Category Archives: Blogologue

the doctor On Technology RFPs: Don’t Put The Cart Before The Horse!

I’m not sure what the reason for this is, maybe it’s the “Free RFP Templates” for e-Sourcing (RFPs & e-Auctions), Supplier Management, Contract Management, and Spend Analysis brought to you by Procuri & Co., maybe it’s an over-inflated sense of technical knowledge, or maybe it’s just plain stupidity – but more and more I’m hearing about buyers looking for spend and supply management solutions that are putting together ridiculously over-specified and complex RFPs that are often eliminating all but the worst solution one could possibly imagine before the first response is even received.

The fact of the matter is that, when you are looking for a solution, there’s more than just one correct architecture, the number of features isn’t important, multiple deployment models may be satisfactory, advanced payment models and complex SLAs may not be necessary, and the processes you assume you need may not be the right processes for your business.

If the solution works on your current platform, does it really matter if its written in J2EE, C++, or Ruby on Rails (as long as it was put together properly)? Does it really matter if one solution has 800 “features” and another solution has 1000 “features” if all you need to support your processes are 200 “features”? And more importantly, do the features even address the critical functions you need to get the most out of the solutions? Although on-demand SaaS has advantages over ASP, and ASP has advantages over localized deployments from TCO perspectives, from a security and control perspective, assuming you have a crack IT team in house that knows what they’re doing, arguments can always be made in the other direction. (However, most non-technical companies don’t have crack IT teams, regardless of what they think, and that’s why I’m such a proponent of the on-demand SaaS model.) Not everyone uses the complex payment models pioneered by Oracle and SAP – some vendors use very simple pay-as-you-go models – especially on-demand vendors who charge you one fixed fee a month for the license, including maintenance, and one variable fee a month for how many days of consulting you utilize, easily calculated as number of days * resource rate. Finally, have you taken the time to evaluate your current processes from an efficiency and effectiveness standpoint? Maybe they are not optimal – in fact, if you haven’t reviewed them lately – chances are they are not optimal and a good time to change them might be upon implementation of a new system that can support the processes you should have, versus the processes you have today.

Thus, when constructing your RFP, if you’re not an expert in technology, and unless you’re an IT company – you’re not, don’t pretend you are. If you’re not an expert in what today’s solutions can do – and unless you’ve spent a significant amount of time researching large and small vendors alike – you’re not, don’t assume feature function lists, and definitely don’t assume that one vendor’s template is the best feature function list that’s out there. And definitely don’t use a template provided by a vendor being invited – that template was written to make them look good from a comparison perspective with their primary competition – which may not have any correlation to the solution you actually need.

Leave the technical and feature specifications open-ended. Instead of describing a proposed solution, describe the problems you’re having and the problems that you expect the solution to solve and let the vendors describe how their solution could meet your needs. And if you’re worried about the responses being too apples-to-oranges to make a decision, do a two-stage RFP. Issue a preliminary, open, RFP that describes the type of solution you’re looking for, the problems you want it to solve, and asks the vendors to describe how their solution meets this need and what key functions it offers and tell them that the best submissions will be invited back for round two, which will be closed.

Review the submissions to the initial RFP, invite clarifications and demonstrations (on the grounds that price and terms will not be discussed), flesh out your requirements, and then issue a closed RFQ with more detail on any architecture or deployment restrictions, the core functions you desire, your minimum SLA requirements, and your criteria for scoring the responses and selecting a solution. (For example, saying you can’t do on-premise Linux because you don’t have the tech resources is good, unlike saying that only on-premise Windows works when in fact you could consider on-demand with Windows Thick client. Saying you need a centralized contract repository as part of your CM solution, once you understand what that is, is fine, whereas saying you want a repository that uses Oracle 10.X, because that’s what you have a license for, when in fact the solution might come with a built in database or license for the database it uses, is overly restrictive.)

