Category Archives: rants

Your Upteenth Reminder That Every Dollar Saved By Procurement Goes Straight to the Bottom Line!

… while 10 cents from every additional sale might make it, if you’re lucky!

A week or so ago, Joël Collin-Demers said COVID was the instigating event that pushed Procurement front and center in a comment to yet another post about the tariff crisis (to which, as I keep saying, the only solution is BTCHaaS), when it was really the (fist) elevating event in over a decade.

The first event that really put ProcureTech on the map was the 2008 financial crisis. This is because companies had to stop the bleeding, fast, and charged Procurement to get ‘er done. But once the markets settled, and the provider base stabilized, and companies willing to spend the money they needed to implement proper tech and get more efficient did so, Procurement kind of faded into the background again. That’s because, when markets rise, and sales rise, the C-Suite focusses entirely on revenue, almost to the point of irrationality, because the faster that revenue rises, the higher the valuation, and the more money they can make on the markets and trades.

However, the 2008 financial crisis is why the M&A and PE activity started to ramp up in ProcureTech in the early teens, because of the importance placed on cost cutting as a result of the 2008 financial crisis. And why, if something else had happened sooner, Procurement would have risen up the organizational chart faster, instead of falling back into obscurity at many organizations who returned undue focus to Sales and Marketing.

This, of course, belies the sad, sorry, state of affairs of North American business that still sees marketing and sales as the key to growth in a shrinking economy (and yes, with birth rates declining in almost all first world countries, it is a shrinking economy) when the real key is cost management. Remember your business 101 equation: Profit = Revenue – Expenses.

This says that every dollar of revenue you add is eaten up by the total cost to acquire that dollar — the total cost of that good or service, which is usually at least 90 cents of that dollar.

However, every dollar of expense you cut is gone in its entirety. Every dollar saved goes straight to the bottom line.

Thus, Procurement is 10 times as valuable as sales! But yet, the marketing madmen will try to hide that from you to protect their multi-million budgets!

So if you want to survive the crisis of the day, whatever that crisis may be, it’s not sales, it’s not marketing, it’s not finance, it’s not executive leadership or vision, it’s Procurement. Plain and simple. Maximize every dollar spent while eliminating those that don’t need to be.

Unless, of course, you are a ProcureTech vendor, in which case, as per a previous post, skip the fairy dust and buzzwords, focuses on your customers pain, and put together some educational materials (marketing and training) that will help them ease the bleeding. If you’ve forgotten how to do that, or never learned, there are those of us who can help you!

Who Needs The Beef?

For those of you who have been following my rants, especially on intake-to-orchestrate (which really is clueless for the popular kids as it doesn’t do anything unless you already have all the systems you need and don’t know how to connect them), you’ll know that one of my big qualms, to this day, is Where’s the Beef?, because while the intake and orchestrate buns are nice and fluffy and likely very tasty, they aren’t filling. If you want a full stomach, you need the beef (or at least a decent helping of Tofu, which, unless you are vegetarian, won’t taste as good or be quite as filling, but will give you the subsistence you need).

And you need filling. Specifically, you need the part of the application that does something — that takes the input data (possibly properly transformed), applies the complex algorithms, and produces the output you need for a transaction or to make a strategic decision. That’s not intake-to-orchestrate, that’s not a fancy UI/UX, that’s not an agent that can perform transactional tasks that fall within scope, and that’s NOT a fancy bun. It’s the beef.

But, apparently, at least as far as THE PROPHET is concerned, (bio) re-engineering is going to eliminate the need for the beef. Apparently, the buns are going to have all the nutrients (or data processing abilities) you need to function and do your job.

In THE PROPHET‘s latest analogy, today’s enterprise technology burger consists of:

  • the patty: (not to be mistaken for the paddy) which combines enterprise technology and labour (which means it really should be the patty [labour] and the trimmings [technology] in this analogy)
  • the upper bun: and
  • the lower bun: which collectively provide you a way to cleanly get a grip on the patty

But tomorrow’s enterprise technology burger will consist of:

  • the upper bun: which will be replaced by a new type of technology that fuses co-pilots and agentic systems to power autonomous agents and replaces the patty [labour] and part of trimmings
  • the lower bun: which will represent the next generation data store and information supply chain and build in “self-healing” technology for data maintenance and replace the other part of the trimmings

… and that’s it. NO BEEF! Just two co-dependent buns that are destined to fuse into a roll … and not a very tasty one at that. Because this roll will, apparently, operate fully autonomously and never get anywhere near you, leaving you perpetually hungry.

