There are Three Primary Parts to Procurement Orchestration

Procurement Orchestration is the craze, presumably because Procurement shouldn’t operate in a vacuum. There are a number of startups just focussed on orchestration, a number of analyst firms are jumping on the orchestration bandwagon, and a number of enterprise automation platforms are all of a sudden claiming to be procurement orchestration platforms to get in on the buzz. But there’s a lot more to Procurement Orchestration than just application automation. A lot more.

Procurement Orchestration, which we included in our 39 Part Series to Help You Figure Out Where to Start with Source-to-Pay in Parts 34 to 36 and 39, MUST Address, at a minimum, the orchestration of:

  • procurement data
  • procurement process
  • procurement stakeholders

First of all, good Procurement needs to be data-informed. (Not data driven, data informed. Data driven means that all decisions based on the available data, which is never complete. You can accurately capture all bids in an RFP, previous OTD metrics, previous defect metrics, subjective quality ratings, ESG data, etc. but you can’t capture relationship data, innovation support, etc. and these are also factors that are important in Sourcing and Supplier Selection.) This means that all available data needs to available to the Procurement team. It doesn’t have to be centralized in one system or pushed to a data warehouse / lake / lakehouse, but the source system (that holds the golden record of truth) for every piece of data needs to be identified and integrations created to allow the necessary data to be accessed as needed by the Procurement system currently being used.

Secondly, good Procurement needs proper processes. That’s more than just application orchestration as not all Procurement teams will have applications for every step of the process, and even those that have major applications for every major stage (intake / need identification, spend analysis / opportunity / procurement process identification, sourcing, supplier onboarding / management, contract negotiation and governance, e-Procurement/PO Generation and Management, Invoice Management and OK-to-Pay) will still need to orchestrate intermediate process steps such as stakeholder collaboration, external vendor risk/ESG review, etc.

Thirdly, good Procurement needs to involve all of the relevant stakeholders. The category manager, the risk manager, the budget holder / executive, the in house counsel, etc. All of these individuals need to be able to interact with the procurement process and artifacts at the right time, and through their applications if they have special tools to do the risk analysis, budget analysis, contract review, etc. Thus, supporting procurement goes beyond just supporting procurement applications and processes, but peripheral applications and processes as well so that all stakeholders can be part of the process and effectively contribute their expertise and experience.

Remember this the next time a jazzy tool tries to lure you in with pre-built Procurement platform integrations or easy, visual, procurement workflows. That’s just part of the puzzle.

There are NO Perils of Big Data in Procurement!

First of all, no organization has enough data, and those that come close don’t have big data.

Secondly, the more data you have, the better.

Third, if you think you have too much data, you’re not getting it!

So where’s this rant coming from? The rant-inducing headline du jour. The CIO Review recently published an article on The Perils of Big Data in Procurement which is complete non-sense, as there are no perils to having more data (because there’s never enough), unless it’s bad data (but the assumption in the article was that all the data was correct), just perils in terms of how that data is presented and accessed.

The perils in terms of how that data is presented and accessed can be significant, but that’s not due to having big data, that is due to poor system design — and that’s a different issue!

According to the article, buyers and procurement managers … have available a huge and unprecedented amount of data … [and] start to measure everything in order to manage it and that with this approach, several data lakes are created, feeding various dashboards, scorecards, reports, and metrics as procurement professionals try to understand spend analysis, price trends, market fluctuations, volume, cost savings, negotiation performance, and other essential factors. And this is true.

It goes on to say it is very easy for a person to be lost in the sea of numbers and details and miss the big picture entirely because you don’t know what is the crucial data that would give you critical insights. And if that wasn’t enough, it goes on to say it is the same as someone that enters the hospital with a broken leg but has everything else checked. WTF?

This is so dumb it makes you angry!

  1. If a person gets lost in the sea of details and numbers it’s because they don’t know what they should be looking for and how they should be looking for it, not because there’s too much data.
  2. If they don’t know what is crucial, it’s because they don’t know enough about the project they are doing to identify what’s critical and what’s not.
  3. What health practitioner is going to be so stupid as to not see a broken leg on a triage? Come on now! And what Procurement practitioner would check all but one dashboard randomly and then not check the last remaining dashboard? (And that’s what the article is implying with its ridiculous statement.)

In other words, the headline, and claim, is bullcr@p. Don’t blame a mountain of data for a lack of capability in your people, poor vendor technology choices (that bury you in useless dashboards), and your unwillingness to train your talent in modern technology and best practices so they can do their job properly.

And while the author is completely right in that you need to

  • understand what matters
  • start with a top-down view
  • have people who are good at interpreting the data

It still misses the point in that you need to, for any application you buy and any project you wish to undertake

  • define what’s relevant up front
  • find a solution that is configured/configurable to show that up front
  • make sure the data is easy to interpret, is accompanied with written guidance, and that your talent is trained on how to properly interpret the data and
  • if the goal is opportunity finding, the solution needs to identify and present the top opportunities across all of the analysis done, with deep supporting dashboards buried under the high level summary dashboard

More data is always better, especially if you want to use machine learning. In other words, it’s not the data, it’s the application, or the people, so don’t blame the data for your organization’s shortcomings.

Can the UK Help American Manufacturers Shift Their Sourcing of Critical Materials?

Maybe, but not in the way this recent article in SupplyChainBrain suggests. The article, which really had the doctor scratching his head, referenced the Atlantic Declaration and how the United States and United Kingdom are resolving to build resilient, diversified, and secure supply chains and, more specifically, bolster the U.K. as a source of five critical minerals: cobalt, graphite, lithium, manganese, and nickel.

