Category Archives: Procurement News

Why Procurement Needs to Open the Door to Supplier Diversity

Procurement is under pressure to engage more in supplier diversity. But help is at hand from organisations who can help make connections.

open door supplier diversity

In May 2015, the Australian Government set out Indigenous company contract targets for federal departments and agencies. Starting from 0.5 per cent, the targets were set to rise to 3 per cent by 2019-20.

The joint message from the Minister for Indigenous Affairs and Minister for Finance claims, “the policy will ensure that Indigenous businesses have the chance to compete and showcase the products they have to offer.”

Supply Nation is the Australian leader in Indigenous supplier diversity. The organisation exists to connect Indigenous-owned businesses with the procurement teams of government and corporate organisations.

Supply Nation has worked closely with government to collaborate and influence the evolution of procurement policy that is now represented by the Indigenous Procurement Policy.

We sat down with Supply Nation’s CEO, Laura Berry, to talk more about the importance of this benchmark, and how organisations across Australia can strive to meet it. 

Why is engaging with Indigenous-owned businesses and suppliers so important for organisations across Australia?

Supply Nation strives to increase opportunities for Indigenous-owned businesses to supply their goods and services to large organisations. Supplier diversity puts under-represented businesses on a level playing field with other qualified suppliers when it comes to competing for the supply of quality goods and services.

One of the major benefits of opening the door to additional markets and engaging in supplier diversity, is that it facilitates the growth of Indigenous businesses. This results in increased economic activity and employment, and channels greater social value back to Indigenous communities.

In addition, data clearly shows that supplier diversity drives significant and measurable long-term business benefits, aside from the goods and services, which can ultimately provide a unique experience to customers. The addition of Indigenous-owned businesses can bring increased competitiveness, innovation and savings to the supply chain.

What qualities and capabilities have you built that supported you in achieving better procurement outcomes?

Creating an environment where our members and suppliers can connect, develop relationships and identify future procurement opportunities is integral to the work of Supply Nation.

Supply Nation assists our government and corporate members with tools and strategies to embed supplier diversity within their supply chain through a tailored account management model.

We also provide support for business matching, opportunity briefings, supplier promotions, external training opportunities and networking events.

What are the biggest challenges Supply Nation faces in procurement at the moment?

As a not-for-profit organisation, the procurement challenges facing Supply Nation itself are not significant. However, for our Indigenous suppliers, the challenges are the same as those faced by small businesses across Australia.

These include the difficulty in breaking into established supply chains and conventional procurement processes, or in developing relationships with buyers.

With the Federal Government’s Indigenous Procurement Policy, there’s more pressure for government buyers to find and engage with Indigenous-owned businesses. We see a real challenge – and a real opportunity – in facilitating the connection between the businesses and procurement professionals.

What’s the first step for organisations looking to alter their processes to meet new supplier diversity requirements around Indigenous suppliers?

Step 1 would be to become a member of Supply Nation (if you’re not already)!

Take the opportunity to search for goods or services through our directory, Indigenous Business Direct. You can engage with a Supply Nation Relationship Manager who can help you navigate the process.

We can help with changing internal policies and procedures, connecting with businesses that meet your requirements, and setting up established and sustainable supplier diversity practices that are modelled on world best practice.

How can attendees benefit from attending GovProcure 2016 (where Laura is speaking)?

We have some amazing, successful and diverse Indigenous-owned businesses that are growing fast and delivering incredible products and services. I’d recommend everyone comes along to understand how they can engage not only to hit their targets, but also to get some insight into the benefits these businesses can bring to your supply chain.

Among other Australian procurement leaders, the event will also feature Ian Rudgley, CPO for the City of Sydney, a council that despite not being subject to the federal targets, has award-winning engagement and mentorship of Indigenous suppliers.

For more details on the agenda please download the brochure.

Does Insurance Against Failure Really Keep You Covered?

Is it really worth taking out insurance against system failure? Is the true value in a system that works first time, all the time?

space launch insurance

Download ‘Parting the Clouds‘, Smart by GEP’s latest whitepaper, to understand the difference between Cloud Solutions and SaaS Software.

There was a debate in the office that ran for a while when we were putting together the white paper that’s associated with this post.

“Yes,” said one camp, “we understand that there are technical, operational and architectural differences between Cloud and SaaS, but so what?”

In other words, why should Procurement care how their software “solution” is delivered to them, as long as it works?

“Fair point” said the others, “but if we believe the cloud model is inherently more secure, robust and future-proofed than the other, should we not call out that distinction?”

“Again,” came the response “if a SaaS implementation is backed by the necessary service level agreements from the supplier, what’s the difference?”

And that is when the subject of insuring space launches came up.

Bear with me.

Can Insurance Really Cover Everything?

