Category Archives: Guest Author

Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation

Over on the Old St Labs blog, Mark Perara recently penned a great post on “Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation” in homage to a post by Rosabeth Moss Kanter on the HBR blogs on “Nine Rules to Stifling Innovation”. I thought Mark’s post was so awesome that I asked to share it with you, and he graciously agreed. So, without further ado, here are Mark’s Nine Rules.

1. Be suspicious of ideas that come from your suppliers – your strategy, innovation and R&D teams know your business better than anyone externally.

2. Keep suppliers really busy. Change your requirements and staff regularly so suppliers have no time to focus on innovation. Their account managers will be too busy to try and second guess what your business needs as well as not knowing who to speak to.

3. In the name of excellence, encourage cut-throat competition. If a new idea comes in from a supplier, immediately put it out to the rest of your suppliers to see if they can provide it cheaper. Even better run a RFX and auction.

4. Don’t share any information with your suppliers. Sharing product roadmaps, demand and organization charts will only encourage them to come up with ideas on how to help. Knowledge is power!

5. Sit on ideas for as long as possible. If a supplier does find the time to share some innovation, ensure not to get back to them in a timely manner. Let the idea bounce around the different areas of the business with no ownership until it fizzle’s out and the supplier stops asking for an update.

6. Ensure quarterly reviews don’t happen. Make sure the procurement team are so busy that they don’t have the time to hold their quarterly meetings with top suppliers. Having a face to face meeting with suppliers on a regular basis may provide a sign that you care about the relationship.

7. Pay late and extend payment terms. By paying late your supplier will spend hours chasing your accounts payable team trying to get payment. Even better push out payment terms as far as possible. Your FD will thank you and the supplier can bear a little bit of pain for the grace of having you as a customer.

8. Act as though punishing failure motivates success. If a suppliers idea does somehow slip through the net, ensure the employee who championed it is aware that failure will be a direct reflection on their capability. A few public hangings will soon stop future cases arising.

9. Above all, never forget your the customer and you already know everything there is to know about your business.

Following these rules will ensure suppliers will never see you as a customer of choice and will take their innovation to your competitors. That said if you work for a dynamic business that wants to develop a competitive advantage, I would suggest creating a culture to embrace and nurture supplier innovation.

For each of these supplier innovation stiflers, innovation promoters can move to the opposite behaviours. So if you want to be a customer of choice, which suppliers invest in and bring innovation to, take a look at these behaviours and allow supplier innovation to flourish:

1. Encourage ideas from suppliers as they often know your business better than some of your own team.

2. Promote your commitment to the supplier innovation programme and ask your suppliers to invest time into providing new ideas. Respect their time by giving them as much notice of changes to requirements and key members of staff, so they can spend the time on innovation.

3. Nurture ideas with suppliers and establish a culture of trust, so suppliers know you respect their IP.

4. Share as much information as you can with your top suppliers. The earlier suppliers can see your product roadmap, the sooner they can provide ideas to improve it.

5. Make sure you have a defined supplier innovation workflow and let your suppliers know how their ideas are progressing on a regular basis. Assign an internal owner to each idea ensuring there is accountability.

6. Make sure your category managers hold their quarterly reviews with strategic suppliers, to share performance reviews and discuss innovations

7. Pay your suppliers as agreed and if at all possible don’t push out payment terms. It diminishes your position as a customer of choice and adds costs to the suppliers, as they have to find alternative financing to support your improved working capital position.

8. Motivate your employees to collaborate with suppliers on new innovations. Let them know there will be some projects that will not be as successful as others, but its okay to fail. Publicize and reward innovative suppliers at annual supplier awards ceremony.

9. Embrace your suppliers as an extension of your business. Learn from their ideas and build open and trusting relationships where innovation will thrive.

Thanks again to Rosabeth for the inspiration for this post and good luck with driving supplier innovation in your business.

Thanks again Mark for sharing “Nine Rules for Stifling Supplier Innovation”.

Vinnie Mirchandani on “The Costs of Software Renewal” (Repost)

This post was originally posted there years ago today on October 22, 2009. Given that three years is a typical mid-term renewal timeframe, I think it is important to review Vinnie’s advice as renewal season is now upon us!


Today’s guest post is from Vinnie Mirchandani of Deal Architect and New Florence. New Renaissance. Vinnie, a founding member of the Enterprise Advocates, is a tireless advocate of trends and technologies that can help buyers get more for less.

Ray Wang gives us a timely reminder that “Labor Day (US & Canadian Holiday) traditionally marks the end of summer BBQ’s, the beginning of the fall conference season, and yes, the time to begin a review of your software maintenance contacts that expire at the end of the year.”

I would say start with that — and then keep going. Take a look at all of your contracts that renew through the end of 2010.

