Category Archives: Vendor Review

Trade Extensions: Still No Rest for the Wickedly Powerful

In our last posts on Trade Extensions (No Rest for the Wicked-ly Powerful, Part I and Part II), we talked about how Trade Extensions (TE) added real-time decision optimization auctions, award management (that allowed a user to fix the award for part of a scenario and re-run a smaller model for what-if), built-in OLAP reporting, and supplier feedback mechanisms to their platform to increase the power, usability, and friendliness of their platform. Since then, as per our recent post on Optimization: Is it Time to Move Beyond Sourcing, Trade Extensions has been toiling away to increase the power, flexibility, and usability of their platform to take it beyond sourcing.

Trade Extensions has made significant improvements in the following three areas:

More Powerful Fact Sheets

Back in Trade Extensions Trades Up to a Fact Sheet User Interface, we talked about how Trade Extensions had built the capability for the end user to provide data in d-dimensional fact sheets, which include 2-dimensional spreadsheets and 3-dimensional workbooks, in order to allow the user to define models in a familiar format. Fact sheets could be used to define any model data element in simple row-column data format. In addition, a user could define certain values as simple formulas on other values in the sheet. Since their initial introduction three years ago, Trade Extensions has extended the capability to allow users to define more complex models with more complex formulas that can reference not only values, but formulas, and values and formulas in other fact sheets. Models can get as complex as they need to, and this is the foundation that allows Trade Extensions to define models that go beyond sourcing.

Formula Analyzer

The more complex the models get, the harder it is to pin down why they aren’t quite doing what you think they are supposed to be doing, why they are taking so long to solve, or what is driving the sensitivity. That’s why Trade Extensions built a formula analyzer that allows a user to analyze a formula and see how it is defined, how long it is taking to calculate with respect to the other formulas in the model, and what is affected by the formulas or changes to the formula. In addition, if they exist, it can suggest formula modifications that would allow the model to solve faster. However, just knowing where the problem lies is a great help if a model is solving slow.

Enhanced Browser-Based Reporting and Visualization

OLAP is good, but the ability to do real-time drill-downs, data segregation, reformulation, and graphing in the browser is even better. Noticing that a number of clients were exporting the scenario results and importing the results into a third-party reporting tool with more powerful data analysis and graphing capabilities, Trade Extensions built their own full-fledged rules-based data analysis package (like TS Insight and IQub and a host of others) that allows a user to do the real-time drill-down analysis required to understand complex models in the browser so a user never has to leave the Trade Extensions application. The ability to drill down and reorganize dimensions equals what you will find in the more advanced data analysis applications.

Put these new capabilities together, and a user is truly able to build, analyze, solve, and explore more complex beyond sourcing optimization models than they would have ever thought possible just a few years ago.

Nipendo: Bringing O2P and P2P to the Mainstream

Nipendo, which recently secured $8 Million in funding, a provider of order-to-payment automation software, recently released a new version of its order-to-payment (O2P) platform that includes automated rules-based end-to-end invoice reconciliation. Billing itself as the Supplier Cloud* solution, Nipendo has done an excellent job of making seamless supplier connectivity a reality for its customers.

By integrating with a number of platforms, providing a supplier portal, and by offering a print package that suppliers can download and install as a print driver on their PCs to print invoices to the Nipendo solution, Nipendo makes it easy for suppliers to e-invoice buyers without having to do any sort of complex integration with yet another platform. This is a powerful feature.

But what is really great about the Nipendo platform is the fact that they took three years to build a good understanding of customer fears as well as customer needs and built a solution that not only does what it says it does, but also addresses the main customer fear points, as outlined in our last post on points to ponder when people are pushing off procurement platforms.

Reality #5: It does save money.
A proper implementation of the Nipendo platform automates the full O2P/P2P (Procure-to-Pay) lifecycle, including invoice matching, verification, and payment subject to user-defined rules, allowing O2P/P2P to be managed on an exceptions-only basis. Once supplier onboarding is complete, all tedious tactical no-value-add manual processing or review time is required unless there is an exception, which allows 80%+ of the invoices and payments to just flow. This eliminates 80% of valueless tactical manpower effort, which can be redeployed to more strategic work, as well as all of the associated costs of sending, receiving, processing, and filing paper.

