Only Supply Management Has a Future

In yesterday’s post we said that Procurement is Doomed, Entombed, and Marooned and we meant it.

No employee is going to send a paper request for authorization to Procurement to purchase a new phone when his dies, to authorize a laptop repair when his breaks, or to detail his need to purchase a few cases of paper when an emergency print run has to be done in house because the delivery from the printer got lost. They’re going to go online to Amazon or Office Depot or Apple and just order the product or schedule the service they need, and schedule the (same-day) delivery when they need it.

No analyst is going to wait for the quarterly market report from the old-school analyst firm when up-to-date online indices with past, current, and projected trends are instantly available at the click of a button. Another p-Card charge and it’s in their hands.

When demand increases rapidly, Sales isn’t going to wait for Procurement to negotiate a better logistics rate with a current carrier, they’re going to phone up the supplier and ask for expedited delivery on as many units as they can get their hands on.

And if a critical project requires additional contingent labour to be completed, HR is going to phone up the trustiest supplier in their rolodex (even if it is the most expensive) or go online to talent marketplaces to find talent for deliverables that can be outsourced and just get it done.

And so on. Procurement is doomed, entombed, and marooned.

But Supply Management is not. (And that’s why Sourcing Innovation is all about Next Generation Supply Management — the doctor saw the beginning of the end for traditional Procurement long ago and has been working hard, year after year after year, to educate you on what you need to do to transform your organization into an industry leading Supply Management organization that will not only survive, but thrive and get its seat at the table).

You see, while Procurement is focussed on buying for the organization, Supply Management is focussed on helping the organization buy. While Procurement is focussed on supply, Supply Management is focussed on supply assurance. While Procurement is focussed on supplier management, Supply Management is focussed on supplier development. And while this may sound the same, as the differences appear subtle at first glance, nothing could be further from the truth. Let’s take them one by one.

Before the age of the internet where an employee could go online, do a few searches, and not only quickly find the product she needed (and get it delivered next day), but find it at a good price too, it was difficult to research suppliers, research market pricing, cut a purchase order, and get the product in a timely manner. Without up-to-date knowledge on the supply market, market pricing, and delivery options, buying something was quite a hassle and many employees and departments were happy to hand off as much as they could to Procurement. But not anymore. People believe they can do it faster, better, and cheaper if they do it themselves — and a Procurement organization that tries to say otherwise is not looked upon very lovingly. However, a Supply Management department that realizes this and instead looks for ways to empower employees to do their own buying in a way that allows them to increase compliance is appreciated. A Supply Management department that finds a single platform that can integrate the marketplaces employees normally buy from with preferred vendor platforms, organizational pricing, and push on-contract and preferred products to the top of the search results is appreciated. Employees want one-stop-shops to buy their office supplies, software, electronics, and incidental needs just like they want one-stop-shops to book their air travel, shuttles, and hotels on a business trip. A Supply Management organization that enables that is cheered.

Moreover, a Supply Management organization that walks into Marketing and offers to teach them how to disaggregate creative spend with editing and print services so that each can be managed appropriately, which allows savings in non-critical categories identified and applied to new projects or top creative talent to insure better results, is welcomed compared to a Procurement organization that just wants to put the spend up to auction or consolidate it for discount leverage.

In addition, as SI has been stressing for weeks now, while supplier (relationship) management is important, supplier development is even more so. Having a supplier that comes to you at the first sign of trouble and works with you to resolve the issue before a delay or disruption occurs is good, but having a supplier that is able to constantly identify potential issues in its supply chain and work with its suppliers to prevent them is even better. Having a supplier that can implement any design for a custom manufactured component that you throw at it is good, but having a supplier that can provide suggestions on design improvements that will allow for lower cost materials and cheaper manufacturing processes without sacrificing quality is better. And so on.

In other words, while Procurement is focussed on cost reduction and control, Supply Management is focussed on value generation, of which cost is just a tiny component. And that’s why Supply Management has a future while traditional Procurement is doomed, entombed, and marooned.

Procurement is Doomed! Entombed! Marooned!

Apparently the recent Procurement Pub Debate, summarized in a recent post from Mr. Smith on “procurement pub debate arguments from the doomed side”, ended up with a win for the pro side. But the harsh reality, is that Procurement, at least as we know it, is doomed, ready to be entombed, and marooned on a desert Island. The pro side can be as blindly optimistic as they want to be, but it doesn’t change Procurement’s future.

As the supporters of the doomed side note, with modern web platforms:

  • it’s easy to buy what you want, when you want, for the price you want,
  • up-to-date market information lets you know how the price compares to other offerings on the market, and
  • peer reviews and opinion crowd sourcing lets you know how likely it is to fit your needs.

In other words, from an average employee’s point of view, who needs Procurement?

Furthermore,

  • inflation is back, so Procurement is not going to be able to negotiate significant cost reductions, or do much better than a market auction across a sufficient supply base,
  • risk is increasing, and organizations’ think it’s more important to focus on Risk Management in the Supply Base than Procurement, and
  • the market is becoming more digitized by the day and the organization would rather focus on expanding sales through the largest sales channel out there than worry about cost control as they see increased revenue as the quickest path to greater profit in a time of inflation.

So, despite the continued need of an average organization to insure that the organization can continue to acquire the supply necessary to meet customer demand, Procurement is increasingly being seen to be of secondary importance in an average organization and this trend is only going to continue. As it stands now, Procurement has peaked well below the level it should have reached. There is no future for Procurement. Unless, of course, it evolves. How? Stay tuned!

