Category Archives: Strategy

Myth-busting 2025 2015 Procurement Predictions and Trends! Part 6

Introduction

In our first instalment, we noted that the ambitious started pumping out 2025 prediction and trend articles in late November / early December, wanting to be ahead of the pack, even though there is rarely much value in these articles. First of all, and we say this with 25 years of experience in this space, the more they proclaim things will change … Secondly, the predictions all revolve around the same topics we’ve been talking about for almost two decades. In fact, if you dug up a Procurement predictions article for 2015, there’s a good chance 9 of the top 10 topic areas would be the same. (And see the links in our first article for two “future” series with about 3 dozen trends that are more or less as relevant now as they were then.)

In our last instalment, we continued our review of the 10 core predictions (and variants) that came out of our initial review of 71 “predictions” and “trends” across the first eight articles we found, in an effort to demonstrate that most of these aren’t ground-shattering, new, or, if they actually are, not going to happen because the more they proclaim things will change …

In this instalment, we’re again continuing to work our way up the list from the bottom to the top and continuing with “Strategic Value”.

Strategic Value

There were 7 predictions across the eight articles which basically revolved around “strategic value” with some sideline focus on the need for “flexibility” and “diversification”. As with almost every “prediction” and “trend” in this series, this is yet another prediction that makes headlines every year, no more important this year than the last, and no more likely to be addressed unless a disaster occurs that, if not handed to, and solved by, Procurement, could end the business. Before we discuss further, as is our custom, we will list the seven predictions.

  • Flexibility and Agility in Procurement
  • Future of Procurement: Operational Excellence and Innovation
  • Global Sourcing and Diversification
  • Innovation
  • Procurement Diversification Strategies
  • Procurement Takes the Lead Internally
  • Procurement Will Continue to Evolve to Become More Strategic

Every function in the business should be about value creation, not just Procurement, but of all the functions, Procurement is the one that is the most likely to be viewed as a cost centre since, fundamentally, Procurement exists to acquire supply in exchange for money. As a result, all it typically does is spend, even though, when done right, it spends less than the business would spend without the function.

But we all know spending less when

  • costs are rising across the board,
  • demand is rising, and
  • production and distribution complexity is increasing

is not easy. It is only accomplished through strategic efforts, meaning that the focus needs to be on strategy for Procurement to shine. And in an age where geopolitical-based disruption is higher than it’s been in over two decades, it’s easy to see why “diversification” is coming to the forefront in strategy.

It’s also easy to see why some of this is materializing as “friend-shoring”, although it really should be “near-shoring” and, when possible, “home-shoring”, since a strategic advantage comes from not needing to depend on neutral third parties whose alliances could shift at any time, and, even worse, adversarial third parties that will take your business when they feel like it and then cut you off when the winds shift direction. Moreover, in an age when supply assurance is becoming the most critical thing, multiple sources of supply are becoming more critical than ever. As is flexibility (and innovation). Willingness to shift supplier, supply, and sometimes even product designs at a moment’s notice to maintain supply assurance and, hopefully, profitable operations.

But in the end, the focus on strategy will be no more than usual unless a major disruption or near catastrophic event occurs that thrusts Procurement back into the limelight.

What Should Happen? (But Won’t!)

Procurement should take a good hard look at its operation and separate the strategic from the tactical, and get really strategic about that which it classifies as strategic. If the organization has “strategic” suppliers, then it should have performance tracking, management, and development software (as per a previous entry in this series) to help it manage productive, collaborative relationships. If the organization takes a category strategy to Sourcing and Procurement, then it should be practicing strategic category management. If the organization has a high risk supply chain, then risk management should be a strategic function to help the organization maintain uninterrupted supply. It should be more than just something they say, it should be something they do … where doing it has meaning and returns value. Going from strategic spend to strategic value-add.

That’s five down, five to go.

Sourcing Success in these Turbulent Times Require Long Term Planning and Cost Concessions

This originally posted on January 2 (2024).  This is being reposted, in case you missed it, due to the rising criticality of Long Term Planning!

