Tag Archives: Impact

Spring Forward, Fall Back

The changing dynamics of world events reinforce the uncertainty of life, and no matter how much technology advances, human behaviour remains unpredictable.

The concept of smart supply chains underscores the need for agility and resilience:


The threat on current supply chains requires procurement leaders to be more aware of the potential impact to their organization. There are a number of AI based tool sets that are available in the market [a useful ProcureTech link is included to help independent research].

A common business criticism is that the procurement process already takes too long and any increased complexity and additional risk management demands will place further strain on the process.

There is still considerable fear around the use AI. Recent business feedback highlight concerns with data security and a further need to perform greater process due diligence. The challenge is closed minds and extended time delays create barriers that do not help the organization to respond to potential supply chain disruptions.

Forrester’s research suggests as many as 86% of US employees fear that many people will lose their jobs to AI and automation, and almost a third (31%) believe that trend will manifest during the next two to five years.

It is understandable that many organizations hesitate to make the leap. What’s the alternative?

The best strategy is to develop a strong business culture. There is a high correlation between culture and performance. McKinsey studies across 1000+ organizations suggests a special ‘something’ enables competitive advantage to grow and sustain over time. That something is culture.

Why is culture so important to a business? Here is a simple way to frame it. The stronger the culture, the less corporate process a company needs. When the culture is strong, you can trust everyone to do the right thing.”

Brian Chesky, Co-founder and CEO, Airbnb

Despite the fears and the uncertainty, I was encouraged following a discussion with a junior colleague, who confidentially echoed the Forrester finding that Gen AI will reshape far more jobs than it eliminates. “Only those [individuals] would fail to use AI will lose their jobs”. Generation-z have no issue in leveraging technology; after all they have grown up in the digital world.


It is not about ‘having’ time, it is about making time

Oh no, now we have Intelligent Automation (IA)

To add to the already long list of existing and confusing digital technology acronyms; we have Intelligent Automation (IA). IA uses AI but builds on automation technologies such as Robot Process Automation (RPA). The diagram below illustrates the intersection perfectly.

Our previous articles have highlighted that AI is not yet widely adopted by many organizations and remains largely at the proof of concept stage.

A recent report from Hackett Group [2024 Procurement Agenda and Key Issues Study] underscores the progress of digital automation adoption and better illustrates the relative adoption success between RPA and AI. According to Hackett, RPA is adopted, or in the process of adoption, by 51% Procurement functions studied compared to 28% for AI.

RPA is not AI

RPA uses rule based scripting to integrate and perform repetitive tasks. It follows a process defined by the end user, however RPA can utilize AI agents. These AI agents can recognize patterns in data, in particular unstructured data, learning over time.

Value Proposition Expectation

The Hackett study differentiates between solution suites, such as ERP, and point technology solutions. Gen AI, RPA and ChatBots are all point solutions. The low level of large scale deployments of Gen AI (5%), RPA (19%) and Chatbots (6%) suggests a need to join up the ‘points’ and develop more suite solutions for procurement organizations to leverage.

Looking into the crystal ball and beyond the current AI hype, the combination of technologies would suggest that IA, which incorporates sub-disciplines of AI, like ML and Natural Language processing (NPL), is the logical and practical ‘suite solution’ outcome which we predict to be the digital automation toolset that provides real executable value for procurement.

IA could be that sweet spot that realizes the true potential of AI to deliver business value.

IA or AI : What is your success prediction?

Bold

ADJECTIVE

  1. (of a person, action, or idea) showing a willingness to take risks; confident and courageous.

Do we consider Procurement bold or risk averse? In risk averse organizations, the desire to avoid failure overrides the desire to achieve good outcomes (Lopes, 1987). An old debate suggested that Procurement’s risk aversion is limiting it’s ability to deliver value in the public sector (Public Spend Forum Exchange 2017). This risk aversion impacts the ability to find a better way and generate commercial innovation. Too often cultural mindset barriers are formed which are then legitimized through rigid procedures and regulations which in turn leads to further mediocrity. We all get tired of banging our head off the same wall……

Is Procurement bold enough to challenge those established norms and shift the mindset? Or do we sit back and bend to the immovable object that sees creativity as a risk that breaks the rules.

Boldness requires a wealth of relevant experience , and a level of confidence that comes from knowing your stuff! The question is how we change mindsets as today’s organizations face more and more regulation. The original study conclusion remains the same: the core issue concerns organizational knowledge, education and training.

For those seasoned Procurement practitioners, are we condoning risk aversion or helping facilitate a mindset change?

<Join the debate>

Procurement’s Innovation Dilemma

>>Evolution of Lap Time<<

F1 cars have become dramatically faster over time, and estimated to be 2x as fast as the original cars.

