With each passing day, the need for new commercial capabilities becomes more evident – and to support this, commercial groups must change.
Gone are the days when business to business relationships were marked with adversarialism and contention. The narrow views typified by sales and procurement (to a high degree) and legal (to a significant degree) are destroying value. Trading parties must increasingly cooperate to deliver efficient and effective results.
Adversarial and arm’s length behavior carries a tremendous cost. It frequently results in selection of the wrong supplier or confusion over requirements. It prevents proper definition of scope or goals and the creation of effective performance measures or governance techniques. This results not only in expensive claims, disputes and changes, but it adds enormously to operating costs through inefficient use and deployment of resources.
At this week’s IACCM Europe conference, sales guru Neil Rackham acknowledged how the world of selling must alter…
View original post 177 more words
For commercial lawyers, the practice of law is transforming. Acting as a semi-independent advisor on specialist risk and legal issues is no longer enough. Today, the business expects much broader appreciation of opportunities and challenges – and that the support and contracts produced by lawyers will directly contribute to the best possible outcome.
Lawyers are no longer operating purely at a transactional level seeking to protect assets and avoid worst-case scenarios. They are being called upon to assess the wider economic consequences of the agreements they help put in place.
Many in-house counsel – and some law firms – would argue that they have always been ‘business advisors’ and in some cases I would agree. But the demands today go much further. As trading relationships change, the nature of legal support must also change. Here are a few of the factors and examples of their impact:
1) many trading relationships now focus on longer-terms outputs…
View original post 416 more words
State, Federal Experts Update Legislature on Status of Early Earthquake Warning System in California
Home to one of the most diverse socioeconomic and geographic landscapes, California is also at risk of a major earthquake every day. While no one can reliably predict earthquakes, technologies do exist to rapidly detect seismic waves as earthquakes initiate. Today, experts from the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) and the United States Geological Survey (USGS) went before a joint informational Legislative hearing of the Committees on Governmental Organizations to discuss the future of an operational earthquake early warning (EEW) system.
The hearing, “California’s Earthquake Preparedness: Status of the Earthquake Early Warning System,” included testimony from the state’s leading emergency managers and planners, as well as nationally recognized earthquake scientists.
“There’s no doubt that we have the best minds in the state, in the country working on this system,” said Cal OES Director Mark Ghilarducci. “I learned early on that we couldn’t just pick up the Japanese model…
View original post 404 more words
Audit tendering process will force procurement professionals to go beyond traditional boundaries by Jon Hansen
Traditionally I have not been a fan of press releases. This of course should come as no surprise to anyone who has been following this blog for any length of time.
Generally speaking, press or news (and I use the word “news” loosely here) releases, are little more than self-serving flatulations of meaningless proclamations, designed to somehow elevate the profile of the writer be it a company or individual. Let’s be honest here, how many of you out there have upon reading a press release, jumped up out of your chair to proclaim “I gotta get me that!”
All this being said, and similar to the frequency in which I ingest chemical-laced sweet heat chili nacho chips from Doritos – my one only real vice – I actually do read almost all of the press releases that cross my virtual desk. It is the ultimate indulgence in literary junk food. Most…
View original post 650 more words
A New Yorker explainer on why the airlines want to make you suffer has been making the social media rounds. It’s an excellent case study in how the airlines have created a miserable experience for passengers so they can build a profitable business based on charging fees for bags, early boarding and better seats. It’s also just like the playbook big broadband companies are using as they make efforts to charge both consumers and the content companies for access to their pipes.
The parallels between the airlines and the goals and arguments of the broadband industry are too similar. For example, from the New Yorker piece we have this section:
[blockquote person=”” attribution=””]The airlines, and some economists, argue that the rise of the fee model is good for travellers. You only pay for what you want, and you can therefore save money if you, for instance, don’t mind sitting…
View original post 672 more words
In 4th quarter 2014, The Innovation Garage® visited 7 cities and attended or facilitated 7 events on the subjects of The Next Decade in Procurement, Design for Manufacturing, Supply Chain Technology, Innovation Executive Leadership and Accelerating Innovation across the mid market company enterprise.
We’ll share what we have learned and the common connections in a series of The Innovation Garage® blog posts over the coming weeks. We’ll offer some steps on how to address the challenges in your business and link them to your open innovation business growth strategy. Here’s a quick list of the themes we’ll focus on:
Trend 1:Welcome to the Worlds First Truly Free Market.
The Internet has smashed the playing field and traditional business models for EVERYONE. Internet usage has grown from 100 million users in 1999 to 3 billion.
- Did you know that today, with some internet savvy research by your customers, 75%…
View original post 445 more words
On Spend Matters, Peter Smith recently made interesting observations about the growth of Procurement influence. He suggests that two major factors have raised its profile and purpose, one being the dramatic growth of external spend (largely driven by outsourcing) and the other being globalization. Each of these has taken organizations into uncharted waters, stretching internal skills and experience and exposing unfamiliar risks.
One obvious effect of this shift has been the centralization of most Procurement functions, as management realised the importance of greater controls, more consistent policies and the consolidation of spend in a group outside the control of individual business units.
But as Peter points out, spend volume cannot go on increasing for ever and many of the risks associated with global procurement are becoming better understood and managed. So what is the next big thing that will maintain the influence of the Procurement function – or isn’t there one, was this growth…
View original post 445 more words