Category Archives: Procurement Innovation

You Don’t Need to Fish to Identify Savings Opportunities in Indirect Procurement

A recent article in the SIG Newsletter on “How to Identify Savings Opportunities in Indirect Procurement” gave a fisherman’s perspective on how to identify savings. It wasn’t bad, and went something like this:

  • The “big catch” comes from understanding the entomology
    Just as an angler must understand the feeding opportunities created by a trout’s main source of food – bugs – a Procurement Professional must understand the current business climate and the opportunities provided that, when intersected with the right plan at the right time, will create success.
  • Match the Hatch
    Trout opportunistically feed at the time of the hatch (when fly larva emerge and float to the water’s surface to dry their wings). A skilled angler will know when a bug hatch is occurring and match the fly to the hatching bugs to increase the catch. Similarly, a skilled procurement professional will identify which business trends are hatching and what elements need to be considered to create a category “catching” opportunity. She will start by prioritizing categories by ROI, developing a change management strategy, and focussing on internal and external adoption requirements.
  • Fish With a Guide
    There’s a big difference between traditional spincasting rods and fly rods and moving from one to another can be intimidating even for an experienced angler. The best way to move from one to the other is through a guide — an expert who already made the transition, learned from past mistakes, and who can help you overcome your fears and take you forward. In Procurement, a good guide will help your company create a strong indirect program through:

    • Analysis (Opportunity Evaluation)
    • Strategy (Best Practices)
    • Implementation (Adoption)
    • Management (Sustainability)
  • Approaching Indirect Procurement Services is Just About “Getting it Done”
    Intimidation and uncertainty can create a paralytic environment. Be empowered. If fish are analogous to categories, then plan where you want to fish and what kind of fish you want to catch. Determine where the fish are and if you can access them. Then, set out with clear goals and enlist the help of a good guide. The results can be that “big catch” or a series of smaller fish that add up to a great day or quarter.

And it overviewed some of the more common reasons why companies are not taking a more aggressive approach to indirect services expenditures, which include:

  • Fragmented buyer base
  • Difficult to transactionally manage (no comprehensive systems — too many point/niche solutions)
  • No detailed, real time visibility
  • Big change management issues
  • Not properly staffed to ensure adoption & sustainability post sourcing
  • Focused on direct materials & services
  • No internal expertise
  • No executive sponsorship

And it even indicated the most common indirect categories organizations were going after.

So it wasn’t bad. But it wasn’t that good either. It didn’t dive into how to detect a business climate that was prime for “a big catch”, how to detect “hatching” trends early in the game to be ready for an opportunity that is about to become prime, how to identify the right “guide” for your business, or the best way to “Get it Done”. As we indicated in a recent post, this will require stakeholder involvement across the board — and this is where the fly fishing analogy breaks down. You fly fish alone. You need to source indirect categories in a team. Furthermore, the right “guide” might be category dependent (as IT [targeted by 76% of businesses surveyed] and Travel [targeted by 84% of business surveyed] require very different knowledge bases and skill sets), trends are often very dependent on a sector, and a “big catch” will vary depending on business spend patterns, industry, and the overall economic climate (and the supply / demand [im]balance). And while these answers may be organization specific, they need to be answered to insure success.

How To Increase Spend Compliance

A recent item over on the CPO Agenda addressed “How to Increase Spend Compliance” because, as we all know, procurement organizations still face opposition to initiatives to channel indirect spend through preferred suppliers. The article chronicled advice from Carrie Ericson, VP of Procurement and Analytic Solutions, at AT Kearney. This is what she had to say.

Treat it like an opportunity.
It might be a problem, but it’s also an opportunity to cut considerable cost. There’s a chance for procurement to deliver greater value by driving standardization to existing contracts through preferred suppliers.

Focus on the right thing.
A mature organization with quality contracts with preferred suppliers can focus on compliance, but an immature organization without quality contracts with preferred suppliers who can provided products and services that meet organizational needs cannot. This organization must first focus on vendor identification, supplier selection, strategic sourcing, and contract observation.

Procurement must be good at arbitration.
Where you have a category that a lot of different functions within the organization buy and use, you get a lot more perspectives on which is the right supplier or the right contract. It’s Procurement’s challenge to not only get them to align, but get them align in a way that meets corporate needs.

Procurement must understand that buyers think their needs are special.
Even if a user understands that a contract is good for the company, the buyer may still think they need something just a little bit different for their needs. Or they may have developed a relationship with a certain supplier over years and feel that no other vendor can provide the same level of service to them. Or they may feel that it will take too much time, and cost too much money, to transition to a new supplier because their needs are special.

Focus on thresholds, not 100% compliance.
A broad compliance initiative across all contracts and preferred suppliers is risky because it assumes that all the contracts and preferred suppliers procurement has in place actually meet the business users’ needs. If care was taken, this may be the case, but if there are a large number of diverse business units with (seemingly) diverse needs, it may not be feasible, or cost conscious, to meet all the needs with one supplier. Sometimes, it’s cheaper to let low spend business units (on that category) do their own thing. Procurement should establish a spend threshold where anyone having to spend over a certain amount needs to use the Master Contract or get Procurement involved. (And if a proper analysis is done, the Threshold can always be designed to insure that at least 80% will be on contract by default.) Then, the Procurement organization isn’t wasting dollars chasing pennies and if a unit’s needs truly are different, they can still get the right product (at the best value with the help of Procurement).