If you’re smart about the RFP process, then the solution you end up with will surprise you in its effectiveness and efficiency. However, if you just follow the herd, then you might find that you add to the statistics that say at least 70% of all IT-based projects are at least partial failures, because the system will likely not live up to your expectations of it. I guess what I’m saying is, don’t be an RFP-lemming. (As a reader of this blog, I know you’re smarter than that – but I need you to help spread the word!)

the doctor Gives You Nine Questions to Ask Your Technology Vendor

Inspired by InformationWeek’s 9 Questions To Ask A Tech Startup, here are the equivalent nine questions that you should be asking your prospective sourcing and procurement technology vendors.

What’s Your Background?
This question applies to founders, key executives, and the company itself. Look for the right mix of people with deep technical expertise, deep domain expertise, and proven success in managing a growth company in a growth industry. If the depth of technical expertise is building websites (and all coding is outsourced), the depth of domain expertise is buying office supplies, and the depth of management expertise is managing a team of advertising executives – RUN!

When Was Your Company Formed?
Anything less than two-to-three years is a cause for caution. You want to see maturity in terms of the management team, revenue, and the product.

What’s Your Financial Situation?
You want to know where the company is getting the money it needs to support day-to-day operations. Is it drawing on VC funding? If so, at what rate is the required draw decreasing on a monthly basis and can the company honestly expect to be at least break-even before the funding runs out?

Do You Expect To Be Acquired?
Most companies in this space are start-ups, or were in the not-too-recent past. They should have had an exit strategy from day one. If the exit strategy was acquisition, how soon do they expect that to happen? If the exit strategy is six months down the road, be cautious – since many companies in the space will acquire a competitor just to take it off of the playing field – and there goes your investment in learning to use their technology!

What Do You Have Today?
Every vendor and their dog will paint you a rosy picture of where the space is going and where their product is going if you give them the chance, but what’s really important is what they have today. You’re buying a product because you need to increase productivity and decrease costs today – not 3 months or 3 years from now! Furthermore, this is an emerging market – that means that not every solution is equal, and, thus, not every solution is equally appropriate for your needs. You really need to understand what the vendor has today and how it solves your problems.

What Success Have You Had With Customers Similar To Us?
The usual “our e-auctions have saved an average of 12%” is not enough to base a decision on. Although you shouldn’t be considering any vendor who can not make a significant productivity or savings claim, you want to be sure that the vendor you select has saved money in the categories that you need to source or reduced processing time in the processes that your organization employs. An average is just that – an average. Maybe they save on average 20% on office and janitorial supplies and 2% on high-tech purchases. If the bulk of your purchases are for high-tech, then the product they have today is not the product you’re looking for.

Can I Talk To An Early Customer?
You’re looking for a company that has demonstrated the ability to continually improve – not just a company that expresses a willingness and a grandiose roadmap. An early customer will be able to give you insight as to whether or not you can expect the promised savings or productivity gains, how long it’s likely to take, and whether the company has a history of delivering on its roadmap and promises.

Who Are Your Competitors?
The list they give you should be similar to the list you build yourself after doing your homework. If it’s not, either they don’t understand what they’re selling or don’t think they stack up well against their real competition. Either way, it’s a warning sign.

Can I Visit Your Offices?
You want to feel comfortable that you’re dealing with a professional, mature company. This is sometimes the only way to know. Just because the salesman is slick and well-prepared, doesn’t mean the company is well managed. And just because the competition tells you that the company you’re considering is four-guys-in-a-garage, doesn’t mean it is. The opposite can be true. Just like you take the time to visit a new supplier before giving them a major contract, take the time to visit a new technology vendor before giving them a major enterprise contract. It’ll only take a day and won’t cost you much, especially compared to how much you could lose if you pick the wrong vendor!

the doctor Exposes The Elephants In The Room

This is a continuation of the doctor wonders why the elephants in the room are often so hard to see where I expose the elephants hiding behind the couch, the lamp, and the projection screen. In my last post, I exposed you to the optimization elephants, the EIPP elephants, and the spend analysis elephants that were hiding behind the blinds. In this post I’m going to expose you to the supplier enablement elephants, the contract management elephants, and the hidden cost elephants.

