Category Archives: Sourcing Innovation

There Are Best-in-Class Solutions for End-to-End Indirect Sourcing Processes …

… you just have to do your research!

A while ago I posted that your standard sourcing solution doesn’t work for direct (because it doesn’t, and, relatively speaking, very few sourcing solutions do work for direct), and one of the comments I received implied that it doesn’t even work for indirect. And while some of the solutions out there are so minimal / antiquated / poorly designed, it can be considered a fair question (as there are certainly a number of solutions that would never make a recommendation list by the doctor under any circumstance), the reality is that there are lots of solutions that work well for indirect sourcing.

Now, if you are thinking about a best-in-class 7-step sourcing process, then it’s true you might just need on the supplier side:

  • one module for supplier discovery
  • one for extensive supplier qualification from a 360-degree risk, compliance, sustainability, quality, service, etc. perspective
  • one for supplier onboarding and communications
  • one for supplier performance management and development

As well as a sourcing platform that supports:

  • multiple RFX Formats
  • fluid multi-round events
  • strategic sourcing decision optimization so you understand baselines, the cost of business rules, etc.

And possibly a separate best-in-class analytics solution that:

  • lets you dig deep into costs, trends, and outliers

And then an “orchestration” platform that

  • helps you integrate them all so that all data is available in all platforms all of the time

So while you could need as many modules as steps, they exist, and you can build a fantastic solution for your organization and process and get great results. Just don’t expect it from an average suite (that won’t be BiC across the board, will only be tailored for large enterprise, and may only be super appropriate for certain industries). The sheer number of companies in this space (see the Mega Map) means that the odds of you not being able to put together a good solution are small (although it also means that the workload of finding those solutions is quite large, as it takes work to weed through 666 solutions, which is a number that is ruining Procurement, as Joël Collin-Demers indicates).

The lack of solutions for indirect is not the problem, the lack of solutions that not only allows, but can be configured, to enforce a good process is!

More specifically, we are talking about mandatory dual-sourcing! Which, sadly, is still not being done in direct, even though JIT supply chains have been out-the-window at least since Eyjafjallajokull (remember that? it should have been the first push to start properly dual sourcing), with the situation getting progressively worst (on a sometimes daily basis) since March, 2020. (Five years of natural and man-made disasters should be more than enough of a wake-up call, right?)

This is not something indirect has normally done because the view has been “it’s a standard finished off-the-shelf product, I’ll just get it from someone else if I need to“, not recognizing that, for some products, 90% still ultimately come from a single destination country (which is often China) and any disruption to that country (pandemics [as China’s, often impossible, zero tolerance policy will close entire cities for months without any regard to the consequences to the rest of the world], border closings on key land routes, port strikes, and now extremely high [never seen before] tariffs) will jeopardize almost all supply. And for other products, they have chosen a smaller supplier with limited scalability and no nearby options (and resourcing will take time as it will also involve rerouting and ripple effects through the supply chain — and this could also add to cost).

At the end of the day, the platform has to allow you to understand, track, and address your biggest risks, or, as we wrote sixteen (16) years ago (and stand by it to this day), your platform will be your biggest risk because it’s the unexpected that you don’t plan for that kills you, not the expected, no matter how severe.

And while this is not a risk-centric post (as we have written series on that), the largest cause of risk is not natural disasters (even though we are now seeing dozens of major disasters every year, the reality is that most are still localized) or pandemics (while epidemics are increasing, true pandemics still work out to only be a twice-a-century event [although if we don’t step up our global management thereof, the rate will double]), but human generated risks. Stupid humans create more risk and chaos than the planet does!

Despite Attempts to Simplify It, There Are MANY Categories of ProcureTech Solutions

When selecting a ProcureTech Solution, you have all the following buckets:

Function X Classic Type X SaaS Category X Integration
Sourcing
SXM
CLM
Analytics
e-Procurement Best-of-Breed Standalone App
(full function)		 Suite EcoSystem
Invoice-to-Pay Mini-Suite Lightweight App
(task specific)		 I2O Ecosystem(s)
ESG/Sustainability Suite Bolt-On
(extends a module)		 Open API
GRC
Category/Cost Intel
Niche (Legal, Marketing,
Hospitality, SaaS/Tech, etc.)
I2O

And if you do the multiplication, that’s 297 combinations … and that’s just the tip of the iceberg when there are 10 core areas of SXM, multiple niche areas being addressed (some classic solutions were just for print/telco), multiple buckets of risk management solution, generic and scope-3 specific sustainability solutions, different approaches to intake-to-orchestrate, and that’s just addressing the functional areas of Source-to-Pay+.