Visibility into what’s going on is a huge obstacle.
Much of the data CPOs can get their hands on is historical and the money has already been spent. (And that’s why there is no real-time spend visibility and it makes no sense to require that the central data store / spend analysis cubes get updated in real time. Even a spend cube for your fastest moving category doesn’t need to be updated more than once a week. Put the resources into analysis, not updates.) That’s why the biggest challenge for the CPO in driving benefits to the bottom line is influencing that spend before it actually occur.

And


Compliance is typically achieved through stakeholder alignment and outreach by Procurement.
This is the most important point in the article and, unfortunately, it’s buried at the bottom where you are likely to miss it. If the stakeholder’s aren’t aligned, they won’t buy in, and the only way you get buy in is to insure they are part of the process from day one. All of the key stakeholders should be part of the vendor identification, supplier selection, and strategic sourcing; every stakeholder who is affected should give a chance to provide their input up front, and before a contract is signed, the sourcing team should hold a session to explain why a supplier / contract selection is best for the company and each affected stakeholder should be given one more chance to provide their input. Stakeholders who feel they are part of the process are much more likely to accept the results than those who are ignored and have a contract forced on them. While it’s true that there are those whom you’ll never be able to make happy, this will get you to compliance faster (even though it’s more work up front) than any other effort you care to undertake. Work with your stakeholders, and they will work with you!

Good Public Procurement Recommendations from the McClelland Report, Part III

It may have been written five years ago, but the recommendations from the McClelland Report, which inspired Scotland Public Procurement to new levels of efficiency and performance, are as poignant today as they were then. These recommendations include:

  • Procurement “Centres of Expertise” should be established on a commodity-by-commodity basis.
    And these centres of expertise, which can be cross-disciplinary should be coordinated by a centre of excellence.
  • It is obvious that there is a level of mandatory compliance required for the effective operation of the [contracts] model described above.
    Projected cost avoidance is only realized if the plan is followed.
  • A Charter for Suppliers should be established for the complete public sector in Scotland. It should essentially describe the sector’s commitment to suppliers by defining the generic standards which suppliers can expect from the operation of public-sector procurement and in turn what will be expected of them as suppliers to the sector.
    Suppliers should know what to expect and what to deliver.
  • There should be total transparency in connection with procurement decisions.
    Hidden opportunities are lost opportunities.
  • There should be a review of non-core activities to establish candidates for outsourcing evaluation.
    Remember, outsourcing doesn’t necessarily mean offshoring. You can outsource to an operation down the street. Outsourcing is about doing what makes financial sense. Letting someone do non-core activities that they are better at than you so that you can do what you’re good at.
  • A clear and unambiguous central information systems strategy for the Scottish Public Sector would deliver major benefits in terms of effectiveness of services, staff productivity and overall cost, including improved benefits to procurement.
    Good technology enables good processes and good results. Plus, good technology enables good data, which enables good data analysis, which leads the way to good results.

Good Public Procurement Recommendations from the McClelland Report, Part II

It may have been written five years ago, but the recommendations from the McClelland Report, which inspired Scotland Public Procurement to new levels of efficiency and performance, are as poignant today as they were then. These recommendations include:

  • The procurement leadership role should extend to those activities associated with functional excellence including staff communications, education and training, staff development, career paths, job gradings, salary scales and where appropriate workload balancing.
    Procurement leadership is more than negotiations and contracts. Good procurement is also about good people.
  • A public sector-wide Procurement Policy Handbook should be established offering a standard and well-documented approach to be utilized across all of the public sector.

    It must also cover ethics as well as procedures.
  • Each organization within the Public Sector should review its procurement organization to establish the adequacy or otherwise of the resources including skill levels dedicated to the procurement activity.

    The team must be appropriately skilled.
  • Work should be undertaken to establish how a complete, cross-public sector career path or ladder can be established which will facilitate career management and employee development and retention.
    Talent wants a career path.
  • Every public-sector organization should have a formal programme of procurement internal efficiency measurement and management.
    Improvement requires a baseline.
  • Absolute information and performance data should be exchanged and shared across the public sector in a formally co-ordinated procurement benchmarking programme.
    A little data goes a long way. Let the teams challenge each other for better performance based on the metrics.

Good Public Procurement Recommendations from the McClelland Report, Part I

It may have been written five years ago, but the recommendations from the McClelland Report, which inspired Scotland Public Procurement to new levels of efficiency and performance, are as poignant today as they were then. These recommendations include:

  • The optimum reporting line for the Head of Procurement is directly to the Chief Executive but at a minimum he or she should report to an Officer or Executive who reports to the Chief Executive. The Procurement Function should not have a less senior reporting line than this minimum.
    Procurement must have visibility at the highest level.
  • Contractual commitments on behalf of all organizations should be executed by a “Procurement Officer”. The Procurement Officer should have the sole authority to make these legal commitments on behalf of the organization.
    Large procurements must go through the Procurement function.
  • Procurement activities and transactions should be conducted by the appropriate staffed and skilled procurement function and its procurement officers. It should not be undertaken by non-procurement staff located either in central structures or employed in other (e.g. operational) sub-sections of the organization.
    Procurement must be done by procurement personnel with the skills.
  • In some cases internal business practices inadvertently facilitate the ease of unofficial buying. All organizations should review controls and practices with this in mind.
    Processes must be reviewed to insure that they do not facilitate maverick buying.
  • Where the procurement of low-value goods or services creates anomalies in administration cost versus value procured, then alternative methods such as payment on receipt should be developed and introduced within the principles of full procurement and financial controls.
    A buy that costs money is not a good buy. A buy should reduce costs.
  • A business conduct guideline document should be developed and issued for all of the Public Sector.
    Standard procurement processes should be developed, clearly documented, and distributed.