Category Archives: Market Intelligence

LogicSource OneMarket – An Interesting Solution for Sourcing Projects

LogicSource OneMarket, which grew out of a unique automated procure-to-play platform to enable buyers and suppliers to more effectively address the complexities of print management, is a unique platform for sourcing “projects”. Marketing and advertising projects, capital equipment and leasehold acquisition projects, temporary labour projects to meet the holiday rush, etc. The developers — having recognized how the pre-cursor complex category platform they developed to specifically handle complex categories such as direct mail promotions, marketing collateral, promotional items, and packaging was being used across a wide range of industries — also recognized that what made these categories complex was the project-based nature of the categories, and focussed on extending that.

A few years later and they have a distinct platform that, while not specific to marketing, capital acquisitions, or labour projects, is well suited for those types of one-off sourcing events. While the platform has four components — the main e-Procurement (Sourcing) Engine, the Analytics Platform (designed for Finance), Digital Asset Management (designed for Marketing), and Visual Merchandising Management (designed for Operations) — we’re only going to discuss the e-Procurement / Sourcing component in this post.

The module is built around “campaign” management, and that’s why it is effective in special projects that are essentially campaigns to get something specific, and special, accomplished like managing a print advertising campaign for a new product, acquiring a new office building that meets everyone’s needs*, or quickly hiring 100 new workers to staff the warehouse to get all the packages out on time for the holiday rush.

Campaigns are much more challenging than regular commodity/product/service sourcing projects where you can just send out a bid for a group of SKUs, ask carriers to quote on lanes, and request standard rate cards for well defined service roles, as you need to develop customize requirements and RFIs, allow for and handle highly variable RFPs depending on the solution proposed by each vendor, compare bids at different levels of granularity, support complex review and sign-off chains, and capture the data required for detailed Statement-of-Work addendums to the contracts that can be used to generate the appropriate POs for whatever billing framework and schedule is agreed to.

To support this type of special project, each campaign starts with a specification where the buyer defines what they are looking for to the best of their ability, defines the workflow, selects the initial suppliers, includes any known products they need (quoted) from the built-in catalog capability, and/or defines any services they need (quoted) and attaches the rate cards they need filled out. The buyer can also choose to automatically populate the RFPs sent to suppliers with known or historical prices for known product or service needs, which then requires the supplier to only provide updates where necessary and fill in prices for products or services not known to the buyer.

Special projects can have multiple RFX rounds and the product logs all steps and changes for historical audit purposes. When the project is complete, an award can be created and, if necessary, split across multiple suppliers at different levels of project granularity. For example, if it was an advertising campaign project, one supplier might get a region (southern), another might get a state (California), and another might simply get a city (such as New York) because of distinct consumer preferences in a large target marketplace.

Once the award is made, the tool can be used to track project progress and handle the traditional billing and payment cycles (which you would expect as it evolved from an e-Procurement platform). In addition, it can track all change orders and everything related to project management is integrated, logged, and audited. In addition, suppliers can generate invoices within the supplier portal against work orders at agreed upon payment schedules for milestone driven projects, which makes it a lot easier for payment review and approval then when a supplier sends AP an invoice for “Services Delivered Against Campaign X” and the accounts payable clerk has no clue if the milestone has been hit or not.

LogicSource OneMarket is a fairly unique solution that is worth checking out if your organization does a lot of campaign-based projects across disciplines and your standard sourcing suite doesn’t suit the purpose. Keep it in mind the next time you hit a brick wall with respect to campaign management in your previous-generation sourcing suite.

*but not everyone’s wants — because, as poor Dilbert found out in the “Tower of Babel”, Episode 7 of Season 1 of the animated TV Show, if you try to satisfy everyone, you satisfy no one.

Procurement Trend #31: Increased Competition

Today we continue our coverage of each and every “future” trend that we debunked in our Future of Procurement series that falls under old-blues and ongoing news. Before all is said and done, we’re not only going to make sure that you not only understand why the historians are still talking about these ancient trends, but why they are still relevant to many Procurement organizations stuck in the past with the historians as well as what your organization needs to do to prevent getting sucked into the historical time vortex as well. So on to trend number thirty one!