Insurance is what we’re talking about, of course. Ensuring your Procurement operation can carry out the business at hand without interruption or disruption is a primary goal of selecting the right software system. The SLAs in the contract with the vendor are what comprise that insurance policy.

As is the case with everything in the insurance world, the greater the degree of protection you want, the higher the premiums.  But there is also a matter of the risk.

Seven per cent of satellites and spacecraft fail at launch. Recently some fairly dramatic launch failures have made the news. The ones that really make the headlines are those that involve the destruction of a payload that teams of scientists have been working on for years.

You can almost feel the despair and horror of watching a decade’s hard work destroyed in mere seconds.

Usually, but not always, these payloads are insured against multiple possible eventualities. Launch failure, failure on deployment, failure on landing – as in the case of the recent ESA Mars mission. Naturally the premiums are immense to insure an interplanetary mission. Often the insurance by no means covers the ultimate cost of the failure.

The many millions paid out after a launch failure may cover some of the financial stake invested by the agencies funding the project. However, there is essentially nothing that can recover the loss of the science that was to be delivered. The physical and material can be replaced, but the loss of the results is absolute.

Don’t Insure Against Failure – Do It Right First Time!

A far better form of insurance for space launches is a system that doesn’t go wrong. This is in fact the calculated risk taken in many projects. Catastrophic failure cannot be mitigated with cash, so better to spend the insurance premiums on building something that won’t explode.

And this is why it seemed an appropriate metaphor for the kind of SLA insurance under discussion. It’s all very well having the on-paper insurance for failure coverage, but that’s of little consequence if the financial value of the pay-out can do nothing to mitigate the real cost.

This is why, then, we feel there is a clear distinction between different interpretations of what “cloud” actually means. The fundamental underlying scalability, security, robustness and other forms of risk really should be considered when making a genuinely informed decision.

Comparing vendor contracts like for like you may see the same SLAs – system availability, uptime and access. But without a doubt the benefit of an SLA is in never having to rely on it.

If your procurement technology fails, are you really covered against all the potential losses? What risks should you be considering when adopting new Cloud technology?

Download Smart by GEP‘s latest whitepaper, ‘Parting the Clouds to find out all you need to know.

Could Brexit Cloud have a Silver Lining?

The Brexit result upset the apple cart. It also left many people searching for a silver lining to the clouds on the horizon.

silver lining

This article was written by Daniel Ball, Director, Wax Digital.

Marmite – you either love it or hate it as they say. Well, Tesco for one was probably agreeing with the second of those sentiments recently when its rocky relationship with the brand’s owner Unilever hit the press.

As you’ll remember the food giants’ spat was triggered when Unilever stated it would need to raise its UK prices. This was in order to offset the impact of the pound’s post-Brexit weakness against the Euro in its supply chain.

Tesco retorted by removing Unilever products from its shelves. A bold move considering the food manufacturer owns many leading consumer brands.

Weakening Sterling

To recap, in mid-October the pound fell to a value below €1.10 for the first time since March 2010. The pound had generally been on the slide ever since the UK’s EU referendum back in June. It was also performing weakly against other major currencies including the US dollar and those in most emerging markets.

In many ways this is bad news for UK consumer and business to business purchasing. Both as individuals and organisations we’re pretty heavily reliant on global supply chains, meaning that it will cost domestically-based organisations heavily.

UK manufacturers sourcing parts and materials from overseas to make products locally, will pay more due to poor exchange rates.

Equally retailers and wholesalers buying end products from other countries will pay more to put them on their shelves or fill their warehouses. These cost increases will inevitably be passed on to UK business customers and consumers alike.

Returning to Domestic Focus?

However the situation may not be all bad and there could be a silver lining in this post-Brexit cloud. One potential positive outcome from this situation could be some British supply chains choosing to return to a more domestic focus.

Weighing up the options in a less than favourable global financial position, it may make sense for some UK businesses to explore the cost benefits of buying locally. This will help to remove exchange rate risk, even if local supply is not the cheapest price book option.

After years of decline, UK manufacturing may actually receive a boost and resurgence of ‘Buy British’ standards of the past. However this will be fuelled by necessity, rather than a Brexit campaign.

Admittedly it’s an ambitious scenario. Imagine the impact of Tesco commissioning UK food producers to come up with viable, locally made alternatives to replace Unilever’s full range. Especially considering its brands comprise around half of the worldwide grocery market share.

Secondly, consider how a weak pound may also drive overseas buyers to look to British suppliers for pound-based pricing. This will allow them to realise the benefit when the Sterling costs are converted back into their own stronger currencies. UK suppliers could see new market openings and opportunities to trade overseas that once didn’t exist.

British supply may suddenly become in vogue.

