Purchasing 0.3
Is Purchasing Magazine trying to give me a heart attack? Isn't it enough that they refuse to acknowledge the presence of Sourcing Innovation (which, as you know, is one of the few blogs that brings you real supply management content you can use day-in, day-out six days a week, every week) which they dropped from their "News from the Web" feed years ago (when I first ripped apart one of their sloppy articles)? After reading a few of their recent articles, my blood is boiling!
That's right! That bullcr@p that Spend Analysis is expensive (see last Thursday's post) is just the tip of the iceberg. And even though many of the quoted individuals had good advice to share, in the end, Purchasing's recent article on Purchasing 3.0 is just as bad and filled with absurdities ... which start on the first line! (If Purchasing had their way, we'd regress to Purchasing 0.3!)
Have you used Social Networking to build supplier relationships?
I Hope Not! Since all Facebook is good for is Facebook parties that result in Million dollar homes being trashed ...
If you want to build drinking buddies relationships, yes, Facebook will work great ... but what you want is productive and professional relationships where you can work together to make each of your businesses better.
Are you sure you're using Excel effectively?
You can't use Excel to manage your supply chain! How many fracking times do I have to say it? Spreadsheets are bad strategy, prevent innovation, and cost you billions! You're better off using an etch-a-sketch like the dork in It's All About the Pentiums (2:54 mark). (And just because it's still all about the pentiums, baby, that doesn't mean it should be!)
Do you, uh, Tweet?
Are you kidding me? Hasn't Twitter Turned Too Many Into Twits already? It appears that Twitter has already made twits out of at least 3 in 10 students! The only things that should go "tweet" are Tweety Bird bird and Rockin' Robin (Muppet Version).
With the prevalence of ERP systems in large companies, more purchasing professionals ... should be focusing on developing advanced database skills.
Uhhm, no. Purchasing professionals should be focussed on learning advanced data analysis skills. This is not quite the same as learning advanced database skills. Purchasing managers don't need to know how to configure, manage, scale, back-up, restore, and replicate databases ... that's what DBAs are for. Purchasing managers know how to use today's spend analysis tools, which require them to learn how to build and manipulate cubes through dimension-driven UIs, not how to optimize 4 level nested SQL statements ... that's what the tools do! (And frankly, even your average CS graduate would have a hard time optimizing 4-level nested SQL statements across multiple tables, if they could even write them in the first place!)
The article also promotes the new Microsoft Online Services
which will only work if everyone on the team is using a supported version of Windows. And even then, it might not work. (Furthermore, even though they claim that LiveMeeting works on Safari and Firefox on Mac, even if your system meets all the requirements listed, it often doesn't.) Mac is around 15% of the market and growing, Linux is on the rise (especially in Netbooks), and a number of organizations still use AIX and UNIX based platforms (which could become popular again if thin-client desktops [e.g. SunRays] take off). Not everyone is in the Microsoft eco-system anymore. (And the majority of supply management systems are NOT built on .NET.)
And then the last paragraph indicates that mobile devices are the answer to requisition approval (to keep projects moving), commodity price updates, and procurement communication!
This is probably the most dangerous message of all, because now we're in Yes, ... but territory. Not all requisitions can be approved on a 3x5 screen. What if there are 20 (or more) line items? What if your system flagged 5 as off-contract? What if it's an unusual request for a significant amount? You're going to need more data to make the right decision than you're ever going to fit on that itsy bitsy teeny weeny tiny Blackberry Storm or Curve. It's one thing to approve a new laptop or mobile phone for an employee that needs it right away to continue working, but another to approve an order of 10,000 units of SKU XYZ123, when the contract is for ZYX321! Why is the order off contract? Oversight? Have requirements changed? Or is your supplier out of ZYX321 and you need an acceptable substitution right away? And what good is a commodity price update if you can't see the history and the trend graphs. Unless you've already done the analysis and figured out that you should buy when it hits 75 or sell if it hits 100, because you're hedging risk on the commodities markets, that update is useless. And communicating in 140 byte tweets? That would just make you a Twit!
