Category Archives: Miscellaneous

The University is Still Here Because …

A couple of years ago TechCrunch wrote an article that asked Why is the University Still Here? In a time where information is universally accessible, knowledge can be compiled by experts and shared in a reviewed and verified form far and wide, and intelligence can be conveyed direct from an expert in Oxford (England) to an able learner in Liberal (Kansas) if both are ready, willing, and able thanks to virtual classrooms with audio-visual conferencing and screen sharing.

Then, earlier this decade, we saw the launch of massive open online courses (MOOCs) where anyone can register for a course from a leading professor, get the lectures, complete assignments, send them to TAs (teaching assistants) half a world away, get graded (automatically for multiple choice and by a human for essay or problem solving questions), and work towards what is supposed to be the equivalent of a University degree. But is it?

First of all, universities, even with remote learning aspects, have always been based on classroom learning. Secondly, advanced programs have always been based on one-on-one instruction between teacher and student. Thirdly, they have always been based on carefully structured curriculums that are designed to ensure a student gets an appropriate depth and breadth of knowledge. Fourth, the testing is always done in a manner that makes cheating or plagiarism difficult.

MOOCs are the antitheticals of University. They are trying to abolish classrooms. There is no personal one-on-one instruction between a recorded lecture and a semi-engaged viewer. The student can design their own haphazard curriculum that ensures neither depth nor breadth in the appropriate subject matter. And anyone can submit a document created by anyone else and there is no way to know.

But the failure of MOOCs to displace universities is not an argument for the continued existence of universities. Just because X does not displace Y, that doesn’t mean that Y is superior. It just means that the masses do not believe that X is superior. In our case, it’s not enough of a case for universities.

To make the case, we look at where MOOCs failed. As per the techcrunch article, they failed in keeping a user’s interest. Most people who registered for and even started a course, never completed. Most who completed didn’t come back. They weren’t motivated. The reasoning in the article is that because, for the majority of learners, it was part time, on their own time, it never got primacy and without primacy, efforts get abandoned.

And that’s part of the reason MOOCs failed and part of the reason we still need Universities. When you go to University, you make education a primary focus of your life. But the other reason is that a real, established, prestigious University provides something no other form of education can — a well-rounded full-featured educational experience with primacy, one-on-one instruction from an expert, great curriculums, and, most important, a community to share the experience with. This last aspect is key — you are part of a dedicated group of people there to learn and share the experience of learning and better each other in the process. And while that group shrinks a bit over the years, by the end, you have your own support group, and possibly a few colleagues for life, that got you there and take you further. That’s something you’ll never get from a MOOC.

And that’s why Universities still exist and need to continue to exist.

Procurement Wasteland!

Down here in the crypt
I search for a script
I put my soul into my living

I constantly fight
To prove I’m right
Management is not forgiving

Don’t cry
Don’t raise your eye
It’s a Procurement Wasteland

Buyer, take my hand
We’ll analyze spend plans
Put out the fire
And don’t look past my shoulder

The exodus is here
Our downfall is near
Let’s band together
Before we get much older

Procurement Wasteland
It’s a Procurement Wasteland
Procurement Wasteland, oh yeah
Procurement Wasteland
We’re all wasted

I Can’t Get No Satisfaction …

Because. Just because.

I can’t get no … satisfaction
I can’t get no … satisfaction
‘Cause I try and I try and I try and I try

I can’t get no … I can’t get no
When I’m sittin’ at my desk, and the bot pops up on the dashboard
It’s telling me more and more about some useless information
Supposed to fire my imagination

I can’t get no, oh, no, no, no, hey, hey, hey
That’s what I say
I can’t get no satisfaction, I can’t get no satisfaction
‘Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can’t get no, I can’t get no

When I’m watchin’ my phone and a mail comes in to tell me
How low my costs can slot
But it can’t be for real ’cause my spending is
Not for e-Auctions or spot

I can’t get no, oh, no, no, no, hey, hey, hey
That’s what I say
I can’t get no satisfaction, I can’t get no chain reaction
‘Cause I try and I try and I try and I try
I can’t get no, I can’t get no
When I’m slicin’ up the spend
And I’m buyin’ this and I’m signin’ that
And I’m trying to please the boss who tells me
Buyer, better have some savings this week
Can’t you see we’re on a losing streak

I can’t get no, oh, no, no, no, hey, hey, hey
That’s what I say, I can’t get no, I can’t get no
I can’t get no satisfaction, no satisfaction
No satisfaction, no satisfaction

 

A Supply Management Alphabet

Inspired by Edward Gorey.

