Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Hope’ Category

Gluing myself to the TV news seems like all I’ve been doing in every waking moment at home this week.  The daily developments are painful to watch, and it just appears as if the worst is always yet to come.  At work, we all are beginning to reflect upon how this epic disaster will have its effect toward our companies and commodities.  Business continuity plans need to be in-effect.  What about our staff, suppliers, partners, stakeholders, and customers in the zone of terror?  How will the utility crisis brought by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant turn out for the rest of the world?  Regardless of which line of work you are in, believe me, you will be affected. 

Jason Busch from Spend Matters has the following to say in how procurement and supply chain practitioners should be prepared for in this latest crisis.

“Spend Matters suggests an earthquake/tsunami procurement, commodity management and supply chain action plan based on the following steps for companies anywhere in the world in the following industries: automotive, diversified manufacturing (including transportation equipment and electrical machinery), aerospace and defense, high technology, consumer products, chemical/process. A plan should include at least the following steps:

  • Fully understand your extended supply chain and supplier locations and facilities — two, three or even four levels down
  • Stay in constant communication with your suppliers and send resources, if possible, to monitor production ramp-up at key facilities. Lessons from supply chain history suggest that what suppliers might be telling you on the phone in situations like this might be very different from reality. Those buying organizations who are on-the-ground first working closely with their suppliers are likely to receive more favorable treatment in capacity-constrained situations
  • Understand the geographic concentration of suppliers in potential regions in the area (and potential geographic concentration from a port standpoint as well). Even in a multi-source arrangement, natural disasters can help cancel out most of the insurance a split-of-business sourcing strategy provides when geographic concentration exists
  • Offer to help purchase raw materials and lower tier parts/components if necessary on a demand aggregation basis (your purchasing power as a larger organization may help secure supply given the constraints created by the disaster); provide resources to support the sourcing of materials necessary to get supplier facilities back up to production levels and understand, on a bill of material level, the raw material specifications that comprise a finished part, component, SKU or product (i.e., what your suppliers must buy)
  • Monitor the situation (and your supply chains) in neighboring countries as well as those throughout the Pacific that may be impacted by the disaster
  • Prepare to rely heavily on airfreight in the coming weeks and offer to step in and help suppliers from a logistics standpoint — despite the high costs, those who can rapidly secure sufficient capacity and favorable terms with airfreight working closely with carriers directly or indirectly through their 3PL partners are likely to face less; move quickly in general and consider charter situations based on industry, volume and the degree of impact
  • Put friendships and relationships with supplier personnel first — factories can be rebuilt, facilities can be overhauled, ports can be brought back online. Human lives and the spirit of connection are temporal. We must all remember that relationships need to come first — not the bottom line.”

I cannot agree more to the last advice, ever. 

Read Full Post »

Do I believe in bonuses for procurement professionals?  Why wouldn’t I?   And it’s not just because we don’t want to be singled out as the only profession not getting any, it’s more toward the pay-by-performance concept that I believe in.  Otherwise, it’s human nature to be complacent.

Yet there are still many opinions within my profession who opt against the idea because of integrity, measurement and benchmarking concerns.  I acknowledge those concerns, but I think they are addressable through rigorous control mechanisms rather than taking away the incentives for precision, innovation, effectiveness and efficiency.

The issue is well addressed in the following article by Rima Evans, projects editor for CPO Agenda.   The pros and cons of bonus schemes are covered, together with an implementation checklist.  For those organizations who are not convinced of rewarding their champions of change, I hereby recommend this article to them.

“Because You’re Worth It

By Rima Evans

Procurement has been widely credited for showing its mettle during the downturn and delivering value to businesses, but has this been supported by adequate financial reward?

Amid the current period of fragile and uncertain recovery, now is not a great moment for pay rises – in fact, the latest CPO Agenda economic survey showed a considerable drop in the number of companies approving pay increases (from 25 per cent in May 2010 to 9 per cent in November 2010.) But bonuses may be an option for CPOs currently wanting to redefine or improve the way their teams are rewarded while having to adhere to strict mandates to keep salary bills under control.

Although bonuses are not uncommon in procurement (sector and level of seniority are obviously big influencing factors), there is still some way to go in terms of catching up with other professions.

Andrew Coulcher, director of business solutions at CIPS, says its annual salary survey with Croner Reward in 2010 showed about a third of procurement and supply professionals received a bonus.

Most FTSE organisations offer bonuses ranging between 10 and 30 per cent as the average value, although these figures don’t just apply to procurement staff.