Let me finish by saying that I'm so glad that you, dear reader, are an educated, informed, and intelligent individual who would drop this blog from your feeds faster than a hot potato if I ever published anything as ridiculous as what Purchasing and other publications are getting away with these days!
Categories: Knowledge Management, Spend Analysis, rants, Supplier Management, Market Intelligence
Tags: Purchasing.com Rant
"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."
Michael, if you want to complain credibly about Purchasing dropping SI from its feed, then I'd suggest putting Spend Matters back in your blog list. And Jason Busch (from Spend Matters), if you're listening, I'd suggest putting Sourcing Innovation back in yours.
Let's put an end to the childishness around "ignoring" other blogs. It's pointless and silly, and reflects poorly on anyone who does it.
Eric:
I've never dropped Spend Matters from the Resource Site Master Blog List:
<http://www.sourcinginnovation.com/resources/BlogListing.php?from=140>, which tracks about 100 blogs in, and about 60 blogs related to, the sourcing space (though not necessarily all still active). Spend Matters isn't on the sidebar blog list because it's not one of the 15 blogs that I read daily (or as often as the blogger publishes). I would suspect that Sourcing Innovation isn't on the Spend Matters blog-roll for the same reason. (Furthermore, if you look closely, you'll see the SM blog-roll is very analyst/business oriented while SI is very product/process oriented. Not only does this demonstrate the differences in primary focus of the two blogs, but makes a case that not every blog in the space should be on the blog roll if the blog master is trying to recommend similar blogs or blogs you might like.)
And my beef with Purchasing is of a different nature than what you seem to be addressing. Like a number of publications, they have an amalgamated "News From the Web" feed which, supposedly, randomly displays recent stories from all feeds related to purchasing. However, any time someone disagrees with one of their articles, or gives them negative press, that feed quickly vanishes from the rotation. (And I'm not the only regular blogger to notice it, although one person who did somehow got his feed re-added a few months later.) If you don't want to include the SI feed, that's fine by me, and I don't care whether or not you do unless you claim, or imply, that you have all the "news from the web" if you're axing feeds from blogs and related publications that also have news relevant to your audience. Because then you don't. Either open it up completely, or close it off to named feeds.
For example, the SI Resource Site is truly open. I will allow any listing for any resource in the identified categories, whether I like it, or you, or not. In contrast, the blog is closed. I am the Editor-in-Chief, and if I don't like your submission for a guest post, or if it doesn't follow the rules clearly laid out in the SI FAQ, I won't post it. I do my best to make sure there's no gray area on SI. (I think I was the first blog to institutionalize comment rules.) Everything about how the blog, and resource site is run and sponsored is clearly laid out in the FAQ, about posts, rules, and disclaimer pages.
And Spend Matters is being run the same way. Jason is Editor-In-Chief, he retains final say over what runs or not, and he's publicly stating how all the new Spend Matters offerings and services work. No behind the scenes shenanigans, misleading statements, or random deletions of posts, comments, etc.
And that's the way it should be. That's my beef. And I like to complain. ;-)
Ironic how Eric uses John 8-2-11 for a olive branch, but it's Purchasing.com who are the wh*res.
Wow! Purchasing has done a great job of offending people lately. An e-mail I received yesterday that described someone's last encounter with one of their sales staff as a "cheesy experience" had a few not very nice things to say. An e-mail I received last week used the word "flying" to indicate how far off the ground an individual was after an interaction with the editorial staff (after I posted my last rant that said I was jumping up and down after reading one of their articles). And that's just the tip of the iceberg! Anyone else have a story to share? If you don't want to comment publicly, feel free to e-mail me (thedoctor@sourcinginnovation.com). I'm curious as to just how far the mighty have fallen.