Silver Lining in Currency Battles

For procurement teams choosing to buy domestically, a move such as this will mean significant focus on supplier sourcing and close inspection of supplier relationships. Necessary checks and due diligence would have to be built in, in order to ensure any changes in supply didn’t leave the business at risk.

Equally procurement professionals working supply side in the UK should seek to advise the business on how to make the most of new opportunities and negotiate effectively in supply relationships.

Brexit is rather like Marmite in that it divided the nation. But while there are fears about the UK’s future after Brexit, recent currencies-related battles have highlighted a potential silver lining.

Now could actually be the time where we see both onshore and offshore buyers eyeing up UK supply options over going overseas or opting for their foreign domestic choices.

Procurement would need to ensure necessary checks, due diligence and information management in new sourcing activities. There would be a need to ensure swift and effective onboarding. New contracts and relationships would have to carefully managed to minimise ongoing trading risk with new partners.

But if procurement can pull this off, who’s to say this cloud couldn’t have a silver lining?

What Can Procurement Learn From 2016?

From politics to procurement – 2016 has changed our outlooks. But what can the profession learn as we head towards the new year?

politics of change

I’m not a political person, never have been, but maybe 2016 has put paid to that. It could be my advancing years or the direct relevance the events of 2016 have created, but politics has now piqued my interest.

Furthermore, as a business owner, parent and amateur investor, it’s beholden on me to be well informed and to put in place risk mitigating strategies should the worst happen.

Different Outlook

To anyone who knows me, I think I’d fairly describe myself as a cautious optimist. Someone who believes in the enduring power of ‘doing the right thing’. I must say this outlook has been tested to its limits these last three months.

And with the result of last Wednesday’s US election now a reality, I find myself having to re-evaluate this mantra.

I think it’s fair to say that few people in business expected the UK to vote for Brexit. Even fewer expected the US to elect Donald Trump as President. To say that the pollsters who predicted strong contrary outcomes have been wrong-footed is an understatement.

As BBC correspondent Mark Mardell wrote on Wednesday, “it is perhaps ironic that our two countries, with a reputation for stable political systems, have declared political revolutions of such importance”.

Ironic or inevitable, if find myself asking. As Trump put it, his path to victory was ‘not a campaign, but a great movement’.

Undoubtedly from these 2 cataclysmic events there is the notion that globalisation has given folk a raw deal. There is a belief that the gap between rich and poor has widened. This is clearly nothing new.

But the events of 2016 are now showing us that people are willing to express their desire for change in a manifest way, and that the UK’s referendum and US elections have facilitated this expression. Clearly the belief that ‘we need people who change the world, rather than describe it’ has never been more true.

Politics & Procurement

So aside from emotive connotations of such seismic change, what can the Procurement profession learn about these events?

I’ve always read with interest the term ‘Force Majeure’ in contracts, essentially the common clause that frees parties from legal obligation when an extraordinary event occurs. Is 2016 now the year of Force Majeure?

As organisations have historically rushed to globalise their supply chains, are we now going to see a reversal of this and a more localised, protectionist approach to markets? The challenge for Procurement Leaders will be how to predict these events and to mitigate the risks associated with global change.

Without doubt we are entering an era that favours a less politically correct approach of yesteryear, one that rewards forthright opinions and direct action. The new breed of procurement practitioner will need to build this thinking into category plans, sourcing strategies and contracts.

I, for one, will be watching with interest.

How 9 Technologies Will Drive Global Supply Chain Disruption

Cloud corporations, supertrends, and potentially procurement without lawyers and auditors. Are you keeping up with technologies driving global disruption?

technological-disruption

Last week, Procurious attended the ProcureCon Europe conference in Berlin. You can read about our experiences, keynote highlights, and more on our Blog.

One keynote caught our attention enough that we felt it needed delved into in more detail. Professor Leslie Wilcocks, Professor of Technology Work and Globalisation at LSE, spoke about how procurement needed to prepare itself for digital disruption.

If you are a regular reader of the Procurious Blog, then you will be aware that we have a keen interest in future technologies. From drones and last mile logistics, to blockchain, we’re aiming to keep up to date with the impact on global supply chains.

So with this in mind, we revisit what was a fascinating keynote.

Prepare for Disruption!

Professor Wilcocks kicked off with the following statement: “Technology will disrupt pretty much everything between now and 2025.” This isn’t just the world of business, though that will see a massive change. But it’s also everything we do, see, touch, and encounter in our daily lives.

According to the GEP Procurement Outlook 2016, there are 5 so-called “supertrends” we need to be on the look out for. These are:

  1. Heightened impact of geo-politics
  2. Shift of economic power to the USA and emerging economies
  3. Continued decline in global commodity prices
  4. Increased impact of climate change
  5. Push to Digital

It’s safe to say that all five have been highly visible during this year. We’ll be keeping an eye out for 2017’s “supertrends” with great interest!

