Category Archives: Vendor Review

AECsoft: SIM-Powered e-Negotiation, Part I

AECsoft, a Houston-based provider of Supplier Information Management (that also has offices in Atlanta, Las Vegas, and Shanghai), Supplier Data & Diversity, and e-Negotiation solutions, is a unique platform offering as they have a very competitive (and very configurable) Supplier Information Management (SIM) platform (that can be augmented with third party supplier [diversity] data) as well as a solid e-Negotiation platform that will meet most of the needs of many mid-market companies. Most SIM companies focus mainly on SIM, SRM (Supplier Relationship Management), SPM (Supplier Performance Management), and when they branch out they root into extensive, customized, risk, compliance, or sustainability solutions. Furthermore, most e-Negotiation platforms, once they have gone as deep as they can in terms of surveys, score-carding, and multiple auction formats, branch out into (stronger) spend analysis, contract management, optimization, and (corrective) action management. In comparison, AECsoft has taken a dual approach in its efforts to create what it calls a 360° Supplier Management solution that allows you to discover suppliers, manage their information, use that information in sourcing events, and then manage their performance during contract execution — in a manner that can be customized for each client. Given that they have over 200 customers, including some of the most progressive sourcing organizations in the world, it’s obviously paid off for them to this point, but I have to wonder how they are going to fare going forward given the divergent messaging in the SIM and e-Negotiation spaces and the number of best-of-breed players now competing in each. However, that’s a question for the analysts as we’re concerned about what they have and what they can do for you.

To this end, we’ll start with a review of the Supplier Information Management capabilities, which are used by over 400,000 suppliers that are managed by over 30,000 buyers at over 200 large corporate clients, around half of which are large multi-nationals (and many of which belong to the who’s who of supply chain innovators). SIM is their most mature platform, with development dating back to company inception in 1997 and production dating back to their first implementation in 1999, as well as their most extensive. The platform is setup to let new suppliers self-identify, buyers pre-qualify (before an e-Negotiation event, so the event can focus on negotiations and not discovery), and evaluations to be conducted in a 360° manner if necessary. Compliance can be enforced during the on-boarding process (as registrations will not be marked as complete and ready for review until all fields are filled out and necessary documents uploaded), status can be monitored (as alerts indicating expiring certifications can be set-up at any time and continuously monitored), and reviews can be scheduled in advance and pushed out at any time.

The system can be configured to track any kind of information you want — general, business data, contacts, classifications, safety & insurance, quality, certifications, product & service information, risk and so on. In addition, category/answer specific questions and workflows can be configured for any category, sub-category, or question which is answered with a certain option. For example, if a supplier indicates they supply laboratory equipment, you can ask what kind — balances, centrifuges, pumps, valves, piping and tubing, and if they indicate piping and tubing, you can bring up questions on pressure, diameter, etc. Basically, it’s your standard workflow-driven SIM where the supplier, who can access and update all of their information at any time, maintains its own information, by way of one or more authorized delegates. In addition, when the supplier logs in, the supplier sees all of the outstanding information requests that need to be completed — new requests, certificate updates, data confirmations, scorecards (self-scoring or buyer scoring), and so on. AECsoft put a lot of work into their supplier portal to make sure it was at least as easy for the supplier as it is for the buyer and it shows.

And, of course, the platform can be integrated with multiple external data feeds which capture diversity data, financial/risk data, and OFAC data, among other data sources, and which can automatically check SSN and EIN data in the US.

Finally, the platform is Hybrid SaaS, which means that AECsoft can deploy and host it for you or you can deploy it inside your own four walls. Unless you’re in Finance, Gambling (Casinos), or Pharmaceuticals, and are ultra-concerned about security and have top IT security pros in-house, I would recommend you follow the lead of most of their clients in other verticals and go SaaS. However, should you choose to go in-house, you can take solace in that the current version of the platform is built on .Net 3.5, MS SQL Server, and XML … and there are tens of thousands of developers out there familiar with the technology stack (which is 100% web-based in delivery).

