Category Archives: Technology

Making BI Available to Everyone

A recent article in Information Week on “The Road to Making BI Available to Everyone” noted that, on average, only 25% of workers use BI. Considering that we’re in the information age, this is rather pathetic. Why is this?

According to the article, there are five major reasons for this:

  • The tools themselves … as most of them are not very usable
  • Company managers … that promote gut-feel decision making
  • Company cultures … that essentially promote information hoarding
  • Failure to convey the value … to business executives & decision makers
  • Lack of training … which promotes use of all-too-familiar Excel

Which are all-too-true, but I’d also add:

  • Cost … costs per user are often ridiculously high for many of today’s BI tools

So how can we change this? Good question. The author believes that several roads must converge before BI will get widespread adoption. Namely:

  • Businesses need to fully appreciate the data gold-mine
  • Vendors need to provide lower-cost ways to license and deploy BI
  • BI interfaces need to be upgraded to present data in a manner amenable to the user
  • BI tools need to be able to work on relevant data stores

These points are also correct, but what really needs to happen is:

  • The tools need to allow the user to build as many data cubes as they need, on as many data sources as they have available – as a stale data warehouse is not very useful to anyone
  • The tools need to be available on-demand – current tools overload IT resources and limit implementation
  • Users have to think outside-the-cube when it comes to recognizing what a BI tool is and how they can use it
    – and
  • Users have to understand that a few of today’s on-demand spend analysis tools can be used for more than just spend-analysis

For example, tools like BIQ can be used for more than just spend analysis. This post details how the tool was used to detect overspending, find fraudulent claims, determine when failed equipment under warranty is worth reclaiming, and detect questionable resource usage patterns. Plus, compared to traditional behind-the-firewall BI tools, they’re very affordable for massive deployments across your organization.

In other words, even though they’re not perfect, with their built-in ETL, cube generation, and pattern-based rules engine, they’re significantly more powerful than Access and Excel and would allow the vast majority of office workers who need BI to use BI today.

Exploring EcoVadis

Last month, Jason Busch gave the sourcing world an introduction to EcoVadis in his two part series (Part I and Part II) over on Spend Matters.

In his posts, he noted that EcoVadis was a European (and, in particular, a French) provider of a sustainability solution for evaluating and monitoring suppliers whose primary focus is helping European companies meet emerging green and sustainability regulatory requirements. According to Jason, not only does EcoVadis monitor environmental and operational practices, but they also consider labor practices & human rights, fair business practices, customer and product responsibility, and sustainable procurement. This is important because, in the EU, there are country-specific laws that require green and sustainability efforts.

Jason also notes that not only does EcoVadis provide capability with respect to supplier assessments, supplier audits, and corrective action procedures, but that they are also compliant with GRI G3 standards and the pending ISO 26000 certification with respect to the 150 procurement categories they are currently supporting across 23 green/sustainable criteria (and the 1200 plus pre-defined questions at a user’s disposal).

In this post, I’m supposed to be tackling the technology underpinnings of the solution, but the fact of the matter is that the technology underlying the platform is quite basic – which it should be when you consider the goal. The goal is to give a procurement buyer a quick overview of the sustainability status of a supplier on a single screen while also giving the buyer the ability to drill down deep into the rating and understand where the supplier is strong and where they are weak from a sustainability perspective.

All you need is a “dashboard” that shows a snapshot rating of a supplier on each of the key categories with the ability to drill down (which is key, because, otherwise, a “dashboard” is useless) into scorecards for each rating to find out why the score was high, low, or zero and linkages to relevant audits, alerts, and reports that led to the scores. In addition to this, EcoVadis offers a 360-degree watch that aggregates human-reviewed news articles relevant to the suppliers and their sustainability ratings, benchmarks against other suppliers in the industry on the relevant sustainability categories, and highlight summaries of each supplier. With regards to the solution they are trying to offer, the only critical component missing is an administrative interface where the head of CSR can add additional questions specific to the company and category in question (as some companies will want to go above and beyond the regulations and others will have special needs). The solution, which is multi-linqual, has the ability to add specific questions by category and customer – they just haven’t coded a web-accessible user interface yet (as most of their early customers have been more than content with the extensive question sets built into the product).

The big advantage of a standard web-based solution such as Ecovadis is the fact that suppliers only have to answer a question once and the result of an audit can be shared across multiple clients. One of the biggest downsides to wide-spread sustainability initiatives is the severe burden they place on a supplier. Think about it – not only is it resource constraining for a supplier to answer essentially the same questionnaire from each of its customers, and undergo multiple audits on the same indicators (when one surprise audit every couple of quarters should be more than enough), but it is resource crippling to have to answer the same set of questions for every potential customer, knowing that you’re only going to win a percentage of the RFPs you answer. A supplier should be able to answer the questions once, go through the (surprise) audit once, and then not worry about it for at least a couple of quarters.

Healthcare – Three Way Matching

Today I’d like to thank Vinnie Mirchandani of Deal Architect and New Florence. New Renaissance. for allowing me to re-post his thoughts on Healthcare – Three Way Matching as part of Healthcare Week.

At the HiMSS conference a couple of weeks ago, I had the privilege of having an industry veteran – Dave Watson – as a tour guide through the exhibit hall. He has years of experience at Baxter and Kaiser and is now CTO at MedeFinance, and it was a joy to hear his commentary on the technologies on display.

But at one point, he mentioned “three way matching” and I had to do a double take. Why was he talking about an age-old accounts payable concept of matching invoice with purchase order and receiving report?

The concept has been adapted in healthcare to reduce medication error with some slick new technology. The three-way match is across patient, prescription and care giver (whether certified to administer the medication) information. It involves all kinds of RFID and other sensors, bar codes, software to check on conflicts, and drug dispensers with their own controls built in.

