One Hundred and Twenty Five Years Ago Today

And over 60 years before they would line the walls of diners everywhere (and become staples in hundreds, if not thousands, of movies about the swinging ’50s), the first jukebox, built by the Pacific Phonograph Company, went into operation at the Palais Royale Saloon in San Francisco and launched the Music-on-Demand revolution. (See the Wired obituary.) Unlike a modern jukebox, which blasted music though built in speakers, this early version required the listener to use a stethoscope-like tube that was attached to an Edison Class M electric phonograph to hear the recording.

And then a mere sixty-five years later, as chronicled in our post last month, TI would launch the mobile music revolution. Forget Apple. Forget Sony. Forget RCA. The real revolutionaries that made music on demand are long out of the music business.

Can You Solve the Compliance Challenge?

Regulatory compliance is usually defined by an organization’s adherence to laws, regulations, guidelines and specifications relevant to its business.

There are two primary categories:

  • Internal compliance that focusses on the policies and procedures of the organization (which must be followed to insure SOX compliance) and is focussed on personnel and procurement
  • External compliance that focusses on the (government) legislation and agreements that govern the operation of the organization and falls into the categories of:
    • financial/operational
    • import/export
    • environmental
    • private data / worker’s rights
    • insurance / liability

Non-compliance can be a very costly situation for an organization to find itself in as it can cost an organization hundreds of millions of dollars in some cases. Consider the following costs of external non-compliance:

Financial

  • SOX violations can cost up to 5M per violation; even Deloitte, known for its audits, had to pay 2 Million for a SOX violation
  • Anti-bribery violations have no ceiling; Aon paying £ 5.25 M in 2009, Wills Limited paying £ 6.9 M in 2011, and Macmillan Publishers paying £ 11.26 M in 2011
  • FCPA violations don’t have a ceiling either; Weatherford International paid $152.6 M in 2013, Alcoa paid $384 M in 2014, and Siemens paid $800 M in 2008

Import/Export

Meggitt paid 25 M in 2013 to settle charges of AECA & ITAR violations, Standard Chartered Bank paid 132 M in 2012 to settle charges of OFAC sanction violations, and ING Bank N.V. recently paid 619 M to settle charges of several OFAC sanction violations

Insurance

In 2012, Wal-Mart paid $8M to settle a workers’ compensation class action settlement, and in 2010 a jury awarded $82.5 in a workplace death lawsuit

Lack of compliance costs. Dearly. Why is there a lack of compliance in most organizations? Lack of knowledge, policy, visibility, analysis, and procurement technology. Knowledge can be addressed with training. Policy can be fixed with planning. But visibility, analysis, and procurement fixes require technology.

What kind of technology?

Supply Chain Visibility, Spend Analytics, and a Procurement Marketplace that captures, tracks, and maintains an audit trail of all of the relevant data to insure SOX and FCPA are not violated, import and export restrictions and requirements are adhered to, and that suppliers comply with insurance and regulatory compliance.

To find out how a Procurement Marketplace helps your organization solve the compliance challenge, reduce maverick spending, and enable organizational growth, download Sourcing Innovation’s latest white-paper on The Procurement Marketplace and The Power of Compliance (registration required), sponsored by Vinimaya.

Procurement Trend #15. System Integration with Partners

A dozen anti-trends from those wild and crazy guys still remain, and as much as we’d like to find some entertainment value in what they have to offer, we must agree with LOLCat who is bored with our continuing anti-trend coverage and, like the foxes the wild and crazy guys like to chase, instead flee from the obnoxious diatribe they thrust upon us.

