Category Archives: Technology

Has Coupa Settled on a Coupe? Part II

In our last post we discussed how, when Davie ran The Coupa Factory, their strategy was innovation focussed and they were constantly charging ahead in their efforts to bring Procurement Independence to the masses. However, lately, it seems that Coupa‘s strategy has shifted from “build a better platform and they will come” to “get the customer and then build them a better platform”. While not much of a change, it’s a change nonetheless and it appears to have affected their rate of innovation. Furthermore, it has been accompanied by a shift from groundbreaking new features to even flashier UIs, iPhone apps, and streamlined ERP integration. [Either that, or they’ve been celebrating all those new customer wins with The Coupa Drinking Song. ] While these features are important to the tactical buyer, they don’t add value to the strategic parts of the procurement process.

This isn’t to say that Coupa has stopped developing, or that some of their new features aren’t impressive, especially where the average buyer is concerned, but that their rate of innovation for the last year and a half just doesn’t compare to the Coupa of old. And while it is to be expected that the rate of innovation will drop as a company matures, if the rate drops too fast, the company risks going stagnant, and that would be troubling. However, what is really troublesome is that Coupa hit upon two areas in real need of innovation in their latest release, but appear to have completely missed the point on how to bring that desperately needed innovation to the masses (unless it’s still a work in progress, but why not go for the big win before anyone else beats you to the finish line?). However, that’s the subject of our next post.

For now, let’s review what they have accomplished in their latest release, as a few of the features are quite useful and still unique to the space.

Drag-and-Drop Expense Management

One of the developments Coupa seems quite proud of is the ability to snap a photo of a receipt with your iPhone, e-mail it to your Coupa account, log in to the system, bring up expense reporting, and then drag it to an expense category in an expense report. The receipt is immediately associated with the report and removed from your unprocessed receipt bucket.

Transaction Metadata for OLAP reporting

Coupa has added transaction metadata to each transaction that provides supervisors and CPOs the ability to roll up reports by chart of accounts, reporting hierarchy, and category. They’ve also added more fine grained security to insure that a user can only see spend within her visibility. (Note that they were calling this “data striping“, which, of course has nothing to do with OLAP reporting but data storage on physical mediums as it is the technique, used in RAID, of segmenting logically sequential data across different devices. So if you were confused, this is what they meant.)

Real-time Budget-Based Alerts

Not only does the application allow a user to keep on top of her budget, by way of it’s budget dashboard on the home screen (which is actually useful as most buyers don’t have a clue how much they are spending), but if a requisition puts a user over a certain percentage of her budget too early in the year, the application will alert the user, and the approver before it is approved. It will also let the approver know if the requisition would put the category or department budget over a dangerous (administrator configurable) threshold too early in the year.

iRequest

iRequest is a bookmarklet (bookmark app) that allows the user to add a bookmark to their browser that will bring up a pop-up window that will let them request whatever item is on the page of the external site she is browsing. Not only does it make requesting an item on Amazon.com a breeze, but it eliminates the excuse for out-of-system requisitioning as every item can now be easily requested through the system.

Opt-in Benchmarking

With opt-in benchmarking, a customer can opt-in to sharing benchmarking data anonymously and see how it is performing on a standardized set of benchmarks relative to all of the other customers on the Coupa system. It’s interesting, and could be a powerful tool, but right now, it’s not very useful. More on this in our next post.

Supplier Ratings

With this feature, they’ve essentially added the ratings feature of Amazon.com which allows a buyer to rate the supplier with respect to each purchase, but since the ratings are optional, and since they’re not made against meaningful performance categories, the usefulness of this feature is rather limited.

All-in-all, some useful functionality that I’m sure will go far in convincing the average office manager to accept Coupa with open arms and joy in her heart, but not what Coupa could have delivered to totally knock your Procurement socks off. More on this in our next post.

To be concluded.

Share This on Linked In

Has Coupa Settled on a Coupe? Part I

Has Coupa, which opened the Cabana Cafe a little over four years ago with the goal of enabling Procurement Independence for all with it’s Rails-driven cloud-based EC2 platform, given up its quest for a coupasonic flying car and instead settled for a mini-cooper?