The supplier enablement elephants are “catalog management”, (traditional) “supplier network”, “e-Document Management”, and “supplier portal”. Despite grandiose claims, not one of these solutions is the be-all end-all supplier enablement cure … and not one is even guaranteed to “enable” your supplier at all! One definition of “enable” is “to make able”. Another is “to make possible”. My favorite is “to make easy”.

Just because you’re giving your supplier a way to interact with you, doesn’t mean you’re “enabling” them. They already have a way to interact with you – it’s called old-fashioned telephone and old-fashioned fax machine. What they need is a better way to interact with you – that works for them. A catalog management solution isn’t enabling them if they have to send all their data to a third party and then double check that the third party actually entered all the data correctly. A supplier network isn’t enabling them if it isn’t compatible with their systems. e-Document management solutions aren’t worth a can of beans if they can only be used by a few individuals or if document location and access takes just as much work as it does to walk down the hall to the filing cabinet or get a clerk to get the document for you. And “portals” aren’t very helpful if it forces the supplier to re-key in a 100 line invoice. The fact of the matter is that most of the “supplier enablement” solutions out there today are not enabling your suppliers at all – they’re enabling you. That’s a big difference between what’s promised and what’s delivered. If that’s all you care about, then go buy whatever solution tickles your fancy. Just be clear on what you’re buying!

The big contract management elephants are called “repository” and “compliance”. Simply having all of your contracts in one place is not as great as it sounds. You can do that today without a contract management system at all – it’s called “central filing”. Simply enforce that every time a contract is signed the person responsible immediately sends a copy to central filing that files it, in duplicate, on-site and off-site and you have a contract management solution that requires zero investment in software. (How do you enforce this? It’s called the “three strikes and you’re fired” policy. After every contract is signed, you call central filing three days later. If they haven’t received a copy, the employee responsible for filing gets a strike. After the third strike, they get fired. It will be surprisingly effective after a senior employee gets fired.) Of course, you could have to wait a few days every time you need to reference a contract.

A “contract management” solution with a central contract repository will thus only be useful if its accessible by everyone (and you definitely don’t want to pay by the seat) and easily searchable (with indexes on meta-data and the contracts in their entirety) – otherwise, it’s not much better than “central filing”. Furthermore, contracts are only valuable if purchases are made against them at the negotiated rates. Thus, not only should it be easy to determine if a contract exists for a specific item, but it should be easy to determine the agreed upon rate for that item, extract it, and get it into your e-Procurement system.

The hidden cost elephants come in many varieties, such as “required upgrade”, “service fees”, and “implementation consulting”, but the most dreadful is “too-good-to-be-true discount”, as he’s always accompanied by a few, close friends. There’s no such thing as a 50% + discount in enterprise software, and any vendor that comes back and says they can give you a discount of 75% off of the original quote is making the old “we’ll gouge them later” play. They know that once you’ve spent many times your initial investment getting the software installed and configured, and your user base trained, it’ll be too late to turn back and that’s when you start getting hit with “service fees” and “maintenance fees” and “upgrade fees” because you bought the starter edition, but the features and functions you really need to be efficient are in the “regular edition”. It should be obvious that this is not a vendor you want to deal with, because if the vendor really could afford to sell at a 75% discount and remain profitable, then they were trying to screw you up front.

The reality is that traditional, installed, enterprise software shops have high overheads. There’s a reason their software costs hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of dollars. It’s because they literally can’t afford to sell it for much less and stay profitable because they need large teams of people to install, maintain, and support their customers as each instance has to be upgraded and patched separately. They also need large teams of enterprise sales people to continually pound the pavement to bring in enough software and service deals to keep these large implementation and support teams busy. Then they need lots of expensive office space to house all these people. And so on. (Now I’m not saying that enterprise software isn’t worth hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars – as long as the ROI is there, some of it is. I’m specifically saying that, whether or not their software is worth that much, chances are the traditional enterprise software vendor cannot afford to sell for less than that and remain profitable – and if they claim they can, that should set off big warning bells!)

the doctor Goes Mental on Auctions

With respect to e-Auctions, there’s a host of myths out there that need to be busted. Where-forth they sprang from, I don’t know, but to the graveyard, they must go! I’ll start with some of the more dangerous ones, and maybe the experts from e-Sourcing Forum [WayBackMachine] and Where Next will chime in with some of their personal favorites (or is that afflictions) in the comments.

