Comments for The CPO Agenda blog http://blog.cpoagenda.com The blog for chief procurement officers and global supply leaders Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:05:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 Comment on Limitations of technology by Pietro http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2011/04/limitations-of-technology/#comment-145 Pietro Wed, 27 Apr 2011 15:05:19 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=57#comment-145 John, I agree with you e-processes/tendering may bring big advantages to all of us but I would absolutely not conduct any "big" project (the question here is what big does it means, where is the limit..?) using such a tool. Why? because those more complex projects need to be delegated and negotiated face to face and not electronical. A final crucial aspect is that the procurement manager must (!) make sure, before activating the e-rfq, that any request/needs/documeent or whatever is final complete and understandable. This is in the reality, almost by managing projects who need more effort, a very instabil point. Finally I would say e-tool always, but only for "easier projects" not less due the fact you talked about "the sceptic of the project manager/owner" ....starting so, it is quite sure to get some uncomplete documentation that would bring your/our project to fail. You will not loose sceptic with an elex tool but with valid argumentation and knowledge face to face to the Supplier in presence of the Stakeholder. Kind regards Pietro Mutolo CEO Italconsor Procurement Services John,

I agree with you e-processes/tendering may bring big advantages to all of us but I would absolutely not conduct any “big” project (the question here is what big does it means, where is the limit..?) using such a tool. Why? because those more complex projects need to be delegated and negotiated face to face and not electronical. A final crucial aspect is that the procurement manager must (!) make sure, before activating the e-rfq, that any request/needs/documeent or whatever is final complete and understandable. This is in the reality, almost by managing projects who need more effort, a very instabil point. Finally I would say e-tool always, but only for “easier projects” not less due the fact you talked about “the sceptic of the project manager/owner” ….starting so, it is quite sure to get some uncomplete documentation that would bring your/our project to fail. You will not loose sceptic with an elex tool but with valid argumentation and knowledge face to face to the Supplier in presence of the Stakeholder.

Kind regards
Pietro Mutolo
CEO Italconsor Procurement Services

]]> Comment on Know your numbers by Peter Smith http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2011/02/know-your-numbers/#comment-122 Peter Smith Sun, 27 Feb 2011 12:48:32 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=52#comment-122 Guy I don't disagree with anything you say - what really good Spend Analysis tools can do is exactly what you say - let a good procurement person understand the data better, ask 'what if' questions, slice and dice the data in different ways...do a lot of the hard work in fact. "Show me the compliance by category - by value and number of orders - split by internal cost centres and how much that is costing me in terms of invoiced spend". That's the sort of thing you can get to. But you still need a d**n good buyer to understand a. what questions to ask b. what it means and c. what to do about it! And it also (word of warning) strikes me that there is huge difference between the very best providers of this sort of software / service and firms who are basically not offering much more than a very big spreadsheet! So choose your provider carefully.... Guy
I don’t disagree with anything you say – what really good Spend Analysis tools can do is exactly what you say – let a good procurement person understand the data better, ask ‘what if’ questions, slice and dice the data in different ways…do a lot of the hard work in fact. “Show me the compliance by category – by value and number of orders – split by internal cost centres and how much that is costing me in terms of invoiced spend”. That’s the sort of thing you can get to. But you still need a d**n good buyer to understand a. what questions to ask b. what it means and c. what to do about it! And it also (word of warning) strikes me that there is huge difference between the very best providers of this sort of software / service and firms who are basically not offering much more than a very big spreadsheet! So choose your provider carefully….

]]> Comment on Know your numbers by Bill Young http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2011/02/know-your-numbers/#comment-120 Bill Young Thu, 24 Feb 2011 09:04:06 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=52#comment-120 "...what do you lose by getting a computer to make the deductions for you?" (I presume 'a computer' means somebody elses computer, a proprietory application, an external service, and a not insignificant amount of money. I can partly answer the question: time and insights. The really valuable thing you get from analysing data yourself is the deep understanding of what the organisation is buying. You don't get this easily from pre-analysed data, unless you spend as much time deconstructing it as it would have taken to do the analysis in the first place. When I was persuaded to buy external analysis, we had to throw the results away because of the errors. When you have done it yourself, you know where the errors are. Self-analysis of spend data, even from multiple ERP systems is straightforward. Every company has the tools and capabilities to do it, but they have somehow been persuaded otherwise. “…what do you lose by getting a computer to make the deductions for you?” (I presume ‘a computer’ means somebody elses computer, a proprietory application, an external service, and a not insignificant amount of money.

I can partly answer the question: time and insights.

