Robert A. Rudzki, contributor to the Spend Matters blog, brings up a great point in a recent post. “’Strategic’ is perhaps one of the most overused (and misused) terms in business today,” he says. “Simply adding a few bells and whistles to conventional purchasing and then slapping the word strategic onto the process … is not the same thing as adopting the process as it is intended.” This holds especially true when companies are seduced by the “quick fix,” rocked by changes in leadership, or lulled back into conventional purchasing practices.
We couldn’t agree more. In conversations with companies interested in a strategic sourcing solution, we hear the same pain points over and over. “We’ve tried sourcing events in the past, but they never gained traction.” “We don’t really know where to start with a sourcing event.” “Things tend to just fall apart after we’ve collected bids.” “We select the lowest price, but the savings often aren’t realized.” “It could take us months after an auction to actually award our business.” And so on.
What these companies are missing is a true front-to-back sourcing strategy. They have the middle parts strategized – selecting suppliers, running an auction, evaluating the results of the auction – but the most vital aspects of sourcing may actually take place before and after the bids are solicited and collected. The front end of a strategic process is Spend Analysis, and the back end is Decision Optimization.
Having a powerful sourcing team and tool means nothing if you don’t have an effective strategy for what to source, and that means knowing your current spend patterns. You have to know what you’re buying, from where, from who, and so on in order to save money and make the investment in sourcing tools a good one. You can ensure stakeholder buy-in and an increased chance for savings success if you focus on correcting documented issues — sourcing items that have too many suppliers with a high amount of spend, items that don’t have buying consistency across distribution centers, and so on. Spend analysis gives you this type of visibility into your areas of need.
Award decisions can cripple a sourcing effort after the fact, unless you use decision optimization techniques to guide your decisions. Lowest cost may not always be the optimal award scenario for your business. Freight issues, quality issues, and so on can wipe out any projected savings you were expecting unless you factor these issues into your award decisions. An optimization tool can automatically calculate how different scenarios affect your award decisions, based on supplier attributes, award constraints, and so on. Considering this vital stage can mean the difference between dragged out, lackluster events and quick savings realization.
Don’t, as Rudzki advises, become stuck in conventional purchasing practices because you aren’t factoring in spend analysis and optimization into your sourcing decisions. These tools may be the key to putting “strategic” back into your sourcing.
This is the first in a series of posts discussing the history of, business case for and strategy behind supplier performance management.
Before we can get to the end goal of creating an SPM strategy, we must understand the factors in our supply chains that have caused SPM to become an enormously important part of our processes. Over the past decade, economic globalization has allowed companies to reach suppliers in previously untapped parts of the world. With the ability to purchase goods and services at lower costs around the world, we now rely more on outsourced suppliers for these goods and services, which has increased our supply chain risk, the complexity of our supply chains and the globalization of our businesses. These shifts in focus have changed a company’s view of its suppliers as a cost to a revenue source to hold down the bottom line.
The combination of these factors across a globalized supply chain means that companies must maintain strong, viable supply chains in order to maintain strong, consistent business performance to protect their bottom lines. Effective, smart supplier performance management allows us to achieve these goals.
So does this mean a company needs a perfect supplier scorecard that makes its metrics look good? NO. Supplier scorecards are one small, though important, piece in the intricate puzzle that makes up supplier performance management. SPM involves aligning the organization, enabling strong business processes, developing meaningful supplier scorecards, and building actionable supplier improvement plans.
But at the end of the day, SPM is mainly about finding ways to improve your suppliers’ performance to reduce costs and risks, while increasing supplier value. Supplier performance improvement could take the form of making more on-time deliveries instead of shipping a few days early, which increases your inventory costs. Or suppliers could decrease lead time for delivery, which lowers your production time. A strong SPM program allows a procurement team to have visibility into performance issues like these so it can correct them with the supplier, while continually building a strong, mutually beneficial business relationship.
For more information on Supplier Performance Management click here to download our white paper.
Today’s post is the second on Center Led Procurement. In these next few paragraphs, I would like to examine the benefits of center led procurement.
Center Led Procurement: What does it mean and what does it look like?
A center-led model of procurement is where a procurement center of excellence (COE) focuses on corporate supply chain strategies and strategic commodities, best practices, and knowledge sharing while leaving individual buys and tactical execution to the individual business units provides the best of both worlds – all of the advantages of the centralized and decentralized models with minimal disadvantages.