Now, while the original goal of Coupa, that wanted to fill your e-Procurement gas tank, was to bring e-Procurement to the masses, it would seem that they are now content with the fact that you can buy anything you want in The Coupa Store as it would appear that they are no longer charging ahead on the innovation front. While it’s true that they’ve been quite busy ever since they enabled QuickDraw Procurement with QuickStart, what they’ve accomplished since then isn’t all that spectacular compared to their historical rate of innovation … and they’ve missed most of the opportunities for innovation that could take their platform to the next level with their latest release. And while it’s true that you don’t need a very powerful solution if you’re selling fertilizer to farmers (and can get by with a simple cart and a good old-fashioned hoe-down), you’re never going to get the design engineers. (i.e. You’ll get the tactical buyers requisitioning office supplies, but never the strategic buyers trying to order a bill of materials for engineering.)

Basically, besides revamping the UI for the upteenth time (which seems to be a waste of resources to me as it was already [among] the easiest enterprise procurement solution out there and as easy to use as Amazon.com), all Coupa appears to have accomplished in the last eighteen months is:

  • improved ERP integration through upgraded APIs and Boomi,
  • drag-and-drop expense management,
  • transaction metadata for OLAP reporting,
  • a new inline spend dashboard,
  • real-time budget-based alerts during requisitioning,
  • the iPhone app,
  • iRequest,
  • opt-in community benchmarking, and
  • supplier ratings.

Considering that:

  • they’ve had APIs since day one, Boomi handles most of the integration, and ERP integration is always just a matter of time and resources,
  • it’s about data capture (not slick UIs),
  • they’ve had the ability to capture this data since day one,
  • dashboards are dangerous and dysfunctional,
  • they’ve always had alerts and the usefulness of this should have been obvious years ago,
  • if you have an iPhone, you have e-mail, and that’s good enough for approvals,
  • the goal is not to buy outside the system,
  • benchmarks are pointless unless you’re benchmarking against peer data, and
  • optional surveys are about as useful as snowshoes in summer

while it is still forward progress (which is more than a few of their peers can claim these days), it really isn’t much considering their historical rate of innovation. (Of course, that’s when Davie ran The Coupa Factory.) While their new strategy may have enabled their rate of growth to skyrocket, going from a few dozen customers to over one hundred and fifty in under two years, it appears to have put a crimp in their rate of innovation — especially considering the unprecedented power Coupa could have brought to their platform if they had taken the last two features to the next level.

To be continued.

Share This on Linked In

Demos Don’t Teach You Much … Unless … (Part I)

Sheesh is Right! The average analyst doesn’t have a clue how to properly evaluate a technology offering. But what should you expect considering most of these individuals come from a liberal arts background and think “C” is for Cookie? And if you don’t believe me, maybe you should read those tragic quadrants, graves, and benchmarking futiles more carefully … because the reality is that an evaluation scheme based on chicken-with-its-head-cut-off bingo would likely be just as accurate as the rankings in the average analyst report these days.

But back to the point. Recently, over on Spend Matters, Jason Busch decided to tackle the issue of product demonstrations (Part I and Part II). In his first post he said that you should be prescriptive where the demo is concerned and that, except in a few rare cases, you should focus on ease-of-use. I disagree.

In the words of commenter “Sheesh” [italics in the rest of this post], Jason’s points are true if the analyst knows what to ask. If all you do is focus on “usability”, you’ll end up choosing the solution with the most flash. Problem is, there’s always a trade-off between flash and substance. A software company only has so many development hours before it runs out of cash and has to sell something. This means that the more hours it spends on creating a razzle-dazzle UI, the fewer hours it has to spend on actually building useful functionality. Remember, we’re talking about enterprise software, not end user entertainment.

Jason’s followed with a second post where he proposes a series of demonstrations based on specifically prescribed scenarios.

The problem is that, as Sheesh says, you’re not a tech expert and you shouldn’t [even] attend the demo unless you bring one with you. The “business scenario” approach assumes that the ability to address “business scenarios” is a useful measure of anything. Typically “business scenarios” are crafted from melted-down aggregations of vendor marketing messages and feature lists, combined with some business problem that the vendor has already got a pat answer for unless he’s a complete idiot. If he’s on the ball at all, you won’t discover anything interesting; or if you do, it will be something on the order of Debbie Wilson’s mouse clicks. ‘OMG this vendor takes seven mouse clicks and that one takes twelve!!!!!’ Not at all useful!

