Category Archives: Market Intelligence

SAP bought Ariba. What Should You Do?

 

Don't Panic

 

With one hand, pick up your copy of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy, with your other hand grab a Pan Galactic Gargle Blaster, have a seat, and read a few random entries while you have a nice relaxing drink. And definitely don’t panic.

In fact, don’t even give the acquisition a second thought right now. Why? Despite what every e-Procurement, e-Sourcing, and Supplier Network vendor seems to be implying with their comments (as summarized by Peter Smith over on Spend Matters Europe), press releases, etc., the reality of the situation is that, for the time being, nothing is going to change and you don’t have anything to worry about.

Since no one else is going to spell it out for you, the doctor is.

  • Ariba was the largest pure-play vendor in the Sourcing/Procurement space
  • SAP is one of the largest ERP vendors in the space
  • Large Companies are slow moving
  • Large Companies have high overheads
    (and can’t afford to sacrifice revenue streams without replacements)
  • SAP has a Fusion road-map through 2020

When you put all this together, and consider what has happened with past acquisitions in both companies, the following picture quickly emerges:

  • SAP is going to slowly merge Ariba products into its suite(s) through Fusion
    but this is going to take years and in the meantime
  • SAP is going to continue to sell and support Ariba as-is in the interim
    because it needs to not only make its money back, but support the high overheads until it is in a position to absorb Ariba into it’s core platform and do away with needing to maintain a separate suite.

In other words, you have a few years to come up with a backup plan if the way SAP merges Ariba’s suite into their platform isn’t to your liking or if the renewal costs when it happens are too rich for your blood. The only people who need to panic now are SAP partners where a significant percentage of their business came from SAP referrals as SAP will no longer be referring anyone with Sourcing, Procurement, or Supplier Network needs to third parties. (Companies like Hubwoo might be in this boat.)

Now, depending on where you are in terms of a renewal, or how much data you have in the system, or how much you use the system, you might not want to wait a few years to start thinking about moving off of the platform if you are worried about it meeting your future needs, but you don’t have to rush into a decision. And you certainly don’t have to panic. Time is on your side.

Is Co-opetition a Good Thing for Your Supply Chain?

Not too long ago, the ISM ran a cover story on “Collaborating with the Competition”. In this article, they addressed horizontal collaboration, which is the sharing of supply chain assets for mutual benefits, and which is becoming common among some manufacturing groups. This typically occurs between companies in the same industry that, while not direct competitors, market and sell to similar customers and consumers. As an example, if one manufacturer made HDTVs and another made Blu Ray players, which do require similar raw materials and even chipsets for encoding and decoding, they could cooperate in sourcing because, while they are selling to the same consumer, they are not selling the same product. However, this is now occurring between companies that, at least in some product categories, often directly compete with each other. The case of Hershey Co. and the Ferraro Group, as pointed out in the article, is one example. “Higher-end” hershey bars and “lower-end” Ferraro chocolates are in the same price category and target the exact same consumer that will likely only buy one of these products during a trip to the store. This is an example of co-opetition in the supply chain.

According to the “North American Horizontal Collaboration in the Supply Chain Report”, published by EyeForTransport, while still in its early stages, the benefits [of horizontal collaboration] are clearly recognized and there are companies already optimizing their supply chains with this cutting-edge strategy. This is especially true if the collaboration is deep, and extends into sharing warehousing, distribution and even manufacturing capabilities. And of course, the collaboration is going to achieve efficiencies and savings beyond what either company can achieve on its own if you collaboratively optimize everything, as the article recommends. [This echos what the doctor has been saying for years. No other technology or process delivers the returns that optimization delivers, and the maximum effectiveness is always in a collaborative application.] But the real question is, what is the value that is going to be delivered? When you optimize everything within your organization, you maximize the value to your bottom line. But this isn’t necessarily the case when you optimize a joint supply chain.

Why? To understand the rationale, we need to take a step back to the predecessor of horizontal collaboration — the Group Purchasing Organization. The idea behind the group purchasing organization was that if a bunch of companies came together and pooled their total purchasing volume, they could get a better deal from a single supplier than each could on their own. (In simple terms, they are the enterprise version of today’s consumer GroupOn or TeamBuy.) This was true for each company if they all had volume requirements in the same order of magnitude and there was enough companies in the group to take the volume to the next order of magnitude (which, in manufacturing terms, is defined based on the throughput of a production run and the threshold at which manufacturing the product becomes cheaper). If one company had an order of magnitude more demand than the others in the GPO, then the reality is that it could get just as good of a deal if it had a good negotiator, and if a company had an order of magnitude less demand, then it was getting a way better deal than everyone else.

