Monthly Archives: August 2009

Five Secrets of Team Building

Share This on Linked In

In “Why Teams Don’t Work”, J. Richard Hackman of Harvard laid bare the five critical conditions that mark the difference between success and failure. Given that these trying times are requiring your team to do more with less and that the ultimate secret of supply chain success often boils down to cross-functional teams managing needs from product inception to final product disposal, successful teams are more important than ever. Here are Hackman’s five basic conditions of effective teams and ultimate success:

  1. Teams Must Be Real
    People need to know who’s on the team, who’s not, and who has what responsibilities. A virtual team or vague team concept won’t get the job done.
  2. Teams Need a Compelling Direction
    Members need to know what they’re supposed to be doing together. Without a clear direction, there is a real risk that different members will pursue different agendas.
  3. Teams Need Enabling Structures
    Teams with poorly designed tasks, the wrong mix of members, and un-enforced norms gravitate towards trouble.
  4. Teams Need a Supportive Organization
    The organizational context must facilitate teamwork in a manner that is conducive to the team and its members.
  5. Teams Need Expert Coaching
    A focus on individual performance does not necessarily improve the team. Teams need to be coached as a group in team processes.

Front-End Loading

Share This on Linked In

In supply management, front end loading is the coming together of all stakeholders in a multi-disciplinary team to insure that the concept, value, and strategy of a proposed product are worked out well before the design is finalized and production begins. It focusses on front-end planning, and insures that required parts and materials are available and affordable within the target cost.

Front-End Loading is used heavily in Japan where it is seen as a primary contributor to Kaizen (value creation), which refers to the Japanese approach to continual quality enhancement and waste reduction through small, but continual, improvements. It has contributed to a lot of success over the past decade, and the CAPS Research Japan Group recently released a detailed white-paper on “Front-End Loading” (FEL) that chronicled the result of their surveys in 2002, 2004, and 2006 on FEL and ESI (Early Supplier Involvement) and eleven industry case studies.

The surveys, which also revealed a number of trends in the automobile, electronics, food, retail, and engineering industries, found that supply management experienced a significant change in the first half of the decade from where it had little involvement in product planning in 2000 to significantly increased involvement in 2006. Although some companies don’t involve their suppliers in the early stages of NPD, the involvement is on the rise.

Front-End Loading has contributed significantly to each industry it has been adopted in. In electronics, for example, Xerox obtained an annual 10% reduction in net product cost, a 93% reduction in rejected material, a 50% reduction in NPD time and cost and, most importantly a reduction in production lead time from 52 to 15 weeks and in automotive parts, Mitsuba expects to reduce it’s average product life cycle from seven or eight years to four.

When procurement leads the cross-functional team in the screening and evaluation of potential sources of supply, cycle time is reduced, costs go down, and green purchasing, social responsibility, audit/compliance, and risk management are considered up front. By tackling these timely issues, procurement can be sure that the organization reduces, reuses, and recycles; acts in a socially responsible manner; implements effective internal controls; and minimizes supply risks and the opportunity for disruption.

Does Your Software Come With A Bill of Rights?

Share This on Linked In

Ray Wang of Forrester recently released Version 2 of their “Enterprise Software License Bill of Rights” and Vinnie Mirchandani did an excellent revision over on Deal Architect that not only outlines what your rights should be but identifies some key issues you need to be aware of if your vendor does not provide you with a bill of rights as part of their textbook thick contract.

In particular, watch out for:

  • 40%+ SG&A
    that money should be going to R&D to give you a better product for the 22% to 30%+ maintenance you’ll be paying
  • no support/defect stats
    your provider should be measuring them, actively working on improving them, and be willing to provide them on request
  • certified service partners
    if they don’t have any, or won’t certify any, that’s a problem
  • an inability to flex-up / flex-down at each quarter
    you don’t want to be paying for shelf-ware
  • confusing SLAs
    you want clear, concise, and to the point

And be sure to check out Vinnie’s Version. If you going to invest seven, eight, and even nine figures (over the long term), you better make sure up front that you can get what you pay for.