In a McKinsey article a few months back on How medium-size enterprises can better manage sources, McKinsey said that small and medium-size enterprises often struggle to find Procurement cost savings. Yet there are ways to do it while still pursing growth and providing a superior customer experience. The article, which concluded with an action plan for procurement cost savings, recommended:

  • establishing CoE teams
  • improving forecasting
  • expanding (the) use of digital procurement tools
  • gaining greater market intelligence
  • establishing a culture of — and process for — continuous cost improvement
  • incorporating supplier-driven product improvements

which, of course, are all great suggestions, and mostly address four of the five reasons that McKinsey give that prevent companies from reining in spending, which included

  • a lack of spending transparency (which would have to be corrected to improve forecasting)
  • talent gaps (which can be minimized with the right tools, market intelligence, and CoE teams)
  • underused digital tools and automation (which is directly addressed by using more of them)
  • exclusion of procurement and supply chain in business decision (which would hopefully be a byproduct of a corporate culture for continuous cost improvement that only happens when procurement and supply chain is not involved higher up)

but the fifth is largely unaddressed — the myopic focus on the short term which McKinsey claims could be addressed by putting more effort into planning and forecasting. But that doesn’t solve the problem.

Better forecasting will allow for longer contracts to be signed for higher volumes, which can lead to long term strategic supplier relationships, and better planning can allow this to happen, but this does not completely address the need for long term planning.

Supply Chains today are not the supply chains of the last ten to twenty years.

  • rare earths are even rarer
  • many critical raw materials are in increasingly limited or short supply
  • transportation can be unpredictable in availability and cost; even though most of the world declared COVID over in mid-2022, China still had mandatory lockdowns, ocean carriers scrapped many of their ships for insurance (and in some cases, post-panamax ships that had never made a single voyage), airlines furloughed too many pilots who found other jobs or just flat out retired, and the long-haul trucking in North America (the UK, and many first-world countries) has been on a steady decline for over a deacde
  • ESG/GHG/Carbon Requirements are escalating around the globe and you need to be in compliance (both in terms of reporting 1/2/3 and ensuring you don’t exceed any caps)
  • human/labour rights are escalating and you have to be able to trace compliance down to the source in some jurisdictions; you need suppliers who insist on the same visibility that you do
  • diversity is important not just to meet arbitrary requirements for government programs or arbitrary internal goals, but to ensure you have the right insight and expertise to solve all types of problems that might arise

And you can’t effectively address any of these problems unless you think long term AND accept that some of the solutions will cost more up front.

  • In mid November, the trading price for Neodymium (a rare-earth that is critical for the creation of strong permanent magnets, which makes it possible to miniaturize many electronic devices, including the [smart]phone you might be reading this on) was over $87,000 USD/mt. In comparison, hot roll steel was around $850 USD/mt. In other words, Neodymium was 100 times more expensive than steel. And while you can still buy steel for about the same price you could 10 years ago (it was around $900 USD/mt), Neodynmium is almost $20,000 more (as it was around $69,000 USD/mt in November 2013). It’s not the only rare earth to increase about 26% in 10 years, with further increases on the horizon. You need to have a strategy to minimize your need (which could include product redesigns that use more sustainable alternatives or recycling strategies that use recovered materials from older phone models). And when it comes to recycled materials, due to a historical lack of recycling efforts, or research into technologies to make recycling efficient and cost effective, recycled materials are almost always more expensive at first. Always. But as adoption increases, plants, technologies, and processes get more efficient, and the cost goes down (while, at the same time, raw material prices for materials in limited supply continue to go up). In other words, if you want to mitigate the ever-increasing costs for rare earths and other materials that are in limited supply, you have to incorporate the use of recycled materials, and maybe even invest in your own plants (and recycle your own phones you buy back because it’s cheaper just to buy them back and extract the rare earths yourself than buy the recycled rare earths from someone else).
  • Global trade is costly and unpredictable. Supply assurance is finally dictating near-sourcing and home-sourcing (which SI has been advocating for almost fifteen years, as inevitable disaster was the logical conclusion of outsourcing everything to China as eventually a pandemic, global spat, natural disaster, or other event would send shockwaves through the world when it severely disrupted the trade routes [because even though the chances of a pandemic, natural disaster on the scale of Krakatoa or the Valdivia earthquake, or another catastrophic event is minimal in any given year, over the course of a century, it becomes very likely]), and that is going to require re-investing in those Mexican factories (that worked just fine, by the way) you shut down twenty years ago, training appropriately skilled workers in low cost North American (or Eastern Europe) locales, and paying a bit more per unit (and even transportation until the carriers rebuild those routes). But in the long term, as global transportation costs continue to rise, and the local-ish resources get much more efficient (using the best technology we have to offer), your costs, and transportation risks, will go down while your competitor costs continue to go up.
  • if you don’t insist, and ensure, up front that your suppliers can report the data you need, how will you get it; chances are those suppliers need help and modern systems, which temporarily increase their operational costs as they install, integrate, and learn the systems; not more than a few cents here and there per unit, but a noticeable blip on the overall costs none-the-less
  • if you want suppliers that monitor their supply chain and insist on no slave/forced/child labour, appropriately treated and well paid labour, and, better yet, a community focus throughout the supply chain (so that the humans who mine the materials, harvest the food stuffs, weave the silk, or otherwise do the foundational work have a reasonable quality of life, health, and safety), you’re going to have to put the effort in to find them and the extra money to support them in their humanitarian efforts; since most of these workers in remote low-cost locales are paid pennies on your dollar, it’s another blip on the total cost to ensure they are paid every penny they deserve, but it’s still a blip; but you can’t afford not to do it if your jurisdiction has laws making you responsible for slave labour that later gets discovered in your supply chain
  • and while diversity shouldn’t cost more, since it’s the same number of employees, the reality is that the supply base embracing it could be a minority, and if these minority suppliers suddenly become in demand, market dynamics may kick in and they may charge a premium that your competitor will pay; but, as new challenges continue to arise, you will need the diversity to solve them; so, another blip in the cost you need to absorb