Myth 1: Auctions won’t save me a single penny!
Dozens upon dozens of providers have saved hundreds upon thousands of clients millions upon tens of millions (and sometimes hundreds of millions) of dollars using e-Auctions – and sometimes saved this much on the first auction! Done right, on the right category, an e-Auction will save you money – with savings in the 5% to 35% range, depending on the category and whether or not this is your first time applying serious e-Sourcing to the category.

Myth 2: I’ll e-Auction it! e-Auctions always save money!
This myth is almost as bad as myth #1. Not everything can be auctioned – and anytime some fool starts with the one – and I mean the one – high dollar category in the company that can’t be auctioned, and gets dismal results, he all of a sudden does a 180 and decides that he was wrong, and that myth #1 is right – and won’t ever budge from that position. (Even though his stupidity costs his company tens, if not hundreds, of millions!) There are a number of requirements for a successful e-Auction. The first two are the existence of a competitive supply base and demand exceeding supply. If there are only two suppliers in the whole world for the item you need, and if demand is increasing faster than their production capabilities, even if the suppliers agree to an e-Auction, your prices aren’t going to go down. The suppliers are going to bid high and stay there. And that’s if you’re lucky! If you’re unlucky, they’ll collude and you’ll be up sh*t creek without a paddle or a way to plug that slow leak in your canoe.

Myth 3: If I don’t like the results of the e-Auction, I can just hold it again.
If you believe this, then you’re the one giving e-Auctions a bad name! Assuming you can even get any of the suppliers whose chains you jerked to even agree to another round, do you really think they’re going to give you anywhere near their best price? And do you think they’re going to want to participate in your future auctions? And do you think they don’t talk to each other? The rule is this – if you commit to an e-Auction, you commit to an award based on the result of the e-Auction – whether you like the results or not. That’s why you do your homework before deciding to do an e-Auction and make sure that the category, and market, is right for an e-Auction. If it’s not, you choose another negotiation method, such as a multi-round sealed-bid RFx with Decision Optimization to help you appropriately analyze potential awards.

To find out more about the Key Steps to a Successful e-Auction and the ethics you need to abide by to build and maintain a positive reputation in the supplier community, check out the e-Auction wiki-paper over on the eSourcing Wiki [WayBackMachine]. You’ll be glad you did.

the doctor Says Duh! (Of Course Leadership is Crucial in the Retention of Talent!)

I recently stumbled upon an article over on the European Leaders Network that was titled “Leadership Crucial in Retention of Talent”. Needless to say, I was a little shocked. How much more obvious can you get? Come on! I don’t know about you, but I’ve never heard anyone say “My boss is a a**h0l3! I work nine hours, he tells me I should have worked ten. I do my job and his job, and then he asks if I can do the administrative assistant’s job as well so she can accompanying him on that Bermuda trip. I arrive five minutes late because I was honestly stuck in traffic due to a six-car pile up on the interstate, and I get my head chewed off for the next forty-five minutes. He arrives forty-five minutes late for the all-hands meeting he scheduled, and then gets a big bonus later that day. Of course I love working here and would never think of leaving, even it was for a job where I would get treated like a real human being!”

But it gets better – it’s based on a study by US-based Kenexa Research Institute who, apparently, had to survey workers in six countries to find out that those [senior management] teams who demonstrate a strong emphasis on customers, an unwavering commitment to ethical behavior, and who keep employees informed about the direction the company is headed, are the [senior management] teams who build more highly engaged workforces and outperform their competitors. It makes you wonder what type of hypothesis they started with – did they honestly think it was the companies who hired trained chimpanzees to manage their workforces that succeeded?

You don’t even have to pay me my not-insignificant day rate to get this consulting advice from me. I’ll give it to you for free! After all, it’s just the old adage of treat others as you would want to be treated yourself (unless, of course, you’re a masochist who revels in pain and mental anguish – then simply treat others as you would not want to be treated).