Category Archives: Sourcing Innovation

Best Practice Technology Vendor Selection for True Multi-Nationals Part II: RFX – You’re Not Asking for the Right Information!

Today we continue our series on best-practice vendor selection for your enterprise e-Procurement and e-Sourcing solution. As per yesterday’s post, this series specifically relates to the selection of technology(-based) vendors for your enterprise software needs, and e-Procurement and e-Sourcing solutions in particular.

In yesterday’s post we reviewed the traditional RFX process at a high-level, which is more-or-less correct, and then reviewed how this process is typically interpreted, which is where the problems begin, especially where multi-nationals are concerned. We noted that there are three big problems with the standard interpretation of the process, which occur in the first part of the RFI process. In particular, we noted that most supply management project managers ask for the wrong information when they:

  • ask stakeholders for product/service requirements
  • ask stakeholders for preferred vendor recommendations
  • ask vendors for capability information and self-assessment

This last request in particular is especially futile as the last thing a vendor who wants your business is going to do is say that they can’t meet your request, even if their chances of success are dismal. You need to start by verifying that the vendor has the potential to serve you, independent of the vendor. To do this, you need to start the process where an average organization ends it. In particular,

Start with the Reference Interviews

Too many organizations do this:

  • Collateral-Driven Vendor Identification
  • Request for intent to bid
  • Request for proposal and quote
  • Shortlist
  • Negotiations
  • Final List
  • Reference Interviews

By the time a typical large organization gets to the reference interviews, it’s too late. Months have been spent on the project, which needs to be wrapped up shortly. As a result, the buyer gets stuck with one of the finalists, even if none of the finalists are good solutions for the organization.

If you’re a multi-national organization, you have to start with the reference interviews. If you’re a small company, only do business in one or two countries, and only conduct official business in English (and all your international suppliers are Chinese with english-speaking reps), then it doesn’t matter because just about every vendor can serve you. But if you’re a multi-national that:

  • has offices in over twenty countries,
  • conducts official business in seven languages (English, French, Spanish, Italian, German, Russian, Portuguese, for e.g.),
  • has suppliers that speak six more languages (Mandarin, Cantonese, Vietnamese, Thai, Korean, and Japanese, for e.g.),
  • and has to support customers in over forty countries

then not every vendor in the space is going to be able to support you. In fact, despite the plethora of companies in this space even after the recent M&A frenzy, the number of pure-play best-of-breed companies that will be able to support your global e-Procurement or e-Sourcing initiative is likely countable on your fingers, thumbs optional.

And the only way you can have any assurance that a vendor is going to be able to support such an initiative is to start with reference interviews with customers who are similar in size, scope, and needs.
While this doesn’t mean that the vendor has to have offices in each country that you are in, support every language that you need supported, and have a success story for each of the forty countries you are selling into, it does mean that the vendor needs to have a global presence, should support at least a dozen languages (that meet a majority of your language requirements) with a track record of being able to add new languages quickly, and should be in dozens of countries with a history of successful roll-out initiatives to new countries.

In other words, unless you have been convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the vendor can support your organizational needs, they shouldn’t even get a detailed RFI. Because it’s not about who can survive the funnel, it’s about who deserves to even be in the funnel. And that’s a very simple determination, as we’ll discuss in the next post.

Best Practice Technology Vendor Selection for True Multi-Nationals Part I: RFX – You’re Asking for the Wrong Information!

Before we begin, it must be clearly stated that this series relates to the selection of technology and technology-based vendors to provide enterprise software platforms, and/or implementation services, back-office (processing) functions, or technology-driven consulting services for your multi-national organization. While some of the best practices contained herein may also apply to the selection of (strategic) suppliers for high-value and/or complex products and/or services, this series particularly relates to the selection of a vendor to provide an enterprise software backbone, and, in particular, a backbone for e-Procurement and/or e-Sourcing technology for your Supply Management organization. Furthermore, no claims, express or implied, are made with respect to any other vendor selection process and, in fact, if you’re only buying paper and pencils, some of the best practices contained herein will, in all likelihood, be overkill.

Now that the preamble is out of the way, let us begin by noting that the traditional RFX processed is well understood, and well documented in many places, including in the e-RFx for Total Value Management wiki-paper, co-authored by the doctor over on the e-Sourcing Wiki. And, in the wiki-paper in particular, the high-level process is more-or-less correct.