The center led model, built on cross-functional teams that represent all of the key divisions and business units, allows for the creation of flexible supply chain processes and commodity strategies that can be tailored at the local level, when necessary, to adhere to local regulations, or take advantage of local markets or tax breaks.
Corporate spend can be fully leveraged on strategic commodity categories well suited for centralized sourcing and non-strategic categories not suited to centralized sourcing can be handled by the individual business units.
Operational efficiencies are increased and overall operational costs are decreased and the organization maintains the ability to react quickly to unexpected changes in supply or demand. Best practices can be shared easily throughout the enterprise, maverick buying significantly reduced, and performance maintained at a consistent level.
Which of the 3 procurement organization models does your organization use -or prefer? For even more information, please visit the E-Sourcing Wiki on this topic.
Incumbent and new suppliers can sometimes be reluctant with a reverse auction. The most important advice to remember when dealing with these types of supplier situations is: communicate, communicate, and communicate.
This point cannot be stressed enough. Many feel that by utilizing an online sourcing tool, all communication only takes place electronically. The e-Sourcing tool should facilitate communication, not replace it. It is important to still maintain professional relationships with your bidders and stakeholders through one-on-one meetings or phone conversations. Before initiating any online sourcing initiative, suppliers should be notified about what they will be receiving and what to do with that information. This also gives you the opportunity to minimize any fears and preconceived notions they may have about online sourcing technologies. The Sourcing Team should also properly monitor suppliers’ progress on different tasks set out for them to do, and follow up with a phone call whenever they are not being responsive. This will ensure maximum understanding and participation from suppliers.
Here are some key times that you should communicate with your suppliers.
• before an invitation to participate in an auction, notify them of the upcoming event
• after the invitation is sent, confirming the supplier received it and asking if they have any questions
• when there are dramatic changes to the RFQ including new deadlines, dates or specifications
• 24 hours prior to the auction to verify participation and answer any open questions
• during the auction if there are noticeable issues with a supplier (like not logging in, logging off too soon)
• after the auction to communicate the award decision
Clarity and communication are keys to not only a successful auction, but to maintaining strong relationships with potential suppliers who don’t win.
Simple steps like these will drastically reduce the risk of event day issues and will keep suppliers interested in your business later, as they will feel the process was fairly managed.
UNSPSC coding is great for numerous industries, but it seems that there is a void in the coding structure when it comes to large financial institutions. I recently held discussions with several directors of sourcing from large insurance and finance companies while speaking about spend analysis. In each conversation it has come to light that the coding is great for a lot of commodities, but doesn’t address the unique services aspect of their spend.
So how do they accurately classify their spend when UNSPSC isn’t adequate? As all animals do in the world, they adapt and evolve out of necessity. They have created a hybrid of UNSPSC that includes the strong elements of what UNSPSC coding classifies well and included additional coding that relates specifically to their unique services spend.
UNSPSC coding is a strong coding system. However, companies should not be afraid to add to coding structures to meet their needs. Visibility into your spend is only as good as a desired taxonomy’s ability to accurately reflect the nature of your data.
A strong Spend Analysis solution will be able to handle not only classifying to UNSPSC, but also any internal structure as well. A spend analysis solution should be as flexible and scalable as the company it’s doing the work for.
Last month I met with Reuben Slone, a highly respected supply chain executive with OfficeMax. During the meeting, we had extended discussion of the effort that it takes to publish a book such as the one he just released through the Harvard Business Press. It was fascinating to hear about the peer review process and length of time it takes for a book like this to actually get to market.
I encourage you to read this book as it contains powerful real world examples and strategies for supply chain mangers to C-level executives.
Here is a brief description of the book and what a couple of people have thought of the book.
In The New Supply Chain Agenda, Reuben Slone, J. Paul Dittmann, and John Mentzer explain how to reinvent your supply chain to avoid those errors—and turn your supply chain into a competitive weapon that produces unprecedented economic profit for your firm.
Drawing on a wealth of company examples, the authors show how to activate the five levers of supply chain excellence:
• Putting the right people with the right skills in the right jobs
• Leveraging supply chain technologies such as system optimization and visibility tools
• Eliminating cross-functional disconnects, including SKU proliferation
• Collaborating with suppliers and customers to generate a seamless flow of information and supply chain improvements
• Managing supply chain projects skillfully
Apply the steps in this book, and you build a supply chain that delivers as it should—without leaving money on the table.
