Myth-busting 2025 2015 Procurement Predictions and Trends! Part 11

Introduction

In our first instalment, we noted that the ambitious started pumping out 2025 prediction and trend articles in late November / early December, wanting to be ahead of the pack, even though there is rarely much value in these articles. First of all, and we say this with 25 years of experience in this space, the more they proclaim things will change … Secondly, the predictions all revolve around the same topics we’ve been talking about for almost two decades. In fact, if you dug up a Procurement predictions article for 2015, there’s a good chance 9 of the top 10 topic areas would be the same. (And see the links in our first article for two “future” series with about 3 dozen trends that are more or less as relevant now as they were then.)

In our last instalment, we continued our review of the 10 core predictions (and variants) that came out of our initial review of 71 “predictions” and “trends” across the first eight articles we found, in an effort to demonstrate that most of these aren’t ground-shattering, new, or, if they actually are, not going to happen because the more they proclaim things will change …

In this instalment, we’re again continuing to work our way up the list from the bottom to the top and ending with “AI”.

AI

“AI” is the only “prediction” or “trend” that would not have appeared ten years ago. (Ten years ago it would have been “analytics”, the favourite precursor technology.) There were 10 predictions across the eight articles, and this was the only category where they were not in synch (because the technology, as well as the usage thereof, is not only still evolving but not well understood). Given the vendor hyper-focus on AI (and especially Gen-AI) over the past few years, it is yet another “prediction” or “trend” that is not new, as we are still in the (over)hype(d) cycle, but one that should be adequately addressed as it’s where we have the biggest gap between expectation (pushed by the vendors and the analyst firms and the consultancies) and reality.

Before we go any further, here were the ten predictions from the articles:

  • Advancements in AI and Automation
  • AI: overhyped or underestimated?
  • AI and The Digital Transformation Revolution will Continue
  • Artificial Intelligence in Procurement
  • Automation and Artificial Intelligence
  • Digital Transformation, Automation, and AI
  • Focus on AI Talent in Procurement and Skill Upgrading
  • From AI adoption to AI adaption
  • Integration of AI and Advanced Analytics
  • We’ll Evolve from AI Adoption to True Integration

They range from continued adoption to adaption to analytics enhancement to seamless integration to true advancement in underlying technology, and with the exception of continued, mostly unbridled, and definitely unresearched, adoption, they are more-or-less all off the mark.

The analyst firms are still overhyping this technology to the max (despite continuing to publish studies that 85%+ of technology projects fail)). At least six (6) in seven (7) vendors are overhyping (Gen-)AI to the max, if not nine (9) in ten (10). The Big 3 (Google, Microsoft, and, of course, “Open”-AI) are promising miracles for all who adopt their technology. It’s being marketed as the ultimate panacea, the magic elixir of your dreams, and the silicon snake oil that actually works (among other things). And when you combine the facts that most people don’t have the mathematical and technological background to understand what a given “AI” technology is and, as Bertrand kindly pointed out, humans are biologically wired to be lazy, most are happy to close their eyes, cover their ears, sing “la la la la la la”, and buy in to the BS promises hook-line-and-sinker. So, whether the technology is right or not (and we’ll give you a hint, it usually isn’t), they’ll buy it. (And then blame the vendor when it fails to deliver, who will blame the consultant for improper implementation and training.)

So how accurate were these predictions? Did any hit the mark? Come back for Part 12!

Need a Good Solution? Make sure you ask the right questions off the bat … not just the hard ones!

It’s only been a few months since our last post on the topic of vendor selection where we flat out said that if you want a good solution from a good vendor, you need to start off by asking the hard questions off the bat , and gave you the 1-2-3 punch you should start with, but it seems that some vendors have come up with new tricks and you now need a 1-2 pre-qualification phase before the 1-2-3 knockout combo before you can decide if a vendor’s solution is worthy of your consideration.

Now that we have the richer enterprise vendors deploying fully AI-agents to make their standard pitches, create their demos, and, in some cases, even handle their fund-raising and sales cycles, you don’t know if you’re even talking to a human! And you need to talk to a human. An “AI” will only tell you what it is programmed to say and only feed you what it thinks you want to hear, and we all know how that is a recipe for disaster.

Thus, the first question you need to ask in the pre-qualification one-two punch is:

1. “Please tell me whether or not you are an AI construct, knowing that this conversation may be recorded and that if a falsehood is spoken, it may be used against your employer in a court of law, especially if the intent of such falsehood was to deceive us. Also, we retain the right to ask you to prove your response at any time.”

If you get a “yes” response, you must immediately disconnect and eliminate the vendor from your consideration. If they won’t even let you talk to a lowly pre-sales person in a third world country, what chance will you ever have of speaking to a real support person if something goes wrong?

