2015_Global SRM Research Report - Supplier Relationships

State of Flux 2015 Global Supplier Relationship Management Research Report focuses on the business of supplier relationships. Nearly 500 Supply Management professionals have contributed to this year's research. Its free to download but provides incredible insights into the SRM market right now.

THE BUSINESS OF SUPPLIER RELATIONSHIPS

2015 Global SRM Research Report

FOREWORD

Welcome to the 2015 Global SRM Research Report . Thank you to

everyone who has supported us this year . The research is now in its

seventh year , and this time more than 360 companies have

participated globally . Over the course of the past seven years we

have seen input from more than 1 , 200 companies , giving us over

500 , 000 data points on supplier relationship management ( SRM ).

You may notice that our report has taken on a different look this

year . While our research has been as comprehensive as ever , we

have decided to focus on the business opportunity that SRM

presents and how this needs to be moved up to the senior executive

agenda . Companies that have a structured and well - supported

approach to SRM are reaping more direct financial benefits , as well

as broader commercial gains , such as access to innovation ,

improved speed to market and greater profitability . The gap in value

derived from SRM continues to increase between companies fully

committed to and investing in SRM ( leaders and fast followers ),

those who are at an earlier stage in their journey ( followers ) and ,

most certainly , those who approach it in a piecemeal way ( others ).

Our research and direct engagement with clients make us sure that

realising tangible value requires the whole business to embrace

SRM . It needs to be a business change programme rather than a

procurement initiative , and it needs full engagement and support

from the senior executive level down . This report is written with

senior executive or C - suite readers in mind , whose support and

engagement is critical to SRM achieving its full potential for

businesses . We hope the evidence within convinces you that

supplier relationships are a key lever to achieving the business

objectives of growth , profitability and increased shareholder value .

As for how you deliver this , please contact us or we have provided

many tools , tips , articles and case studies highlighting best practice

in our 2013 and 2014 SRM reports . These are available to download

at www . stateofflux . co . uk ( under ‘ Reports and publications ’).

I hope you enjoy reading the report and , as always , find it stimulating

and a valuable source of information .

Alan Day

Chairman and founder

State of Flux

INTRODUCTION

The business of supplier relationships

SRM is a business - critical issue . Our seven years of research in this

area have demonstrated that companies that get this right generate

higher profits , innovate more effectively and

are better able to manage risk . It is hard to imagine a more

commercially relevant set of issues , all of which we discuss in more

detail later in this report .

All the evidence suggests that the role of suppliers will only become

more important in the future . We can see that the nature of business

is changing , with many companies becoming both flatter and more

reliant on third parties to deliver everything from customer support

through to research and development as well as more traditional

products and services . In other words , businesses are putting more

and more of their brands ’ reputations into the hands of other

companies . In such a scenario , a business can only be as good as its

worst supplier .

This is why business leaders – chief executives , managing directors ,

executive chairmen – need to take notice of SRM . Procurement

functions can and should offer support and advice , but at its heart

SRM is a strategic issue that requires senior strategic leadership .

In fact , this year ’ s research shows a direct correlation between

companies that are leading the way in this area and strong senior

backing of SRM , with 46 % of leading companies saying that SRM has

the support of their top executives . On the other hand , this is true of

only 21 % of all organisations in this year ’ s survey , while the

proportion that say their leaders are not engaged has risen , now

sitting at well over a fifth .

Why does this matter ? Because organisations that want to make a

real difference with SRM – and that should be any organisation that

wants to maintain its competitive edge – need to be led by people

who understand its importance . That means recognising that

changing business dynamics are giving suppliers more power and

choice about who they partner with , and how . It means in turn

recognising that becoming a key supplier ’ s customer of choice will

bring access to a range of benefits , from price advantages to

innovation – and that failing to do so will mean such benefits

accruing to competitors instead .

This understanding must be paired with a board - level commitment

to investing in the technology and training that underpin successful

SRM and to creating an organisational culture in which all

employees understand the part that they play in SRM , and the part

that it can play in meeting their own needs . Novartis ’ s Chris Holmes

offers a particularly good example of this on page 17 .

As in previous years , we have asked questions and analysed

answers around the six pillars of SRM :

1. Business drivers and value : this covers the SRM value

proposition – both the bottom - line benefits , such as the cost

reductions reported by 60 % of respondents ,

as well as less tangible advantages such as innovation and

preferential access to scarce resources .