However, it’s the fifth trend that Professor Wilcocks focused most on. He believes that much of the interconnectedness and innovation being seen in procurement comes from the application of technology.

As we have frequently stated, procurement cannot afford to ignore technology. If it does, it cannot deliver true value to organisations, and faces redundancy, or obsolescence, in a fast-changing world.

Rise of “The Cloud Corporation”

Happily, the assembled procurement professionals were given a list of technologies to watch over the next 4-5 years. These fell into an easy to remember acronym, SMAC/BRAID.

  • Social Media
  • Mobile Technology
  • Analytics (Big Data)
  • Cloud Service
  • Blockchain
  • Robotics
  • Automation
  • Internet of Things
  • Digitisation or Digital Fabrication

These technologies all link together to help the emergence of digital businesses. Or as Professor Wilcocks put it, “The Cloud Corporation.” They also provide a number of opportunities and challenges for businesses. They need to be more agile, and manage on a ‘micromultinational‘ level, but it also opens up the potential for major process innovation.

However, Wilcocks did give one caveat on technology and innovation. No-one knows how to fully maximise the potential of technology. The only way to do this is by learning by making mistakes, something less agile organisations have proven themselves to be less good at in the past.

Transforming the Supply Chain

So how does all this fit together with disruption to the global supply chain? For the most part, the disruption has already started, and, as a result, organisations are playing catch up. However there are some tactics that can be used.

  • Organisational – realigning organisations strategy for supply chains on a functional, geographical or regional level.
  • Technological – ensuring supply chains are integrated to work best through better connectivity.
  • People – traditional pyramid structures aren’t optimised for the digital era. Human talent in the digital supply chain should be organised as a diamond, providing a more streamlined hierarchy, and better training opportunities at the lowest levels.

Switching the focus to the benefits of automation showed how the technologies could impact productivity. Traditionally, organisations have used five methods to transform their supply chains:

  1. Centralise
  2. Standardise
  3. Optimise
  4. Relocate to Low Cost Region
  5. Technology Enablement

However, there is a sixth that can, and is already, increasing productivity in supply chains – automation. It’s estimated that by automating, an extra 3-4 per cent can be added, on top of the efficiencies found in the other measures, by automating processes.

Final Word on Blockchain

There was one final word on blockchain before the end of the keynote. The disruption being caused by blockchain is, in itself, a protector for organisations from being disrupted. And organisations can leverage the technology to aid transparency, governance, and authentication.

Blockchain can also help with the evolution of “smart contracts”. These contracts can have rules set for automatically storing data, and executing commands.

Could it help to disrupt the disruptors? Probably, yes. Operating the technology at its most effective level could remove the need for banks, lawyers, credit cards, and even auditors, in the procurement process.

Whatever the challenges that exist, surely that’s something to aim for. Isn’t it?

Do Labels Matter? The Debate That Just Won’t Go Away

Purchasing? Procurement? Strategic Sourcing? Supply Management? As the profession continues to evolve, old labels tend to come unstuck and peel away.

chrysalis labels

Getting Out of the Back Room

It started in the 1990s. Like drab caterpillars transforming into magnificent butterflies, purchasing professionals left their brown cardigans draped over the backs of their uncomfortable chairs in dimly-lit back offices and emerged, blinking, into the bright hub of the business.

No longer a service department, we were suddenly business partners. We talked strategically rather than tactically, proactively seeking to understand what the organisation was trying to accomplish, and find ways to contribute to its competitive advantage.

But, what did we decide to call ourselves?

Almost thirty years later, the only thing that has really been agreed upon is to leave the term “purchasing” behind. Perhaps if there was one global, all-encompassing professional body, the decision would have been made for us, but unfortunately this isn’t the case.

In the U.S., the National Association of Purchasing Agents (founded 1915) changed its name to the National Association of Purchasing Management (1968). It finally became the Institute for Supply Management (ISM) in 2002.

In the UK, CIPS changed its name from the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply to The Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply as late as 2014.

Across private businesses and government departments there’s a bewildering array of labels and job titles. This, of course, makes the standardisation of job descriptions and salary levels unnecessarily difficult.

Getting Out of the Box

I’m half-way through ISM’s “Fundamentals of Purchasing” guided learning (e-learning) course under the tutelage of Dr Wade C. Ferguson, President, Erv Lewis Associates, LLC. The course begins with some of ISM’s definitions around Supply Management and what the profession actually entails. It led to one of the class (me, actually) asking Wade’s opinion on the term procurement versus supply management.

His reply: “Changing definitions represent the evolution that the profession has gone through. In the company I worked at for over 30 years, we changed our name from “purchasing” to “procurement”, but it didn’t really change anything, as procurement is basically a subset of supply management.

