Decideware: Taking Marketing Magic to a Whole New Level!

When we last briefed you on Decideware, they were Taking Agency Expense Management to the Next Level! Their Production module had just entered beta, and they had the facility to track not only quotes but actual costs down to the lowest level of detail and associate it with tasks, budgets, providers, and even individual resources.

In the production module, clients define jobs in detail, associate team members, define workflow, assign to vendors, breakdown costs, and go. The definition of job can be quite detailed — name, scope, lead, budget and budget period, type, geography, org unit, and so on. It can be as detailed as necessary, supporting everything from the creation of a simple banner advertisement to a full-scale shoot of an extended informercial, with costs ranging from 10 thousand to 10 million.

Costs can be broken up by phase, and then broken down by expense type, and even resource. The module can track estimated, actual, and will then compute the variance automatically by line item, task type, and phase. This may simply sound like an enhanced version of their scope of work, but the breakdown is much more detailed and their ability to capture data much more refined. This is important, because it supports their new dashboard module.

Their dashboard module, which needs a better name, is not a dashboard at all, but the release beta of their new deep BI capability. Decideware have recently integrated Tableau and can finally bring Marketing the deep insight into spend, and performance, that Marketing has until this point lacked.

Using Tableau, they have developed custom level 1 and level 2 dashboards for over a dozen big clients and are providing marketing spend insights that are going light years beyond what Marketing has ever seen, with the deep drill down you’d expect from a standard spend analysis tools.

At level 1, clients can see how much they are spending by agency, project type, phase, task, or resource, drill down on any available dimension, and, once and for all, see average costs for resources, tasks, projects and other deliverables. They can see when the average cost per hour for banner ad creation and management is $75 and one firm is charging them $125.

This is great, but the real value comes when you start importing performance data and contrasting it against cost. Nowhere is it more true than in marketing that “it’s not what you spend, it’s the impact you make”. It’s not how much more or less than the average you pay for social media campaign marketing, it’s how many impressions you make and clicks you get. If the average impressions on a campaign that cost $5000 is 500, and the average click throughs 15, then paying a company $10000 for a campaign that gives you 2000 impressions and 100 click throughs is a great deal, as you are paying 100 per lead vs. 333. And while most good marketers will get this data from a focussed campaign, how many can integrate it with the cost of campaign (banner ad) creation, how many can contrast it against similar campaigns, and how many can do that against normalized costs around the globe? None. But now they can.

With their latest development, DecideWare have not only taken (Marketing) Agency Management to a whole new level, they have also taken the insight into the ROI into a whole new level. Which creative genius is worth the $500 / hour (as his contribution can now be compared to end results across all his projects and his cost per effect normalized and compared against the other creative geniuses at the other agencies)? And which one isn’t even as productive as a $50 grunt doing stock art. With the new Decideware platform, not only can Marketing win the Agency Management Battle, but the cost management war.

First Clue that the New Public Procurement Policy is Going to Cost Everyone Money

Effective immediately, our policy is to only buy “Made in X”, where “X” is the local country or state.

Why is this going to cost you money?

First of all, it’s going to eliminate competition. And we all know what happens when competition goes away. Suppliers, who know they don’t have to worry about being replaced, as there’s only a few alternatives, and they’re already in your door, stop working as hard to be as cost competitive, innovative, or valuable to your organization.

But if that was the worst that could happen, it wouldn’t be so bad.

The reality is that as soon as a “buy local” policy comes into effect, suppliers are going to also (pretend to) “buy local”, which of course is going to raise their costs, because their suppliers are going to also stop working as hard to be as cost competitive, valuable, or innovative because the market is small, they’re in the door, and they know their competitors will also be content to maintain the status quo so they won’t have much competition. And this will continue down to the raw material supplier.

But if this was the worst that could happen, it still wouldn’t be so bad.

The reality is that once a supplier knows that it’s effectively the only game in town, it’s not going to worry about cost increases. In fact, it’s not only going to stop asking how much it has to raise costs to cover its increased costs and ensure it maintains nice, fat margins, it’s going to ask how much it can raise prices and just how fat its margins can get. It’s borderline corruption.

But if this was the worst that could happen, it might still be something that could be grudgingly accepted and dealt with.

The reality is that not all suppliers will be content to inflate their margins. In locales where corruption is common, this is only going to encourage more corruption. As per the public defender‘s post on how “Made in Nigeria” Public Procurement Policy Will Simply Lead To More Corruption, this sort of policy provides the perfect cover for both parties in a typical corrupt procurement transaction. How so? Read the public defender‘s post. Simply put, the buyer can now get away with saying “I had to buy local, and this looked like the best choice” and use it as a defence when caught.

How Does Your State of Flux Measure Up?

Your SRM (Supplier Relationship Management) is in a state of flux. It’s a fact. Policies are undocumented. Processes are not automated. Critical interaction data is not captured. And the majority of your employees interacting with your suppliers on a daily basis cannot even identify five of your top ten strategic suppliers. (Finance might hazard a guess, but while dollars spent is an indicator, it’s not a guarantee.)

