THE PROPHET recently asked What Procurement Tech Product Categories Were Really Just Features All Along? Which is a great question, except he cheated.

He cheated with the first 5!

• Supplier performance management
• Supplier quality management
• Supplier information management / supplier master data management
• Supplier diversity
• Supplier risk management (not supply chain risk!)

We’ve known for years it should be one Supplier 360 solution! (Even though no one offers that when you consider all of the elements that should be there. Heck, none of them even offer the 10 basic CORNED QUIP requirements … in fact, good luck finding a solution that offers 5 of those requirements among the 100+ supplier management solutions).

He you cheated again with the next 3!

• Should cost / cost modeling (for procurement, not design engineers)
• RFX and reverse auctions (when not bundled with broader capabilities or services)
• Sourcing optimization

We’ve also known for yours it should be cost-model and optimization backed sourcing (auction, RFX, hybrid, single source negotiation, etc.) … otherwise, it’s an incomplete solution. But only a fraction of the 80+ sourcing platforms offer true optimization (less than 10) and fewer still do extensive cost modelling. (Note that we are focussed on modelling, not cost estimation — that requires data, and that can, and probably should, be a third party data feed.)

And he was wrong on the last front.

Real Spend Analytics should be standalone. Wrapping restricts it! The modules you use should provide all the specific views you need, but the reason that spend analysis quickly becomes shelfware in most organizations today is the same reason it became shelfware 20 years ago … once you exhaust the limits of the interface its wrapped in, it becomes useless. Go back to the series Eric and I wrote 18 years ago (which you can since Sourcing Innovation didn’t delete everything more than a decade old when it had to change servers in 2024, unlike Spend Matters when it did its site upgrade in 2023).

But Very, Very right in that features are not applications!

And very, very right in that too many start-ups are launching today as features (which will only survive if acquired and rolled up into existing applications and platforms), and not solutions. While apps dominate the consumer world, in business there is not always an app for that, and, frankly, there shouldn’t be. This focus on point-based apps is ridiculous. It’s not features, it’s functions. It’s not apps, it’s platforms. It’s not orchestration (and definitely not spend orchestration), it’s ecosystems!

Recent stats, such as those published by Spendesk put the average number of apps a business uses at 371, with an average of 253 for SMBs and 473 for enterprise firms. WHAT. THE. F6CK? This is insane. How many departments does an average organization have? Less than 10. How many key functional areas? Less than 12. Often less than 10! How many core tasks in each function? Usually less than 6. That says, in the worst case, an enterprise might have 72 distinct critical tasks which might need their own application (but probably not). This says that SMBs have at least 3 times the app they should have, mid-size organizations at least 5 times, and enterprises at least 7 times. That is insane! No wonder there are so many carbon copy SaaS optimizers (as we covered in our piece on sacred cows), because if you have that many SaaS apps, you have features, not applications. And you need to replace sets of these with functional applications that solve your core problems.

(And if you want to know how to prevent app sprawl, before buying yet-another-app, ask yourself “is this supporting a function that should be done on its own, or just a task that should be part of an existing function” … if the latter, it’s a feature, not an application, and if the application it should be part of does not have an upgrade/module that supports the task, then you have the wrong application and it’s time to replace it, not pointlessly extend the ecosystem!)