Category Archives: RFX

SI Has Been Telling You Solution Provider RFX Templates SUCK for Years!

For almost seven (7) years to be precise – ever since it published its now classic post On Technology RFPs: Don’t Put the Cart Before the Host where it noted that more and more buyers were putting together ridiculously over-specified and complex RFPs for its technology solutions that often eliminated all but the worst solution one could possibly imagine before the first response was even received!

And yet, the doctor missed this two-part series later this spring by Thomas Kase over on Spend Matters where he asked “Why Set Yourself Up to Fail” Don’t Use Traditional Solution RFPs (and Part II).

In it he notes that most RFX Templates are bad — not just the ones for technology solutions (which started my rants seven years ago) — and he’s right! Most of them are generalized mash-ups of dozens of RFXs that have been pushed through the solution over the years by a user base which consist of watered-down versions of the most general questions and cost categories, along with a few extra questions and cost requests that the vendor believes are becoming more common and/or more important. As a result you get a one-size-fits-all garment that, depending on your organization, will be two sizes two big, two sizes two small, lopsided, backwards, or even inside out. How can you possibly expect to get a good response from your supplier when you send them a proposal that doesn’t even define your requirements?

Needless to say, the doctor was not surprised to hear Thomas say it was (and probably still is) rare to see a well-written RFP built on a clear use case, with sufficient data and other information to provide the solid assessment of needs that is needed to deliver a response that is reasonably close to what the client needs in order to make a down-selection, or even an award recommendation.

As a result, this is the reason why cold-call solution RFPs (from previously unknown prospects) are unlikely to receive much attention. The better the firm is, the busier they are, and more likely to weed out such RFPs — and the responses you get back can very well be from firms that are either less capable (desperate) or haven’t truly understood your needs. In other words, reducing your chances of a successful first round outcome.

So how can you fix the situation? Come back tomorrow and we’ll cover recommendations from both Thomas and the doctor who has been, and will be, ranting and raving about this for years!

Are You Ready to Leave the Procurement Dark Ages? ScoutRFP Has a Simple Tool For You. Part II

In our last post, we noted that many organizations are still in the Procurement Dark Ages, conducting procurement using the age-old three-bids-and-a-buy technique and the fax machine running over a 64 kbit digital ISDN circuit. And that, in the low end of the mid-market in particular, this was the norm and not the exception. Scary!

We also noted that there were a number of reasons for this dismal state of affairs including, but not limited to, a lack of foresight and faith in Procurement by the organizations, the high price tag that used to be associated with these products, and the complexity of the suite solutions that were often thrust upon the technologically illiterate organizations that, sadly, were just not ready for sophisticated solutions.

Some companies need to take it one-step at a time, and like a kid on the beach for the first time, dip their toe in the open ocean before getting comfortable enough to walk, and eventually, dive in. To this end, Scout RFP has decided to launch a new RFP solution to help those companies, and other companies who are using RFP solutions that are overpriced or too advanced for their needs.

Does this make sense given that they are not the first company to offer a stand-alone RFX product, or at least a stand-alone RFX module, and that there are a number of companies on the market that have, or started with, this strategy? For example, EC Sourcing, ThomasNet, and PurchasingNet all offer low-end stand-alone RFX solutions that can be obtained at low cost.

Unless they do something different, definitely not. But the founders recognize this, and might find a way to brighten up the space just a little. (Time will tell.)

So what’s different about ScoutRFP? Especially considering the maturity of RFX technology? Not much, but when you consider the market they are going after, it probably doesn’t take much to make a difference to have an impact. (With the majority of players chasing the same Global 2000, there is still a big unexplored blue ocean when you move further down the corporate food chain.)

Scout RFP is currently focussed on differentiating themselves in the following ways:

1. Ease of Use

The solution is 100% web-based and designed to work with minimal inputs. Like all other modern RFX products, it guides the user through a minimal workflow to create the RFX, select the suppliers to receive the RFX, and evaluate the responses, side-by-side, when they are returned.