In recent times, speed improvements have slowed given the rise of ‘competition’ game changers such as safety, fuel economy and stakeholder interests. The goal posts are always moving; the F1 purpose evolved – its values changed.

Purpose of the Past

Sounds familiar? Your organization wants to improve the performance of procurement and ‘raise the bar’, however:

  • Procurement performance is ‘hard wired’ to cost savings –  price becomes an easy measure; cost is much harder to quantify and evidence; and non-cost factors valuation is over simplified to pass or fail
  • Procurement investment targets the sourcing and bidding processes – there are clear tangible wins especially where there is a ‘low bar’
  • Innovation investment is riskier, continues to ‘raise the bar’, but often targets value beyond cost savings
  • Procurement becomes stuck to its traditional ‘hard wire’ output (it is less risky and sits within their existing comfort zone). Particularly where an organization fails to change recognition and rewards; these form passive barriers to change. The ‘bar’ becomes fixed.

A breakthrough is required to avoid the law of diminishing returns.

>>New Purpose required<<

Where you innovate, How you innovate, and What you innovate are Design Problems

– Tim Brown

Using the F1 analogy, there will be a point where organizations need to evolve their purpose; either driven by the customer, regulation or market disruption. It becomes clear when continuing to ‘raise the bar’ that the same organization will need to realign their value and performance measures. This is a common ‘ high bar’ challenge. Of course speed remains core to F1, as costs will be for Procurement >>

Implications for Procurement

  • Procurement no longer have cost savings goals as their only objective
  • New value measures need to be established to reflect an enhanced and changed purpose – this requires a different procurement mindset
  • Innovation programmes enable new purposes. This requires investment, planning,  talent and leadership. Set a ‘why you innovate’ robust vision at the start!
  • Transformation is a business journey involving extensive internal and external change management.  Transformation takes time (typically measured in quarters and years). Tackle roadblocks quickly and stay consistent to the vision.

The game just became more complex. Is your organization changing Procurement’s Purpose?

The Age of AI: What’s Procurement’s fate?

We are now living through the fourth industrial revolution, and our daily life is being influenced and augmented as IoT, cloud, cognitive and artificial intelligence tech becomes more prevalent. The trend towards increased automation is benefiting business and improving procurement’s ability to transact.

But will it really revolutionize the way we work?

Machines are efficient at performing repetitive work, however where there are dysfunctional, chaotic, and unchartered environments; and where rules of engagement have not been established, replacing humans with machines would be considered untenable (and for future tech, seemingly improbable). For many of us, the last few years have been unprecedented, unpredictable and extraordinary. In the world of procurement, whilst many the problems have similar themes, each day brings different challenges. Although we would love to structure the business in such a way that would make it more predictable, the reality is that a large number of transactions do not follow a ‘happy path’.

the People Factor ……

Procurement act as natural trouble shooters, ‘go to’ individuals, champions of external relationships (who does the supplier call when they have an issue!), and supply chain disruptors. BUT the desired goal is not to develop a bunch of hero’s. Hero mentality reflects a process truly out of control and extraordinary effort is required to put things back on track.

Creativity, innovation and relationships are positive human factors. Unfortunately conflicted motivations, self-inflicted disarray, and obstructive organizational politics are human downsides. Typical organizations have elements of both good and bad, which means intermediaries, such as the procurement function, will continue to be in demand.

Strategy vs Transaction

Given the challenging complexity of procurement process, today’s AI investment market is targeting the simpler transaction problems: aiding and accelerating the PR/PO transaction, processing invoices that already match, asking if we want fries with our cheeseburger selection etc. This is a great start, but we want more!

AI, as a tool, has potential to add the greatest value with Spend Analytic Insights (e.g. spend trends and patterns, price variances, focus points), Contract Lifecycle Management (e.g. contract formation, key term assessment, meta data analysis, and renewal support), Demand Management (e.g. resource forecast, material shortages, order and inventory reorder), and Risk Management (e.g. spend irregularity identification, price outliers, suspect supply situations, block /value chain) Solutions.

Work impact … Advanced Procurement Business Management

Assuming we have laid the right foundations, our fate is to advance our value proposition. This is a hugely positive outcome. I am not suggesting that Procurement are more important than other functions; we are all part of the same team, however imagine a football team without a goal keeper and midfield players. Procurement can help secure and play the ball forward to ensure a team win.

Good procurement functions wear three hats: gatekeeper, subject matter expert and business partner. AI will give Procurement the ability to grasp new insights, manage by exception and develop deep expertise. Of course, the tech still needs to catch up with the hype. It will 🙂

Super powers to kick ass. Hero’s are not required!