2. Stakeholder engagement and support : this is often thought of

as something that concerns external stakeholders but , as our

research around the low levels of senior executive

engagement indicates , it is just as important to consider

internal stakeholders .

3. Governance and process : 80 % of respondents say that they do

not have robust risk management in place for more than three

quarters of their suppliers , despite the very real chance of

reputational , financial and even criminal damage when

governance fails .

4. People and skills : responses make clear that training people in

communication and other skills needed to deliver effective

SRM is not a organisational priority for many – 40 % have not

spent much on SRM - specific training , while more than a quarter

have invested nothing at all .

5. Information and technology : this has the potential to make

every other pillar easier to manage in a more effective manner .

6. Relationship development and culture : on this last pillar more

than 90 % of respondents cite good cultural alignment as being

important or very important to successful supplier relationships .

View large image

Our research enables us to compare responses to our six pillars of SRM best - practice

model and thereby assess the SRM maturity of companies . These assessments allow

us to group companies that , based on their responses , are regarded as leaders , fast

followers , followers or others . It ’ s clear from this analysis that even the leading

companies still have much room for improvement .

As you read through these findings we ask you to remember that all

six pillars are interlinked . It is only with the commitment and support

of its leadership team that any organisation will be able to make the

changes needed to embed SRM into its culture in a way that makes

it the responsibility of every employee – not simply those that work

in a procurement or supply role . This does not mean that chief

executives have to become de facto chief procurement oficers – far

from it . It simply means they must recognise that the strategies they

develop and the examples they set have a crucial role to play in

shaping SRM , and that the shape of SRM has an equally important

role in the success of the organisation as a whole .

ABOUT THE RESEARCH

view large image

view large image

view large image

view large image

BUSINESS CASE

MAKING THE CASE

SRM can deliver significant gains across a business .

Articulatingthe benefits is key to getting board - level buy - in

Higher profits , lower costs , more innovation and improved

competitiveness : organisations that get SRM right can benefit across

the board . More than 40 % of respondents have achieved a positive ,

quantifiable post - contract benefit from their SRM activities , with 31 %

reporting a benefit of 4 % or more . Meanwhile , 60 % report cost

reductions , 52 % cost avoidance and 39 % preferential pricing . Nearly

a fifth ( 18 %) claim to be more profitable as a direct result of their SRM

programme .

view large image

To put this in context , research by Dr John Henke , who writes on

page 10 , suggests that good SRM contributes to as much as 70 % of

a company ’ s gross profit – far more than any other business function

can claim .

But the full business case for SRM is even richer and more nuanced

than these direct financial benefits . An SRM programme that is

aligned with an organisation ’ s strategic objectives also offers

significant ‘ soft ’ benefits , which are hard to measure but immensely

valuable .

view large image

Effective SRM enables organisations to become customers of

choice . Customer - of - choice benefits include service level and quality

improvements ( each cited by 39 % of respondents ), improved

customer experience ( 28 %) and increased competitiveness . SRM

brings a more constructive tone to negotiations , say 52 % of

respondents , and helps both sides to take a longer - term perspective

and bring about better outcomes for both parties ( each 46 %).

Collaborative partnerships with suppliers can also contribute

significantly to innovation , as outlined on page 16 .

The evidence also suggests that suppliers that are engaged through

SRM programmes are more willing to put in effort and resources

above and beyond what is contracted . More than half of

respondents say that their key suppliers ’ senior management team

is more committed to their partnership as a result of their SRM

activities , while the same proportion see improved account

management as a result . Other examples of additional commitment

from suppliers include : proactive ideas for continuous improvement

( 46 %); collaborative problem - solving ( 45 %); and priority access to the

best people and resources ( 21 %). All of these can help a business

get a jump on its competitors , particularly in the case of the last two

elements . But the flip side is that they also indicate areas of potential

commercial risk : few chief executives would be happy telling their

boards that they were struggling to get a product to market because

their main competitor had done a better job of securing their supply

chain .

view large image

It is worth pointing out , however , that over the past seven years the

benefits , both ‘ soft ’ and ‘ hard ’, that have been secured by the

companies leading the way in SRM have continued to increase –

meaning these companies are pulling away from those lagging

behind . In other words , the gap is big and getting bigger .

Soft benefits are hard to measure

This combination of direct financial benefit and longer - term value

creation presents a striking picture , but some leadership teams still

struggle to recognise the contribution that SRM can make to their

organisation ’ s success : only 40 % of respondents believe that their

organisation ’ s executive team can articulate the value SRM brings .