The really valuable thing you get from analysing data yourself is the deep understanding of what the organisation is buying. You don’t get this easily from pre-analysed data, unless you spend as much time deconstructing it as it would have taken to do the analysis in the first place.

When I was persuaded to buy external analysis, we had to throw the results away because of the errors. When you have done it yourself, you know where the errors are.

Self-analysis of spend data, even from multiple ERP systems is straightforward. Every company has the tools and capabilities to do it, but they have somehow been persuaded otherwise.

]]> Comment on Know your numbers by Garry Mansell http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2011/02/know-your-numbers/#comment-116 Garry Mansell Tue, 22 Feb 2011 14:41:22 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=52#comment-116 I would agree with you totally. e-sourcing/procurement vendors such as the one I run are adding value now, and this is not an advert in any way. The numbers and an understanding of them are vital in any buyers role. I know because I spent 20 years as a buyer and CPO in the FMCG industry before becoming CEO at Trade Extensions. http://www.tradeextensions.com Most buying opportunities are in fact beyond the capabilities of Excel, and "what if" type examinations. A large number of Fortune 500 companies are using optimisation to help them manage bids and offers, applying and resolving business constraints. BUT they cannot be treated as "black boxes". Buyers must be able to dig into any scenarios they produce using powerful analysis tools such as those seen in OLAP (on line analytical processing) applications. These tools give buyers the opportunity to examine, slice and dice data quickly and effectively, encouraging the buyers to truly understand the consequences of the constraints they are applying and decisions they are about to make. We are not alone working in this sector, don't just look at us, examine our competitors too, who include Emptoris, CombineNet and Bravo Solutions I would agree with you totally. e-sourcing/procurement vendors such as the one I run are adding value now, and this is not an advert in any way. The numbers and an understanding of them are vital in any buyers role. I know because I spent 20 years as a buyer and CPO in the FMCG industry before becoming CEO at Trade Extensions. http://www.tradeextensions.com
Most buying opportunities are in fact beyond the capabilities of Excel, and “what if” type examinations. A large number of Fortune 500 companies are using optimisation to help them manage bids and offers, applying and resolving business constraints. BUT they cannot be treated as “black boxes”. Buyers must be able to dig into any scenarios they produce using powerful analysis tools such as those seen in OLAP (on line analytical processing) applications. These tools give buyers the opportunity to examine, slice and dice data quickly and effectively, encouraging the buyers to truly understand the consequences of the constraints they are applying and decisions they are about to make.
We are not alone working in this sector, don’t just look at us, examine our competitors too, who include Emptoris, CombineNet and Bravo Solutions

]]> Comment on Apples are not the only phones by Guy Allen http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/09/apples-are-not-the-only-phones/#comment-52 Guy Allen Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:49:05 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=17#comment-52 Thanks for the responses everyone. I didnt want to write a bland blog for my first instalment so perhaps you'll forgive the in your face style. I do have a view that RIM is a better business device, and I don't agree that Corporate buying decisions should be influenced by how usable a device is in the users private life, but these are personal opinions. I have also moved slightly in my view on the iPhone and iPad.....and will provide an updated blog in a couple of days. Thanks for the responses everyone. I didnt want to write a bland blog for my first instalment so perhaps you’ll forgive the in your face style.

I do have a view that RIM is a better business device, and I don’t agree that Corporate buying decisions should be influenced by how usable a device is in the users private life, but these are personal opinions.

I have also moved slightly in my view on the iPhone and iPad…..and will provide an updated blog in a couple of days.

]]> Comment on My journey to public sector cuts by Guy Allen http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/11/my-journey-to-public-sector-cuts/#comment-51 Guy Allen Wed, 01 Dec 2010 16:38:30 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=34#comment-51 Peter, Is that the sound of hairs splitting I hear? All I know is that my taxes go to fund both Network Rail and TfL. I also use both services and pay for the non subsidised part of those organisations through my ticket costs. If both organisations invest their funds wisely, then the subsidy that they require from Government (and tax revenues) would be less and therfore the deficit would be smaller. And I think there is an arguement for top slicing, forcing organisations to address sacred cows. Its how many corporate redundancy programmes operate. Either that or there needs to be a spending review at a micro level to avoid such wastage. And re my earnings and tax bill.....pot, kettle and black spring to mind! Peter,

Is that the sound of hairs splitting I hear? All I know is that my taxes go to fund both Network Rail and TfL. I also use both services and pay for the non subsidised part of those organisations through my ticket costs.