Comments/Reviews of the Book
“As recognition of the potential organizational performance benefits from superior supply chain management continues to work its way into board rooms, C-level execs have needed a guide to help them understand how something that happens on a loading dock 8000 miles from home can influence their earnings per share on Wall Street the next day. This book provides that guide, using real life examples experienced by the authors. Every aspiring executive of a firm that sources, makes, stores or moves products should read this book..as should the bankers who invest in these “real world” companies!! I recommend it strongly.”
“As a supply chain executive, I have read several journals, books etc and quite honestly of late I have been hungry for some new, relevant and meaningful learning. This book truly stands out and offers something valuable to learn. An outstanding blend of technical, social and strategic insight in a field that is rapidly becoming a differentiator for companies. This book offers powerful ideas that are truly applicable in the real world of supply chain management. A must read for senior supply chain executives. Not only does this book dive deep into powerful supply chain concepts relevant in today’s world, it also provides unique and valuable insight into the social challenges of the field – hiring the right talent, internal and external collaboration, change management all the way up to the boardroom etc.”
If you would like to learn more about the book we have attached a link to its amazon page below. Click here to view the book.
Winning bidders in auctions often experience buyer’s remorse, a gnawing sense that they have paid too much for something that they don’t need and perhaps no longer want. Something similar can happen in reverse when a client selects the cheapest service provider in a competitive tender for outsourced services. For example, in today’s tough conditions, many clients are anxious to strike deals that shift fixed components of their cost base onto the provider. But this can exert colossal pressures on the provider’s operating model if the services are not fairly priced and consumption falls.
Buyers typically – and often with justification – worry that the deal will come to strongly favour the provider. Here are the TPI Top 5 reasons why the opposite might be the case:
1. The service provider doesn’t understand the requirement. Buyer’s remorse is often accompanied by a feeling of embarrassment where the buyer thinks, “the other bidders must know something I don’t.” Likewise, a suspiciously low bid might indicate the provider misunderstood the scope of services or the level to which they were to be performed. Service levels can be a culprit here, as small changes in requirements can result in step-changes in cost.
2. The provider underestimates the transition and transformation effort. This is a subset of the first category, but worth mentioning separately because it is so common. Many service providers understand their own cost bases well, yet believe their products, systems and processes to be broadly standardized when, in fact, significant effort is required to adapt them to client processes and systems.
3. The provider is “buying the business.” A service provider might offer an attractive price in order to acquire a capability and client base in an attractive business area. This is rarely to both parties’ advantage and often ends badly if the provider’s expansion plans don’t result in the expected revenues. Similarly, changes in the provider’s management or business direction (or both) will lead to suboptimal behaviours that are typically focused on the provider’s profit and loss rather than service to the client.
4. The provider relies on leveraging the transferred assets. Perhaps the provider wants to subsidize the cost of, say, a data centre in anticipation of winning additional business that can be serviced from the same location. As above, this can benefit both parties, particularly if both recognise it as a fundamental part of the solution. The risk in this approach, however, can be costly if the new business doesn’t materialise or is delayed, or it if can only be won if the pricing assumes yet more growth.
5. Corporate activity. A client was able to extract a low bid from a service provider who had already announced to the market a strategy dependent on winning the business. As with any price reduction that is unrelated to a corresponding reduction in cost, clients should be wary of such an approach, as the provider’s rationale will soon be forgotten once the margins are being reported.
The lowest bid can easily turn out to be the most expensive. At best, the relationship will be strained and the service provider will try to recover costs through a self-serving reading of the contractual obligations; at worst the client might find itself depending on a bankrupt provider.
OGCs everywhere are finding that their budgets are not immune to the economic downtown. Concurrently, the evaporation of hundreds of millions of dollars in “deal” fees on Wall Street has many of the law firms scrambling for new business in other practice areas. It’s a great time to be sourcing legal. However, you have to be careful in the way you approach this category and the players involved.
The relationships and confidence your General Counsel has with all of the firms they work with has a higher value to them than simply saving a few bucks. In order to be successful in this category, you have to earn the confidence and trust of your OGC.
By that, I mean the Office of General Counsel (OGC) needs to have a high level of confidence that the insertion of Strategic Sourcing will not, in any way, materially impact the relationships that office has with outside counsel – particularly their “A-Team” of law firms.