Mark Childs, director at Total Reward Group, points out that the higher the salary, the higher the bonus procurement can command. “If you are earning £60,000 you might expect a 15 per cent bonus, but on £100,000 you might be offered a 50 per cent bonus,” he says.

This type of financial incentive has its obvious advantages – it promotes improved performance and results by being tied to personal objectives.

Jonathan Bean, managing consultant at Purcon, an executive recruitment company specialising in procurement and supply chain management, says: “Do bonus schemes work? Ordinarily they do.

Procurement professionals are tasked with delivering results – not always savings, but often performance that is quantifiable – and a bonus is a great way to acknowledge performance.”

He adds: “The size of the achievement does not always correlate to the size of the bonus and as long as the mechanisms for bonus entitlement encourage sustainable solutions rather than short-term actions, there is no reason why bonuses should not motivate over-achievement.”
Childs agrees. “Bonuses work – partly because people believe they work. In procurement if the lifecycle of the thing or service that is being procured can be measured over time then bonuses are worth looking at.”

A recruitment tool

There are added benefits, Childs explains. Not only can they increase the retention value of reward packages – which is an advantage for CPOs trying to keep talent from walking out the door – they can also be used as a recruitment tool to differentiate your organisation from the competition. 

For employers, bonuses are an effective way of keeping a proportion of employment costs variable, which offers flexibility when employment costs need to be reduced quickly, for example, during a downturn.

At an individual level, “providing a line of sight between their activity and earnings promotes a healthy psychological contract”, Childs also explains. “Often the consequences of not providing a bonus are more detrimental than the positive effects.”

Not all procurement leaders, however, are convinced by their worth and they remain a contentious issue for some practitioners.

CIPS also warns that while bonuses do have their merits, it is a particularly sensitive issue given the austere economic cutbacks being implemented in many countries, and employers should tread carefully.

Performance incentives

Coulcher says: “In times of recession and economic turbulence, retaining good staff and keeping them motivated can sometimes be a challenge. Of course procurement and supply management professionals should be offered incentives in the way other professions are and it’s just one way of keeping the high performers. Yet, with all the controversy around bank bonuses, naturally there is a degree of uncertainty on how this should be approached, and with public sector cuts even more sensitivity is needed.”

Martin Blake, head of corporate procurement at London Probation Trust, a UK public sector organisation, admits to much deeper concerns about the principle of bonuses, describing them as incompatible with the aims, integrity and effectiveness of procurement.

“They can create a negative effect for an organisation, especially when buying services. Reducing cost and making savings is easy – but at what cost to quality? Procurement professionals must act with integrity and in the interests of the greater good of the organisation rather than merely looking after their own interests. A salary should be sufficient.”

However, Blake concedes that the effectiveness of a bonus depends on the nature of what is being purchased. “If you are buying commodities or products that are very discrete, bonuses may not be so detrimental. But in services it’s a different kettle of fish. How do you put a bonus on such intangible aspects as creating robust contract terms to protect the business, or important factors such as flexibility? Procurement adds a lot more value to the organisation, for example risk management, but how do you measure that for a bonus?”

Motive to influence

By contrast, Dirk Zemke, director of strategic procurement, ESAAP, at Sensus, thinks if other departments such as sales are offered bonuses, procurement should be included in the deal too. “Purchasing has to convince other departments to change so why not motivate them with a bonus to change the thinking of others? As service levels are defined and agreed with other departments I do not think a bonus creates negative effects for an organisation.”

Zemke says there is a bonus scheme in place at his company, offering 10 per cent. “It does work. It helps to define the priorities clearly and helps people focus on these priorities. I think it’s important with a scheme such as ours offering 10 per cent to keep people focused on two or three projects a year. With a team of five that is at least 10 major projects or activities you can achieve per year.”

So what elements make bonus schemes work, how can they be structured and what criteria should CPOs set down for the individuals’ and organisation’s benefit?

First of all arrangements will differ according to role and job. Childs explains there is a key distinction between a bonus, and commission or incentive plan. A procurement manager is likely be on a more general bonus plan, driven by the profitability and results of the company, as well as having to meet personal objectives. Whereas more junior staff carrying out transactional work might more commonly be on a commission-based arrangement, directly linked to individual results.
“For junior staff, where there is a more direct relationship between what they do and results achieved in the short term, they tend to want to see the reward more quickly. So they might earn £20,000 basic but be able to increase that to £500-£1,000 more per quarter in commission,” says Childs.