In addition, a deal is only a better deal if it doesn’t help a competitor more than it helps you. So if the GPO contained direct competitors, typically it was only used for buying indirect or non-essential products or services (like office suppliers, maintenance parts, and temporary labour services), and never for components or raw materials used in direct manufacturing. So the organization never saw the full value of what a GPO could deliver unless it joined a smaller GPO that prohibited direct competitors from belonging to the GPO. And then it still didn’t get the best possible deals across the board because smaller GPOs generally had smaller volumes, especially since not all companies were buying the same products or services, or they were not all ready to buy the same categories at the same time.

Co-opetition is taking the concept of a GPO to the next level. It’s essentially saying “why stop at products and basic services when you can also collaborate on warehousing, transportation, and manufacturing asset purchases and take GPOs to the next level”. And while this sounds good in theory, the reality is that you can really only collaborate this deeply with an organization in the same space as you making similar products, and maximum benefit (from an optimization viewpoint) will only be achieved when they are making the same category of products. And if the other companies are making the same categories of products, even if they are not directly competing (like tablets and laptops), they are probably close enough that they are vying for the same consumer dollars (as many consumers have limited disposable income these days), and if the products are that close, and your competitor ends up getting more efficiency gains then you, with the indirect knowledge of your products that they are going to acquire, what’s to stop them from creating a product that directly competes with yours, at a lower production price, using the supply chain you helped them build?

And yes, there are always legal precautions you can take, but first of all, you have to think of every eventuality and then, if the competitor is determined, be prepared for a lengthy, and costly, court case. In other words, the greater the savings are for you, the greater the value your competitor is likely to see. Is it worth it? the doctor doesn’t have the answer, but thinks it is very important that you ask the question!

What Finance Still Wants from Procurement, At Least According to the Survey

According to a recent survey conducted by CFO Research Services, as summarized in a recent post on “How to Improve Procurement” over on Procurement Leaders, finance leaders want procurement to increase its contribution in the following areas:

  • Working Capital Management
    especially since Procurement spends so much working capital
  • Supplier Collaboration Improvement
    especially since Procurement has the majority of the interaction with suppliers
  • Business Performance Risk Management
    as Procurement is supposed to be on the 8-ball when it comes to risk
  • New Market / Business Line Expansion
    as Procurement is already in foreign markets buying and probably has the most low-down

So what should you do? Start with the advice offered by the author:

  1. Initiate discussions with Finance on how Procurement can make the greatest contribution in their eyes.
    Remember, Procurement’s biggest problem in many organizations is still its image. In many organizations it’s still seen as the island of misfit toys, the ax men, or the one-trick cost-reduction pony. It doesn’t matter how much Procurement saves, how much it reduces organizational risk, or how much value it brings, if Procurement’s image doesn’t change, then all of its contributions are for naught.
  2. Develop a plan to embed the right analytical and financial skill sets in Procurement.
    Face it, success today depends on the ability to analyze data, extract information, and generate the knowledge that the organization needs to make the right decisions. This requires the right skill sets.
  3. Determine the right technology roadmap to support the strategy.
    This will be a two-part strategy. In the first part, the organization will implement a closed-loop e-Sourcing and e-Procurement / P2P solution to reduce tactical processing requirements and free up more time for strategic activity. In the second part, the organization will use appropriate analytical solutions and apply it’s new analytical skills to trying to find more opportunities to increase organizational value.

And then, finally, don’t forget to create an appropriate transition plan — remember, success depends on the 3 T’s — talent (with the right skills), technology (with the right functions), and transition (to the right operational structure).

A Great Guide to Enterprise Influence(rs)

Over on the Enterprise Irregulars, Paul Greenberg recently published part 1 of a 4-part series on how to deal with and think about influencers and the basics around building an influencer/analyst program that is a must read for any Marketer or PR Pro looking to get the attention of one or more influencers to cover their product or service. The post is great because it contains a number of key takeaways, including this key point that most non-PR Pro’s miss: Do Your Homework: understand who they are, not just what they are. That means learn something about them as actual human beings.

