Category Archives: Vendor Review

Trade Extensions is Redefining Sourcing, Part II

In part I, we noted that Trade Extensions are redefining sourcing with their TESS 6 sourcing platform, unveiled at their recent user conference (which has already been discussed by the public defender over on Spend Matters UK), and indicated that what they were soon to release was significantly beyond first generation, second generation, even modern (third generation) optimization backed sourcing platforms, even though we didn’t precisely say what that was yet.

We outlined first generation platforms, and what the glaring issues and omissions were; second generation platforms, and noted how the rigid workflows limited not only flexibility but capability; and optimization-backed sourcing platforms, which, while much more flexible and capable and powerful, are also much harder to use for the average user. And we noted that in today’s post, we’d give a little more background on what’s missing.

First of all, especially in first and second generation platforms, usability is missing. The more the user wants to do, the less they are able to accomplish. Workflows are rigid, features are limited, and the optimization model is often fixed. And in third generation platforms, even though the flexibility is there and the optimization model is fluid, the reality is that the more the user wants to do, the more math they need to know, the more formulas they need to write, and the more difficult it is to build the cost models and scenarios.

Secondly, the more involved the process, the harder it is to determine the appropriate workflow. Since the most powerful platform is data centric with few controls, it’s just as easy to create a workflow that results in the core data being overwritten and destroyed or a workflow that results in an incomplete model as it is to design the right model under the right workflow that results in the right model and right scenario. Sometimes only the experienced can figure it out and get it right.

Third, most platforms centred around optimization have little or disassociated analytics support, when analytics and optimization need to go hand-in-hand in advanced sourcing. Even though Trade Extensions, like many leading platforms, has some analytics and reporting support, like many leading platforms, they are not currently best in breed in analytics. Optimization success requires appropriate cost models on accurate data in categories where there exists additional value to be captured. Without good analytics, the best categories may not be identified (and inappropriate categories may be rigorously pursued, wasting valuable time and resources to identify little or no additional value), the cost models may not capture all the relevant components at the appropriate level of detail to maximize the opportunity, and bad data can slip in and invalidate the entire result. Plus, forget about cleansing, mapping, and enriching without strenuous effort. (Considering this is the case in even most standard-faire analytics platforms, which claim to be best of breed, what can one really expect in a sourcing suite where analytics is just a component?)

Fourth, repeating events or creating similar events is typically quite cumbersome. Many platforms allow “copy”, but then a buyer has to go in and delete all the inappropriate scenarios, old suppliers, invalid starting bid data, etc. Some allow templates to be created, but these typically only capture the basic RFX questionnaires and cost models, and significant work is required to set up the timelines (which change little in phase duration), supplier pool, scenarios of interest, current constraints, etc. Trade Extensions allows templating, copying, initiation from fact sheets, and any combination thereof and is better than most, but there is always room for improvement and streamlining.

Fifth, visualization is limited, especially in first and second generation platforms. Most platforms limit visualization to standardized reports with graphics options limited to line charts, bar charts, and pie charts – which are not at all appropriate to visualizing global sourcing requirements and award scenarios. This is one area where Trade Extensions really shines, with Google Maps integration and the ability to plot global supply chains and proposed awards, but their dashboard reports are only average, and new 3-D charts are hitting the market.

Sixth, most platforms have limited support for different types of users and collaborators. While the lead buyer should be the one that builds and runs the event and identifies the award that is most likely the best, stakeholders need to weigh in on initial supplier identification, RFX response scoring, model design, constraints, scenario analysis, and contract proposals. Some collaborators can score, other collaborators can comment, and some users will need to create their own views, reports, and even scenarios. Depending on the affiliation of the user (organization or consultancy helping on the sourcing project) and their role, their access needs to be defined appropriately. Most platforms only have the concept of an admin or a buyer or a reviewer, and these are applied on a platform, and not an event, or task, basis. Again, Trade Extensions does quite well here, but anything to simplify user management for the buyer is a plus.

And so on. But these missing or incomplete requirements are key to advanced sourcing success.

For sourcing to advance, and the full power of advanced sourcing to be realized, a platform has to address these issues (and more) and do so in a way that enables buyers of all levels of experience and capability to take advantage of the platform and realize savings for their organization at an equal level. But this will only be possible in a platform that changes the way sourcing is supported, and that is why TESS 6 is redefining sourcing — so that, to at least a reasonable degree, it can overcome all of these limitations (and more). And do so in a way that makes advanced sourcing a natural exercise for every category — not just the high dollar, strategic or complex.

