Comments for Vendor Management http://blog.hudgeon.com Procurement, spend analysis and vendor management Sun, 19 Jul 2009 03:30:19 +0000 http://wordpress.com/ hourly 1 Comment on Goodbye for now… by Jeff Gordon http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/07/17/goodbye-for-now/#comment-12684 Jeff Gordon Sun, 19 Jul 2009 03:30:19 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/07/17/goodbye-for-now/#comment-12684 Doug: Sorry to see you go, but it sounds like you're moving in the right direction. Best of luck on your new position! ~Jeff Doug:

Sorry to see you go, but it sounds like you’re moving in the right direction. Best of luck on your new position!

~Jeff

]]> Comment on US 2008 Election Campaign Spend Data – Part 02 by US 2008 Election Campaign Spend Data - Part 02 « Vendor Management http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/04/16/us-2008-election-campaign-spend-data-part-02/#comment-12676 US 2008 Election Campaign Spend Data - Part 02 « Vendor Management Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:53:14 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=401#comment-12676 [...] post: US 2008 Election Campaign Spend Data - Part 02 « Vendor Management Tags: building, categorise-each, ensures, james-purchase, kitchen-supplies, kpmg, [...] [...] post: US 2008 Election Campaign Spend Data – Part 02 « Vendor Management Tags: building, categorise-each, ensures, james-purchase, kitchen-supplies, kpmg, [...]

]]> Comment on Marketing, Procurement and Sustainability by tenders http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/03/20/from-twitter-03-19-2009/#comment-12641 tenders Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:29:06 +0000 http://hudgeon.wordpress.com/2009/03/20/from-twitter-03-19-2009/#comment-12641 Thanks for the links - these are some very interesting sources of information. I will look into them in more detail when i get more time. Thanks for the links – these are some very interesting sources of information. I will look into them in more detail when i get more time.

]]> Comment on E-Sourcing: Destroyer or Doyen of Value by hudgeon http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/04/02/e-sourcing-destroyer-or-doyen-of-value/#comment-12640 hudgeon Mon, 06 Apr 2009 10:52:22 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=378#comment-12640 Thanks for the comments Allison. I agree that nothing in e-sourcing necessarily creates a reduction in the flow of information to the vendors but, like overly-restrictive tendering policies, e-sourcing can inhibit the free flow of information that may lead to suppliers providing the most innovative solutions to the buyer. Ensuring this doesn't happen is the responsibility of the buyer in the same way that not shooting your hunting partner is the responsibility of the hunter. Of course, Dick Cheney's love of hunting is no reason to ban rifles. Thanks for the comments Allison. I agree that nothing in e-sourcing necessarily creates a reduction in the flow of information to the vendors but, like overly-restrictive tendering policies, e-sourcing can inhibit the free flow of information that may lead to suppliers providing the most innovative solutions to the buyer.

Ensuring this doesn’t happen is the responsibility of the buyer in the same way that not shooting your hunting partner is the responsibility of the hunter. Of course, Dick Cheney’s love of hunting is no reason to ban rifles.

]]> Comment on E-Sourcing: Destroyer or Doyen of Value by Allison http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/04/02/e-sourcing-destroyer-or-doyen-of-value/#comment-12639 Allison Fri, 03 Apr 2009 15:45:08 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=378#comment-12639 Doug - Specifically referring to the below comments: "Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of what Tim says because auctions create information flow in only 2 of the 3 possible directions. Data flows from supplier to supplier and from supplier to buyer but it does not flow from buyer to supplier." While I agree that during the course of the event (the period of time in which the suppliers are providing competitive quotes) information is in a dual-directive flow, the buyer has full opportunity to provide information and actually increase communication with the suppliers prior and post the e-sourcing event. Allow me to expand - It is strongly encouraged in most e-sourcing environments that suppliers still be technically capable and their product or service be sourcable in terms of quality. The foundation of quality is unwavering throughout the process. This supports the notion that the buyer-supplier communication line must be fully open prior to an e-sourcing event. The buyer may have already collected initial pricing from the suppliers as well, in which the buyer can give feedback prior to the event - so long as there is equal opportunity provided to all suppliers with this feedback. There are parameters within e-sourcing events that allow the buyer to communicate important factors, ask relevant questions, and encourage suppliers to drive to targets set from the buyer side - not simply compete against the natural market. Really, the important takeaway from my commentary is that suppliers cannot be blindly subject to an e-sourcing event. It destroys both the integrity and honesty of the sourcing process, but can also destroy the validity of buyer communication to the suppliers. It's also crucial on the opposite side of the coin that suppliers ask the right questions, at the same time with the expectation that the buyer is providing them with all relevant and necessary information to participate, fully knowledgeable of their obligation upon winning. Doug –

Specifically referring to the below comments:
“Nevertheless, I agree with a lot of what Tim says because auctions create information flow in only 2 of the 3 possible directions. Data flows from supplier to supplier and from supplier to buyer but it does not flow from buyer to supplier.”