Broadly speaking, there are a number of criteria or KPIs that may be common to procurement bonus plans:

1. Savings
On the face of it, this is a logical way for procurement’s performance to be measured, but there are challenges. According to Bean: “As savings can be captured in a variety of ways, such as negotiations, cost avoidances or specification changes to reduce costs, it is not always a clear-cut issue. One problem often experienced within procurement is of course the validity of savings and how they are measured or recognised within the business. If you change the specification of a material used in production, is that a saving that can be banked against procurement for identifying an alternate grade, or against finance as the cost of manufacturing the product is reduced?”
Bean also warns that the contribution by procurement can also be muddied if savings are reinvested but overall budgets stay the same.

Childs says procurement enjoying a share of the savings they make is not as common as one might expect. “It’s more likely to happen among outsourcing procurement providers, where their revenue is tied in with savings achieved. Where procurement is not the core activity of the business they are more likely to be on a conventional management scheme.”

2. Contract compliance
Candidates are often measured on this, says Bean, as well as spend coverage managed or influenced by procurement. “It can be quantifiably measured while at the same time showing how much leakage there is in contracts set up with suppliers.” It’s not completely watertight however. Procurement can often bank a saving based on anticipated budget. But the savings might not be fully realised as compliance or buy-in to a deal is poor.

3. Customer or internal stakeholder feedback 
This can often be used to validate activities and satisfaction levels and can be used as a KPI, especially if the business is encouraging experts in their field and wanting customers to have full confidence in procurement, says Bean.

4. Compliance to follow the sourcing process
A measurement that can be adopted especially within organisations keen to make sure their interaction with suppliers is fair, auditable and transparent.

5. Quality and outcomes

Offering bonuses that hold individuals to account for outcomes is an area of opportunity for innovation, explains Childs, particularly in long-term, major contracts or purchases of large capital items.

“An element of the bonus could be deferred and remain at risk subject to long-term outcomes. So if a person cuts a deal and claims a certain amount of success, but 18 months later there were outcomes or quality issues that were not so great, that person can be held to account. So a person can’t just walk away after a deal has been cut.”

Childs adds: “This is much like what is going on in the financial services. I haven’t come across a scheme like this in procurement yet.”

The value of bonuses is hugely variable – some meritocratic organisations offer up to 98 per cent bonuses, according to Bean, but he adds that it is not usual for companies to directly relate the bonus value to value of savings delivered. “Ordinarily it is a combination of company, function and individual performance,” says Bean.

Coulcher thinks the split should be about 75 per cent/25 per cent with reward linked to overall company performance and supply chain performance.

However, Bean also advises: “A typical CPO will have a pot of money that will need to be sliced and diced for team members and the exact value an employee receives is affected by whether they have hit or exceeded expectations. There is no guarantee that a higher performer will always get a generous bonus, especially if peers are also performing well and the pots needs to be divided equally.”

Ensuring an effective bonus scheme requires there to be clarity about its purpose and reason. Being clear to staff on what the bonus represents – reward for contribution over and above a job or role and how it differs from salary, which is an employers’ contribution for doing a job, is paramount to avoid confusion. Its benefits should also be clearly spelled out.

They also have to be part of a long-term strategic approach rather than about encouraging short-term wins, says Coulcher. “Otherwise it may not encourage the right behaviour in staff. There may be consequences with supplier relationships if any incentives are based on cost savings.”
Childs warns that many managers place too much faith in bonus plans and are over-reliant on them as a tool for management control. “It’s the combination of the bonus plan and management support that makes a difference to performance. You can have the most generous bonus in the world but if you don’t enjoy working at an organisation it won’t make any difference,” he says.

He also advises that plans be designed so targets can be easily modified when necessary, which will also avoid allowing schemes to get stale.

Can bonuses be taken away? Usually they are discretionary, but not always. However employment contracts rarely refer to bonuses being guaranteed, says Bean.

They are usually cut when people are more concerned about job security than they are about earnings. “It’s very difficult to take bonuses away in boom times,” Childs warns. 

Checklist

Five tips for implementing a bonus scheme

Align performance measures to your procurement function needs for both now and the medium term.

Keep bonus schemes fresh. Periodically change performance measures and be prepared to revise targets to reflect changing circumstances.

Align payment frequency to the procurement cycle. If you are letting long-term contracts then consider deferring some element of the bonus to be able to measure on outcomes and quality.  If you are trying to incentivise short-term, tactical, small-scale results, consider monthly or quarterly payments.

