Category Archives: Procurement Innovation

The New and improved Triple Lucky Sourcing Innovation Cascading Mega-Map … Now With 33% More Vendors!

7EB V1 Edition ^{(c) 2026-09-27}

Still totally useless, but still slightly less useless than every other logo map that clogs your feed!

1. Every vendor url still valid and active as of 3 days ago! (w.r.t. posting date)

2. Every vendor logo is clickable and takes you to a live site (as of 3 days ago w.r.t. posting date)!

3. Every vendor is mapped to a meaningful category as of the last date of analyst investigation!^*

So what’s the point? Click here for the full explanation that has been moved to the end of the post (as it’s the same as last time).

In summary, let this be proof that there are a lot of logos in our ProcureTech+ space and that, if you want logos, you got logos!

888 of them!

Enjoy!

			Source-to-Pay
Souce-to-Contract			Procure-to-Pay				Intake-to-Orchestrate
Sourcing + SXM + CLM	Sourcing + Analytics	SXM + Analytics	e-Procurement	Invoice-to-Pay / AP	Expenses	Payments (& P-Cards)	Training
Sourcing + SXM	Sourcing + CLM	SXM + CLM		Sourcing	SXM	CLM	Analytics
Direct Supply Chain	Cyber Monitoring	ESG / Carbon	Marketplaces	Legal	Marketing	SaaS	Intelligence
	(3^rd Party) Risk Mangement	Contingent Workforce Management	Hospitality	(e-)Document Exchange	AI Procurement Offerings	AI Frameworks (Generic)

Source to Pay

Source to Contract

Sourcing + SXM + CLM

SXM + CLM

Sourcing + CLM

Sourcing + SXM

Sourcing & Analytics

SXM & Analytics

Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM)

Sourcing

Supplier Management (SXM)

Analytics

Procure-to-Pay (P2P)

eProcurement

Invoice-to-Pay (I2P) / Accounts Payable (AP)

EXPENSE

PAYMENTS & V/P-CARDS

Intake-Manage-Orchestrate

ESG/Carbon Scope 3

Cyber Monitoring

Direct Supply Chain

Legal

Marketing

SaaS

Training

MarketPlaces

Intelligence

Risk

Contingent Workforce Management

Hospitality

OOCument eXchange

AI Procurement Offerings

AI Frameworks (Generic)

To again make it utterly clear you can’t select a vendor based on a random grouping of logos on a map, even if they are categorized! (And especially if the solution has not been human reviewed and verified!)

Not even if the map categorizes the vendors by market size, industry, and/or geography. Those are just proxies for organizational spend, solution needs and cultural requirements. Not every mid-market manufacturing plant in the USA is the same.

The only way to select a good vendor is to follow a proper assisted process and engage an expert who understands what vendors are out there to identify the right vendors to invite to the RFP process once your true needs have been identified.

Especially considering the true number of vendors out there is many times more than what an average big analyst firm will tell you, especially when they restrict their recommendations to their paying clients in their maps, and multiples of what an average big consultancy will tell you, especially when that consultancy only knows their partner solutions (that they need to maintain significant focus on to maintain their preferred partner status).

So, what’s the value?

As we explain in detail in the real value of the sourcing innovation mega map, it shows you

why you need proper proper assisted solution selection (and we can’t stress this enough)
how dynamic the space is:
- 2 more companies are gone in just 8 months
- 8+ companies have been acquired or renamed
- there are just too many options for an average buyer to make sense of
quite a few vendors ARE NOT GOOD (for you at least) by statistics alone

P.S. Generally, logo size means nothing — logos were scaled to be readable. However, in this 7EB V1 preliminary version of the 2027 Mega Map, new vendor logos are 25% larger. (These new vendor logos will be scaled back in size 25%, or all the other logos scaled up 25%, in the final version, likely released in January after the annual culling when walking dead vendors typically go into liquidation or shutdown or acquired vendors get full absorbed into the acquiring company.)

^* Some vendors haven’t been reviewed in a few years, so offerings may be more extensive than what was originally offered, or may have changed focus. (One analyst can only review so many vendors a year!)

An Updated Checklist for Major International Procurements

Twenty years ago we presented a slightly modified version of a great checklist by Mr Paul Emanuelli who presented key concepts for major procurements in the age of globalization and a movement by the mid-market to take advantage of the global sourcing opportunities big enterprise had been taking advantage of since the 80s. It wasn’t complete, but it was complete enough for an average organization and a great start.

But that was the age of globalization. Opening borders. Minimal conflicts. Reasonable levels of natural disasters. Efforts to ensure major maritime routes were not blocked by any disagreements or conflicts were made. Piracy was an issue, but alternate routes and good (military) security minimized impacts.