Only slightly more say that their chief procurement oficer ( CPO ) can

do this , while more than a third of SRM teams suggest that they

cannot .

view large image

Sometimes this is because soft benefits are hard to measure – less

than 8 % of respondents could quantify benefits such as

competitiveness , supply continuity and improved customer

experience in financial terms – which may explain why 42 % of

respondents do not know what post - contract benefit SRM activity

brings them .

One company that has seen a raft of tangible benefits since

implementing SRM is United Utilities . Its approach starts with how

contracts are agreed , says Mark Hopkinson , the water company ’ s

head of SRM . “ The benefits we have seen are significant ,” he says .

“ We can report improved service , reduced cost and improved

sustainability performance . We know it ’ s dificult to measure SRM

benefit on its own as it is intertwined with overall business and

supply - chain strategies but we haven ’ t let this stand in our way .

view large image

“ We believe it ’ s more important to get on with the job than to haggle

over where savings are attributed . However , where we have made

specific interventions , we have achieved post - contract savings in the

region of £ 30 million , and contributed to much more .”

Suppliers that are engaged through SRM programmes are more willing to put in effort andresources above and beyond what is contracted

SRM ensures contacted value is delivered

When it comes to value , however , it is important to stay on top of

hard - won contract gains , says Mark Colechin , Legal & General ’ s

head of SRM . This is where good governance , as discussed further

on page 18 , should be deployed to ensure that SRM ’ s reality lives up

to the potential outlined in the business case . “ There is plenty of

evidence to suggest that much of the value negotiated in contracts

is not actually delivered , because the contract isn ’ t effectively

implemented and managed ,” Colechin explains .

view large image

One final challenge to note when it comes to SRM is lack of a board -

level champion . It is rare for CPOs to have a seat at the main board ,

with many reporting through the COO or CFO – or even a level

below that . This does not necessarily mean that the CPO must

become a more senior role , but it is vital for members of the senior

leadership to have an understanding of , and commitment to , SRM .

Best practice : Alan Day , chairman and founder of State of Flux

More than 11 years of working with leading companies and seven

years of industry - leading research reveal that the business case for

SRM remains one of the perennial challenges for procurement and

SRM leaders .

For many , SRM simply feels like the right thing to be doing . But it is

much more than that . Defining the value proposition and business

case for SRM allows business leaders to focus on real value

opportunities . We suggest that leaders do this by focusing on the

four drivers of value :

• post - contract benefits • sustained sourcing savings • contribution to profits • customer - of - choice ( soft ) benefits

Leadership teams still struggleto recognise the contribution that SRM can make to their organisation ’ s success

BUILDING PROFITABLE RELATIONSHIPS

HARNESSING SHARED VALUE

Every chief procurement officer in every business is sitting

on anopportunity to add substantially to their firm ’ s

profitability

Our research indicates that good SRM contributes to between 30

and 70 % of a company ’ s gross profit .

Where does this figure come from ? For the past 25 years we have

studied the relationship between major manufacturing companies

and their tier - one suppliers – first in the automotive industry , and

then in another 17 sectors . From this research we developed the

Working Relationships Index ®, which shows that the more

collaborative the relationship between supplier and customer , the

greater the supplier ’ s contribution to the company ’ s profitability . In

the auto industry this contribution is , on average , around 70 % of

gross profit . In other sectors , where customers spend a smaller

proportion of their revenue on suppliers , the supplier impact can

drop to 30 % – still a substantial contribution to the firm ’ s profit .

This contribution comes in two ways . The first is that better

relationships give suppliers the assurance that they will continue to

supply the company in the future , which results in suppliers being

willing to offer greater price concessions in the present .

The second factor relates to non - price benefits . For example , the

more collaborative the relationships , the more willing are suppliers

to share new technology without the assurance of a purchase order

or to invest in innovation in anticipation of future business . In

addition , when the customer needs support , suppliers will give this

‘ customer of choice ’ A - team support ( rather than B - team ), and will

invariably provide more support than is contractually required .

Mutual benefits

Together these non - price activities allow customers to be more

eficient and effective in their operations and to get products to

market faster than their competitors . At the same time , the

arrangement also benefits suppliers : our latest research suggests

that collaborative relationships improve not only customer profits ,

but supplier profits as well . The reason

for this joint benefit is that neither side has to waste time on

nonsense such as the adversarial accusations associated with non -

trusting relationships , which are much more dificult to maintain . With

a collaborative , trusting relationship things run more smoothly and , if

a problem does arise , it can be resolved in a quick and

straightforward manner .

