Category Archives: Technology

Trade Extensions: No Rest for the Wicked-ly Powerful – Part I

It’s been less than five months since we last checked in with Trade Extensions, who had traded up to a Fact Sheet User Interface and added a slew of new features, including improved RFI support, multi-dimensional rankings in e-Negotiation, Google Earth integration, new incumbent rules, and an OLAP foundation to reporting, including the implementation of a new n-way comparison report. Since, then, it would appear that Trade Extensions have been working around the clock to add a host of new features in auctions, reporting, award management, scenario creation and analysis, and feedback mechanisms. They are advancing the platform so fast that only a few companies in the space are currently keeping up with their rate of development. And while nothing added in the last few months is earth shattering, Trade Extensions has again taken usability to a whole new level, which is the key to adoption, use, and, ultimately, cost avoidance and reduction in your sourcing organization.

Auctions

Probably the biggest improvement is the new wizard-based interface that defines different types of RFX and Auctions, including Quick Quote and Simple Auction, that simplify event creation. In the new wizards, the user only needs to define the critical information necessary to create the event and can, if the user so chooses, define everything necessary to set up straight-forward RFXs and Auctions, including lots, on a single screen. While the workflow-driven wizards provided in many of today’s platforms are good, if you just need a quick quote or are auctioning office supplies, you just need to set it and forget it. The platform’s newfound ability to handle simple events with ease while simultaneously allowing for the creation of the most complex events one can think of is quite powerful for an organization that wants a single tool to handle the whole gamut of sourcing events. Now a user can define how much information is required to define an event and enter just that, whether it be a few pieces of information or a few hundred pieces of information. In addition, the new bidder UI is slick, clean, and quite easy to use.

Reporting

Trade Extensions, which supports the Fortune 1000, has added new multi-project reporting which allows for the creation of (roll-up / drill-down) reports across projects. The user can select any set of projects and any set of scenarios in those projects and create a roll-up or comparison report across those projects on any set of dimensions and facts that they choose, which can be organized in a user-defined row-column format. One of the things that Trade Extensions noticed was that a number of users, even when their new OLAP reporting was rolled out product-wide in January, were still downloading reports to Excel for the sole purpose of reformatting them into a preferred or dictated format. So they built this capability, including pivot table functionality, into the tool. Combined with the ability for a user to create fields defined on just about any formula (macro) the user can imagine, there is now no need for a user to have to export to Excel for analysis or report formatting. It’s a very impressive leap forward in reporting and goes well beyond the reporting capabilities of most of the on-line sourcing and procurement platforms that SI has seen.

Award Management

Trade Extensions has created a new set of rules that allows a user to define a scenario that uses allocations from an existing scenario for any subset of the award that they want to fix. No longer does a user have to copy the scenario and define fixed award rules, which can quickly lead to unsolveable scenarios if the user has 20 rules and messes up one or two to create a conflict that results in an unsolveable scenario. Just point at an existing scenario where part of the award is acceptable, indicate that the award for items X and Y at locations A through M are acceptable, and the tool will fix those allocations and build a smaller model that will solve faster (instead of a bigger model with more constraints that solves slower).

Come back tomorrow for Part II which will address the rest of the cool new features in Trade Extensions’ new release.

Outsourcing is More Than Throwing It Over the Wall

While outsourcing may be on the rise, it’s still not the holy grail of cost savings. The number of companies that bundled two more or more core F&A processes into an outsourcing deal may have doubled in 2010 (as compared to 2009), but it’s still no reason to rush into one. Even if it is, on the surface, getting cheaper (as the average contract value appears to have shrunk almost 40% since 2004), it will not necessarily save you money. First of all, there has to be money to save. If the organization has a global services unit that is best in class in a process, the organization is not going to save much by outsourcing. Maybe a few percentage points if the organization contracts to a best in class outsource provider that can leverage economies of scale, but that’s it. It is hardly worth the risk of losing the knowledge. Secondly, and this is the usual reality, if the process is broke, throwing it over the wall is not going to gain any efficiencies or savings, at least in the long term.

A recent article in CFO Magazine on how “outsourcing matures, slowly” did a great job of making this point with a quote from Mark Satchel of Skandia, a European investment firm that signed a 175 million dollar multi-year outsourcing deal with HCL Technologies. Skandia hired HCL to develop applications and manage the infrastructure of Skandia’s legacy systems, and absorb 250 of Skandia’s IT employees in the process. While it probably sounded great on paper, as it likely would have taken at least 25 Million in fixed recurring costs off the books, as well as the huge headache of managing legacy systems, which is something an investment firm wouldn’t be an expert in (or want to do), it was a poor decision.

Not only does such a deal “result in a great deal of inflexibility”, as Mark Satchel noted, but it doesn’t address the core issue. The reason that Skandia needed so many IT employees and a sophisticated data warehuse was because it was running on legacy systems. Skandia should have first modernized its systems and processes and then thrown it over the wall. Then, instead of having to go back and renegotate the outsourcing deal to contain the flexibility it needed to serve the “peaks and troughs” of its needs, including the need to update systems, it would have negotiated the right deal the first time. (And “the right deal” would have been considerably less as it’s a lot more cost effective to support new systems than legacy ones.) And Mark would have spent a lot less time wondering whether the gain on one side is lost on the other.