In other words, you need the long term focus to guarantee success, and you need to understand that, up front, it may cost a bit more. However, done right, your costs will decrease over time while your competitors’ costs skyrocket. So if you truly want success, in any high dollar, strategic, or emerging category, plan for the long term. And you will truly succeed.

Strategic Procurement for Strategic M&A

A recent article over on Fierce Healthcare on how strategic procurement can maximize M&A benefits noted that consolidating procurement can slash costs by standardizing purchasing processes and taking advantage of volume discounts for supplies because a smart business buying strategy involves using one technology platform for purchasing a wide variety of products from multiple sources.

The healthcare sector has also been ripe with M&A over the past few years, with $13 Billion in revenue now required to be a top 20 healthcare system, as many systems have grown significantly as a result of inorganic M&A growth over the past few years. According to the article, the recent M&A activity has been characterized by cross-geography deals designed to create value by scaling investments in platform capabilities across digital, analytics, shared services and workforce management.

But Procurement can find more value beyond shared products, shared supply base, and shared systems.

As hinted in the article, Procurement can also:

  • identify opportunities for shared services across the merged companies:
    this can allow for service provider contract consolidation and renegotiation for better rates
  • better workforce management:
    Procurement can help analyze the workforce needs across the proposed combined organization to better reallocate workforce needs (and possibly reduce the need for outsourced services)

But it doesn’t have to stop there.

An organization spends money across:

  • employees
  • contractors
  • facilities
  • utilities
  • products
  • systems

Procurement can help identify opportunities across each of these.

In other words, don’t overlook:

  • facilities:
    maybe you can reduce the number of locations through relocation of some personnel, and even reduce the overall cost through better facility identification
  • utilities:
    some states have energy deregulation, and there is significant opportunity in telco (like SaaS)
  • software: well beyond the S2P tools

Anywhere money is spent, Procurement can help provide an objective, fact-based view — not just on product-based spend.

Craft Category Strategy Like a Chief with akirolabs

As much as many vendors and consultancies would like to tell you that category strategy selection can be automated whenever you need to kick off a new sourcing cycle, because “it just depends on the supply vs demand imbalance and based on that you either do an auction (if [way] more supply than demand), do an RFP (about balanced), or renegotiate with the incumbent for a contract extension (if there is [projected to be] a lack of supply)“, that’s simply NOT the case, especially for highly strategic, specialized, or evolving categories.

The reality is that category strategy depends on much, much more than this. Factors it depends on include, but are not limited to:

  • supply vs demand
  • current and projected spend
  • current relationships
  • innovation requirements
  • environmental requirements
  • industry and regulatory requirements
  • risk factors
  • regional differences between source / make / sink
  • etc. etc. etc.

That’s why we have so many methodologies to arrive at a strategy including, but not limited to:

  • Porter’s 5 forces
  • Kraljic Matrix
  • SWOT
  • PESTLE
  • etc.

All of which serve a purpose and give us insights, but none of which actually give us a strategy. Consider Porter’s five forces — it provides insights into the current market, but then we decide what to do with that. Consider the Kraljic Matrix. It tells us whether an item is non-critical, bottleneck, leverage, or strategic based on an analysis of risk/complexity vs. profit impact, but we still have to decide what strategy to use, and, more importantly, how to evaluate the responses based on non-price factors that are also important to us (such as supply assurance, carbon / GHG reduction, etc.). SWOT helps us identify the responses, but we still need a strategy to evaluate them against. PESTLE is one of the more complete analyses of external factors encompassing Political, Economic, Sociological, Technological, Legal and Environmental factors, but you still have to build a strategy on that.

