Category Archives: Sourcing Innovation

Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive (P16) … Time to Break Down the CORNED QUIP of Supplier Management, A-Side

So, we’ve implemented e-Procurement, adopted Spend Analysis, and identified Supplier Management as the next Source-to-Pay solution to implement. But it has as many aspects on its own as Source-to-Pay has, so finding the right solution is going to be tough. First we have to decide which aspects of the CORNED QUIP, as identified in Part 15, the organization needs, and then we need to make sure that the solution has the necessary features for each aspect the organization needs. What are those features? Let’s take the aspects one by one, starting with some of the classic capabilities first.

Information Management.

Supplier Information Management (SIM) is where it all began back in the early 2000s. Some would even argue that it began with the formation and launch of Aravo, one of the first pure Supplier Management solutions, and possibly the last surviving great granddaddy in the Supplier Management space. (Aravo was among the first to get big name clients, including Google, using a pure-play SIM platform.)

Almost every Supplier Management solution does basic Supplier Information Management because you can’t really do any supplier management without tracking basic information. (However, these solutions are not all equal in terms of depth and breadth, and the degree of differentiation is quite large.) The core, and the point, of a SIM solution was the centralization of all supplier information for tracking, access, and reporting purposes, which, long ago, was seen as the foundation for management. As a result, the core capabilities required are both limited and fairly obvious:

Extensible Schema
If the schema is fixed or has very limited extensibility, it’s not a modern SIM solution — every S2P system can store the supplier information the S2P system needs to function in a fixed, or limited extensibility, schema. A modern SIM solution has to support unlimited extensibility so that an organization can use it as the supplier master data management (SMDM) solution.
Fuzzy Search
More technically, full reg-ex (regular expression) search across all data fields for partial/like matches as well as weighted rankings (using customized similarity models) for finding the right suppliers (with existing relationships) to meet buyers’ needs.
Customizable Approval Flows
Just like every S2P solution contains a fixed schema that captures the supplier information it needs to function, any that require supplier interaction have a basic onboarding flow. As such, a modern SIM solution needs to have customizable onboarding flows with customizable approval rules.
Customizable Alerting
The platform should support configurable rule-based alerts that can be defined on any field, dimension, or derived dimension to alert a user when a threshold is reached or a value is detected, especially as a modern SIM solution should be the foundation for SMDM. This sounds vague, but the capability has to be very generic and flexible because neither a relationship, performance, compliance, or uncertainty solution will be able to detect everything on their own.
A relationship system that tracks active supplier relationships may not detect that a person just entered into the system as a rep is one that you dealt with in the past (at another supplier that consistently performed poor when you needed to interact with that rep). A performance solution will only detect performance for projects and suppliers actively being tracked, and may not be able to compare that to full historical benchmarks (or realize that the increase in performance correlated to a decrease in ESG activity). A compliance solution will detect compliance with regulations, but not necessarily with corporate goals designed to meet anticipated regulations, or how the compliance affects performance. The uncertainty solution will only be able to identify risks based on the integrated data sources and the integrated models, which won’t cover everything. Nor will it be useful to build risk models for situations that are currently irrelevant for the organization. However, the organization should be detecting whether it may need to build new, or augment, existing models — and that will often be if a value in the database exceeds a threshold. (E.g. The organization is not currently doing a detailed risk of financial failure predictions, but an OTD KPI dropping below a threshold is a signal to start, and that data is currently only tracked in the inventory management solution, and pushed to the SIM, serving as the SMDM, in the weekly cross-enterprise system synch.)

Relationship Management.

What’s the point of tracking information if you don’t do anything with it? The next major solution to hit the scene was Supplier Relationship Management (SRM), where the data was used to help manage the supplier relationship. The majority of modern supplier management solutions claim to be SRM platforms, even though they have wildly different definitions of what SRM is and wildly different functions. Most definitions considerably overlap with SIM and SPM, but we don’t agree with this. While such a system needs extensive data to be effective, and must track performance, it needs to focus on managing the relationship, not the data or the numbers.