A strategic supplier is any supplier that supplies products and / or services that are critical to your operations and that cannot be easily replaced by going out to bid to one of three suppliers in the next state. The supplier might get 1 Million annually and might get 100 Million annually. And if you want the best value from that strategic supplier, you have to be a customer of choice.

How do you become a customer of choice? Good SRM. How do you get good SRM? Good processes, and good platforms. That’s why it’s quite appropriate that this year the annual State of Flux research report is centered around technology. In particular, State of Flux will be researching the use of SRM technology globally, the benefits achieved, and implementation best practices for commercial success.

As with previous years, the 75-question survey takes about 20 minutes and all respondents get a free copy of the annual report, released at the end of October. This report has traditionally been the most extensive research on SRM on the global market and is well worth the time investment.

This year, as a bonus, State of Flux will immediately provide all companies that take the survey a benchmark ranking of how well they are doing against their peers based upon the eight years of survey data they have collected and a standardized ranking system that they are able to use. (And if multiple parties from your organization in different roles complete the survey, they will even augment that benchmark ranking with a SWOT analysis.)

The survey is open until July 1, 2016. Take the survey here.

How to Save a Whopping £500 on 1.0M of Spend!

Unless you are a best-in-class purchasing organization (and that is not the case for 92% of you), then you need to save. Budgets are shrinking. Costs are rising. Growth and consumer spend is flatlining. And if you don’t get your costs under control, you will be out of a job one way or the other.

But there’s a right way to save, and a wrong way to save.

The right way to save is to apply advanced analytics and optimization across your strategic and high spend categories which has proven time and time again to save an average of 10% across the board year after year when properly applied.

The right way to save is to influence and control demand. The only time demand should increase year over year is when it is for products or components that are for sale, or go into for sale products, and sales for those products are increasing. Demand should not increase more than x% for office supplies or MRO where x% is the increase in workforce, and, in fact, in many categories, should be decreasing year over year. For example, paper spend should decrease (since so much can be distributed online). MRO should decrease, as better inventory management and higher quality parts should decrease the number of products required. Etc.

The right way to save is to increase the value of the product sourced without increasing the price, so that even if costs stay constant, value increases and allow for an increased revenue stream.

So what’s the wrong way to save? Capital manipulation. In particular, earlier customer payment and later supplier payment.

The majority of analysts, accountants, and consultants, especially the unenlightened ones, will dazzle you with calculations that show how if you decrease accounts receivable from 30 days to 15 days and extend accounts payable from 30 days to 60 days, the extra 45 days of working capital you have will save you a fortune as you’ll either have to borrow less or can invest more and generate a huge savings on every Million that stays in your coffers an extra 30 to 60 days.

For example, if you have an annual cost of capital of 6% and you typically have to borrow 50% of required working capital to pay your suppliers on a timely basis, you will be paying:

  06% ACC   12% ACC  
Borrowed Amount 30 days 60 days 30 days 60 days
1 M  5,000 10,000 10,000 20,000
10 M  50,000 100,000 100,000 200,000
50 M   250,000   500,000   500,000 1,000,000

And as soon as a CFO at a mid-size company believes that if he can squeak out an extra 60 days across 50 Million of expenditure at 6%, he can save £500,000, a blind mandate to delay payment terms and expedite payment collection goes out across the board. And then CFO pats himself on the back and goes on a well deserved corporate retreat to the next conference he can find at a mountain resort.

But what actually happens?

If you do the proper calculation, which is:

You see that very little is actually saved because the savings is on the cost of capital for the payment days of the amount, NOT cost of capital for the payment amount. Which is a much smaller number. If you do this calculation, the real numbers are:

  06% ACC   12% ACC  
Borrowed Amount 30 days 60 days 30 days 60 days
1 M  500 1,000 1,000 2,000
10 M  5000 10,000 10,000 20,000
50 M   25,000   50,000   50,000 100,000

Remember, in the long run, the payments still have to be made and, most importantly, still have to be made on a monthly basis. So while you might see a savings the first month, there will be no further savings because all you have done is shifted all payments ahead by x days. A payment delayed is not a payment negated.

Moreover, all you’ve really accomplished is p!ss!ng off the supplier. And any chance of being a customer of choice has been thrown under the bus, where you effectively threw the supplier, who now has to borrow more capital to stay in operation, often at a rate double yours. In other words, the whopping £5K you saved likely cost the supplier £10K and, at the end of the contract, the first thing they are going to do is increase their costs substantially to cover their loss. So, at the end of the day, your short term savings of £5K is likely going to cost you £15K or more (especially when you consider the value associated with being a customer of choice). But hey, the CFO is always right, right? Wrong!

Don’t believe the doctor? Check out the public defender‘s blog that goes through this calculation in even more detail.