Supply & Demand Executive recently ran an article that an organization can use to determine whether it needs a more strategic approach to manage external supply networks. The article presented ten questions and indicated that if an organization answered yes to at least half, then it should consider investing resources to better understand and strategically manage it’s supply network needs.
The ten questions presented were:
Are we struggling in the adoption of our revenue models to changing marketplace needs?
Do our customers require increased flexibility despite rising complexity?
Are we sourcing from, selling into, and servicing our products in global markets?
Do our suppliers play a key role in solution design?
Do we manufacture less than 50% of the parts and assemblies that go into our products?
Could we make use of an early warning system to reduce supply risk and identify supplier issues before they become serious?
Have we reached the limits that our internal systems can support in facilitating external collaboration?
Are we still looking for a C-level Executive to champion the business value that external supply relationships can bring?
Would we classify our need to secure information both from an IP and regulatory perspective as high?
Do we need to put programs in place to understand the total cost of ownership of each component we make or source?
Why is this important? Strategic Sourcing only identifies savings, proper supply management after the fact is what delivers them. Considering that this depends on a properly managed supply network, it’s important not to overlook the external requirements when doing your internal calculations - and this means its important to determine whether or not your external supply network is up to snuff.
Strategy
Strategic Sourcing is all about a good strategy.
Sourcing & Category Management
Good strategic sourcing generally has a strategy for each individual category.
Requisition to Pay
This is the one (pure) procurement characteristic.
Supplier Relationship Management
Good supplier relationship management is critical from the initial RFI through the final delivery.
Workforce & Organization
A good sourcing process is well organized and results oriented.
Technology
A great sourcing process is built on leading eSourcing technology.
Regardless of the mis-characterization of the six key characteristics, they are still important because Accenture has found that:
Procurement Masters excel across the board and exceed the survey average in each of these characteristics.
Procurement Masters achieve higher savings.
Procurement masters save 10 times as much as it costs them to operate their procurement organizations, as compared to low performers that save only 4 times as much.
Procurement Masters face fewer organizational challenges.
In other words, Procurement Masters tend to save two and a half times as much money, which is very significant.
Furthermore, the study on which the white-paper was based also found the following key sourcing and category management capabilities:
Centrally Led Category Management Structure
Best-in-Class Structure and Process
Focused Sourcing Analyst Pool
Maximum Leverage of Global Sourcing
Value Tracking and Budget Integration
and the following key supplier relationship management capabilities:
Supply-base Segmentation Approach
Partnering with Key Suppliers
Proactive Management of Contracts
Automated Tracking / Reporting of Supplier Performance
which provide some tips for those looking for starting points to improve their category management strategies or supplier relationship management capabilities.
The topic of LCCS is fairly prevalent within supply chain circles with camps on both sides of the issue, so I was curious to read a recent cautionary article on the subject in Industry Week, which covered a new study by Boston Consulting Group. This also tied nicely to the comprehensive post written by Sean Delaney last week.
“”In their rush to source from China many companies are blindly walking into a strategic trap. The trap is thinking that sourcing from China will result in lower product costs, when in reality the supply chain dynamics will, in many cases, drive up overall costs and reduce profitability, “explained senior partners, Georgle Stalk Jr. and Kevin Waddell, in their report,” Surviving the China Riptide: How to Profit from the Supply Chain Bottleneck.”
The authors suggest looking closer to home in the US or Mexico and provide options to sourcing from China:
Build “land-side” capacity at ports not yet overwhelmed by congestion.
Explore shipping alternatives, such as air freight, “that may appear costly but may actually lower overall expenditures by reducing hidden costs.”
Invest in “premiums” and “capabilities” — paying higher prices, for example, for priority service (”premiums”) or improving the company’s own abilities to move goods quickly and efficiently past or around congestion.
Diversify supply with “multiple suppliers and supply points” or produce critical components and products domestically, accepting higher production costs as a tradeoff for lower supply-chain costs and reliable delivery schedules.
Many thanks to my friend, the Cynical Sourcer, who pointed me to this excellent story about a $15,000 martini coming out of Japan. To many sourcing professionals, this is just the type of extravagance that makes fiscally sound and responsible people squirm on their bar stools. My favorite quote is the description of the “service” that comes with the actual vodka: “That price includes drink preparations table side, a serenade of “Diamonds are Forever” as a cut stone slides to the martini glass bottom, and later a ring mounting by a local jeweller.”