Sheesh continues, You have to go deeper than chin-stroking about a suite of standard reports and baked in transaction processing flows for “business scenarios.” What’s behind the curtain? What if you want to write your own report, or modify one of theirs? What if you want to change the way the transaction processing works, fundamentally? If you find a solution that’s extensible in those dimensions, then it’s tons better than any canned solution, by definition. Because you can make it do whatever you want it to do.

Furthermore, the software procurement process shouldn’t try to find a “best fit” in a shoe store that doesn’t carry your size. Rather, the software procurement process should focus on finding a solution that can be easily extended and adapted to your needs, on as many dimensions as possible. If the solution can be extended and adapted, it really doesn’t matter what it does out-of-the-box, in terms of canned reports, canned transaction flows, canned sourcing and optimization templates, or canned demos — or what its relative performance might be on business scenarios that encompass what you think you need today, but tomorrow might fail miserably at characterizing your needs. If the solution is extensible, then it can solve a universe of problems rather than a small subset of them.

As the commenter stated, there are lots of such questions that need to be asked, but they need to be asked with the aid of a technical resource.And there’s really no excuse not to have an expert technical resource on hand. Expert advice is cheap, especially compared to what you’d pay to some analyst firm, or waste on some solution that compares well on an analyst checklist, but is actually hopelessly inflexible. In the long run, it’s probably a few tenths of a percentage point of what you’ll spend on the “enterprise” solution (which won’t be a solution at all if it sits there, on the “shelf”, unused).

Share This on Linked In

A Couple of Surprises in the Supply Chain Strategy Survey

A cooperation between the Cranfield University School of Management and Solving Efeso that resulted in the publication of Supply Chain Strategy in the Board Room (based on a survey of 181 senior logistics and supply chain executives) between July 2009 and January 2010) had a couple of surprises in the top ten findings, at least to me.

While the following findings made sense:

  • The most important supply chain performance drivers are cost focus, customer lead-time and customer quality but these vary by sectorUnfortunately, supply chain initiatives are still primarily focussed on cost and not the overall value supply chain can deliver in terms of risk mitigation, service level improvements, and innovation.
  • Customer service issues and cost issues are the main triggers for strategy reviewReviews are usually reactive and not proactive.
  • Supply chain strategy implementations are not straightforwardThe supply chain affects all areas of the business and multiple systems in sourcing, procurement, logistics, warehouse, and trade management are needed to address the supply chain end-to-end.
  • Successful supply chain strategy implementations have top level supportGreat results typically require significant changes to systems and processes, which just don’t happen without support and leadership from the top.
  • Cross-functional accountability and a balanced combination of several key approaches and techniques also improve the likelihood of successAll of the affected parties need to collaborate. This will generally only truly happen if they are all held responsible for the success or failure of the initiative.
  • Development of the supply chain strategy is largely internalisedEven though most corporations don’t truly understand how to revolutionize the supply chain, those that embark upon defining a supply chain strategy generally try to do it themselves without the help of an expert guide from outside the organization (even though Consultants are Cheap).
  • Of the many barriers to success, the major ones are company culture, lack of leadership and poor supply chain visibility. Barriers are predominantly people-related, rather than technical.Implementations may be difficult, but with the right guidance, support, and elbow grease, they can be done relatively quickly and efficiently and, depending on the system or process in question, sometimes be completed in a few weeks. Most of the solutions are fairly matures these days. As a result, any hiccups are generally caused by humans and not hardware.

The following findings are a little shocking:

  • Supply chain is recognised as an important part of the businessWhile I hear a lot more talk these days about how important supply chain is to the business, I still don’t see a lot of action. It’s shocking how many mid-market companies still don’t have basic e-RFX/e-Auction platforms even though affordable solutions have been available for years! As far as I’m concerned, it’s Action, Not Words, and until I see more action, I won’t believe it.
  • Service and corporate strategy are key driversNo, cost is. While 10% of the true innovators might have moved onto service and strategy in an attempt to generate long term value, 90% of the time it’s cost, cost, cost. (If you get any other response is just lip-service.) While it should be value, it’s still cost.
  • Review of supply chain strategy is highly cross-functional and in many cases, a continuous process with regular monitoring and continuous adaptation according to circumstances. Well, at those few companies that actually have real supply chain strategies, review is likely to be cross-functional (as these are the few companies where the CSCO/CPO will actually have a seat at the table), but at the vast majority of companies monitoring is irregular, adoption is haphazard, and cross-functional participation is still a pipe-dream. Sorry, but this is either wishful thinking on the part of the survey respondents, or the survey sample was very skewed towards the 10% of true innovators. If review and monitoring was continuous, you wouldn’t have 40% to 60% of negotiated spend unrealized at the average company, because maverick spending would be caught and eliminated, overcharges would be caught and never paid, and off-contract shipping options avoided in all but true emergencies.

