Category Archives: Supplier Management

Perks and pitfalls of knowledge diffusion in the supply chain


Today’s guest post is by Professor Ralf W. Seifert & Olov H. D. Isaksson.
Ralf W. Seifert is Professor of Operations Management at IMD and he teaches in the “Leading the Global Supply Chain” (LGSC) program.
Olov Isaksson is a PhD candidate at the Chair of Technology and Operations Management at EPFL, specializing in buyer-supplier relationships. He previously worked at Henkel as a supply chain project manager.

Do you collaborate with, and learn from, your suppliers, or are you serving them the knowledge to compete with you head-on on a silver platter? This question is increasingly relevant in today’s global competitive environment. Firms are routinely leveraging global sourcing to gain cost advantages but competition nowadays occurs between supply chains, rather than businesses. Thus keeping an eye on your supplier’s ambitions is vital.

Case in point, just look at the ongoing patent infringement lawsuits between Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. Apple turned to Samsung as a supplier for its new iPod and iPhone products back in 2005. At first the two companies jointly developed the components, which gave Samsung an insight into Apple’s technology and operations. Being the only supplier for the processors, Samsung also gained critical knowledge on Apple’s prediction of the market size for the iPhone. In 2010, Samsung launched its own smart phone and has since become Apple’s largest competitor. Today, Apple still remains dependent on Samsung, but it is trying hard to diversify its supplier portfolio.

The above situation exemplifies the negative aspects of knowledge spillovers in the supply chain — i.e. how important knowledge that exceeds the scope of the formal transaction can be diffused between customers and suppliers, and then be used in a rivalrous manner. At the same time, spillovers can also have positive effects and lead to a competitive advantage for the supply chain as a whole.

How does your desire to draw on trading partners for innovation balance with the need to protect strategic knowledge? And, to what extent do you take co-competition from suppliers into account in your supplier assessments? We engaged 34 executives from different high-tech firms and asked them about their opinion. Their consensus: recognizing knowledge spillovers is a critical issue in today’s supply chains. Both suppliers and customers are seen as important sources of information for innovation (see Fig 1).

“We get plenty of valuable information about the market, its players in the value chain and its main drivers from our customers and suppliers. My business relies on it. It is a great input for our R&D portfolio,” said Dr. Ir. Kees Joziasse, Director of Innovation at Corbion Purac.


Figure 1
While most high tech firms protect their innovations through patents, most of the executives stress that knowledge spillovers occur outside formal collaborations — to a large extent via personal interactions between employees of the firms (Figure 2).


Figure 2
Greg Nelson, Sr. Director R&D LED Systems at Philips highlights that employees possessing important knowledge must be conscious of the risks and rewards of knowledge spillovers when interacting outside the firm:

“Knowledge spillovers in the supply chain are a clear attention point. There is a need to create awareness up front with people who have these contacts and to have an explicit policy regarding what can be transferred. Policy restrictions must be balanced with the potential benefits that can be derived from collaboration and not hinder speed in the process. While policies and procedures are not always 100% effective, they do help create awareness in the organization to guard against unintended transfers.”

The Supplier Perspective

While a supplier can learn from its customers, it cannot choose who wants to buy its products/services. Still, Ted Smith, EMEA Sales Director at ON Semiconductor suggests that firms can leverage knowledge spillovers and gain a competitive advantage by carefully choosing collaboration/innovation partners.

“We typically don’t select which customers to do business with, but we do select customers to innovate with. We work with selected alpha-customers, or early adopters, who support supplier innovation in return for a head start in the market.”

The Supply Chain Perspective

Good and enduring partnerships can lead to a competitive advantage for the supply chain as a whole: Mukesh Singh, Senior Regional Manager at BASF explains that “Suppliers easily share their new learning/knowledge if the customer has a strong supplier relationship management program.”

However, it is important to agree upfront how innovative output that is generated in a collaboration should be divided. Dan Negrea, Managing Director AEMtec GmbH and Chief Technology Officer at ECMS exceet, elaborates:

“We strictly consider the background and foreground intellectual property (IP) in our cooperation with partners. The background IP is a source of information “for free.” The foreground IP is normally shared between our company and the customers. Product related IP goes to the customer and process related IP stays with us. In most cases, cutting edge products require the parallel development of a product and a manufacturing process.”

The Customer Perspective

Most executives viewed knowledge spillover as a positive phenomenon. Reflecting on the Apple-Samsung example, others might beg to disagree. Managers do need to protect important knowledge from potential competitors and patents offer only limited protection. Thus, strategic supplier assessments and a detailed supply chain contract are vital to mitigate this risk. If the knowledge in question is critical, in-house production or vertical integration of the supplier might still outweigh short-term gains.

