The First Rule of Any Technology …

… used in a business is that automation applied to an efficient operation will magnify the efficiency. The second is that automation applied to an inefficient operation will magnify the inefficiency.

Bill Gates

So many companies forget this in their rush to implement new S2C / P2P / S2P systems after finally getting budget approval. If you just automate what you have, you’ll simply amplify your mess and your problems.

Take sourcing. If, all of a sudden, a buyer can go from 50 mini-RFX events to 250 mini-RFX events, this is not always a good thing. What if the buyer is always using the suppliers she favours, who recommend custom SKUs for every project? In this situation, all that will happen is the buyer will proliferate SKUs throughout the system, often adding SKUs for products that were already supplied by another supplier (that the stockroom clerk ordered from), that was not invited to the RFQ as it was not one of the buyer’s favoured suppliers.

And while this theoretically increases Spend Under Management (SUM) as it gets the spend in the system, this just increases Spend Under Record (SUR) as, instead of properly managing the spend — which in this case would have resulted in SKU standardization instead of proliferation and category-based supplier rationalization based on a collective stakeholder scorecard and not just buyer preference — all the buyer did was add more chaos to the spend.

As another example, take invoice processing. As the purchasing wizard regularly laments over on Purchasing Insight, many organizations still think invoice automation is OCR and automatic field extraction based on keywords or relative location in the document. This in a time when most suppliers have EDI or the ability to send some form of standard XML, and when just about every decent e-Procurement or Source to Pay platform allows smaller suppliers without these abilities to “PO-flip” to an invoice. Some platforms even allow virtual printer drives to be distributed (for Windows and Mac) that will allow a supplier to “print” an invoice from their AR software straight to the e-Procurement platform — there are so many options that don’t require erroneous OCR, why would anyone in their right mind* even consider it.

Before automating anything, be sure to do a formal process review, identify any areas that are inefficient, and any areas that could be improved by technology. Then identify what the processes should look like. Only then do you automate. And be sure to measure whether or not the automation is delivering the planned results. This means that you should have, and be reading, throughput/efficiency metrics before the conversion, and throughput/efficiency metrics after the conversion. And the metrics should improve in the right direction. If they don’t, stop and figure out why. Automation should help, not hinder.

* We know, we know. Many MBAs aren’t always in their “right mind”. 😉

Thirty One Years Ago Today

Microsoft Windows 1.0 was released, which marked the beginnings of the PC revolution. While poorly received, it was followed by Windows 2.0, which ran the first versions of Word and Excel, and then Windows 3.0 (and 3.1) which was the first widely released version of windows when it was released less than 5 years later.

And overworked LOLCats everywhere rejoiced!

Maybe Self Driving Cars Are Inevitable …

… but so is wrong way driving (as happened in Pittsburgh) as online maps are not error free …

… and crashes into the side of a bus (like Google’s Lexus) …

… and crashes into the sides of small trucks (when the autonomous taxi decided to crash into a truck) …

… and even autonomous vehicular manslaughter (when a Model S decided to crash into a tractor trailer) …

There’s a reason that LOLCats avoid all self-driving cars (and not just chryslers that will drive you off the road) … and that’s because they knew just where self-driving cars would take them … and they only have nine lives.

They are quite happy to listen to great grandpa LOLCat who said ride a bike/

So Why Do You Want To get a Grip on Supply Dynamics?

Simply put, because when you do, target costing becomes a reality. And with target costing, you can not only set, but achieve, realistic cost goals for key products. This is only achieved when you have good insight into end to end cost components from a raw material, energy, labour, and overhead perspective. And this is only achievable when you have the systems that allows you to gather real cost data right down to the raw materials, and not just average cost data from across buying organizations (that are used to feed statistical models).

Seven years ago today SI ran an article on how Target Costing Works and You can Do It Too! We quoted an article from the now-defunct Purchasing magazine on how purchasing learns cost modelling which noted that smart buyers are working with engineers, finance and suppliers to identify cost drivers in product development and eliminate them and that Whirlpol was able to close a gap of 30% between the target cost for a module on one product and the initial design cost.

We also noted that new players in the market, like Akoya (which was puchased by I-Cubed in 2014) and Apriori (which Whirlpool selected as a provider in 2013 [Source]) could be used to help set target costs as Akoya’s market intelligence and statistical models gave a decent target range and Apriori’s production cost models, when populated with raw material, energy, and overhead costs, gave an expected production cost.