So just how is TESS 6 going to accomplish all of this?

We’ll finally get to that in Part III.

Trade Extensions is Redefining Sourcing, Part I

At their recent User Conference in Stockholm, recently covered by the public defender over on Spend Matters UK, Trade Extensions unveiled the upcoming version of their optimization-backed sourcing platform. With it, Trade Extensions are redefining the sourcing platform.

In first generation sourcing platforms, you have stand-alone Spend Analysis, RFX, e-Auction, Decision Optimization, Contract Management and, maybe, Supplier Information Management (SIM) modules where each module feeds into the next in a well-defined linear order: Spend Analysis into RFX. RFX into e-Auction, Decision Optimization, Contract Management, and/or SIM. e-Auction into Decision Optimization and/or Contract Management. Decision Optimization into Contract Management. Contract Management into SIM.

In second generation sourcing platforms, which permeate the market today, these modules are better integrated and data is more fluid. Data can flow back and forth between all of the modules. However, flows are still well defined. Data can flow from any module into any other, but only using well defined, scripted, workflows. You can’t break a process, or enhance a process, with capability from another module. For example, you analyze the spend data, and issue an RFX. You can analyze the costs that come back, and when you do, you can pump additional data into the optimization module. But as it’s not common to output multiple scenario awards into spend analysis, slice and dice for cost variances, and understand how the cost models and bids affect the global supply chain, there’s no easy way to push them into the spend analysis module. As a result, a user typically has to save the scenarios in .csv or Excel format and then import them into spend analysis.

In an optimization-backed sourcing platform, like TESS, that is properly defined all data is centralized in a data store and can easily be accessed by the RFX, Auction, Analytics, Optimization, and Contract Management modules. Because the system works off of common centralized data (known as fact sheets in TESS), cost models, and scenarios and not predefined, rigid, workflows, the user can approach the sourcing event the way they want to approach the sourcing event. They can create RFIs, send them out, get data back, create cost models, send them out for completion, analyze them, optimize them, go back to suppliers for cost concession or innovation requests, jump straight to negotiation and award if they get an innovative proposal, realize that a supplier can only satisfy 75%, cut the contract, and then push the unsatisfied demand back to the RFX for a subsequent round for a secondary supplier and so on. It’s extremely flexible. But it takes a skilled user to understand how to manipulate a tool that requires an advanced understanding of models, scenarios, workflow composition, and analysis. In fact, considering the user may not only have to design the workflows, but also the fact sheets, formulas, constraint definitions, and sourcing process, the skill level required to maximize the value potential of a sourcing is often more programmatic than an average user can handle. It essentially takes a skilled software developer to maximize what the platform can deliver.

And even though Trade Extensions, with their leading, state-of-the-art, optimization-backed sourcing platform has dozens upon dozens of clients making very extensive use of their platform and getting industry leading returns, they have also realized that the best results are from the most capable users and that there is always an opportunity to do better still. And not ones to settle for anything but the best there can be (even though they have the most powerful optimization-backed sourcing platform there is), they decided to figure out how to do better still. However, realizing that they were optimization experts and not design experts, they took a step back to figure out what was needed. After much consultation, soul searching, experimentation, user canvassing, and testing, they came up with an approach that will allow not just the pros, but the beginners, to use the platform with the same ease and achieve the same results, no programming skills, or training, required. And, even though they are already industry leading, that’s how they are redefining sourcing.

So what in particular is Trade Extensions doing?

We’ll get to that. But first, a little background on what’s missing (in Part II).

Basware: P2P for the Global “E” Part VI

In Part V, we noted that since we discussed Basware last in 2014 — where we covered their invoice and payment plan capability, their Basware Commerce Network (BCN), supplier/buyer portal, and their analytics offering — Basware has continued development in each of these areas and their invoice, spend analytics, and payment plan capabilities are quite powerful. But this is not all Basware has to offer.

Their standard e-Procurement capability is also very competitive, and, while you can’t claim to have e-Procurement without good requisition and PO management, Basware does have this down pat. Requisitions can come from every corner of their platform — RFx, forms, catalogs, T&E, and the shopping cart. This allows all spend to be put through the requisition process. Also, approvals can take place through the platform, e-mail, or even a smart phone app, allowing an approver to review an urgent requisition at any time or any place, negating the excuse “there wasn’t time for an approval”.

