Category Archives: Procurement Damnation

Influential Sustentation 96: Consortiums

Consortiums, better known as Group Purchasing Organizations (GPOs), will be one of your biggest organizational conundrums of the decade. Regardless of whether your organization is currently using a GPO or not, with the need to save money in every category in your tail spend, the next few years will be the years that you can’t live with them, you can’t live without them.

GPOs are going to be pushed upon you by under-informed CFOs because the believe that a GPO will be able to leverage economies of scale, in the form of more volume and more efficiencies, then the organization can achieve on its own.
For example, a supplier might offer price reductions at 1,000 units, 10,000 units, and 100,000 units and offer 2%, 3%, and 6% discounts at each price level. On its own, an organization that only buys 20,000 units would only be able to obtain the 3% discount but if it banded with five other organizations that required a similar amount of units, each organization could obtain the 6% discount. In addition, if only one contract needed to be negotiated and cut, each organization could reduce the amount of negotiation and administration overhead required to negotiate the contract and save even more. Theoretically.

But all of this comes at a cost. First of all, the GPO has to be funded — so, either the organization has to pay a fixed membership cost every year or a percentage of each transaction. Secondly, the GPO has to be managed just like every business processing outsourcing (BPO) provider. This isn’t always easy because not only does the organization have to manage the relationship and insure that the GPO is working on categories that are important to the organization, but it has to make sure that the GPO is taking the organization’s needs into account. And, the double edged sword, the best deals materialize when the combined volume allows a supplier to hit peak production (which allows them to produce the product at the lowest possible cost) and offer their customers the lowest possible cost. However, getting to peak production often requires combining the needs of a dozen or so different organizations, each of which has its own viewpoints and goals for each category. In other words, while you might prefer Supplier A’s products, because your Engineering department feels that they are of superior quality, the other GPO participants might prefer Supplier X — the least favoured supplier of your organization.

So what do you do?

1. Categorize all of your unmanaged spend.

You need to understand how much spend is each category, how much savings is likely available from (better) management, how much savings you could get if you began to manage it yourself, and how that would compare, using market average GPO statistics on savings and GPO overhead, to having a third party manage it. If you could save 2%, but the overhead to save that is 30%, that’s 1.4% savings at the end of the day. If the GPO can save 3%, and the amortization of the fixed and transaction fees work out to 40% of that, that’s a 1.8% savings, and throwing it over the wall might not be worth it. But if the GPO can save 5%, and they are really efficient on that category and their fees work out to 20% of the savings, that’s a 4% savings and you strongly consider throwing it over the wall.

2. Identify the Candidate GPO spend.

Identify all categories that the GPO could save enough on to make it worthwhile, then remove any categories too strategic to the business to hand over to a third party, and then remove any categories where they are primarily being sourced from a strategic or high-volume supplier and where they could be added on to an existing or renewal contract.

3. Estimate the Realizeable Savings from the Candidate GPO Spend

How much is being spent? How much of that could be saved based on industry average statistics? What would it cost to obtain that savings in total fees and overhead? What would really be saved? What is the real ROI?

4. Determine if the ROI is worth it.

If the ROI is not at least a factor of three, by the time you factor in all the change management, learning headaches, and delayed savings, it’s probably not worth the GPO. If it is, it probably is. Make your decision, and then present the detailed calculation to defend your position, and don’t waffle. If you can save, do it, and evaluate in 3 years. If you can’t, just get the best damn tail spend management you can and do better. But you can’t be constantly evaluating, reevaluating, and bickering about it. Do it. Or don’t. No in-between.

Procurement is Still the Rodney Dangerfield of the Organization and Land of Confusion Is Its Theme Song

Why else would we need an egalitarian Procurement Revolution where we must work collectively to shape and drive change?

But in all seriousness, the numbers don’t lie. If you check out Five Imperatives for Creating Greater Procurement Agility, which was recently (and still may be) temporarily free from The Hackett Group, you see that the average Procurement Function Operating Budget is forecasted to increase a mere 1.1% this year. Now, that’s better than last year where it was forecasted to increase a mere 0.7%, but when you consider the average annual US inflation rate from 2000 to 2015 was 2.25% (which you can verify on a number of sites), relatively speaking, Procurement is still getting further and further behind every year!

This is despite the fact that world-class procurement (which needs to be properly funded), has an average payback that is twice that of the Procurement peer group. And, as far as the doctor is concerned, the argument that, since world-class procurement organizations have 18% lower operating costs than the peer group, Procurement doesn’t need as much money, doesn’t pass muster because “operating” costs are different from “capital” costs and might or might not include “training” costs or “travel” costs.

