We do love our acronyms in procurement, but rather than being an exclusionary tactic designed to keep “them” out, I like to think that shortening our long phrases to “TLAs” is in line with the resource efficiency we apply to spend management.
In Part 1 of this series I wrote about making a business case to bring in new procurement technology. All organizations have handled first-time implementations of some sort – whether they are switching to a full platform or adding a new piece of functionality to a system already in place. The thing about new technology implementations is that, after all the effort invested in vetting prospective solutions, executive teams generally accept the notion that having technology in place is better than not having technology in place.
Although procurement technology is nothing new, there are first-time implementations going on all the time. Whether you are introducing the company’s first full end-to-end platform or adding a new area of functionality to an existing platform (i.e., contract management, supplier information management), preparing a solid business case will help win over decision makers and improve the selection process. Articulating your POV can be the difference between getting the green light to go ahead and more discussion and justification.
In this series, I am sharing some of the lessons I learned as a procurement professional dedicated to hired services — both location based and corporate. In Part 2, I discussed the process of establishing demand and requirements, as well as the eSourcing considerations associated with each type of service.
In this post, I want to share some of the additional opportunities associated with hired services, along with the areas where procurement should proceed with extreme caution. After all, services procurement is about securing access to expertise more than anything else. As Julien Nadaud, Determine’s Chief Product Officer, pointed out in a recent Determine OutLoud podcast, “You can not buy people the way you buy goods.” Procurement needs to approach services with the same level of preparation that they would apply to any other complex, strategic effort.
I recently wrote about the differences between product and service procurement: from demand to specifications, and technology to relationship management. But as I pointed out at the end of the post, the idea that “services procurement” is one thing vastly oversimplifies this broad category. Perhaps that is part of what causes product specialists to shy away from services procurement.
In a recent episode of the OutLoud podcast series, Serving Up Services Procurement, Determine’s Chief Product Officer Julien Nadaud summed up the differences between product and services procurement in one neat statement: “It is very difficult to put services procurement in a box.”
Backstory: This blog is a synopsis of a presentation by Determine customer Dave Quillin, Manager of Procurement & Third-Party Risk Management at Alliant Credit Union, one of the largest credit unions in the United States, at ProcureCon Indirect West in September 2017. This year, Alliant deployed several modular solutions on the Determine Cloud Platform. This […]
Background: Salon Solutions is the premiere event in Europe for all things related to the fields of digital transformation, Big Data, e-procurement and e-business in general – more than 6,000 visitors attended in 2016. As a major presenter hosting six roundtable discussions, Determine covered many topics of critical interest regarding source-to-pay. While I did not […]
The podcast series that’s all about minding your business in contract management and source to pay. Following on the heels of a webinar with SIG and Chris Monk of Determine partner Protiviti on Third Party Risk Management Efforts 101: Aligning Supplier Onboarding to Contract Onboarding, the discussion continues with Tony Abel, Managing Director and Chris’ […]
