Category Archives: Procurement Damnation

2025 Is Just Another Year … But Is It All Doom and Gloom? Part 3 (The Talent Tussle)

It’s another year, unless you decide to make it otherwise. As per our last instalment, the first thing you can do is look behind the hype and find the right tech (and not the tech the vendors and analysts are trying to push upon you.) The next thing you can do is:

Identify Talent Outside the Norms

There’s not enough talent in Procurement as there is, so STOP LOOKING in Procurement. Unless you are going to be smart enough to bring back apprenticeships, and even then, that could be long term talent (especially if you are bringing in kids with no real world experience in what the company does, how to run a company, or even how to do basic buying).

Start looking in functions that understand the business need, and find the doers with good people skills, good planning skills, and good computing technology skills. Hire them and train them in Procurement. Working for a manufacturer buying mainly direct parts — recruit engineers as sourcing professionals. Working for a department store chain selling primarily CPG, hire a distributor rep who knows all the big brands, products, and logistic networks as procurement professionals. Looking to create better contracts, hire a lawyer with a STEM background as your contract manager. What to get vendor management right, hire former vendor account managers who worked for multiple big names that match your customer profile and train them on Procurement needs so they can find a balance that will NOT p!ss off your customers. It’s a lot easier to teach basic Procurement than engineering, advanced logistics modelling and management, law and risk management. Especially to reasonably skilled and intelligent engineers, Masters of Operations Management in logistics, lawyers, and economists specializing in econometrics (and risk management). I’ll tell you one thing, learning everything a Procurement Manager did buying a nine (9) figure category was way easier than designing one of the first Strategic Sourcing Decision Optimization solutions that hit the market (and the first with multi-line item support, as recognized by Gartner 25 years ago), and that’s with a PhD and degrees in mathematics and computer science. It’s not Procurement that’s hard, it’s the people and planning skills that are hard, and that comes from doing the hard STEM (-based) degrees and getting real world experience applying those degrees. And if you can find the engineer, lawyer, economist, etc. who’d rather work with people than machines, and offer them a bit more, those are golden hires that will quickly transform your operation once you teach them what Procurement does (as they are also seekers of efficiency and outcomes).

The reality is that Procurement skill is not buying skill, it’s relationship management skill; it’s strategic planning skill; it’s logistics management and supply assurance skills; it’s quality management; it’s risk identification, mitigation, and management; it’s everything but buying. You can automate an e-auction or a multi-round RFP to do buying, or outsource it to a GPO if you don’t even want to think about it at all. The value of Procurement is not just cutting costs and keeping them down, but it’s keeping the business running, and that requires, as they say, mad skillz, and those aren’t found in traditional Procurement departments staffed by the island of misfit toys, despite what some bloggers may claim.

And then, once you have that talent, remember that they need good solutions and that

There Are Affordable Solutions

If you think solutions still cost mid to high seven figures when all is said and done, I have news for you. It’s not the noughts (even though you may feel like it because budget requests always end in the nots and get you in knots), it’s the twenties. (And if you don’t start roaring, the 20th century showed us what awaits in the thirties.) And good cloud-native SaaS solutions cost two orders of magnitude less. Enterprise licenses for BoB modules that can do everything an average mid-sized plus business needs to do (and more) start in the five figures, with starter solutions for SMEs and smaller mid-sized businesses being cheap enough to put on a P-Card. We’ve already told you about Spendata for spend analysis, but there are solutions for every step of the cycle.

You have (pay-as-you-go) solutions like Market Dojo or Serex Procurement for sourcing. New players like Bedrock and Canopy for SXM (and if you just want survey powered SPM, check out Vendor Score IT). CLM, check out Curtis Fitch or an AnyData Solution. SME Procurement — get yourself a Blue Bean. Or, if you want a full Procurement Suite with proven performance at the mid-market and F500 levels, bundle up everything you need, pay a reasonable six figure fee, and off you go to a Vroozi or Eyvo. Can’t manage those categories? Go do an Airflip. Not enough service management, it’s trivio with Zivio. Vendor Data Nightmare. You don’t need a team of overpriced Big X consultants, you just need a Tealbook. Too many apps? Get a Focal Point. SaaS subscriptions out of control, lock them away in SaaSrooms. And so on. (More information on most of these can be found in the SI Vendor Archives. Also, while the dives are not nearly as deep, Mr. Meads does his best to catalog the mid-market providers on his Procurement Software.site. It may not capture the Mega Map, but trust when I say that’s a good thing!)