A Supplier Relationship Management solution must provide functionality geared around managing and improving the supplier relationship. This must include functionality geared towards helping a buyer identify and implement best practices to manage and improve supplier performance and, in addition to functionality geared towards helping the supplier interact with the buyer, collaborate with the buyer to proactively identify and improve processes to improve future performance.

Synchronous and Asynchronous Messaging
In addition to the standard asynchronous messaging supported by every platform with collaborative elements, it must also support synchronous messaging and real-time discussion and collaboration through voice (with auto-transcript and storage) and screen-sharing and support saving, search, and semi-automatic/assisted work/change order creation from these sessions.
Collaborative Project and/or Product Plans
The system must allow for the collaborative creation of (improvement) project plans — with milestones, tasks, and owners — as well as checks, balances, notes, and sign-offs. If the solution is for direct/manufacturing, it should also support the creation, possibly through integration hooks to CAD/CAM systems, approval, and management of product (production) plans.
Integrated Best Practice Guides
A modern solution should contain a large library of standard improvement plans for common situations, as well as automated best-practice plan selection and guidance when key metrics (either computed internally or imported from an SPM solution) exceed threshholds or predictive metrics indicate likely problems. If the platform does not provide insight, at the end of the day, it’s no better than a SIM.

Performance Management.

At the end of the day, relationships are important, but you, as a buyer, get measured on performance, and you need that from your suppliers too. Relationship management should be the foundation for improved performance management. However, performance management is more than just relationship management. It’s measurable process, and product, management, and that’s the focus of a Supplier Performance Management (SPM) capability.

KPIs and Custom KPIs
Performance is all about improving KPIs, so it should be obvious that the platform should track KPIs. But not just a small set of standard “canned” KPIs! The platform should track standard, customized, and any specific KPIs you can think of to identify potential issues or opportunities for improvement. Just like there is no one set of reports that can uncover everything of relevance in a spend analytics project, there is no one set of KPIs that can guarantee everything is running smooth and that there are no opportunities for improvement. While the standard KPIs are critical, and display major issues that need to be addressed, you want to discover those KPIs that present leading indicators that allow you to sniff out, and deal with, a problem early (before it becomes significant enough to make a noticeable difference in a standard KPI).
Internal and External Benchmarks
KPIs are good, but only measuring against your own benchmarks only tells you how good each supplier is doing against the best supplier for your business, not the average performance other businesses in your industry get from their suppliers, or their best suppliers; you want those external benchmarks built from anonymized data for deeper insight from the KPIs you calculate.
Easy Data Ingestion
Product quality is going to be in the quality / PLM system. OTD (On-Time Delivery) is going to require promised dates from the contract/PO system and receipt dates from the inventory system, etc. It’s going to be critical to get lots of data from related systems to make the maximum use of the supplier performance management module.
Performance Improvement Management
Once you detect an issue from a KPI or a benchmark, you need to do something about it. It might be as simple as contacting a supplier to find out that the root cause was force majeure and outside of their control (a flood prevented transport for three days) or just the result of a miscommunication or it might be that the supplier is repeatedly delivering defective units and there is obviously an issue with their quality control. In the latter case, you will need to start a supplier development project, and the platform should allow you to define it, track it, and, hopefully, manage the interactions (possibly through the relationship management functionality).

In our next post, we’ll move onto the next set of the more classic capabilities: Compliance, Quality, and Uncertainty Management when we flip it to the B-Side in Part 17.

Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive (P15) … And So Is Supplier Management! It’s a CORNED QUIP!

That’s right, Supplier Management is a CORNED QUIP! And we’ll explain what we mean shortly, but first … how did we get here?