How bad is the medication error problem? A recent study reported “One in every 10 patients admitted to six Massachusetts community hospitals suffered serious and avoidable medication mistakes”

So we saw the Motion C5 tablet.

Look at all the capture and communication technology it integrates:

wireless connectivity: to access patient information and physician’s order.

RFID: to identify patients, medications and assets

integrated bar code reader: to manage medicines or costly supplies

integrated digital camera: to take pictures and capture video for patient education and sealed design: wipeable for quick cleaning and disinfecting

bluetooth: to help capture patient vital signs

security: integrated fingerprint reader, hardware based encryption

Then on to smart pumps like Hospira’s Symbiq which delivers precise amounts of fluids, medications, blood, and blood products.

More safety checks – this time between the patient code, the IV bag bar code and the pump bar code. A wireless link connects both the pump and the bar-code scanner to the main database, which matches patient, order, and pump. If correct, the order is checked against the hospital drug library that contains formulation and dosing guidelines. Once verified, the pump is automatically programmed and the infusion can begin.

For pills, there are other smart dispensers such as this Medicine Cabinet developed by Accenture.

At the show we also saw various voice recognition products from Nuance. Doctors are notoriously poor scribblers so dictating prescriptions can also reduce other medication errors.

Of course, as with accounts payable, you can also have a 4 way match by introducing cross-check with an inspection report. My wife who works part-time at a hospital tells me about the four-way match in health care: The patient who asks “how come my pill today is pink. It was blue yesterday”. Inspection report indeed.

Fallacies of Logistics Productivity Management

Manufacturing & Logistics IT recently ran an article on “The 10 Fallacies of Logistics Productivity Management” that noted that productivity management often represents the lowest hanging fruit for companies interested in reducing supply chain costs. It also noted that the failure to implement advanced productivity management systems may be related to a number of misconceptions surrounding productivity management system processes, technology, and impact. I’m betting the authors are right … because I know similar fallacies prevent many companies from adopting modern strategic sourcing support software.

The top 10 fallacies outlined by the article are the following:

  • My current WMS / ERP does productivity management.
    Warehouse Management Systems (WMS) manage your warehouse with respect to inventory, what’s coming in, what’s being stored, and what’s moving out. They don’t optimize your logistics. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) systems are even worse – they just tell you what you need to acquire to produce your products
  • Productivity management represents an unenlightened way of thinking about employee relations.
    Advanced productivity management systems emphasize such elements as management/supervisor engagement, detailed training on the best method to perform each job, and consistent employee feedback.
  • Productivity Management Systems reduce morale and increase employee turnover.
    The reverse is almost always true because employees want to know how well they are performing when measured against fair and objective feedback.
  • Productivity management benefits are primarily for the DC manager.
    Productivity Management provides a broad set of benefits that supports multiple organizational objectives by way of cost reductions and quality improvement.
  • Productivity management increases complexity and risk.
    The reverse is almost always true as it generally dramatically reduces operator variability by way of the increased training requirements.
  • Productivity management doesn’t add a lot of value.
    It’s true that engineered standards deliver results, but without productivity management, the extent of the results delivered will often be limited.
  • A new “system” won’t provide much incremental benefit when high quality DC supervision is in place.
    Good management is good – but precise, discrete goal time calculation and detailed feedback is better.
  • Productivity management requires too much time for data collection and administration.
    Companies with WMS and/or RFID systems already have the data collection infrastructure in place to support productivity management systems.
  • Productivity management is unnecessary in an incentive environment.
    Advanced productivity management systems offer benefits beyond incentive systems by way of discrete standards that precisely determine the specific goal times of each task.
  • Productivity management won’t fly in a union environment.
    It all depends on how you sell it … are you trying to ram it down their throats, or are you introducing it with increased training and a new incentive program based on the new, objective, metrics the system will capture?

(A Great CPO is) The Practical Visionary

A recent article in Strategy+Business which started off by noting that today’s Chief Information Officer must enable the organization to meet its strategic goals and to envision goals that were never before possible caught my eye. The article, which quickly quoted Michael Giledman who said that you (need to) spend a lot of time listening and fixing things in the background because you need to prove yourself if you want to be taken seriously, really emphasized why today’s CIO needs to be The Practical Visionary.

Moreover, not only is the article packed with great advice for CIO’s – but it’s also packed with great advice for CPO’s! The article noted that today’s CIO also trains her focus on the demand side of the business, becomes a serious contributor to business results, and harnesses powerful new technologies that make (real-time) information attractive and accessible. This is because a strategic CIO has much to offer the organization with her specialized knowledge of the capabilities, requirements, and costs of new technology – capabilities that uniquely position the CIO to help the organization set priorities that affect each and every one of its operations.

Replace “CIO” with “CPO” and add “product” to the above and you get Today’s CPO also trains her focus on the demand side of the business, becomes a serious contributor to business results, and harnesses powerful new (on-demand) technologies that make (real-time) information attractive and accessible. This is because the strategic CPO has much to offer the organization with her specialized knowledge of the capabilities, requirements, and costs of (new) products and technology – capabilities that uniquely position the CPO to help the organization set priorities that affect each and every one of its operations. That’s one of the best descriptions you’re going to find anywhere on what today’s CPO needs to be!

It’s a long article, but like many of the articles on Strategy+Business, it’s a good read. The article also stresses the importance of openness, intelligence, and interoperability – which are also key to supply and spend management success. And of course, just like the CIO has to manage the information life cycle, the CPO has to manage the product and service life cycles. The guidelines it gives for strategic leaders are also very well thought out and worth the read. So check it out.