“It’s a necessary and important subset, but if you want to be more encompassing, we prefer the term ‘supply management’. It underscores the recognised breadth of the modern supply chain and the need for coordination and value optimisation.”

Wade argued that the reason for dropping the old label was a profession-wide effort to, “Get out of the box. Out of the myopic purchasing view, to understand what the organisation is really trying to accomplish. When we can do that, we’re perceived as being strategic, not just a tactical cost centre.”

Pigeon-Holed by Labels?

This argument makes sense when you look at ISM’s definition of responsibilities under the Supply Management umbrella:

  • Purchasing/Procurement
  • Strategic sourcing
  • Logistics
  • Quality
  • Materials management
  • Warehousing/stores
  • Transportation/traffic/shipping
  • Disposition/investment recovery
  • Distribution
  • Receiving
  • Packaging
  • Product/service development
  • Manufacturing supervision.

If you wanted to keep things in separate boxes, then I’d estimate that roughly half of the components above belong to Procurement, while the other half belong to Supply Chain.

This separation of responsibility might work in a company where, say, you have a Chief Procurement Officer working closely with a Chief Supply Chain Officer. But why not combine those two roles into one? It’s all interconnected, and it makes sense. And Head of Supply Management could be the label that encompasses the whole picture.

Here’s the thing – maybe, just maybe, the narrowing effect of “Procurement” labels is one of the contributing factors holding Chief Procurement Officers back from that coveted spot at the boardroom table.

Even for those CPOs out there who do in fact have responsibility for the supply chain as well. It’s possible that their very title means that this vast part of their role isn’t actually recognised by the people that matter.

Don’t Abandon the Progress We’ve Made

In a previous article, Procurious founder Tania Seary also called upon the profession to stop worrying about what we call ourselves:

“In my opinion, re-branding procurement is a distraction, especially since we’ve made enormous progress in educating businesses about what procurement does. Rather than having to re-educate the C-Suite about what a Commercial Director or Chief Relationship Officer does, that energy could be better spent actually showing people what we have and can achieve.

In line with why we created Procurious to begin with, we know that the procurement and supply chain profession has struggled to overcome outdated stereotypes, so it’s time we join forces to become collectively valued. By empowering future procurement leaders, we can change the face of the profession from the inside out, rather than worrying about the label itself.”

Things Certain to Change Again

“The only constant in life is change.”

…just as the only quote that the Greek philosopher Heraclitus will be remembered for is the one above.

The Procurement/Supply Management/Whatever-you-want-to-call-it profession has changed so much in the past thirty years that there’s no reason why it shouldn’t change again. By the time we’ve settled our current labels debate, it may already be outdated.

Can Procurement Lead the Fight Against Protectionism?

Protectionism will never produce a win-win situation. And it can be a huge wall for procurement to work around.

protectionism

Few procurement professionals view their role through the lenses of either protectionism or free trade. But the protectionism-free trade dimension is a crucial topic for procurement, so it is certainly worth thinking about the impacts on procurement the world over.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines protectionism as, “the theory or practice of shielding a country’s domestic industries from foreign competition.” Further, protectionism is a mind set as much as formal policy; it is the intentional or inadvertent preference for domestic industries over foreign industries.

Free trade meanwhile is “international trade left to its natural course without tariffs, quotas or other restrictions”.

The translation into procurement is fairly simple. Protectionism is limiting access to domestic procurement markets to foreign suppliers, and the preference for awarding public contracts to domestic rather than foreign suppliers. Free trade is the absence of this.

Protectionism is largely, or partly, illegal between numerous countries with free trade agreements (FTAs), such as the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), or are part of a trade bloc such as the European Union. But protectionism includes more subtle biases.

Ideas around boosting the local economy, creating local jobs and protecting the local environment are all protectionist when preferred over equal boosts to an economy, job creation, or the environment elsewhere.

Protectionism – A Zero Sum Game

The first strand of this article is that protectionism harms economies, jobs and prosperity, locally and globally, for two reasons.

Firstly, it is intuitive to think that sourcing goods and services locally has positive impacts, creating jobs and economic growth in the local area. But this is a zero sum game.

Protectionism is normally reciprocated. If one country has policy preference for domestic businesses, then other countries respond in the same way, offsetting the benefit. Protectionism may allow Country A to create more local jobs by awarding contracts to domestic businesses. However, when Country B does the same, export jobs in Country A are lost.

No more jobs are created and no additional economic growth is produced by procuring from domestic suppliers. Domestic industries get some short term benefit and exporters lose out.

Should We Really Favour Our Own Country?

Protectionists argue that public procurement in their own country should favour domestic businesses. In the UK, the contract for a large rail project in London was awarded to Germany’s Siemens, ahead of UK-based Bombardier. Cue outrage at job losses in the UK factory because the government awarded to a foreign business.