As per our original series, while an idiot, and maybe even an imbecile might not be aware that Globalization is, obviously, going to lead to increased competition (and that as the pace of Globalization increases, so does the pace of increased competition), but even your everyday dull-witted dimwit is going to realize this, as is everyone of average intelligence (and it’s pretty unlikely that you’re going to find anyone of lower IQ in a senior management or Procurement position [with the possible exceptions of Texas and Florida]). As a result, not only is this trend as old as globalization, but it has been obvious for almost as long.

So why are the historians still pegging it? What are some of the primary reasons?

  • Emerging markets are new Emergent Marketsand even emergent markets are outsourcing

    China is no longer emerging, it is now the world’s second biggest economy, regardless of whether you take the UN, IMF, or World Bank GDP calculations as gospel, Brazil is the seventh, Russia is the eighth, and India is the tenth. In other words, the BRIC are all top 10 economies. If that’s not an emerged market, I don’t know what is (especially since Canada and Mexico, the latter of which used to be buoyed by American near-sourcing, have been knocked down the list. Canada is not even top 10 anymore! [the doctor blames Harper.])

  • A New Set of Emerging Markets are Risingand even Africa is seeing investment

    A few years ago, people were talking about BRICS. Most because they saw the beginnings of the rise of South Africa, which matched the beginnings of the rise of the BRIC a decade or so ago, and a few because they were forward looking. But now that the BRIC has emerged, focus is shifting to the MIKTS (Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and South Africa). As a result of the continual rise in transportation costs, labour costs in China, and automation, progressive American multi-nationals are realizing that near-sourcing to Mexico is not only the low-cost opportunity, but increases JIT capability in their supply chain. Indonesia is the new China and Vietnam for traditional manufacturing. South Korea, while very technologically advanced, is not as prominent as Japan or China as an outsourcing destination and, thus, provides additional opportunities for forward-looking multi-nationals for high-tech outsourcing. And Turkey, like Poland, has considerably lower labour costs than Western Europe but still has top-notch manufacturing standards and capabilities that not only meet Western European standards and capabilities, but in some industries, such as steel, exceed those capabilities. (For example, 1 US Dollar is approximately 2.3 Turkish Lira, and minimum wage in Turkey equates to about 4.3 Lira per hour [turkeys-minimum-wage-earners-slaves-to-poverty (todayszaman.com)], while the minimum wage in their neighbour Greece is about 2.5 times that, and the average Turk makes about 2,000 Lira or $800 US a month).

  • Developed Markets are becoming hyper-competitiveand sometimes the only option is global expansion

    Despite the irrational beliefe by some US leaders that markets can grow forever (because, theoretically, population can grow forever), from a global perspective, relatively speaking, market share at any given time is a zero-sum game. Your economy grows at the expense of another economy. At any given time, the are a fixed number of people on earth with a fixed number of hours to contribute to create a fixed amount of product — which means at any given point in time, there is a fixed global gross domestic product. So if your economy is getting more for that product than another economy is getting for an equivalent product, then your market share is growing at the expense of that market.

    So it should come as no surprise that now that reality has sunk back in and companies realize that market growth is limited to population growth, markets are becoming hyper-competitive as each company wants a bigger share of the fixed pie.

So what does this mean for you?

  • Emerging markets are now Emergent MarketsDon’t look for outsourcing cost savings from these markets, look at new customer opportunities and opportunities for nearby, or even local, production to keep global transportation costs and transportation delays down.
  • Third World Markets are Now Developing MarketsIf you must outsource, you need to look to the MIKTS, not the BRIC. If you still believe there is labour arbitrage, cost savings, etc. by outsourcing, then you have to look at Mexico, Indonesia, Turkey, or South Africa or get ahead of the curve and figure out what markets will be developing markets in 10 years.
  • Developed Markets are Becoming Hyper-CompetitiveSavings is not the answer — someone bigger can use leverage to save more. Value is the answer — value to the consumer, value to the company, and value to the supplier. So look for value generation in everything your organization does.

Future of Procurement 2014 (Consolidated Links)

If Software Has to Embed Games To Make You Want To Use It …

Then the software isn’t worth using in the first place!