As per the wiki-paper, you start with a three-stage RFI before an RFP, which is solution focussed (and not cost or contract focussed), which is issued before a final RFQ, which is when you collect quotes and start the actual selection / negotiation process. Specifically, the high-level process is:

  1. RFI #1: Stakeholder Requirements
  2. RFI #2: Vendor Interest
  3. RFI #3: Vendor Pre-Qualification
  4.    RFP: Solution Inquiry
  5.    RFQ: Clearly-Defined Specifications

So what are you doing wrong, especially if you’re a Multi-National? To answer that, let’s look at how this is typically translated:

  1. Product Needs, Service Needs, Preferred Vendors
  2. Vendor Info. Request, Vendor Interest, NDA
  3. Product & Service Capability Profiles
  4. Solution Design Request
  5. Explicit requirements, process definition, and bid request

See the problems?

  1. Stakeholders typically don’t know what they need in a solution. They aren’t technology experts. They aren’t supply management experts. They are domain experts. It doesn’t matter what they think they need in a product or a service, it matters what problems they are having today. You need to ask them what problems they need to solve, so that you can ultimately select a vendor with the solution that solves as many of your stakeholder’s pain points as possible.
  2. A preferred vendor is one that can offer you the best product or service from an organizational perspective, not a single stakeholder’s perspective. For example, a stakeholder might rate a vendor A+ because the representatives always responds quickly. But this is not necessarily indicative of great service. If the answer is always “we’ll send someone to fix that in a week”, and you need the machine up 80% of the time, that’s poor service.
  3. Asking a vendor if they can provide you with the necessary functionality or service levels after you have shortlisted them as a possibility based upon a review of their collateral is not likely to get you anything other than a “yes we can”, especially if the vendor also offers consulting or “value added services”. One has to remember that most (big) consulting (and value-add) organizations are driven by a greed for dollars and the reps are told to always say yes and take on as much work as possible, leaving the question of how to get it done (if the organization is already stretched or weak in that area) until after the ink is dry.

Which brings us to the biggest problems with the current selection process, which we will discuss in Part II.

The (Board) Gamer’s Guide to Supply Management Part V: Small World

I’m tickled technicolor to continue this one-of-a-kind summer series that will help you whether you are just interested in finding out about this new and exciting career opportunity, or ready to take your Supply Management career to the next level. Not only is it more fun than reading the latest study on the daily migration patterns of the three-toed sloth, but when you can grasp a lot of the basic concepts by playing the right mix of strategic (and sometimes tactical) board games with your friends, it’s three blasts and a half!

While we are still putting off the economic games (like Puerto Rico) that we are going to get to at some point, we’re going to make use of the fact that, thanks to unprecedented generosity of Wil Wheaton (@wilw) and Geek & Sundry, we have yet another fantastic TableTop episode where Wil Wheaton introduces us to the mechanics — and fun — of the game. Until we run out, we are going to take advantage of the priceless gifts that Mr. Wheaton has granted us with this spectacular educational series.

As with every other episode in the series, Wil Wheaton gives us a very succinct introduction to Small World in TableTop Episode 1, a classic victory-point game with near endless variations that give it exceptional replay value.


Small World combines the military strategy of risk with the delightful art and fantasy races of cosmic encounter. Whoever has the most points at the end of nine rounds wins the game. We earn points by conquering and ? territories. Empty territories cost two units to conquer. Every item in a territory costs one more unit to conquer. … At the beginning of every game, each player will choose a fantasy race, like Orcs, Elves, or Dwarves. Each race is combined with a unique special power like seafaring, flying, or heroic. These power and race combinations change every game, giving Small World tremendous replay value. No empire lasts forever, so don’t get too attached to your diplomatic skeletons. You will inevitably run out of units to conquer new territories. But don’t worry. When that happens, you simply put your active race into decline and choose a new one from the board and begin conquering all over again. It’s a very small world. And only one person can be the victor atop the bloody stinking heap of his vanquished opponents!

So what does this have to do to supply management? It introduces us to the intricacies of the markets that marketing and management expect us to indirectly support not only with products and services, but with market-entry advice (because, after all, we’re already sourcing from there so advising the organization on how to sell into there shouldn’t be that hard, right?). An alternate introduction to the game could be:

Small World combines the military strategy of risk with the marketing strategies of an MBA program. Whoever has the most money at the end of year wins. We earn money by conquering and maintaining market territories. Empty, blue ocean, territories cost two units to conquer. Every competitor or obstacle in a territory costs one more unit to conquer. At the beginning of every game, each player will choose a primary market strategy, like brute advertising force, niche marketing, or price-undercutting, and combine it with a perceived marketing advantage such as a big war chest, coveted partnership, or new manufacturing process that allows production costs to be drastically slashed. The primary market strategy and perceived marketing advantages change every game, giving Small World tremendous replay value. No market lead lasts forever, so don’t get too attached to your past successes. You will inevitably run out of units to conquer new market territories. But don’t worry. When that happens, you simply put your current market strategy into decline and choose a new one from the board and begin conquering all over again. It’s a very small world. And only one company can be the victor atop the looted corporate carcasses of its vanquished opponents.