When we started this series back in Part 1, we noted that Source-to-Pay is extensive, your organization needed all of it, but your organization couldn’t implement it all at once. So we needed to give you advice on where to start, which, after a careful analysis, needed to be e-Procurement. Next came spend analysis because, in the hands of the right analyst, if your organization wasn’t sure what module was the next most valuable, spend analysis would help the organization identify which modules would likely bring the most (relative) value (based upon the opportunities spend analysis identified). Often, there will be a clear winner, and your organization will know what module to start implementing tomorrow, but sometimes there won’t be. So what’s the answer then? When you are dependent on suppliers, there is no value beyond the supplier. Thus, in this situation, Supplier Management comes next.

But why is Supplier Management a CORNED QUIP? A good solution preserves and maintains the data, like a good cure, but the marketing from most of the vendors with these solutions is more entertaining than enlightening (as they seem to prefer wit to wisdom). This, of course, is not at all helpful when there are literally ten (10) different types, or at least aspects, of supplier management solutions on the marketplace, no one vendor addresses all of the aspects in their solution, and, in many cases, doesn’t even address more than a couple of these aspects. Furthermore, depending on your organizational needs and the platforms your organization currently has in place, some capabilities will be much more important to your organization than other capabilities. Moreover, sometimes certain capabilities in a supplier management solution, already present in solutions already implemented by the organization, will be downright useless as these aspects will, thus, be completely redundant. So, if a vendor is just selling “Supplier Management” or “Supplier Lifecycle Management”, which theoretically includes every core type of capability (even though not a single solution on the market today comes close to materializing all the capabilities), how do you know what they are selling?

Just what might that vendor be selling when they are trying to sell you Supplier Management? One or more management aspects of the CORNED QUIP (but likely not all of those aspects, as every cure is different, and every message witty in its own way, but not exactly enlightening).

What are these ten (10), core, aspects of modern supplier management? (Which dictate the core capabilities that such a solution should offer.)

  • C: Compliance (+ Government + Regulatory)
  • O: Orchestration (or Onboarding + Multi-Tier/Multi-Supplier capability)
  • R: Relationship
  • N: Network
  • E: Enablement (+ Engagement)
  • D: Discovery
  • Q: Quality
  • U: Uncertainty (+ Risk)
  • I: Information
  • P: Performance

Now, before we continue, we know you’re saying “what about ESG” and “what about diversity“? Well, at least as of today, most of these providers are data services that you use to augment your central supplier records (in your Supplier Master Data Management [SMDM] Solution, which could be your SXM or could be the ERP that the SXM extracts data from), and not standalone SXM products, so we will tackle those separately at some point in the future (especially since diversity is literally just data enrichment on a supplier record in any current solution).

Thus, now that we know what we are implementing, our next step is to decide how to evaluate the solution. Thus, in our next post, we’ll begin to break down the ten core aspects of the CORNED QUIP and define not only what they mean, but what capabilities are critical to the cure.

On to the A-Side in Part 16.

Source-to-Pay+ is Extensive (P14) … So Do Not Stop at Spend Analysis!

As we discussed in Part 8, once you have your eProcurement baseline, that’s just the beginning. The very beginning. Even though not all modules are equal, and not all modules will return equal results, you, and your organization, will need all of Source-to-Pay eventually. However, since you can’t implement it all at once, you take it one module at a time.

After eProcurement, if you aren’t 100% sure where the most value will come from, you go on to spend analysis and use it to help you identify the best opportunities, and those opportunities may indicate the next best module to implement (for your organization at the current time). After that, you may have a clear answer, or, you may not. Sometimes the analysis indicates almost equal opportunity between sourcing and contracting, between contracting and supplier management, or between sourcing and supplier management. (Or, you might not have the manpower or expertise to do the analysis you need to get the right answer.)

So if it’s unclear as to which solution to choose next, it’s back to arguments and logic in an effort to determine which of the three aforementioned solutions to choose.

