Delivering Value Creatively

A recent report by management consultants McKinsey identifies seven priorities for the UK to focus on as we move from a period of austerity to one of growth. The first of these is that business must increase its productivity, defined as average output per employee hour. Although the UK’s productivity growth has been encouraging over the last 15 years, says McKinsey, it still lags significantly behind the US and Germany.

The gap must be closed if the UK is to continue to enjoy economic success, and although McKinsey does not highlight procurement as a key factor in its report, From austerity to prosperity: Seven priorities for the long term, it is clear that effective strategic purchasing has a clear role to play in delivering this improvement.

While traditional purchasing usually focuses on driving lower prices, a strategic procurement approach of the kind now so badly needed has a far broader remit embracing not only price, but also targeting cutting costs and increasing value.

Such non-price opportunities are often abundant and are rarely mined to their fullest extent. When outlining the initial position in a particular area of spend, it is too easy to focus on the price history. We also need to understand the way in which supply chains work and the inefficiencies that are built into them, often over a long period of time.

Examples of such inefficiencies we have found include the impact on waste of volume uncertainty in production, a lack of understanding of maximising the use of any particular asset and the impact of over-stocking items resulting in eventual disposal, often at the most expensive point of the production or service provision cycle.

What is striking is how often businesses maximise the potential for waste within a supply chain, running all the way through a development and production cycle and then disposing of the product or service before it is delivered. This maximises the value contained in the product or service just before it is used.

A good example of this is in the food supply chain. Many of us have disposed of unopened food which has gone past its sell by date. This is the point at which the food has greatest value –  all the production, transport, storage and purchase costs have been embedded in a product that has travelled all the way to our house only to end up in the waste bin.

We have a unique opportunity in procurement to look across the whole of the life of a product or service, not only at price, but to challenge the way in which products and services are acquired and used. When we do this, we are at our most effective and most inspiring within a business, taking a genuinely holistic approach to the goods and services we source.

Our challenge in addressing the productivity gap identified by the McKinsey report is to look for every area of opportunity within the businesses we serve and ensure that no stone remains unturned in the search for efficiency.

 

Positive Purchasing is in a great position to help businesses find creative ways to get most value from their supply chains. Visit us at www.positivepurchasing.com


 

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Cost of Change

I get to watch a lot of change programs developing and working across a number of industries, and there seems to be a common theme. The recognition of the cost of change and the actual benefits of change is often masked by a desire to ensure that the big new idea happens, at any cost.

There is something really interesting happening in the way people build a new idea, then defend it mightily, even when there are issues which have not been fully allowed for within the construction of the big idea. It seems that, once a certain level of work and committment has been made, it is really hard to stand back and test for real risks and challenges within the idea.

It’s not just at work, either. I’m contemplating a move from traveling to our offices by car to traveling by train. It’s a nice idea, and supports a number of personal objectives; reduction in pollution, saves money, and has the opportunity for more exercise built in. I got to the big idea pretty quickly; drive car to near the local train station, cycle from there to the station, and cycle from the distant station to the office.

A suitable bicycle was identified, the potential for free parking investigated, the cost of trains established and a spreadsheet was built, happily justifying the change of approach.

However, a number of risks and challenges were ignored; for example, the likelihood of rain dampening my enthusiasm for implementation; the number of days I could do this in a year; the surprise that a different, more fuel efficient car might be a better alternative. To justify my original choice, and investment in bicycle, I have started to roll out ever stronger justifications for my choice, even when the argument is clearly weak in places.

I could go back and revise my plans, but I have time, effort and a position to defend now – just as I used to have a position to defend for driving in every day.

When change programs in Purchasing are being developed, the new idea has to be sold hard to defeat the resistance of other stakeholders. We build a case and sell it, often ignoring issues which need to be addressed within the change model. We do this to try to bring our stakeholders on board.

How much stronger would our case be, and our chances of success, if we had a really well developed picture of the issues and challenges, and a well developed mitigation approach for those areas where there is a chance of failure?

By fully addressing the issues involved in the implementation, we are far more likely to reach people who don’t want to change, and we’re far more likely to be successful with our original aim

There’s more at www.positivepurchasing.com

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Hello world!

Hi, this is a sequence of thoughts on the world of purchasing in big and small businesses. keep watching for more thoughts

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment