Category Archives: SaaS

Why You Need SIM-Powered Recovery

Two weeks ago, we explained how SIM Powered Recovery Will Take You to the Next Level by noting that it can improve your recovery results by a factor of 3, 5, or even 9 over time and asked you to download the latest Sourcing Innovation Illumination, sponsored by Lavante, on Taking Capital Recovery to the Next Level.

Today, we’re going to make it clear how that will happen. Traditionally, a recovery audit will be done by a recovery audit firm that will send in a team that will spend weeks manually reviewing invoices, payments, and transactions looking for discrepancies and revenue recovery opportunities. Depending on the deal you strike, this will cost you manpower plus a not-so-small percentage of the recovery above the manpower cost (that will be in the 10% to 20% range, we’ll assume 15%) in a time plus results deal, or a large percentage of the total recovery, typically 30% to 35% (and we’ll assume 30% after strong negotiations), in a results-only deal.

In addition, it will typically be three (3) to six (6) months before the recovery firm even attempts to recover the first dollar because it will take them that long to get through enough paperwork to find enough opportunities to make a recovery effort worthwhile. During this time, up to 20% of potential credits will disappear permanently as dispute timeframes and contracts will expire.

In comparison, it’s likely the case that you can acquire a perpetual license to a good SIM-based recovery platform for approximately 100K with 20% (or 20K) annual maintenance. And you won’t need to hire any extra manpower as all you’ll need to do is feed it your sourcing, procurement, and accounts payable data, set up some matching rules, and the platform will automatically identify duplicate, non-compliant, or suspicious payments. We’ll assume it costs 25K to integrate the data feeds and work with the provider to set up the initial rules set, and 5K to maintain the feeds on an annual basis. In addition, we’ll assume a firm that does a time plus recovery deal will bill you 150K in manpower. Given these costs, we can now compare manual-vs-SIM-based recovery efforts noting that an average company, due to cost, will only undertake a recovery effort every 2 years. (Mainly because a recovery audit firm will only want to do an audit every two years because it typically takes 18-24 months after a recovery effort before a company has the same recovery effort.)

After a recovery effort, a company will temporarily scrutinize invoices and payments more closely. During this time, the vendors will also be careful not to over-bill or duplicate bill until the buyers have stopped watching so closely and have gained confidence that the over-billings have stopped. As a result, available recovery will be less the following year. However, as the buyer gains confidence that overspending is under control, the buyer will stop watching as diligently and the vendor, if it has a history of over-billing or duplicate billing, will revert to its former ways and the overspending and recovery opportunity will creep back up to where it was.

Noting that you can expect to identify 90%+ of recovery opportunities with a SIM platform, that can process all of the data you throw at it, compared to the 60% of recovery opportunities that you can expect to find with a manual effort that stops when 80% of the spend has been identified and analyzed and when almost 20% of opportunities for recovery have been lost, we get the following.

 

Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total
Overspend 1,000,000 500,000 1,000,000 500,000 3,000,000
Recovery
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total
SIM 900,000 450,000 900,000 450,000 2,700,000
Manual T&R 600,000 300,000 600,000 0 1,500,000
Manual R 600,000 300,000 600,000 0 1,500,000
Cost
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total
SIM 125,000 25,000 25,000 25,000 200,000
Manual T&R 240,000 0 240,000 0 480,000
Manual R 300,000 0 300,000 0 600,000
Recovery over Cost
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Total
SIM 7.20 18.00 7.20 18.00 13.50
Manual T&R 2.50 N/A 3.75 N/A 3.13
Manual R 2.00 N/A 3.00 N/A 2.50

 

Which says that a SIM-effort is expected to return 4.3 times as many dollars into your organization as a manual time + results audit over four years and 5.4 times as many dollars into your organization as a manual results-only audit over four years!

You can argue the numbers a little bit each way, but it won’t affect the fact that a SIM Powered Recovery solution will deliver results that is orders of magnitude above what a manual audit will deliver. So download your copy of SIM Powered Recovery Will Take You to the Next Level today! (registration required)

Lavante Connect – Streamlined Supplier Self Management

Lavante, a provider of Supplier Information Management (SIM) and SIM-based Recovery, has just released a new version of Lavante Connect, their supplier self-management solution.