Then you have the situation where some vendors only offer a single best of breed (BoB) module, others offer a mini-suite, and others still offer a mega-suite with all of the core modules and often a half dozen more on top of that.

While most are SaaS apps these days, they vary from heavy standalone apps that implement full functions to lightweight apps designed for specific tasks (that are usually missing from larger standalone apps that purport to completely cover a function but don’t) to bolt-ons that offer advanced functionality, but require a core module to work on top of.

One also has to consider how you integrate them into a comprehensive workflow that supports Source-to-Pay+. Sometime modules integrate into one-or-more suite ecosystems out of the box (like the SAP Store or The Coupa Store), other times they just come with a (semi) open API, and now some, not built for integration, are integrating into one or more of the new orchestration ecosystems.

And while functionality should come first, you have to consider all of these other factors as well because if you select a suite for a module, you’re probably locking yourself into the other modules you need as those the suite offers due to cost and integration cost considerations, if you select light-weight or bolt-on apps, then you better have something to integrate them into, and you better be sure the ecosystem has all of the modules you will need to implement over the next five years or so before locking yourself into an ecosystem.

So even though THE REVELATOR believes that everything is going to be a bolt-on or an app and that’s all your going to have to worry about, unfortunately the ProcureTech world is NOT going to make it that simple. Overlooking traditional category and integration can completely destroy the value you require if you can’t easily integrate with complementary modules/apps (and especially if you are in a [primarily] direct industry and need to integrate with supply chain applications for the data you need to make good supply chain aware decisions).

However, it will be interesting to see the primary solution category, breadth, and integration of ProcureTech Solutions (by, and independent of, function) in the future.

Moving Forward to Supply Chain Aware Direct Sourcing Is Not an Easy Task

As Bob and I point out in our joint series on Supply Chain Matters on why legacy sourcing and (supply chain) planning solutions can’t handle today’s supply chain challenges (and why direct sourcing needs to be supply chain aware), moving forward is not an easy task and consists of three main parts:

  • persuasion
  • platform
  • process

and each of these parts presents its own set of unique challenges.

The Persuasion

The technical challenges that will need to be solved will be difficult, but likely won’t be anything that talented engineers can’t solve if they put their minds to it (and avoid the distraction of shiny new technology and the buzzword filled marketing that surrounds it).

But, as we keep saying, it can never be “technology” first.

Moreover, the people challenge — convincing the source-to-supply-to-service professionals, stakeholders, and sponsors to buy in is the harder challenge. Moreover, unless you succeed in this challenge, you won’t make any progress at all.

There’s quite a few reasons for this, as well as requirements for success, and we strongly recommend you dive deep into Part 6 of our series for a discussion.

The Platform

There are a number of considerations with regards to getting the “platform” right, and great engineers will be able to do it, if they realize all that they need to do.

Let’s give them a few tips by starting at the foundations.

They will need to address, and resolve, the:

  • data fabric
  • federation
  • integration
  • orchestration
  • alignment
  • the multi-platform metaprise requirements
  • purpose

There’s a lot to unpack here. For a start, we strongly recommend you dive deep into Part 6 of our series for a discussion.

The Process

The process needs to be much more involved than traditional software / SaaS / app selection. It is not just sending out an RFP to a vendor, evaluating the responses, picking one, and then having them and/or your favourite implementation partner implement it.

That’s because you need to do proper Design Engineering and define an ecosystem solution that fits your end-to-end processes, which not only differs between manufacturing and distribution centric organizations, but also across industries (which are subject to different regulatory constraints and operate differently) and even geographies (for enterprises that are regional vs. global).