Think about the total reward package on offer to staff. It’s not just about earnings from a bonus. Personal development is also important, so too are opportunities to climb the career ladder, and the culture of the business plays an important part in motivating teams.

Be situational. Don’t look for best practice or compare with another organisation’s bonus plan. Have the confidence to do what’s best for your own business.”

Read Full Post »

Getting people to stop whining is one of my most favorite catch phrases.  You will often find my Facebook updates filled with reminders to look at how fortunate we all are despite our beliefs.  If none of that was convincing before, what happened in Japan last Friday sure brings us back to perspectives in the most unfortunate fashion.

Every disaster is a test of our faith and endurance, and I believe that even though I am an atheist.  When one of the world’s most prepared nations for earthquakes and tsunamis was hit, there is just no way of telling how we can make sense of all this.  In the middle of all those hard-to-watch videos and news clips of the disaster, I have been in awe of the unity and perseverance of the Japanese people.

While they are still looking for the whereabouts of their loved ones, scrambling for food and shelter, and assessing immense damages of their properties, many Japanese offer to lend help to vulnerable foreigners and visitors who have had no experience or expectation of such disaster.  They offer precious water and food, look for transportation information for those who are hurrying to leave the affected cities, as well as to provide recommendations and options even with the slightest understanding of the English language.    If that’s not being considerate and compassionate, I don’t know what is.

So what does that tell us when we see this happening in our city every day?

  • when asked by local reporters whether he may risk airport chaos in Japan, a Hong Kong gentleman about to leave for his vacation answered: “Of course not, I know the Hong Kong government will charter flights to take us home”;
  • people jumping queues at bus terminals, subway stations, and even while waiting for elevators;
  • bitching at the government that they don’t have enough money to buy the HK$6 million show flats after graduation;
  • renowned for our checkbook charities instead of making a physical effort to help the needy

While trying my best not to turn into a grumpy old man bitching at the senseless cruelty of everything happening about us these days, I restore my faith when I see there is still goodness in people. 

And my dear Japanese friends, your spirits and strengths will pull you out of this disaster in no time.  I will make sure I learn from you.

Read Full Post »

Men’s Best Friend

What does it tell you when you find a dog, men’s best friend, more reliable and loyal than your partner? 

I know it’s a sick thought, but that is what I felt when I bumped into the world’s friendlist golden retriever tonight.  The love it generates is the most selfless and unconditional, ever.

Whenever I feel disllusioned towards relationships, I can’t help to turn towards dogs.  Is it pathetic?

Read Full Post »

I couldn’t put the book down and finished reading it within a day.  It’s the New York Times bestseller Buyology: How Everything We Believe About Why We Buy Is Wrong, by Martin Lindstrom.   Lindstrom is one of the world’s most respected marketing gurus, and he has been traveling around the world advising the biggest Fortune 500 companies, at least 300 days of a year.  Most of us believe that we are smart shoppers, and that we are careful with how we make our buying choices through conscious thinking.  In fact, we are far from there.  And as Lindstrom points out, we are actually getting worse and worse.

The better we think we are, the more we let our guards down, and the more vulnerable we are for everything happening around us.  One example, a supermarket with a whole stack of canned soups priced at $1.95 receives no customers.  The next day, the store puts up a giant sign saying “Maximum 6 cans per customer”, and the soups are flying off the shelf at the same $1.95 price tag.  Mind games working, huh?

On the book’s back cover, Lindstrom lists out a few intriguing questions:

  • Why did so many people who took the “Pepsi challenge” say they preferred Pepsi, only to carry on buying Coca-Cola?
  • Why do the majority of anti-smoking campaigns inadvertently encourage people to smoke?
  • Why does the scent of melons help sell electronic products?

Lindstrom addresses all these questions with his main theme of neuromarketing.  We used to rely on old school questionnaires and focus groups to study what customers want.  The fact that more and more of these traditional studies failed miserably has led to the widespread effectiveness and popularity of neuromarketing.  It is very well a science for subjects’ brains to be scanned when shown various advertisements and marketing programs.  The results are startling, and in many cases, contradicts completely with what we would admit, on paper.

I find the topic of product placement and the American Idol example fascinating.  With Idol’s 3 main sponsors, Coca-Cola, AT&T and Ford, who do you think gets the most of their advertising money’s worth?  Who fails miserably?  Why do some product placements fail?  Do you remember Elliott places pieces of Reese’ Pieces candy to lure E.T. out of his hiding 19 years ago?  Tom Cruise with his Ray-Ban sunglasses in 1983’s Risky Business, Top Gun and the later Will Smith in Men in Black II?