So why do so many historians keep pegging system integration with partners as a future trend? I honestly can’t fathom this as Big Blue has been pushing integration projects for decades, but maybe it is because they’ve been living in the corporate cave (as Procurement is still relegated to the basement in many organizations) and:

  • e-Procurement benefits like invoice Automation require some system integration

    because invoices come from suppliers and often have to get into AP systems on the way through the e-Procurement system

  • supply chain visibility is critical for risk mitigation

    because you cannot take action to protect against a disruption if you do not know that a disruptive event occurred

  • strategic planning is improved with good data

    because even though you can make great strategic plans without data, it’s just a theoretical exercise if the plan depends on postulated conditions that do not actually exist in the real world

So what does this mean?

System integration

Not only do you need to brush up on your IT skills, but you have to brush up on your IT project management skills too. System integration projects have been responsible for some of the worst supply chain disasters in history. Don’t believe me? Review Supply Chain Digest’s top supply chain disasters and notice that 9 of the 11 top failures were as a result of technology, and all but one of these technology failures was at least partly, if not entirely, IT technology!

Supply Chain Visibility

You need to implement a multi-tier supply chain visibility. Knowing your supplier’s status is not good enough, you need to know your supplier’s supplier status and sometimes even the status of the supplier of your supplier’s supplier — especially if raw materials acquisition is the weakest link in the chain. Leave no stone unturned that could be covering a ticking time-bomb.

Good Data

When we say good data, we mean good data. Not just data because not all data is good. If it has a lot of holes, is inaccurate, or is too old, it’s bad data, and all analysis on bad data leads to is bad information that results in bad decisions. But good data can lead to good information and then good decisions, and, in an appropriate model, it can lead to actionable intelligence that can power great decisions.

Procurement Trend #16. Stronger Supplier Relationships

Thirteen anti-trends from those crazy eighties (or earlier) still remain, and as much as we’d like to provide some entertainment that hasn’t been rebooted and re-rebooted to LOLCat who is bored with our continuing anti-trend coverage, we must continue to play Sam Sheepdog and make sure that no Ralph E. Wolfe in sheep’s clothing goes undetected or unrewarded for his effort.

So why do so many historians keep pegging stronger supplier relationships as a future trend? Besides the fact that they are likely still struggling to pronounce col-lab-o-ra-tion (which is a undoubtably a new word for them), it is probably because even the Businessman knows that:

  • delivery dates can make or break a product release and a company

    as a late launch can allow your competition to launch first and secure a substantial amount of marketshare that your company may never get back

  • knowledge work needs to be done with knowledge

    and you can’t fake it by throwing more warm bodies at it

  • supplier failures can often be prevented, but only with foresight

    once a supplier’s doors have been closed, it’s too late to reconsider that 180 day net-terms policy

So what does this mean?

Delivery Dates

Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) is key. In order to make sure everything stays on schedule, Supply Management has to monitor, or manage as the case may be, the design, the supplier selection, prototype production, full production, transportation, and the delivery schedule. Any delay anywhere in the process that goes uncaught and uncorrected in a timely fashion will result in a missed delivery date.

Knowledge Work

As per our many previous posts, including our posts on inter-departmental collaboration, more stakeholder collaboration, and talent, we’re in a knowledge economy and supply management is knowledge work. Implement a good Knowledge Lifecycle Management solution, get training, collect knowledge from your employees, partners, suppliers, and customers and put it to use.

Supplier Failure

Suppliers typically fail for financial reasons, and this is often something that can be foreseen. You can follow the financial risk ratings, or you can just pay close attention to what is happening. There are always cues when a supplier is in trouble. Multiple contacts disappear overnight. Late deliveries. Poor quality. And so on. Often it’s just a cash-flow problem that is easily fixed by simply paying the supplier a little earlier (which, for many companies, translates into simply paying the supplier on time) so it can cover its operating costs. When you consider that the supplier has to buy the raw materials, produce the goods, ship the goods, wait for you to get them, and then wait for the clock to start ticking on the invoice when you can often sell the goods as soon as you get them, it’s completely understandable that they can be struggling to make payroll when they have to float operations for six months or more when you, if you are selling a hot electronics item or piece of apparel, can get paid in six days or less.