We offer a few more tidbits on this requirement in Part 6 of our series, but this may just be the process of a future series as we have written multiple series on the past on enterprise technology selection alone, and this goes beyond that as you can’t assume all the vendors did appropriate Design Engineering that considered anything beyond the platform they were selling, if they even considered Design Engineering when they designed their platform.

The short story here is that moving forward is more than just a decision to “make it so”, but a complex endeavour that will take time, money, and top talent. But it is necessary to survive the future of anti-globalization when supply chains are fundamentally global and insanely complex to the point where they cannot be unravelled in some industries in anything short of a decade!

It’s Not A Supply Chain Anymore, It’s a Supply Ecosystem!

As Bob clearly points out in our joint series on Supply Chain Matters on why legacy sourcing and (supply chain) planning solutions can’t handle today’s supply chain challenges (and why direct sourcing needs to be supply chain aware), Supply Chains Have Evolved to Demand and Supply Ecosystem Networks.

They are not a simple linear chain anymore. They aren’t even a simple tree where a supplier uses sub-tier suppliers for parts that uses sub-tier suppliers for components that uses sub-tier suppliers for raw materials. A tier 1 supplier could be using a tier 2 supplier that is used by other tier 2 suppliers and a tier 3 supplier could be using a tier 1 supplier for products for manufacturing. Then you have intermediate assemblers and distributors that pull parts, components and materials in, assemble some, and package others in a bundle for resale. Maybe you are selling your product to a tier 3 supplier and don’t even know it. It’s a many-to-many graph. and a very convoluted network that can only be described as a complex supply ecosystem.

It’s a complex network that requires the orchestration of strategic and tactical product sourcing with supply management teams who might be participants in the customer fulfillment process, leaders of the sourcing process, managers of the logistic network, or all three. All depending on what is needed, when, where, and why.

If you only look at one need, from one perspective, at one point in time, you miss the fact that any decision not only impacts every other internal organizational unit in the supply chain ecosystem (which includes sourcing, procurement, logistics, supply chain, R&D, production, and operations), but has network wide impacts, implications, and response.

If you change the supplier for a part during a sourcing process and award a new contract, that affects Procurement since they have to update their catalog and reorder systems; Supply Chain as they need to have the appropriate network in place for cross-docking, temporary warehousing, and storage; logistics as they may need to onboard a new carrier to pick up from the local factory; Production as they have to confirm the part will work across all product lines the part being replaced was used in (and, if not, you may have to retain the current supplier at a much smaller volume or find a replacement); R&D as they will have to confirm the part is okay for all the products they are developing; and operations needs to ensure it is categorized and tracked properly so they understand the data shifts during their analysis and cash flow forecasting.

When you change the supplier, that could have a negative impact on the former incumbent who might have been continuously allocating 40% of their capacity to your business with no quick way to recover that (because they had to cool their pipeline to support you), especially if that part was 75% of your business. (And this could have a negative impact on you if you are relying on them for other parts.) Chances are they’ll have to do layoffs in the short term, and that will impact their OTD and quality on your remaining contracts.

When you change the carrier, they need to reallocate the driver. Probably not a big deal, but if they were subcontracting to a Mom & Pop Trucking Co. for a route they didn’t normally do, that’s a big deal to that Mom & Pop Trucking Co. that needs to find a new regular route fast. And it’s a big deal to you if cancelling that route drops you below the commitment you made (and you lose your discounts and special rates you spent weeks negotiating).

The impact on all of these departments and gears in the supply chain machine have to be considered, especially as those gears turn back towards you. To make the best decision, you truly need to do an integrated analysis across multiple levels of planning (long-term, mid-term, and short-term).

Moreover, this analysis needs to be done in near real-time as businesses need to be able to quickly pivot to changing demand or supply balancing requirements in today’s dynamic global marketplace (brought on by pandemics, border closings, canal closures and slowdowns, sanctions, economic upheavals, wars, and trade wars). This requires an integrated network view across business departments, views, and timeframes.

And, as we have said before, it requires that business finally Think Different, and stop reverting to spreadsheets as a means to attempt to span non-integrated internal and external information streams. But considering that Excel is still every analysts favourite tool and they all want to be King of the Spreadsheets, who knows when the shift to modern, integrated, analytics will finally happen.