In the next chapter, Lindstrom describes how mirror neurons are responsible for why we often unwittingly imitate other people’s behavior.  Apple and its iPod sensation.  Abercrombie & Fitch with their all gorgeous American popular teens image that is ever so irresistible for 14 year-olds.

Do subliminal messages exist?  Yes, but its power has little to do with the product itself.  Instead, it lies in our own brains.  Tobacco companies spend huge percentage of their marketing budget into subliminal brand exposure.  “…Philip Morris, for example, offers bar owners financial incentives to fill their venues with color schemes, specifically designed furniture, ashtrays, suggestive tiles designed in captivating shapes similar to parts of the Marlboro logo, and other subtle symbols that, when combined, convey the very essence of Marlboro – without even the mention of the brand name or the sight of an actual logo.”  It’s an irony that because of government bans, tobacco companies have been forced to develop a whole new set of marketing skills, a set that is now vastly copied by many other industries.  Don’t let yourself fall prey to them.

Other topics of ritual, superstition, faith, religion, our somatic markers, senses, and sex are expressly covered.  Does sex really sell, or are consumers too distracted from the steamy images that they have forgotten entirely about the product?  Is it the sex that is selling or is it the controversy?  Well the latter is actually the more potent factor, though mirror neurons explain why sex and beauty continues to be popular in advertising everywhere around the world.

I highly recommend Lindstrom’s book and it’s one of the best investments I had made, considering the subliminal messages I was put through from his various appearances on CNBC prior to my purchase.   We will continue to shop for sure, but if we can all at least remember bits and pieces of this mind-provoking book and pause for a while before we take out our credit cards, we can at least delay the unavoidably path of becoming worse and worse shoppers, as Lindstrom predicted.

Read Full Post »

I came across an excellent article on CPO Agenda written by Tom Lawrence, strategy director at European procurement specialist buying team.  Those of you who have read my earliest posts on procurement branding will understand my frustrations and aspirations of my profession.  If you are keen in hearing another person’s views, I have taken the liberty to honor Mr. Lawrence’s work by copying his article here.  I will read it again and again as it echoes my views and vision exactly.  For those of you in my profession who would like to get in touch with Mr. Lawrence and his consultancy, please feel free to visit his company’s website.  The bold formatting is done by myself in highlighting the parts that resonate with me most.

 

What’s In A Name?    By Tom Lawrence
 
“The profile of indirect spend has grown considerably in recent years, but it is currently receiving more attention than ever before. There are two principal factors behind this rise.

Businesses are struggling to grow their top-line revenues. While forecasts do predict growth, this is weighted heavily towards 2013 and beyond. The outlook for the next two years is very sluggish. Therefore, to increase shareholder value, organisations are focusing on the bottom line, and on cost management.

Procurement is making headlines. Three recent government reports – Sir Philip Green’s efficiency review, the Strategic Defence and Security Review and the Comprehensive Spending Review – have turned the spotlight firmly on procurement and the consequences of not managing it effectively.

Procurement has come a long way in the past 20 years. However, the journey is far from complete. The renewed focus presents us with an opportunity to redefine procurement as a key strategic support function at the very heart of business. Yet indirect procurement’s value is frequently misunderstood, and this ambiguity leads to business leaders undervaluing it.

There are several fundamental questions which, as a profession, procurement simply does not provide consistent answers to. If we are unable to clarify these issues ourselves, it’s no wonder ambiguity occurs elsewhere.

It’s all in the name. First, perhaps surprisingly, is the terminology that we use – indirects, overheads, goods not for resale (GNFR), and non-core. All these words are both negative and imprecise. Indirects are simply the opposite of directs. The same goes for non-core and core, GNFR and GFR. Using only negative terms immediately relegates them to the second division, where they are perceived as secondary and unimportant, if not irrelevant, when in fact the complete opposite is true. Procurement is crucial. Without it, an organisation simply cannot function.

We need to shift fundamental perceptions, replacing the perception of procurement as a cost to one where it is valued as a business-essential activity. And it might be time to adopt a new name for this activity – one that reflects its importance and which will help to change mindsets. At buyingTeam, we have been using the term ‘Enabling Spend’ for several months.

