Category Archives: Supply Chain

(Supply Chain Management Technology) Still Going …

A month or so ago, “AMR Research” (acquired by Gartner) released their “Supply Chain Management Applications Report 2005-2010”. Considered one of the cornerstone reports of the space (with a price tag to match), it’s always worth a read – if you can afford it.

If you can not afford it, you can settle for the highlights, which SupplyChainBrain was kind enough to post in an extended three page review in the September 6, 2006 edition of the e-Insider. I hope you were fortunate enough to catch the summary before it disappeared from their site. If you were not, here are seven highlights from the summary.

(1) The SCM market grew 3% in 2005, and is expected to grow 7% in 2006 and 5% in 2007.

(2) The most rapid innovation is being delivered by independent software providers that are focusing on industry-specific functionality and targeting under-serviced business problems.

(3) While 75% of firms have supply chain organizations, only 52% have experience with a supply chain organization for more than two years. As a result, domain expertise is a limiting factor for user adoption of supply chain management technologies.

(4) Analytics is merging with optimization to drive decision support for critical processes.

(5) The following environmental factors affecting the SCM market have triggered a shift in business priorities since the last report:

  1. Globalization and global sourcing
  2. Leaner supply networks
  3. Increased customer expectations
  4. More mass customization
  5. Increased demand variability
  6. Cost volatility, inflation, and competitive pressures

As a result, the development focus for vendors has shifted as follows:

  • movement from static demand planning to demand sensing and shaping
  • progression from enterprise planning to multi-tier decision support
  • recognition of materials and logistics as major manufacturing constraints
  • shortening of order execution cycles
  • focus on network flow analysis

(6) The top growth area for 2005 was in AMR’s inventory configuration and policy technology category as a result of the need for multi-echelon inventory optimization and inventory policy to buffer against supply risk, maximize in-stock positions, and ensure continuity of supply.

(7) Revenue from application hosting/subscription grew strongly at 16%. SCM software is increasingly purchased by buyers on a subscription basis to avoid capital budgeting, rapidly achieve ROI, and avoid large upfront license commitments. Furthermore, AMR expects subscription licensing to continue to grow as a share of SCM software revenue.

In other words, (1) the market is growing, (7) on-demand is capturing the market place, (5) execution cycles are shortening in a time when improved demand sensing and shaping is key, (6) technology that addresses this problem will continue to grow and improve, (4) the best technology will be built on analytically-based optimization, (2) it will be built by innovative fast-moving independent software providers, and (3) chances are good that you need to adopt this enabling technology since there is a 52% chance your supply chain organization is limited in expertise and experience and the right technology from the right partner will greatly enable your organization.

And all of the above is good news for you.

(1) In a growing market, your solution providers will be pumping more sales dollars back into R&D to make better products for you. This will be especially beneficial to those of you who use on-demand solutions with frequent upgrade cycles.

(2) As time goes on, there will be more and more solutions that address an ever-increasing number of business problems, making your job easier and easier.

(3) Knowing that your domain expertise is limited allows you to go out and seek precisely that. Many consulting firms have been springing up to help you with specific problems. Use them. After all, Aberdeen has found that companies that outsource well do better than their peers.

(4) Considering that Aberdeen has found the application of optimization tools to analyze total costs, and of flexible bidding functionality to uncover creative supplier solutions has enabled early adopters to identify an average incremental savings of 12% above those that basic, price-focused auctions alone have generated, the quality of your allocation award decisions can only improve.

(5) One of my summer series discussed how Demand Driven Supply was the future of supply chain demand planning, so the fact that vendors are already actively pursuing this direction is great news for you.

(6) Simply put, improved inventory management software decreases your costs and increases your profits.

(7) On-Demand is here to stay – which is good news considering all of the benefits it provides (as chronicled on the e-Sourcing Forum [WayBackMachine]).

Apexon and Performance Visibility

I’ve been blogging a lot about visibility lately and mentioning Apexon (acquired and merged with Infostretch in 2022) rather frequently even though I’m sure most of you haven’t heard about this little company or what they do. Last week I had the opportunity to sit down with Kevin Brooks (an occasional guest blogger here on Sourcing Innovation, in other words, his commentary on The Future of Sourcing is not slated to be his last post) and discuss where Apexon was, where it was going, how Apexon goes beyond spend visibility to performance visibility, and how this will eventually translate into actionable intelligence. (A topic I’ll be diving into in the future.)