In our next post, we’ll discuss the e-Negotiation platform.

Share This on Linked In

MCA Solutions – Bringing the Aftermarket Forward, Part II

In Part I, we re-introduced you to MCA Solutions, a Philadelphia, PA company that specializes in after market service (and service parts) optimization, and noted that they were still going strong despite some recent shake-ups in the market (and the noteable acquisition of Servigistics and Click Commerce by Marlin Equity Partners, who also acquired Emptoris not too long ago). We noted that, in addition to completing a strong SAP integration, they’ve also added a considerable amount of new functionality in the last two years around reporting, plan analysis, and reporting management.

Since we covered their new reporting and plan analysis solution in the last part, today we’re going to cover their performance management solution. Since you can’t manage what you can’t measure, and the best way to measure is often with a balanced scorecard, it’s based on scorecards, but since managers don’t like columns of numbers, it’s implemented using a dashboard, but since MCA agrees with me that traditional dashboards are inherently dangerous and dysfunctional, they realized that the only way the application would be truly useful was if it clearly identified not what was right, but what was wrong (since a goal of after-market service is exception-based management so that you only expend resources where needed). More importantly, the scorecard dashboard would only be useful if it allowed you to quickly discern what was wrong and do something about it. So what MCA built is a dashboard scorecard that not only highlights any metric that is out of bounds in red, but an interactive graphical scorecard that allows you to drill down into the metric retrieve all of the data associated with that metric in a single click.

Just like you can drill into a spend cube, you can drill into any metric on the scorecard. The first level drill will bring up all of the metrics the high level dashboard is composed of, and highlight which metrics are a problem. You can then drill into those metrics and bring up all of the associated raw data. So, if you brought up the scorecard and saw on-time delivery was only 80%, when anything under 90% is unacceptable, you could drill in and see the problem ports are LA and New Orleans and that San Diego, Washington, Vancouver, Boston, and Halifax were all meeting or exceeding their on-time delivery targets. You could drill in again and see that at these ports, most of the late deliveries were from West Coast Warblers and East Cost Easies and instantly know that either these suppliers have performance problems or that you’re not allowing them enough time in your inventory network design to transport the parts require to replenish your North American stock from your foreign suppliers. But since you can also drill into the application and the underlying model associated with any part, location, or supplier you can quickly determine if it’s a performance problem or a network design flaw. For instance, lets say you only allow 14 days for replenishment of goods in your LA warehouses from Shenzhen. Considering that sailing time is typically 12-15 days, and that it probably takes at least a day to get your goods unloaded at the port, and another for them to clear customs, get loaded onto the truck, and transported to your warehouse, there’s no way you’re going to get that part in less than 14 days by sea and it’s probably going to take at least 17 days on average, especially if these carriers are running slower ships. Then you know you need to adjust your model, and measure the supplier against a more reasonable delivery time. But if you are allowing 21 days, and your third party carrier is consistently late, then you have a supplier performance problem.

Moreover, the scorecard dashboard is completely customizeable. Each component is actually a dashboard report, and with their new flexible reporting capability, you can build any report you want. So you can design the dashboard to focus only on reporting problems. That way you can ignore the 90% of your network that is running smoothly and dive right into the 10% that isn’t running right, analyze the situation, revise the model, analyze the revision, implement an improvement, and see if the situation improves over time. If not, you can dive right in and try again. And if everything looks too good, you can define more metrics, more sanity checks, and find new problems to work on. Which is precisely what an actionable scorecard should allow you to do!

And your suppliers in China and Japan can use it too. The product is double-byte Unicode compliant and, in addition to a number of European languages, has also been translated into Mandarin and Japanese. With these recent improvements, you should be able to plug it right into your follow-the-sun operation and, once it’s configured and your data is complete, close the loop on your end-to-end after market service (parts) operation.