Lavante Connect is one of the more powerful, and more streamlined, supplier information self-management solutions on the market. In the Lavante Connect solution, the supplier is walked-through the 3 to 5-step process of completing their profile and is updated with respect to their progress, and percentage of work remaining, after each step. In the Lavante system, the supplier goes through the following easy to follow process:

  1. Company Profile
  2. Legal Identification
  3. Certifications
  4. Payment Information (may be optional)
  5. Specific Information (may be optional)

Profile information walks the supplier through the definition of headquarters information, address information (notices, payment, warehouse, etc.), references, ownership, diversity, business structure, and contacts.

Legal ID walks the supplier through entry of business numbers, tax numbers, and other government identification in the countries that the supplier operates in. It also makes sure that the supplier uploads the appropriate documentation required by the customer, such as W9s in the US.

Certifications walks the supplier through the insurance and certification requirements of the customer and makes sure that the supplier specifies all of the relevant information and uploads the appropriate documents.

Payment walks the supplier through the specification of the payment types they accept (pCard, check, EFT, wire, etc.) and the specifications for each payment type.

Specific Information, of which there can be more than one tab, walks the supplier through the specific information requests unique to the client, such as required product and service information, sustainability information, etc. and the documentation that needs to be supplied.

The ease of use comes not only in the easy to follow registration, and profile completion process, but the fact that the system:

  • validates everything that can be validated,
  • eliminates duplication of data entry whenever possible, and
  • forces e-signatures and verification for all legal documents.

Not only does the system validate that all data entered is in a valid format, but it integrates with as many third party systems as possible to verify that the entered data is correct. Business numbers and tax numbers are automatically verified against government databases, address information is validated against address databases, bank and p-card information is verified through penny-transactions, etc. The system makes it hard for a supplier to make a mistake and harder for any errors to persist for more than a few days. It also alerts the supplier as soon as certifications or registrations are about to expire or information has to be re-verified (according to the customer’s schedule, where such customer may require re-verification of contact information every six months).

All address, contact, and similar data is automatically indexed and can be mapped to any other information requirement that makes sense. So, if headquarters also happens to be the payment and legal notice address, it only has to be entered once. Same for contact information.

For the most part, SIM isn’t complex, and neither are supplier portals, but few master the usability and simplicity required to onboard even the technology unsophisticated supplier quickly and easily with complete profiles, no errors in critical information, and fresh profile data. Lavante Connect is in this group.

Intesource – A Strong Sourcing Solution for Mid-Market Supply Management

When we last covered Intesource almost three years ago in 2010 in this post about intelligent sourcing through Intesource, we noted that this full-service offering eSourcing provider had a fully-featured e-Negotiation platform with SIM, document/contract management, and a relatively unique integration with Microsoft Sharepoint for those clients that ran on a Microsoft back-office and wanted to use these solutions to collaborative author documents and track changes.

Besides integration with the Microsoft platform, which is very common in the mid-market that can’t always afford, and often doesn’t need, the massive ERP solutions found in the Fortune 1000/Global 3000, other unique differentiators at the time were their massive template library for e-Negotiation events, integrated feeds from over 160 market exchanges for up-to-date raw material and commodity price information, and hands-on experience running tens of thousands of events. This put them in a restricted group of providers.

Since then, they have continued development work on the platform and added additional functionality that not only enhances the end-to-end strength of the platform, but narrows the group of competitors that can say the same. Three particular enhancements stand out — award analysis, market price centre, and mobile interfaces. We will describe each in turn.

Intesource has added an award optimization component that, while not true strategic sourcing decision optimization, is a very useful analytic component that will allow a buyer to determine a near-optimal, if not optimal, award for non-complex sourcing events. In the new component, buyers can create multiple award scenarios based on pre-defined rules, such as low-quote (which selects, for each item, the supplier with the lowest bid), low-group (which selects, for each group, the supplier with the total lowest cost for a group, or bucket, of item), or low program (which selects the supplier(s) with the lowest cost based upon a program specification, which could be to select suppliers with the highest quality, shortest-lead time, or MWBE specification where possible); or by hand-picking suppliers for each item and/or group. Then, the buyers can compare each scenario side-by-side to see how the different scenarios compare and what is gained for each price sacrifice.