Moreover, these solutions don’t take months to implement and years to integrate. They take a flip of a software switch to activate, usually a few hours to days at most to configure, and the only delay is usually your IT department providing the integration details to the necessary systems or producing the data dumps for flat file upload (which will then have to be cleansed, enriched, and mapped because your data will be dirty.) Some of these (like true DIY analytics, vendor performance assessment, and e-Procurement enhanced with full internal catalog [cross-indexed with active contracts and agreed to pricing], punch-outs, GPOs, and third party marketplace support) will deliver an ROI the DAY you start using them.

So get them … and use them!

2025 Is Just Another Year … But Is It All Doom and Gloom? Part 2 (Real Tech!)

As per our first instalment, it all depends on your point of view and whether you are willing to look beyond the hype, buckle down, and get the real job done.

For instance, just the following five technologies will eliminate 95% or more of your tactical sourcing, procurement, and supplier monitoring work — and all you have to do is find them, properly implement them, and use them. Let’s talk about them briefly.

Real DIY Analytics

The ability to analyze the data you want, when you want, how you want, enriched and augmented using the auxiliary data you want … and not in predefined dash-boards or hidden “AI Agents” which may, or may not, do the analysis you want (and need) … cannot be underestimated! Real value comes from ad-hoc analysis and investigating hunches, abnormalities, and trend changes when you discover them; not days, weeks, or months later when the “cube” has been refreshed, and it might be too late to correct a problem or capture an opportunity!

Remember, this is not 2005, this is 2025, and there are at least half a dozen great DIY (spend) analysis solutions that will do most of what you want, for a price tag that is a fraction of what you might expect, and if you are okay with full DIY, some of these start at a price you can put on a P-Card. For example, Spendata Classic (which can handle data sets up to 5 Million Rows) can be obtained for $699 a year, and Enterprise, which can handle data sets up to 15 Million records, which comes with unlimited use for 5 users (and view licenses for more), and some consulting and setup, starts at an amount that will surprise you. (You can still put it on a P-Card if you pay monthly.) And there is literally nothing you can’t do in it if you’re willing to apply a little elbow grease. It truly is The Power Tool for the Power Analyst.

(Strategic Sourcing Decision / Supply Chain Network) Optimization

Yes, it’s math. But you know what? Math works! And when you use deterministic math, it’s 100% accurate, every time! And it’s one of only two technologies in S2P+ that was been proven (by multiple analyst firms) to repeatedly identify 10%+ savings year-over-year (but since this was pre-COVID and pre- the 47th, we need to amend this finding to adjust for inflation and tariffs). And as an FYI, the other technology was NOT AI. (It was proper DIY spend analysis. Only Human Intelligence can intuit where to look for previously unidentified opportunities, the best AI can do is just follow a script and run standard analysis. Furthermore, the thing about spend analysis is that an analysis that identifies an opportunity only helps you ONCE — once you capture the opportunity, the analysis is useless. You need to do a new, and different, one.)

Rule Based Automation

When you think about most tasks across Source to Pay, most of them are just execution of simple, easily defined processes — most of which don’t require much (if any) intelligence and, thus, don’t need AI (and shouldn’t use an unpredictable AI agent when you can encode a process that gets it right, guaranteed, every single time. (Plus, the way you want to source, buy, pay, track, manage, etc. is probably a little bit different than your peers, and who knows how the AI Agent would do it for you. You certainly don’t!)

With rule based automation, you can easily execute an entire sourcing event in the background all the way to award if you like. It can run auctions, it can run multi-round RFPs with detailed feedback (it’s all calculations, response comparisons, and decisions on what data you want to share and how blinded you want it), it can run analyses and optimizations, it can calculate recommended award decisions subject to the constraints and goals that matter to you, present that to you for acceptance, or, if it’s a simple winner take all or top 2 situation, create the award automatically, send it out, get supplier acceptance, assemble the contract, and send it for e-Signature. You don’t need Agentric/Gen-AI, just tech we’ve had for over a decade!