So what does it take to become a customer of choice ? First , get the

foundation in place . Customers need to follow good business

practices that are conducive to suppliers wanting to work with them :

pay invoices on time , resolve any payment issues in a timely manner ,

and have purchasing personnel who are willing to work to develop

good supplier relationships . Second , build on this foundation with

relationship initiatives that benefit all involved . For instance , help

suppliers reduce their costs by sharing information with them early

in the product development cycle , and minimise any conflict

between purchasing and engineering or other functions in the

business .

Good supplier relationship management contributes to between 30 – 70 per cent of a company ’ s gross profit

Finally , it is worth noting that companies do not need to build great

relationships with all their suppliers . Our advice is that firms should

concentrate their attention on those suppliers whose role is critical

to their own success . However , others , even those suppliers with

whom dealings are transactional , should be treated in a trusting

manner . The bottom line is that any company that wants to improve

its profitability would be well advised to put effort into working with

its suppliers in a manner that is commensurate with the supplier ’ s

importance .

Dr Henke is president of consultancy Planning Perspectives , Inc , a

professor of marketing in the School of Business Administration at

Oakland University in Rochester , Michigan , and a research fellow at

the Center for Supply Chain Management , Rutgers University , New

Brunswick , New Jersey .

SUPPLIER VIEW

WHAT SUPPLIERS WANT

To secure the commercial advantages of a strong

relationship withsuppliers , companies first need to address

the barriers they themselves have put in place

On average , State of Flux conducts one or two Voice of the Supplier

( VoS ) studies for clients every month – that ’ s more than 1 , 200

different suppliers in the past two years . These give us a unique

insight into industries as varied as the automotive , financial services

and food and drink industries . From this work we have identified a

number of consistent themes that exist across sectors and that send

a powerful message to business leaders .

It is also worth pointing out that many leading companies conduct

their VoS studies to increase mutual understanding and ensure that

they are remaining customers of choice . Such VoS studies have

three key uses : they enable the company to assess whether it is

operating in a way that gets the best out of its relationships with

suppliers and whether there are any gaps that threaten its standing

as a customer of choice ; they can add suppliers ’ perspectives to any

business case being made for change or investment ; and they can

position the customer as one that is prepared to listen and engage .

Slow decision - making

This is suppliers ’ biggest complaint , with 58 % reporting that client -

led delays in making decisions are a major barrier to successful

implementation of innovation and change . Things do not seem to

get better once the decision is finally taken , with 55 % reporting that

bureaucratic approval and sign - off processes cause problems too .

Lack of engagement or alignment between different functions

A supplier will only want to invest in innovation to support its client if

it is confident that the client is actually interested in its ideas . If not , it

makes more sense to find someone else who is . The problem here ,

say 53 % of suppliers , is that many organisations lack the internal

alignment needed to know this themselves .

Unwilling to share risk and reward

Suppliers want to work in partnership with their most important

customers by exploring joint investment opportunities and ways to

share risk and reward . This approach offers companies significant

opportunities to secure a commercial advantage over their

competitors . However , 53 % of suppliers say that their clients do not

want to talk about sharing risk and reward , while 42 % rule out joint

investment discussions .

Corporate social responsibility

Effective management of CSR risk shapes the reputation of both

organisations and the chief executives that lead them . Despite this , a

large number of companies fail to engage with their suppliers on this

issue , with 38 % of suppliers saying that their clients are not

receptive to ideas that promote CSR improvements .

Unwilling to consider ideas outside current priorities

Some of the most powerful , market - changing innovations in recent

years have come from people and companies thinking outside

traditional markets and models , from Uber ’ s taxi hire to Spotify ’ s

music streaming service . Despite this , too many companies are

unwilling to look at any ideas beyond their rigidly defined list of

priorities , say 33 % of suppliers .