But one thing these providers couldn’t necessarily do was figure out how low costs could go if the costs could be traced right down to raw material providers, which can only be done if the input component costs can be traced through the supply chain. But with a solution that allows all costs to be collected and correlated, aggregation and streamlining opportunities to be identified and captured, and high production / overhead costs to be identified, aggressive, but realistic target costs can be set and realized as the organization knows where to focus its cross functional teams. And that’s one of the big reasons why you want to get a grip on supply dynamics!

Supply Dynamics: Tackling The Dynamics of Supply Head On! Part II

In our last post we introduced you to Supply Dynamics, a new direct procurement solution provider with a mature solution that was developed over the last 15 years, first as a skunkworks project inside, and supporting, O’Neal Industries, and then recently spun off into a new completely independent standalone best-of-breed offering.

We described their ability to collect relevant data feeds on the full product life cycle from raw material to finished product, correlate that data, track the product lifecycle from raw material to buyer warehouse, and, most importantly, to determine which data needs to be tracked in the first place using their efficient and inexpensive automatic extraction software that processes (CAD/CAM) blueprint files and builds up the appropriate bill of materials and manufacturing process overview automatically.

But their software can do more than that. Much more.

Their solution also tracks (contract) demand and sales forecasts and not only allows an organization to predict a 12-month rolling forecast at any time, but do so at the product, part, or raw material level — broken down by category, region, or other dimension of interest. Since the platform keeps such detailed records, it can do such detailed predictions.

Their solution also cross references all product data across not only all bill of materials but all suppliers. This means that you can see holistic metrics around each component and raw material. More specifically, for any given raw material, you can see the total forecast across all products for a year, how many assemblies it will be used in, how many BoM records it appears in, how many vendors are supplying, how many processors are working (if the raw material passes through a processor on the way to a component manufacturer), how many different processed forms it takes, etc. For steel you can see how many lbs the organization is expected to use, how many fasteners (or other primary component categories of interest) it will be used to create, how many raw material vendors supply it, how many processors process it into its various allows, how many alloys the the organization uses, how many grades of those alloys it employs across the product line, and how many individual specifications for various grades it has used over the years.

And the platform doesn’t just support bill of materials for an assembly or component, it also supports much more detailed bill of resource for individual parts that specify the material inputs in detail at a fine-grained level. For example, not just “steel” but “X52 Carbon Steel, API 5L Standard”. Also, any processing requirements. These are extracted from the part level blueprints, verified by the suppliers, and the entire process verified by Supply Dynamics’ in-house team of US experts.

From this combination of bill of resource data and forecasts, the platform is able to automatically identify aggregation opportunities across a raw material type (steel) or instance (stainless) type by looking at total weight / volume, vendor count, and demand split. The user simply specifies the business unit of interest; any restrictions on vendor, conversion process, form, spec, and time period; and the max % of allocation to a single vendor, the minimum number of current vendors providing the raw material, and/or a minimum volume / weight / spend requirement for it to be considered and the system reports on the top potential opportunities, which the buyer can quickly drill into to determine the real potential. Maybe the demand is too geographically disjoint, maybe the top suppliers are satisfying the majority of regional demands, or maybe the prices from the top suppliers are at market and no opportunity is there, but maybe the demand is centralized, too many suppliers are supplying the same location, or prices are above market and there is a great opportunity. Regardless of the truth, it’s very easy for a buyer to drill in and find out.

It also has geographic visualization capability so that, for any raw material, you can see where it’s produced, where it’s consumed, and whether the distribution looks right geographically. This makes it very quick to visually identify awards that just don’t make sense and figure out where effort should be focussed. The same is true for machine shop locations, processors, and suppliers. You can visualize your supply chain by raw material, part, component, assembly, or vendor. And you can cross reference this against D&B scores and disaster mapping to visually see which suppliers are ranked poor and which suppliers, processors, or manufacturers might be impacted by a disaster.

The Supply Dynamics platform is very powerful and would support any platform focussed more on the strategic sourcing or day-to-day procurement activities of a supply management organization with a large direct procurement need quite well. It’s a rather innovative new offering and one that SI expects we’ll be hearing more about as well in the new year. Especially since they are about to launch a new capability that might turn the marketplace on its head. Stay tuned.