Share This on Linked In

MCA Solutions – Bringing the Aftermarket Forward, Part I

MCA Solutions, a Philadelphia, PA company that specializes in after market service (and service parts) optimization, is still going strong despite the recent struggles of a few of its direct competitors (namely Click Commerce and Servigistics who were recently acquired by Marlin Equity Partners). If anything, the recession (although it did considerably lengthen the sales cycle) only bolstered the need for after market service (as no one could afford new equipment) and optimization thereof (as everyone is strapped for cash and every penny counts).

As I indicated in my first post on MCA Solutions and their strategic service parts management platform, many large manufacturing, semiconductor, high-tech, aerospace, defense, and oil & gas companies often have tens of millions, if not hundreds of millions, of dollars tied up in inventory in their attempts to meet specified service levels, and every dollar in inventory costs them money in overhead. Since many of these companies typically have 10% to 20% more inventory than they need, they’re tying up tens of millions of dollars in working capital needlessly as well as throwing away millions of dollars in inventory holding costs — a situation which is easily remedied by a service level optimization platform that can optimize your multi-echelon parts inventory storage network such that your contracted service levels are met but your costs are minimized. Furthermore, as per the value of after market service in a down economy, done right, this optimization will also improve cash flow by roughly 10%, reduce inventory by 15% to 50%, and even improve service levels by 5% to 20%.

Since the last time I covered MCA in depth, which was almost two years ago, they’ve made a number of significant enhancements to their platform, the most notable being flex reporting, performance management, and plan analysis. Of these, flex reporting and plan analysis excite me the most, because the former lets you construct any report you can imagine (if you’re willing to write some SQL*) and the latter lets you build, optimize, and compare as many what-if scenarios as you want, which is the (one of the) most powerful feature(s) of any good optimization platform.

Their plan analysis tool not only allows you to define your service parts strategy (fill rates, inventory/investment caps, number of echelons to consider simultaneously in stock planning, etc.) and run an analysis on that strategy (to determine total cost and inventory distribution), and not only allows you to compare one strategy against another (how much do I save by sacrificing 1% of fill rate? how does inventory distribution change? etc.), but also allows you to define a rules-based sanity check that can be run against every model and the resulting inventory solution. For example, if the inventory levels change by more than 20%, the overall investment changes by more than 10%, shortages or excesses at any location exceed pre-defined maximums, etc., the product will immediately warn you that the new model might not be an acceptable replacement over the current one. Also, each of these rules can be defined by location, SKU (or family), or segment (or lane), which gives you a lot of flexibility in your analysis and sanity checks. (Other checks can include replacement rate, forecasting model [parameters], export mode, horizon, manual overrides, time factors, intermittence, thresholds, and other relevant measures tracked and/or computed by the platform.) Furthermore, they’ve also added the ability to generate plans by Average Customer Wait Times, which is becoming important in aerospace and defense, oil and gas, and other sectors where you have equipment that can’t be unavailable for more than a very short amount of time and service (availability) levels aren’t good enough.

While we’re talking analysis, they’ve also added a new multi-period budget report which is a system generated report that is very useful as it not only calculates total forecast, condemnation forecast, repair forecast, overall metrics, TSL, average inventory position, scheduled demand, new buy, and cost across your entire operation to anywhere between 12 and 36 months in the future, but does so using a successive series of automated optimizations where the output of one period is used as the input to the next. It will take anywhere from a few minutes to a few hours to run, but it clearly allows you to see the long term effects of any change to your aftermarket service (parts) strategy.

In the next post, we’ll talk about their new performance management solution.

* Yes, I’ll admit that I’m not your average user but I have to applaud them for acknowledging their expertise is not in the creation of report builders, that no set of canned reports, no matter how extensive, will please everyone, and that the right thing to do is expose the schema and let power users do what they want — which isn’t dangerous when you also give them the ability to make as many copies (partial or full) of the database as they want and to mess around with the copies, and not the production data.

