When we see business and news media coverage of the somewhat esoteric procurement, finance and supply chain topics that form the core of our focus on Spend Matters, we usually celebrate. The classic logic is that the more attention the popular press can bring to supply management, the better for everyone on the supply side. Yet sadly, this is not always the case anymore.
灰色的阴影应该责备。采购和财务主题比以往任何时候都更复杂，特别是在新的流程和供应商参与方法可以减少零汇率购买者/供应商关系游戏的常用。
为此，我们相信华尔街日报Serena Ng was led astray by surface-level information surrounding P&G and their new accounts payable and supply chain finance strategy in an article with the somewhat misleading headline:P&G, Big Companies Pinch Suppliers on Payments.
这story reports that P&G “is looking to move its payment terms to 75 days and recently started negotiations with suppliers.” Ng suggests “P&G is actually late” to the extending payment terms game, as it “currently pays its bills on average within 45 days, faster than the 60- 100 days that other consumer products makers and large companies in other industries generally take, according to industry experts.”
是的，Ng确实指出，“为了帮助供应商应对这些变化，宝洁正在与银行合作，这些银行将在15天后向供应商预付现金并收取费用。”这只反映了部分实际应付账款情况和宝洁更广泛的战略。
有时，最好的意图妨碍了建设性结果。这WSJ和许多新闻媒体一样，这篇文章只是将其描述为一家财富500强企业向供应商施压以囤积现金的故事。但真实的故事往往比一般商业媒体或贸易出版物所描述的更加微妙。在这种情况下，有几个原因可以在地表以下挖掘。
花费事项首席研究官Pierre Mitc万博体育下载apphell多年来一直与P＆G的许多人合作，他已经忘记了对此的回应WSJarticle based on our近期报道上看不见的手在互联网经济中，这只手的优点和危险越来越明显。
他说：
“我认为，宝洁正试图在这里深思熟虑地创造价值。我不是像许多宝洁的信徒一样来赞扬宝洁，但我也不会因为宝洁最近的努力而将其埋葬和抛弃。事实上，我认为写一份清单是值得的——它有十课之长——其中一些是宝洁的工作方式。”l程序展示了如何使用看不见的手来创建更大的饼，而不仅仅是改变切片的大小。”
我们邀请您下载我们对WSJ’s新闻报道：P&G: A Case Study of Supply Management’s “Non-Invisible” Hand in 10 Easy Lessons.
我们希望那些读过这本书的人能对宝洁的真正意图有一个细微的差别和洞察力——更不用说它背后对我们所有人的重要教训了——这本书中缺失的所有东西WSJ故事
杰森，如你所提到的那样，关于P＆G的WSJ文章的标题是误导性的。也许更重要的是，它埋入了lede。
这y key here is that P&G is moving suppliers to industry standard payment terms in a collaborative way based on industry benchmarks and the use of Supply Chain Finance (SCF) technology and services. P&G is offering SCF to suppliers who wish to get paid early at a discount rate of 1.3% per year. Suppliers moving from 45 to 75 days will actually save money as long as their cost of capital is greater than 2.6%. That’s because it’s cheaper to fund a 75 day receivable at 1.3% than a 45 day receivable at 2.6%. In addition, suppliers can improve their operating cash flow by taking early payment on day 15 instead of their current pay date of day 45. Finally, with SCF, suppliers are immune from buyers holding on to payments arbitrarily, for example at the end of a quarter or year. This improves cash flow visibility for suppliers. If P&G simply wanted to “squeeze” suppliers they would not offer them Supply Chain Finance and allow them to take early payment.
SCF是否适用于所有供应商？不。在很大程度上，我们谈论的是全球2000名买家、他们的“直接材料”供应商和更大的“间接”供应商。它通常不适用于较小的供应商（尤其是间接的）或一次性消费。这正是P-Card和动态折扣等高成本/低接触解决方案发挥作用的地方。
通过在延长期限的同时向供应商提供SCF，宝洁可以将其运营现金流提高20亿美元，并降低供应链中的总成本，而不仅仅是转移成本。如果我是宝洁的股东，如果管理团队没有利用这个机会，我会对他们感到非常不安，尤其是当SCF能够真正改善供应商的现金流时。
Robert Kramer
营运资本解决方案副总裁
PrimeRevenue公司。