iValua: Proving Their Mettle with Source to Settle, Part I

When we last covered iValua in 2010, they were one of the few providers tackling end-to-end sourcing and procurement in a single suite of integrated modules built on one common platform. We noted in Tackling End-to-End Sourcing and Procurement, Part I that this French company had capabilities that, at least to some degree, addressed each of the core phases of the basic sourcing-and-procurement cycle except decision optimization and tax reclamation. The platform still doesn’t address decision optimization, but in the past three years, in addition to adding considerable intelligence for tracking and managing taxes, ASN (Advanced Shipping Notice) support, and customizable pivot-tables for bid and auction analysis, they’ve made extensive additions to many of their modules, added powerful workflow capabilities, extremely powerful UI customization capabilities in Design Mode (considering the platform is accessed through a standard web browser), drag-and-drop document authoring capability (also through the web browser) and round-trip integration with Microsoft Word, a comprehensive supplier view (that integrates all of the data related to the supplier across all of the modules), and the ability to easily define and load custom data tables for surveys, questionnaires, tracking, and reporting through built-in native ETL tools, among other enhancements.

Version 8.0 of the iValua platform, being released at the start of Q4, is one of the most extensive integrated native Source-to-Settle platforms that SI has ever seen, especially considering their recent additions for the management of services. It comes as no surprise that they now have over 100 customers globally with a 99% renewal rate, that the majority of their customers have migrated to their SaaS platform, and that their current growth rate year-over-year is over 20%. Along with bPack and Wallmedien, they are making a serious play to take over the high-end of the Best-of-Breed market that was almost eliminated (with the exception of BravoSolution, that does have industry leading decision optimization) with the acquisitions of Ariba and Emptoris. (It truly looks like the European providers are starting to pull ahead of the pack where Spherical Supply Solutions — Part I, Part II, and Part III — are concerned.)

iValua divides their platform into Supplier Management, Sourcing, Contract Management, Catalog Management, Procurement, Invoice Management, Expense Management, Reporting, and Administration. So we will cover the highlights of the platform with respect to each of these categories. Note that, in addition to the application dashboard, each of these modules has their own dashboard that is extensively configurable so that a user can quickly see the status of supplier efforts, sourcing projects, contracts under construction, procurement processes, catalog integration, invoice processing, expense and budget management, and performance reports.

Supplier Management

Supplier Management in the iValua platform consists of Supplier Registration, Supplier Performance Management, Supplier (Related) Document Management, approved Supplier Lists, and Supplier Risk Profiles (called Supplier Risk Indicators). The on-boarding process is similar to the process employed by other SRM vendors, document management is the process of tracking certifications, proof of insurance, and compliance documentation, and approved supplier list management is quite straight-forward so we won’t go into any additional details on this functionality. What is interesting, and powerful, is the ability to identify and track anomalies from expected performance, create improvement plans, and access a supplier risk profile based on environmental, CSR, and other user-defined indicators, as this is functionality typically only found in SRM platforms, and not sourcing, procurement, or source-to-settle platforms.

The supplier management tab integrates all of the data associated with a supplier across the entire platform. The user can quickly access the basic info (name, address, credentials, risk score, etc.), the lifecycle workflows associated with that supplier (with respect to sourcing projects), the supplier’s credentials, associated users, pre-defined reports and analytics with respect to the supplier’s performance, current activity, commodities and services being provided, financial and risk KPIs, and overall performance and risk rating. It’s a one-stop SIM/SPM shop.

In iValua, an improvement plan, which can be created off of an anomaly (which is a user-defined record that describes an issue that needs to be addressed, such as an exceptional late delivery, quality problem, etc.) and associated with a commodity and/or organization, is an action plan designed to address an (underlying) issue (that caused the anomaly). It consists of a sequence of defined tasks that are expected to resolve the issue. Each task has a type, an associated user who is responsible for the task, a manager who will ensure the task is completed, start and end dates, and other attributes consistent with the definition of a project in a standard project management application. It’s interactive, and as steps are completed, the plan, and status thereof, are updated.

The supplier risk profile capability is quite advanced. A user can define any type of risk that they wish to track (supplier, product, sustainability, financial, product, etc.), how the risk indicator rolls up (finance, CSR, etc.), and where it comes from. iValua integrates with leading risk profile providers out-of-the-box, like D&B, and this integration goes beyond simple financial profile providers and also includes an integration with a leading provider of sustainability data, namely EcoVadis. (You can even access the native EcoVadis profile direct.)

We’ll cover the remaining parts of the platform in the remainder of this series. Come back tomorrow!