How about Strategic Sourcing? It’s the one technology proclaimed to identify the most savings and deliver the best results. The truth is that while it almost always identifies the most savings, it doesn’t actually deliver those savings, or even guarantee them. The savings are guaranteed by the contract, delivered by the (new) supplier, and captured by the eProcurement system.

So how about a Contract Management System? In order to guarantee the cost reductions, you need the contract. Or it’s just a quote that’s given today, denied tomorrow. But, as we indicated in a prior post, you don’t need a contract management system for a contract. You need (e-)paper, (e-)ink, and a pair of (e-)signatures. The right contract management system makes it easy to author, negotiate, manage, track, and enforce a contract. But the contract itself is up to people, and if they don’t agree, there’s no contract, and, thus, no need for a contract management system.

This just leaves Supplier Management. But is this where we start? If we think about the value sourcing identifies, it’s generated by the supplier. So it’s critical that the supplier perform. If we have a good supplier management solution, it will track the supplier’s progress, alert us to issues, and assist us in managing the relationship if intervention is required. It will enable performance management, which is critical because if the supplier doesn’t perform and/or doesn’t adhere to the contract, then it doesn’t matter how great the sourcing event was or how good the contract inked was.

And so, because suppliers, and relationships with them, are key, when all things are about equal, or when it’s hard to identify where to go next, we go with supplier management.

Start the dive in Part 15.

Source-to-Pay+ Is Extensive (P13) … But I Can’t Touch The Sacred Cows!

In our last installment (Part 12) of this series here on Sourcing Innovation (SI), we provided you a list of forty-plus (40+) vendors that could potentially meet your spend analysis needs and help you identify the cost savings, reduction, and avoidance opportunities you have in your organization as well as the best modules to achieve those cost savings, reduction, and avoidance opportunities. The right spend analysis tool properly applied will generate returns that are many orders of magnitude greater than the cost of the tool and will surprise you.

However, some of those best opportunities will be in the “sacred cows” of Marketing, Legal, and SaaS subscriptions. And you probably think you can’t do anything because you don’t have the data, Marketing and Legal won’t let you touch their spend (or give you the detail you need to even analyze it, often because they didn’t collect it), and you have no idea on what SaaS is actually being used and how much you overspend.

the doctor knows this, and knows that you might need custom solutions to manage, and analyze, this spend, so, before we move on and tackle the next module in the Source-to-Pay queue, we’re going to take a brief sidebar and provide you with short lists of vendors that specialize in each area that will collect the data you need — and sometimes even provide you with deep, customized, integrated analytics that provide you with the insights that matter (including the insights that matter on your matter spend) — to enable deep spend analysis, benchmark creation, and opportunity identification.

But first, we have to repeat our disclaimer that, as per the lists of e-Procurement vendors provided in Part 7 and the list of Spend Analysis vendors provided in Part 12, this list is most definitely in no way complete (as no analyst is aware of every company, and neither Marketing nor Legal are the particular domains of expertise of SI), is only valid as of the date of posting (as companies get acquired and go out of business, often without notice), and does not include the broader range of offerings that are available for SaaS Management (including provisioning and cloud management), Marketing (including agency management pure-plays, although DecideWare, for example, does this), or Legal (including contract authoring, management, and clause analysis — although we will cover some of these players when we get to Contract Lifecycle Management [CLM]).

Again, and we can’t say this enough, not all vendors are equal and we’d venture to say that this most definitely applies to the lists below. The companies below are of all sizes (very small to very large), offer different functionality (focussing in on different aspects of Marketing, Legal, and/or SaaS Spend Management), different levels of customization and integration, different types of companion services, focus on different company sizes and/or company types, and integrate with different Source-to-Pay and Enterprise ecosystems.

Do your research, and reach out to an expert for help if you need it in compiling a starting short list of relevant, comparable, vendors for your organization and its specific needs. For a few of these vendors, you may find a write up in the Sourcing Innovation archives, Spend Matters Pro, or Gartner cool vendor write-ups, but for many of these vendors, you’ll have to look beyond your typical sources of information as they are highly specialized and don’t fall into the typical Source-to-Pay bucket. But if you have enough Marketing, Legal, or SaaS spend, they can be highly valuable.

