It’s NOT a Suite, It’s JUST Sourcing, Part I

In Wednesday’s post, we made what some might consider the rather bold statement that it’s not optimization, it’s strategic sourcing and we will get back to this statement shortly, but first we’re going to step back and make a statement that some may feel is an even stronger claim. It is certainly a statement that is going to irk a number of vendors, but we’re not in 2005 anymore. We’re in 2015 and the market, and the game, has changed.

Thus, It’s not a suite, it’s just Sourcing.

What do we mean by this? Simple. These days, Sourcing needs to be much more strategic and is thus not an activity that can be accomplished as a descrete set of loosely connected tasks where you can pick and choose what you need ahead of time. Strategic Sourcing is an activity that needs to both analyze the need and the market situation and respond to the stimuli the market is providing in a dynamic fashion.

This can not be done according to a pre-planned, limited set of tasks. To clarify, let’s take a hypothetical, but realisitic situation. Let’s say that the company is a high-tech retailer selling custom assembled high-end development boxes to software development and engineering shops. This company will not be buying pre-configured Dell and HP machines, targetted to the consumer market, but custom configured boxes using high end motherboards, which may be manufactured by the same production houses that manufacture boards for companies like Dell and HP, high end Intel and AMD processors, ultra-fast high density DRAM, high-end Solid State drives, mid-tower cases with extra fans, etc.

This might sound like a relatively easy sourcing event as there are a relatively small number of acceptable MB manufacturers, DRAM manufacturers, drive manufacturers, case manufacturers, and only two chip manufacturers, but even 5 * 5 * 5 *5 * 2 = 1350 and each manufacturer might have over a dozen acceptable options — and it’s hard to say up front how many of these combinations are not only viable, but acceptable (as even though it might be feasible to connect the components, there might be driver or other issues that affect compatibility or performance). In addition, new manufacturers arise once in a while and old manufacturers fail or sell out. Last year’s customer spend pattern is not the same as the spend pattern two years ago, and until year-over-year is analyzed for multiple years, you have no idea of the average deviation.

In other words:

  • you may or may not need a pre-event spend analysis to determine potential volume leverage points, the opportunities with supply base consolidation, and expected savings potential, all depending on when the last event was run, how much data you have, and current market data points
  • you may or may not need optimization; if you restrict the bid to pre-configured systems, because business is up 40% and you need a quick event to get through the rest of the year with plans to do a more detailed analysis in 6 months, you can probably get away with a weighted auction, but if bid options are open, you will probably need optimization to handle all the data
  • you may or may not need multiple RFX rounds, so you may or may not need a supplier portal to handle the communication necessary for a multi-round event

And this is all fairly obvious, so you are probably thinking

  • if I need the analysis, I invoke the spend analysis module, get my insights, and plan my strategy
  • then I invoke the RFX module to create the RFX
  • if I am doing multiple rounds — I have to configure the Supplier Portal instead of just sending out the Excel spreadsheets (which I would import on return otherwise)
  • when the data is retrieved, validated and cleaned up then I either
    • push it into the auction for a weighted auction or
    • push it into the optimization module for optimization-backed analysis
  • when I have my winners, I push the data into the contract management module for draft contract creation

… easy-peasy, right?

Wrong!

This is the real world and it never works this way.

Organizational Damnation 55: Sales

You may have thought we reached the pinnacle of organizational damnations when we discussed damnation 54: Marketing, and while Marketing can be bad when they stretch the truth, promise products months before they can be developed even if everything were to go absolutely perfect (which it won’t), and create a hype that the organization may never be able to live up to, but it’s nothing compared to sales. It’s one thing to sell an expectation, especially when one can always weasel one’s way out with an “it’s all a misinterpretation” argument, but it’s another to sign a contract knowing that there is no way the organization can possibly deliver. That’s why the Sales damnation often trumps the Marketing damnation (even though the two are often intertwined).

Why is Sales so bad?

They often live by the mantra that the customer gets what the customer wants.

Regardless of reality, sanity, or the huge loss that could ensue when the product is not delivered, a penalty clause kicks in, and a large lawsuit is filed for incidental damages when the customer finds out that the organization(‘s salesperson) made a promise with the full understanding that it could not keep the promise (because the salesperson wanted to make a quota to get a year-end bonus).

Moreover, the customer gets what they want when they want it.

Sometimes sales will actually limit themselves to selling a product or service the organization actually has today, but promise unrealistic delivery times. For example, Sales might promise 100,000 units of the new motherboard next Monday, when they haven’t even been produced yet by the Factory in China which can only produce 10,000 a day working double shifts and requires 72 hours to air-freight a rush order when you add in packaging, customs clearance, and ground-transportation time.

Even if what the customer asks for is not what they really need.

Not satisfied selling deep freezes to Eskimos, or heat lamps to Colombians, some salesmen have to one-up their peers and sell complex products and services they don’t need to gullible CXO’s who, after seeing the success their peer organization’s supposedly achieved with the same service, acquire a “me-too” mentality. For example, BPO for invoice and payment processing when the organization is a staff augmentation operation and needs deep insight into it’s T&E cost in order to accurately bill and price it’s resources under different cost models. Or lean workshops when all the organization does is joint product design with strategic suppliers and the bottleneck is not the design process, but the suppliers with inefficient plant floor setups. Or customized web-based order entry screens for the sales-team to input orders when in fact the real bottleneck is inventory visibility and availability – not the time to enter an order. Or, even worse, a new ERP to support that new Procurement platform when, in fact, the current ERP is just fine and the data migration effort is monumental.

