We’re pleased to bring you a short series (这是现在最后一个！) on that perennial topic – managing stakeholders, users, budget holders, colleagues – whatever we want to call them. But we thought we’d approach it from a slightly different angle. So let’s look at how to make sure we can instil real hatred of the procurement function and the people within it amongst that population!
5. Focus purely on savings
We know how important savings are to our organisations. For many procurement people it is the only way we are measured. So of course it must mean just as much to our stakeholders – how could they possibly be interested in anything else?
So that should be the whole focus of our work with suppliers, and we should talk constantly about savings when we interact with stakeholders. And it doesn’t matter what spend areas we’re talking about – they’re bound to be interested. Quote how the unit cost of whatever they’re buying has gone down by 3%, 5% or whatever – they’re bound to be impressed!
OK, we’ve gone on about this one before. Many times. But it needs saying - not all stakeholders care about ‘savings’ and to many, it is a meaningless concept. A manager who has a budget in many cases will spend that budget, whatever unit prices happen to be, and whatever ‘savings’ procurement generates. Their interest in most cases is about getting the maximum value from that budget, not the unit cost, the volume of stuff that is bought, and the apparent ‘savings’ that are reported.
So finding a cheaper consultant, marketing services provider or air fare is meaningless to a user if the consultant writes a useless report, the marketing provider comes up with a campaign that fails to grab the customer’s attention, or the flight we have chosen routes them through Algiers and they miss their key client meeting.
价值。这是我们应该在99％的情况下使用的这个词，我们与利益相关者交谈，而不是节省。现在当然，在某些情况下，在某些情况下，来自直截了当的，无乱，降低成本。但它仍然是关键的价值，而不是节省。
我同意你的意见，价值是我们应该在99％的时间与利益相关者交谈的词;但是你的意思是什么意思？
客户永远不会购买产品。根据定义，客户购买想要的满足感。他买了价值。
因此，价值实质上，实用程序，即源自良好或服务的总满意度。
该效用一个来自良好或服务难以测量;但我们可以与客户行为理论间接地确定它，这假设消费者努力最大化其实用程序。
Again, as value is difficult to define precisely moreover and as it is used frequently, loosely and in a number of contexts how do we define it in supply management? to us I guess that value has the following connotations:
Value is relative to an alternative – value cannot be judged in isolation.
Value is composite and decomposable – value can be analysed into a set of value drivers – for example – time, cost, quality and service
值可以在几个语境中使用 - 在B2B的关系中，它往往是经济的性质，但也可以考虑其他方面，例如情绪，环境和社会价值。
Value is measureable/quantifiable – economic value might be see as revenue, or cost savings; but other aspects have their own forms of measures such as Intellectual Property Right (IPR).
Category managers can map the way in which the customer gets value to the way in which the seller charges for value.
例如，在建筑业中，表面涂层的价值可能导出覆盖的面积，而价格远远可能在卷中引用。
Value management relies on multiple streams of information from inside and outside the organisation – both internal and external perspectives are necessary.
Information about customers, competitors, demand, offers, costs and production constraints are all used in value management and Procurement is well placed to make this their own.
So what do YOU mean by value?
Totally agree with you Gerard but I think the challenge we face is two-fold:
(i) “Value is measurable/quantifiable” – I would personally say “should be”: it is often very hard to really define in quantifiable terms the value of, say, a consultant’s advice on a strategic reorganisation or the assurance offered by financial audit services.
（ii）采购的利益攸关方也可以是他们自己最糟糕的敌人。例如。我最近致力于提出一项主要的金融外包协议，其中采购和供应商均拟议的业务价值措施，这些商业价值源于速度和准确性所取得的服务，财务报告的债务卓越，准确性等。所有备份信用/奖金制度。利益相关者想要衡量的是什么？供应商雇用的FTE有多少，他们的数据陷入发票速度有多快。
On both these fronts we have to keep up the fight and I’d welcome concrete examples of great value definition, especially in the provision of services.
在公共部门更糟糕。
Savings will be removed from the stakeholders budget permanently.
So don’t expect a welcome, next time you knock on their door, with another savings proposal.
乌鸦关于储蓄，但从不拥有昂贵的错误