Machine Learning

Now, when it comes to Enterprise Master Data Management and Administration (E-MDMA) and Invoice Processing, it can be quite a lot of work to keep up with the mapping, cleansing, and enrichment rules, and you don’t want to have to manually define all the new rules every time a new data element appears or a new invoice format arrives, especially if the system can auto-detect/”guess” 90% of the time through rule re-use and generalization. With machine learning, the system can keep track of your corrections, mathematically extract models, and adjust it’s rules to handle the new mapping again automatically as well as improve its suggestion logic when it doesn’t know what to do — increasing the chance that you just have to “accept” a new rule vs. defining it from scratch. (Unlike Gen-AI which just tries to find similar patterns somewhere to present you with something that may or may not have any correlation to your business and even reality!) And we’ve had great non-(pure-)Neural Network machine learning that works great with enough data for decades! Predictive analytics was making huge progress late last decade before this Gen-AI BS took over and could have helped Procurement departments automate 90%+ of what they wanted to automate with just a bit more development and effort by the leading vendors — it just required a bit more time, money, and focus. (Gen-AI has set us back a decade!)

Analytics Backed Augmented Intelligence

We don’t need machines to make decisions for us (especially when they can’t think, or even reason), we need machines to do calculations for us that help us make the right decision quickly and effectively. We need the machine to automatically identify and retrieve all of the relevant data, do all the relevant situational and market analysis, do all the predictive trend analysis, identify all of the typical responses with respect to the situation, predict the likely success of each, and present us with a set of ordered recommendations, complete with the calculations and supporting analysis, so we can pick one or realize that the machine didn’t/couldn’t know about a recent event or a human factor and that none of the responses are right (and that only we could craft one, with full information on the situation). The machine may not think, but the thunking it can do far exceeds our computational ability (billions of computations a second, all flawless), and that’s EXACTLY what we should be using the machine for.

If we give up on this Artificial Intelligence BS (even if the current models are right, machines need to be 100 Million times more powerful for it to even “mimic” human intelligence. That’s not happening any time soon) and instead just give all the machines all the (boring) grunt work, leaving us free to do what they can’t (strategy and relationships). If we do so, we can be at least 10 times as productive as we are now and deliver on the promises Gen-AI / Agentric AI / AGI never will, and do so at a small fraction of the cost. And oh, we have that tech today … we just need to deploy and integrate it properly!

And this is just the beginning of what you can do when you look beyond the hype and use your Human Intelligence [HI!] to cut through all the BS.

2025 Is Just Another Year … But Is It All Doom and Gloom? Part 1 (Find Out!)

So now that I’ve myth-busted all the trends and predictions, told you yet again that AI won’t save you, told you that all the upbeat “influencers” are just dreaming (and should get back to reality and spend a few more years, or decades, in the trenches), that things aren’t going to rapidly and magically change, and popped all of your bubbles of joy (because they were all fake), what should you do? Should you just crawl back to the dungeon in the Tower of Spend that they’ve locked you in?

No. Just because the hype is all fake, the talent is scarce, the budget isn’t what you hoped, the risks are worsening, and your stress levels are at an all time high, that doesn’t mean all is lost, that all tech is fake, that you can’t find talent, that you can’t do something with the budget, or that you can’t manage the worst of the risks.

It just means that you have to

  • look beyond the hype,
  • identify talent outside the norms and do more with less,
  • realize that not all solutions are overpriced or unaffordable,
  • need to identify which supply disruptions will cripple you and which risks are most likely,
  • keep calm and carry on,
  • roll up your sleeves, and
  • be ready to use your Human Intelligence (HI!).

Look Beyond the Hype.

As we’ve told you time and time again.

  • AI won’t save you
  • Gen-AI won’t help you do anything that is not essentially (large) document (collection) summarization
  • You can’t turn it all over to the machine

This doesn’t mean that

  • you can’t use tech to do most of the boring, tactical, drudgery that you are doing now,
  • you can’t use automation to improve your productivity, or that
  • you can’t use AI to improve your decisions and outcomes.

It just means that you can’t expect that these solutions are the magical big read easy button silver bullet solutions to all your problems that the vendors are promising, regardless of what fancy words they use. (Always remember that AI really stands for Artificial Idiocy and you will do so much better in tech selection, especially when Gen-AI is involved, because hallucinations aren’t a feature, they are a function of the underlying model!)

The reality is that if you stop looking for Artificial Intelligence, which doesn’t exist (and definitely don’t fall for AGI), and start looking for Augmented Intelligence, then, if you are willing to look hard, you can find some really good solutions. As we pointed out in our recent article on You Don’t Need Gen-AI to Revolutionize Procurement and Supply Chain Management — Classic Analytics, Optimization, and Machine Learning You have Been Ignoring for Two Decades Will Do Just Fine!, if you pick the right technology for the task, you can get great results.