While we need a secure supply of these minerals in the Americas to ramp up and sustain EV (Electrical Vehicle) production, as the article also notes, the UK is the world’s 12th largest exporter of cobalt, 16th largest of graphite, 12th largest of manganese, 11th largest of raw nickel, and doesn’t even make the charts on Lithium. It can ramp up all it wants, these numbers aren’t going to change (because every other country is ramping up too), and the bigger countries (likely) have deeper reserves.

Plus, the UK, with very dense cities like London and limited land mass, is in desperate need of EVs itself to keep its smog levels down, so how much can it really afford to export?

The reality is that the UK can help by working with the US to identify non-China sources of these materials, use their collective bargaining might to secure supply at a sustainable cost, and help manage suppliers who are closer to / more used to working with the UK than the US. Similarly, since the UK is a small island and will likely need to import these vehicles (since the local market size doesn’t make an automotive production plant an economical investment for most automotive brands UNLESS a significant part of the UK market would switch to that vehicle), it can also guarantee a market for any suppliers that it secures those materials on behalf of.

Plus, if UK and US companies team up, they can split the effort and share their knowledge and best practices, and the more creativity you have to solve the upcoming challenges, the better — and chances are that the UK, who no longer have the weight and support of the EU backing them up, needs to be very creative these days.

Anyway, while we applaud the joint effort, it’s doubtful that the UK is going to solve even a fraction of the US need raw material wise. But human capital wise, they are even more incentivized than the US to solve these challenges.

B2B Marketplaces Have Their Place But …

… don’t look to them as a foundation for supplier collaboration! While it’s nice to see Procurement platforms and technologies getting noticed in Financial publications, the juxtapostion of the headline and subheading on this recent Financial Express article made us go “OI! YOY! YOI!”.

The headline was great:
Integration of B2B marketplaces into supply chain networks for increased efficiency

… it’s exactly what Finance needs to hear as B2B Marketplaces are a great solution for commodities or products typically bought spot-buy on the open market, and much more efficient than sending out an RFP for something you can find and buy quicker, easier, and cheaper online, and definitely better than searching half a dozen supplier sites to find the right product at the right price.

And the subheading started off great:
A notable opportunity for enhancing Supply Chain Management (SCM), as rated by 53% of businesses, lies in collaborative efforts with suppliers.

… because collaborative efforts are not only a great way to increase efficiency, but also increase value by lowering cost, increasing quality, adding capability, etc.

But the way the sub-header ended was head-scratching to say the least:
… The answer lies in utilizing user-friendly and efficient B2B marketplaces.

NO! No, No, No, NO! If you want to collaborate with suppliers, you need a modern Supplier Management solution that focuses on supplier development, innovation, and collaboration.

B2B Marketplaces were created to help buyers find (new) suppliers to buy from and to help suppliers widen their potential customer base when buyers find their products in a search and check them out. They were not setup for collaboration and the extent of “collaboration” on the majority of these platforms is asynchronous messaging. That’s not collaboration! Not even close.

In comparison, a Supplier Management platform with

  • Relationship Management will not only support asynchronous messaging, it will also support collaborative project/product plans and a best practice/knowledge base for both parties
  • True Network Management and not just an integrated online marketplace will also support a true bi-directional graph, bi-directional search, classification, and anonymous (peer)
    reviews
  • Proper Discovery will not only support simple searches, but deep location, product, capability, and multi-factor searches; proactive web-search and web-site monitoring; anonymized ratings and reviews; and deep product sheets and history management
  • Orchestration Management will support multi-tier linkages, cascading onboarding, and multi-tier supplier support so that you can quickly and easily onboard the supplier onto your own personal Supplier Management instance that you can customize to your liking
  • Enablement Management will add an integrated supply-centric portal, sustainability guidance, and true supplier-led innovation support

In other words, this article, which could have focussed on the core value of B2B Marketplaces and introduced them as a first step into the Procurement world, with an entire suite of valuable tools to help an organization, missed the mark.

For more information on what a proper Supplier Management platform should do, as well as a list of vendors who offer these platforms, see parts 15 to 20 of our The 39 Steps … err … The 39 Clues … err … The 39 Part Series to Help You Figure Out Where to Start with Source-to-Pay.

Supplier Management

Part 15: Supplier Management is a CORNED QUIP Mash

Part 16: Supplier Management A-Side

Part 17: Supplier Management B-Side

Part 18: Supplier Management C-Side

Part 19: Supplier Management D-Side

Part 20: Over 90 Supplier Management Companies to Check Out

THE Sign That You Need a CPO

The Supply Chain Management Review recently published an article on the top 10 signs that your organization needs a talented chief procurement officer. They were all good reasons, but they kind of suggested that you needed multiple reasons to hire a CPO. The reality is that you only need one reason, it’s very straight forward, and it almost needs no explanation. In fact, most of you will get it right away, so we’ll give it to you straight away, and you can stop reading now if you like.

The Sign That You Need a CPO: Your organization spends over 10 Million a year.

That’s it. Easy, eh? No top ten list. No long winded explanations. No complicated requirements. Just one number. Just one check.

Why is it this easy? Simple. Good Procurement practices will save your organization at least 10% across the board, regardless of current market conditions. Why? Even if costs are going up, if best in class Procurement practices weren’t deployed in the past,

  • even previously sourced categories will not have maximized savings
  • the process will have been inefficient, which would have cost the organization time, resources, and opportunity costs on other categories
  • most tail spend categories would have been completely ignored
  • many orders would have gone out without POs
  • most invoices would not have been closely checked, resulting in over-payments
  • etc. etc. etc.

So, if you’re spending 10 Million, a CPO is going to save 1M at a minimum. That’s going to be 3X or more the CPOs fully burdened cost in a smaller organization. Simple calculation, simple rule.