Note that, due to the newness of SaaS spend management, the different marketing and legal needs of every organization, and the high degree of differentiation between many of the solutions below, we are not (yet) defining baseline functionality and instead advising you to do a detailed analysis of your spend, processes, and needs and judge potential solutions based on that. If you need help with that, seek out a pro who can do the (gap) analysis and RFI creation for you.

Finally, a second reminder that inclusion on this list DOES NOT imply Sourcing Innovation is recommending the vendor.

SaaS (Software-as-a-Service) Subscription Cost Management

Company LinkedIn
Employees		 HQ (State)
Country
Beamy 60 France
BetterCloud 305 New York, USA
Cledera 63 Colorado, USA
Flexera 1026 Illinois, USA
G2 Track 792 Illinois, USA
Hudled 8 Australia
NPI Financial 410 Georgia, USA
Productiv 139 California, USA
SaaSRooms 9 United Kingdom
SaaSTrax ?? North Carolina, USA
Sastrify 166 Germany
Setyl 14 United Kingdom
Spendflo 70 California, USA
Substly Sweden
Torii 114 New York, USA
Trelica 12 United Kingdom
TRG Screen 179 New York, USA
Tropic 240 New York, USA
Vendr 404 Massachusetts, USA
Viio 18 Columbia
Zluri 111 California, USA
Zylo 144 Indiana, USA

Legal Spend Management

Company LinkedIn
Employees		 HQ (State)
Country
Apperio 48 United Kingdom
Brightflag 150 New York, USA
(LexisNexis) CounselLink 28 Ohio, USA
Fulcrum GT 158 Illinois, USA
Mitratech TeamConnect 1119 Texas, USA
Onit 339 Texas, USA
Ontra 421 California, USA
Persuit 100 New York, USA
Thomson Reuters Legal Tracker ?? Ontario
Tonkean LegalWorks 76 California
Wolters Kluwer (TyMetrix 360) ??? Netherlands

Marketing (Procurement) Spend Management

Company LinkedIn
Employees		 HQ (State)
Country
DecideWare 27 Australia
HH Global ?? United Kingdom
Mtivity 15 United Kingdom
Promost 68 Poland
RightSpend 23 New York, USA
SourceIt Market 6 Australia

Onwards to Part 14.

Do You Have a Procurement FocalPoint?

Last month we asked where’s the procurement management platform primarily because we now have a plethora of procurement-centric applications but very little integration between them. However, once you tackle that issue, you have the secondary issue of all these applications, but often no clear starting point and, even worse, no way for an average organizational employee outside of Procurement to interact with Procurement beyond an inbound email to “please get this for me” and the eventual, possibly many months later, outbound email to “we got it, it’s finally here … it will be on your desk tomorrow“.

This is a big problem, even in organizations that supposedly have market leading source-to-pay suites. While all the modules are connected, and the integrated workflow will guide a buyer from project selection to sourcing to supplier selection to award to contracting to supplier onboarding to order creation to receipt creation to invoice confirmation and payment approval and loop back to the order creation until pending contract expiration when the contract can be renewed, renegotiated, or
revoked and the sourcing process started all over. This is great, but for predefined sourcing projects on encoded categories only!

It’s not great for any category not already encoded and typically strategically sourced, and it’s atrocious as new product and service needs arise within the organization, as new hires need new assets for onboarding, as customer requirements change and the organization needs to adapt rapidly and source new products or services to meet new, or one-off, needs. There’s no intake, and no collaboration with the organizational stakeholders Procurement is there to serve.

And that’s a huge problem. That’s why you’re seeing a few companies talking about “intake”, “orchestration”, or “PPM” (which stands for either Procurement Performance Management or Procurement Process Management, depending on who is talking about it) because, without this capability, a Procurement platform will never be complete or support the organization.

