Mapping. Once the organization has mapped out everything it does, it can identify what decisions need to be made and what information is required. Then, it simply assigns responsibility for decisions and institutes mechanisms for information flow. After these responsibilities are assigned and the information mechanisms are put in place, the organization can align organizational structure to mirror the decision rights and necessary information flows and adopt incentives to support the changes. While the devil will be in the details, the process itself, like the process for developing a strategy, isn’t magic. It is within the grasp of every organization.

Share This on Linked In

Don’ts for Procurement Leadership, Part II

A recent article in the CPO Agenda had some good “Dos and Don’ts of Procurement Leadership” that are worth repeating. Today we’re going to dive into the other five don’ts and put an SI slant on them. DON’T:

  • Wish for a Quiet LifeNot only do you have to constantly evangelize the benefits of your procurement, but you have to be in the thick of it day in and day out. After all, any job that’s too quiet is probably on the way out. (You don’t want to be this guy.)
  • Ignore the Power of Networking EventsEven though confidentiality and non-disclosures may prevent your colleagues from sharing all the details of their challenges, you can still get the pulse of what the hot button issues are and what your colleagues are trying to do to address them. You might learn about new processes or (software) solutions that can help you with your job.
  • Ignore TalentAs per our last post, your people are the ultimate key to your success. Nurture their talent and do what you can to attract more talent to work for you. After all, there’s nothing wrong with not being the brightest bulb in the box when it comes to execution when you’re measured on organizational performance. Your analysts should have better data skills, your negotiators better sales skills, and your relationship managers can have a higher EQ. You’ll never be replaced if you’re the one with the best leadership skills who can serve as the glue that can hold the team of chefs together and convince them to work towards the common good and not their own personal goals. (Well, at least not if your boss has any brains at all.)
  • Miss Your Key ResultsYou have to deliver what you promise, plain and simple.
  • Be ArrogantYou should be extremely confident in your abilities to deliver world-class performance, but you shouldn’t step over the line. You’re still the new kid on the block, so you need all the help you can get.

Don’ts for Procurement Leadership, Part I

A recent article in the CPO Agenda had some good “Dos and Don’ts of Procurement Leadership” that are worth repeating. Today we’re going to dive into five of the don’ts and put an SI slant on them. DON’T:

  • OverpromiseProcurement still doesn’t have the recognition that Marketing, Sales, Legal, and other traditional business functions have. And we’re not going to get it if we set expectations we can’t deliver on. So while it’s important to promise (almost) as much as you can to get notice, it’s even more important not to over-promise.
  • OverreactYou’re going to face countless challenges and frustrations on a daily basis. It’s part of the job. Trust in your ability, and that of your team, to get through it, because if you overreact, the C-suite might think that maybe you’re not ready to be a business leader and even considering outsourcing your department and you.
  • Limit Your AmbitionsA CPO is an agent for change. You should always be striving to find ways to do better.
  • Miss An OpportunityBe sure to sell your success ever time you’re in front of a C-Suite Executive or a Board Member. It’s part of The Quest for Purchasing Fire.
  • Spread Yourself Too ThinBe sure to focus on the biggest priorities and cost reduction opportunities first. There’s always next year for the other opportunities, and maybe changing market conditions will allow for greater cost reductions on those opportunities next year. If you’re not sure where to start, do a spend analysis. After all, with a real spend analysis tool, the traditional reasons why data analysis is avoided are irrelevant.