Plus, it’s not just the external factors these methodologies are based on that’s relevant. It’s internal factors that include, but are not limited to:

  • current and projected category spend
  • current relationships
  • organizational culture and process
  • organizational direction and goals
  • stakeholder needs
  • etc.

All of this needs to be considered simultaneously with the external factors and analytic methodologies described above in order to arrive at a proper, acceptable, and executable strategy — and a strategy is not a strategy if it is not:

  • proper : an inappropriate strategy will NOT lead the desired results
  • acceptable : if the stakeholders don’t buy in, your project won’t go anywhere, and you may have to start over (or just continue with the status quo)
  • executable : a strategy that doesn’t provide actionable guidance cannot be executed and isn’t really a strategy at all

And that’s what akirolabs, challenging the 40-year old Kraljic matrix as the de-facto standard in category management, is building — an augmented intelligence (because they fully realize that no Artificially Idiotic technology can ever do something that requires real human intelligence and experience) solution that helps category managers build proper, acceptable, and executable strategies and do so in weeks, not months, and see the results in months, not quarters.

The akirolab platform guides you through an analyze/strategize/realize process where it helps a category manager, or management team in a larger organization, collaboratively analyze the company and market factors, develop a strategy based on value levers and strategic scenario modelling, and then realize the strategy using the project and performance management capabilities (not found in most strategic sourcing applications).

In the Analyze phase, the company pulls in the following company data:

  • current spend (it just pulls in your current spend cube in a frame; it’s only volume tier and trend that’s relevant for strategy, not minutiae transaction details)
  • current budget (based upon projections)
  • current contracts (which formalize relationships)
  • stakeholder mapping (who is involved, and how)
  • strategy & requirements survey (what do the stakeholders need, why, and what are their goals and concerns)

… and the following market data …

  • market intel – articles, studies, white papers, etc. found by an appropriately trained semantic search engine
  • innovation factors and data
  • cost drivers relevant for the category
  • risks and associated data
  • supplier preferences (based upon relationships, innovation, and supplier risks)

… and then completes the following analyses, with the help of the akirolabs platform:

  • Porter’s Five Forces — where the category team scores and ranks the relevant factors in each force (which can be seeded from market data using the AI if enough data is available)
  • Kraljic Matrix — where the category team evaluates the risk/complexity vs. cost (and where the platform can suggest risk/complexity based upon available market intelligence, risk data, and innovation factors)
  • PESTLE — where the category management team can complete a full PESTLE analysis using all of the available data and the aforementioned Porter’s Five Forces and Kraljic Matrix
  • SWOT — where all of the above is fused into a category SWOT analysis

And the best part about its analyze capabilities is that the strategies can be analyzed by region (or by department if each department has different needs and/or goals for the products in the category), scored and weighted separately, and then overlaid visually (using a spider graph in the case of Porter’s Five Forces) to allow a team to see the average as well as the regional, departmental, etc. differentiations.

Another unique feature is its approach to SWOT. For each quadrant, they define key questions and key parameters to ensure that the analysis is done consistently (and comparably) across categories, and to ensure that the category management team collects the right information in order to generate a good strategy.

In the Strategize phase, the category management team identifies the value levers and then creates a strategy using Strategic Scenario Modelling. Using the akirolabs strategic scenario modelling capability, a category team can build a strategy that balances cost savings, sustainability, supply chain resilience, procurement agility, innovation, quality, regulatory requirements, and growth potential by evaluating multiple scenarios inspired by the market analysis in the analyze phase. These can be overlaid graphically to provide a visual comparison of the strengths and weaknesses of different scenarios.

They can pull in the relevant information from the analyze phase, and define the strategy that will be applied as well as their reasoning as to why, backed up by all of the relevant analysis and data. They can then create Executive summaries for each executive (CEO, CFO, COO, CIO, etc.) that explains the strategy, rationale, and expected results. The platform allows the team to create standard report templates by function and makes it super easy to pull in the relevant data and graphs that explains and supports the decision.

And all of this can be done collaboratively, as it was designed to allow all stakeholders to answer the survey and all team members to work together to collect the data, associate it with the appropriate analysis, score appropriately, and collaborate on the strategy using the built in messaging platform.