And the great thing about Small World is that victory points are measured in victory coins, for which a player gets one victory coin for each region his race tokens occupy. Whereas some games, like 7 Wonders, give you half a dozen ways to score victory points, scoring victory coins in Small World is straight forward. It’s simply a function of how many regions you occupy, and how many extra bonus coins you get as a result of race or special ability. Plus, conquests can be first (it’s a blue ocean market and you are the first entrant, having only to conquer obstacles such as resistance to foreigners or geographic distance to your target market), takeovers (where you use overpowering force to take over a market from another player), or a hail-mary conquest where a player knows he does not have enough resources to take over any more regions with certainty, but chooses to make one last attempt, literally betting everything on luck (that boils down to the roll of a die). Finally, when all is said and done, a player may redeploy his resources among the various markets he controls in an effort to either maintain them in the next round or move into adjacent markets.

The game is brilliant, and should definitely be in your organization’s lunch room. Forget about those boring seminars and brown-bag lunches. If you really want to push your Supply Management brain cells into overdrive, this is the way to do it!


It’s a small world
But it’s the only one we’ve got
Huey Lewis

SCD’s Seven Habits of Highly Effective Supply Chains

A recent article over on Supply Chain Digest touted The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Supply Chains 2012 in honour of Stephen Covey, who noted that too many people focus on “urgent” and not what is “important” and that changes are required to reduce the need for “urgent” activities so that more time can be spent on the “important” ones. According to SCD, these are the seven habits of highly effective supply chains.

  1. A written strategy that is regularly updated
  2. Alignment with the business is a constant priority
  3. Focus on Talent Management
  4. Fact-based Cultures
  5. Savvy Users of Technology
  6. Smart about Collaboration
  7. Organized for Innovation

While it’s hard to whittle down supply chain best practices to seven, these are a great start. In fact, if you asked the doctor what the top seven priorities were for your supply chain, you’d get:

  1. Talent Management
  2. Innovation in Process and Product/Service Offerings
  3. End-to-End Technology Platforms
  4. Mid-Term and Long-Term Strategy
  5. Organizational Alignment
  6. Data-Driven Fact-Based Decision Making
  7. Cultural & Emotional Intelligence

The only real difference, besides the order of priority, is that the doctor thinks cultural & emotional intelligence (given the global nature of supply chains) takes priority over collaboration, because CQ and EQ will enable the necessary collaboration.

The SCD article, penned by Dan Gilmore, is a good one. Check it out.

All Models Still Lead to Total Value Management

Not that long ago, Sourcing Innovation released “Taking the First Step on Your Next Level Supply Management Journey”, a white paper sponsored by BravoSolution that defined a simple 3-level maturity model that an organization can use to determine where it is on it’s Supply Management organizational journey. Noting that your organziation is either below average, above average, or best-in-class*, SI did not see any point in trying to be more complex (even though many industry associations, consulting firms, and analyst powerhouses will often proffer four and five level models).

And while the acronyms and acclamations — including VFS, Hi-Def Sourcing, Next Level Supply Management, Next Practices, and Value Chain Creation — will fly fast and furious, there is still one commonality among all leading models, including Gartners Global Trade Management Maturity Model, which is nicely summarized in this free white paper from Amber Road that offers “A Model for Value Chain Transformation”.

That commonality is something that the doctor has been prescribing for over five-years — Total Value Management (TVM). When you get right down to it, that’s what Strategic Business Enablement is all about. Maximizing value across the orgnization, end-to-end. In the sourcing process, the organizational model, the finance operation, the (information) technology platform(s), product management (& marketing), risk management, asset management, and relationships — the eight directions of the supply management navigator’s compass. QFD (quality function deployment), maximization of SUM (Spend Under Management), and end-to-end transportation management is all about extracting maximum total value for the organization. Demand creation, joint innovation, and new market entry is all about creating maximum total value for the organization.

And that’s why, if you’re not already there (above average and on the road to best-in-class), and more than half of you are not, you need to be moving to an advanced sourcing platform that supports in-depth spend-related analysis, decision optimization, collaboration, and market-informed category-based sourcing. These tools allow you to identify, maximize, extract, and retain value in your operations. For more information on these technologies, check out SI’s other recent white-paper, also sponsored by BravoSolution, on the “Top 10 Technologies for Supply Management Savings Today”.

*but not average as average can only be defined as an organization that is dab-smack in the middle of every other organization