2. Flexibility

Whereas many solutions force the user to create an RFX section by section, question by question, the ScoutRFP solution allows the user to create the RFX at their desired level of detail. They can cut and paste entire sections from a Word document into an entire section, break it up into individual questions, or go somewhere in between.

3. Control & Visibility

It allows for the definition of hierarchical visibility and control that allows a CPO to view the work being done by his or her directors who can see the work betting done by his or her buyers.

Like other modern tools, ScoutRFX also has a dashboard view, supplier response and status tracking, and side-by-side comparisons.

And it’s brand new. The company has not officially been around for a year, and has accomplished quite a bit of development in that timeframe as well as landing over a dozen customers in that time as well. So it’s very likely that the next year will see quite a bit of new development, the creation of a knowledge and template library, and other useful advancements to jump start your dark-age Procurement enterprise.

If you’re a mid-size company without an RFX solution, it’s worth checking out. It doesn’t have all of the bells and whistles of some more established solutions, but it doesn’t have the price tag either. And the founders, who know what it’s like to be stuck without basic tools to do your job, won’t beat around the bush or try to shovel you a side of bullcrap with a modules, services, or license seats you don’t yet need. (After all, when you’re selling enterprise systems in the low five-figures, you can’t afford to!)

Are You Ready to Leave the Procurement Dark Ages? ScoutRFP Has a Simple Tool For You. Part I

In yesterday’s post we noted that even though the Procurement profession has went from zero to hero in those leading organizations that were forward looking enough to let Purchasers gain influence in both the inbound and outbound supply chain and raise the profile of the organization in the eyes of both customers and suppliers, it is still only a select group of leaders that have truly embraced Supply Management and leaped the pond.

The remaining organizations are still in the Procurement Dark Ages, conducting procurement using the age-old three-bids-and-a-buy technique and the fax machine running over a 64 kbit digital ISDN circuit. And, especially in the lower end of the mid-market, this is the norm and not the exception.

To this end, a new company has hit the Procurement Technology marketplace focussing only on RFX. That’s right, RFX. You’d think that the market would be saturated by now, given that RFX solutions have been on the market for a decade and a half, but it isn’t. There are a number of reasons for this:

1.As described above, a lack of foresight and faith in Procurement has held Procurement, and Procurement technology, back in a number of organizations.

2. The high price tag that was associated with such technology in the past. This technology used to be six figure technology. It’s far from that today, but when many companies first investigated this technology, they got such a sticker shock that they decided it would be out of their reach for years, if not decades, as used to be the case with MRP and ERP technology.

3. The complexity of the suite of products that were often forced upon them. A number of early Sourcing and Procurement Technology providers tried to sell entire suites, insisting that individual products were not valuable on their own, and most companies, still using phone and fax, were not ready for the breadth of technology being thrust upon them and so retreated to their dungeons.

The companies at the low-end of the technology and innovation spectrum need to take things one step at a time, and get comfortable with basic technology solutions, like RFX, before moving on to auction and spend analysis and even, if we’re lucky, optimization. And they want to be able to acquire these solutions one at a time.

That’s why Scout RFP has launched a new RFX solution that attempts to provide these companies with a simple, starting, technology solution that these companies can use to dip their toe in the modern age of Procurement at a low cost with little to no risk.

Is it needed? Is it worth it? Stay Tuned for Part II.

MarketMaker4: The Mid-Market’s Market Making Mezzanine

Some of you might say the e-Sourcing space is too crowded. And that certainly was the case in the mid-zeroes — platforms here, platforms there, platforms platforms everywhere. But then came the acquisition frenzy where mid-sized players swallowed smaller players and start-ups before getting swallowed up in turn by the dominant players who, in the last couple of years, themselves were swallowed up by the massive enterprise software providers. As a result, there is an opportunity, especially in the NA (North American) market for a couple of new players – provided, of course, that such players bring new and innovative solutions to the table (that address the needs of a considerable market segment).