Now, apparently, not all parts of the patty (with its complex amino acid chains and protein structures) will be capable of being (bio) re-engineered into the buns right away and the patty won’t disappear all at once, just shrink bit by bit over the next decade until there’s nothing left and the last protein structure is absorbed (or replaced by a good enough AI-generated facsimile — they can do that now too). In THE PROPHET‘s view, legacy systems of record (ERP/MRP, payment platforms, etc.) will be the last to be replaced, and those will survive along with the legacy labour to maintain them until they can finally be split up into components and absorbed into the bun.

In other words, in THE PROPHET‘s view, you don’t need the patty, and, more specifically, you don’t need (or even want) the beef. I have to argue this is NOT the case.

1. You Need the Beef

Thinking that the patty can be completely absorbed into the buns is what results from a lack of understanding of enterprise software architecture best practices and software development in general.

The best architecture we have, which took years to get two, is MVC, which stands for

  • Model: specifically, data model, which should be at the bottom (and could be absorbed into a data bun)
  • View: specifically, the UI/UX we interact with (and could be absorbed into a soft, warm, sweet smelling sourdough bun)
  • Controller: the core algorithms and data processing, which needs to be its own layer that supports the UX (and allows the UX to reconfigure the processing steps and outputs as needed) and can be cross-adapted to the best available data sources (that need to be remain independent)

Moreover, even Bill Gates, who predicts AI will have devastating effects across all industries, realizes that you can’t replace coders, energy experts, and biologists, and, by extension, jobs that require constantly evolving code, organic structure, and energy requirements to complete. So you will still need labour that creates, and relies on, highly specialized algorithms and expert interpretations of outputs to do their jobs. That also means that, in our field, strategic sourcing and procurement professionals cannot be replaced but tactical AP clerks are on their way out as AP software automatically processes 99% to 99.9% of invoices with no human involvement, even those with missing data and errors, handling the return, correction, negotiation, etc. until all of the data matches and costs are within tolerance.

2. You Want the Beef!

The whole point of modern architectures and engineering is to minimize legacy code / technical debt and maximize tactical data processing and system throughput (and have the system do as much thunking as possible, which is what it’s good at). If you try to push too much into the lower bun, you don’t have separation of data and processing, which means it’s almost impossible to validate the data as it’s not data you’re getting, but processed data, which means that the system might be continually pushing wrong data to the outer bun, even with good data fed in, due to a bug deep in the transformation and normalization code. But your automatic checks and fail safes would never catch it because you’ve turned what should be a crystal (clear) box into a black box! If you try to push too much processing into the upper bun, you have to replicate common functionality across every agent and application, leading to a lot of replication and bloat that consumes too much space, uses too much energy, and makes the systems even harder to maintain than the legacy applications of today.

So while the burger of tomorrow might be different with a much leaner, more protein rich, patty (with less sauce and unhealthy trimmings), and the bread might be a super healthy natural yeast-free multi-grain flat bread, making for a smaller (and possibly less appetizing burger from a surface view), it still needs to be a burger and anyone who thinks otherwise has joined the pretty fly Gen-AI in hallucination land!

Happy National Sourdough Bread Day

It’s pretty clear with the state of the world right now that April Fool’s Day is cancelled as it appears we are all subject to one never-ending year-long prank no matter what country we live in.

So go bake a sourdough and at least you will be able to enjoy something today …

Blacklight.