Now we’re in the age of isolationism. Borders are closing. Sanctions are restricting others. Conflicts and wars are breaking out with regional impacts. Major maritime routes are being blocked as a result of conflict, including the Red Sea and the Strait of Hormuz, putting trillions of dollars of trade at risk. Natural disasters, including droughts, are also limiting trade routes, including restricted passage through the Panama Canal due to water shortages. The rules have changed, and your Procurement (knowledge) needs to keep up.

This means two things:

1. Your Team Needs to Expand

When once upon a time you may have been able to get away with:

procurement lead
finance lead
legal counsel lead

Now you also need, at a minimum:

logistics lead
domain lead
(geopolitical) risk lead
compliance lead

These stakeholders will need to provide the following insight between them:

procurement: handles the details of the buy — cost vs expected return
logistics: handles the global supply chain – carriers, modes, import/export requirements, etc.
finance: handles the international economics — currency exchange, projections, international banking arrangements, tariff management and (VAT) reclamation
legal counsel: appropriate international legal frameworks, supplier home country law, local laws
domain lead: realistic supplier and product assessment vs. supplier claims
compliance lead: handles international compliance regulations — source country, intermediate transportation hubs, and local companies with respect to finished goods, raw materials, transport, and entities
(geopolitical) risk lead: keeps a handle on the international geopolitical conditions relative to the source country, destination country, and any intermediate countries the goods would have to pass through — and if they are likely to lead to sanctions, border closings, conflicts, wars or other situations that could prevent or significantly hinder trade

In other words, the analysis of a potential buy has become significantly more involved than it was 20 years ago, because it’s not just the buy, it’s the likelihood of supply assurance and affordability when exchange rates can fluctuate significantly almost over night or fuel, and thus carrier costs, can double or triple with almost no warning.

Once you’ve selected the team, you need to determine the extent of the project. Is it a sourcing project or a mega project. If you’re simply replacing a source of supply, and using a supplier in a region you’re already doing business in, it’s a project. If you’re looking for a source of supply for a new product or material, trying to enter a new country, and/or looking somewhere you don’t have a logistics network, it’s a mega-project. Just like a major technological project / system replacement, underestimating the effort involved is a recipe for disaster. Especially if the effort is not put in up front before a contract is signed and an issue crops up later.

This means that before the contract is signed, the following sub-projects need to be completed:

detailed product requirements assessment
detailed proposed supplier and product assessment
detailed proposed logistics / supply chain network
detailed legal frameworks review
detailed compliance and risk review
detailed business plan

Only then, can you move forward to:

contract framework
negotiations
final contract

International procurements are not as easy, or predictable, as they were 20 years ago. Now they’re mega-projects which require mega-effort to get right.

Why Your ProcureTech Initiative Will Fail … Part 2

We’ve written many series on best practice tech identification, tech selection, and tech implementation in the hopes of inverting the odds from an 80%+ chance of failure to an 80%+ chance of success, but given that failures are literally still happening on a daily basis, it seems that most people can’t be bothered to read best practice advice so today we’re going to flip the script and tell you all the reasons you’re going to fail and then you hope you go back and read the best practice advice we’ve freely given you (in series such as Successful Vendor Selection – The Series).

5. You Don’t Understand How To Select Proper Systems

As per our previous instalment, the answer is never to select the systems recommended by your favourite Big X consultancy whose recommendations are always in the mutual back-scratching club. With all the finders fees and recommendation fees built into the relationships, you’re paying multiples of what you should be for the tech even if the tech is appropriate. Typically the tech in the big vendors isn’t the best or most modern tech, and often the tech you fall back on only if you’re such a large enterprise that smaller vendors can’t serve you.

It’s not vendor size, Big X recommendation, marketing, or hype. And it’s never (Gen-) AI unless there’s no other solution. AI accelerates what you give it. And when you give it bad process, bad data, and bad instructions, you get an even worse result than what you have now. Until you’re best in class with last generation tech, you’re not even ready to consider AI.

The answer, as we’ve said before, is to find an independent consultant or consultant from a niche consultancy with no vendor relationships and no implementation team. The consultant/consultancies only line of business must be advisory, solution advisory, and project assurance — not implementation and integration and definitely not vendor partnerships. While the consultancies with the partnerships will tout the benefits and how they get (their customers) top tier support, first response, and the newest releases; that’s hype, not results. Results come from the systems that are right for you, not the systems right for the Big X consultancy.

Unless, of course, you are skilled enough to implement the best practice selection process yourself.

6. You Don’t Understand How Long It Will Take To Implement New Systems

A technology system implementation, replacement, or upgrade is an organizational mega-project in a mid-sized or larger organization. Even though SaaS vendors can partition a new instance in minutes, that’s not implementation, integration into your systems, incorporation into your daily processes, or institutionalization into your team’s routine. That all takes time. Lots of time — and a lot more time than your vendors will tell you. They know that you’ll be drawn to the proposal with the shortest implementation time so they will lie about how long it will really take and base their proposal on the theoretical minimum if everyone worked 12 hours a day, 7 days a week, and nothing ever, ever went wrong.