As a result, even though the EU (European Union) vendors are starting to enter the sourcing market in a big(ger) way in NA, there is still an opportunity for someone new if they go about it the right way. So, despite the fact that many thought the market almost dead at the end of the zeroes, it was not completely crazy that a small team of e-Sourcing market veterans, including Mr. Alan Buxton who was the CTO of of Trading Partners back in their heyday, decided in 2011 to start a brand new e-Sourcing software start-up and build a new solution from scratch.

Two years later, MarketMaker4 is a strong offering for the mid-market that needs a new, modern, e-Sourcing solution. In particular, those mid-market companies that are late to the e-Sourcing game, those that are still relying on third parties to manage their sourcing events and are ready to bring those events in house, those that are trying to use ERP sourcing solutions, and those stuck on platforms that, due to acquisition, are stuck in integration limbo and haven’t been upgraded in a while.

So what is MarketMaker4? It’s a four-part sourcing solution that consists of:

  1. A modern e-Negotiation platform
    with a best of breed e-Auction and RFX solution
  2. with a built in supplier discovery engine
    built on the entire D&B database which is augmented with your own supplier database
  3. and market data indices that span commodities and currencies
    that let a buyer know current prices, historical trends, and relative market conditions (when the data is available)
  4. that is augmented with real-time product and sourcing support 24/7/365
    through online chat that connects all of the global support representatives around the world that are currently online.

The MarketMaker4 founders, who were involved in the space for over a decade and who worked for both software providers and services providers learned the following:

  1. While some companies will start with services to get going, these companies will eventually decide that pay per drink is expensive and look for software.
  2. The companies switching from services to software will typically select a best-of-breed software provider with little or no services or support beyond the product. As a result, due to limited sourcing and product knowledge on the in-house buying team, the product typically gets under-utilized and the company fails to achieve the ROI they expected.
  3. When the license expires, the company will typically revert back to a pay-per-drink, but limited to high-value categories, or put its faith in a good e-Procurement system, that will reduce maverick buying and, hopefully, with limited RFX capability, lead to better buying habits.
  4. But even if the company moves to a modern e-Procurement system, the company will typically have little insight into current prices or suppliers that they aren’t already buying from.

As a result, the team decided what was really needed for these types of companies was:

  • An e-Sourcing solution that was easy to use by the average buyer,
  • augmented with real-time support and guidance as new buyers get up to speed,
  • integrated with market index and currency index data (that could be linked into cost models), displayed in easy to understand graphical representations, that the buyer could use to understand current prices and likely trends, and
  • extended with a huge database of potential suppliers.

And that’s what they built. And in each component, they added some innovation to the mix.

  • The e-Auction product, which consumerizes the enterprise capability, is one of the most powerful on the market, with one of the most sophisticated, but yet easy to understand at a glance, interfaces out there.
  • While chat-based, they chose to build a support solution that connects all of their services and support personnel around the world who are currently available rather than use a call-center model. (And as they were just acquired by Xchanging, one of the big players in the Procurement market who are leaving MarketMaker4 as a stand-alone product and company, they now have a large network of support personnel around the world who speak multiple languages and can support their customers in their native language.)
  • Their market index solution is linked into the RFX/Auction module so that the buyer can see current component / raw material prices if there is a market index and can see current currency values as well as trends over the last year for every currency a supplier might bid in.
  • And they were the first e-Sourcing platform to integrate with D&B for the purposes of supplier discovery. Up until they did, most integrations were for risk data or data enrichment. As a result of their partnership and early efforts, they have one of the more powerful integrations and in addition to being able to search on name, location, etc. they can also filter on a variety of dimensions, including risk, size, diversity, etc. that even D&B can not filter on through their API.

MarketMaker4’s e-Auction product and supplier discovery products in particular are quite innovative, and SI will dive into them in more detail in the new year.

IQNavigator Navigates You Through Statement of Work Creation

Since we last covered IQNavigator and their IQ-based Navigation of Contingent Labour Sourcing in 2008, IQNavigator has been hard at work extending their platform and its capabilities to go beyond temporary and contingent labour and also handle project and SOW (Statement-of-Work) sourcing events and the full SOW life-cycle.