Is Your SRM Program Leaving Hundreds of Millions on the Table?

With external spend in an average company between 60% and 80%, a considerable amount of an organization’s value is dependent upon its supply base. Quality, reliability, and attractiveness are all dependent upon the supplier’s ability to create a quality product for your supply base. Service, repair, and timely customer interactions related to such all rely on the suppliers ability to deliver quality service and quality, timely, communication.

Moreover, the average organization is not only relying on its suppliers to create its value, but is losing out on hundreds of millions of dollars of value due to inefficient, and sometimes ineffective, supplier relationship management. For example, a recent study by Vantage Partners found that the top ten performers in SRM reported an average of $298 Million in financial benefits from SRM in 2014. That’s a lot of cash. As summarized in this article titled “unlocking potential value srm through effective governance” over on My Purchasing Center, there is a lot of value to be had by investing in better supplier governance.

For example, companies with good supplier relationships have suppliers who alert them to potential issues or potentially late deliveries at the earliest sign of trouble and jointly work with them to identify a resolution. But this is just the tip of the value iceberg. Joint cost reduction initiatives. Joint innovation. And so on.

But how do you get there? According to the article, the starting points are

  • supply base segmentation
  • policies and procedures
  • alignment with sourcing, category, and contract management
  • (designated) executive sponsors
  • (designated) relationship managers
  • strategic business plans

which is true, but this only addresses three of the six pillars of SRM, namely

  • stakeholder engagement & support
  • governance & process
  • business driver and value

but doesn’t really address the other three pillars of SRM,

  • people and skills – talent matters
  • information and technologies – platforms enable process
  • relationship development and culture – management is just the start

But, fortunately, there’s still time to get a handle on all of this and, more importantly, find out where your organization stacks up with respect to its peers as you still have one week to participate in the 2015 SRM Survey by State of Flux. Taking this survey, which is the most extensive survey out there on SRM, will not only give you first look into the survey results, but also give you first access to what has become the largest, most in-depth, SRM report on the planet. The 2014 SRM Survey Report clocked in at 216 pages of data, results, and expert interpretation and was full of valuable, actionable, insights — including the pillars and the ten essential starting points, not six — that your organization can use to launch an SRM program — and it’s free to all survey participants as well! Moreover, you’ll also get the full 2015 Report as soon as its available – and this will be invaluable as it will be the first report focussing on what a Supply Management organization can do to gain the executive sponsorship and support it needs for success, and the first report written with the C-Suite in mind. You will be able to use it in your quest for purchasing fire.

So don’t delay and take the 2015 SRM Survey today, before it’s too late!

Just What Can Strategic Sourcing Decision Optimization Do?

That You Can Not Do Without It?

the doctor has explained this many times, but it seems that some people still have difficulty understanding exactly why they need this technology. However, a recent article over on CNN on Hello Games and their upcoming ambitious sci-fi adventure game No Man’s Sky might help him explain the necessity of decision optimization to you.

In the recent article 18 quintillion planets: The video game that imagines an entire galaxy, CNN explains how the next generation of open-world gaming is expanding to take on the entire universe and offer players an online game with 18,446,744,073,709,551,616 algorithm-generated planets. That’s a number so large that a person would have to live 584 Billion years to visit each planet for a single second. That’s also the number of possibilities that an analyst might have to consider if she wanted to consider every possible selection of suppliers, products, carriers, lanes, pricing tiers, and allocations to optimize the entire spend of a global Fortune 500 multi-national corporation.

A large multi-national organization might

  • deal with 10,000 global suppliers
  • operating in 100,000 global locations
  • shipping to 20,000 retail outlets and warehouses
  • with 50,000 different global carriers at their disposal
  • to transport the 50,000 unique SKUS required to meet their needs
  • that can ship over an average of 10 lanes between point to point
  • at 2 different LTL rates and a FTL rate
  • and 4 different volume tiers

and this generates 600 quintillion different ship-from, SKU, carrier, lane, price break, ship-to combinations.

And, with appropriate category definition and model partitioning, Decision Optimization can handle this complexity.

Get it now?

One Hundred and Fifty Years Ago Today

One Hundred and Fifty years ago Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland was first published. This classic novel, written by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, is about a girl name Alice who falls through the rabbit hole into a fantasy world. This book, which is considered to be one of the best examples of the literary nonsense genre ever published, is a seminal work in logic and mathematics, even though it is not traditionally recognized as such.

The author was a mathematician, and unlike Edwin A. Abbott, who, nineteen years later, decided to take a more traditional approach to the creation of a satirical mathematical novella with his (also pseudonymously published) Flatland, he decided to take a
less traditional approach and predate satire with a creative philosophical treaty wrapped in fantasy that, to the average reader, looks like gibberish.

For example, infinitesimal shrinking of distances is how we are taught limits when leaning (pre)calculus. The word play that explains that the semantic value of a sentence is not the same value of the converse talks about the different truth values of a statement, its converse, inverse, and contrapositive. The changing of seats is a reference to a classic combinatorics problem, where the goal is to count seats at the table. (Not to be confused with another famous circular combinatorics problem that is contained in the dining philosophers problem.) And the race gives us an example of the importance of one-to-one mapping if one is trying to get to the finish line and fully define a mathematical system.

It’s a great book, and one that will hopefully stay in publication for another 150 years.