Once a requisition was approved, POs can be created from scratch, a blanket order, an approved purchase plan or saved shopping cart, and flipped from a requisition. The PO can be entirely processed in the Basware system, with complete history tracking and audit trails, and distributed to the supplier using e-mail, the supplier portal, EDI, or the BCN.

In addition to great invoice management, the system also has great p-Card management. The buying organization can integrate the platform with their p-Card provider, import the transactions, and automatically match the transactions on the monthly p-Card invoices with purchase orders and goods received. Once each transaction is matched with an associated, approved, business document, the invoice can be automatically approved and queued for payment. And if a transaction cannot be matched within a certain time window, the transaction can be flagged for manual review and brought to the front of the list for manual review.

The T&E capability, not yet covered, is also quite good. It goes beyond simple gathering, approval, and re-imbursement of travel and expense management and allows for the creation of entire travel plans for preliminary review, approval, and eventual claims. Rules can be set up so that if claims come in for approved expenses within a threshold (and with receipts for any amount above a threshold), the claim can be automatically paid, minus any advance. This is a very powerful capability. Once a plan is approved, if the employee sticks to the plan, the expense report doesn’t even have to be touched by human eyes. Good Procurement is only approving something once, and only looking at at something again if there is an issue. In addition, the solution can also integrate with banks and credit card companies and allow receipt amounts and claims to be automatically validated, especially if the expense is not on the corporate P-Card. Finally, the solution also collects all data required for tax authority reporting and tax authority claims (if the organization is entitled to reimbursement) as it implements VAT compliance for dozens of EU countries.

But perhaps the best capability is the Basware early payment discount management capability where it’s not only easy for buyers to manage an early payment option and a supplier to sign up, but for buyers to manage early payment discount campaigns when they first introduce, or re-introduce, early payment discounts. It’s set up on a e-mail marketing campaign system, which just about everyone understands.

There’s more, but for a much deeper dive into the platform, as well as a detailed SWOT analysis, check out the upcoming in-depth Spend Matters Pro [membership] series from the doctor, the revolutionary, and the prophet. This is one of the most in depth, most complete, and most accurate reviews you will find of this European juggernaut anywhere, and worth your time if you are looking for a truly global P2P platform.

Basware: P2P for the Global “E” Part V

When we last discussed Basware two years ago, we did a deep dive into their solution, particularly with respect to their invoice and payment plan capability, their Basware Commerce Network (BCN) and supplier/buyer portal, and their analytics offering. You can review this coverage in our four part series: Part I, Part II, Part III, and Part IV.

Since that coverage, there have been a few updates to the platform in these areas, but the biggest news is the recent Verian acquisition that extended their procurement offering, and we’ll cover this shortly.

From an invoice processing point of view, the match algorithm has been improved, as has the interface to the invoice. The upgraded UI makes it very easy to see not only unmatched invoices, but unmatched data, the closest match purchase orders, and all associated history of both. The pop-up windows allow a user to view the invoice and PO side by side, as well as the full audit trail if need be. From a payment plan point of view, the solution supports very powerful rules that allow a payment plan to match as many invoices as needed, and be automatically paid and approved subject to the rules.

From the BCN point of view, it’s growing year over year, at a transaction growth rate of 37%+, and should be processing 250M invoices by the end of 2018 and continues to add digital signature and tax compliance as more and more countries add regulations and allow digital signatures. The supplier portals have gotten a face lift, and it’s easy for a supplier to not only manage all communication, but multiple versions of their catalog for multiple buyers, as well as multiple price lists for different order volumes.

Their analytics offering keeps getting extended and improved as well, with the standard reports and dashboards now meeting 90% to 95% of what a typical buyer or AP clerk would ever need to look at. The reports have been grouped into three categories: spend, which are focussed on actual spend; procurement, which are focussed on overall process metrics and quality; and AP, which focus on financial data, process metrics, and overall end-to-end P2P KPIs.