Slow decision - making is suppliers ’ biggest complaint , with 58 per cent reporting thatclient - led delays are a major barrier to innovation

view large image

view large image

view large image

view large image

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND SUPPORT

GETTING C - SUITE BUY IN

Getting stakeholders – in particular senior management –

to understand and champion the benefits of SRM is

critical to itstake - up and success

Effective SRM offers business benefits that go well beyond

boundaries of the procurement function . Improved profitability ,

better risk management and increased innovation are all issues that

boards and leadership teams should be considering in their

assessment of their organisation ’ s progress towards its strategic

goals . This in turn helps SRM to be embedded more thoroughly into

the corporate culture , as discussed on page 26 , and thus to have a

commensurately bigger impact on the bottom line .

view large image

Leading companies clearly grasp the power of senior support for

SRM , with 46 % of them indicating that they have the backing of their

chief executive . This compares to a much smaller overall figure of

just 21 % of all respondents feeling that their senior managers are

strongly and actively engaged in SRM . In fact , 23 % identify a lack of

engagement , while 4 % face active opposition . Alongside this , only

40 % of respondents say that their executive team can articulate their

organisation ’ s SRM value proposition . This direct correlation

between being a leading company and having the backing of senior

executives paints a clear picture of just how important such support

is .

view large image

Just 21 % of all respondents feelthat their senior managers are strongly and actively engaged inSRM

The lower levels of executive support at organisations more broadly

may well be connected with the fact that nearly half of respondents

do not have a stakeholder management and communications plan

for senior executives , perhaps failing to recognise the important part

that this group of stakeholders plays in SRM . At least engagement

levels have generally increased over the past two years , with the

number showing opposition dropping sharply from more than 20 %

for both operational and senior executive staff in 2013 . However , in

both cases , there has been a slight rise in the number that are not

engaged .

view large image

Senior executives who want to change this picture in their own

organisation need to take on two interlinked roles . The first is

around programme support . This means backing

the business plan , creating a culture that supports SRM and

allocating the resources needed to do this .

view large image

Alongside that is the need to offer individual support . Key suppliers

are key stakeholders , and should be managed as such . Very often

this means that the chief executive will play an important role in

building their company ’ s relationship with the supplier by forging

their own relationship with his or her counterpart there . This

demonstrates to others in both organisations that SRM is taken

seriously at the highest levels , which will in turn assist with work on

cultural change .

THE CHANGING ROLE OF THE CPO

As the procurement function continues to mature and embrace the

benefits of SRM , so to should the role of the modern chief

procurement oficer ( CPO ). This is particularly so when we consider

the influence needed on the wider business , in an indirect way , to

unlock the strategic objectives and to ensure procurement as a

function plays a wider and more strategic role as a true business

partner . In simple terms , we cannot wait for the invite to come from

the CEO to do something ; we need to ensure we create a natural

path to their door by understanding how the organisation works and

thinks , and how the SRM value proposition needs to be aligned . This

is particularly true when we look at the associations made in the

thought processes of senior management and how people behave .

Those involved in behavioural economics , a practice underpinned

by psychology and decision science , reafirm this in that how

decisions are arrived at … does not follow linear formulaic patterns of

total predictability , but instead is influenced by ‘ rules of thumb ’,

experiences , biases and sometimes instinctive decision - making . The

job of the modern CPO is to understand these better , to position the

function and to articulate the benefits of SRM in a way that will

resonate with senior executives . As the procurement function

evolves from leading on category management and strategic

sourcing into process ownership of the whole supplier management

lifecycle , the skills required will change . None more so than those of

the CPO . David Loseby , group procurement director at Arriva

Best practice : Mel Shutes , head of SRM , State of Flux

Executives need to play two roles : supporting the SRM programme ,

and proactively leading important supplier relationships . The

challenge is to find time within executives ’ already busy schedules .

The key to getting executive time and focus is having a well -

articulated and compelling case for SRM and selling it at the most

senior level . It is only at the very top that such a case can

demonstrate how SRM supports the company ’ s strategic priorities ,

and can thus secure the training , technology and other budgets

needed to support it to its fullest extent . For more detail on what

should be included in a SRM business case , please refer to

www . stateofflux . co . uk / ideas - insights / articles

INNOVATION

CAPTURING SUPPLIER INNOVATION

SRM is a key enabler of innovative collaboration

betweencompanies and their suppliers

“ Innovation is not often a eureka moment , but rather a continually

evolving process where all parties are focused on a common goal ,”

says Dom Tribe of McLaren Automotive – a company that is rightly

respected for its creativity .

view large image

By “ all parties ” he means not just McLaren ’ s own staff but also its

suppliers . “ Creating the right environment for suppliers and their

internal teams to work together is critical to making innovation

work ,” Tribe explains .

There is an intrinsic link between effective SRM and innovation –

one of the reasons why the ability to harness suppliers ’ creative

thinking is such an important part of the business case for SRM .

