Category Archives: Technology

Procurement Trend #15. System Integration with Partners

A dozen anti-trends from those wild and crazy guys still remain, and as much as we’d like to find some entertainment value in what they have to offer, we must agree with LOLCat who is bored with our continuing anti-trend coverage and, like the foxes the wild and crazy guys like to chase, instead flee from the obnoxious diatribe they thrust upon us.

So why do so many historians keep pegging system integration with partners as a future trend? I honestly can’t fathom this as Big Blue has been pushing integration projects for decades, but maybe it is because they’ve been living in the corporate cave (as Procurement is still relegated to the basement in many organizations) and:

  • e-Procurement benefits like invoice Automation require some system integration

    because invoices come from suppliers and often have to get into AP systems on the way through the e-Procurement system

  • supply chain visibility is critical for risk mitigation

    because you cannot take action to protect against a disruption if you do not know that a disruptive event occurred

  • strategic planning is improved with good data

    because even though you can make great strategic plans without data, it’s just a theoretical exercise if the plan depends on postulated conditions that do not actually exist in the real world

So what does this mean?

System integration

Not only do you need to brush up on your IT skills, but you have to brush up on your IT project management skills too. System integration projects have been responsible for some of the worst supply chain disasters in history. Don’t believe me? Review Supply Chain Digest’s top supply chain disasters and notice that 9 of the 11 top failures were as a result of technology, and all but one of these technology failures was at least partly, if not entirely, IT technology!

Supply Chain Visibility

You need to implement a multi-tier supply chain visibility. Knowing your supplier’s status is not good enough, you need to know your supplier’s supplier status and sometimes even the status of the supplier of your supplier’s supplier — especially if raw materials acquisition is the weakest link in the chain. Leave no stone unturned that could be covering a ticking time-bomb.

Good Data

When we say good data, we mean good data. Not just data because not all data is good. If it has a lot of holes, is inaccurate, or is too old, it’s bad data, and all analysis on bad data leads to is bad information that results in bad decisions. But good data can lead to good information and then good decisions, and, in an appropriate model, it can lead to actionable intelligence that can power great decisions.

Procurement Trend #18. Improved Supply Management Skill Set

Fifteen anti-trends still remain but today we can take solace in the fact that we have finally finished with the “old news” anti-trends and have reached the “ongoing” blues anti-trends. While these anti-trends are still “old news”, most are only a few decades old, as opposed to some of the earlier trends we debunked which described situations encountered by many business centuries ago (which is when globalization really began).

So why do the modern historians continue to peg an improved supply management skill set as a future trend? Maybe it’s because they’ve only recently been expelled from an old-school Procurement organization into this brave new world, and this is as far as they’ve made it in their readings, but three likely reasons are:

  • technology is progressing rapidly

    and much faster than the average person can be reasonably expected to keep up with

  • the breadth of supply management continues to expand

    and new categories and responsibilities are often added to Supply Management’s (shared) purview on a regular basis

  • processes aren’t keeping up

    and Supply Managers are getting buried under an avalanche of tactical demands

So what does this mean?

Rapid Technology Progression

Your organization, and in particular, your talent, needs to keep up. Regular training is going to be required for your talent, and thus your organization to keep up. You will have to fight for this though, because despite the fact that it has been among the top three or top five concerns of most CPOs and CXOs for the past five years, the training budget is always the first budget to get cut.

Expanding Supply Management Breadth

This is a good thing, but you your Supply Management organization needs to keep up, not fall behind. The tech progression is a good starting point, the training is a good continuation, but you need to also learn other areas of the business – their language, processes, and goals so that you can collaborate with them, learn their wisdom, and, if possible, share the workload.

Processes Need to Move Out of the Past

Processes need to continually progress forward — that’s why SI is all about Transition management and not just focussed on the classic people-product-technology triangle (as it’s actually talent-technology-transition management). You will have to conduct process reviews not only on all Procurement processes, but on all related operational processes to determine if they can be made more efficient, reliable, or better, identify what new processes would look like, determine if the current technology platforms can support these new processes or if new platforms are needed, and create, and then execute on, appropriate transition plans.

Procurement Trend #19. Service Providers Excel

Sixteen anti-trends still remain but we again assure you that we are getting to the end of the series and all is ok as LOLCat is still dreaming of his grandfather’s adventures as an archaeologist cat uncovering lost tombs, and waiting for this series that is regurgitating topics of his past lives to fade into history. We will continue to lay bare each and every one of the futurists’ lies, and when we’re done, you’ll be in a better position to learn the truth and seize upon the real trends that lie ahead and the opportunities they contain.

So why do the historians keep pegging service providers excelling as a future trend? Have they spent too much time in the janitors’ closets breathing paint fumes from improperly sealed paint cans while practicing their speeches that no one really wants to hear? Hard to say, but some of the reasons probably include:

  • Outsourced Services are still improving

    in both traditional Business Processing Outsourcing (BPO) and non-traditional service sectors.

  • Service Providers are mastering tech faster than their clients

    and often get a lot more experience with a platform in a shorter time frame as they are running projects for multiple clients on that platform.

  • Everything is going out

    because overpriced overly-optimistic consultants have strapped themselves to the outsourcing bandwagon in an effort to make sure that they never fall off.

So what does this mean?