While I agree that during the course of the event (the period of time in which the suppliers are providing competitive quotes) information is in a dual-directive flow, the buyer has full opportunity to provide information and actually increase communication with the suppliers prior and post the e-sourcing event. Allow me to expand –

It is strongly encouraged in most e-sourcing environments that suppliers still be technically capable and their product or service be sourcable in terms of quality. The foundation of quality is unwavering throughout the process. This supports the notion that the buyer-supplier communication line must be fully open prior to an e-sourcing event. The buyer may have already collected initial pricing from the suppliers as well, in which the buyer can give feedback prior to the event – so long as there is equal opportunity provided to all suppliers with this feedback. There are parameters within e-sourcing events that allow the buyer to communicate important factors, ask relevant questions, and encourage suppliers to drive to targets set from the buyer side – not simply compete against the natural market.

Really, the important takeaway from my commentary is that suppliers cannot be blindly subject to an e-sourcing event. It destroys both the integrity and honesty of the sourcing process, but can also destroy the validity of buyer communication to the suppliers. It’s also crucial on the opposite side of the coin that suppliers ask the right questions, at the same time with the expectation that the buyer is providing them with all relevant and necessary information to participate, fully knowledgeable of their obligation upon winning.

]]> Comment on Startups, global sourcing and supply chain ownership by the doctor http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/03/29/from-twitter-03-28-2009/#comment-12634 the doctor Sat, 28 Mar 2009 15:21:38 +0000 http://hudgeon.wordpress.com/2009/03/29/from-twitter-03-28-2009/#comment-12634 The Trouble With Twitters, courtesy of current.com: http://current.com/items/89891774/twouble_with_twitters.htm The Trouble With Twitters, courtesy of current.com:

http://current.com/items/89891774/twouble_with_twitters.htm

]]> Comment on Why I hate Procurement! by Jeff Gordon http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/03/06/why-i-hate-procurement/#comment-12624 Jeff Gordon Fri, 06 Mar 2009 03:43:36 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=357#comment-12624 To answer your question, it's because most procurement consultancy folks aren't willing to risk their gigs by putting a cost savings number on what they can accomplish. Plus the fact that it's hard to quantify risk in terms of dollars. Now... there is some logic to not promising financial ROI. Then again, if you're willing to base your payment on savings, this shouldn't be a problem if you're good at it. :) To answer your question, it’s because most procurement consultancy folks aren’t willing to risk their gigs by putting a cost savings number on what they can accomplish. Plus the fact that it’s hard to quantify risk in terms of dollars.

Now… there is some logic to not promising financial ROI. Then again, if you’re willing to base your payment on savings, this shouldn’t be a problem if you’re good at it. :)

]]> Comment on The Medium is not the message by hudgeon http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/01/16/the-medium-is-not-the-message/#comment-12614 hudgeon Wed, 28 Jan 2009 09:36:40 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=332#comment-12614 I'm sure that, even in an economic downturn, there'll be work for people skilled at turning massive amounts of data into an informative visual representation. I’m sure that, even in an economic downturn, there’ll be work for people skilled at turning massive amounts of data into an informative visual representation.

]]> Comment on The Medium is not the message by vinnie mirchandani http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/01/16/the-medium-is-not-the-message/#comment-12613 vinnie mirchandani Wed, 28 Jan 2009 02:58:07 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=332#comment-12613 There is interesting work being done in presentation of massive data sets - much bigger than the NY times data set - to help mine data for security, experiments etc. Some of those pictorials are pretty bizarre looking though, so I guess the next wave will try to figure out how to make them eye pleasing like the NY Times figure... There is interesting work being done in presentation of massive data sets – much bigger than the NY times data set – to help mine data for security, experiments etc. Some of those pictorials are pretty bizarre looking though, so I guess the next wave will try to figure out how to make them eye pleasing like the NY Times figure…

]]> Comment on The Medium is not the message by Mike Oswalt http://blog.hudgeon.com/2009/01/16/the-medium-is-not-the-message/#comment-12612 Mike Oswalt Mon, 19 Jan 2009 12:52:53 +0000 http://blog.hudgeon.com/?p=332#comment-12612 Thanks for the tip on Tableau. Information Aesthetics has consistant good thought on presenting information. http://infosthetics.com/ The NY Times does a wonderful job of presenting information and frequently demonstrates the benefits of a presentation using Flash over a printed chart. Doug, I know you are in Australia and it would be difficult to attend but, for your other readers Edward Tufte conducts a valued one-day course titled "Presenting Data and Information". http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/courses His books are a pleasure to peruse and the course is highly recommended (if you have an interest or job requirement to present information). Thanks for the tip on Tableau.
Information Aesthetics has consistant good thought on presenting information.
http://infosthetics.com/
The NY Times does a wonderful job of presenting information and frequently demonstrates the benefits of a presentation using Flash over a printed chart.
Doug, I know you are in Australia and it would be difficult to attend but, for your other readers Edward Tufte conducts a valued one-day course titled “Presenting Data and Information”.
http://www.edwardtufte.com/tufte/courses
His books are a pleasure to peruse and the course is highly recommended (if you have an interest or job requirement to present information).

]]>