I had a number of people at our recent user conference comment to me that drinking beer in a brewery is a whole lot better than hanging out in a posh 5 star resort being schmoozed. Those blow out events might lead people to believe the hosting companies are doing well, but more appropriately have them scratching their heads trying to figure out exactly who all this money is being made from…oh yea, its the attendees!
I cant help it, I have to rub it in to all the people that could not come to our user conference. It was a great time. I personally was within a couple feet of Sam Hornish and Tony Kanaan, others in our group got to meet and talk to drivers like Milka Duno and Dan Wheldon. This picture was taken by an Iasta client who was walking around with Heriberto from our team in Mexico. I have conveniently cropped him from the image as the important part of the picture is on the left:
These videos came from one of our cameras and give you some idea of what we all got to experience:
Danica Patrick getting up to top speed
Panasonic pitting
Panasonic leaving pits with 2ft of clearance
One other thing that struck me as humorous…our corporate suite was right behind the Penske pits (Castroneves/Hornish) and we were tucked nicely between other companies at the event in order:
VISA — Patrone Tequila Racing — IASTA — Chip Ganassi/Target — Sysco
It was very cool to walk through those areas and be positioned with our “peers” off Gasoline Alley. Make sure you register early for reSource next year!
I recently came across a document which was created by the Software & Information Industry Association (SIIA). From the executive summary:
“According to Gartner, a global IT research firm, the annual cost to own and manage software applications can be up to four times the cost of the initial purchase. As a result, companies end up spending more than 75% of their total IT budget just on maintaining and running existing systems and software infrastructure.1 With the introduction of computers, companies have accepted this as a cost of doing business. The number of software applications that a company may need are infinite. The resources to operate these applications however are finite.
The Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) revolution allows companies to subscribe to software applications and outsource operating the back-end infrastructure to the SaaS vendor. In most cases, the SaaS vendor can do this much more cost effective; providing overall cost savings for the company. As a result, companies can spread their IT budget across many more applications to support and grow their business operations which will in turn contribute to the bottom line.
This document educates end-users and decision makers on Software-as-a-Service (SaaS), where it differs from traditional software, and what the key benefits are when deploying SaaS applications. In addition, this document also provides the reader with a comprehensive look at the Total Cost of Ownership (TCO) analysis any decision maker should complete before making a choice between a SaaS or a traditional software deployment.”
Key Arguments in Favor of SaaS Applications
There are many arguments that can be made in favor of SaaS applications but there are four key arguments that make a surprising but resounding case for deploying SaaS applications. These four arguments are:
Making the IT budget go further
No underestimation of people services
SaaS allows better growth management
Accountability of the SaaS vendor
I am not going to copy the actual breakdown/calculator into this post but the criteria used are:
Comparable Cost Analysis
Capital Expenses
Hardware
Software or License costs
Support and Maintenance
Upgrades
Facilities/Datacenter Expenses
Management and Operations
Design and Engineering
Integration/Implementation
IT and Helpdesk Staffing
End User Training
Scheduled Maintenance
Unscheduled Maintenance and Outage Recovery
Monitoring and Security
Legal/Purchasing and General Administration
Intangible Costs
Reliability and Availability
Interoperability
Extensibility
Security
Scalability
Performance
Capacity
Opportunity Costs
It is a very comprehensive set of metrics that these professionals used to build the custom value calculator, especially if you overlook a couple spelling errors. This is a very interesting white paper for those that are considering differences between SaaS and installed software options in any industry whether its eSourcing, web conferencing, CRM or a myriad of others.
According to the report, companies should evaluate their operations and supporting technology to ensure they effectively accomplish the following:
centralize key elements of the supply chain management organization
work toward end-to-end data and process visibility throughout the supply chain to improve utilization of manufacturing capacity and distribution efficiencies
move to more frequent inventory policy review (multiple times a year) and improve ability to sense changes in customer demand (aim for five days or less)
upgrade supply chain applications, deploy supply chain optimization, and move to a closed-loop planning and execution technology framework, and
view supply chain management as a competitive differentiator.