Unless protectionists believe they deserve double standards, this logic dictates that Bombardier should not have won contracts with Trenitalia, Italy’s main train operator. Nor should British architects have been awarded the contract to build the dome for the German Reichstag.

These created British jobs from German and Italian taxpayers. Hundreds of thousands of British jobs rely on British businesses winning public contracts outside the UK through non-discriminatory competition.

In the USA, incoming president Trump has riled against other countries “stealing” American jobs. However, he does not seem to oppose German, Japanese and Korean car manufacturers employing hundreds of thousands of workers in American factories. But surely the British and American governments’ obligations are to their own workers and businesses?

Maybe so. A country having an obligation to help domestic businesses and workers more than the rest of the world is understandable, but there is not actually any gain. Protectionism also makes British and American citizens and workers worse off.

Reducing Choice & Raising Costs

This leads onto the second reason. Protectionism gives citizens fewer choices of what they can buy and increases their living costs. The belief that protectionism helps local communities at all is flawed.

Free trade allows consumers to have the best goods, regardless of location. In the developed world, the UK is bad at growing bananas and the USA makes expensive toys, so free trade enriches citizens by allowing better bananas and cheaper toys.

Free trade allows businesses and citizens in the developing world to access the best technology and equipment that is not or cannot be effectively produced locally. In essence, protectionism limits the goods that citizens can buy, to everyone’s loss.

Hamstrung by Protectionism?

This has the exact same impact on procurement and the second strand of this article is that the procurement industry is hamstrung by protectionism. Protectionism harms both the procuring entity and ultimately the users of public services.

If a hospital needs new radiotherapy machines, it should procure the machines with the best combination of quality and price. In a world of 7 billion people, the best radiotherapy machines will probably not be made locally, and maybe not domestically.

Basing buying decisions on nationality rather than value for money and effectiveness of the radiotherapy machines hurts cancer patients and increases costs for taxpayers. As protectionism is reciprocated, it decreases consumer choices and increases import costs. This is without even a net benefit for domestic industries or workers.

This conclusion that should therefore be reached is that every protectionist move has pros and cons, but the pros are directly and equally offset by counter-moves, leaving only the cons intact and everyone worse off. Hardly a desirable outcome.

So in the context of the Brexit vote, Trump’s victory and the stagnation in global trade, the case needs to be made now more than ever that protectionism on net harms prosperity. Procurement functions have a large role and responsibility to their organisations, countries and the world to avoid it.

Disrupting or Disrupted? Why The Status Quo Won’t Do Anymore

If you’re not disrupting, then you are being disrupted. If procurement doesn’t get to grips with the right technology, then the profession’s future path is uncertain.

innovation

Watch our free webinar, ‘200,000,000 to 1: Using Technology to Find Your Perfect (Supply) Partner’, here.

The current pace of change around the world is unprecedented. Procurement and the wider organisation are quickly recognising that maintaining the status quo will not suffice in staying ahead of the pack.

However, that’s not to say that simply implementing a technology solution will solve every problem. No technology is perhaps better for the long-term health of an organisation, than a poorly chosen technology, implemented poorly.

Procurement 4.0 is a term many of us are using to encapsulate the changes Industry 4.0 is making in the supply chain. Also known as the fourth manufacturing revolution, Industry 4.0 marks the convergence of physical and digital manufacturing capabilities, where increasing automation and computerisation allow us to create so-called ‘smart’ workplaces.

Technology is at the core of the Industry 4.0 changes. Procurious hosted a webinar last week, in conjunction with Oracle, to discuss the critical role technology will play in the evolution and advancement of the procurement profession in this “brave new world”.

Ask the Experts

We invited David Hobson, Business Development Director, Cloud Solutions at Oracle, and Darryl Griffiths, Enrich Director of Delivery and Presales, to help us answer the tricky questions.

The discussion covered four key topics and challenges that face procurement, and provided some solutions as to how the profession can deal with them in the future.

Innovation

“IT is only ever an enabler for change.”

Procurement is under a lot of pressure today to find suppliers who will deliver the ground-breaking innovation that will give their company a huge competitive advantage.

However, real innovation is now coming from smaller, more agile companies, which procurement hasn’t traditionally worked well with. Traditional procurement structures and processes have been designed to work with large strategic suppliers, and are now inhibiting innovation.

We heard:

  • Why most rationalisation and standardisation efforts in the supply base have failed.
  • How the right technology or platform can ensure that performing supplier relationships are fully leveraged.
  • Why the challenge for business is to be able to adapt and apply new solutions and technology for competitive advantage
  • Why highly customised legacy systems, fragmented data, complex integrations and inefficient processes are hindering the digital innovation agenda.

Predictive Analytics

“Increasingly the evolution of the procurement function is to more proactive, rather than reactive.”