Following the introductory post on the procurement management platform, we lamented and celebrated that Per Angusta was going away and being integrated into SpendHQ as the foundations of a new PPM. It’s a great start, but today the focus of SpendHQ is on managing the existing workflows and creating visibility into existing projects — and savings tracking is limited to integrated projects. However, when it comes to intake support and project tracking for arbitrary organizational needs, that’s not there yet.

However, there are other players which are strong here, and one of those players is Focal Point, which was built from the ground up as an intake-to-orchestrate solution that is capable of

  • capturing all organizational requests for Procurement and Procurement-related activities,
  • assigning those requests to customizable workflows using either built in automation rules or manual (re-)assignment,
  • allowing an end-user to see exactly where any request is in the process at any time,
  • allowing for in-platform communication between the stakeholder and Procurement,
  • integrating with any external tool through jump-out/jump-in to support the process, and
  • supporting whatever approval chains are required, among other intake and orchestration functions.

The tool was built to solve the most significant problem the founders repeatedly saw as CPOs and implementers of various leading sourcing solutions — little to no intake management or general purpose procurement process orchestration. And it does it incredibly well. The visual workflow construction is extremely usable, and the wizards that power both the process, form construction, and form completion automatically extend and compress the form as needed based upon user selections and actual needs, making for a very smooth flow.

All of the workflow elements and steps support deep conditional logic, allowing the organization to create as many branches as possible but ensuring that the end user making a request, and the end buyer assigned to deal with that request, only see the relevant paths and only need to enter the relevant information to be guided by the platform.

There can be as many intake types, with associated branching workflows, as the organization needs, each can have the appropriate level of automation, and, most importantly, each can have as many milestones as needed to walk the process through at a high level, allowing the requester to easily see at a high level where the process is, and then, if interested, dive into the detailed workflow within the current milestone to get a more accurate picture of where the process is.

The only thing the platform doesn’t do is actual sourcing, supplier management, contract management, analytics, procurement, or payment management. It expects the organization to have tools for this already and integrates into the appropriate modules in those tools as needed to accomplish the workflow in progress.

In terms of getting up and running, Focal Point typically has a fully fleshed out, functioning, and integrated instance that captures all of the organization’s workflows up and running within 90 days, even if the organization is a multi-(multi-)billion dollar organization, which is Focal Point’s target market size. This is because it’s typically the 1B+ organizations that have a lot of tools, and a lot of stakeholders, but no way to manage those tools effectively or to give stakeholders any visibility into where their requests are and how their spending is being managed.

The reason it typically takes 90 days is that, unlike many sourcing suite providers, who just flip a virtual switch and drop an empty SaaS suite on you and say “good luck“, Focal Point fully configures the platform as part of their statement of work. This includes:

  • working with the organization to understand all of their requirements and current workflows
  • encoding all of those intake workflows with milestones, task-breakdowns, and existing platform jump-outs
  • integrating any existing procurement system you need to complete the workflow
  • creating a UAT instance and allowing for at least one iteration and approval before it goes live
  • training your team on how to use the system and maintain the workflows

So even though Focal Point has obviously achieved efficiency in terms of workflow creation and customization, external platform integration, and implementation project management, it takes time for an average organization to collect and document their existing processes and requirements and for FocalPoint (or a third party consulting organization if that is the customer’s preference) to fill in the gaps, so it’s not possible to get it much below 90 days. But when you think about the fact that they have fully implemented a 10B+ organization in that timeframe, when some major suite players will take 18 months working with a consulting partner to fully implement those solutions, that’s an incredible time to value, which is generated day one when every request flows into the tool; gets tracked, assigned, and executed; and stakeholders have full visibility into the process and can intervene if necessary.

Focal Point solves the problem it was built to solve, fills the hole the vast majority of sourcing and procurement solutions make, and does it incredibly well. If any part of this post resonates with you, the doctor encourages you to check them out.