Takeaways

Knowledge spillover readily occurs in your supply chain. Managers need to be aware of the risks of negative leaks, which can have detrimental consequences for the firm. At the same time, knowledge spillover can offer significant benefits for your supply chain if suppliers leverage newly acquired competences to your advantage. These are our recommendations:

  • Explicitly recognize the potential of knowledge spillovers in collaboration and sourcing decisions up-front! What do you need to protect from your competitors? Are there limitations in your supply chain contract? To what extent can your enforce non-use, non-disclosure and non-competition clauses in a global marketplace?
  • People buy from people. Make sure that employees are aware of the risks and benefits of knowledge spillovers! Create an appropriate policy regarding disclosures and interactions outside the firm!
  • Have a clear strategy with regards to each supply chain partner! Do you want a win-win situation or to squeeze a supplier? In collaborations, clearly agree upfront how innovative output shall be divided! If the knowledge is strategically important, in-house production or vertical integration of the supplier might be the safer option.


Thanks Ralf and Olov for this interesting take on Supply Chain collaboration.

iValua: Proving Their Mettle with Source to Settle, Part I

When we last covered iValua in 2010, they were one of the few providers tackling end-to-end sourcing and procurement in a single suite of integrated modules built on one common platform. We noted in Tackling End-to-End Sourcing and Procurement, Part I that this French company had capabilities that, at least to some degree, addressed each of the core phases of the basic sourcing-and-procurement cycle except decision optimization and tax reclamation. The platform still doesn’t address decision optimization, but in the past three years, in addition to adding considerable intelligence for tracking and managing taxes, ASN (Advanced Shipping Notice) support, and customizable pivot-tables for bid and auction analysis, they’ve made extensive additions to many of their modules, added powerful workflow capabilities, extremely powerful UI customization capabilities in Design Mode (considering the platform is accessed through a standard web browser), drag-and-drop document authoring capability (also through the web browser) and round-trip integration with Microsoft Word, a comprehensive supplier view (that integrates all of the data related to the supplier across all of the modules), and the ability to easily define and load custom data tables for surveys, questionnaires, tracking, and reporting through built-in native ETL tools, among other enhancements.

Version 8.0 of the iValua platform, being released at the start of Q4, is one of the most extensive integrated native Source-to-Settle platforms that SI has ever seen, especially considering their recent additions for the management of services. It comes as no surprise that they now have over 100 customers globally with a 99% renewal rate, that the majority of their customers have migrated to their SaaS platform, and that their current growth rate year-over-year is over 20%. Along with bPack and Wallmedien, they are making a serious play to take over the high-end of the Best-of-Breed market that was almost eliminated (with the exception of BravoSolution, that does have industry leading decision optimization) with the acquisitions of Ariba and Emptoris. (It truly looks like the European providers are starting to pull ahead of the pack where Spherical Supply Solutions — Part I, Part II, and Part III — are concerned.)

iValua divides their platform into Supplier Management, Sourcing, Contract Management, Catalog Management, Procurement, Invoice Management, Expense Management, Reporting, and Administration. So we will cover the highlights of the platform with respect to each of these categories. Note that, in addition to the application dashboard, each of these modules has their own dashboard that is extensively configurable so that a user can quickly see the status of supplier efforts, sourcing projects, contracts under construction, procurement processes, catalog integration, invoice processing, expense and budget management, and performance reports.

Supplier Management

Supplier Management in the iValua platform consists of Supplier Registration, Supplier Performance Management, Supplier (Related) Document Management, approved Supplier Lists, and Supplier Risk Profiles (called Supplier Risk Indicators). The on-boarding process is similar to the process employed by other SRM vendors, document management is the process of tracking certifications, proof of insurance, and compliance documentation, and approved supplier list management is quite straight-forward so we won’t go into any additional details on this functionality. What is interesting, and powerful, is the ability to identify and track anomalies from expected performance, create improvement plans, and access a supplier risk profile based on environmental, CSR, and other user-defined indicators, as this is functionality typically only found in SRM platforms, and not sourcing, procurement, or source-to-settle platforms.

The supplier management tab integrates all of the data associated with a supplier across the entire platform. The user can quickly access the basic info (name, address, credentials, risk score, etc.), the lifecycle workflows associated with that supplier (with respect to sourcing projects), the supplier’s credentials, associated users, pre-defined reports and analytics with respect to the supplier’s performance, current activity, commodities and services being provided, financial and risk KPIs, and overall performance and risk rating. It’s a one-stop SIM/SPM shop.