Share This on Linked In

B2B Connex: Automating the End-to-End Purchasing Process

When we introduced you to B2BConnex last December, we told you about their e-Document Management Solution for Small & Mid-Size Manufacturers that is a great fit for all types of small and mid-size manufacturing organizations that need simple e-Sourcing and e-Procurement functionality at a low price tag (which starts as low as $30,000 / year, plus 20% annual maintenance for a small operation, and isn’t much more than $100,000 a year for a mid-sized operation).

Designed to fill the niche in the small and smaller mid-sized market left by the big end-to-end e-Sourcing and e-Procurement suite vendors whose big footprint solutions come with an equally big price tag, the B2B Connex solution allows for easy management of a slew of e-Documents — including RFQs, purchase orders, kanban orders, advance shipment notices (ASNs), payment inquiries, invoices, and sales orders, which enables an organization to efficiently conduct its transactional back-office procurement operations (especially since it integrates with a dozen ERP/MRP systems with minimal or no configuration).

Since our introduction to B2B Connex last year, they have been quite busy upgrading their platform and adding new functionality. They’ve improved their integrated scorecard capability, added more customer branding capability (which allows a customer to define their own logos, colours, fonts, etc), streamlined Excel integration for data import and export, and launched a new customer portal that not only streamlines the transmission of purchase orders, outbound RFQs, ASNs, and inbound shipment inquiries, but also contains a new shopping cart application that runs on a catalog that is customized for the customer.

The new portal application allows the manufacturer to tailor a catalog for each customer. For each customer, the manufacturer can specify what items are visible, what the price is for that customer (based on markups, contracts, or discounts), and any restrictions on purchase (minimums or maximums, manufacturing plants & shipping locations, etc.). Since the customer catalog is implemented as a view on the manufacturer’s full catalog, only customer specific information has to be defined for each product. It also contains embedded search functionality which makes it easy for the buyer to find what they are looking for and the manufacturer to find what products they want to make visible to the customer.

The cart works like your standard one-click e-Commerce cart, but instead of asking for payment information on submission of an order, it generates a purchase order that is automatically incorporated into the manufacturers back-office system and forwarded to the appropriate warehouse(s). Billing and shipping address, billing and shipping contact, invoice and ASN recipient, and (default) shipment method are all automatically filled in based on the customer representative’s profile, but can be manually overridden as required. Once the order is manually reviewed and accepted, a purchase order acknowledgement is automatically sent to the buyer. Once it is ready to ship, the buyer receives an ASN, which the warehouse personnel can generate in a single click (as it is automatically generated from the PO data and the shipping clerk’s profile). Once the order ships, an AR rep. can automatically generate and send the invoice (which also flows through the customer portal) in a single click (as all of the information can be pulled from the ASN and the WMS [Warehouse Management System]). The entire system has been designed to streamline the tactical parts of the purchasing process and eliminate duplicate data entry [which is the most common cause of errors and lost time in the tactical purchasing process].

The platform is multi-lingual and currently supports five languages: English, French, German, Italian, and Spanish. It’s also compliant with EDI standards and allows the customers to define their own menus, which can be used to include information about their own specific processes, requirements, and specifications. And the next major release, expected sometime this fall, is going to have scorecard (based) correction action reporting (SCAR) capability, which will be available through the portal and integrated with the scorecard capabilities.

At this point, with respect to the basic process they are trying to automate, about the only noticeable weakness is the lack of a bid analysis capability to complement their RFQ module, which would round out their e-Negotiation capabilities and enable them to provide a solid sourcing offering in addition to their solid purchasing offering for small and mid-sized manufacturers who don’t need sophisticated e-Sourcing platforms. But it looks like they won’t have this weakness much longer, as they indicated that as soon as SCAR is in general release, bid analysis is the next project in the queue and they plan to have a first release in the first half of next year. All-in-all, B2B Connex offers a very good solution for the price tag.

Share This on Linked In