The report also identifies the top supply chain transformation goals for process industry companies:
data and process visibility
cross-functional metrics
closed-loop integration of supply chain planning & execution
centralized supply chain management organization
Good advice, and good advice, but I was a little disappointed that they did not point out the importance of good eSourcing and eProcurement tools as part of your end-to-end supply chain technology solution as these platforms lead to better centralization in supply management as well as improved data visibility and metrics.
This month, I received my copy of Contract Management Magazine and noticed an article written by a couple colleagues I know in Washington DC - Raj Sharma and Jim McIntosh. They are also pretty well known in procurement circles from the Freemarkets background and their successful consultancy, Censeo Consulting. I have had some extremely informative conversations with Raj in the past, so naturally, the article is very comprehensive.
The article begins, “While organizations have become increasingly sophisticated at sourcing direct and indirect materials, services spend remains quite elusive as an opportunity. Taking the lessons learned from sourcing of direct and indirect materials, while useful, will not adequately address the complexities inherent in services
sourcing.”
They outline the challenges that confront sourcing when dealing with service centric procurement:
Commodity Definitions: Developing a definition that all key stakeholders can agree upon is a critical step in the services sourcing process.
Identifying Expected Outcomes: Identifying expected outcomes requires a clear understanding of customer needs and priorities. Once outcomes have been defined, there is a clearer path for defining
requirements and metrics for measuring performance.
Determining Cost Drivers: A detailed cost structure analysis, both of internal costs and supplier costs, can help uncover many opportunities to drive down total costs.
Defining and Communicating Requirements: Writing requirements is perhaps the one part of services sourcing that needs the most help. Poor requirements begin with a limited understanding of customer
needs.
Supplier Evaluation Criteria: Evaluating suppliers begins with being as knowledgeable as possible about the commodity being sourced. Lack of knowledge means lack of transparency, which often means “smoke and mirrors.”
I recommend reading the article. Topics as complicated as sourcing services cannot be distilled into 4-5 glossy pages, but it can help start the proper thinking towards effectively sourcing complex categories. Censeo is a services company, so the article does not mention any technology usage. However, there is a significant place for eSourcing technology when these bids are properly planned and executed.
I know this has been written about before but we cannot under estimate China’s effect on world economic growth over the last 15 years. The low wage Chinese economy has been a major influence on prices and in some instances deflation in most developed countries.
However, is the party all going to come to an end? More crucially what impact will this have on our low cost country sourcing strategies?
Let me elaborate…..in a recent article it stated there were some concerns about the state of the Chinese economy but there is a danger that these concerns could be “prone to being overdone”.
Taking this article on its own then I would agree with this summary but when you take this in the context with other factors I think the issue is a lot bigger.
Firstly, this year China has tentatively raised interest rates in an effort to slow growth. However, this intervention has had little effect with GDP increasing from 10% in Qtr4 of 2006 to approximately 11% in the first quarter of 2007…and that’s the official line real GDP and inflation could be a whole lot higher.
Secondly, the central bank allowed some limited realignment of the exchange rates (it is still estimated that the currency is some 15 – 20% undervalued). Since interest rate rises have had little effect it seems obvious that the Government will have to intervene in exchange rates to stem demand for exports.
Thirdly, in an effort to standardise the corporation tax system the Chinese Government are planning to increase the corporation tax for foreign companies from 15% to 25%.
Fourthly, if that wasn’t enough there are signs of wage inflation within the economy both in white colour and blue colour workers.
Finally, due to the developing worlds’ insatiable demand for commodities, prices are at an all time high. Since these are generally input costs it seems inevitable that output prices would need to rise to compensate.
I could be accused of overdoing the issue here but it seems to me that the price pressures are real. Somebody said once that if it looks like a duck and quacks then maybe it is a duck!
In much the same way during the 70’s the dependence of the industrialized world on OPEC oil was exposed when prices were increased dramatically. The question is, could rising price of Chinese exports have the same effect?
In my opinion, the Sourcing community is certainly going to have some challenging times ahead. For example, at which point do you change your policy on Low Cost Country Sourcing, what are the triggers and when are they likely to arise?
In many instances, this decision is already finely balanced, for example, the long lead times are not exactly suited to say the retail industry.