Spend management and standardising processes can come across as a pretty uninspiring (yet essential) part of what we do. Technology, innovation and digital strategies are where people want to be, but it all comes undone if we’re not managing risks in the supply chain.

On the table in this topic was:

  • The question of are procurement using the right tools in the right way?
  • The vast array of data available for tracking compliance, and how organisations can best leverage this.
  • How automating non-differentiating processes will free up time for value creating parts of the business, such as gathering insights into changing market dynamics.
  • Why many organisations are still grappling with getting data into a structured and accurate form that they can use for predictive analytics.

Streamline Processes

“Organisations that are effective in integrating data outrank their peers by 70 per cent across revenue and margin.”

If procurement can get its processes frictionless, we could then focus on the sexier, more value-adding, parts of procurement.

Standardised processes are a huge enabler for this. And, of course, technology plays a huge role in helping realise the benefits of standardised processes.

We found that:

  • In the past, often the best the system ever was on go live day, thanks to sporadic, or non-existent updates
  • Few organisations are entirely harmonised across business operations, as result of M&A, divisional evolution and conflicting business demands.
  • People tend to underestimate the complexity of stitching together the myriad vendor solutions as they aim for a more B2C-type interface
  • We will see gaming industry concepts and increasing virtual representation as part of Industry 4.0

Implementation

“The journey to Cloud is often viewed as a when, rather than an if.”

Time and time again, we hear stories about how the business case a software solution hasn’t been realised due to a failed implementation.

Among some of the most common reasons for this are a lack of understanding that this is a change management process, not just a technology roll-out, and cuts to budget for training and support.

Our experts also argued that:

  • Solutions providers need to move from being software companies, to being service companies, or risk losing their customers.
  • Grand technological visions of the past failed as the solutions we too far out of line with the business needs
  • Regardless of solution some common foundations exist for any project success which include rubbish data in means rubbish data out.
  • Change management is vital in implementation, or people will revert to old habits
  • Focus needs to be on proving the tools first to help quickly establish credibility

Watch Now!

These are just some of the highlights from the webinar. You can catch up with the full discussion by signing up here.

And the learning doesn’t stop there. If you have any questions, please let us know below, and we’ll make sure it gets passed along to the experts.

For more information, and to watch the full webinar, visit our dedicated page.

How Can Procurement Break the Chains of Sole Sourcing?

Whether its design specifications, or traditional attitudes, sometimes procurement gets painted into a sole sourcing corner.

single sourcing

This article was first published on Future Proofitable.

I am jealous of those who have never had to deal with true sole suppliers. I think IT buyers will understand me best. It’s just not that much fun. Let’s take a closer look at what sole or single sourcing is, and how best to deal with it.

I will cover the subject in two articles. The first one covers what it is, and the second will contain tips and hints how to deal with these situations.

Spot the Difference

If you there are a few suppliers in the market who you could buy from, but you choose to stick with one supplier (leaner supply chain, eliminated duplicating logistics and management, administration costs), you have a classic single source situation.

If there is only one supplier in the market, and no alternatives, you have a sole sourcing situation.

Real-life Examples?

There are many office cleaning services providers out there in the market. However, for a list of very good reasons, you choose to outsource it to one service provider. That would be single sourcing.

Now, imagine five different suppliers working on your ERP system creation and implementation at the same time, doing the same job for the same part of scope. Not fun.

Or imagine that your supplier comes up with exactly the product you need for your manufacturing process, but patents it and keeps on increasing the price at every opportunity. Even less fun.

How Does It Happen? 

For single sourcing, the option is deliberate choice. There are many advantages to it:

  • You keep the competition, because the supplier can be easily replaced. Negotiation leverage is at its maximum level like this.
  • At the same time, you spend less time for supplier management and supply chain administration.
  • You have consistent quality of items or services delivered. Or, if not, deal with it in one go.
  • You eliminate all non value-adding activities (some examples here).
  • The supplier will be more willing to work with you on various cost reduction or services improvement initiatives.
  • The threat of losing business in the future will be a big motivator to not overcharge you.

There are a variety of reasons why a sole supplier situation can form. Some are more to do with perception and resistance to change, while others are truly sole supplier situations. They can be categorised in three ways.

1. True Sole Sourcing

Where your company might depend on one supplier without any escape routes. For example:

  • Market monopoly – utilities (water, gas, electric); Governmental services.
  • Patents – technical designs; chemical formulae.
  • Lack of supply alternatives.