Reality #4: It does integrate.
Nipendo integrates with all of the major ERP vendors — including SAP (Business One), Oracle, Microsoft Dynamix, Quickbooks Enterprise, and Sage; integrates with a number of third party supply management platforms — including IBM Cognos, Synertrade, BuyerQuest, Global Factoring, and TIS; has it’s own Print to Cloud solution (which, thank your deity, does not actually print to the cloud but allows a supplier to submit their invoice to the Nipendo platform in a common data format); and has a number of third party technology partners that can build you an integration point if you don’t have one. Nipendo realizes that in order to truly deliver O2P/P2P savings, you had to automate the entire process, which means automating it for ALL parties, which means you have to integrate with all parties and the platforms they use, and they have spent years building a multitude of integration points.

Reality #3: It will work for you – it has a customizable workflow.
You can define the exact O2P/P2P process that you use, and precisely how complex each step is. For example, where purchase orders are concerned, you can define each status and step, the approval(s) level(s) required, whether you want to be notified of viewings/approvals, actions the vendor can take, information required by the vendor for each action (comments, reasons for rejections or requests for corrections or clarifications, etc.), required attachments (such as insurance certificates, certifications, etc.), the validations executed against invoices, the variations allowed, rules for automated approval, etc. The system can be setup to match your current organizational workflow precisely.

Reality #2: Suppliers can use it. They can choose among a number of low effort solutions!
In addition to the ERP integrations, third party platform integrations, the Print to Cloud utility, and options for custom integration from a third party, the supplier also has the option to use a good old-fashioned web portal. The supplier can use the platform.

Reality #1: The solution is designed for efficiency. Not job elimination.

It’s true that if the primary reason for O2P/P2P automation is that you just want to outsource the function (using BPO – business process outsourcing) and make sure that the third party organization is actually capable of delivering cost savings (by way of reduced manpower), then jobs will be eliminated. But if the driver for paperless O2P/P2P automation is that your Procurement and Supply Management personnel are spending too much time on costly tactical activities and not value-add strategic activities, the solution will end up providing a much greater contribution to the organizational bottom line as your Procurement and Supply Management personnel will be able to focus on getting more spend under management (and through the system), which will identify cost reductions in addition to process savings.

With the recent release of their automated end-to-end invoice reconciliation functionality, Nipendo enables true end-to-end O2P/P2P process automation in an exception driven fashion. This is where O2P/P2P needs to be. Manual review of invoices adds no value, and manual payments when everything matches approved purchase orders adds no value either. Value is in the identification of issues; the creation of corrective action plans; the implementation of efficiency, service, and product improvements; and in the identification of areas for cost avoidance. Pushing paper accomplishes nothing.

* Presumably because, even though Nipendo knows it’s not true, too many people still think that the cloud is a fluffy magic box (which it is not).

Ecovadis-Powered E-TASC: A Great Solution for ICT Supply Chain Sustainability

The Global e-Sustainability Initiative (GeSI) is a 36-member strategic partnership between the Information and Communication Technology (ICT) sector and organizations committed to creating and promoting technologies and practices that foster economic, environmental and social sustainability that recognizes that sustainability is a strategic issue. As a result of this recognition, GeSI has decided to do something about the situation. In partnership with EcoVadis, it recently developed and re-launched a new and greatly improved version of the Electronic Tool for Accountable Supply Chains (E-TASC). Designed to facilitate support and drive accountability in the area of human rights and other sustainability standards throughout the supply chain, the goal is that the tool will allow for a more effective and transparent management of ICT Supply Chains and allow companies to better report to their different stakeholders.

Within a month of launching, over 20 ITC companies are already fully deployed on the platform and using EcoVadis to assess suppliers and over 1000 ICT suppliers are subscribed and registered on the platform (which can be found at etasc.ecovadis.com). The platform has all the power of the core EcoVadis platform, which has been EcoVating the Globe for many years (as described in the linked SI post) plus new capabilities in the areas of collaboration and corrective action plans, multi-tier transparency, site audits, and SEC conflict mineral tracking (which is very important if you are a supplier that wants to supply to a US ICT company). In addition to the deep supplier sustainability, business practice, and environmental assessment, there is also an in-depth labour practice and human rights assessment as well as the ability to track sustainable procurement initiatives. But the biggest improvement by far is the ability to share supplier audits and associated data between participating member companies.