If you look at text books or read market research to answer the question ‘what is procurement?’, you will find much around the source-to-pay process (eg, supplier relationship management, contract management, strategic and tactical sourcing, spend analysis, etc.). All of which is true and accurate. But business engagement – a key ingredient for successful procurement and an essential catalyst, in fact – is almost completely ignored. Procurement’s potential is released when it looks not only outwards to the supplier community, but at its own organisation, acting as an internal consultant or analyst, challenging and influencing behaviours, business rules and ways of working.

Beyond an almost cursory acknowledgement of the need for change management, business engagement is ignored by most textbooks and research and, to be quite frank, by many procurement functions. Procurement will only ever be viewed as a function to secure the best deal if that is all it focuses on, or all that it is tasked to achieve.

There is no common or industry-wide understanding of the areas that make up Enabling Spend. In some organisations, professional services such as audit fees or bank charges, for example, fall outside the remit of procurement. In almost all of the organisations we work with, there are areas of spend over which procurement has little influence, and these can include large spend marketing and IT.

The function may be engaged by the business to negotiate a deal, but all too frequently buyers are not trusted with any further involvement. The root cause of this attitude is the ongoing lack of understanding, even among the CFO community, of how procurement’s principles should be applied to all areas of spend. This is a missed opportunity.

What works for direct procurement doesn’t necessarily work for Enabling Spend. Enabling Spend contains hundreds of diverse categories, with thousands of suppliers serving a very wide range of stakeholders, all of whom have different needs. In comparison, directs has far fewer areas of expertise, suppliers and stakeholders. So a totally different approach is needed – yet many organisations apply their directs approach to Enabling Spend.

The range and depth of skill sets that Enabling Spend requires, – such as commerciality, change management, communication, procurement and deep category knowledge – are vast. ‘Best in class’ is a misleading concept. What is right for one organisation is not necessarily right for another. Procurement must be tailored according to an individual organisation’s culture, structure, profile and strategic aims to deliver the best results. Rather than ‘best in class’, a more useful question to ask is: “What do I need?”

Which brings us to procurement outsourcing. Even here there is confusion. Procurement outsourcing has come to mean different things. To many people, it involves shifting work wholesale to low-cost countries using technology and streamlining processes, running the same processes for less money. It’s all about efficiency. Yet true procurement outsourcing – and where multiples of the value achievable through efficiency are possible – is about how to do procurement better. The benefits are all about effectiveness.

Given all the above, it should come as no surprise that business leaders remain unaware of what is achievable by getting this right, and are therefore failing to prioritise it above other initiatives.

Finally, organisations are simply not investing enough in the management of their Enabling Spend. This is certainly preventing large elements of the above from improving, and is possibly the root cause of much of it. In our experience, procurement can and should be generating a return on investment of between 8 and 15 times. This is a huge benefit and one that substantially outperforms the ROI generated by most other investment decisions. Moreover, it goes straight to the bottom line. We see time and time again that the opportunities to improve shareholder value and operational performance are great – and way beyond the expectations of the senior executives.

The value that most procurement functions deliver is simply not good enough. Yes, much of this is due to the lack of investment in procurement. Yet we, as a community, must shoulder our fair share of the blame.

If procurement is to take its rightful place as a key strategic support function and be recognised as one, it’s time for us to address some of these fundamental issues. In doing so, we can continue to push procurement to front-of-business leaders’ minds as a powerful strategic asset that can deliver real business improvements.

The time has come for us to raise our game and, in doing so, release procurement’s true potential.”

If you have read my earlier posts, you will remember that I have written about delivering solid ROIs to my employers (my commitment is 7 times and up, comparing to Mr. Lawrence’s 8 to 15 times), as well as constantly expanding our span of involvement to areas of above-the-line marketing, consulting, sponsorship and professional services so as to further maximize the author’s definition of “Enabling Spend”.  If you are interested in joining my (and Tom’s) vision of “raising our game”, I am more than happy to hear from you!

Read Full Post »

I read from the vault guide that there are now actual internship applications with candidates listing “excellent Facebooker” and “highly skilled Tweeter” on their resumes.  Apparently the ability to connect with thousands of Facebook friends is an accomplishment, and I take my hat off to them. 

But seriously?  What are they thinking?

Hold that thought.   Continuing on from my thoughts yesterday, when today’s post-80s, or Generation Y, are ready for more senior roles in the corporate world, the scene may be totally different.  While social networking skills may not be something worth bragging about now, a few years later the absence of such will be considered fatal disqualifiers for Generation Y hiring managers.