A is for analysis, of data sets quite large.

B is for bid, which might leave out the surcharge.

C is for contracts to cover our backsides.

D is for demand ‘cross the customer divides.

E is for ethics, which often get overlooked.

F is for finance, where the books will get cooked.

G is for global, the world is our stage.

H is for hub, where our goods get waylaid.

I is for inventory, obsolete by the day.

J is for JIT, a difficult ballet.

K is for Kaizen, often mispronounced.

L is for labour, who strike unannounced.

M is for majeure, which suppliers will claim.

N is for negotiate, the salesperson’s game.

O is for optimize, as we’re lost in the woods.

P is for procure, we need our missing goods!

Q is for quote, where assumptions abound.

R is for requisition, for products unsound.

S is for supplier, our life in their hands.

T is for taxes, which cross many lands.

U is for upcharge, which blows up our cost.

V is for value, which always gets lost.

W is for warehouse, where our goods disappear.

X is for XML, held hostage by the code buccaneer.

Y is for yield, which is never as expected

Z is for zone, where trade is inspected.

Buyer Beware! A Tax Efficient Supply Chain is Not a Tax Effective Supply Chain!

Many global consultancies with large tax practices and some supply chain capability like to preach tax efficient supply chains and how they can help you optimize your global supply chain to minimize the overall tax that you pay. As many multinationals know all too well, sometimes the biggest cost after the product cost is not the logistics cost, but the tax. Depending on where you are buying from, where you are storing your goods, and where you intend to sell the goods, you can end up paying a plethora of taxes that can add up real fast.

The country you are buying from likely imposes federal and state taxes on all sales, and might even impose municipal taxes as well (especially if there is a value-added service component). Then you have to get those goods to a port (air or sea), and guess what, there will be taxes on the transportation. Then the dock or carrier likely charges a loading service fee, which is, of course, taxed. And let’s not forget the export duties. Ka-ching! And then there’s the air or sea transportation tax (as the carrier is registered somewhere). And, of course, landing/docking unloading fees when you get back to land. And then, Free/Foreign Trade Zone be damned, when you (finally want to) import those goods, import duties! Ka-ching! Then you have local transportation costs, taxed, and local warehouse costs, taxed, and even final transportation costs to the store or consumer, taxed again. Taxes. Taxes. Taxes. And if you have to pay all those taxes, you might as well just source from the closest factory because, regardless of how much more their unit cost is, we guarantee it will be cheaper.

However, if you have what the tax consultants call a tax efficient supply chain, then, because you are theoretically sourcing from countries you are not doing (much) business in (or selling in), then your organization is not responsible for most of these taxes, and the rest of the taxes, through clever classification and trade agreements, are minimized.

But just because you are not responsible for a tax doesn’t mean that you don’t have to pay the tax up front (and then file for reimbursement later). In many countries, unless you have an exemption id to provide the seller or [logistics, etc.] service provider (which may or may not exist or which might only be granted to non profits, etc.), the seller / service provider still has to collect the tax. And if it takes six, nine, or even twelve months to recover the tax, this is not exactly tax efficient.

First of all, your working capital is tied up, and there is a cost to having this tied up, which is the greater of what it costs you to borrow that working capital from your lender, the average early payment discount you are giving up, or the investment opportunity your Finance department has at its disposal (through factoring, short term GICs, etc.).

Secondly, there is a cost associated with the recovery of that tax. It will consist of at least the time required to submit the paperwork for recovery, and fees associated with submitting the paperwork for recovery, and, if the process is so involved or onerous that you really need a best-of-breed software solution to help you, the cost of that solution. (Note that you might need multiple such solutions, as many as one for each country you have to to through a submission process as some countries might only certify in-country vendors to connect to their e-document submission systems or accept, without [mandatory] audit, documents produced by an in-country provider.)

Third, and most important, the supply chain is not cost efficient if the cost of minimizing the tax ends up creating a considerably more dispersed supply chain that ends up significantly increasing the logistics cost, and, as an effect, the overall cost. Tax efficiency is supposed to minimize overall cost and cannot always be considered on its own.

In other words, unless the consultant creates a model that takes all of this into account (and many don’t due to the overall complexity of such a model), the “tax efficient” supply chain is not a “tax effective” supply chain and is not necessarily one you want to pursue.