Sourcing Innovation: Recent Comments

Comment on Seven Warning Signs Your ERP System Is Extinct

2010-03-12T15:09:55Z

Right again. I guess I keep assuming that end users know by now that the goal of the majority of vendors is to get as much money for as little as possible (on the software and services front) and that they will only see the numerous benefits a solution has to offer (which, for SaaS, includes the benefits listed here http://www.esourcingwiki.com/index.php/On-Demand_/_SaaS_Application_Platforms#Benefits, for example) IF they actually insure that all the benefits are clearly described and mandated by the contract.

The reality is that most of the better SaaS vendors and all of the vendors who have a major SaaS (related) certification (like SAS 70) have a parallel, fail over instance in a separate facility. However, not all have the same amount of computing power available in this fail over facility and those who distribute customers among multiple facilities might not have all customer profiles and data backed up at the primary fail over facility if it's not in the contract that the fail over facility must contain a complete data backup and enough computing power to provide the same level of service as the primary facility.

So, with SaaS, you can get all these benefits (and more), AS LONG AS you make sure they are clearly spelled out in the contract that it is the vendor's responsibility.

Comment on Seven Warning Signs Your ERP System Is Extinct

2010-03-12T15:00:02Z

How many vendors are paying their SaaS hoster for a parallel instance? How many SaaS hosters are providing a parallel instance for free? How many vendors are planning for database and OS upgrades by creating a parallel fail-over instance for every customer?

This argument is another way of throwing the ball over the fence. "It's up to the vendor, and because it's SaaS, my vendor is obviously super intelligent and super careful, so I don't have to worry about anything, it'll just happen by magic."

No, it won't. You should worry deeply about it. In fact, you should write into your SaaS contract that your SaaS vendor MUST provide a parallel fallback instantiation of your solution WHENEVER there is a database or OS or JVM or [whatever] update.

Comment on Seven Warning Signs Your ERP System Is Extinct

2010-03-12T14:34:07Z

You're right, but how many companies have sufficient staff with sufficient competency and resources to pull this off?

The answer is not very many. With SaaS, the vendor takes care of maintaining a parallel instance, and handles the (near) real-time switch, updates the system, synchs the database(s), switches back, updates the parallel instances, syncs the database(s), and restarts the regular database backup and synchronization to allow for (near) real time switching or fail over when an update needs to occur again. In reality, 95%+ of customers would not be setup to do this with a traditional system.

Furthermore, what you are suggesting is a lot of work, and added up across a few hundred customers, an awful lot of resources (time, money, etc.) if you go the traditional solution route. With SaaS, it's done once, and then it's done.

In summary, you're right in theory, but in practice, it doesn't happen.

Comment on Seven Warning Signs Your ERP System Is Extinct

2010-03-12T13:23:08Z

Excuse me, but an OS or database update will take a SaaS system down for just as long as any other system. If the author is saying that another system can be brought up in parallel with the first, so what. Such a strategy can be executed with or without SaaS. Hardware is cheap, virtual hardware cheaper.

Comment on The Tiger is Beginning to Roar ... but the Eagle is beginning to Snore!

2010-03-11T19:32:42Z

There'll be plenty of great stuff to sell to each other! http://www.boingboing.net/2010/03/10/white-trash-video-ad.html

Comment on What Level of Procurement Performance Are You At?

2010-03-11T04:11:22Z

Pierre:

The Word Document you sent me with the complete survey was 15 pages -- 14 pages and a cover page. Depending on your reading speed, it will take you a good 30 to 45 minutes if you read every question and every possible answer.

As you pointed out, this is not necessary since (a) some of the questions are long only because detailed descriptions of each of the possible answers are provided, (b) some are drop downs with a number of disjoint choices (like industry), and some multi-part questions are answered simply with a 1-5 rating (which mean you don't have to review the rating scale for each part). As a result, some questions will be quick (15 - 30 seconds), but others, like the capabilities question (with 5 sub-points) or the question asking how the 18 procurement value contributions are recognized by Finance, could take a few minutes (3 in the first case, 9 in the second).

Even if we allow an average of a brief 2 minutes per question, that's 40 minutes. I know the survey is designed to be much, much, quicker than your normal multi-week process, but I think if people spend less than 30 - 45 minutes, they won't carefully consider the questions, and, more importantly, the possible answers -- which are jam packed with great suggestions that they can use to improve their measurements, capabilities, and processes.

Comment on What Level of Procurement Performance Are You At?

2010-03-10T20:34:41Z

Michael,

Thanks for the post. But, 14 pages?! What font is your printer set on?

It's only three survey sections and about 20 questions. Okay, Question 18 has the 18 value streams in it - and many are multi-line questions, but it shouldn't take more than 30 minutes, and it's a veritable walk in the park compared to our 6-12 week benchmark process!

Seriously, thanks for the mention. The more companies that can participate, the more that I can have some selected insights to share back with the broader community/blogosphere.

And this is a really important topic. Until we can broaden the Procurement measurements, we're going to be limited in how much we broaden Procurement's delivered value.

Comment on Happy New Year from the Sourcing Maniacs

2010-03-09T17:01:55Z

As Jib-Jab says, there was never a year like '09! We hope 2010 can live up to it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKYe1KiwywE

Comment on The Gartner Tragic Quadrant for Strategic Sourcing Application Suites, Part II

2010-03-09T12:06:04Z

On another note, I'd hope that my readers would know by now that I don't think it's fair to deeply criticize a work without at least saying why it's not all that. Furthermore, I'd hope it's clear that I believe that if you're going to shred something, in addition to saying why it's not all that, you should provide a few counterpoints at the very least because your readers will not be able to see your viewpoint otherwise, and that would not be very educational. And since the one of the primary goals of this blog is education ...

Comment on The Gartner Tragic Quadrant for Strategic Sourcing Application Suites, Part II

2010-03-09T12:01:22Z

You are right in that, initially, the understanding at the big consultancies was limited to resident experts, but it doesn't change the fact that there are experts who have had a solid understanding of strategic sourcing processes for about two decades. It also doesn't change the fact that these consultants who left to start and/or join fledgling vendors in the late nineties and early naughts brought with them a deep understanding of what the tools should eventually be able to do. Nor does it change the fact that you've been able to do a decent comparison between vendors at the suite level (which modules were/were not present) for five years and at the individual module level (which standard features are/are not present) for about three years.