In iValua, an improvement plan, which can be created off of an anomaly (which is a user-defined record that describes an issue that needs to be addressed, such as an exceptional late delivery, quality problem, etc.) and associated with a commodity and/or organization, is an action plan designed to address an (underlying) issue (that caused the anomaly). It consists of a sequence of defined tasks that are expected to resolve the issue. Each task has a type, an associated user who is responsible for the task, a manager who will ensure the task is completed, start and end dates, and other attributes consistent with the definition of a project in a standard project management application. It’s interactive, and as steps are completed, the plan, and status thereof, are updated.

The supplier risk profile capability is quite advanced. A user can define any type of risk that they wish to track (supplier, product, sustainability, financial, product, etc.), how the risk indicator rolls up (finance, CSR, etc.), and where it comes from. iValua integrates with leading risk profile providers out-of-the-box, like D&B, and this integration goes beyond simple financial profile providers and also includes an integration with a leading provider of sustainability data, namely EcoVadis. (You can even access the native EcoVadis profile direct.)

We’ll cover the remaining parts of the platform in the remainder of this series. Come back tomorrow!

Don’t Confuse Centralized Sourcing with a Centralized Sourcing Model

A recent article over in S&DC Executive on “The Four Vs of Fixing a Decentralized Procurement Model” noted that implementing a centralized model from nothing is no mean feat and then presented the Four Vs” as a good starting point to begin their path forward to centralization of selected spend categories. Centralization of spend is a necessary step on the path to a centralized sourcing model, but that’s all it is – a step.

In order to have a centralized sourcing model, you have to centralized:

  • Talent,
    all of the Sourcing and Supply Management Personnel have to be in the same business unit
  • Technology, and
    all of the operations, even if they are decentralized all over the world, need to run on a common base technology platform
  • Transition,
    all of the processes need to be migrated to common sourcing and supply management processes, with local sourcing only taking place on categories that are truly local (otherwise, sourcing should be center led)

Now, when you are transitioning processes, you should start with sourcing and procurement, as this one-two punch will give you the biggest bang for your buck. The application of good advanced sourcing techniques to categories never sourced this way, or to significantly larger spend volumes, will typically identify savings opportunities in the 10% to 12% range. Then, good procurement systems will make sure that the savings are captured by preventing maverick spend (if the spend has to go through the system and appropriate rules are in place) and making sure the invoices match the POs which will need to match the contracted rates.

And the first step in a good sourcing process is spend analysis, which, if you want to get it right, does require:

  • Visibility,
    into all of the spend in the category being sourced
  • Variance,
    on the spend between sites (which will give you a quick estimate of savings potential)
  • Velocity, and
    to savings which results by choosing categories where contracts are expiring or have expired and where there will be little resistance
  • Value.
    generated from the process in a way that can be measured, tracked, and reported to the CFO.

The four V’s covered in the article are indeed a good starting point on your journey to centralized the sourcing process, but that’s just one aspect of transition, and it doesn’t even address technology or talent, two key factors in the centralization of a Supply Management function.

What The A-Team Can Teach Us About Supplier Negotiations, Part II

Today’s guest post is from Mason Lee, Manager of the Strategy and Operations Practice at Archstone Consulting, and Matt Kucharski, a Senior Consultant in the Strategy and Operations Practice at Archstone Consulting, a division of The Hackett Group.

In Part I, we discussed how the Hackett Group’s point-of-view on Strategic Sourcing Negotiations is that it is a team effort, and that you should be sending in your A-Team. We also overviewed the role of “Face”, the Frontman. Today we will discuss the rest of the roles.

“B.A”. Baracus – The Muscle
When all else fails, sometimes you need to bring the pain and, to do that, you are going to need some Muscle. “B.A”. pities the fool who takes NO for an answer. At the negotiations table, people often have a tendency to stop when they first hear that word. If you want to maximize the result of your negotiation, be sure to bring your “B.A”.; his role on the mission is to handle challenging topics like price. Just make sure that you have enough ammo (fact-based analysis) to give him the confidence to negotiate aggressively.

While supporting our client through their negotiations with a major Hotel chain, both parties were far apart on price. The hotel representative continually stated that the room rates offered were the best they could do and insisted that they did not have visibility into our client’s historic spend and stay volume. Armed with analysis, our “B.A”. presented the client’s historic data and proved more aggressive pricing was warranted if the chain desired to keep the business. As a result of providing proper ammo and “B.A’s” inability to take no for an answer, an incremental 15% savings was achieved.