But we know the truth. Everything that can go wrong, will, to some degree. No one can dedicate as much time as the project plan says. All of the integrations will take longer than estimated. The data will be 10 times worse and 10 times as incomplete as was assumed, so there will be delays to clean the data and integrate external sources to buff it up. So things will drag out well beyond the proposal. Typically multiples.

That’s because no one will admit it’s a mega-project, and that’s why the technology project failure rate keeps increasing year-over-year despite being at an all time high of 88%+ in general, and 94% if Gen-AI. The reality is that mega-project success rates are 0.5%, as chronicled by Bent Flyvbjerg & Dan Gardner in How Big Things Get Done, where a study of over 16,000 projects across 136 countries going back to 1910 revealed the success rate. This is where technology project success rates are headed until everyone wakes up to the reality that they are dealing with mega projects and all AI does is speed up the failure.

7. You Don’t Understand How To Do Change Management

It’s not just implement the software, integrate the data feeds, flip the switch, and go. That’s a surefire guarantee for system avoidance and bypass.

Change management involves understanding how the processes are changing, what training the users will need, how best to go about it, how fast the switchover can actually happen, planning for, and managing all the non-technology details and implementing proper project assurance to make sure it actually happens. That last part is key — project assurance that starts before the first step of system implementation and continues until the adoption and usage hits the required targets — which will typically be months, if not years, after initial system implementation depending on the system. A few months for a dedicated solution or small suite, to a few years for an organization wide ERP or SCP for a large multi-national organization in dozens of countries.

8. You Don’t Know How To Recognize and Correct Issues To Avoid System Bypass

Just like no implementation will go according to plan (which is why over-optimistic schedules will never happen), no design will be as perfect as believed. Something critical will always be missed and multiple significant issues will crop up over time. The ability to recognize these issues quickly and do something about them before your employees start bypassing the system — because once they start, they won’t stop — the harder it will be to get them back on the system.

Let’s say you buy a new e-Procurement system designed to curb P-Card tail spend and allow the vast majority of spend to follow procedure, be tracked against budgets, and properly managed over time. Sounds great in theory, but lets say that any purchase not in the catalog requires an RFQ with at least 3 vendors, or a 3-way price comparison between 3 online vendors with a manager’s sign-off, which adds time and hassle for purchases that used to be one and done because the amounts were under thresholds, all of the options were always within a few % of each other, and saving $2 on a $100 purchase is NOT worth 15 minutes of an employee’s time who’s fully burdened cost is $100 an hour.

If you don’t pick up on this quickly, and let them one-and-done purchases under the old P-card amount through easy-peasy punch-out, they’ll go back to P-carding everything and if you take the P-card away, they’ll go back to the personal credit card and monthly expense report. You need to quickly figure out who is bypassing, why, and how you make the system easier to use than bypass.

Why Your ProcureTech Initiative Will Fail … Part 1

1. You Don’t Understand Your True Needs

You’ve never done a full end-to-end process analysis on your organization, you don’t understand how inefficient your processes are, what processes you actually need, why you need them, and how much better you could be doing. You just know that the KPI metrics you are tracking are not on par with industry averages based on what your overpriced consultants are telling you, that your balance sheet isn’t as good as best in class, and that you need to do something … and that something is get a shiny new tech toy that the overpriced consultants will help you select by telling you who to invite to your RFP. (And you should know all the problems with this — they’ll only recommend the partners they have sycophant partnerships with, get referral and implementation fees from, and who will ensure that they remain your overpriced consultancy of choice.)

2. You Don’t Understand What You Already Have

Once you understand what the correct processes are, why, and where the automation points are, you need to revisit the systems you have to see where they can solve the problems. Chances are you have a number of suites, supply chain platforms, and ERPs with easy to implement plug-in modules that solve a lot of the problems you have without buying any new systems. And even if new systems might do it better, chances are the improvement won’t be worth the extra money, downtime, and change management — which will all cost you dearly. The reality is that if you can get an 80% solution today, with tools your people are already using, that’s much better than a potential 95% years in the future.

3. You Don’t Understand What Your Capabilities Actually Are

By this we don’t mean your process capabilities or technological capabilities, we mean your actual functional capabilities. Your domain knowledge, your ability to execute on that domain knowledge, and your natural efficiency. It’s pointless improving processes to apply more advanced techniques or employing modern technology to speed up processes when you’re not capable of managing those advanced processes or technology. If you employ processes and systems you’re not ready for, they won’t deliver any results while costing you millions of dollars in the system selection and implementation processes.