If you get past this question, then the next question is:

2. “Is your offering built around, or just, someone else’s LLM/Gen-AI/AGI (including, but NOT limited to, ChatGPT, Claude, Azure, etc.) offering in a new wrapper? Again, this conversation may be recorded and we retain the right to use everything you say against your employer in a court of law, especially if the intent of the falsehood was to deceive us. Also, we reserve the right to an independent audit of your solution at any time upon purchase thereof.”

If you get a “yes” response, you again must immediately disconnect and eliminate the vendor from your consideration.

i. As SI has repeatedly informed, you there are only a few valid uses for Gen-AI on its own, and even fewer valid uses for Gen-AI in Procurement.

ii. Why should you pay a steep markup to a third party for a shiny wrapper when you can just license the source at a fraction of the cost?

Now, if you have confirmed you are talking to a real vendor rep offering you a real solution built by the vendor PRIMARILY on their own stack (and not just a third party’s in a shiny wrapper) that does something useful for at least some Procurement departments, then you hit-them with the one-two-three punch we gave you last fall:

3. Can, and will, you show me (not tell me) live … preferably on use cases or data I give you on the spot?

Again, the most critical point is you don’t want a canned demo, you want a live display showing you that their solution will do what you need it to do. (Not necessarily the way you envisioned, your process might not be the best or the most technologically friendly, but in a way that will solve your problem.)

4. Once you show me the core use cases, can, and will, you explain the breadth of use cases you developed your solution for and how they are specific to my business?

You want a vendor who can do more than answer a specific question when asked, and tell you the standard script on what their product does. You want a vendor that knows the real world problems that businesses have and who tirelessly works to build a solution to solve those real-world problems.

5. Once we tell you the extent of your solution we feel is appropriate, can you talk us through what the implementation and integration to our environment would require without bringing in a paid third party “expert” consultant? And how long will that take?

It may be a great solution during the demo, but the reality is that it is only a great solution for you if your team adopts it, which will only happen if it works on the technology platform and in the technology ecosystem they are forced to work in. It needs to seamlessly get the required data in from other applications, make it easy for the users to do their tasks, and then push out the needed alterations and decisions to other systems in the ecosystem. An app that stands alone will never get used and will fail even before the implementation starts.

If you get through these 5 questions, you have a real vendor with a real solution which will solve your problems to some degree, and one who should definitely be on the RFP shortlist, if not fast-tracked to negotiation if they solve a critical problem in a way that just works for you.

Myth-busting 2025 2015 Procurement Predictions and Trends! Part 10

Introduction

In our first instalment, we noted that the ambitious started pumping out 2025 prediction and trend articles in late November / early December, wanting to be ahead of the pack, even though there is rarely much value in these articles. First of all, and we say this with 25 years of experience in this space, the more they proclaim things will change … Secondly, the predictions all revolve around the same topics we’ve been talking about for almost two decades. In fact, if you dug up a Procurement predictions article for 2015, there’s a good chance 9 of the top 10 topic areas would be the same. (And see the links in our first article for two “future” series with about 3 dozen trends that are more or less as relevant now as they were then.)

In our last instalment, we continued our review of the 10 core predictions (and variants) that came out of our initial review of 71 “predictions” and “trends” across the first eight articles we found, in an effort to demonstrate that most of these aren’t ground-shattering, new, or, if they actually are, not going to happen because the more they proclaim things will change …

In this instalment, we’re again continuing to work our way up the list from the bottom to the top and continuing with “Category Management”.

Category Management

There were 2 predictions across the eight articles which basically revolved around a shift from generic sourcing to “category management”. As with almost every “prediction” and “trend” in this series, this is yet another prediction that makes headlines every year, no more important this year than the last, and still as unlikely to actually happen because, despite all the lip service around the value achievable from a category focus, at the end of the day, unless the C-Suite is convinced it will save more money (since it’s only savings they are ultimately concerned about), it doesn’t happen. Before we discuss further, here were the two predictions:

  • Category Management Takes Center Stage
  • We’ll See More Emphasis on Category Management Innovation

Category Management is yet another topic that a small contingent of thought leaders, Gurus, and consultants bring up year after year. And it’s yet another topic that never really sees the light of day. Especially when you consider that, at any given time, less than (half-a) dozen vendors take a category-centric approach to sourcing, and only a handful of consultancies push the approach.

We wholeheartedly agree that category centric Procurement is the key to value creation in certain enterprises where some categories are more strategic than others, have unique characteristics that can be exploited at the category level, and where experts can identify unique avenues of pursuit that will allow for strategic differentiation that can allow the company to charge more for the finished products, thus creating the value management that the experts say Procurement should be focussed on. However, as this is a value-centric activity that is, initially, far removed from the cost-cutting focus that CFOs and CEOs ultimately hand down to the head of Procurement, it will continue to live on the periphery of Procurement and only come into play in select organizations for select strategic categories.

What Should Happen? (But Won’t!)