If both organisations invest their funds wisely, then the subsidy that they require from Government (and tax revenues) would be less and therfore the deficit would be smaller.

And I think there is an arguement for top slicing, forcing organisations to address sacred cows. Its how many corporate redundancy programmes operate. Either that or there needs to be a spending review at a micro level to avoid such wastage.

And re my earnings and tax bill…..pot, kettle and black spring to mind!

]]> Comment on My journey to public sector cuts by Peter Smith http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/11/my-journey-to-public-sector-cuts/#comment-26 Peter Smith Mon, 22 Nov 2010 10:59:54 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=34#comment-26 I disagree - we should just tax rich b*****s like you more heaviliy.... OK only joking. Very good points although some of what you describe is Network Rail and London Transport spend rather than 'pure' public sector. Network Rail is sort of not public sector (which allowed them to get away with some very 'interesting' expenditure and management practices if you read Private Eye). My fear in the current environment is that some public organisations don't have the skills to identify and implement the savings that can be made with the least pain to everyone. If they don't have the skills, then we'll see simple 'top slicing' spend reduction and some unneccsary spend will remain while necessary gets cut. So more bollards get installed while support for vulnerable kids gets cut. I disagree – we should just tax rich b*****s like you more heaviliy…. OK only joking.
Very good points although some of what you describe is Network Rail and London Transport spend rather than ‘pure’ public sector. Network Rail is sort of not public sector (which allowed them to get away with some very ‘interesting’ expenditure and management practices if you read Private Eye).

My fear in the current environment is that some public organisations don’t have the skills to identify and implement the savings that can be made with the least pain to everyone. If they don’t have the skills, then we’ll see simple ‘top slicing’ spend reduction and some unneccsary spend will remain while necessary gets cut. So more bollards get installed while support for vulnerable kids gets cut.

]]> Comment on Apples are not the only phones by Charles Letizia http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/09/apples-are-not-the-only-phones/#comment-21 Charles Letizia Sat, 06 Nov 2010 12:57:20 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=17#comment-21 Hi Guy! I think we met in a dinner some time ago in London. I will give you 10 reasons why iPhone is a great device. As a handset buyer myself I think I know a thing or two about mobile phones. 1 - I want a device to seamlessly connect with my work life. Email/Calendar/Address book worked from day one, little IT intervention to set up and has been working perfectly ever since. 2 - I want a device to seamlessly connect with my personal life. I can tweet, update my blog, check on Facebook and Linkedin, have video conferences right from the device. Again, easy. You don't need to be a techie to get these things working. 3 - If you loose your handset Apple allows you to block it remotely instantly to protect your data. 4 - 4 - Customer service is superb - a problem with your phone and just walk into an Apple store. Try doing that with other brands. 5 - You have hundreds of thousands of applications to enrich your phone experience, some of them quite useful. 6 - The interface. Have you used it? Nothing compares to it. Intuitive, elegant engineering, easy to use. 7 - I think dismissing iPhone buyers as design or brand-conscious is a generalisation. I've been a Nokia and RIM user for the last 20 years and a reluctant iphone user to start. Don't really care about brand and the design is always a plus as long as its functional to your needs. Functionality is what drove me to this great device. 8 - The buzz about the reception issues are mostly unfounded. All mobiles have weak spots, but problems with other devices certainly don't make headlines. I never felt any significant difference in dropped calls compared with other phones I used in the past. 9 - Battery life is excellent for a smartphone, the processor is lightning fast, the camera is high quality, the display is times better than anything else in the market right now, the overall build of the phone is - as anything Apple - amazing. 10 - iPhones have multitasking and you can certainly listen to music while doing something else. Fact-check before posting anyone? :) So a strong buyer with an iPhone - you certainly have one here! Cheers - hope to see you soon... Charles Letizia Chief Procurement Officer CWC Hi Guy! I think we met in a dinner some time ago in London. I will give you 10 reasons why iPhone is a great device. As a handset buyer myself I think I know a thing or two about mobile phones.