It’s amazing how many PR / Media Relations people don’t understand why they should do this. They think that if they just spam the same bullsh!t press release to three thousand e-mails, they will get results. I can tell you that, like the influencers named in the post, every day I get dozens of spam press releases that just get dumped to a spam folder that gets emptied, unread, once a month. Why? Well, not only do I not have time to read them all, and not only do I have no interest in hyped up carbon copy that doesn’t bother to tell me how the product or service will benefit my readers, but I have no interest in wading through paragraphs of hype to figure out if the product or service being hyped is even related to Supply Management. (Now that SI gets about 125,000 visits a month, it gets on spam lists for political and religious products too, for example.) But more importantly, the doctor not only dislikes vendor press releases, but despises requests to blog about or post a press release. SI is about solutions, not about hyperbole. And, if the PR / Media Relations person had taken 5 minutes to actually visit the site and read a few paragraphs of the FAQ, they’d know that. (Unlike many blogs or sites, just about everything a PR / Media person would want to know is in the FAQ!) Furthermore, while multiple press releases typically gets a sender on a spam blacklist, a request for demo is usually answered in an hour with “here’s how much notice I need and, in this timeframe some days I could fit you in”. But I digress.

The point is influencers are people … insanely busy people. While I typically don’t get the 30-50 requests for demos, interviews, and story pitches that Paul gets in a week, I can tell you that I typically get 20 – 25 requests for interviews or stories, with typically 20-24 of the form “Would you like to talk to X / Would you please cover Y quoted/referenced in the Press Release before”, and, these days, ignore all of them. On the other hand, the one that says “we have just released Product X that does A, B, and C for Purchasing/Procurement/Logistics/Supply professionals that we believe would be of benefit for your readers because you cover Z, would you like a demo/discussion” gets a response within 24 hours. Unless, of course, this sentence is expanded into two pages that compares the product to the holy grail, in which case I assume that the company, like the author, has way too much ego and, like Paul, shake my head in disbelief and relegate it to the bottom of the queue.

Now, I might not be front page WSJ (but, in our space, who is?), but if you are building Supply Management technology, can you really afford to kiss-off a niche site known for its coverage of supply chain technology that gets 1,500,000 visits a year? (To put this in perspective, based on a recent post, the Spend Matters family of blogs gets about 3,600,000 visits a year — or 900,000 visits per blog on average, with SpendMatters and MetalMiner getting the majority of visits.) Maybe you can, but since you don’t know where your next lead is going to come from, why should you? (Especially since a demo and subsequent coverage costs you nothing! And this holds true for many influencers in the space.)

Plus, as Paul points out, an influencer can impact

  • the purchasing decision of a prospect
  • the thinking of an entire industry
  • the mindshare that a company will have
    which indirectly influences the purchasing decisions of a prospect
  • institutional and individual investors

and can often do so with much more credibility than you can acting on behalf of your organization.

So where do you start?

  1. Figure out what kind of influencer is right for you — be it an institutional, boutique, independent, established, newly emerged, vendor, media, or influencer influencer. It will depend on the specifics of your product/service and the market you want to reach, and you should definitely read Paul’s post for insight on how to make the call, and, depending on what type of influencer is right for you, who some starting influencers are.
  2. Then, as we stated in the beginning, do your homework.
  3. Remember it’s the person, not the organization, that you are reaching out to.
  4. Say the right thing.
  5. And read Paul’s 4-part series for the details.

More Questions to ask your Decision Optimization Vendor (Repost)

Continuing yesterday’s post, here are six more questions to ask once you’ve confirmed the vendor really does have a real strategic sourcing decision optimization solution.

1. What do I have to do to get a good handle on how to make effective use of this technology, and for an organization of my size, how long is it going to take?