Social media usage will only grow further with younger generations as they mature, contrary to some beliefs that they will grow out of such sites.  With the increasing leverage of social media sites for corporate advertising, loyalty programs, public awareness and even hiring, the next time we try to shrug our shoulders reading those social networking attributes, let’s get real for a second and think again.

Read Full Post »

“Post-80s” (generation born after 1980) or “post-90s” continues to be a popular topic in the media lately.  According to a local paper, many corporations are seeing post-80s employees as one of their top human resource challenges these days.  Apparently there are now training courses organized for managerial staff to understand and interact properly with our next generation of workforce. 

The human resource consulting firm being interviewed reports the top 9 characteristics of post-80s workforce:

  • Poor concentration
  • Poor reading skills
  • Impatient
  • Difficult to communicate
  • Overly confident
  • Poor punctuality
  • Poor personal conduct
  • Irresponsible and poor accountability
  • Overly temperamental

Though I am sure there is a bunch of people who are guilty with such characteristics, it’s also time for employers to start adapting their managerial style according to the times.  Many younger recruits are not used to listening to orders because of their unique ways of being brought up.  Family sizes are smaller, there are fewer siblings, and many of them are used to being pampered by all material and financial means.  The new generation is often confident in their own ways, and they are raised to question authority at all times.  Managers who still stick with announcing orders without rationalization are only asking for trouble.  A new managerial style has to be adapted, and the first step to do is to learn how to embrace the new generation of workforce.

What are the new rules?  I am no expert, but off the top of my head I can come up with a few.

  • Don’t be condescending.  Attitude is important, and it should be a two-way street.  Assuming rightaway the post-80s is a group of whining needy kids will only add to the tension.  Don’t talk down to them, and don’t use phrases like “You know how lucky you guys are?  Back in the days, I wished that someone would have spent the time to teach me like I am doing for you right now!”
  • Get rid of the “Because I told you!”  The new generation needs to be convinced through lots of questions and answers.  Their new thinking may spark new solutions which is well worth the added time invested. 
  • Be patient.   Like raising kids, sometimes you have to let them make their own mistakes.  I know it is definitely costly for corporations to allow their staff to make mistakes, but think about it, his other departmental colleagues or external clients are of his generation as well.  What we view as mistakes now may be a norm in the new era.
  • Focus on results rather than the process.  Since the process is going to be challenged anyway, why not allow them to make up some rules themselves?  However, the new rules still have to be socially accepted by others, meaning no one can skip work claiming they are “working from home”.
  • Nurturing.  I know, the workplace is meant for business, but if we understand the social reality of the new generation, managers nowadays also need to be the psychological coach of new recruits.  There is no guarantee that the new joiners will prove to be a valuable asset to the company, but not spending the time to teach them responsibility and accountability, for example, will only lead to disastrous results.  Set the expectation low, and there is no harm to overly communicate. 
  • Positive reinforcement.  When staff feels that they are being rewarded or acknowledged of an accomplishment, the motivation is often so strong that a momentum will be created.  Don’t be stingy with the compliments, be humble and take advantage of their creative juices and unorthodox thinking.

All in all, bitching alone will never bring any solution.  We should all face the reality and ask ourselves what is something we can do to bridge the gap.  After all, who says the negative qualities are possessed only by the post-80s?  Aren’t you equally mad at that other colleague of yours who have been around forever and unwilling to accept any new ideas?

Let’s make sure we do not turn into those we used to despise, period.

Read Full Post »

Back in the years, one of the earlier lessons I learned as a consultant was how to manage our clients’ expectations.  Our client projects were mostly related to e-sourcing events with an estimated savings figure in mind.  We wanted to ensure our clients a handsome return of investment.   Yet there could still be a number of uncontrollable factors that could go either ways.  The suppliers could be colluding, the parts for bid could turn out to be obsolete, or our clients’ credibility was not as high as they would believe themselves.  The golden rule for all engagement managers therefore is to manage our clients’ expectations on a daily basis until the project finishes.

In short, managing expectations is to minimize the impact of surprises, particularly those unpleasant ones.  It requires the ability to think of all the possible scenarios that could go wrong.  I have since learned to extend this cardinal rule to my daily life, and so far this rule has not been disappointing me a single bit.