Take Arcadia (£1.8bn turnover) clothing retailer in the UK made the strategic move to shift production from the Far East to countries like Turkey. Highly Fashionable products can be on the shelf 3 weeks quicker than sourcing from the Far East.
eSourcing has to play its part but the question is how. Here are some thoughts:
Increase the visibility of your spend. If you are not doing so then start using spend analysis software. This will help to understand areas of spend that have been untouched.
In conjunction with SA, projects will have to be run on a much more frequent basis. Look at smaller values and train administration staff to host projects.
Cost avoidance projects are as important. Do not take incumbent supplier price increases on the chin. Spend time analysing the pricing matrices and possibly share the benefits of projects.
Cost saving and sharing with third parties. Look at the opportunities and be realistic about the time scale v’s the benefit. If the analysis says it will work – make it and dedicate resources to it. The next collaboration project will be easier than the last.
Dedicate more time to nurturing the product develop process. Influence spend decisions earlier. (Far Easier to accomplish if staff and processes are aligned with the organisations eSourcing goals).
It is difficult gauge the exact timing and the exact impact. However, what I do know is that each country will feel the impact differently and those without a flexible exchange rate could be more at risk. Of course, I could be “overdoing” the risk?
Much like the duck that is cranking his little webbed feet as hard as possible to swim, but looks calm and stable on the surface, was the 3 days of our first user conference. I think since we did it all ourselves, listened to a number of ideas from our clients beforehand, and avoided rain on Wednesday, I will consider this event to be hugely successful for both us and our clients.
One of the things I learned very clearly, was that no matter how much we email or call, it is very difficult to explain everything our software can do without having adequate time and energy spent to do it. 100% of the attendees that came up from this week, left with a list of new things they were going to start implementing throughout their own companies. Perhaps most interesting (almost to a person) these people were genuinely excited about the new value they were going to be able to generate through the software they already had license to use.
I know we learned a great deal about what to do for future conferences to make them even better. I am still a proponent of content density over lack of depth, but admittedly had hit my limit by the end of the day Tuesday. Ultimately, I think people can decide for themselves when they need to decompress and take a walk or charge ahead to participate in everything. My only regret is that I had two opportunities (conference kick-off presentation and wrap up discussion) to tell everyone in attendance that we administered everything for reSource using our own technology. We built an extensive RFP to collect detailed data from the best downtown hotels and added pricing information through a sealed bid process. Ultimately, we had the executive team go through and score/evaluate the responses which determined our winner - Marriott. A reverse auction was seriously considered but due to the lack of available hotel rooms already and our relatively low purchasing clout, we opted for the less aggressive strategy. However, as Jason Busch says, we ate our own dog food, and I forgot to tell people!
The Iasta user community is doubling (or more) every year which means reSource will be quite extensive next year. I have no doubt that there will be word of mouth attendance growth as there were so many people that enjoyed themselves and got value. Fortunately, we ended on a very high note as a ton of people got to see and do things that cannot be replicated anywhere else in the world and the word “optimization” was ne’er uttered once all day Wednesday…
Continuing in the spirit of ERP week, I’d like to point out a great article by Sam Graham that asks Does your ERP System need a service. According to the article, ERP systems require regular servicing to ensure they are running correctly. To this end, it points out six categories where things can go wrong that are worth noting.
1. System Enhancements
Most ERP systems are updated at least yearly. Sometimes these enhancements contain functionality that would be appropriate and beneficial to the organization. Failing to implement these updates could cost the company more than not.
2. Changes in Expectations
The more comfortable users get with a system, the more they want it to do. Thus, a system that was great two years ago might not be so great today.
3. Incorrect Decisions at Go-Live
Most of the time, the company is unfamiliar with the services company chosen to assist in the system implementation and integration and the services company is also unfamiliar with the company. Thus, the decisions made are often sub-optimal, especially considering that tight budgets and overly aggressive schedules are often mandated.
4. Sitting with Nellie
Refers to the fact that some individuals held, and still hold, the view that the best way to learn a job was to sit alongside the person who did the job. Although the person who does a job now is the best person to tell you how the job is currently done, such an individual is not necessarily the best person to tell you how a job should be done.