The spend reports capture actual invoice data and payments and summarize, among other things, spend under control in a reference period, spend by supplier, spend by category, percentage of supplier spend under control, payment terms, and top n suppliers. The Procurement reports are focussed on quality and metrics. The quality reports focus on supplier quality and summarize active suppliers, (average) quality metric summary, rank by quality, rank by category, etc. The metrics focus on value. PO counts, by supplier, and by value. Average total order time by supplier, by category, and geography. Average procurement task time (for requisition approval, PO flips, etc.) and duration. The AP reports focus on finance, process, and KPIs. The financial reports summarize cash flow, cash flow forecast, discount availability, discounted invoices, discount trend, and similar financial data. The process reports summarize invoices — open, exception free, resolved exceptions, and average resolution time; tasks and durations; and average supplier acknowledgement/response times. The KPI reports summarize overall e-Invoice metrics, spend under control, auto-match performance, on-time payment, and average cycle times. It’s a very complete set of reports.

In other words, even though everything discussed above was quite good when we reviewed it back in 2014, Basware has kept developing and improving and streamlining, but that’s not all Basware has to offer. In our next post in this series, Part VI, we will discuss the other capabilities Basware has to offer.

DirectWorks: SaaSifying Co-exprise

Co-exprise was founded back in 2004 with a goal of building a new-type of direct sourcing solution not yet available in the North American marketplace. The goal was to integrate the new sourcing tools of the day — namely RFx, auctions, project management, collaboration, product information management [PIM], dashboards — with bill of materials, supplier engagement and management, and workflow management — capabilities not found in standard sourcing tools but desperately needed by manufacturers to handle their direct sourcing needs. In fact, it was so revolutionary that the doctor described it in 2007 as the first solution on the [North American] market to make a serious, honest, effort to address the complex direct sourcing problems that other systems cannot handle because these types of problems are unique and require a distinct solution.

The Co-exprise platform was relatively unique in its day in that it was built on a number of basic building blocks, including workflow management, business process rules, collaboration technologies, a centralized repository, project management, cBOMs (collaborative Bills of Material), cost models, and analytics, that were inherent to, and invasive across, the platform. This meant that all of the technologies were integrated into one collaborative workflow where all of the common data required by a direct sourcing professional was always accessible and analyzable. But, fast forward a few years, the platform had one failing — and that was that it wasn’t designed to be multi-tenant SaaS from the ground up.

Why? Back in the early 2000s, fast internet wasn’t pervasive, third party data center and application management was expensive and, most important, manufacturers wanted to keep their proprietary data in-house and valued deep security over remote manageability. But now that cost is paramount (and SaaS is always cheaper than in-house for non-IT enterprises), the cloud is accepted, and multi-tenant SaaS managed by professionals is often more secure than the corporate intranet, the playing field has changed and modern manufacturers want a SaaS platform.

So, shortly after a regime change, Co-express decided that it needed to go true multi-tenant SaaS, and that it would re-build from the ground up … as DirectWorks. Doing this would allow them to take advantage of new web development capabilities, such as better UI and distributed processing, that might not be doable if they just tried to do a straight port. So was this the right thing to do?

Yes and No. The new platform has a very easy to use and clean UI. Is extremely simple for the mid-size manufacturers that still use a traditional BoM sourcing approach that it was designed for. It allows manufacturers to organize items into products and products into programs so that sourcing and management can be done at the appropriate level. It still has good RFQ capabilities and a supplier repository. And a graphical dashboard with reporting capability.

But it still doesn’t have many of the features in the original Co-exprise product. There are no auctions. They may not be common, but sometimes it’s the fastest way to source commodity raw materials and items at market prices. Co-exprise had a fair amount of configurability and a workflow manager with some capabilities to customize the application to the buying organization, and the new SaaS product doesn’t really have either yet. The BoM structure and sourcing process is very inflexible, and there are no hints of true SRM.

However, while the indirect sourcing platform space is quite large, the direct sourcing space is quite small. The only players are DirectWorks, Pool4Tool, and SupplyOn — the last of which is mainly oriented around electronic interfaces and document exchange (but which also includes proposal, auction, and contract management capability). And while Pool4Tool, which used to lag in usability and integration among its modules, has now caught up and surpassed DirectWorks, Directworks has managed to port over half of the capabilities they built over ten years in two years, so it’s conceivable in two more they could be back to their glory days and a major fighting force on the market. Time will tell. And SI will be watching.

For a much deeper dive into the new DirectWorks, watch out for the upcoming Pro series by the doctor, the prophet, and the maverick over on Spend Matters Pro!