The first thing you have to do is get a good understanding of what strategic sourcing decision optimization is, what it can do for you, and, most importantly, what data you’re going to need. I strongly suggest you read the wiki-paper authored by yours truly if you haven’t already. The wiki-paper will tell you:

  • The requirements of a true decision optimization system
    which will insure you don’t get taken in by a cheap imitation decision support system
  • The basic capabilities a decision optimization system should have to be truly useful for strategic sourcing decision optimization
    which will insure that the decision optimization system you select is most appropriate for the problems your team faces as sourcing professionals
  • The basic requirements for success when using a decision optimization system
    which include good forecasts, appropriate cost breakdowns, and knowledge of the required, vs. desired, business rules
  • Ten strategies for success
    which will help you get the most out of every strategic sourcing decision optimization project

Then you need to figure out what your potential return is from strategic sourcing decision optimization. Although every project will benefit, the reality is that decision optimization is still relatively expensive technology to buy and the amount of work involved in these projects can be considerably more than an auction. This sometimes requires the time of senior professionals, which can add up. If you’re a small or mid-size company whose largest sourcing project is 10M — and you only expect to save 3%, primarily on reduced freight and inventory by way of better allocations, because it’s a buyers market and auctions work very well — then, considering that the cost of buying, maintaining, and using a good solution starts in the mid six-figures a year, it’s probably not for you. However, if you’re a global 3000 company with a dozen or more sourcing projects in the 50M to 500M+ range, and a possibility of savings of 5% to 15% per project, and your total potential savings is in the 50M to 150M range in the first two to three years, then you should identify the right optimization system for you and start using it as soon as possible.

Once you’ve decided optimization is a useful technology, and one you should be using, you need to review the categories that you will be sourcing in the next 12 months, and then rank them by dollar amount and complexity. The projects that appear in the top half of both lists will be good candidates for strategic sourcing decision optimization. (Note that if your annual spend is in excess of 1B, the doctor can tell you right now that properly applied decision optimization technology will generate ROI for you.)

Armed with the potential projects, you need to devise appropriate cost breakdowns for each of the goods and services under consideration, identify other relevant non-cost and qualitative factors, and prepare the appropriate surveys and RFPs/RFQs so that you can get projects underway relatively quickly. Optimization only achieves significant returns if done right – and this requires that you get accurate bids and cost breakdowns where the cost of the good or service is separated from the freight cost, and any relevant costs such as duties, differential costs of waste and returns, and discounts are taken into account. The extra preparation is definitely worth it when you consider that studies done by Aberdeen in 2005 and 2007 (as referenced in the wiki-paper) found that organizations that employ advanced sourcing methods based on decision optimization save an organization, on average, 12% above and beyond what can be saved in an e-Auction or basic sourcing project.

The amount of time it takes really depends upon the skill-level of the people you have. They have to wrap their minds around decision optimization for strategic sourcing, understand what it really is, how they best use it, and how they have to approach decision optimization sourcing projects and data collection to get the most bang for their buck. If they are junior buyers in skill-level, it could easily take them a few months to truly grasp the basic concept, and chances are they will never be able to take full advantage of the tool until you upgrade their sourcing skill level (through an appropriate certification program such as the CPSM or SPSM, for example). If they are senior buyers in skill-level, they should be able to grasp the basics and re-design the RFXs for the first project within a couple of weeks.

2a. How much functionality is my organization realistically going to be using in 12 months?

Your senior buyers should be using all of the functionality in the strategic sourcing decision optimization tool within 6 – 12 months. The situation now isn’t as it was when these tools were first hitting the market place 7 years ago (at which time the UI alone was so complicated you needed a graduate degree just to understand it). A good tool has a clear UI and good data import capability that allows you to specify the categories and items under consideration, the suppliers who can supply those items, the locations where you need those items (which may be done by way of groupings), and the cost breakdowns (at least by adjusted unit cost and freight cost). The tool should be able to import data from an appropriately formatted excel worksheet, or from an e-RFX or e-Auction module if it is integrated into a sourcing suite. Furthermore, modern software allows each type of constraint that can be defined to be clearly delineated, and step-by-step wizards exist to help you define the constraint appropriately.

Your intermediate buyers should be able to master the basic constraints in this time-frame, and be well on their way to improving their sourcing decisions and relative skill levels.

Even though the tools have improved significantly, strategic sourcing decision optimization, by its very nature, requires a more advanced skill level than other tools in the e-Sourcing suite and your junior buyers may not be up to the challenge. You will need to provide them the training they need to upgrade their sourcing competence to an intermediate level before you can expect them to master the tool, even though your technologically savvy junior buyers will be able to get a reasonable grip on the basics of setting up a scenario and defining simple constraints in a rather short time frame. You have to remember that the use of strategic sourcing decision optimization is advanced sourcing, and this requires more than just a friendly tool – it requires buyer skill.

2b. How much functionality do I really need?