And more horror stories than you care to count. As long as compensation is immediate on signed deals, instead of long term based on customer retention (for example, instead of 30% of deal value, 10% of annual revenue for as long as the organization is a customer, even if the sales person leaves the organization or retires), Sales will do whatever it takes to line their pockets, even if it means promising the impossible (which will, in the end, come back to bite Procurement in the rear end when they have to source additional product or service support that just may not exist). So keep an eye on Sales, and be prepared to step over their head if need be before deals are signed that Procurement cannot possibly deliver on.

The Trade Extensions Event Was Different. Their View Is Different. It’s time for Different.

In our last post we noted that those of you following Spend Matters and Spend Matters EU will have noticed Nancy’s and Jason’s posts on the recent Trade Extensions events in London and Chicago on Managing Complexity. In these posts they made a number of interesting observations about the event and how it was different from many other customer-focussed vendor events. We summarized these in our last post and noted that while all of the differences identified were major differences between the Trade Extensions event and the average vendor event, the biggest difference was left unsaid.

The biggest difference was not in the event, or even in the unique approach Trade Extensions took in the planning and organization of the event, but in the viewpoint they took with regards to the core subject matter. The viewpoint, which is one that Sourcing Innovation has had for a long time, is simply thus:

It’s not optimization. It’s just sourcing.

It’s 2015. As indicated in a recent white paper by Mr. Smith of Spend Matters UK on “What Defines Complex Sourcing”, Sourcing is Complex. In fact, as will be clarified in Sourcing Innovation’s upcoming paper on Complex Sourcing: Are You Ready, even the most basic of categories these days hide complexity well beyond an average Sourcing Professional’s wildest imagination. In fact, even a basic print tender can hide all nine dimensions of complexity and finding the right solution is in fact a sourcing problem of the highest magnitude. (The reality is that sourcing custom made controller boards is often easier.)

Sourcing involves identifying the plethora of options available, defining the cost model breakdowns, capturing all of the data, allowing suppliers to define their own proposals, capturing all of the buyer constraints and capacity restrictions, and creating various scenarios that represent different workable options. All of this requires an optimization platform.

The reality is that strategic sourcing requires a lot of analysis, and the only sourcing platform that can support the analysis required is one based on optimization. But it’s not necessarily about the optimization. Sometimes it’s about the requirements capture. Sometimes it’s about the data collection. Sometimes its about the modelling. Sometimes its just creating and costing scenarios. And sometimes, which could be a small fraction of the time, it’s about the optimization.

It’s not optimization, it’s strategic sourcing. You can’t do sourcing without optimization, even though you can do optimization without sourcing. That’s why the Trade Extensions event focussed on Sourcing. Whether or not the end of Procurement is nigh. How to effect change to keep it relevant. How to source responsibly. And what some best practices to achieve that goal are. If you can not strategically source, you cannot optimize. Don’t try to preach optimization before one understands the importance of true and proper strategic sourcing.

That’s also why Trade Extensions commissioned a book, The Strategic Sourcing Lifecycle: An Introduction, written by the doctor, which they will be giving away FREE as an e-Book download through their TESS Academy. (Stay tuned for more information on when this will be available.) It’s not optimization, it’s sourcing. And we’ve reached a point where most firms that claim to have Sourcing don’t.

Environmental Damnation 21: Climate Change

We’ve hinted at this in our damnation posts on natural disasters, water, and food shortages but this source environmental damnation is one that has repercussions across the damnation categories. While we won’t discuss all of the ripple effects of the shockwaves it is producing, we’ll discuss some of the biggest ones from the primary effects.

Hotter Summers

Everyone associates climate change with global warming, and the summers are definitely warming up, as this is one aspect of climate change. As a result of hotter average summertime temperatures, we are experiencing a global change in weather patterns that is bringing more droughts and wildfires, which is resulting in an increase in lost crops at a time when food reserves are hovering near the all time lows that arrived in 2011 (and at a time when the US no longer has any strategic grain reserves). This means that spiking commodity prices are going to keep spiking, assuming that you can even get enough of the commodity. If your organization is not your supplier’s preferred customer, and 30% of the global crop gets wiped out, is your order getting filled?

Colder Winters

Global warming is not just global warming, it’s global climate change year round. While the summers get hotter, the winters get colder and more severe and bring more severe storms with record setting snowfalls that can bury your average personal automobile, massive ice storms (that can bring down entire power grids), and fast moving ice, even in the US. (Source: Raw Video) As a result transportation routes are shutting down, which doesn’t matter because your factories cannot run without power, and your people can not get to work in temperatures that can inflict frostbite in less than sixty seconds.

More Regulations

Climate change is a result of global warming and global warming is at least partially a result of our industrialization and all of the carbon and particulates that we pump into the atmosphere that would not get there naturally. The smarter countries realize this, and are creating regulations to prevent (over) pollution that is damaging our planet and threatening our very existence. And while this is a good thing in theory, the fact that these regulations are not only popping up faster than Fibonacci’s rabbits but that every clean air, water, etc. regulation around the globe has not only different restrictions on pollutant output, but on quality control and reporting, it’s a paperwork nightmare. When one considers all the trees that are being cut down to support the creation of these regulations, one has to wonder if more harm is being done than good sometimes.

In short, climate change is another eternal damnation that plays havoc in the direct manners specified above, and in more indirect manners when one considers the impact it has on transportation infrastructure (as extreme cold and rapid freezing and thawing is very hard on our man made structures), our providers (who are forced to claim force majeure on a more regular basis), and us (when we just cannot handle extreme weather conditions we never evolved for).