So what is the best method to approach this category?
The most successful strategy is to spend 75% of your time on building relationships with the OGC and his team to understand their needs and firm relationships. From that, you will have a better understanding of what they value and will not change. A General Counsel’s level of comfort that you “get it” is directly correlated to how deep into the spend you will get. So, after thorough relationship building, you are left with 25% of the project or areas of spend that you can begin to do tactical sourcing projects. Take a look at litigation support service as a good starting category to source and begin building that bridge to strengthen the confidence and relationship with your OGC.
“You can improve what you can measure” is an adage many contact center managers strive to realize. But while data collection and reporting systems are critical contact center tools, access to statistics alone will not ensure success in improving performance. Improper communication, unnecessary complications and inconsistent application of performance measures often cause the best contact centers to underachieve and cause key programs to fail.
How do you acquire the biggest bang through measuring performance? Here are the TPI Top 5 steps that can boost your chances of operational improvement:
1. Plan your direction carefully. Determine which key measure(s) is/are most critical to the success of the operation and develop the plan for improvement around that measure.
2. Limit key measures to a core four or five. Do not be trapped into developing multiple simultaneous improvement plans
3. Ensure that all goals are achievable. In an attempt to improve numbers rapidly, do not be fooled into thinking a lofty, unachievable goal will provide sufficient incentive for an agent to stretch performance that much further.
4. Avoid metrics that send conflicting messages to the staff. Key performance indicators and metrics that are contradictory in nature can lead you down a path to failure.
5. Carefully explain the objectives to all members of the contact center team. Every member of the team must clearly understand your objectives and work together to achieve the primary target.
Following these tips may not ensure performance improvement, but it can certainly improve your chances of success.
Does your company have copiers, fax machines, workgroup printers, desktop printers, and multi-function devices? Are some of these devices connected to the network, and some not? Are some leased and some owned? Do the lease terms vary?
If you answered yes to one or more of these questions, you likely have a cost reduction opportunity!
The cost related to copying and printing is one of the final frontiers of indirect expense reduction. While many companies have made strides in equipment lease and ‘click’ costs, there often remain a significant number of non-networked desktop printers with no way of measuring print volumes and corresponding costs.
With multifunction printers blurring the lines between copiers, fax machines and traditional printers, now is a great time to take a comprehensive look at all internal print sources and related costs. A managed print solution undergirded with a strong corporate print policy and ‘right sized’ printer to employee ratio can provide an opportunity to upgrade to best in class equipment while saving money via reduced equipment costs, reduced toner costs, reduced energy costs, and reduced help desk costs. Additionally, state of the art tools can be deployed to control color print costs and reduce overall paper consumption, thereby supporting your company’s green initiatives.
Paladin recently led a print solution project for a client with locations nationwide. Having grown by acquisition, the client had 5 sets of copier leases, each via a different supplier and with varying termination dates and pricing. Three additional suppliers provided toner for owned devices. The client had no corporate print policy. Personal printers ‘multiplied’ quickly, and in some locations were used almost exclusively while leased equipment sat largely unused. By moving to a managed print solution the client reduced their costs by over 25% while upgrading devices, meeting green initiatives, and right sizing their fleet.
As a sourcing professional, my most difficult negotiations aren’t with suppliers but rather with internal customers. Based on conversations with my colleagues, that experience is not unusual. One measure of this challenge is “savings leakage” (savings negotiated but not realized). Aberdeen Group reports average leakage rates of 21% as Purchasing strives to implement its sourcing decisions. Best In Class companies experience about 14% leakage whereas All Others see 24% leakage (1). Small companies experience up to 40% savings leakage (2). Net, there is a huge payout for improvement.
There can be several reasons for leakage:
Communication. The using organization is unaware of the award and continues buying from the incumbent.
Inconvenience. The new supplier’s process is inefficient providing a negative incentive to change (e.g. a travel reservation website which is difficult to use).
Fear of the unknown. There may be a long-standing, positive relationship between the supplier and the user. Alternately, the internal customer may not be thrilled with their current supplier, but at least the incumbent is “the devil they know”.
Lack of trust. The internal customer organization doesn’t trust the buyer to properly address non-price criteria when making sourcing decisions.
Regardless of the reason, leakage represents innumerable hours of wasted effort and, more importantly, millions of dollars in missed bottom line profit improvements.