Several good reasons to this include:

  • Establishment of a savings target on the total maintenance spend for 2010.
    Have your staff focus on every software contract, especially those that have been “auto-renewed” for years now because they were “small” and fell under attention thresholds. If you make the overall target part of a compensation plan for key IT and procurement staff, you’ll quickly find that Thar’s gold in them yellowing software contract files.
  • Multi-year maintenance deals which looked good when signed may now be overpriced.
    Current market trends are driving the cost of maintenance down, especially through third party services. Don’t assume they cannot be re-opened. (See Marc Freeman’s tips for “renegotiating with integrity” on the ISM site.)
  • If you don’t start now, you might not finish the renegotiations in time.
    Don’t overestimate the ability of your team to get organized — or underestimate the ability of the vendor team to stall — beyond the end of the year. If maintenance expires, and something goes wrong, you could be at the vendor’s mercy in renegotiations. Formally document your new process and let the vendor know next year will be different. Furthermore, be sure to allow 6 months for the renewal negotiation next year.
  • Even if you are looking to migrate, you will still need incumbent vendor support until the cut-over occurs.
    This holds true whether you are looking to migrate away from the incumbent vendor to SaaS, or to third party maintenance, or to do-it-yourself support (and readers of Deal Architect will know I am a broken record on the subject of considering all of these options). This will likely push you into 2010 planning and funding.

So, use Ray’s call for intensity over the next 3 months and build momentum for another 12 months. The payback will be huge — software maintenance continues to be one of the items on the IT menu with the most “empty calories“.

Thanks, Vinnie!

45 Million People Are Blind today!! Cheesecake Factory Might Be the Answer? (Part 2 of 2)


Today’s guest post is from Dalip Raheja, past contributor to Sourcing Innovation and CEO of The Mpower Group, Inc.

Would You Go to McDonald’s for Surgery? What if I Added the Happy Meal Toys?

Atul Gawande just wrote a piece in The New Yorker in which he applies The Cheesecake Factory (TCF – restaurant chain) model to the healthcare system. He cites soaring costs, mediocre service, unreliable quality and significant variability in outcomes/results as the dominant attributes of the current medical system in the USA. Sounds like the typical Supply Chain/Sourcing issues that almost all of us are trying to deal with on a daily basis.

Why did Atul choose The Cheesecake Factory as a model? Because they are a chain with 160 restaurants with 308 dinner items and 124 beverage choices serving more than 80 million people a year. And they manage to do it with very high quality, every entre cooked fresh, reasonable prices, etc. etc. Oh by the way, they put out a new menu every 6 months! I will let you read why TCF is highly successful but mostly it’s all the stuff that you and I are so used to dealing with in our professional lives. Size gives them buying leverage, centralized common functions, demand forecasting integrated with inventory management, etc. etc. They aim for no more than 2.5% waste in an industry where the shelf life is very short. (Editor’s note — this is only 6.25% of the average food waste in America! See yesterday’s post … )

In addition, there are some things about TCF that are quite intriguing. They’ve laid out their kitchen like a manufacturing production line. They have a very good POS system integrated with their kitchen to track “manufacturing” and “delivery” times. They make sure that their staff is well trained and provided with all the tools necessary. They have a well-defined oversight process that provides positive and negative feedback at the end of the manufacturing line.

An immediate challenge is that doctors have been historically paid for effort, and not results. While Hammurabi dictated that a surgeon’s hand be cut off if the patient died, we have apparently moved away from that as I don’t see too many one handed surgeons out there. Healthcare reform is now starting to link compensation to outcomes. Standardization has long been looked at very suspiciously by the medical community.

Gawande discusses an attempt at standardizing knee replacement and how it impacted his mother’s surgery — reducing recovery time in the hospital by more than half and reducing rehabilitation time by 3/4ths! And did I mention all at lower costs and better outcomes? The doctor has gathered best practices and then standardized them — an unheard of phenomenon. All the way from anesthesia to rehabilitation, including cutting down on the number of options for prostheses surgeons could order. It is a fascinating must read for ALL supply chain/sourcing people as it reads like a classical case study.

The challenges that Gawande lays out for the medical community are very significant. The first and biggest challenge is the incredible amount of time it takes for this profession to adopt (AEIOU) new ideas — decades for new protocols and guidelines to be adopted. This should come as no surprise to readers of the doctor‘s blog and our numerous discussions on this topic. Competency Development in the medical community is still not focused appropriately — “In medicine, we hardly ever think about how to implement what we’ve learned“. An example he cites is Dr. Armin Ernst who is essentially the Chief Adoption Officer. Ernst does not deal with patients — but works with the doctors at their 10 ICUs in ensuring that best practices are being adopted. He provides the same kind of oversight that was found at TCF. Do you have a Chief Adoption Officer?

The transformation in the health care sector is underway and it will borrow heavily from our profession. Supply Chain/Sourcing can and will contribute significantly. As Dr. Gawande points out, “We’ve let healthcare systems provide us with the equivalent of greasy spoon fare at four-star prices, and the results have been ruinous. The Cheesecake Factory model represents our best prospect for change“.

Thanks, Dalip.

Relative to Procurement Tools TCO

Rant on blogger, rant on along
Rant on buddy till the day is through
Rant on brother, sister too
Rant on momma like I asked you to do
And rant on fellow blogger, rant on (Rant On!) 