So before you throw that process over the wall, ask yourself:

  1. Is the process (and supporting technology) ready for outsourcing?
    If it’s not, fix the proces (and / or update the supporting technology) first.
  2. What can I reasonably expect to save by outsourcing?
    If only a few percentage points, it’s probably not worth it. If over 10%, then it’s definitely worth pursuing.
  3. What could happen and what flexibility do I need in the agreement to insure I don’t get caught holding the hot potato?
    Flexibile staffing? Variable throughput levels (because more invoices have to be processed over the holidays, for example)? The ability to include additional resources for system updates or replacements at pre-defined costs?

If you do, you’ll be better off.

The Best Argument for Making Your Data Available Online 24/7

If your data isn’t immediately accessible online, either behind your firewall or behind someone else’s firewall or in the cloud, when your employees need it, then they are going to download it to their machines. If their machine is a laptop, and the data is not securely encrypted, and the laptop is stolen, then, as per a ZoneAlarm Blog Entry on “what is the cost of a missing laptop” from earlier this year, it could cost your organization 1 Million (or more). (And even if the data is encrypted, and it’s valuable enough, someone will invest the time in breaking the encryption.)

But if your data is always available, and, better yet, the applications that do the processing reside on the servers the data is on, then your employees and contractors won’t need to download it to their laptops to process it. And you can even implement safeguards to prevent such. Then, when the laptop gets stolen, your loss will be the replacement cost and a minimal lost productivity cost (as you can replace it in hours), which will max out at a few thousand. Compare this to the situation where you have data breaches, IP loss, and forensics and investigation costs which can be 10, 100, or even 1000 times the replacement and lost productivity costs.

So encrypt your data, put it on a VPN behind a firewall, and make it available 24/7. It will be much cheaper, and safer, than having it unencrpyted on your employees’ laptops which will, inevitably, get stolen despite their best efforts to protect them.

Can Your Supply Chain Be More Agile? Yes It Can!

A recent article on speeding up business agility over on ChiefExecutive.net had some great tips for making your supply chain more agile.

  1. The CIO is Your Business Partner
    Let’s face it, the best supply management organizations run on modern technology platforms that have to be implemented quickly and efficiently and operate 24/7/365. Supply Management needs to make a partner out of IT to insure that this happens.
  2. Foster a Culture of Innovation
    Yesterday’s best practice is today’s common practice is tomorrow’s laggard practice. The best organizations are constantly innovating, and this takes an innovative culture.
  3. Use Software to Fail Fast and Minimize Risk
    Model potential supply strategies and simulate both expected flow and disrupted flows to insure that the supply strategy chosen has the maximum chance of succeeding in today’s volatile and unpredictable global market place.
  4. Integrate IT at the Grass-Roots Level
    Not only is the CIO your business partner, but IT is part of every sourcing team. You need their support, and they need your help to minimize their costs. And they are your best ally when you need a new system.
  5. Establish Centers of Excellence
    Not only are the best supply management organizations generally center-led or hybrid (center-led / centralized models), but they have teams dedicated to nothing but strategy and innovation.

These are all great pieces of advice. They are so good that not only has SI recommended each individually before, but will do so again. Agile supply chains survive volatile times. Make yours agile before its too late.

Every Supply Management Vendor Should Review Their Strategy, Not Just Ariba

There was an interesting article over on Fast Company recently that described three steps for re-evaluating your company’s strategy. To illustrate why a company might need to reevaluate, the article chronicled Ariba’s rise, fall, and their recent 300% growth in their stock price over the last year.

According to the article, Ariba, which has a Supplier Network with over 500,000 participants that conducts 170B in transactions a year, had to change their model and refocus when their stock crashed from over $700 a share to $10 in a matter of months. This included opening up their network and switching to SaaS. Furthermore, according to the article, this change was the result of learning the following three strategic lessons:

  1. Don’t Confuse Missed Timing with Missed Vision
    Often the vision is right but ahead of its time.
  2. Look for the Rise in the Fall
    When a company is forced to revisit its strategy, it may find an opportunity it overlooked.
  3. Build the Snowball
    Find a solution that will draw in customers that will in turn draw in more customers.

While the lessons are important for Ariba, if Ariba has truly learned them (as I believe they could have done, and could still do, better than they have done with respect to lessons two and three), they are equally important for Ariba’s competitors. And, as the article points out, Ariba’s competitors have to ask the following questions:

  • If it ends up taking three times as long to achieve our vision, what would we do differently today?
    While some would argue the Supply Chain space is dead, only the leaders have adopted modern solutions, and the laggards are still struggling to get past a spreadsheet to an outdated ERP.
  • If our core business fails, how else could we profit from the assets and activities of our business?
    Sometimes it’s the right vision, but the wrong implementation. Sometimes an idea belongs in the consumer space. Sometimes the add-on becomes the application. And sometimes its just a different deployment model. The original business plan is just the starting point.
  • What is the kernal of our snowball?
    It’s all about making it almost viral.

If they do, many will be in a better position than they are today.