Buying, Purchasing and Procurement – What’s the value difference?

For those working in the supply side profession, the perceived performance difference between these roles can be enormous. Is this because we are fixated by titles and getting recognized? Probably.

Titles aside, the challenge within any organization is articulating your value add. Where organizations are inclusive, and there is an understood benefit for a particular role, titles become less important. The team normalizes effort and then starts to synergize performance.

In those organizations where the functions are less mature, and or management is less experienced with best practices, there is a need to establish and build a function brand / reputation to underscore your targeted value add. There is a broad spectrum of skill set expertise / emphasis which requires us to position and differentiate roles. To confuse further, organizational roles titles may be interchanged which blurs the understanding around the role deliverable emphasis.

Key supply side function roles

Buyer: This role traditionally supports and generates the PR/PO transaction. This administrative role is important but tends to be overshadowed by the more strategic elements involved in supplier selection, negotiation, contracting and management (buying process). Check out a couple of Buyer job descriptions. Getting a super star that delivers the strategic elements as well as attending to the administration detail is rare. Individuals tend to have either strategic or transaction skill biases.

Purchasing: This role incorporates the strategic elements of the buying process, however there is more emphasis on compliance and governance activities. A common complaint about the purchasing process is that it seems to be arranged to hinder business, is risk adverse, and too focused on price rather cost. Together with a tendency to be reactive, ticking boxes rather than adding value can be an easy trap for less developed purchasing functions.

Procurement: This role includes all of the purchasing elements, and is typically targeted to add value and improve total cost of ownership. Procurement is much more strategic than Purchasing, and better aligned to organizational goals. Moving from a reactive to proactive approach is a key enabler for the function to deliver value. There is a much more emphasis on relationships. The downside is that the long game requires more effort and time investment. The upside is that business benefits are much greater (see my article x10 Impact).

The supply side source, contract, purchase and pay cycle is common throughout all the roles; but depending on how you position the function, the emphasis changes. For those within the supply side function, procurement positioning is generally preferred because of its strategic nature. This is not to suggest that the emphasis associated with the other roles is less important. Many larger organizations separate out the roles within the overall function to help manage the different elements of the value chain. Super stars are difficult to find, and harder to scale when you expand the function.

Positively, a recent survey suggests that 85% of respondents position the function as strategic. This is great news, however a more in depth survey is required to better explore the organizations understanding and valuation of their supply side function.

LinkedIn Survey screenshot

Operating Model

An operating model is the way an organization does its work, and considers the structure, roles and collection of processes it uses to perform the work. Depending on the supply side function capability and aspiration to build its brand/reputation, an appropriate operating model needs to be developed. Starting with the basic role building blocks and moving up the value stack is a journey and a valid strategy. Note: matching capabilities with the operating model is a continual balancing act. Change management is required.

For those organizations with the supply side function already positioned at the strategic procurement level, I wonder if the operating model is truly aligned with the targeted brand/reputation – Is it where you want it to be? We know there is always room for improvement and alternative ideas and strategies exist.

To conclude, titles and positioning statements are a matter of matching and marketing the function. The reality is that customers value what they value! The real test is whether you have the capability to deliver that value.

What’s your value add? Have thoughts. Please share. Contact Us.

10x Impact

I was asked the other day to articulate the secret recipe to become a successful procurement individual. A great question!

My on-the-spot response was that procurement offered a service and by placing the customer (our stakeholders) at the center, engaging to understand needs, and collaborating with the customer to develop solutions, procurement would deliver value add that the customer actually values.

Together with this positional change, and to ensure procurement understands the business, procurement needs to act as a ‘business manager’ to appreciate the cost, quality and time factor interlock. Too often functions operate in silos and lack appreciation of what happens upstream and downstream.

A win in one function which leads to a failure in another part of the organization is not a success for the business. The challenge is finding a way forward that respects each contribution and gives individuals the opportunity to play their part within the time constraints. Moving from a reactive to proactive way of working pulls effort forward and essentially delivers more time for collaboration, but needs a level of business maturity.

Unfortunately many organizational success measures are not consistent; they can conflict and sometimes force a short sighted and short term approach within the respective function. Establishing common goals will enable individuals to work together as a team, and focus on a shared objective. The sum of the whole is greater than the parts!

My favored recipe:

  • Customer centric mindset
  • Business acumen and value creation skills
  • Team work
  • Focus

Successful procurement individuals that enact and advocate these attributes will deliver 10x impact compared to their counter parts.

Have a better and or improved recipe ? Alternatives welcome. Please share and comment.

How do you calculate Procurement’s value add?