Intesource’s award optimization module is not true optimization in that there is no underlying model, it doesn’t support cross-item / group rebate / discount bids, specification of capacity is currently limited to the event level and the specification of macro-qualitative constraints is limited, and you can’t yet re-run a scenario to see what would change if a supplier increased/decreased prices/quality/etc across the board by 5%, but as SI pointed out five years ago in it’s post on (Spend) Analytics vs. (Decision) Optimization, if your organization had a spend analysis product that allowed you to build a spend cube any time you wanted – on any data you wanted – on any dimensions you wanted – and then throw it away when you’re done then there would be nothing to stop you from building a cube on your RFP or Auction data, building cross tabs and tree maps, and then changing the cube to look at the data a different way. You’d find that you wouldn’t need optimization or a plethora of deterministic reports to find out who the lowest cost supplier was, who the highest quality supplier was, who the lowest cost supplier was relative to your quality metric, or any other query that can easily be answered by rank and cross-tab queries. And, as a result, you’d be able to solve many simple scenarios without optimization — and this is what this tool is attempting to do. Intesource realizes that many supply management organizations, especially in the mid-market, don’t have the advanced sourcing and modelling skills required to build complex optimization models and is endeavoring to build a tool appropriate to its user base. And while it’s not perfect, the reality is that, for an average (smaller) mid-size organization, continued development will allow Intesource to approach an 80% solution as many sourcing events and models of a (smaller) mid-size organization aren’t that complex and this type of solution will get such an organization much further than just e-Negotiation alone.  And on those 80% of events, the results will be near-optimal, if not optimal.

Intesource has centralized all of its raw material and commodity price feeds into a market price centre that integrates the feeds with additional graphing and reporting functionality, monitoring and alerts, and statistical modelling capabilities. In the market price center, users can view historical trends and price fluctuations, focus in on any particular period of time, extend trend projections into the future, monitor prices, cash, and futures contract specifications, set watch lists to monitor key categories, set alerts to immediately inform the user if a price threshold is reached or a price fluctuation exceeds a certain threshold, and even pull up all of the information associated with the exchange(s) a commodity or raw material is associated with.

Finally, like a few other providers, it is tackling mobile, but it is doing it in a smart way. The reality is that, while you might want mobile access because it sounds really cool, in practice it’s typically not very cool because you can’t do really do anything useful on a 3″ to 4″ screen, and what you can do is limited on even a 9″ to 10″ screen. Realizing that all you can really do is retrieve critical pricing and status information, Intesource is building a customized read-only interface that will allow you to determine current event status, bid information, and whether or not there is anything you need to to do or respond to when on the go.  And it’s working with its customer base to develop an appropriate interface that they can use effectively.

Other improvements since 2010 include an improved contract centre with more (user-defined) meta-data, search, and alert functionality; an improved vendor management (SIM) capability with embedded Q&A, enhanced search, attachment management, compliance, and watch-list capabilities; more milestone and scorecard management capabilities; an RFI question library with thousands of questions indexed by category, commodity, and other attributes (built on an analysis of 12 years worth of RFI data) to allow for quick definition of templates and RFIs; and a roles-based public event calendar. Intesource is constantly developing new modules, functions, and features with a roadmap largely driven by its user community as all requests are reviewed quarterly by an advisory committee and prioritized based upon overall demand and usefulness.

Intesource is a solid player in the eSourcing mid-market that should be included in the candidate pool by any company that does most of its business in North America.

DropShip Commerce Brings Drop-Shipping and e-Commerce Enablement to the Distributor and Retailer Masses

On Monday, we announced that BizSlate Just Released its ERP for Mid-Sized Distributors and Retailers that gave the masses a useable, and affordable, ERP solution with exceptional supply chain support — especially where inventory and order management were concerned. With the BizSlate ERP, it’s a breeze for a retailer to order hundreds of variants of dozens of SKUs with a few mouse-clicks and keystrokes and to see inventory requirements at any point in time in the future. And this is great for inventory and storefront management, but what about the e-Store?