Innovation brings tangible benefits for 39 % of respondents , although

quantifying these in financial terms can be dificult . ( SRM technology ,

discussed on page 24 , could help here .)

Leading companies understand that they can trust their suppliers to

know what they are doing and that there is , therefore , no need to

spend a lot of time telling them how to do their job . Instead , they

build a relationship that actively encourages suppliers to present

ideas based on their own insight . And , critically , they respond

promptly to those supplier ideas rather than letting them disappear

into a black hole , never to be seen again . When that scenario

happens , it is incredibly frustrating for suppliers , who will quickly

learn not to waste time sharing ideas with companies that treat them

this way – and may of course mean that they share their ideas

instead with the companies ’ competitors .

view large image

Leading companies recognise they can harness the expertiseof key suppliers

To avoid such supplier fatigue , it is up to the chief executive and

their leadership team to create the environment and corporate

culture needed to encourage innovation with suppliers . At Harley -

Davidson , for instance , the company has adopted a partnership

approach and works hard to engage its suppliers in design and

product development , even bringing bikes and other merchandise

to supplier meetings . And Bang & Olufsen , the high - end audio

equipment business , builds a sense of partnership by offering

strategic suppliers benefits such as staff discounts that are normally

only available to employees .

Alongside these softer relationship initiatives , it is a good idea for

companies to develop a strong process for evaluating and providing

feedback on ideas that are proactively suggested by suppliers . This

should be transparent and offer clear time frames so that all involved

know where they stand . An equivalent process for handling

innovation requests – where the company crowdsources ideas from

its supplier base – is just as important .

Innovation in action

NATS , the air navigation services provider , has also secured tangible

results in innovation thanks to its collaborative relationships with

suppliers , says Dominic Hastings , head of category management at

the organisation . “ An excellent recent example is Time - Based

Separation , developed with Lockheed Martin , which provides

controllers with a new way of separating arriving aircraft at Heathrow

in order to cut delays caused by strong winds .”

Best practice : Mel Shutes , head of SRM at State of Flux

It ’ s important to define what innovation means to you as a company .

Establish business processes that support both supplier - led or

business challenge - led innovation . We recommend technology

being used to help enable these processes and support

communication . When you have decided your innovation strategy ,

processes and technology approach it needs to be communicated

to suppliers . Once you have done this , and innovative ideas are

flowing , our advice is to focus on areas where you see real

challenges or opportunities and where innovation will provide the

greatest return on investment .

CASE STUDY

NOVARTIS : ENABLING COLLABORATIVE

HEALTHCAREINNOVATION THROUGH SRM

SRM has helped the Swiss pharmaceutical company

drive innovation , which will ultimately lead to better

products for itscustomers

Innovation is at the core of what Novartis does . This global company ,

headquartered in Switzerland , builds innovation into all aspects of its

business , from scientific discovery right through to the eficiency of

its manufacturing processes . Novartis also collaborates closely with

external partners to drive innovation , says Chris Holmes , the

company ’ s head of global procurement strategy and transformation .

“ We pride ourselves on our strong research and development

capabilities , supported by robust processes along the entire value

chain . But at the same time we recognise there is a huge amount of

external experience , talent and expertise that we can draw on for

the benefit of our customers .”

Involving diverse parties allowsus to secure the best and brightest brains to work challenges into innovative solutions

While the focus on innovation has been part of the company ’ s ethos

for some time , SRM at Novartis has only really come into its own in

the past five years or so , Holmes says . “ It began with a procurement

transformation project in 2011 – 12 that looked at how the

procurement function could contribute to innovation in collaboration

with our supplier base . That was when we introduced the SRM

concept , which we call supplier performance and innovation ( SP & I ).”

This name was chosen over SRM to emphasise the initiative ’ s focus

on outcomes , Holmes explains . “ We want to improve performance of

the total relationship and to drive innovation together for the benefit

of both parties .”

Novartis now has a number of SP & I managers who work alongside

the firm ’ s category teams to ensure that procurement , the business

and suppliers are collaborating effectively . “ They focus on supplier

segmentation and on the areas where there are opportunities to

work more closely with our most important suppliers – the ones with

game - changing potential ,” Holmes says . “ They look for ways to add

value beyond the contracts in these key relationships .”

One example that neatly illustrates how the procurement function is

connecting its key suppliers to the business comes through the

Innovation Factory . This Novartis approach was developed to

leverage a 360 - degree viewpoint from in - house and external

experts to address patient and brand challenges . “ Involving diverse

parties allows us to secure the best and brightest brains to work

challenges into innovative solutions ,” Holmes explains .