If the organization is doing a lot of outsourcing, then a lot of travel is needed by procurement, engineering, etc. for relationship and quality control site visits, and if all of this has to come out of the Procurement budget, as opposed to the operations budget, that’s not fair. If Procurement is not allowed to spend “capital” to acquire a new system, but must instead use a SaaS solution so it can be expensed monthly under the “operating” budget, while manufacturing and warehousing gets a budget that does not include the ERP upkeep, that’s not fair. If Procurement is subject to the across-the-board training ban, because people should know their jobs when they are hired, and are deprived of the ability to advance their skills, not only is that not fair, but that can be costing the organization millions of dollars as sometimes a better informed and prepared procurement professional can shave an extra percentage point off of a hundred million dollar buy, which makes the 10K it cost to send the person to a 3 day workshop paltry in comparison.

Plus, when sales has to increase revenue by $10 to equal the same savings that Procurement often makes by taking $1 off of the bottom line, it should, logically, make sense to throw money at Procurement instead of the marketing mad men or the house of lies consulting firm. But it doesn’t, proving that most board rooms are still cemented in the land of confusion and Procurement is still the Rodney Dangerfield that don’t get no respect with a kick-me sign on its back.

Provider Sustentation 68: Carriers

Roll on highway, Roll on along
Roll on daddy till you get back home
Roll on family, roll on crew
Roll on momma like I asked you to do
And roll on eighteen-wheeler roll on (Roll on)

If you decide against 3PL firms, which bring a disadvantage for every advantage, then your only option is to manage the carriers on your own. Without providers, the full force of their damnation is thrust upon you.

Thanks to the outsourcing outsourcing craze that began in the 80’s, no one makes their own stuff anymore which means that they are dependent on logistics carriers to get the products to the warehouses and then again to get the product to the retail stores. And these carriers know that, to use a common expression, they got you by the balls.

Now it’s true capacity isn’t always full capacity, especially in off season, and at these times there is some negotiation room, despite what the carriers will initially tell you, but at peak season when the holiday rush is closing in and half (or more) of your annual sales are at stake, and the carriers really are at, or close to, peak capacity, the carriers are in control and they know it. Fuel surcharges pile up. Overtime charges pile up more. And you’ll pay because if you don’t, your product won’t arrive on time, putting your sales, and profits, at risk. But this isn’t the biggest problem. If the driver shortage continues to worsen, their might come a day when you are willing to gladly pay those surcharges and overcharges but still won’t get your products delivered.

So what do you do?

1. Understand your overall shipping needs.

Map your entire supply chain, associated annual volume levels, associated revenue, and associated criticality. Understand that going out to tender category by category or region by region is not always the best way to do things.

2. Do a national, if not global, supply chain tender.

Do a large supply chain tender across regional, national, and global carriers across all volume where the goal is to award all strategic volume and all high revenue volume to a handful of carriers which will guarantee year round capacity and customer of choice status to your organization in return for long term, guaranteed shipments and income. The bigger the number, the hungrier the carrier.

3. Give a little more to get a little more.

Use optimization to balance cost versus delivery times and service level guarantees. Select carriers that can easily handle the load, are financially stable, and willing to give your deliveries priority in exchange for large volumes, timely payment, and relationship building (and lean transformation help) over penny pinching.

4. Don’t sweat the small stuff.

Some lanes will have to go local, and some smaller carriers won’t give you the best rates, but you can still use competitive bidding and not lose much by making sure the majority of volume is under sound management. You can’t completely escape the damnation, so just settle for getting as much as you can under control.

Geopolitical Sustentation 25: Government Actions

Upon review of our damnation series, we know that governments can be a major source of damnation. From their meddling in the employment rate (economic damnation 3), currency strength (economic damnation 5), and their sheltering of the 1% (economic damnation 7); their lack of support for postal services (infrastructure damnation 11), ports (infrastructure damnation 13), and roads (infrastructure damnation 14); their (mis)management of customs acts (geopolitical damnation 28), trade embargoes (geopolitical damnation 29), and the TPP poison pills (geopolitical damnation 30); their taxation (regulatory damnation 33), tariffs (regulatory damnation 34), and health and safety (regulatory damnation 35); and their poor urbanization plans (societal damnation 43), utter lack of support for education (societal damnation 44), and their handling of workers’ rights legislation (societal damnation 48), their damning meddling is everywhere. (It’s more ubiquitous than the meddling of those meddling kids.)

But this is just the tip of the iceberg. In our damnation post we listed a few of the more focussed damnations that will cause you a never ending nightmare.

