2020供应商管理中的困境：SXM中的三大问题

(Editor’s note: Spend Matters’ analysts are taking on the new year by looking at their areas of procurement technology to see what’s broken and what can and should be fixed this year. Here, analyst Magnus Bergfors lays out the predicaments faced in supplier management (SXM). And for our PRO subscribers, his other post today offers hispredictions for 2020。的）

在假期前我们发表了一份专业版简报（供应商管理能力的5个构建块的）on the complexity of the SXM market and created a framework for how to define this space. That article highlights one of the lingering issues with supplier management: There is no one-size-fits-all solution here. That is, however, a very broad predicament, and in this article we want to break this down into a few more specific predicaments.

前3名捕食

1。Supplier data remains fragmented and poorly managed

Despite all the talk about data being the “new oil” over the last couple of years, the fact remains that most organizations have no real strategy when it comes to managing supplier data. Supplier data exists in silos in ERP solutions, in AP solutions and in a number of different procurement solutions, and there is often a lack of understanding in the procurement (and finance) organizations about what supplier master data management (MDM) means and why it is important. Even the IT department may misunderstand the area by viewing it merely as a technical data integration problem rather than a larger business problem.

这种误解也不只是一个从业者问题。供应商信息管理系统（SIM）的大多数采购套件提供商和供应商声称能够进行供应商MDM，同时不一定具有所需的功能。只是保持供应商档案的能力是不够的;you also need the capability to translate the supplier data into the formats of all other systems that need it (if it’s not needed in other systems it’s not master data) and you need the proper controls over who can edit and approve master data, for example. In some cases, the SIM tool’s data file is the master, and in other cases, it’s not (but still needs to be synchronized).

有一些采购供应商可以做得很好，但在大多数情况下，您需要转向真正的MDM解决方案来执行此操作（这增加了买方希望最好的提供者的复杂性用它的解决方案解决）。然而，采购解决方案非常适合从供应商收集供应商数据，并确保最新。这通常是在供应商自助服务的基础上进行，其中供应商负责将其自身的数据维护到您的任何解决方案。但是，尽管几乎所有的供应商现在提供了N-N-N个供应商网络，但据说允许上传数据一次，然后在许可中分享它manbet万博app，供应商被数百种不同的网络，门户和应用程序所淹没，在那里他们应该保持其维护数据。在许多情况下，实际数据共享在现实有限公司中，供应商通常需要在同一“网络中的多次上传相同的信息。

2.供应商细分停止识别战略供应商

Large organizations have tens of thousands of suppliers and nowhere close to enough people in procurement to manage them all. This means that you somehow have to choose which suppliers you manage and how you manage them. In other words: supplier segmentation. Now, this concept is well-known and accepted as a best practice (after all the Kraljic matrix,大约1983年那is one of the more widespread procurement frameworks). But, in reality few organizations actually do it consistently, especially in the indirect space. Even in direct materials, where suppliers are typically more consistently managed, there is often a lack of differentiation in how the suppliers are managed, especially for the 80-90% of vendors that represent 10-20% of the spend). At most organizations, they’ve identified their most strategic suppliers and put their best resources toward managing those, but often without much of a systematic approach beyond quarterly business reviews.

说到(或缺乏系统性的方法的）那there is a lack of built-in, out-of-the-box support for more sophisticated supplier segmentation in most supplier management solutions and procurement suites. Sure, you can add it as a field in a supplier profile and require it to be filled out during supplier onboarding, but that's about it. There is no guiding of the segmentation itself based on total spend, category strategy or other parameters that define the segment the suppliers go into, nor is there typically a way to apply multiple segmentation strategies concurrently (e.g., based on risk type, performance rating, item/service type, supplier industry, etc.) and then apply those to various workflow processes.

并谈到类别管理，导致我们达到这个系列的最终困境......

3. Supplier management is disconnected from sourcing and category management

As discussed in our posts on Sourcing in 2020 (PredicamentsandPredictions的）there is a disconnect between sourcing and category management. This is also true for supplier management. Supplier management in practice is generally disconnected from both sourcing and category management.

在战略层面上,供应商管理有一个poor connection to the category strategy. Does the category strategy suggest deeper supplier collaboration and co-innovation (something that is supported by specialized stand-alone solutions today while the suites have only very basic collaboration support) or do you need to only keep track of supplier master data in order to execute transactions (or something in between where you also measure basic performance against the contract or a simplistic scorecard)? Do you need to have elaborate contingency plans that are agreed to and maintained with a supplier — or will you just quickly replace the supplier if something happens? All this and a lot more needs to go into the supplier management approach and should ideally be part of a solution guided process based on the category strategy and supplier segmentation.

On a more tactical level there needs to be a better connection between sourcing and supplier management. Here the problem is that a lot of the information that a supplier submits in a sourcing event is the same that goes into a supplier profile, yet the supplier is often forced to enter this information at least twice, in some cases even more if the suppliers participates in multiple (poorly constructed) sourcing events in a year. Combine this with the limited data-sharing capabilities of procurement suites and networks, and you place a lot of work on the suppliers just to upload and maintain basic information. That’s time that could be used for much more value-adding activities.

那么需要碰巧解决这些问题的是什么？看today’s Predictions installment在我们的SXM 2020系列中！