Suppliers benefit from the SP & I approach through improved

understanding of the company , which in turn helps them to see new

opportunities to grow their own businesses while at the same time

supporting achievement of Novartis goals . “ A relationship needs to

go both ways . There has to be a balance of benefits .”

Getting to this point required a clear strategy and sponsorship from

the highest levels . But it was having the right people with the right

mentality across the business – not just in procurement – that was

key , says Holmes . It also required flexibility and openness to change ,

he adds . “ You need a good process as an anchor , but you shouldn ’ t

get hung up on it . You need to be willing to burn it down and start

again as often as you need to .”

GOVERNANCE AND OVERSIGHT

GOOD GOVERNANCE

Key suppliers can make or break company reputations and

profits , so successfully managing the governance of supplier

relationships is vital to business success

It is not just organisations that are hurt when governance processes

fail . Individual leaders can face significant reputational damage , fines

and – in some cases – the possibility of criminal sanctions .

view large image

Not all governance risks come from direct employees . The way in

which suppliers do business can also present a risk in terms of both

public perception and legal or regulatory compliance . For instance ,

companies could fall foul of the UK Bribery Act if an “ associated

person ”, such , as a supplier bribes someone to win or keep

business . And every time a company is found to have bought from a

supplier that uses child labour to make clothes that end up in UK

shops or pick tea that is brewed in UK pots , its directors can be sure

they will face a dificult time in the press and from their shareholders .

Adrian Clements , general manager of operational risk management

at ArcelorMittal , says there are “ three types of supplier risks : those

risks inherent in a complex and interlinked supply chain ; the

possibility of supplier - created risks ; and finally the risks created

internally on how we work with , measure , manage and monitor

suppliers and supply chains .”

view large image

Key suppliers

Despite these very real threats , 78 % of respondents indicate they do

not have robust risk management processes in place for more than

three quarters of their key suppliers . A similar proportion , 80 %, say

the same about performance management . Unsurprisingly , leaders

and fast followers are more likely to say that they do have robust

performance , contract and risk management in place for the vast

majority of their key suppliers .

When it comes to oversight of SRM governance , process

compliance and general activities for key suppliers , only 10 % of

respondents think what they do is very good , with 28 % reporting

good , 34 % adequate and – worryingly – 21 % poor or very poor . The

only good news here is that the results are all slight improvements

on last year .

view large image

There are , however , still some significant gaps in many companies ’

governance models when it comes to their key supplier

relationships . For a start , only 16 % say that they have a model that is

both fully documented and implemented , while 38 % describe theirs

as a work in progress and 32 % say their model has been

documented but only partially implemented .

Typically , these models incorporate : regular performance review

meetings ( 78 %); periodic strategic relationship review meetings

( 71 %); a performance scorecard or dashboard ( 64 %); and a

designated accountable executive . It is rarer to find a relationship

scorecard or dashboard ( 27 %) or a documented responsibility

assignment matrix for each key relationship ( 25 %) – despite the fact

that this is basic good practice , as well as a regulatory requirement

in some industry sectors .

view large image

It could also be argued that the strength ( or otherwise ) of a

company ’ s relationships with its key suppliers is a risk in and of itself

given the very real impact they have on profits , as outlined earlier in

this report . So it is perhaps surprising that relatively few

organisations use a tool such as 360 - degree relationship

assessment to check things over . As things stand , only 34 % of

organisations do this , the findings suggest .

COULD THIS HAPPEN TO US ?

The 1992 Cadbury Report defined corporate governance as the

system by which companies are directed and controlled . Boards of

directors are responsible for the governance of their companies .

The board ’ s actions are subject to laws and regulation and include :

• setting the company ’ s strategic aims • providing the leadership to put them into effect • supervising the management of the business • reporting to shareholders on their stewardship .

• This governance and oversight responsibility clearly extends to supplier management and relations . When it falls short , it can have

disastrous results . One has to look no further than the recent Gulf of

Mexico oil disaster or the UK horse meat scandal .

The question that chief executives and their board colleagues

should be asking themselves is simple : could this happen to us ? As

stewards of their companies ’ values and leaders of their business

decisions , senior executives must assure themselves that they have

a firm grasp of both how they treat their suppliers and how their

suppliers behave if they are to be confident in their overall corporate

governance position .