2. High Exit Barriers

There are situations when due to various barriers (most often financial – switching costs) competitive situations turn into sole supply situations. For example:

  • Equipment investment – when supplier provides plastic granules storage and supply systems; cleaning chemicals’ supplier provides funds for equipment.
  • Digital solutions (and their switching costs) – you may have had big leverage during first negotiations, but once the initial contract period is over you find yourself dependent. The supplier is technically not sole source, but switching costs are so painful that it gradually turns into one way street of constantly increasing maintenance bills.
  • Manufacturing supply chain integrations – this can often happen naturally, or through pre-existing relationships between different tiers of suppliers. Along the way, one supplier is sold to another, or bought out, and a partnership is ended even though production lines are tied together.
  • Industry regulations (or agreements) – for instance, in order to be able to insure cash in a safe, an insurance company might require a specific quality certificate from a very specific certification organisation. In this case, there is really only one option for supply.

3. Pseudo Sole Sourcing Situations

Frequently, evaluating the situation in the business is more about perception and will, rather than based in fact. Identifying these can bring big benefits.

  • Business users’ preferences – surprisingly, there are quite a few categories of spend where business users are permitted to have preferences. Next time you complain about resistance from stakeholders, consider the number of colleagues who work with particular safety equipment, or similar. And yes, over time, people tend to form preferences for brand name products. Implementing any change might be challenging.
  • Historical heritage – the classic “we’ve always done it this way” situation. It always been bought from this supplier, and only this supplier.
  • Business’ requirements – technical specifications, prepared by engineers. Delivery requirements, set by business users. Packaging requirements, defined by operations or logistics or marketing.

 So now you know how these situations may occur. The question is, can you do anything about it? And how? You’ll have to come back to find out more!

Why Procurement Can’t Have Its Head in the Cloud Anymore

Cloud computing is set to dominate every aspect of our personal and professional lives. So why do we still understand so little about it?

procurement head in the cloud

Download ‘Parting the Clouds‘, Smart by GEP’s latest whitepaper, to understand the difference between Cloud Solutions and SaaS Software.

The world’s biggest search engine provides a great window into human psychology, at least of those humans that it’s algorithms decide are sufficiently similar to oneself.

Try it, it’s fun.

Today, if I type “how” it immediately offers me “how…to roast pumpkin seeds”.  Interesting if not immediately an issue.

“Should” suggests “Should…I text him?” Oh, the angst of so many web users! The answer is, of course, no. But will that stop you texting? Of course not.

And “Did” rather disturbingly suggests “Did the killer clown purge happen?”

I’m not sure whatever happen to incredulity and scepticism but people will literally believe anything these days, it seems. And, apparently, the clowns are coming to get us all.

Cloud Computing – Why…?

As so often happens, all of that came about because I got side-tracked while typing another question into my search bar, “Cloud computing, why…”

I was intending to research why a cloud was first adopted as the symbol for the distributed computing concept as opposed to, say a web. But instead I was offered, “Cloud Computing, why…”:

  • do we need it?
  • use it?
  • it matters?
  • is it important?

These are all equally fascinating questions, and clearly asked sufficiently frequently to reach the top of the suggestions list.

Like so many rapid developments in technology such fundamental questions tend to get over-ridden by the pace of change and adoption.

Do we need it? It’s a bit late in the day to ask that question when increasingly we have no choice.

Why use it? Same answer, perhaps.

It matters because virtually every aspect of our lives is in some way connected to it and that in itself answers the fourth question.

Before the most basic of questions can be even asked, the offered answers already indicate some kind of fait accompli.

An even more basic question, that begins “Cloud computing what…” tellingly generates as its top two suggestions:

  1. Cloud computing what…is it? (naturally); and
  2. Cloud computing what…accountants need to know

Well, I wasn’t expecting that.

Cloud Computing – What Procurement Should Know

But it is perhaps an indication of where we are in this particular technology revolution. Cloud computing is set to dominate every aspect of our interaction with the world and traditional ways of doing business are being shaken up and transformed before we can even get satisfactory answers to the most basic of questions.

In our world of procurement the future seems certainly to be in the cloud.  All the software vendors, like ourselves are offering cloud solutions.

But does that mean procurement professionals know everything they need to know about what that means? Is it even relevant? Should you care whether your software is in the cloud or not? Does it matter, as long as it works?

In principal you shouldn’t have to worry about any of it.  But when it comes to making a decision, it’s probably best to be informed.

Cloud, it turns out, is very loosely defined and when selecting a “cloud” solution it’s important to know what you’re actually going to get.  Without a doubt the most important factor is what the software can do for you in delivering maximum value to the organisation. But just as important is knowing what questions to ask to find the best solution for you.

After all, if the internet is to be believed at face value we’re about to enter a new phase dominated by an even more terrifying technology. Clown computing anyone?

Do you know there was a difference between Cloud solutions and Software-as-a-Service? With all the Cloud technology available, sometimes it’s hard to keep track.

Download Smart by GEP‘s latest whitepaper, ‘Parting the Clouds to find out all you need to know.