If every buyer does their own audit of a supplier, it not only presents a significant drain on the supplier (which will end up costing all of the buyers in the end), but diminishes the chance that any buyer will get a thorough audit. There are two reasons for this. First of all, if you are doing individual audits on every major supplier, the cost is going to add up quickly so you are going to opt for the minimal audit from the lowest cost provider. And you’ll get what you pay for. A check-the-box minimal review of operations and records. It won’t be hard for poor working conditions at a secondary factory, off the books underage labour, etc. to slip through. Secondly, if a supplier has to deal with dozens of audits, it’s going to try and rush each auditor through each audit due to limited time and resources. In this case, it’s going to have books, materials, tours, etc. prepared, stick to them, and possibly avoid areas that could be troublesome to you. But if all of the big buyers come together and commission one audit, through a platform such as E-TASC on the EcoVadis platform, they can afford to pay for a very thorough audit at a fraction of the price that is not stressful on a supplier’s resources. Every one wins, especially when the supplier can see their assessment through the platform, what corrective actions they have to take to improve it, and other recommendations for improving their standing with the industry overall. In additional, all parties can see the results of the audit against the industry standard benchmark.

It’s a great solution for the ICT industry and one every ICT buyer should check out BEFORE regulations come into play that will mandate more sustainability and traceability in their supply chain.

Need a Truck? BuyTruckLoad.com!

Believe it or not, counter to every nerve in your body, you should be buying a portion of your freight business on the spot market! Take a minute, get those gasps out, and SI will explain why.

Simply put, for the vast majority of product-based companies, freight is the one category that is inefficient from a contract perspective. At first thought, this might not make sense as efficiencies and cost savings typically come from good planning, but this is precisely why you can often get significantly better rates spot-buying your freight than contracting it.

To see this, you have to look at the situation from your carrier’s viewpoint. It is most efficient, and most profitable, when it’s trucks are kept full. Your contracts keep your carrier’s trucks full at most half the time. Specifically, your contracts keep your carrier’s trucks full from point A to point B. Maybe it has a few pallets to take back to point A, but that doesn’t fill the truck, and it’s only efficient (from your point of view) if the carrier waits until the truck is full to take the pallets back. In order to maximize efficiency and profitability, the carrier needs business from point B back to point A. The chances of the carrier getting precisely this business when competing against 70,000 other carriers and only getting called to the bid on one of every 10,000 or 20,000 freight contracts being tendered are probably 40,000 to 1. Not good odds.

Plus, even if the carrier’s lucky enough to get business that geographically fills, say, 80% of the route from B back to A, chances are the timing doesn’t line up right and the truck ends up sitting idle for a few days on a regular basis, which also takes away from efficiency or profitability.

Because of this, and because of the fact that the carriers have to hedge their bets when you ask them to contract three, six, and twelve months out, you end up paying, on average 14%-15% more for contracted freight than you do freight purchased efficiently on the spot market (if you know what you are doing or use a good freight brokerage). In particular, even if you’ve done a great job on your contract, you’re probably paying, on average, over $1,400 for a load that you could get for $1,300 or less on the spot market.

That’s why Sean Devine and John Labrie, each with over a decade of transportation sourcing and optimization (at CombineNet, Emptoris, and Con-Way), built BuyTruckload.com — the first automated truckload brokerage service. This service, built on an advanced real-time truckload optimization model, takes your requirements, searches their database of over 70,000 carriers (and current spot market prices) across the United States (each with an average of 4 trucks), and gets you a quote that is, on average, $100 less than you would expect to get otherwise (buying yourself with a limited selection of carriers), and $200 less than you would if you were contracting months in advance (based on an average truckload price of $1,400+ and an average savings of 15%).

It’s quick, simple, and almost obvious — and that’s what makes it so useful. As a buyer, all you have to do is define the acceptable authority types (contract, common, broker), the acceptable / required equipment types (bus, van, flatbed, refrigerated, dry van, etc. — they allow for 16 different types), the cargo authorities (private, property, etc.), the safety alerts you will (not) accept (unsafe driving, driver fitness, etc.), the required number of power units, and where you need the trucks and the system will identify the relevant carriers. Define your shipping requirements, and it will generate binding quotes. It’s that simple, and if you use the right mix of contract and spot-buy freight, it could save you a lot of money.