When it comes to model development and solver capability, as much as you can get. This is still a developing technology, and even though you can achieve considerable savings above and beyond an e-Auction just with what’s out there today, there’s still a long way to go.

When it comes to add-ons, it depends on what the company is offering you as an add-on. If it’s services, then, considering you should have guidance on your first few projects, you should strongly consider them if they’re reaonably priced. If it’s custom integration services to your RFX or e-Auction platform, then, assuming these are the right RFX and e-Auction platforms to be using, and the integration is priced competitively, then this is also worth considering. However, if the add-on an enhanced solver module, I’d ask why this isn’t part of the base offering (as it should be).

However, one thing that is important to note, if it’s not easy to load the data into the tool, it likely won’t be used at all. Thus, it’s important to make sure that not only is the import or ETL tool included as part of the basic functionality, but that the import functionality is also easy to use.

2c. And how does this functionality solve my #1 pain today, which is X?

If you’re looking at strategic sourcing decision optimization, chances are you are seeing diminishing savings from your sourcing projects and need a way to improve returns. What you’re looking for here is an answer not based on technical competence, but on sourcing experience. You want the vendor to tell you that their product has been applied successfully by companies in a number of verticals on a number of categories and that, based upon their experience in and around your industry, they expect that you will be able to save in the 5% to 15% range on a well-defined set of categories. You want to know that they have the experience to help you select the right categories to start with that will help you get some quick wins and support for the new technology.

3. How much training is my team going to require to effectively use the software? How long is it going to take them to absorb this training?

It should not take more than a week to get your intermediate and senior buyers up to speed on how to use the tool. However, the training is not really going to be absorbed at a deep level until your professionals apply the tool on a few projects, which should be done under the guidance of an experienced professional who can insure that your team is tackling the project in an optimal manner. Thus, it will probably take a few months, at the minimum, for your senior buyers to truly master the tool.

4. How much is this software REALLY going to cost me in the first year and each subsequent year?

Although real strategic sourcing decision optimization has been around for almost seven years, it only became usable in the last few, and due to its relatively low adoption rate to date, and continued development, it’s still a reasonably new offering. You should expect to be paying in the mid six figures per year, depending on the power of the solution and your hardware and solver license requirements. (Most platforms are built on top of industry leading solvers, such as Ilog’s CPlex, which can run 25K to 50K per license. Plus, you need high end servers if you want to build large models and have them solve relatively quickly. Thus, even an on-demand offering is going to be pricey if you want dedicated solvers and hardware, which you could need if you have large models or intend to use the platform significantly.)

Furthermore, since this technology is still emerging (like real spend analysis), updates should be regular and maintenance will be higher than for e-RFX and e-Auction, so you are probably looking at maintenance (for behind the firewall or ASP solutions) in the 20% range.

Installation should not be time consuming, and should not require more than a few days of consulting. (On-demand should be free if you’re using a basic service that uses shared optimization resources, but if you are asking for dedicated resources, you should expect to pay for some consulting time as a dedicated resource will need to deployed to get this done.)

5. You say you care about your customers and that you are going to provide great service. Prove it!

Ask for references. Talk to them. If the vendor has an upcoming user meeting or conference, ask to go to it. Ask for examples of results their customers have achieved on the platforms recently, and how they can help you achieve the same. But most importantly, ask them if they’ll help you with your initial pilot project at a reasonable consulting rate and see what kind of results they deliver – with their tool.

6. Can I take it for a test drive or a short term lease?

Considering that this software is usually either web-based or a fat client that runs on your desktop, there shouldn’t be any problem for your provider to set you up with a single instance, or copy, for you to use on a pilot project – which they should be comfortable with you undertaking at a low consulting rate – equal to the cost of the consultant that guides you through the pilot project.

7. Can I buy it or implement it in pieces?

Just like you should ultimately buy the entire e-RFx or e-Auction tool functionality up-front, you should buy the entire functionality of the strategic sourcing decision optimization tool up-front as well, but I’d hold off on buying dedicated hardware and solver resources until you’re ramped up and ready to maximize usage of such resources, as a single dedicated high-end machine with a dedicated CPlex license will cost you (well) over 50K a year in additional cost. If you’re maxing out your solver, dedicated resources can be worth it when you consider the ROI that accompanies strategic sourcing decision optimization. But if the hardware is just sitting there, that money is better spent on consulting services to help you get up to speed on how to maximize use of the tool.