Finally, as part of the Strategize phase, a category management team can assess the sustainability of the scenarios using their “Procurement with Purpose” view that assess the strategy against each of the 17 interlinked Sustainable Development Goals of the United Nations.

Once the strategy has been defined and accepted, the category management team can create a project plan and track it in the “Project and Performance Management”. They can track the stages and activities, timelines, responsibilities, status, assigned value category, expected financial effect, forecasted financial benefit, etc.

If this sounds good to you, you’re probably one of the target customers, that fall into three categories where they can provide you with great value (4.4x as per their claim):

  1. Mature Procurement Organizations: leaders (under analyst frameworks) or best-in-class (under the Hackett numbers) organizations that are high on the maturity ladder and that are looking to go beyond savings and expand the core business
  2. Maturing, But Fragmented, Procuring Organizations: average to average-plus maturity, but no centre of excellence, no history of formally captured category strategy development, and little experience bringing stakeholders together across regions and departments (leading to fragmented category events)
  3. Immature, but Growing: and, most importantly, ready to invest the time and effort to formally mature as a Procurement organization by embracing a world-class methodology and platform to jump-start their efforts and success

And if you’re still on the fence, it doesn’t just support traditional “Category” strategy. It also supports “Beyond Category” for organizations that want to use it for supply chain design, logistics & warehousing, sustainability improvements, etc. Not just traditional material or procurement hierarchy categories. And that’s a differentiator. If any of this sounds good to you, be sure to check akirolabs out.

Airflip: Flip it to the “S” Side

Airflip is a new, and unique, offering in the Source-to-Pay+ space that offers what they call “analyze-to-intake” and what is actually a new generation of analytics-backed category intelligence that allows a sourcing team to not only identify categories of opportunity, but identify where that opportunity is and what vendors they should be looking at.

Introduction

Airflip was founded in 2022 to help small Procurement teams in mid-sized Procurement organizations be prepared for their next deal. Billing itself as “vendor intelligence for your next deal“, it provides something that most small Procurement teams desperately need, and don’t even know how much they are missing by not having it.

Before we can dive in, we have to step back and discuss where category management is today and where it’s lacking. Today, category management is typically addressed by services vendors who bring their expertise to help you define a category, understand the market dynamics, put together a sourcing strategy, identify the appropriate suppliers/vendors, put together an RFP, put together a should-cost model, identify the evaluation criteria, and the process for selecting a supplier.

The Category Management solutions out there today are good, but they have their limitations. First of all, it is limited to the categories the services vendor has expertise in. Secondly, it is limited to the categories the buying organization can afford to pay for. (Services are costly, and if it’s a complex category, and requires a month or two of an expert’s time, that’s more than an annual license for a niche best-of-breed module in Source-to-Pay+.) Thirdly, it’s not repeatable by the buying organization the next time the category comes due for sourcing.

A technology solution was needed.

There are a few of those out there, but most of these fall into the categories of:

Savings Estimators
(Hybrid Servies-Backed) Sourcing platforms that keep track of identified savings percentages by category (at level 2 or 3 of a vendor standard hierarchy) and/or changes in average market price over time to identify an expected savings range should an organization choose to source the category (at the current time)
Specialist Category Sourcing Platforms
which incorporate market intelligence on supply vs demand, price trends, economies of scale by supplier, and logistics/supply chain costs and guide the buyer through a fine-tuned workflow for the current optimal strategy

And, outside of select categories, don’t really help a buyer:

  • identify which categories have untapped opportunities
  • get insight into current spend and potential opportunity
    (based on spend on-vs-off contract, etc.)
  • identify which vendors they currently source from in those categories
  • identify which other vendors they could be sourcing from
  • get relevant category-based insight on those vendors
  • get insight into how to evaluate the category
  • get insight into how to identify the relevant organizational needs, and what should happen before the sourcing event is kicked off

As most of this insight is limited to research reports from category consultancies or expert services providers. What is needed is a combination of the two solutions.

Airflip is one of the first solution providers to create a platform that bridges the capabilities of today’s “savings estimators” and “category insights” platforms with detailed category insight and guidance tailored to the organization’s current spend and supply base.

It does this by combining analytics (for spend insight), select contract meta data (for on vs off-contract insight), category intelligence [research] (gathered from the web and curated 3rd party data sources), and pre-sourcing category guidance [deal management] into one unified platform.