Nipendo: Streamlined Invoice Management for Even the Largest Organization

When we introduced Nipendo last month, a provider of order-to-payment automation software, we noted that they were bringing O2P and P2P to the Mainstream and that they recently introduced rules-based end-to-end invoice reconciliation. In Nipendo’s platform, invoices can come in through the portal, web services, EDI, supported supplier networks, and Nipendo’s own Print-to-Cloud solution. The invoice data is then processed and normalized into the Nipendo system, compared against purchase order data, and validated against a complete suite of rules that include data format validation, vendor data validation, referenced document (orders and receipts) validation, tax validation, quantity validation, amount validation, and total validation. If anything is off, it is pushed to a queue for manual verification or correction. These rules can be custom configured as needed and can include automatic data normalization and completion when the purchase order and / or good receipt document can be identified and the line item data accessed.

When this invoice verification and automation is combined with their supplier on-boarding process, their customers, which include a large number of Fortune 500 and Global 3000 Multinationals, quickly reach the point where:

  • 98%+ of all invoices flow through the system,
  • 99%+ of all errors are caught,
  • 90%+ of all invoices are automatically processed without human intervention, and
  • 80%+ process savings are realized and maintained.

Even their largest multi-national Fortune 500 customer reached this point within 24 months, with 80%+ of all invoices flowing through the system in 12 months. A lot of organizations offer e-invoicing, but not all offer all of the invoice submission options of Nipendo and even less reach the level of processing and automation that Nipendo has reached. It’s an impressive Order-to-Payment (O2P) solution.

Could the Fateful Four Bring Down Your High-Tech or Automotive Supply Chain?

Today, Resilinc announced that leading global supply chains have become dependent on the same small group of sub-tier suppliers – concentrating the risk and significantly increasing the potential for crippling supply chain disruptions. Based on global supply chain mapping data that it gathered over the past year, which analyzed a subset of data from over 600 large and medium suppliers across 2,500+ sites spread over 50+ countries, Resilinc performed a detailed analysis in order to identify specific industry trends that could be used to create stronger supply chain resiliency plans.

This study, which focussed on the analysis of sub-tiers that often hide risks that go undetected by the buying organization, not only found that global supply chain risk tends to be concentrated in certain sub-tier suppliers and localities, but also found that many leading global supply chains, in the High-Tech and Automotive sectors in particular, have become dependent on the same small group of sub-tier suppliers.

In particular, the study found that in the High-Tech and Automotive supply chains, the vast majority of suppliers are dependent on sites that are owned by just four suppliers and that more than 50% of all sites analyzed are located in just four countries: Taiwan, China, the USA, and Japan. Who are these four suppliers that can control the fate of your entire High-Tech or Automotive Supply Chain? Taiwan Semiconductor (TSMC), with an 83.8 B market cap; Amkor Technology (AMKR), with a 926 M market cap; ASE Inc, with a 191.5 B market cap ; and United Microelectronics (UMC) with a 5.2 B market cap. With a combined market capitalization of over 281 B, these fateful four suppliers have a commanding control of your High-Tech and Automotive Supply Chains.

For more information on how visibility can improve your supply chain resiliency, see the IDC Manufacturing Insights on Arguing the Case for Supply Chain Resiliency in 2013 (registration required).

Leaders vs. Laggards in Lean

Earlier this year, SC Digest published a comment from Mike Loughrin, CEO of Transformance Advisors, on Designing a Lean Transformation Program that not only covered four key indicators of success in a lean transformation, but also covered the differences between leaders and laggards that deserve a second look.

According to Mike, the four key indicators of success are:

  • Methodology
    Lean is the systematic elimination of waste by way of the five principles of value specification, value stream identification, flow creation, leverage of pull, and the continual strive for perfection.
  • Measurement
    While lean is the top priority, measurement is second as it is necessary to determine the status of the transformation.
  • Community
    Lean succeeds when best practices are shared and people collectively improve upon them.
  • Coaching
    Lean succeeds when mentors coach novices so that they can grow into future mentors.

So how do you distinguish leaders from laggards? According to Mike:

Indicator Leaders Laggards
Methodology Very systematic in the approach to lean. Adopt a couple of techniques from the lean tool box and apply these hammers to every problem whether or not it mimics a nail.
Measurement Assess all of their value streams and focus attention on those areas that need improvement the most, getting to the root causes of the issues. Focus on the symptoms in an effort to identify quick fixes that may or may not address the root causes.
Community Leaders take an active part in the lean community and are very visible at educational and networking events. Laggards don’t have the time, or money, for attending lean educational and networking events.
Coaching Leaders understand that techniques from the lean tool box are systematic and most effective when people are coached on how to use them correctly. Laggards learn by skimming articles and viewing a few webinars. They have a very cursory understanding.

Lean transformation takes discipline not shortcuts. Great article, Mike!