Living on a lighted screen
Approaches the unreal
For those who do not feel
Who live in a reality beyond the gilded meme

Against that unlikely role
Ill-equipped to act
With insufficient tact
One must put up barriers to keep oneself intact

Living on a lighted screen, the influencer’s dream
Those who wish to be seen
Those who wish to be, they put aside the alienation
Obsessed with the fascination
The false relation, the underlying theme

They live in a fisheye lens
Caught in the camera eye
I have no heart to lie
I can’t pretend a stranger is a long-awaited friend

All the world’s indeed a stage
We are merely players
Performers and portrayers
So why must they lock themselves inside the gilded cage

Living on a lighted screen, the influencer’s dream
Those who wish to be seen
Those who wish to be, they put aside the alienation
Obsessed with the fascination
The false relation, the underlying theme

Living on a lighted screen, the influencer’s dream
Those who wish to be seen
Those who wish to be, they put aside the alienation
Obsessed with the fascination
The false relation, the underlying theme

The false relation
The underlying theme

Dear Influencer, it’s not the limelight. Why the Rush?

You Say You Want Success, But Do You?

This post is inspired by THE REVELATOR‘s inquiry where he asked Do You Really Want a Successful ProcureTech Initiative?

For the vast majority of you, the answer is a clear and resounding “YES” (with the possible exception of those of you who have been treated badly by your employer and want to use your last official act to stick them with an application that will make them as miserable as you are, but as far as I can tell, you are a very small minority — you didn’t get into Procurement expecting it to be easy, or to be a way to make friends).

However, you are only one cog in the ecosystem. Let’s look at the other cogs:

Vendor: as long as you keep renewing the SaaS subscription, the C-Suite at the vendor doesn’t care if they sold you a Ferrari (at a Ferrari price tag) but delivered a 2004 Mazda RX-8 …

Analyst Firm: as long as the big research subscriptions keep rolling in from the big vendors (who always feature at the top / upper right / frontal wave of their maps), the analyst firm doesn’t care if you succeed or not, and will not only happily push the hype the vendors want pushed, but happily blame you for not doing your research and not selecting the appropriate technology when you and your counterparts take their advice en-masse and then contribute to the all-time high project failure rates of 88% (two and a half decades of project failure)

Implementor: not really, because if you don’t swap out the solution at renewal time, where is their future revenue going to come from???

Big X who pushed the platform: Hell No! … they need to sell you projects to find bolt ons, do custom additions, and tweak the process for years as they need to keep their bench empty! (And some of these shops have over 100K junior consultants they have to keep busy. Moreover, they don’t make money training them on AI, they make money deploying them as your external support force. (Remember, many of these shops are effectively the new Manpower, except they have to pay their consultants on the bench, whereas job placement agencies just had to place people to keep their government grants or get their placement fee!)

And since YOU don’t take the time to do your research and figure this out (including the fact that the Big X pushed the worst fit solution from their stable on you to keep their Gold/Platinum/Sycophant status with the solution provider), that’s why YOU keep failing. Even if the salesperson honestly wanted to sell you a win (and many don’t, and the doctor can say that confidently with over 25 years in Enterprise Software and he’s sure THE REVELATOR has some stories to tell here), that’s far from a guarantee that a win will happen.

If you truly want success, YOU have to define your processes, define your problem, find the right vendor, make the vendor contractually responsible for implementation success (whether they do it or use a third party) with delayed payment (where you don’t pay for a module until it is working and passes predefined tests) and early termination clauses, identify the gaps, identify the right niche consultancy (who doesn’t have a stadium of junior consultants) to help you identify add ons and processes to fill them, and define early out clauses in case of non-delivery! You have to do all the work the vendors, analysts, and consultants claim they do for you … because they don’t (or at least don’t do it in your best interest). And while the good ones (which may take you a while to find) will help you, YOU still have to take the lead!

And the doctor knows you don’t always have the time to do it all, which is why he keeps pushing Project Assurance where you hire a niche specialist to help you, one who is not a part of the big COGs that need never-ending projects from you to stay solvent, and only cares about helping you get everything in order for success. (After all, there are so few of these experts it is literally a case of too many companies, too little time. These people or small niche consultancies don’t have to worry about running out of work, and by the time they made it through all the current companies they could handle, it would be time for their initial clients to upgrade to next generation systems anyway — and the only way they’d be available for a future project is to ensure client success with every client they take on.)

As we indicated, in our last two rants, you can no longer afford to be led by the Clueless vendors. It’s time you take your Procurement destiny into your own hands. It’s time for the Revenge of the Nerds!