1. Segmenting the supply base
공급선을 세분화하는 것이 첫번째 단계이다. 해당 구매품의 구매사의 전략적 중요도와 공급시장의
복잡도 및 위험도등.. 구매품을 소싱그룹으로 세분화하여 구매전략을 수립한다.
2. Securing executive sponsorship
경영진의 강력한 스폰서쉽이 필요하다. 실무진 차원이 아니라 경영진의 단단한 지원이 필요하다.
3. Embedding processes and governance
구매 프로세스 정립과 구매 프로세스를 관리하는 체제가 필요하다.
4. Using technology effectively
효과적인 기술을 이용하여 공급자관계관리를 실현해야 한다.
5. Upskilling your people
구매담당자들의 talent를 향상시킨다. 교육이 뒷받침 되어야 한다.
6. Measuring the benefits
SRM을 통해 얻게되는 잇점을 측정하여 성과지표로 삼아야 한다.
자세한 내용입니다.
1 Seg menting the su pply base
Only by categorising suppliers into different tiers can an organisation know where to focus its relationship-building efforts. These tiers cover suppliers who are tactical, approved, preferred and strategic. Just over a quarter of respondents did not know how many of their suppliers were strategic. In the past, volume of spend was
seen as the main, if not the only, criterion for ranking suppliers, but business criticality of products/services was ranked top this time, with volume second and supplier capabilities third. The segmentation process needs to be conducted jointly with other functions and lines of business to seek a consensus about the suppliers to concentrate on, and it needs to be reviewed at least annually to maintain its relevance. Discussions also need to take place with selected suppliers to ensure both sides view the relationship as strategic.
2. Securing executive sponsorship
Having C-level or other top executives engaged in managing the most strategic suppliers is vital if SRM is to be positioned correctly. The involvement of a CEO or CFO, for example, helps to align strategic objectives internally and with the supplier. It also sets the right tone for the relationship and ultimately unlocks value for both. Encouragingly, almost half (47 per cent) said they had this level of internal sponsorship.
3. Embedding processes and governance
Sixty-four per cent said they had documented SRM processes, roles and responsibilities. But feedback from the workshops indicated these were patchy across the organisation, with “pockets of excellence”, particularly in IT as a result of its early outsourcing of some operations. Others said they had a written policy, but had yet to detail the process by which they intended to manage supplier relationships or assign clear roles and responsibilities internally. The majority of organisations had taken a “one size fits all” approach to process and governance, rather than tailoring it for different supplier segments.
4. Using technology effectively
Just 11 per cent believed existing technology strongly supported SRM. Most systems focused either on contract management or supplier performance management, while a number of organisations reported confusion among internal stakeholders as a result of transactional procurement modules in their ERP systems being badged as SRM. However, centralised web-based information portals, akin to customer relationship management systems on the sales side, are available and already being used by Vodafone and Royal Mail.
5. Upskilling your people
Relationship management requires different skills to those usually found in procurement departments. Among those mentioned in the survey were a creative mindset, account planning and the ability to work crossfunctionally. Almost half said they had not invested in training to equip people for SRM and the majority spent less than 30 per cent of their time on individual supplier relationships. In other words, SRM is an add-on to the day job rather than a core role. This contrasts unfavourably with the full-time, highly trained key account managers on the sales side. Some take the view that buyers aren’t cut out for SRM. In the words of Martin Perminas, former procurement strategy director at Royal Mail: “Procurement personnel do not necessarily have the correct skill sets. A customer-focused or sales person is sometimes more suitable.” But whether you train existing staff (perhaps by engaging your own colleagues in sales), bring in new talent, or do a mixture of both, upskilling the function is essential.
6. Measuring the benefits
Quantifying the value from SRM initiatives and presenting a compelling business case (see box, right) can be extremely difficult. More than half of organisations were unable to put a number on the “hard” cost savings achieved as a percentage of annual supplier spend. But of those that could, a figure of 3 per cent or more was not uncommon. It’s important, though, not to overlook the “soft” benefits of SRM, such as access to innovation and faster speed to market, because senior executives intuitively understand the value of these things and they may be worth far more to the organisation in competitive terms than savings alone