Today’s guest post is from Ron Southard, the founder and CEO of SafeSourcing Inc, a provider of SaaS e-Procurement solutions.

The single most significant obstacle to improvement, whether personal or professionally, is indecision, so my rant this month is relative to companies that suffer paralysis through excessive analysis when it comes to making a decision about using e-procurement tools. Too many times companies spend excessive amounts of time trying to understand or figure out procurement tools and their TCO, ROI, and CBA etc. instead of just making a decision to try something.

It really is that simple to just DO something! Make a decision already!

It is just so easy to get started with these tools today, that the above will become obvious almost immediately.

There are way too many buzz words and acronyms being thrown around when trying to decide on an e-procurement platform. As such, companies waste way to much time and money trying to understand the complexity of these tools rather than the simplicity they create in helping you and your team in executing your job.

Way too many retail companies spend way too much time meeting, talking, planning, evaluating, designing, trying to implement and then complaining about their procurement solutions. They also spend way to little time DOING. Many of these companies do not have the procurement tools, personnel or the collective capacity driven by both in place in order to compete with the big category killers in any industry (you already know who they are). So here’s a unique chance to DO SOMETHING, ANYTHING. Because the more you talk, plan and evaluate the more behind you will get. And here’s another unique thought, KNOWING is not DOING! Just make a decision.

Just because you have heard about all of the tools available to you today in the form of SAAS, IAAS, PAAS or AAAS (also none as XAAS) all delivered via the CLOUD, does not mean you know how to use them or the strategies required to make them a recurring part of your sourcing strategy and tactics. That is why they all end in the letter (S) which stands for service. And you better believe that service is defined differently by almost every solutions provider in the e-procurement space. The tools are at least 80% the same across the board, and will all drive results. The best results however will come from the companies with the best services attached to those tools. Tools that make customers say, “No one else will do the things you do for us”. The good news is that the CLOUD and all of the AAS’s mentioned above simply means that you can begin as soon as tomorrow. And, there is very little risk. So why do all of the analysis? Just make a DECISION to do something.

It’s really not that hard. Here’s what you need to do. Find a cloud based e-procurement solutions provider with all of the AAS procurement solutions and ask for three references (CEO or CFO). If the references come back as excellent, give the provider a category or two to source for you ASAP. They will probably agree to not charge you if you don’t save at least the cost of the event (cost neutral). The chances are you will see significant results in less than two or three weeks and the payback (see title) will astound you. If it doesn’t, you can turn them off (a benefit of the cloud) and begin with another immediately (another benefit). Perhaps you could even have a bake off with two or more solution providers. It’s just that easy.

If you don’t use e-procurement tools today, you are way behind the curve. The early adopters have done moved on to more sophisticated offerings. This is now a regular part of how they run their business. The good news is you can catch up quickly (another benefit of the cloud and XAAS). Don’t let the clouds and financial acronyms and all the AAS’s get in the way of a decision. Just make a decision.

See. It’s really pretty easy.

Thanks, Ron.

The Lost Art of Account Management


Rant on blogger, rant on along
Rant on buddy till the day is through
Rant on brother, sister too
Rant on momma like I asked you to do
And rant on fellow blogger, rant on (Rant On!)


Today’s guest post is from Dan Kane, a Project Analyst at Source One Management Services, LLC.

In today’s information age, businesses are gaining unparalleled access to data from their suppliers. However, this new focus on a customer’s ability to access account information on their own has had an unexpectedly negative effect on the quality of supplier account management, and the ability for customers to get assistance from their account management team. This issue is especially prevalent in the technology, and financial industries, where complex issues can require multiple points of contact, and significant end-user involvement before they can be resolved. In part, this can be attributed to increasingly complex products; however a large part of the blame rests with the organizations themselves, and a new-found reliance on automation, and customer self-service. While it is understandable that not every supplier representative is versed in every aspect of these specific solutions, it is imperative to the management of a customer relationship that businesses are provided a single point of contact with whom issues can be addressed.

Problem resolution can often take the form of education, by making sure that customers have the knowledge required to access information on their own, and understand the products and processes involved with their partners. This method has yet to be widely adopted, and account managers tend to refer questions to complicated service guides, or online portals, without the instructions on how to interpret these complex, customer-facing tools.

Some functional separation is fine, and many suppliers are attempting to provide account representatives who can completely manage services provided to national organizations, however it is important to note that a single “contact” should not be SINGLE PERSON on whom organizations are completely reliant on, Situations out of the individual’s control, such as sickness, can arise and leave an organization with no recourse to solving their problem.

Few things are more frustrating to businesses than calling for support, spending 10 minutes on hold waiting to get connected, finally reaching an operator who refers them to a single person for help, and happens to be out of the office.

The necessity of accessible information should not be a reason to diminish the functionality of account managers. Even if the information that a customer wants is available to them, the purpose of management is to identify solutions to problems, and assist customers with the tools that they may or may not know are at their disposal. It is counter-productive to decrease the level of live, human support in exchange for automation, and the self-serve environment that many organizations are migrating to.

What ever happened to the delicate, human touch, and a little thing called customer service?

Thanks, Dan!