Communication breakdown is relatively easy to address, particularly with the use of eSourcing, eProcurement, Spend Analysis and on-line contract management systems. The other three reasons require a deliberate process and up-front planning. It’s all about effective change management! Successful sourcing managers don’t wait until after the award to sell their internal customers. This is particularly critical in companies where business units are relatively autonomous, and not subject to corporate edicts.
Effective sourcing professionals follow Stephen Covey’s advice: “Begin with the end in mind”. What does that mean? It means involving key stakeholders throughout the entire sourcing process so they will support implementation of the ultimate award decision
Specifically, what does this entail?
Ensure upper management support for sourcing initiatives and savings goals.
Initiate a comprehensive and methodical change management process early on.
Work with stakeholders to clearly define decision criteria with appropriate measures.
Conduct the RFP/RFQ with stakeholder input and involvement.
Gain stakeholder support for a comprehensive implementation plan and enforce accountability.
Monitor expenditures over time to identify any leakage.
Sound like a lot of work? It is. However, it often eliminates months of wasted effort on sourcing decisions that don’t stick. Why is it that we never have time to do it right, but we always have time to do it over? Is this formal process necessary for all savings initiatives? No, but the thought process should be applied to all situations. Thinking through this process allows you to determine the extent of the effort required. One size does not fit all.
Addressing stakeholder fear, lack of trust and potential inconvenience through a comprehensive change management effort and improved communication will have a tremendous impact on savings leakage.
Click here to access a more detailed write up or here for a podcast on the topic.
Many companies negotiate small package programs to cover the documents in small packages, but how much consideration is given to those shipments with weights between 200 and 300 pounds.
Normally a shipper will tender those shipments directly to an LTL carrier along with other shipments. These shipments are known as minimums in the LTL industry and are either tendered loose or stacked on a pallet and shrink-wrapped.
These shipments can create problems in handling simply because they command an allotted spot with other LTL shipments. They are normally stripped from the pallet and placed in holes between shipments and essentially scattered about the trailer until they are handled again.
Most small package courier companies in the US offer other services such as multi-weight and hundredweight programs geared to the shipments over 200 pounds that are handled within the small package system.
It makes total sense for an organization to look at these additional services provided by US small package couriers since most LTL carriers are shying away and pricing accordingly these type of shipments since they demand a higher degree of handling.
A complete review of your order picking practices must be done in order to reveal if it is cost effective enough and not too labor intensive to move LTL minimum shipments over to multi-weight and hundredweight programs that are offered by US small package couriers.
Your company has wisely contracted for an eSourcing solution. You are relying on it to deliver process improvements and sorely needed cost savings. You’ve trained your people, but you recognize that the challenge has just begun. Internal adoption is key to your success.
The challenge you face is culture change. It is the biggest obstacle in any software deployment. Less than 15% of your user base will be “early adopters”. The majority will take a “wait & see” approach, and 10% or so will be “foot draggers”. There will be resistance because the implementation requires behavior changes for all involved.
Experience across numerous customers representing a variety of industries has identified some levers which can help to accelerate user adoption. These are:
Goals and Measures – Creating a “pull” enviornment
Organization – the right structure, roles and responsibilities
Processes – documented best practices
Leadership creates a “pull” environment by establishing Goals & Measures and holding people accountable. Since everyone has more to do than they can possibly get done, they must set priorities. So how do they decide what gets done and what gets left undone? It is human nature to seek pleasure and avoid pain. Therefore, what gets measured by leadership gets done! That’s why goals and measures are critical for internal adoption.
While goals and measures are important they must be supported by the proper Organization. This is not merely about structure – the boxes on the organization chart. You must also have clearly defined roles and responsibilities with the positions staffed appropriately. Key roles include:
Champion – He/she establishes and communicates goals and measures, provides necessary resources, breaks down barriers and holds people accountable.
Master User – This individual “puts the feet” on the implementation. Required skills include: Leadership, Change Management, Project Management, Sourcing & Communications. He/she is the liaison with the Champion and becomes the on-going center of eSourcing expertise. A strong Master User is a key indicator of success.
Super User – In larger organizations, the Master User can’t do it all. The Super User is typically an on-site resource who teaches tools and tactics, models best practices, coaches other sourcing professionals, shares learnings within and across the organization, and identifies barriers and improvement opportunities.