5. Bad Habits
Over time, bad habits inevitably start to creep in. Sometimes they’re driven by laziness (”hey, I found a short-cut”) and sometimes they’re the consequences of well-intentioned individuals trying to improve the system. Either way, without a usage-audit, it’s likely you will be unable to detect these deviations.
6. Company Drift
Times change - but your ERP system will not change with them unless effort is made to keep it up to date. Without effort, you will one day wake up to find that you have a system perfectly suited to yesterday’s requirements but not at all suited for tomorrow’s.
The article also discusses some advantages and disadvantages of using the original implementation consultants, new support consultants, and the internal team to do the check-up.
Team
Advantages
Disadvantages
Original Consultants
Likely up-to-date with system enhancements
Individual consultants may still be available
Already familiar with the company and accepted by the internal team
Might not be willing to admit to initial errors, if they
find any
Might view it as an exercise in selling more
New Consultants
Fresh Perspective
No vested interested in covering up any errors
Might be willing to give you a good deal
Will need to be brought up to speed on the company
According to the report, On-demand technology platforms (also called “software as a service”) are playing an increasingly important role in enabling electronic communication and process collaboration. Companies seeking to improve their collaboration capabilities should take a strong look at on-demand solutions. On-demand solution providers tend to have greater resources and experience in on-boarding trading partners onto the collaboration platform than a company has in-house. Many on-demand providers also come to the table with networks of pre-connected suppliers and carriers, further reducing rollout times and increasing trading partner acceptance. Considering that most on-demand supply chain solutions are operational in less than three months and have an ROI period of less than a year and that best-in-class companies are more than twice as likely to be using on-demand supply chain applications, on-demand should be in your sights if it is not already.
The report also notes the following benefits achieved by market leaders:
administrative cost savings
shorter planning and execution cycles
reduced out-of-stocks at retail locations
increased percentage of perfect orders
reduced inventory holding costs
shorter cash-to-cash cycles
increased customer satisfaction
revenue growth
According to the report, which notes on-demand solution providers often have much greater resources and experience in on-boarding trading partners onto the collaboration platform and that many on-demand providers also come to the table with networks of pre-connected suppliers and carriers the two main process areas for collaboration are the order-to-cash process (customer collaboration) and the purchase-to-pay-process (supplier collaboration). On the P2P side, the touch-points identified for collaboration are product design, forecasting, VMI, capacity and material planning, transportation management, and order fulfillment. On the order-to-cash side, forecasting, order management, trade promotions and marketing, invoice reconciliation, inventory management, and transportation management are the main touch-points.
Fortunately, on-demand SCM solutions are well-suited to address two critical requirements of effective collaboration and synchronization:
the need for rapid electronic partner enablement
the requirement of process flexibility
The report also provides a value framework for assessing B2B collaboration options to help a company decide whether an on-demand solution is right for its B2B collaboration needs. The framework consists of four dimensions: TCO, business value gained, speed and project risk and is meant to look at the costs and benefits from all relevant angles.
Dimension 1: Estimating the Total Cost of Ownership
The total cost of ownership is dictated by start-up costs, recurring costs, and business partner on-boarding costs. These costs are defined as follows:
Start-up Costs
Cost of software
Cost of pre-requisite software
Upfront hardware costs
Software implementation costs
Initial software training costs
Recurring Costs
Software maintenance fee
Customization costs
Monitoring and on-going maintenance of hardware and pre-requisitie software
Data storage and continuity
Business continuity
Internal training costs for users and system administrators
Help Desk costs
Internal IT staff maintenance and support
Upgrading software
Business Partner On-Boarding Costs
On-boarding business partners
Maintaining and trouble-shooting trading partner connections
Total costs borne by business partners
Dimension 2: Estimating Business Value
The business value is primarily determined by the corresponding reduction in operating costs, increase in revenue, supply chain metric improvements, and community benefits.