Outsourced Services

Service Providers can often do things better than you, but if they do, you need to adapt or lose control. You don’t want to lose control, because one of your jobs is Supplier Relationship Management. However, at some point during the adaptation, you will, if you are doing it right, become better at managing the process than the outsourced provider, but you will still be locked into a multi-year service agreement. So you will have to transition from learning through managing through teaching. And once the service providers masters your teachings, as they will have more opportunity to practice and perfect, they will again get better than you and the cycle of the student becoming the master and the master becoming the student will continue.

Technology Progression in the Outside World

While this is one of the reasons that service providers outpace you, this is a great learning opportunity for you. Most companies don’t pick the right technology the first time around — and instead implement expensive systems in even more expensive projects that turn out to be massive failures. Then they learn from their mistakes, implement the right technology, and provide you a free lesson on what works if your processes match theirs if you choose to seek it out and learn from it.

Out, Out, and Away

Because your managers are still living two decades in the past where cost reduction was defined as outsourcing, you can, unfortunately, expect more pressure in the organization to not only outsource your tactical work, but to outsource as much tactical work for other departments in the organization as can possibly be outsourced. So you need to either prepare for this, or build the business case as to why the work should stay in and how keeping it in house will either deliver savings or add value.

It’s Faster PussyCat; not Faster Idiot!

Fashion. Mobile Devices. Software. Everything is moving faster and faster. Maybe LOLCats need to move faster because their expected lifespan is one sixth of ours. But we don’t. We’re moving so fast that we’re bringing back infinite scroll and software mystery meat. We’re building mobile devices so thin that they bend, sewing new clothes after they are already out of fashion, and re-launching movies from the 80s because no one has time to even think of an original idea (so forget about taking one to completion).

There’s a place for speed — and it’s on the racetrack. And while first to market is nice, in the long run, it’s usually best to market that wins. The same goes for organizational technology. It’s not about being the first to have the shiny new toy, it’s about identifying and implementing the right technology the first time. A shiny new toy always looks good, but what good is a toy that sits on the shelf? And that’s exactly what happens when you buy a piece of software that looks good but doesn’t support organizational processes and do what needs to be done.

Slowing down isn’t just for buddhists and chess masters, it’s for anyone who wants to get ahead in business and Supply Management. While it’s important to be efficient and effective when doing non-value added tactical tasks, when it comes to important, strategic, activities that, if done right, can generate an ROI that is effectively multiples of the resources invested in the activity (but, if done wrong, can cost the company millions), speed is not of the essence. Getting it right is. If it takes an extra hour, an extra day, an extra week, or even an extra month to get it right, sometimes that’s the right thing to do.

And in each of the examples given above, the extra time would make a big difference. With enough time, developers would be able to research, understand, and build software that did what people want the way they wanted the software to do it — there’d be no mystery meat. And while the mobile iPhone version of your site might need to be infinite scroll because, let’s face it, you can’t click a button the size of a flea on a 4″ screen, no one wants that garbage on a regular 13″ laptop screen and they definitely don’t want it on a 27″ desktop monitor! You could take the time to research exactly how thin and light you could make a phone that was still resilient enough for everyday use and you could design practical, fashionable clothes that people actually wanted to wear, and not just wear the day a model walks them down the runway.

There’s nothing wrong with wanting to go as fast as you can, but going fast just for the sake of going fast doesn’t help anyone. It just makes your organization look stupid. So slow down once in a while, figure out where you are, figure out where you want to be, and work out a detailed plan to get there. The results might surprise you.

And now, to (software) developers everywhere who bring us infinite scroll and mystery meat on a regular basis, LOLCat has a special message just for you!


LOLCat says you're stupid!

BYODD is the Norm, But What Should This Tell Us?

According to a recent post on Spend Matters, BYODD (Bring Your Own Damaged Device) is Now the Norm, and the doctor has to agree. Not only are mobile devices ubiquitous in today’s workplace and home-life, but so are damaged ones. With essentially one in two mobile devices in use being damaged in some way, this means that at least one in two employees are using a damaged mobile device.

According to the author, the solution is to follow the advice in the referenced 2014 ZAGG Device Damage Study. Specifically, if companies are encouraging employees to bring their own devices to work, then those companies should be buying screen protectors, cases, and other damage defense products for their employees to make sure that these employees not only have damage free products to work on but to represent the company.

That is sound advice, and a precaution that should be taken, but that’s not the solution. That’s a fix. The solution to the problem is to address the root cause, and the cause is the proliferation of devices that are, simply put, way too brittle. While the doctor is not suggesting that we all need to be carrying around military-grade tech that can withstand blows, high-impact falls, and desert terrain, we should not be carrying around phones that bend in our pockets.

In other words, the real problem is the proliferation of devices that are being made flimsier and flimsier in a ridiculous effort to make a device that is not only lighter than the predecessor, but, as far as the doctor can tell, lighter than (compressed) air. And while 23.6 pounds (which was the weight of the first portable computer) is a bit heavy for a laptop, we can easily lug around a laptop that weighs 10 pounds considering we used to carry around textbooks that weighed 5 to 7 pounds each. We don’t need a 3 pound laptop (which is the rounded weight of a Macbook air), especially when a gust of wind can shred it! The same goes for phones. We used to lug around cell phones that weighed almost 2 pounds. We can certainly handle a pound if that’s what it takes to make it resilient and reliable. At 4 ounces, it can blow away with the wind!

So just like we need to avoid developers who insist on putting look before feel and functionality, we need to avoid manufacturers who focus more on making devices featherweight then on making devices resilient and support those manufacturers who take a more balanced approach to device production. When the money stops rolling in, this will quickly convince all manufacturers to kick their obsession with making featherweight devices and get back to reality.