  • Budget Freeze
  • State of Emergency
  • New Legislation Outlawing your Product or Service
  • Criminal Charges against your Organization or Executives

1. Don’t Sell Governments More Than You Can Afford to Maintain in the Receivables Indefinitely.

There’s no guarantee of quick payment, or even late payment in the timeframe you are led to believe it will materialize in. Government might be good money, long term contracts, and guaranteed references, but they aren’t always the best customers if you need money now. Make sure you have a core business selling to the private sector that can sustain you through the dry times.

2. Don’t be slack in receivables recognition and collection

Insure all deliverables are received, acknowledged, and accepted on a timely basis. Make sure the invoice gets in the approved payment queue ASAP, and follow up the minute a payment date is missed. You don’t want multiple invoices in a queue during a budget freeze or budget shortfall. You want as few as possible, and you want them front of the queue as soon as the freeze is lifted.

3. Keep abreast of any proposed legislation that could impact your product

You want plenty of time to engage lobbyists if you can afford it, and if the product line is that profitable, or identify reformulations (or replacements) if the product is important, but not worth enough to engage lobbyists to try and alter the legislation appropriately (which may not be successful).

4. Make sure you have well documented policies and procedures in place … and all follow them.

Have a policy that failure to follow policies and procedures, especially those that are designed to protect the organization and stay on the right side of the law, will result in immediate discipline and possible dismissal. Also implement monitoring systems and processes to do your best to ensure that all individuals follow critical policies and procedures. The goal is that if someone breaks the law, it’s doing so in a way not supported or condoned by the company.

5. Make sure the board oversees the executive and reviews key financial reports and deals on a regular basis.

If one of your executives is engaging in shady business practices, you want to discover it and take action first. It’s often the difference between a slap on the wrist and a public hanging. (And don’t say you have nothing to worry about. It’s well known that the job that attracts the most psychopaths is that of the CEO, with the job that attracts the second most psychopaths being that of the lawyer who defends him.)

Societal Sustentation 44: Education Quality

Supply Management is hard. Real hard. And it’s only getting harder. SI has said it before, and it will say it again … and again — in order to excel at Supply Management a Sourcing or Procurement professional has to be a jack-of-all-trades and master-of-one.

But this is not an easy thing to do. The skill set required by today’s Procurement professional is longer than Santa’s naughty and nice lists put together and is growing by the day. And that’s just the basics. The EQ, IQ, and TQ required for an average Procurement professional to get through the day is enormous. It’s to the point where a person of average intelligence can’t cut it. It used to be that only the best and brightest could do law and medicine and engineering but now only the best can do supply management. And, to make matters worse, just EQ, IQ, and TQ is not enough.

A modern Supply Management Professional needs knowledge — and lots of it. With constantly changing market conditions, new inventions, and new modes of operation, whatever a supply manager knows today is unknown tomorrow. As new methods of production come online, old methods become cost prohibitive. As new products are invented, old products become obsolete. As market conditions change, old plans become irrelevant. And so on. And what you need to know changes by the day.

But where do you get that knowledge. Most universities have a curriculum that is still mired in old-school logistics and operations research. Most professional associations are still teaching you old-school negotiating tactics. Most blogs are mired in the noughts and still preaching the gospel according to Ariba and Emptoris (which no longer exist on their own). And the analysts … well, we’re not too sure just what they are inhaling before they do their preaching, tragic quadrants, and dangerous graves.

And education quality in general in North America is bad, with the US ranked 14th, and getting worse. Only one in seven people can do math. Potheads have a higher IQ than twitterers. And spelling and grammar? The best case is whatever the iPhone autocorrect feature suggests. So what do you do?

1. Find curious people.

Find people who want to learn and get smarter and more efficient on their own. That will seek out the nuggets of knowledge, internalize them, and try their best to incorporate those nuggets into their work.

2. Seek out those that have a higher than average IQ, TQ, or EQ.

Those with a higher IQ will be able to quickly grasp, internalize, and utilize new theories and methodologies. Those with a higher TQ will be able to master new technology faster and find ways to simplify it and train the rest of the organization on the key features. Those with a higher EQ will be able to work better as a team.

3. Make sure you hire people that excel in each area.

Having a mix of high IQ, TQ, and EQ people will create a well balanced team that can work together, adopt and exploit leading technology faster, and learn about new options ahead of your peers.

4. Encourage continual learning … and pay for it.

Bring back the training budget, and pad it well. Even though you’re going to pay more for these well educated, smart, tech savvy, team-oriented, curious people, that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t pay even more for training. In what other organization can a $1 of training take $100 off of the bottom line when the sourceror takes 5% off a category expected to be at rock bottom, gets the supplier to throw in a value-add warranty for free, or finds a new production method that shaves 50% off of overhead cost? Find people that want to learn, and continually educate them. The cost is nothing compared to the ROI you will generate.