Project and SOW sourcing projects, even if they consist primarily of contingent labour, are different from standard contingent labour sourcing events in that a third party is managing the project, payments are (typically) on a different schedule and have to be tracked against a budget, and named resources need to be tracked. The entire process, from RFX, through contract generation and award, to project management and delivery is different.

The customizations in the IQNavigator platform start with the initial RFX creation, which begins with a wizard-based decision-tree workflow. This Decision Manager is customizable by the organization for each type of SOW project that it undertakes, that, based on a series of questions, will configure the proper RFX for the project in question. This series of questions (that can be customized by each client organization), which could be as simple as asking the user to identify the location where the services are required, the category of the work (IT, engineering, advertising, etc.), the length of the project, the expected budget (range) required, and the approvals required, will, once completed, initiate an RFX workflow that will incorporate the necessary elements of the SOW project. The Decision Manager solution was designed to focus on two things:

  1. Delivering the end user to the correct channel (or category) based on Procurement’s operational and/or vendor preferences and
  2. Placing the end user at the optimal point of the defined category workflow based on the end user’s responses

Depending on the answers given, the RFX will include sections for the definition of milestones, budgets, rate tables, (open) supplier selection, support for named resources, questionnaires, and / or required submissions (such as insurance certificates) from the supplier to be considered for the project. The user will then be walked through the definition of the RFX for the SOW project step-by-step (by way of a pre-configured RFX or SOW template).

Milestones are up to the individual who creates the project, can be tied to a budget line item, and associated with one or more deliverables. Budgets can be as simple as an overall budget for the project, or as detailed as a budget category for each deliverable associated with each milestone (if the project is being paid for on a deliverable basis) or by (named) resource if the project is being conducted on a time-and-materials basis.

Suppliers can quickly be selected from a drop-down search box if the organization has (pre)approved suppliers for the SOW project in question, and if the suppliers have provided rate tables, these rate tables can be automatically pulled in and presented back to the supplier (to verify) during their bid. In addition, if the supplier has previously specified named resources, these named resources can be pre-populated as well. Depending on the project, they buyer may also have the option to add additional suppliers (which will be invited to bid on the project as well).

Questionnaires can also be selected from a set of standard pre-existing questionnaires associated with the type of project being sourced. They can be distributed as-is or modified as required. In addition, the user can create their own questionnaire if one doesn’t exist that fits the bill.

When the RFX is complete to the user’s satisfaction, it is sent to the supplier who logs in and completes a bid to their satisfaction. If the supplier has already defined their rate tables and named resources and uploaded their insurance certificates, bidding on the project by the supplier could be as simple as identifying the resources who will complete the work, providing work estimates and proposed fees, and accepting the (automatically calculated) budget.

When all of the supplier responses have been obtained, the buyer, who can choose to analyze each response individually, can also evaluate the responses side by side in a comparison report that includes the (budget) elements of interest and then select one of the responses as the basis of a project award. At this point, the application can generate a draft contract based upon a template that pulls in all of the collected information, and includes any necessary documents in appendices. And if the supplier has signed a MSA (Master Services Agreement) with the buyer that authorizes password-based named-login approvals in the IQNavigator SOW platform as e-Signatures, the contract can be accepted online and work can begin immediately.

The entire SOW application is streamlined to make the sourcing and approval of SOW projects as easy as possible for the project manager, while incorporating as many best practices as possible, which allows the project manager to focus her time on what she does best — managing projects and not running sourcing events.

Then, once the SOW project has been awarded, the project manager can use the rest of the IQNavigator platform to track project progress against milestones, collect time sheets, approve time sheets and expenditures, make payments against project budget categories, and track overall supplier performance. The reporting engine can be used to run reports at any time and the dashboard can be used to monitor current action items and outstanding project milestones and deliverables.

The inclusion of SOW capability makes IQNavigator an end-to-end platform for managing all types of contingent labour required by your organization, whether such labour is managed in house or by a third party. The IQNaviagor approach to SOW is unique, and it is the most thorough solution for generic SOW sourcing events in a contingent labour solution that SI has seen to date.
The IQNavigator platform is a great way to get all of your labour-based spend under management in one platform.