  • Investments.  I am definitely not one of those daring investors who would bank their entire net worth into a property, stock or a fund.  My lowest expectation in buying my apartment is that I can see myself living in it till the day I die.  If I can flip it and make a profit some time, it will always be a bonus.  Of course I will carefully pick properties with higher appreciation prospects, but expecting any solid return within a specified period of time is not my number one priority.
  • Entertainment.  I have been around the city long enough to know what to expect from the hundreds of thousands of restaurants, theatres, shopping malls, boutiques and bars.  As they all differ by the clientele they serve, level of customer service standard they uphold, and the dollar amount on their price tags, I set vastly different expectations just for that.  This way I know exactly what I will be getting.  If I am in an adventurous and energetic mood, I don’t mind going for crowded eateries that my bowl will be lifted away as soon as I put down my chopsticks.  If I am exhausted after a day’s work, I will go for more comfortable places where I expect pampering service and cuisine, with full expectation that the bill is going to be more pricey.  Why some people choose to swap that around always puzzles me. 
  • Relationships.  One of the reasons why many couples get into fights on Valentine’s Day is expectations mis-alignment.  Some wish for romantic elements, while some choose to be more practical.  Some feel the pressure from their peers and colleagues, and there are a million different expectations of gift choices, dining choices, and what to do afterwards.  This aspect perhaps is the least manageable in my opinion, since no matter how prepared and civilized it is with the prior planning and conversations, one always secretly wishes something more.
  • Career.  This requires no further clarification.  Everyone is dispensable, whether we like it or not.  Every decision we make or advice we provide comes with both opportunities and risks.  If we have not fully contemplated all possible outcomes, we would surely be struck by surprise.   Another thing for sure, is to manage your superior’s expectations on yourself.  He or she also hates surprises!

I know some may see this is all too conservative and behind the times.  Some believe that the society needs constant challenges to the status quo, and they are always ready to make bold objectives and changes.  I see nothing wrong with that, since deciding which path to take solely depends on how well you know about yourself.    Being honest to yourself and listening to your heart is critical. 

There is one thing that I never attempt to manage expectations whatsoever, and that is my Love towards my family and companions.  My devoted love and affection is unconditional.   Just like what the book Eat, Pray, Love says, love is worth losing balance for.

 

Read Full Post »

I was reading the Executive Coach section of CPO Agenda when I came across a very interesting question for coach Dr Richard Russill, who is a business coach and author, specializing in supply, cost and relationship management.   The question is: “People are debating whether “procurement” is the right name for … procurement.  What do you think?”

Dr Russill replies are: “Despite its dodgy connotations the ‘P’ word is too well embedded in the business vocabulary for it to change. Where Google, even recently, suggested ‘Community Post Office’ or ‘Chief Petty Officer’ for CPO, it now comes up with what this journal stands for. Besides, it is perceptions within companies that matter. It is great if your CEO understands procurement as a key business driver. But re-badging procurement is a waste of time if company colleagues still see it as a function in which they are not involved.

Yesterday I was folding village newsletters into envelopes. Recalling Adam Smith’s pins, I found that it was faster to do all the folding, then the insertions, then the stamping, as separate activities. It was also totally mindless. That’s the problem with functions in business. Despite being functionally excellent they can seem mindless if the job is to follow instructions set by others, as distinct from influencing the process which creates instructions. Procurement is not a function but a cross-business team activity with purchasing and supply operating as a sub plot. The CPO’s dual role is to inspire intelligent commercially-aware decision-making as well as minding the supply task. Making this a reality requires story-telling and tangible supply successes…not a new label on the bottle.”

Well I can’t agree more.  Over the years I have personally lived through many names of our profession such as strategic procurement, operations procurement, procurement and supply chain, purchasing services, enterprise supply chain services, global procurement, and global real estate and purchasing services.  Every two or three years all companies are itching to do some rebranding, but the only thing that matters is how top management engages procurement and the rest of the business teams together.  When I used to be the head of procurement for Greater China in American Express,  I found myself in front of my senior business leaders and stakeholders every 8 months or so, reinforcing everyone that regardless of how our names changed, I would still be there to take care of the same duties.  Yes that is exactly how frequent our restructuring took place.

And this restructuring also means that our titles, levels, geographic and commodity responsibilities keep getting reshuffled.  New organization charts were drawn, and everyone needed to re-apply for the new posts, or even the same posts that they were assuming.  The job applications needed to go through the routine interviewing and grading process.  Some posts were added, and some were eliminated.  Such process lasted at least 3 or 4 months after it was publicized, and I had experienced it more than once druing my tenure.

At the end of the day, my core responsibilities were exactly the same.  The number of my superiors had expanded, and my local stakeholders simply could not care less.  The management consultancy engaged made a buckload of money.

And the world turns.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »