It’s Time for a Digital Strategy Audit

And it should be part of your annual planning process. Why do you need a digital strategy audit? Here are five compelling reasons from a recent Chief Executive article that presented what it thought were 11 Reasons Why It’s Time for a Digital Strategy Audit.

  • Digital Mistakes are for the World to See
    Most companies’ topline digital strategies are transparent to an experienced analyst, and readily available for analysis and scrutiny. As a result, mistakes are impossible to conceal and any attempt to do so will cause a media pile-on that makes the torch-bearning lynch mobs of old look like a Sunday picnic.
  • Digital is Cross-Function
    Even a simple e-mail marketing campaign involves sales, marketing, operations, and IT. Only supply chain is as far reaching, and if the digital supply chain strategy doesn’t complement the physical supply chain strategy, you have a disaster waiting to happen.
  • Numbers Tell a Story
    An organization’s spending on R&D tells a lot about its viability in the long term. Plus, digital strategy performance benchmarks can identify competitor strategies and threats and allow a company to make a proactive, rather than a reactive, response.
  • Digital Investments are Probably Higher Than You Think
    And probably generating less of a return than you think. In some enterprises, digital investments account for 5% of operating costs and 20% of marketing spend, and run in the eight digits in Fortunate 1000 companies. But without a coherent strategy, the returns in digital investments are often dismal to none. Consider the emerging mobile market with average click through rates on ads of 0.1%, for example.
  • Digital Affects Everything
    As the article says, no industry is unaffected by digital trends. But, few companies have formal, well-defined digital strategies that articulate the vision and govern investments and behavior. Typically, it’s an afterthought and pushed down to IT to figure out. But if IT is only a support organization in the company …

And, more importantly, unless you do a digital audit:

  • You Still Don’t Know How Unprepared You Are for the Digital Age
    Unless you are an IT company, chances are your infrastructure doesn’t have the scalablity, reliability, falut-tolerance, and, more importantly, the security to go all-out with a digital strategy. If even the Sony Playstation Network can be hacked and taken down for a week, and Sony has a very strong IT division operating a very large on-line service, how long do you think it would take a hacker or organized underground hacking group to your network down if you got in their cross-hairs. Assuming you could even scale up to support a superbowl size response. Online service leaders have experienced network overloads for years. AOL in its heyday had scalability problems and had to offer customers refunds to keep them in late 1996, Toys “R” Us was hit with a class action lawsuit in 2000 for taking orders for Christmas it could not deliver, Nintendo could not keep up with Wii orders in 2006 and Sony could not keep up with Playstation 3 orders in 2006, and the Playstation Network has hacked earlier this year.

Before you launch a digital initiative, you need to make sure that IT is ready to support it, and if you are selling something, that the supply chain is ready to supply any expected spikes in demand. Forget the meaningful opportunities for cost-savings, new revenue channels, and/or competitor vulnerabilities the Chief Executive author promotes. Chances are that you’re not even ready for that.

McKinsey Just Gave Us the Best Argument for Next Practices

From a recent McKinsey Quarterly newsletter:

Spurious frameworks and torrents of data often obscure the basic principles of good strategy. To beat the market, companies must exploit imperfections that stop (or at least slow) its workings. Such competitive advantages are scarce and fleeting because markets drive a reversion to mean performance … . Good strategies therefore emphasize difference …
     From “Why best practice isn’t the best strategy”

But more importantly, an analysis of ROIC and EV/IC for top, middle, and bottom quintile companies from 2001 to 2009 shows an drop in ROIC of almost 75% (from above 15% to below 4%) and a drop of EV/IC of almost 85% (from about 3.2 to 0.5).

Best practices aren’t enough anymore. We need next practices.

As a side-note, the next Next Practices Xchange, hosted by the Mpower Group and one of the few forums dedicated to the discussion of next practices, is November 4, 2011.

Headline from the Land of D’oh: Technology is Closing — and Widening — the Gap

A recent issue of Apparel leads with the headline that Technology is Closing — and Widening — the Gap. Needless to say, this is a headline that I had to read twice to believe I was reading it. It then goes on to say that mobile can be viewed as both a great threat and a great opportunity. Really? Smartphones create interaction much more dynamic than it was back in the days when customers were restricted to flipping through print catalogs. Who’d a thunk it? Mobile also poses a threat allowing customers to hop on Amazon.com or any number of other sites for a quick cost or brand comparison. A browser works on more than one site? Wow!

But seriously, this article is ridiculous. It’s common sense drivel for anyone with half a brain and a memory that remembers more than 10 years of history. (What am I saying? It’s only the last quarter that matters! Thank you Wall Street MBAs for ruining not only innovation but the importance of history. But that’s another rant.) First of all:

Mobile may be new, but it’s just another technology.
It’s going to go through the growing pains of every new technology that came before. There were growing pains with the Web. There were growing pains with television. There were growing pains with radio. And if you study your history (as one of my blogging counterparts will gladly point out as important), you’ll realize that each had the same growing pains, opportunities, and threats. The only difference is that with each generation of new technology, the time frames become more and more compressed. Right now, most minitrends last about five years. In the future, some may only last five months.

The difference between the rich and the poor is $$$.
How much $$$ you have in business depends on market share. It’s a knowledge economy, and how much knowledge you have depends on how fast you can distill it from information. How much information you have depends on how much data you have and how fast you can extract information from it. And both of these steps depend on technology. So, as a corollary, how much technology you have, or have access to, directly affects how rich or how poor you are.

Any change in your situation relative to someone else either narrows or widens the gap.
So if your technology changes, or your competitors’ technology changes, then the gap between you and your competition is going to change as well. D’oh!

Tell me something useful — like how to take advantage of this technology as a retailer. Otherwise, stop wasting my pixels and my time.

Innovation in Sourcing

Today’s guest post is from Chetan Raniga, who is General Manager, Americas at Trade Extensions.

As someone who’s been in the strategic sourcing field for over ten years as a consultant and product manager, it’s been interesting to see the rapid evolution of sourcing solutions over the past few years. Leading solution companies now realize that users need solutions that feel familiar; that’s why Excel integration is common among leaders in the supply management arena. It’s the same reason Coupa has screens that almost mirror Amazon.com — providing an interface and workflow that’s both familiar and intuitive. Another example is the use of dashboards — the charts and alerts in Trade Extensions remind users of Mint.com, a popular personal finance site, though they show vastly different types of data!

Here are some other changes for the better:

Collaboration and Workflow:
The sourcing solutions of the past were extremely tactical (e.g., automating the process of running an RFQ or auction for a specific category), and therefore, didn’t give buyers the ability to share ideas, exchange documents, and view the real-time status of their sourcing initiatives. Now, platforms provide robust project management capabilities with Gantt charting, custom workflows (e.g., only have new suppliers go through the qualification step), document sharing, and Skype-like chat features. A buyer can see exactly which suppliers, team members, and stakeholders are online, and instantly communicate with them. Audit trail and logging capabilities have also gotten stronger, which is important for the confidence of both buyers and suppliers in using these platforms. Multiple teams are now using these platforms to share data. For example, a Direct Materials sourcing group can incorporate freight pricing from a tender conducted by the Logistics team. The group can use the platform to determine which items will use the suppliers’ freight (delivered pricing) and which will use the 3rd party carriers’ freight (FOB plus freight).

Flexibility:
Systems of the past didn’t provide the flexibility that we have today in collecting inputs. Labels such as ‘Price per Unit’ would be hard-coded or the cost formula would only support a limited number of operators and functions. Data entry was also cumbersome and error-prone since it involved either manually entering or copying-and-pasting vast amounts of data. Today’s solutions integrate with Excel, so that existing data and formulas can be easily leveraged. For example, item, demand, and cost component data stored on separate Excel spreadsheets can be uploaded with one click. Even better, some solutions allow users the ability to customize the supplier’s bid form. This is critical to change management since companies can continue to use their existing bid forms in the bid gathering phase but obtain the decision support and reporting benefits in the analysis phase. These improvements have led to even shorter RFQ/P creation times.

It’s also now possible to run auctions with optimization (a step forward in utility from the original concept of reverse auctions), and to run RFQ/Ps with feedback — blurring the line between RFQs and auctions but also going further by providing custom feedback (e.g., a custom message of “Not Competitive” is shown when the bid is x% greater than the median price).

Usability in the Analysis Stage:
The one sourcing area that has lagged in adoption has been the use of optimization (which the doctor has defined as the application of one or more rigorous analytical techniques to a well-defined model to generate the absolute best decision from a multitude of possible alternatives in a rigorous, repeatable, and provable fashion). It sounds complicated, and in the past it really was. For example, if a customer wanted to see what the result would be if all the business went to incumbents at their current proportions, then she’d have to create a rule limiting allocation for each item and affected supplier. That’s painstaking when you have a couple of hundred items — but most projects had thousands of items! Nowadays, in a modern optimization solution (which include the solutions by Trade Extensions and BravoSolution), the buyer just selects one rule, written in plain English (as shown below).


Even better, new platforms allow buyers the ability to create rules in Excel and then upload them. In the example below, the buyer is setting limits by plant and supplier simply by completing a table.


Reporting:
The solutions of the past didn’t offer much in terms of reporting. Most had a couple of pre-defined reports that exported to Excel. Buyers had to spend additional time modifying the reports — even changing labels and creating pivot tables — before they could present the results to their peers and managers.

Solutions today have made major strides in this area. Leading spend analysis tools (which include BIQ as well as Trade Extensions) allow users to create custom reports that can be saved as templates and re-used. The ability to choose specific dimensions (rows), columns (facts), and other information means that users no longer have to go outside the system for further manipulation. Some tools even allow the ability to drill-down/up on data (e.g., view allocation data by country first, then by region, then by state, and finally by city/plant).

We have heard buyers comment that their analysis time is shortened by three-and-a-half (3.5) weeks on average by using the new decision support and reporting capabilities mentioned above.

Thanks, Chetan!