“Howling Mad” Murdock – The Unconventionalist
In many circumstances, it is impossible for a sourcing professional to know as much about the category in question as the subject matter expert they are supporting. In these circumstances, do not be afraid to bring in “Howling Mad” Murdock, your subject matter expert, to help you develop a creative approach and gain credibility as a result of their knowledge. Since some subject matter experts may not be experienced in negotiations, it is valuable to conduct a preparation session with the individual in order to gain alignment on the objective; if you just turn them loose, you never know what may happen.

During the course of lengthy negotiations between our client and HVAC providers, progress was at a standstill. Our client was facing an increase in equipment pricing from all engaged providers. Out of conventional options, our “Howling Mad” Murdock saw an opportunity to expand the scope of the negotiations and bring HVAC services into the mix. By combining equipment and services, our client was able to contract with a single supplier for all their needs and realize 20% in savings.

Hannibal – The Tactician
During the course of negotiations it is important to observe and proactively modify your plan based upon the actions of the supplier. “Hannibal” knows how to do this best. After establishing your preliminary strategy, it is crucial to be able to modify your ground-game based upon what you observe. Is a supplier representative highly analytical? Time to bring out the reports and quantitatively demonstrate where you stand. Is the supplier agreeing to everything? Maybe you have not asked for enough and need to recalibrate.

During negotiations with a German-based metals supplier we hosted, company representatives clearly believed they had won the business, were stonewalling, and were engaging in side conversations at the table. Our “Hannibal” knew it was time to act, calling for a break. During the pause in action, the team revised tactics and sent in the Sr. VP (who had been previously quiet) with a stern message and strong proposal. Our “Hannibal” also decided that only the Sr. VP should speak while the rest of the team remained silent and stoic to reinforce the seriousness of the proposal and shutdown cross-talk. The result of “Hannibal’s” plan was an additional savings of $500K.

Conclusion
The next time you reach the point of Supplier Negotiations it is of the highest importance that all planning, strategizing and due diligence have been completed before attempting to channel the characteristics of the A-Team. A great negotiations team should have the ability to leverage the expertise of “Hannibal”, “Face”, “Howling Mad”, or “B.A”. in order to capitalize on the unique elements that arise. At the end of the day, you’ll “love it when a plan comes together”.

Thanks Mason and Matt for this great two-part post!

What The A-Team Can Teach Us About Supplier Negotiations, Part I

Today’s guest post is from Mason Lee, Manager of the Strategy and Operations Practice at Archstone Consulting, and Matt Kucharski, a Senior Consultant in the Strategy and Operations Practice at Archstone Consulting, a division of The Hackett Group.

From 1983 to 1987, The A-Team delivered five seasons of action-packed episodes to its cult following. The ex-U.S. Army Special Forces unit, turned mercenaries, were constantly on the run for a “crime they didn’t commit”. The four “soldiers of fortune” who made up the team were Colonel John “Hannibal” Smith, Lieutenant Templeton “Face” Peck, Captain H.M. “Howling Mad” Murdock, and Sergeant First Class Bosco “B.A”. Baracus. The sitcom has left its mark on popular culture through its iconic van and catchphrases. But the creators of the A-Team were unlikely to be aware that they were also providing us with valuable lessons in Supplier Negotiations.

Supplier Negotiations are a critical step within the Strategic Sourcing process. After profiling a category, developing sourcing strategies, and engaging the market, it is time to more personally engage your potential future state supplier(s). The Hackett Group’s point-of-view on Strategic Sourcing Negotiations is that it is a team effort. Your A-Team should be comprised of individuals with different skill sets in order to increase its strength and ability to adapt.

“Face” – The Frontman
“Face” had a knack for making friends everywhere. “Face” was the master of the win-win, excelled at breaking the ice, and had an ability to get both parties feeling good. On your negotiations team, “Face” is the persuader and consummate influencer of the group. Use your team’s “Face” to open up the meeting and set the tone or when negotiations get rocky, consider channeling your inner “Face” to diffuse the situation.

In the show, “Face” also had a knack for scrounging up whatever resource the team needed no matter where in the world the team was. You can apply this invaluable ability in business. When negotiating with incumbent suppliers, chances are that there are opportunities for you to become a better customer. Give your incumbent the opportunity to constructively communicate what is not working optimally for them then send your “Face” back into your organization to locate a solution.

We had a negotiation in which our supplier and buyer were equally frustrated with each other (to the point of shouting and nearly ending the relationship) because the supplier was missing orders and the buyer’s orders kept changing. Our “Face” intervened, calming everyone down and eventually helped the supplier revise its planning systems all-the-while also going back into her buying organization and securing commitments to provide better forecasts.

Come back tomorrow for Part II!

Thanks Mason and Matt!