Sourcing Professionals – The sourcing professionals do what they’ve always done – apply sourcing expertise to deliver cost savings, cycle time reductions and process improvements. However, they perform these tasks with the assistance of an eSourcing solution supported by new processes and best practices under the tutelage of the Master and Super Users.
The third lever for internal adoption is Processes. A quality tool called the P-D-C-A cycle (Plan-Do-Check-Act/Adjust) is useful for this purpose.
Plan includes: creating an implementation project plan, user training and spend analysis which enables sourcing pipeline development. There is a tendency to shortcut planning and jump to action. This typically results in significant frustration and rework.
Do refers to the actual implementation. This involves the application of processes, best practices, templates and checklists to conduct successful eSourcing events. Most eSourcing solutions provide templates and allow you to embed processes and best practices into the project management feature of the solution.
Check relates to tracking your progress. Are you achieving the goals established on both a program and project basis? Your goals must be supported by specific measures against which you track.
Act/Adjustfocuses on continuous improvement. This includes periodic reviews where individuals share learnings with each other, identify improvement opportunities, and develop an action plan. The cycle then repeats.
Using the three levers: Goals & Measures, Organization and Processes, helps to embed eSourcing into your organization’s culture. Ignoring these important considerations will impede your efforts thereby delaying the efficiencies and savings that are critical for survival in today’s economic climate.
While the cost to deliver a unit of computing resource continues to fall, there is a “traitor” to the cause of lower costs – Software. Software, eight years ago, was typically in the 40% range of the total cost to deliver a MIPS. Now, we see software taking over more than half the spend in mainframe computing; in many cases greater than 60% of the spend. While other major cost drivers have fallen through the years, software costs as a percent of the total spend continue to rise. Why? The other two largest cost drivers – labor and hardware – have continued to fall year over year:
• Labor – As support for systems has moved offshore to a more economical labor force, labor costs have fallen through the years. Increased productivity from more effective tools and established standard support processes have also increased the efficiency of the support organization.
• Hardware – Faster and cheaper has been the path for hardware; this is expected to continue as the mainframe becomes a worthy competitor to midrange servers as the platform for hosting Linux applications.
In the meantime, software costs are rising. How did software become such a large expense? Here are some things to consider as you begin optimizing your software expense.
• Shiny Object Syndrome – It’s in all of us. We like the latest, fastest, neatest tool on the market today. However, over time the functionality of tools begin to overlap and you end up with multiple applications providing similar functionality. Rationalize applications to those that provide greatest functionality and look to eliminate redundant applications.
• Value Meal – It was free and probably more than you should eat. Upon implementing new systems, software publishers will offer other, complimentary products. The hope is that the customer will begin utilizing and paying for them after some promotional period. After the promotional period of time has passed, the software is charged to the customer whether it is used or not. It’s worth the effort to take a look to make sure that every module and package being paid for is actually being utilized.
• Enterprise License – Software publishers make entering into an “enterprise-wide” agreement very attractive from a unit cost perspective. However, while unit costs are low, if a volume of license far exceeds an organization’s needs, the organization can be over spending for software.
Outsourced? Consider engaging in a dialog with your Service Provider to discuss the software expenses for your systems. Facilitate a discussion that seeks to understand how software is managed, who is looking after the spend, and rationalizing its expense. If software costs are embedded in resource unit rates, consider having your Service Provider separate them so that greater visibility into software costs is provided. Set these cost up with a mechanism that – to the extent you are able to lower costs – allows you to lower these costs dollar for dollar.
Many organizations measure on a monthly basis on time carrier performance assuring both manufacturer/shipper and end-user/customer on-time delivery of product by the service provider selected.
These measurements are used in carrier selection and negotiation purposes by both the shipper, customer and service provider and being based on actual service standards set forth by the carriers.
It is important to understand what on-time performance means and to what detail you are likely to consider to drill down to capture the data provided.
Service providers capture all kinds of data, from delay’s, damages, appointments, weather conditions, line haul failures and so on.
To develop a clear and concise on time measurement program, a shipper needs to determine what data collection is needed to provide an organization good measurable clean information in order to provide a benchmark.
Keeping it as simple as possible and clearly measurable is key to both the organization and the service provider. This information should be shared on a regular basis with both the organization and service provider in order to understand what on-time performance means and how the data can be used to benefit the customer.
Remember, if you start this program continue with this program and utilize the data directly from the carrier and keep it formatted an updated for future negotiation and service issues.
![[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)