Best practice : Chris Thomson , head of category management

andstrategic sourcing at State of Flux

Understanding which areas of governance and which risks to focus

your attention and resources on is key . Leading organisations

segment their supplier base according to multiple criteria ( see

page104 of the 2014 SRM report ) and conduct segmentation at least

annually .

The output of this segmentation creates a tiering of suppliers ,

typically into four groups : strategic , preferred , approved and tactical .

Different supplier management strategies , process approaches and

resources ( including respective roles and responsibilities ) can be

applied to each of the different groups .

SKILLS AND ORGANISATION

SKILLS FOR THE JOB

Effective SRM depends on having the right people with the

rightskills

Like any discipline , SRM requires professionals with a specific

skillset and behaviour profile . Possibly the most important is

communication , which is cited by 83 % of respondents . This is closely

followed by strategic thinking ( 77 %), trust building ( 71 %) and cross -

functional working ( 70 %).

view large image

Leaders who take SRM seriously also realise that , just as SRM is an

organisational concern rather than a functional one , these skills are

needed by all employees who interact with suppliers , regardless of

their job title or level of seniority .

However , our research suggests that too few organisations are

willing to invest in the training needed to support SRM and thus

secure the business benefits it offers . Some 40 % do not spend much

on SRM - specific training , while more than a quarter spend nothing at

all – a significant increase on last year ’ s figure of 19 %. Less than a

third reported moderate spending – a drop of four percentage

points on last year – with only 6 % giving it significant financial

backing .

view large image

This lack of investment is particularly serious , given that 46 % of

respondents believe that their organisation needs to improve

strategic thinking , 41 % say cross - functional working skills need to get

better and 37 % say communication skills need attention . This is

especially shocking given that a lack of people with the requisite

skills is seen as the second - biggest barrier preventing progress in

SRM . In other words , this failure to invest in training is having a direct

impact on performance , which in turn may limit the value that SRM

brings .

On the other hand , leading companies such as Procter & Gamble

are reaping the rewards of comprehensive , well - structured training

programmes . The fast - moving consumer goods business , the

world ’ s biggest manufacturer of household and personal care

products and a leader in SRM , ensures that its staff have the

technical and business skills that they need . “ Successfully managing

supplier relationships takes great listening and communication skills ,

strong strategic thinking and analytical skills , leadership and

influencing skills , and even project management skills ,” explains

Mary Wagner , P & G ’ s director of Greater China product supply

formally responsible for developing tools and best practices ( see

P & G case study www . stateofflux . co . uk / ideas - insights / case -

studies / procter - gamble ).

view large image

“ When I picked up responsibility as the global SRM skill owner , we

taught the skill based on theory and documentation of best

practices . The most common question I received was : ‘ OK , I get it ,

but what do I do with it ?’

“ This led to shifting to a more systematic , pragmatic approach , with

a common methodology focused on several core levels of activity

and tools that buyers can apply to better understand or analyse a

key relationship .”

view large image

Leaders invest in training anddeliver more as a result

Influencing , one of the areas emphasised by P & G , is a skill that 35 %

of respondents feel could be improved . This skill is particularly

important given that significant elements of SRM involve interactions

where individuals do not have oficial hierarchical authority , for

example because they are working with colleagues from different

departments or functions . The chance that people are working in

such a team has increased slightly this year over last , with 61 % of

organisations now relying on a cross - functional team for supplier

management . However , this is still lower than 2013 , when nearly 70 %

did so .

Tailored training

One of the most effective approaches for organisations that want to

improve their SRM skills base is to start by defining the relevant

skills and competencies for each role . Once this is clear , it is

possible to tailor training and development opportunities to meet

the particular needs of the organisation and the individuals within it ,

thus avoiding a ‘ sheep dip ’ approach where everyone gets the same

treatment , whether they need it or not .

view large image

This sort of structured formal training combined with on - the - job

development opportunities through project working can be very

effective . Another option that may suit some organisations is

initiatives such as assignments on cross - functional projects and

interdepartmental secondments . In some cases it may even be

appropriate to arrange secondments or temporary job - swaps

between supplier and customer . This sort of opportunity gives the

individuals involved a chance to build their own professional skills ,

but also strengthens connections between functions or even

companies .

Best practice : John Newton , head of learning and

development atState of Flux

SRM requires the right balance of people , process and technology

capability and needs investment in developing the skills and

competencies required to fulfil its potential .

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71

www.stateofflux.co.uk

Powered by