Share This on Linked In

Algorhythm: Still Pounding Out the Optimization Rhythm on the Tabla (Part II)

In Part I, we re-introduced you to Algorhythm, purveyors of a supply chain optimization rhythm solution platform out of Pune. In the day before yesterday’s post, we discussed their new Inventory Planning Module, inventrhythm, and indicated how it allows you to take your entire distribution network design into account, which is necessary if you truly want to minimize your inventory costs. Then we told you that if you were truly serious about getting the most bang for you inventory dollar, you had to go beyond inventory and also consider your underlying distribution network design, as it ultimately dictates how much your inventory is going to cost you. Just like a bad product design will lock in expensive commodity and engineering costs before it is sourced, a bad network design will mandate higher safety stocks and sub-optimal transportation methods, which will in turn lead to higher carrying and transportation costs. Thus, to truly optimize your inventory, you also have to simultaneously optimize your distribution network to the extent that you are able to do so.

With Algorhythm’s new Strategic Distribution Network Optimizer, which seamlessly integrates their netrhythm supply chain network design module with their new inventrhythm multi-echelon inventory optimization solution, you can simultaneously optimize your facility location, transportation methods, and inventory levels to achieve your end-customer service levels while minimizing your overall inventory-related supply chain costs.

Algorhythm’s netrhythm solution allows you to define the warehouses that are available to you at each level of your network (and to define the warehouses that must be used, or must not be used, in the solution) in addition to source factors and end customer locations; the transportation methods available; the transportation providers available (as well as any that must be used, or must be used, and minimum or maximum business levels); fixed, minimum and/or maximum lot sizes; available lanes, forecasted demand; target inventory levels; and network constraints (with respect to linkages, warehouses, product mix, mode, etc.) and produces a lowest cost distribution network design subject to your constraints that will achieve your target service levels at each location. In other words, it’s a very powerful network design model that lets you take all of the relevant components in your physical network.

But the integrated solution is even more powerful. In addition to the many layers of your distribution network, transportation modes, and logistics providers, you can specify detailed service targets by location, SKU, and period. You don’t have to use average demand levels — you can take into account your detailed forecasts by month, week, and even day. You can model all of your inventory related costs at different demand levels; segment inventory by SKU subgroup, group, and category; and analyze by cluster and channel. You can look at your various cycle times, load factors, and flow options and do so with respect to all of your network and inventory constraints (such as capacity and existing agreements) and cost components (fixed and variable). For example, you can take into account fixed truckload and variable less than truckload rates from a third party and compare that with fixed and variable costs of operating your own fleet (lease, maintenance, etc.). And when you’re done, you get the network design that minimizes your inventory levels and associated costs while ensuring that your service levels are met. The reports detail what inventory levels are needed where, when, and the replenishment cycles as well as what providers move the product, when, using what modes, and at what load factor. It’s a complete supply chain plan. Furthermore, it’s easy to work with because all the reports can be output to Excel — which allows you to drill and pivot to your heart’s content until you see the data in a form that’s most convenient for you to internalize. (And while spreadsheets are not supply chain solutions — especially where optimization and analysis is concerned, they are good for report manipulation, and everyone is already comfortable with them.)

And the results are beyond what you would get with either tool on its own because not only does your distribution network dictate your inventory costs, but changes in inventory requirements over time will dictate your network costs. (If a warehouse becomes unnecessary because customer locations move and new lanes open up, that’s a considerable fixed cost that is unnecessary.) It’s a viscous cycle, and unless you look at both in unison on a regular basis, you’re missing cost reduction opportunities. Consider the case study of a major (FM)CG company in India that typically maintained about 115 tonnes of inventory in its network in an attempt to meet service levels. Not only did every tonne of inventory, depending on the SKUs in question, represent anywhere between roughly ten thousand and a few million dollars of working capital tied up in inventory, but every tonne represented additional inventory costs that chipped away at margin and profit. When Algorhythm applied their basic SKU inventory model, they were able to present the CG company with a solution that trimmed 25 tonnes of inventory out of the system without affecting service levels. (In fact, the average service level was increased!) When they moved to a multi-echelon inventory model, which balanced inventory not just at each level, but across levels (and allowed inter-level shipments as well), they were able to trim an additional 26 tonnes of inventory. But when they applied the full Strategic Distribution Network Optimization model, they were able to shave an additional 5 million tonnes. In the end, they more than halved the required amount of inventory to meet the service levels, and halved the network related costs. That’s a very considerable chunk of change that went straight to the bottom line!