What should happen is stupid simple. Analyze all the categories you buy and determine which categories, if any, should be sourced and procured using a category-centric approach. Then, category strategies and processes should be implemented for those categories and the remaining products and services should be sourced as they typically are. That’s it.

Nine down. Just one (big one) to go!

Myth-busting 2025 2015 Procurement Predictions and Trends! Part 9

Introduction

In our first instalment, we noted that the ambitious started pumping out 2025 prediction and trend articles in late November / early December, wanting to be ahead of the pack, even though there is rarely much value in these articles. First of all, and we say this with 25 years of experience in this space, the more they proclaim things will change … Secondly, the predictions all revolve around the same topics we’ve been talking about for almost two decades. In fact, if you dug up a Procurement predictions article for 2015, there’s a good chance 9 of the top 10 topic areas would be the same. (And see the links in our first article for two “future” series with about 3 dozen trends that are more or less as relevant now as they were then.)

In our last instalment, we continued our review of the 10 core predictions (and variants) that came out of our initial review of 71 “predictions” and “trends” across the first eight articles we found, in an effort to demonstrate that most of these aren’t ground-shattering, new, or, if they actually are, not going to happen because the more they proclaim things will change …

In this instalment, we’re again continuing to work our way up the list from the bottom to the top and continuing with “Cost vs. Value”.

Cost Vs. Value

There were 3 predictions across the eight articles which basically revolved around a shift from “cost cutting and management” to “value creation”. As with almost every “prediction” and “trend” in this series, this is yet another prediction that makes headlines every year, no more important this year than the last, and still as unlikely to actually happen because, despite all the lip service around value, at the end of the day, all the CFO and CEO ultimately care about is increased profit from cost-cutting to make the Board happy. Before we discuss further, here were the three predictions:

  • Cost Management and Value Creation
  • Cost Management vs. Value Creation
  • Shift from Cost Cutting to Value Creation

Every year is the year Procurement is going to switch en-masse from cost cutting and cost management to value creation, and every year it doesn’t happen. We’re constantly being told that Procurement is not a cost center, it’s a value center, and proper Procurement adds value to the business, as a foundation for the “visionaries” to preach the power, and future, of Procurement.

However, as we stated in our discussion of “Strategic Value”, there’s a lot of talk about value creation, but at the end of the day, the majority of CFOs and CEOs define “Value” as “Cost Savings” and, unless Procurement cuts costs, they are not seen as “valuable”. And all of the proclaimed focus on “value creation” gets left on the cutting room floor (where Gen-AI should have been left with the rest of the discarded manuscripts).

However, once Procurement acquires the right technology, it will be super simple to make the right buy at the right price every time. (More specifically, optimization backed sourcing and procurement platforms that build baseline models, capture real-world constraints, import risk data, build minimally constrained risk-aware models, auto-solve them, make the optimal low-cost recommendation, and make what-if analysis easy if the buyer wants to see what would happen by substituting a preferred supplier. Not BS AI!) This means that Procurement will have all the time it needs to focus on strategic value vs. just finding the lowest cost (which takes up all its time now). So this is someplace Procurement should get to relatively soon — but considering we’ve had modern SSDO (Strategic Sourcing Decision Optimization) for almost 25 years, and that for the last decade it could solve large models in real-time with the computing power available, and that the vast majority of Sourcing and Procurement departments have not adopted it, our guess is that they won’t. And Procurement will thus continue to spend the majority of its time focussed on cost cutting.

What Should Happen? (But Won’t!)

If it doesn’t have it already, and it probably doesn’t, Procurement should immediately acquire SSDO (Strategic Sourcing Decision Optimization Technology) and use it for every sourcing event, even if to get a baseline to understand the cost baselines (and how much more they are going to pay regardless of inflation no matter how much they try to negotiate or buy). In addition, if they don’t have it already, they should acquire subscriptions to market cost data (commodity markets, public sector contracts, GPO data, etc.) to understand baseline commodity and product costs.

Then, when they understand the expected cost, use a combination of constraint-aware optimization and analytics to make the right decision as expediently as possible — and not waste time on futile spreadsheet analysis or negotiations that can’t go anywhere (because a price reduction from a supplier would mean the supplier’s bankruptcy).

Then, the focus should shift from minimizing costs, because that’s only going to get an organization so far, and finding value in every buy it makes, partnership it takes, and direction it breaks. It needs to, as per previous entries in this series, focus on maximizing the value of each supplier relationship through performance management and any collaboration required to make sure the expected value is realized for both parties. Focus has to be not just on the lowest cost, but quality and features that buyers will pay more for. Focus needs to be on identifying new products and services that are simultaneously more sustainable and more desirable to the market. And on curbing demand for MRO products and services to prevent spend in the first place. (Just make sure you have the Procurement Infrastructure to support you.)

That’s eight down, two to go.