As more and more retailers need to turn to online sales to compete in the new marketplace where a consumer can get almost anything she wants online — and do so within two days, as the bigger retailers, following Amazon’s lead, are now packing and shipping same-day if an order is received by the cut-off time — the mid-sized and small retailers have to offer the same convenience or get pushed out of the market. Also, sometimes the only way to survive is to create a unique shopping experience for a niche market and offer all of the products, and only the products, related to that niche through a single, customized storefront. (For example, maybe the way to survive is to cater to the fantasy gaming enthusiast and provide a unified storefront for all of the relevant card games, board games, video games, RPGs, and spin-off/related novels and/or movies when the shopper might normally have to go to a local comic/game shop, book store, and online DVD store to find the items of interest.)

However, this need to both integrate (live) inventory (feeds) from dozens, and sometimes hundreds of suppliers (like Amazon) does, and then parse a customer order into separate orders for each vendor that is supplying an item to you and sending it direct to the consumer through its drop-shipping capabilities poses an integration nightmare for the average e-tailer. The reality is that every supplier will have a different database format / taxonomy and every other supplier will have a different access method. One (group of) suppliers will provide access through an FTP site that will contain inventory exports (in a multitude of raw or compressed file formats), another (group) will provide database access through a secure tunnel, the more technical will provide a web API, and the non-technical will e-mail spreadsheets. Some will use (a variation of) CSV format, some will be on an (old) version of EDI, the more techie will have an XML format, etc. Nightmare!

But this is only a quarter of the challenge. The inventory files need to be processed and the relevant data pushed to the live site, after a human has selected or verified what items need to be pushed. Then, the orders need to be pulled from the live site, parsed, and the proper data pushed back to the suppliers for (drop) shipping in the required time-frame — in the format required by the suppliers.

In other words, today’s small-and-mid-sized e-tailers need a solution that makes it trivial to get inventory manifests (if you will), process those manifest, select (groups of) product(s) for the online store, (create a schedule to) push those products to the store, define rules for parsing orders and pushing them back to the appropriate suppliers (on a schedule), create the requisite e-documention, and push the documents to the vendors and the order management systems.

This is the system that DropShip Commerce provides, and it’s the first solution that the doctor has seen that solves the round-trip mid-market problem in a manner uniquely tailored to the specific needs of retailers and their drop-shipping suppliers. And like the other modern SaaS solutions on the market, it’s slick, quick, and very easy to use. By targeting a specific, relatively unaddressed, problem for a specific vertical (consumer-oriented retail), like BizSlate, they were able to create a unique solution that is just what the average mid-sized e-Tailer needs. The DropShip Commerce solution is definitely something the average mid-size e-Tailer that sources from multiple suppliers needs to check out if they haven’t already.

Got Cloud? I Got Mail. Your Mail!

And that’s just the beginning. I’ve warned you before that you can’t control the clouds and that they are inherently insecure. But did you listen? Nope. Clouds are gaining in popularity, and, consequently, every day more and more data is there for the taking, by experienced AND novice hackers alike.

As per this recent article in the (MIT) Technology Review, on “How to Steal Data from Your Neighbour in the Cloud”, a recent study (by researchers at the Universities of Wisconsin and North Carolina) has proven that software hosted in one part of the cloud can spy on software hosted nearby.

This study conducted an experiment in which malicious software was run on hardware designed to mimic the equipment used by cloud companies such as Amazon. The software was able to steal an encryption key that was used to secure e-mails from software belonging to another user. This allowed the researchers to decrypt e-mails sent by the user (which are easily captured by packet sniffers on a compromised machine attached to the cloud).

As per the article, the new attack undermines one of the basic assumptions underpinning cloud computing: that a customer’s data is kept completely separate from data belonging to any other customer. This separation is supposedly provided by virtualization technology. However, because virtual machines running on the same physical hardware share resources, the actions of one can impinge on the performance of the other, an attacker in control of one virtual machine can snoop on data stored in memory attached to one of the processors running the cloud environment (that is used as a cache in a trick known as a side-channel attack).

Remember this before you go for a full-fledged cloud solution. SaaS from a private data centre run by a single vendor is probably okay if they maintain separate database instances for each client (with their own, separate, encryption keys). But shared services on a cloud are probably not a good idea. At least not from a security perspective.