4. You Don’t Understand How Long It Will Take to Upgrade Your Capabilities

Even if you figure out you need to upgrade your skills and those of your team’s, even if you posses a fair degree of human intelligence, you don’t know how long it will take. It’s not just buying a knowledge dump from a consultancy or giving your team a 5-day crash course, because knowledge that is not applied is not retained. There’s a reason College and University courses give assignments and projects as well as exams — the more you apply, the more you retain. If the imparted knowledge is not applied, it will not be retained. Until your team can start applying, repetitively, the new knowledge in improved processes, they won’t retain it and they won’t advance. The best training will be a day or two a month over months, not a week. And that’s for stage 1. It will take years to get your team from average to mastery. We’ve known for decades that major transformation projects take 5 to 10 years, and that the average journey to best in class for the committed is 8 years. Technology doesn’t change that. The longer you choose to ignore this fact, the longer you will fail.

To be continued in Part 2.

Cost Reduction … it Starts With Cost Increase

It used to be cost reduction, which was focussed on cost cutting, started with the one-trick pony of cost cutting by any means necessary, which typically took the form of e-Auctions, RFPs to new suppliers, and GPOs that could aggregate and leverage huge volumes — all tricks that are rearing their ugly heads again with the rapidly rising costs thanks to inflation, tariffs, and global instability.

They all work just fine in the short term, but they all come back to bite you in the backside in the long term. Here’s why:

e-Auctions: find savings by squeezing margins, and you can only take those out once, and once inflation comes back, costs go up
RFPs: designed just to find the absolute lowest price attracts suppliers who cut corners, underpay their staff, and offer no service while alienating your current, more trustworthy, suppliers
GPOs: can aggregate volumes and lower prices, but then you are dependent on them, and paying their markup … forever

None of these is the long term answer.

When we first started discussing cost reduction two decades ago, the key methods we focussed on were:

strategic supplier relationships and customer of choice: so that they put the effort into being your supplier of choice and finding their own ways to keep costs down (streamlined operations, better raw material sourcing, etc.)
supplier investment and development: if the supplier is smaller, or not as advanced, they’ll only do so much on their own, so your efforts to invest, improve, and guide them (through early payments, low-cost new line financing, etc.) could greatly lower your costs over a multi-year engagement
strategic sourcing decision optimization: where you did a multi-objective optimization that took all of the cost factors (unit, transportation, warranty, service, waste etc.) into account as well as risk (that could cause “savings” to evaporate over night) and quantitative assessments of other key factors

And those are all good techniques in (semi) normal times. But these are not (semi) normal times. These are almost unprecedented times. Between natural disasters, geo-political conflicts and wars, and terrorism, we are dealing with unprecedented simultaneous reductions and closures of major maritime shipping lanes (the Panama Canal, the Red Sea, the Strait of Hormuz), unstable (and rapidly escalating) fuel costs, regular supplier and carrier failures, unpredictable crop and raw material availability, etc. all at the same time. Old friends becoming foes, or at least frenemies; friend-shoring, near-shoring, and home-shoring finally gaining ground (despite being promoted and the right answer for decades); and supply chains being swapped whenever possible.

We’re in times where these techniques, while still good, can’t always address all of the situations. Plus, if you’re constantly adapting to what’s available now, versus focussing on what you should be building, you’ll be in a constant, unstable, state of affairs, caught off guard with every flux, and constantly on the brink of ruin.

You need to stop working sourcing event to sourcing event, procurement to procurement, and disruption to disruption and start working on transforming your supply chain to a more resilient long term supply chain. This will require identifying which safe countries and regions (likely to have long term geo-political and trade stability with your home and/or destination countries) you should be doing business with, where solid supply bases could be, and how you could construct a real supply chain from the source countries to the destination countries that don’t depend on unstable source points.

Then you have to engage the carriers, find partners to help you manage the export and import requirements and take advantage of FTZs (free trade zones), build or acquire intermediate warehouses and cross-docks, and be ready for trade with the local suppliers. Those will typically include multiple suppliers you are not currently working with, and they may need to upgrade their production lines, operations, services, etc. to serve you to your level of expectation. This will incur costs that your suppliers and partners will need to incur, which will need to be passed onto you. Which means, in the short-to-mid-term, your costs will increase. But if you design the right, stable, supply chain networks that you can use for years (or decades), develop the right suppliers, and maintain volumes, as operations improve, up-front costs get amortized, and economies of scale get optimized, costs will go down, and with long-term agreements, over multiple years, your company will see previously unrealized savings while your peers see their costs go through the roof.

So if you want to save money, you better be prepared to spend.

M	T	W	T	F	S	S
« Sep
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25
26	27	28	29	30	31

7EB V1 Edition (c) 2026-09-27

7EB V1 Edition ^{(c) 2026-09-27}