Share This on Linked In

Stay Hip with the Program with Hiperos

Last year, I told you how you could Get Hip with Hiperos, an “Extended Enterprise Management” platform that allows you to manage your risk, performance, compliance, sustainability, and supplier information through a single portal that they dubbed R3. Knowing that you can’t stay still in the quickly evolving supply chain space (and knowing that there were lots of point players with deeper solutions in each), they’ve been hard at work on R4 since that time. Last week, I had the chance to do a detailed review of R4, and am pleased to say that they did a great job and that a number of significant improvements in R4 greatly increases the value the solution offers.

In particular, five improvements in the Hiperos R4 platform commanded my attention:

  • In-Line Collaboration
    It’s a pretty simple idea, but the fact that you can associate a discussion thread with any element of the system is quite powerful. No longer do you have to search separate discussion forums or, even worse, try to track down out-of-system e-mails to find out what happened, or why part of a questionnaire is still blank, or why a template was modified.
  • New Workgroup Capability
    Hiperos recognized that true performance, compliance, and sustainability is collaborative, that single-directional Q&A is not collaboration, and built in a new discussion-based workgroup capability that lets buyers, suppliers, and other involved parties collaborate through a centralized, integrated environment.
  • The Program
    Since compliance, risk management, sustainability, and performance all revolve around programs designed to satisfy a regulatory initiative, emerging threat, or a green goal in the real world, in the Hiperos platform, it’s now abundantly clear that everything revolves around the program, which is very easy to define and manage. There are three ways to create a new program. Instantiate it from a template, load it from a properly structured Excel file, or define it from scratch in the tool — which will walk you through its creation step by step in a simple 7-step process. (Outline Detail, Organizational Units, Questions & Documenation Requirements, Dates, Individual Organizational Unit Reqirements, Measurements, and Reviewers.)
  • Out-of-the-Box Compliance Programs
    They have over 60 compliance templates built in, with heavy support for the finance (BITS, etc.) and health-care sectors (HIPAA, etc.).
  • Supplier Focus
    The supplier portal is almost as extensive as the buyer portal. Suppliers get their own set of dashboards, which they can do deep reporting dives into to find out where the measurements came from and how they were calculated, relationships, which they can manage, programs, which they can track, and communities. Truly enabling the supplier on your platform goes a long way towards supplier adoption. The only functionality suppliers don’t get is Supplier Information Management (SIM) and Application Administration (unless, of course, they buy the platform themselves).

The system also includes a number of other improvements, particular in the area of SIM (where you can capture a lot more information in out-of-the-box templates and define your own data elements to be tracked), reporting (where, in addition to dozens of reports in each area that you can use out of the box, you can also create your own reports using an improved wizard that walks you though a simple 6-step report definition process), and built-in KPI and SLA templates available for your use (there are over 6,000 that can be accessed system wide). Furthermore, the dashboards are more than just pretty gages, they also contain a quick summary of your action items (open evaluations, pending approvals, etc.); the relationships you are responsible for; and current risk assessments, in-process supplier profiles and compliance controls. And while other providers might still go deeper in specific areas (though none go deeper in all areas), the breath of integrated capabilities put them in a fairly exclusive club as I have only seen applications displaying a similar breadth and focus in enterprise management from Aravo, CVM Solutions, Rollstream, and, in the healthcare and agency management verticals, Vendormate and Decideware.

Share This on Linked In