When Pierre mentioned a YouTube video of a “first-person shooter” (FPS) game for SAP PO (Purchase Order) approvers to blow away those pesky POs in his recent piece on Gamification in Procurement [Looking Beyond the Technology] (Plus content on Spend Matters), I thought he was being satirical! But he was being factual. And it’s pathetic that this concept exists.

While I agree that gamification has potential as a learning tool, the fact that you have to consider putting games inside your software to get people to use it says, no, screams something — YOUR SOFTWARE SUCKS and no one should be using it in the first place when there are dozens of other options.

In other words, when Pierre said that this is where gamification really runs the risk of going off the rails and resembling the proverbial hammer looking for the nail I not only have to agree, but take it one step further and emphatically state that this is where gamification goes completely off the rails.

Supply Management technology should help you get your job done efficiently and effectively. If it’s done right, and accomplishes this goal, you will want to use it because you’re overworked, underpaid, and will do whatever it takes to get the job done and get home before it’s time to go to bed and start the cycle all over again. Because, while you like games, you’d rather go home and play a tabletop Euro-game with your family where you not only get to challenge your problem solving skills and teach the next generation the basics of supply and demand and resource management, but actually enjoy some time with your family.

So, while Pierre is right in that games, properly applied, can be powerful learning tools (and why SI ran a whole series on the Board Gamer’s Guide to Supply Management), they are educational and modelling tools that need to be used appropriately — not misused to mask crappy software. So, when it comes to games, apply the theory (and, yes, game theory is great), and leave the FPS to the war-gamers.

Why Are We Going to Spend Thirty Posts Exposing Past Procurement “Trends”?

Is it because the doctor is just plain tired of 2nd rate analysts and consultants selling last century’s solutions instead of accepting that we are in the 14th year of the 21st century?

Is it because without a solid understanding of where Procurement comes from, where it is, and where it needs to be, you’ll never get to where you need to go?

Or is it because without this understanding, you’ll never select the right technology and continue to be among those organizations that select those procurement tools that collectively cost organizations in North America 1.5 Billion per year and waste more than 32 Million man-hours because the Procurement system fails to increase their productivity (and, in some cases, because the system is not aligned with organizational processes and needs, actually decreases productivity and hinders savings identification and realization)?

It’s a combination of all three.

Modern Supply Management tools are supposed to save the organization money, not cost it money, but as The Topline Strategy group discovered (as summarized in this article over on S&DC Exec (“only one quarter of procurement professionals believe their procurement system makes them much more productive”) and MarketWatch (“survey finds inefficient procurement systems cost north american businesses 15 billion annually”), only 28% (or one-quarter) of sourcing an procurement professionals believe that their procurement systems make them productive.

This is an abysmal statistic in an industry that spent over 1.4 Billion on Enterprise Software in 2013, software that is supposed to increase efficiency and, in the case of Supply Management, identify savings and add value to the process.

Why is the situation so bad?

The article gives a few hints, including:

  • convoluted user interfaces,
  • lack of critical features,
  • poor integration or implementation (with enterprise systems & IT infrastructure), and
  • lack of regular, often necessary, updates

But, in many cases, the real reason is lack of fit and key functionality.

UI, proper implementation, good integration, and regular updates are important, but the system has to fit the workflow and support organizational processes. Sometimes the organization’s processes will need to be updated, but there is a difference between updating to a more appropriate process, and changing to a completely different process unsuitable to the organization’s business just to force fit a square system into a round architectural hole.

And there’s no way you can select the right fit if you don’t know what the right process should be for your organization. And you can’t know the right process until you know what that process has to support, why, and how the process will need to evolve over time.

And that is fundamentally why we have to spend thirty posts diving into past procurement “trends” so you understand what the real requirements are and what is just hot air coming out of the mouth of another slick talking speaker (or vanishing ink from their specially made pens). It will take time, especially since we will have to take a few breaks to maintain our sanity, but we have to do it.

Don’t you agree, LOLCat?

Can U Wake Me When Its Over.

Yes, LOLCat, we’ll wake you when itz over. We don’t want to drive you to drink too! (Futurists have already driven this LOLCat to drink!)