Please note that the right mix is key! Even if the 15% savings are there for you, it’s probably not a good idea to put all of your freight on the spot market. You need to know you have enough reserved freight for critical products (at critical times) and carriers need to know they have enough baseline business to sustain themselves. the doctor‘s gut is that you probably want a 2 to 1 ratio between contract and spot market, on average. In some industries and/or categories, this ratio will be higher (because, let’s face it, you don’t care if you get those office supplies a day late), and in others it will be lower. But a 2 to 1 ratio is probably a good starting point.

Decideware: An End-to-End Agency Lifecycle Management Solution Part III

In our first post, we re-introduced you to Decideware, global providers of an end-to-end Agency Lifecycle Management (ALM) solution, with offices on three continents (in Sydney, San Francisco, and London) and quickly overviewed the five core modules of the integrated ALM solution that they offer. Then, in our last post, we dived into the Capability and Scope of Work modules and quickly touched on the briefing module. Today, we are going to dive into the Evaluation and Dashboard Modules.

Evaluation

When it comes to cost, most Marketing agencies have a terrible grip on this issue. Generally speaking, they know what they were budgeted at the start of the year, and what they spent at the end of the year when the Controller or CFO tells them. They do a terrible job of tracking costs by project, and if you asked them budget vs spend vs results for any one Agency, you’ll get a blank stare as if you asked them to explain why the tentative confirmation of the Higgs particle by the Large Hadron Collider is important when it comes to the validation of the Standard Model. It’s not a good state of affairs.

However, if they had a proper Agency Lifecycle Management solution where they could enter all cost information at the desired level of detail, or force the Agency to (if the Agency wants to get paid), the state of affairs is completely different. After every phase, they can find out where they are vs. where they should have been and, possibly with Supply Management’s help, take corrective action.  In addition, they could track feedback and get an overview of the supplier’s running (balanced) scorecard (as this module grew out of their initial Supplier Performance Management offering).

The evaluation module, combined with the reconciliation sub-module (that is tied to the scope of work and collects the quoted cost data) allows an Agency (Relationship) Manager to dive into actuals vs. cost for any time period, at any level of detail, at any time and determine how spending is tracking according to budget. If costs are high, they can drill down into the primary components, and go right down to the resource level and, possibly, determine that Joe, the highly paid creative resource, who was budgeted to work 10 hours, worked 100 hours. They can then determine if this was a data entry error or a grossly inaccurate estimation on the part of the Agency, and use this data in the post-mortem Agency evaluation.

In addition, they can bring up the Agency’s (balanced) scorecard (history) and see (and compare) the Agency’s performance on each phase, for the project, and across all projects.  They can even compare Agency scorecard to see if an Agency is performing average, better, or worse than the other approved agencies.

Dashboard

As noted in our first post, the dashboard, another new module from Decideware, provides a unified interface to all of the modules and functionality contained in the system. From the dashboard, which is designed to work like the user interface to a web-based cube-based spend analysis system, the user can search all of the Agency data, retrieve lists of agencies by geographies, capability, scope of work, and other relevant criteria, and drill down into any data category until they retrieve the (fine-grained) data they are looking for. The best thing about it is, unlike the dashboard offerings of many spend analysis or Supplier Information Management (SIM) providers, it’s almost devoid of fancy graphs and charts. Decideware understands it’s the data that matters and focussed on building an easy-to-use, yet powerful, search, and saved the real estate to display the requested data in an easy-to-understand tabular view with as much drill-down support as you will need.

In addition, from the dashboard, the user can quickly get to all of the reporting functionality embedded in the system, which includes scope analysis reports that summarize resource and fee schedules; organizational analysis reports that summarize costs and actuals; comparison reports that allow the user to compare agencies, fees, capabilities, and functions; and contract generation reports that can generate scopes of work and supporting contracts. (The platform has embedded contract management functionality just like it has embedded SIM functionality.) All of the data can be exported to Excel, and the system can automatically generate work-grids and rate cards.

Overall the system is well-designed and so easy to use that even a Marketer can do it. 😉 So if you want a solution to bring to the Marketing table, make sure Decideware is on your short-list.