Category Archives: Technology

Best Practice Technology Vendor Selection for True Multi-Nationals Part I: RFX – You’re Asking for the Wrong Information!

Before we begin, it must be clearly stated that this series relates to the selection of technology and technology-based vendors to provide enterprise software platforms, and/or implementation services, back-office (processing) functions, or technology-driven consulting services for your multi-national organization. While some of the best practices contained herein may also apply to the selection of (strategic) suppliers for high-value and/or complex products and/or services, this series particularly relates to the selection of a vendor to provide an enterprise software backbone, and, in particular, a backbone for e-Procurement and/or e-Sourcing technology for your Supply Management organization. Furthermore, no claims, express or implied, are made with respect to any other vendor selection process and, in fact, if you’re only buying paper and pencils, some of the best practices contained herein will, in all likelihood, be overkill.

Now that the preamble is out of the way, let us begin by noting that the traditional RFX processed is well understood, and well documented in many places, including in the e-RFx for Total Value Management wiki-paper, co-authored by the doctor over on the e-Sourcing Wiki. And, in the wiki-paper in particular, the high-level process is more-or-less correct.

As per the wiki-paper, you start with a three-stage RFI before an RFP, which is solution focussed (and not cost or contract focussed), which is issued before a final RFQ, which is when you collect quotes and start the actual selection / negotiation process. Specifically, the high-level process is:

  1. RFI #1: Stakeholder Requirements
  2. RFI #2: Vendor Interest
  3. RFI #3: Vendor Pre-Qualification
  4.    RFP: Solution Inquiry
  5.    RFQ: Clearly-Defined Specifications

So what are you doing wrong, especially if you’re a Multi-National? To answer that, let’s look at how this is typically translated:

  1. Product Needs, Service Needs, Preferred Vendors
  2. Vendor Info. Request, Vendor Interest, NDA
  3. Product & Service Capability Profiles
  4. Solution Design Request
  5. Explicit requirements, process definition, and bid request

See the problems?

  1. Stakeholders typically don’t know what they need in a solution. They aren’t technology experts. They aren’t supply management experts. They are domain experts. It doesn’t matter what they think they need in a product or a service, it matters what problems they are having today. You need to ask them what problems they need to solve, so that you can ultimately select a vendor with the solution that solves as many of your stakeholder’s pain points as possible.
  2. A preferred vendor is one that can offer you the best product or service from an organizational perspective, not a single stakeholder’s perspective. For example, a stakeholder might rate a vendor A+ because the representatives always responds quickly. But this is not necessarily indicative of great service. If the answer is always “we’ll send someone to fix that in a week”, and you need the machine up 80% of the time, that’s poor service.
  3. Asking a vendor if they can provide you with the necessary functionality or service levels after you have shortlisted them as a possibility based upon a review of their collateral is not likely to get you anything other than a “yes we can”, especially if the vendor also offers consulting or “value added services”. One has to remember that most (big) consulting (and value-add) organizations are driven by a greed for dollars and the reps are told to always say yes and take on as much work as possible, leaving the question of how to get it done (if the organization is already stretched or weak in that area) until after the ink is dry.

Which brings us to the biggest problems with the current selection process, which we will discuss in Part II.

Thirteen Years Later, And It’s Still All About the Pentiums

Rock on, Al Yankovic, Rock on!

Because It’s All About The Pentiums (Original Video!)

Al may have been Running with Scissor, but no one did a better job of predicting the future of the IT industry.

     
My new computer’s got the clocks, it rocks
But it was obsolete before I opened the box
You say you’ve had your desktop for over a week?
Throw that junk away, man, it’s an antique
Your laptop is a month old? Well that’s great
If you could use a nice, heavy paperweight

  It’s All About the Pentiums
    by “Weird Al” Yankovic (@alyankovic)

All Models Still Lead to Total Value Management

Not that long ago, Sourcing Innovation released “Taking the First Step on Your Next Level Supply Management Journey”, a white paper sponsored by BravoSolution that defined a simple 3-level maturity model that an organization can use to determine where it is on it’s Supply Management organizational journey. Noting that your organziation is either below average, above average, or best-in-class*, SI did not see any point in trying to be more complex (even though many industry associations, consulting firms, and analyst powerhouses will often proffer four and five level models).

And while the acronyms and acclamations — including VFS, Hi-Def Sourcing, Next Level Supply Management, Next Practices, and Value Chain Creation — will fly fast and furious, there is still one commonality among all leading models, including Gartners Global Trade Management Maturity Model, which is nicely summarized in this free white paper from Amber Road that offers “A Model for Value Chain Transformation”.

That commonality is something that the doctor has been prescribing for over five-years — Total Value Management (TVM). When you get right down to it, that’s what Strategic Business Enablement is all about. Maximizing value across the orgnization, end-to-end. In the sourcing process, the organizational model, the finance operation, the (information) technology platform(s), product management (& marketing), risk management, asset management, and relationships — the eight directions of the supply management navigator’s compass. QFD (quality function deployment), maximization of SUM (Spend Under Management), and end-to-end transportation management is all about extracting maximum total value for the organization. Demand creation, joint innovation, and new market entry is all about creating maximum total value for the organization.

And that’s why, if you’re not already there (above average and on the road to best-in-class), and more than half of you are not, you need to be moving to an advanced sourcing platform that supports in-depth spend-related analysis, decision optimization, collaboration, and market-informed category-based sourcing. These tools allow you to identify, maximize, extract, and retain value in your operations. For more information on these technologies, check out SI’s other recent white-paper, also sponsored by BravoSolution, on the “Top 10 Technologies for Supply Management Savings Today”.