The procurement discipline has been around since ancient times; the earliest recordings dating back to the Greeks, Chinese and Egyptians. As a profession, modern day procurement and the so called ‘materials man’ was first termed by Charles Babbage, considered by some as the ‘father of the computer’ in his book, ‘On the Economy of Machinery and Manufactures’ (1832).

Despite these early beginnings, procurement has only been recognized as a management function since the 1960’s becoming more prominent as organizations understood a need for a more strategic approach to supply chain management. This begs the question, how is procurement valued?

Bang for Buck

The traditional and main key performance metric ingrained into Procurement is savings measurement. Throughout my career there seems no hard and fast standard; each organization measures savings differently (‘hard’ cost reduction, ‘soft’ cost avoidance inclusion or exclusion, as well as different definitional permutations and combinations in an attempt to establish a measure that the senior leadership of the respective organization understood and value).

Sales and procurement are two sides of the same table, but mathematically, providing you have the sales, sustained procurement effort gets the bigger ‘bang for buck’. For example:

  • Assume a $10 million organizational revenue, whose cost of sales of 65%, returning 20% profit. To grow the operating profit by an extra $1 million, sales would need to increase by 50% ($5 million). That’s a lot of sales effort!
  • In contrast, for the procurement organization, to deliver an extra $1 million operating profit for that same organization, procurement would need to reduce costs by 15.4%. That’s not easy either, but it’s less effort.

The challenge is that the above is a simplistic view and ignores the interlink between sales and procurement. Without the supply assurance of materials or resources, the organization has no sales. Without sales, the organization does not need to consume. The better way is to capture and align supply side value measures that link and support sales. The metrics need not only to capture the effectiveness, but also efficiency of the related processes. Additionally, with ever increasing complexities of supporting organizational brand reputation, supply initiatives around ESG integrity, sustainability, anti-slavery etc., dictate a need for a set of broader value measures.

Technology advancements are playing a major part in enabling organizations to generate and collect data, connect the dots, and support the ability to seamlessly integrate and grow the business. Intrinsic, automated reporting should be incorporated at the start of any digital journey, allowing the function to implement new value measures to track and visualize contribution. Define your measurable goals and start calculating your value add!

You get what you measure. Need help to develop and design your measures. Contact Us.


Net Zero

Carbon neutrality is no longer a matter of if but when. The 2021 court case against Shell in Netherlands demonstrated it is no longer about ticking the boxes but taking real action. What does this mean for your supply side? Scope 3 emissions cover all indirect emissions that are incurred in the supply chain both upstream and downstream and, for many businesses, suppliers can account for between 50% to 80% of total emissions.

Having accurate information on your supply base is imperative; this creates the first key challenge, “data” capture. With potentially 1,000’s of suppliers, businesses who have not structured or enriched supplier master data with the appropriate dataset will struggle to get to grips with net zero. There are a number of third party solutions to help businesses, however unless these tools are embedded into a robust supplier on-boarding process and regular supplier review, the process itself becomes unwieldy and less meaningful.

Accompanying this data challenge, a change of perspective and approach must be applied to ensure the net zero objective can be operationalized in a meaningful way. Importantly this action must be measurable and capable of being validated by customers. Is your sustainability goal more than lip service? What changes have you made?

Need Help. Contact Us

Payment on Time – it matters!

Global recession, supply chain disruption, inflation and erratic demand will continue to place pressure on businesses to improve their cash flow management. A recent UK Dun and Bradstreet annual SME report indicates that late payments have almost doubled since 2019 and invariably these delays are forced down the supply chain without agreement or consideration of any direct and /or indirect consequences.

We know organizations differentiate their customer base and prefer dealing with customers that are stable, consistent and pay on time. Organizations will penalize those customers that fail to meet these ideals – these penalties may not be transparent or explicitly communicated however they exist and will impact the customer negatively.

Examples include:

  • Addition of a risk price premium – charges are significantly adjusted to cover the risk of debt, interest and inconvenience when dealing with that customer. This addition increases cost of sales.
  • Service disruption – services may not be performed until payment has been made. Cash on delivery or advance payments may be demanded from the customer which actually worsens the organization’s cash flow position.
  • Finance charges – Letter of credit or other forms of finance guarantee, and interest payment demands add delays to the process and increase the cost of transaction for the customer.
  • Supply assurance – preferred customers will be top of the fulfillment list where capacity and material shortages occur. Knock on delays across the supply base multiples create a domino effect that destroys responsiveness.

Do not negatively impact your reputation by failing to pay on time. Take a considered approach; there are appropriate supply-side strategies that improve cash management, mitigate penalties and improve robustness.

Need a plan. Contact Us.