For instance, just five technologies will eliminate 95% or more of your tactical sourcing, procurement, and supplier monitoring work. In our next instalment, we’ll talk about what they are and how they will change your life!

Have all the Big X fallen for Gen-AI? Or is this their new insidious plan to hook you for life?

Note the Sourcing Innovation Editorial Disclaimers and note this is a very opinionated rant!  Your mileage will vary!  (And not about any firm in particular.)

Almost every single Big X and Mid-Sized Consulting firm  is putting “Gen-AI” adoption in their top 10 (or top 5) strategic imperatives for Procurement, and its future, and that it’s essential for analytics (gasp) and automation (WTF?!?).

It’s absolutely insane. First of all there are almost no valid uses for Gen-AI in business (unless, of course, your corporation is owned by Dr. Evil), and even less valid uses for Gen-AI in Procurement.

Secondly, the “Gen” in “Gen” AI stands for “Generative” which literally means MAKE STUFF UP. It DOES NOT analyze anything. Furthermore, automation is about predictability and consistency, Gen-AI gives you neither! How the heck could you automate anything. You CAN NOT! Automation requires a completely different AI technology built on classical (and predictable) machine learning (where you can accurately calculate confidences and break/stop when the confidence falls below a threshold).

Which begs the question, have their marketers fallen for the Gen-AI marketing bullcr@p hook, line, and sinker? Or is this their new insidious plan to get you on a never-ending work order? After all, when it inevitably fails a few days after implementation, they have their excuses ready to go (which are the same excuses being given by these companies spending tens of millions on marketing) which are the same excuses that have been given to us since Neural Nets were invented: “it just needs more content for training“, “it just needs better prompting“, “it just needs more integration with your internal data sources“, rinse, lather, and repeat … ad infinitum. And, every year it will get a few percentage points better, but if it gets only 2% better per year, and the best Gen-AI instance now is scoring (slightly) less than 34% on the SOTA scale, it will be (at least) 9 (NINE) years before you reach 40% accuracy. In comparison, if you had an intern who only performed a task acceptably 40% of the time, how long would he last? Maybe 3 weeks. But these Big X know that once you sink seven (7) figures on a license, implementation, integration, and custom training, you’re hooked and you will keep pumping in six to seven figures a year even though you should have dropped the smelly rotten Gen-AI hot potato the minute you saw the demo (and asked them for a more traditional enterprise application they can deliver with guaranteed value).

So, maybe they aren’t misled when it comes to Gen-AI. Maybe they are just shrewd financial managers because it’s their biggest opportunity to hook you for life since they convinced you that you should outsource for “labour arbitrage” and “currency exchange” (and not materials / products you can’t get / make at home) and other bullsh!t arguments that no society in the history of the world EVER outsourced for. (EVER!) Because if you install this bullcr@p and get to the point of “sunk cost”, you will continue to sink money into it. And they know it.   Or do they?

In our view, the sad reality is that while one or two financial managers may have gone deep enough down the Gen-AI rabbit hole to figure this out, most of them likely just don’t see the downside for them or their clients.  Given all the hype the creators of these Gen-AI* models are pushing, with prolific examples only of success cases and upside, with very little education on the realities (because few of us are highlighting all of the risks of Gen-AI and failures when misapplied), maybe all they are seeing are promises that are just too good to ignore.

So, please, ignore the Gen-AI until you’ve validated a use case and instead remember When You Should Use Big X. Every solution and services provider has strengths and weaknesses. Please use them for their strengths, be successful, and increase the project success rate. (Post-Edit: As of 2024, technology project failure is at an all-time high. We don’t want to see any more of it!)

*Remember that AI, and Gen-AI in particular, is a fallacy.

Don’t Zip Through the Zip-sponsored Spend Matters authored Intake and Procurement Orchestration RFI, Part 4: Project/Process Management

… because, as we noted in Part 1, while it looks great on the surface, in our space, looks can be deceiving and what you get may NOT be what you want. (And you’ll have to read this full series to find out if it’s good, bad, both, or neither.)

Post Edit: The summary on LinkedIn has been removed. You can read why in the Social Media Policy. See this post for Zip Solution Coverage.

In Part 1, we discussed how Zip issued a public challenge to check out their RFI (making it irresistible to the doctor who has been rallying against vendor RFIs since they first hit the scene big time with Procuri’s 2006 releases, how the doctor had doubts that this would be the first RFI to get it totally right, and how it was starting off with five strikes right off the bat (observable from a first quick read … but that we would review it in detail because there could be value in it if used and/or referenced appropriately (either for self-education and/or a foundation for a larger, wider evaluation effort) and only a fair, detailed review would surface that. So, this is what we are concluding g with the 14 Shared elements organized into the categories of “Configurability”, “Integrations”, and “Analytics”.