Reduction in Operating Costs
Reduced labor costs
FTEs avoided during business expansion
Reduced transaction costs
Reduced inventory costs
Reduced logistics costs
Reduced managed services costs
Increase in Revenue
increase in sales due to new customer acquisition
increase in new product sales
decrease in sales due to old customer defections
Supply Chain Metrics Improvements
supply chain costs as a % of revenue
increased # of partners participating in collaboration initiatives
demand management-specific metrics
supply management-specific metrics
logistics management-specific metrics
cash-to-cash cycles
Community Benefits
hard and soft benefits of community development
Dimension 3: Estimating Speed
Speed is estimated along the following dimensions
Initial implementation time
Time to on-board trading partner
Rollout to new locations/business units
New process deployment
Time to reconfigure existing processes
Upgrade speed
Dimension 4: Estimating Project Risk
Project Risk is estimated along the following dimensions
Year 1 exit costs
Risk of project failure
Risk of software disuse
Risk of implementation cost overruns
Risk of data security
Risk of system downtime
Once a company has completed this analysis, according to Aberdeen, they can determine if they are in the sweet-spot for on-demand / Software-as-a-Service solutions and use the framework to consider the advantages and disadvantages to using on-demand versus more traditional approaches. It’s a good framework, and I believe it nicely complements the weekend series I authored last summer on On-Demand (The Good, The Not-So-Bad, And The Coming Pretty, And the Story Continues).
Today, we start the main presentation cycle for our conference. I am lucky enough to have great technical facilities at the Marriott which allows live blogging. I, personally, kicked off the presentations with a “State of the Union” regarding Iasta and the eSourcing marketplace. I was followed by John Inwright, former CPO of US Foodservice and UFPC (Yum Brands coop). John had a very interesting presentation about supply chain from the Executive level which focused on taking risks within scope and developing talent throughout the organization. I felt he would provide great perspective of supply chain strategy as it applies to an organization in totality.
Next on is/was the global eSourcing manager for the second largest retailer in the UK who presented fantastic detail and explanation of how to systematically build and expand a successful eSourcing roll-out and embed process in the strategic sourcing lifecycle. I am of the opinion that this is the best tactical discussion of how to correctly implement and grow eSourcing technology that I have participated in for quite a long time.
Coming up, is famed blogger and industry pontificator, Jason Busch as a keynote luncheon speaker. He is well worth the money and I would recommend his services to any group trying to impress. Also, later today, we are breaking up the presentation format and creating working groups of 7-10 to discuss specific concepts which I think will be highly productive. All in all, I think the event is going very well and feedback has been very positive.
Today begins the first day of the first users conference for Iasta. This is very exciting for us as we have pulled, pushed and dragged our way to a point where we can actually block over 150 room nights in the one of the best hotels in Indianapolis, right in the heart of race season.
The conference starts casually today with about 2/3 of the attendees arriving for advanced training and one on one interaction with our operations managers. This is going to be a great opportunity to work with clients that still have parts of SmartSource that they have not yet begun to utilize. I look forward to having detailed discussions with our client base over the next few days to get a good feeling for our performance both good and bad.
There is no question that this was a lot of work to put together almost 72 hours of detail and attendees arriving from multiple continents. I think we did a pretty good job with the planning and agenda but at this point we have “Crossed the Rubicon” and we no longer can control much of what will happen, including the weather!
Tomorrow will be very interesting with presentations from CXOs, our clients and even a famous blogger or two.
According to Nations Restaurant News, Burger King has begun implementing a new program designed to reduce animal cruelty. (No link as NRN locks down all content).
“Controversy over whether animals are being raised humanely for human consumption has escalated with a pledge by Burger King to phase in purchases of pork and eggs for its breakfast sandwiches from suppliers that do not confine pigs and chickens in crates or cages. The world’s second-largest hamburger chain said it would start buying 10 percent of its pork from suppliers that don’t use gestation crates. BK also said it plans to purchase 2 percent of its eggs from suppliers that have eliminated cages, which typically hold from four to six laying hens.”
These are pretty small numbers in percentages but very large in raw numbers from a company like Burger King. I think it must be assumed that BK is bearing the cost of this decision, which is representing the relatively low numbers. Unlike “Green Sourcing”, which many times over has proven to reduce costs and improve the environment, Humane Sourcing is more about social conscience. I commend BK for the decision. Now, if only the Atlanta Falcons could source a new Quarterback to replace Ron Mexico.
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Google]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Windows Live]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/windowslive.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
![[Email]](http://www.esourcingforum.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/email.png)