Whereas most visibility solution providers (like Zycus, Procuri TrueSource [Procuri was acquired by Ariba, which was acquired by SAP] and biq [which was acquired by Opera Solutions, which rebranded ElectrifAI]) focus on spend visibility, or the determination of how much you spend on each of your suppliers, Apexon focuses on performance visibility, or the determination of how each supplier you are spending on is performing. Spend visibility solutions slice and dice on dollars, performance visibility solutions slice and dice on performance metrics – and the good ones slice and dice on the performance metrics of your choosing .

At this point, you’re probably asking are not all visibility providers equal, since all they do is aggregate, slice, and dice raw data ? Technically, they are very similar, but functionally they are quite distinct. The difference lies in the presentation, reporting, and intelligence they provide. Spend visibility solutions are configured to slice and dice on dollars, the data they extract from your underlying systems is your transactional data, and the drill down reports they provide are all pivoted around spend. Performance visibility solutions are custom configured by you to slice and dice on the metrics you track, the data they extract is the data relevant to your metrics, and the drill down reports they provide are all pivoted around metrics. Could one system do both? Yes. Do any current systems do both well? In my view, not really. (But I’m up for a conversation and a demo if anyone disagrees with me!)

However, to truly be useful to you, a system should also provide actionable intelligence. Dashboards that tell you where you are performing well, where you are performing poorly, and provide you with alternatives to improve these poor situations. Although still a young product, with 2.5 slated for release in the near future, this is where Apexon is starting to break away from the pack. Dashboards let you view your performance relative to your key metrics, and then the system lets you drill down into the root causes of poor performance and the root enablers of good performance. Comparison reports can then be used to determine possible solutions – such as shifting supply to a better performing supplier or shifting certain components to different manufacturing lines.

If supply chain performance is a concern for you, and it should be, I’d say it’s worth checking out the solution, especially if you are a traditional manufacturer, particularly in the automotive, aerospace, defense sectors, since Apexon has a strong client base in these sectors that have helped shape the solution since day one. Furthermore, since the solution is a 100% on-demand solution through your browser, the effort required to test-drive it is minimal. The solution works on a push model – at regular intervals (which can occur as frequently or infrequently as you desire), you push updated data to it, and it slices and dices that data on your metrics to give you the intelligence you need to improve your operations.

Is it all it can be? No, I think it can improve in future versions – but more importantly, since Apexon is intent on building its roadmap from customer feedback, I think it will get there. More importantly, you don’t have a lot of choices, most are new offerings, some companies are not as eager to work with their customers to improve the solution, and visibility is an area you can not ignore. Make sure it’s on your list of candidates, and if you’re nearby, check them out at one of their upcoming executive breakfast series in Milwaukee, Chicago, and Detroit (on October 17, 18, and 19). And keep an eye on Sourcing Innovation and Spend Matters – if he’s not traveling, I’d guess that you can bank on Jason hiding out in the back row of the windy city presentation, pounding out notes on his Dell and posting them to you hot off the wire.

Purchasing – Procurement – Sourcing – Supply – Spend – Management – Smorgasboard

Earlier in the year, Tim and Jason had the great supply management vs spend management debate (on e-Sourcing Forum [WayBackMachine]) where they tried to promote the value of the relative terms and why one should win out over the other. This prompted a number of bloggers to try and determine the best term for our space based on public recognition. Many of us tried using Google to count the number of pages or Google trends to gauge the search history, but the net result was that depending on how you approached it, one term appeared to be slightly better than the other, but both significantly trailed sourcing, procurement, and purchasing in common acceptance and usage. (In fact, if you try to plot supply management and spend management simultaneously in Google trends, you get a message that “the terms do not have enough search volume for Google to display graphs“. Ouch!)

Then, last month, Doug Hudgeon of Vendor Management (renamed Contract Capital Management, [WayBackMachine]) pointed out Technorati and the new Blog Value Calculator based on Technorati’s API that computes and displays your blog’s worth using the same link to dollar ratio as the AOL-Weblogs Inc deal. The Technorati angle, which lets you search blog entries for terms, gives us yet another point of reference to test supply management vs spend management popularity in terms of blog posts and the relative blog value of Tim and Jason’s blogs. However, the results are again inconclusive as even though there are more “supply management” blog entries, SpendMatters is valued higher than Supply Excellence [WayBackMachine].

The results for sourcing vs procurement are not much better. Although roughly twenty to thirty times as popular as supply management or spend management, whereas one term is more popular in Google, another is more popular in Technorati. The only clear winner across the board is purchasing, which is roughly five times more popular than sourcing or procurement, or one hundred to one hundred and fifty times as popular as supply management or spend management.