In Part 2, we tackled Intake: the strengths, the weaknesses, and the not so-obvious weaknesses.

In Part 3, we tackled (core) Orchestrate: the strengths, the weaknesses, and the not so-obvious weaknesses.

Before we begin our discussion of the Project/Process Management capabilities that are needed to take the offering beyond a pay per view of YOUR data and more solution sprawl (not less), since you don’t want to be asking where’s the beef after adopting a solution, we will remind you that there are some fundamental capabilities that are necessary that were specifically called out in part 35 and part 38 of our 39 Steps … err Clues … err Part Series on Source to Pay.

Sadly, there aren’t any in this RFI. There are only shared capabilities that cross between intake-and orchestrate in the configurability, integrations, and analytics sections. This means that there is no coverage at all of:

  • project management beyond task and workflow management — there should be extensive support for phases, milestones, obligations, and distributed management of hierarchical projects in construction, commissioning, and other projects that require multiple projects to be synched between multiple service providers
  • KPIs — critical for project and process management requires that there be native support
  • project and process templates — to allow workflows to be preconfigured through system drag-and-drop
  • dynamic project and process shifting — if the situation changes, the type of sourcing / procurement / contract / etc. project might need to change; and it should be a seamless transition, with all appropriate data, settings, etc. automatically transferred into the new structure

With respect to what is covered for shared requirements in the RFI, the following are quite weak:

  • configurability beyond workflow — it’s not just the workflow, it’s the data model as well, for example
  • data type data feed integrations — the platform should understand the different types of data it will be processing and support unknown integrations
  • m-way integrations — as indicated above, processes are not always simple and restricted to two systems
  • real analytics — pre-configured simple out-of-the-box reports are NOT analytics; the power of multi-system multi-source data integration and orchestration is the insightful analytics it can power

However, the following are some strengths of the RFI.

  • workflow configurability — mentions parallel approval support, escalation paths, conditional logic, and no-code editing
  • multiple workflows — and automatic assignment on procession initiation
  • in-flight workflow adjustments — workflows should be capable of being upgraded or reconfigured at any time (without breaking anything)
  • ERP integrations — ERP is never going away, and even if it’s not used for any core procurement processes, it is still used to support the supply chain and the true power of intake-to-orchestrate is beyond S2P
  • collaboration — S2P is about collaboration — through whatever platforms the organization uses, including Slack, Teams, etc. in addition to the S2P tools the organization tools
  • integration monitoring — the platform should monitor integration status, including the last access/synch with every data source, the synch schedule, and system response time

Overall, the overlap is ok, but the support for project and process management assessment is almost nonexistent in the RFI. As per our last post, it is clear the focus of the RFI was intake, not orchestrate, and a whole section needs to be added on project and process management — especially when the true value of intake to orchestrate is going beyond just taking requests and managing S2P solutions to support end-to-end project and process management beyond S2P and upstream into the supply chain and through finance downstream to sales.

SUMMARY

At the end of the day, it’s a good foundation to educate yourself on what intake solutions in S2P should functionally do and how to compare them in a consistent manner, but it’s not nearly enough to evaluate intake-to-orchestrate solutions.

It’s also a good foundation upon which Spend Matters could build an intake-project/process management-orchestrate Solution Map if they addressed all of the points in the last three articles, fleshed out the necessary capabilities more, and refined the scale.

However, it’s certainly not enough to evaluate a provider’s suitability for your organization, as partially pointed out in Part 1. First of all, it doesn’t address all of the capabilities that you are likely to need in a solution. Secondly, as hinted in part 1, it’s not just the functionality, it’s the capability of the platform to support your processes — that’s not just functionality. Thirdly, once you confirm the tech meets baseline (and trust the doctor when he says that multiple platforms will), you have to go beyond the tech to whether or not they will enable YOUR organization with the processes YOUR organization needs with the systems YOUR organizations uses with interfaces appropriate for YOUR people and whether or not they custom integrate new solutions on an ongoing basis for you, be available on your working hours, support the languages of the third parties you need to work with, or culturally be a good fit for your organization. And that’s just the baseline requirements for a good solution RFI — which will always need to be customized to your business.