Analytics

Airflip is powered by a modern spend analytics application which allows the cube to be sliced, diced, shaped, and reshaped to your liking. While it only supports one cube (for now), the dynamic spreadsheet-like interface still puts it on par with a top 10 analytics application as a user can easily map and remap transactions and categories, create customized views using filters on any dimension, and drill down into the individual transactions if necessary.

Like every good analytics application, it has a dashboard that displays standard spend breakdowns by department, category, supplier, and cost center. Standard filters are date, thresholds, category, PO, contract, requester/department, payment method, domain, etc.

The standard spreadsheet view is a split view with the category hierarchy on the left and the transactions on the right, displayed in standard row/column spreadsheet format where the rows can be resorted and the columns reordered and hidden. For easy manipulation, the user can bring up a configuration view on the right that allows the columns to be hidden and unhidden and rows to be grouped in any order, based on any arithmetic formula.

One of the more unique capabilities is their semantic spend classification that uses all of the transaction data, their augmented supplier / vendor profiles, and third party data feeds to classify a transaction to level 3, and even level 4, if there is sufficient data, or to a higher level if there isn’t, with high accuracy. (Unlike traditional neural nets which tended to max out at 80% or Gen-AI which tends to max out at 70% or worse.) For example, they can often classify an implementation down to a CPQ software implementation (level 4 under software implementation, under IT Consulting, under Professional Services) vs. web development vs. translation and localization vs. generic implementation services. It’s a level of classification not found in most providers.

Associated with each transaction is a generated vendor overview based on retrieved profile data from the vendor website and any available third party data feeds.

Contracts

As noted above, it’s not a contract management platform — all it can do is integrate with a contract store, suck in all the contracts, process them with semantic AI, extract defined clause types, extract products and services, extract costs and obligations, and use that data to augment transactions and help the user answer questions as to whether or not a contract contains a clause or term.

Right now, it’s a very simple repository where you can sort and filter contracts by supplier. Drilling into a contract brings up the meta-data and key details associated with the contract, and a link to the uploaded pdf.

Research

Their “research” centre provides the category intelligence by subcategory, for example sales/marketing software in back-office software in software. The market research category intelligence provides deep insight into:

  • business area (sales acceleration, workforce management, intelligence, quotes, and contracts)
  • description
  • market leaders
  • (sub) categories (engagement, email, dialer, demo management, etc.)
  • … and in each (sub-) category, with the right license level,
    • the business impact,
    • overview
    • market details
    • key features
    • the (sub-) category leaders and organizational suppliers,
    • the recommended sourcing strategy
    • category risks
    • the related categories,
    • the relevant evaluation criteria,
    • the internal worksheet (for eliciting the necessary information from internal stakeholders)
    • a (starting) vendor questionnaire (that can be extended by the customer)
    • relevant links
    • … and, for each vendor, with the right license level, a research report that specifies
      • what the vendor does
      • who the solution is for
      • why the vendor is different
      • the funding the vendor received
      • known integrations
      • recent product/service launches
      • acquisitions the vendor has made
      • other key facts on the vendor

In most indirect and services categories, it will be more than enough information to identify the right suppliers to invite to the RFX. For direct, where custom goods are required, it will at least allow a buyer to identify those suppliers who make similar products in the (sub) category and get the buyer close to a short-list.

Deal Management

Deal Management is the final part of the application and provides the pre-sourcing category guidance for the product or service being sourced based upon the built-in category research.

The deal management capability walks the category owner through the business owner requirements, the evaluation workflow steps, the necessary compliance considerations, an evaluation of the business impact, an overview of the alternatives (for comparative baselines and negotiation ammunition), the recommended negotiation strategy, an outline of key steps in the strategy (and progress tracking capability), and the estimated savings potential. It can be configured with all the standard steps to help a junior buyer work through a purchase on their own, or a senior buyer expedite a process while ensuring they don’t miss anything important.

In addition, during the research phase, the application contains survey capability for the buyer to solicit the inputs required from the category or business stakeholders in order to properly plan the sourcing event.

Summary

Airflip is a great solution for mid-market companies looking to get platform-based insight and assistance into their category management. While the depth of insight will vary by category and vendor (as it’s relatively new and development is ongoing on a daily basis), it’s considerably more than the average small Procurement team in a mid-size organization will have access to, and a great foundation for success where the team doesn’t have deep category knowledge or insight across the board. So if you want better sourcing strategy support, consider flipping it to the Success side and inviting Airflip to your category management RFP.