Which begs the question, should we take a nomenclative step back and just use purchasing, continue to fight the hard fight and push for broader use of these better, more descriptive terms of today’s purchasing/procurement/sourcing organization, or develop a whole new term entirely, one that will catch on like wildfire. Something in line with the next craze. For example, if the wild, wild west became cool again, maybe we could call it Wrangling. Or maybe we could just co-opt a more popular term, like politics (which is roughly two to four times as popular as purchasing). At least then your sourcing blogs would be valued at what they’re worth. (A recent Technorati valuation of seven sourcerors put our combined blog value at under 90K. On the flipside, political and media centric blogs such as BuzzMachine have valuations over $1M. Commentary might make great reading, but does it help you do your job? Hmmm.)

Managed Services

In Part XI of The Sourcing Innovation Series, John Martin of Building SaaS authored a guest post on “The Future of Sourcing … for Services” which I discussed further in Part XII where I indicated that I not only agreed with John in that services sourcing is going to become a major part of your future sourcing initiatives but provided you with the outlines of an approach that I thought you could use to start getting a grip on your services procurement today.

Little did I know how timely these posts would be at the time I was preparing them. It turns out that as John and I were collecting our thoughts, Aberdeen was releasing their Supply Chain & Logistics Market Alert “The Next Wave: Managed Services for Supply Chain”. In this market brief, Aberdeen indicates that in a recent benchmark of 180 companies, 58% indicate that they are highly interested in using at least one of the following managed services:

  1. Network design and strategic inventory optimization
  2. Supply chain execution
  3. Trade compliance
  4. Supply chain planning
  5. Periodic Operational Improvement Analysis and System Tuning
  6. Data Quality Monitoring and Cleansing
  7. Data Mining and Analytics
  8. Supplier On-boarding

The study also points out that midsize companies are most likely to be interested in exploiting the expertise and resources of their technology vendors to augment their internal staff, though large companies are highly interested in supply chain execution support.

However, one of the most interesting facts is that companies that view their supply chain capabilities as “above” average for their industry are twice as likely as their peers to be highly interested in wanting to use managed services to help in supplier on-boarding and they are also more likely to desire trade compliance managed services. In other words, top performers appear to want to take advantages of any services that can help them perform better.

Finally, I’d like to emphasize that managed services offer companies the flexibility of gaining additional staff resources and expertise without having to hire people internally or having to abdicate complete process control to a third party-organization. In other words, it appears that, managed properly as part of an overall supply chain strategy, managed services can effectively augment (but not replace!) your internal supply chain teams.

Lack of Visibility Kills

I know it’s Saturday, and I know you’re probably expecting me to talk about something along the lines of Flaming Laptops since I usually take the day off from sourcing, but something happened this week that not only cost many large retailers a significant amount of money, but killed someone. If you haven’t figured it out yet, I’m referring to the E. coli outbreak that has hit 20 states (so far) as a result of tainted spinach.

Even though Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Safeway Inc., SuperValue Inc., and other major grocery chains stopped selling spinach and removed it from their shelves and salad bars, the problem is not over – since investigators still are not sure about the source of the problem, which they believe to be somewhere in California’s Monterey County, which grows more than half of the nation’s spinach crop.

The CNN article seems to suggest that the nation’s “fractured network” of food safety agencies is the problem – that they do not “communicate” well enough, implying that one of the agencies, or someone at one of the agencies, did not do their job. I do not think that is the problem. As far as I’m concerned, the problem lies with Wal-Mart, Safeway, SuperValue, and every other chain that sold the spinach. You should know who your suppliers are. You should be aware of their health and safety processes and policies. You should verify that they do regular health and safety inspections or do your own. Your supply chain should be visible to you and you should know that you can trust everyone in it and that everyone in it is doing their job.

It’s not just the benefits of global visibility, or the costs associated with having to trash or scrap and write-off a large buy since the quality was sub-par and the product unusable. In cases where you are producing a product for public consumption, lack of visibility, as this example clearly demonstrates, can produce a product so unsafe that someone dies. And that’s going to cost you a lot more than the high dollar lawsuit sure to come your way – it’s going to cost you brand image, customers, and if you’re the poor sap whose job it was to insure quality, a hell of a lot of sleep.

I’m not saying you need to rush out and buy a six, seven, or eight figure visibility solution (although I’m sure Apexon (acquired and merged with Infostretch in 2022) would love to talk to you if you thought that was the answer for you), although a solid visibility solution is definitely worth a reasonable investment, but that you need to develop a visibility mindset. Institute processes to make sure each supplier meets your health, safety, and quality requirements, perform your own random checks, make sure your suppliers do their checks when they say they do, and to the required level of quality, and, finally, make sure your suppliers have a culture of making sure their suppliers aspire to the same level of health, safety, and quality that they do. Visibility needs to permeate your supply chain to provide maximum benefit.