Blogging on International Contracting?

Share This on Linked In

Editor’s Note: Today’s post is from Dick Locke, Sourcing Innovation’s resident expert on International Sourcing and Procurement. (His previous guest posts are still archived.)

After I made a brief comment on international contracting, the doctor suggested that “maybe I could write an expert piece about international contract construction?“.Well, that piece would be way too long for a blog format. I take about an hour on this topic in face-to-face seminars and that’s after a session on cultural differences.

What I can do in this format is give my philosophy and a tactic or two.

Why do people write purchasing contracts? (And not everyone does.) I see two reasons. First is to get a written document that describes what each party is going to do. Second is to enable bringing in a powerful third party (a court) to get a company to do what they might not do otherwise, such as pay liquidated damages.

When you cross borders, cultures and language barriers, the first reason becomes more important than it is domestically. The second reason becomes less practical. Adjudication and enforcement can be awfully difficult and expensive.

That means first of all, it’s much more important to get a good supplier than to get a good contract. Second, it means that the contract should be written to help with communication between the parties, not hinder it. It should be clear and easy to read (no size eight gray type please.)

Here’s the tactic for the day.

Run a grammar check on your contract using Microsoft Word with “check readability statistics” turned on. Look for a “reading ease” score of 40 or higher and a grade level requirement of 11th grade or less. Remember, the document probably won’t be in the supplier’s language. Once you achieve that, then print the document in an attractive format. Pay attention to typography and white space. Make it easy to read.

If your lawyer struggles with this, get him or her a copy of the SEC’s “A Plain English Handbook”.  It has lots of guidelines and tips. Another good source is “Plain English for Lawyers,” which you can find on Amazon.

As a final note, I just happen to be doing my one and only public Global Supply Management seminar for 2009 in the Chicago area on August 11-12. Check this link for details.

Dick Locke, Global Procurement Group and Global Supply Training.

Today’s Spend Management Priorities ARE Today’s Spend Management Priorities

Share This on Linked In

This spring, Ariba conducted a survey across 225 Procurement and Finacne executives across a variety of regions, industries, and company sizes to determine the spend management strategies and approaches that companies are adopting to cope with the global economic recession. What they found, as chronicled in their white-paper on “The Return to Profitability”, shouldn’t be surprising:

  • Identifying savings opportunities faster is the #1 focus for most companies
    Companies are looking for a quick ROI and immediate savings to demonstrate the value of spend management before seeking executive support and funding for a wider roll-out.
  • Increasing spend under management is a key initiative for most companies
    Companies are recognizing the advantages of more spend under management.
  • Automating procurement processes is becoming a top priority for many companies
    Almost two thirds of respondents listed the need for automation across the entire source-to-settle process in their top five priorities as they are feeling the pain of depending on paper and people-intensive processes.
  • Mitigating risk and managing supplier performance is critical
    Concerns range from meeting customer demand if critical suppliers are interrupted to reduced supplier innovation to deteriorating quality and service.

Ariba, which has adopted their own variation of the best-in-class, leaders, and laggards classification of Aberdeen with their pioneers, survivors, and stragglers classification, found that pioneers had over 75% of spend under management, made moderate to extensive use of technology, and had over 50% of suppliers under a formal management program while stragglers had less than 25% of spend under management, made low to no use of technology, and had less than 10% of suppliers under a formal management program.

As a result they made the usual recommendations that organizations should:

  • improve spend visibility NOW to help identify savings opportunities faster
  • make procurement automation a top priority to maximize savings and compliance
  • not be afraid to get outside help to capitalize on current market conditions

So what does this mean?

It means that you need to take action now to avoid falling further from the path of profitability and recovery. Because when software companies are spending tens of thousands of their own money to verify analyst results, which have been cross-verified by multiple analyst firms, it means the results are right and that you have to take action now.