*but not average as average can only be defined as an organization that is dab-smack in the middle of every other organization

Where’s the Supply Management Technology Usability Guide?

There are a lot of guides out there as to what a good Supply Management Tool for Sourcing, Procurement, or Logistics is supposed to do, including a number of very detailed posts on SI (and wiki articles on the e-Sourcing Wiki that the doctor wrote, or co-wrote), but are there any guides for usability? (A google search for ‘supply management software usability guide’ comes up empty in the doctor‘s view.)

I couldn’t help but wonder this after reading an article by John A. Gentle that gave the sage advice: provide better instructional tools that offer real value. It clearly pointed out the challenge of “ineffective instructions” that logistics teams create for their suppliers, especially for how vendors are expected to complete forms, input data, and operate software that was provided by your company for warehouse and trucking operations, billing, and reporting. Now, if the provided software was so obvious and easy to use that even a fifth-grader could figure it out, then the issue of “ineffective instructions” is a small one. But the reality is that, even with most platforms that are attempting to adopt consumer-style interfaces, most procurement and logistics software is still reasonably complicated due to the complex nature of what a Procurement or Logistics package capable of supporting global trade needs to do.

Even though the functionality is well understood, the best way to lay out the functionality, and underlying workflow, is not well understood in comparison and, unfortunately, if one company builds an interface that is too close to a competitor’s for some standard functionality, instead of the formation of a standard, in America, we get a frivolous lawsuit (courtesy of the patent pirates). So even though there should be design standards, there usually aren’t.

And the poor supplier, who probably has to manage five such systems which all have completely different workflows and user interfaces, experiences more frustration than John and his Ph.D. wife who had to experience two weeks of trial and error just to reset the time on a poorly designed watch (with even poorer instructions).

I know that the very nature of software, which is always evolving, makes such a guide difficult (and that this particular challenge is compounded by the fact that America still allows software to be patented), but there should be at least some standard workflows and processes that all sourcing, procurement, and logistics software should attempt to follow in a reasonably standard way. It will make things easier for all supply chain partners, minimize unnecessary stresses and bumps, and help us evolve the profession as a whole.

For a Good Lesson in e-Procurement System Selection, Ask Discount Tires.

This winter, Chief Executive ran an article on The Synergy Mirage: A Case Study that had a great lesson for every Supply Management team looking to select an e-Procurement system with the intent that anyone in the organization who wants to order something will use it. The lesson was simple:

Customers don’t want to buy new tires. They need to buy new tires. It’s expensive and it takes time out of their day. As a competitor, [Chairman] [Bruce] Halle benefited from making the process somewhat less expensive and taking less of the customer’s time. He also spent extra time cleaning up the shop, including the bathrooms, to make the customer visit a bit more comfortable. Customers appreciated the discount that came with the off-brand products Halle offered, but they also appreciated the opportunity to leave as soon as possible.

Similarly, in your organization:

Administrative assistants don’t want to place re-orders for toner cartridges. Engineers don’t want to have to order new workstations and business analysts don’t want to have to buy reams of papers. And office managers definitely don’t want to order pens. They need toner, computers, paper and pens to do their jobs (and make sure their coworkers can do theirs). Finding the best value for the organization is not their strength and it takes too much time out of their already too busy day. They want a process that is easy and quick. They want to find what they want as fast as possible, place the order, make it someone else’s problem, and get back to their job. And if they have to do it anyway, they would like an experience that is clean, comfortable, and relatively stress free. (And if they have to fill out 17 fracking forms to procure a single pencil they have two choices: pull out their hair and go postal in the classic sense, or just not do it.) They appreciate a tool that simplifies their life and lets them get back to their job as soon as possible.

So if you want to be the organization with 90%+ e-Procurement system penetration (as opposed to the one with 30% to 40% e-Procurement system penetration), you better make sure that whatever e-Procurement system you select is trivially easy to use and designed to make the location and ordering of a particular item quick and easy. Otherwise, you’ll just be buying more shelf-ware. There’s a reason that companies like b-pack, BravoSolution, Coupa, Iasta, and iValua are tearing up the middle market. They get that systems have to be easy to use. And there’s a single reason in particular that BravoSolution is making waves in the Fortune X where only Ariba and Emptoris used to play and that Coupa has reached the upper end of the Mid-Market (and started to sneak into a few Fortune X’s) in five-short years. Their systems are about ease of use. In all of these examples, their systems are about allowing a user to do what they need to do and get back to the more important aspects of their job. And, most importantly, their systems are about customer success.

And that’s also why you are going to see new waves forming in the Fortune X. Companies like hubwoo, IBX, and Wallmedian in particular are each going to make a [big] splash as their focus on helping Fortune X clients stuck on SAP get more value from their ERP system (from a Supply Management Perspective) with a lot less pain is going to start paying off as SAP gets stuck in the Fusion quagmire trying to integrate its latest acquisition. Watch for Wallmedian in particular, a name you’re probably unaware of on this side of Atlantic, to come over and pull a BravoSolution in the Fortune X SAP user base. (Remember when we didn’t know who BravoSolution was on this side of the Atlantic? It wasn’t that long ago and now with Ariba swallowed, they will soon be one of the biggest stand alone names out there in the Supply Management space.)