1 – I want a device to seamlessly connect with my work life. Email/Calendar/Address book worked from day one, little IT intervention to set up and has been working perfectly ever since.
2 – I want a device to seamlessly connect with my personal life. I can tweet, update my blog, check on Facebook and Linkedin, have video conferences right from the device. Again, easy. You don’t need to be a techie to get these things working.
3 – If you loose your handset Apple allows you to block it remotely instantly to protect your data. 4 – 4 – Customer service is superb – a problem with your phone and just walk into an Apple store. Try doing that with other brands.
5 – You have hundreds of thousands of applications to enrich your phone experience, some of them quite useful.
6 – The interface. Have you used it? Nothing compares to it. Intuitive, elegant engineering, easy to use.
7 – I think dismissing iPhone buyers as design or brand-conscious is a generalisation. I’ve been a Nokia and RIM user for the last 20 years and a reluctant iphone user to start. Don’t really care about brand and the design is always a plus as long as its functional to your needs. Functionality is what drove me to this great device.
8 – The buzz about the reception issues are mostly unfounded. All mobiles have weak spots, but problems with other devices certainly don’t make headlines. I never felt any significant difference in dropped calls compared with other phones I used in the past.
9 – Battery life is excellent for a smartphone, the processor is lightning fast, the camera is high quality, the display is times better than anything else in the market right now, the overall build of the phone is – as anything Apple – amazing.
10 – iPhones have multitasking and you can certainly listen to music while doing something else. Fact-check before posting anyone? :)

So a strong buyer with an iPhone – you certainly have one here!

Cheers – hope to see you soon…

Charles Letizia
Chief Procurement Officer
CWC

]]> Comment on Apples are not the only phones by Jamie Napper http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/09/apples-are-not-the-only-phones/#comment-14 Jamie Napper Tue, 26 Oct 2010 14:21:56 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=17#comment-14 I love the question (for its refreshing and direct nature!) and agree in part with the summary. But surely it only holds true for those who bought one to use as a 'traditional' smartphone?. If it was bought to access the multitude of Apps that turn it into a social networking / gaming and techno toy it is, and hey, it also serves as a 'phone as well, doesn't the observation fail? The iPhone is a product that seems to have made it's own market and as such is difficult to categorise and therefore compare to other 'of a type' 'phones. Take me as an example, I don't an iPhone as I love the fact you can get a cracking Sony Ericsson with a 12mp camera on it which means I can now leave my normal camera at home and still get some great shots. This purchase was made primarily becasue of the camera, and I paid a premium for that aspect, not the other functionality of the 'phone itself and the Cybershot functionality it has is seen as market leading. So would I be seen to be blinded by brand or buying something only they can deliver? I love the question (for its refreshing and direct nature!) and agree in part with the summary. But surely it only holds true for those who bought one to use as a ‘traditional’ smartphone?. If it was bought to access the multitude of Apps that turn it into a social networking / gaming and techno toy it is, and hey, it also serves as a ‘phone as well, doesn’t the observation fail? The iPhone is a product that seems to have made it’s own market and as such is difficult to categorise and therefore compare to other ‘of a type’ ‘phones.

Take me as an example, I don’t an iPhone as I love the fact you can get a cracking Sony Ericsson with a 12mp camera on it which means I can now leave my normal camera at home and still get some great shots. This purchase was made primarily becasue of the camera, and I paid a premium for that aspect, not the other functionality of the ‘phone itself and the Cybershot functionality it has is seen as market leading. So would I be seen to be blinded by brand or buying something only they can deliver?

]]> Comment on Apples are not the only phones by Thomas Holzapfel http://blog.cpoagenda.com/2010/09/apples-are-not-the-only-phones/#comment-11 Thomas Holzapfel Mon, 18 Oct 2010 11:37:17 +0000 http://blog.cpoagenda.com/?p=17#comment-11 Based on the number of comments, it appears that upsetting as many people as possible did not work very effectively - maybe because the reasons you put forward against buying an iPhone are rather lame. I think it is one of the mistakes of corporate IT and IT buyers to think of End User Technology as an item where only performance in terms of processor speed, functionality and maybe security matter. However, in the end of the day, you will have a much better return on investement, if you give end users a a device that supports them to get their job done, and that they *like* to use (many examples of corporate IT that I don't like to use come to mind...). So, maybe those buyers with an iPhone are actually a lot smarter, because they think about the total benefit of their investment, and not just about the cost. Oh, and why does Fujitsu invest money in its brand and its marketing team? Based on the number of comments, it appears that upsetting as many people as possible did not work very effectively – maybe because the reasons you put forward against buying an iPhone are rather lame.

I think it is one of the mistakes of corporate IT and IT buyers to think of End User Technology as an item where only performance in terms of processor speed, functionality and maybe security matter. However, in the end of the day, you will have a much better return on investement, if you give end users a a device that supports them to get their job done, and that they *like* to use (many examples of corporate IT that I don’t like to use come to mind…).

So, maybe those buyers with an iPhone are actually a lot smarter, because they think about the total benefit of their investment, and not just about the cost.

Oh, and why does Fujitsu invest money in its brand and its marketing team?

]]>