|
|
Like this article? PLEASE +1 it! |
|
Kraft Buys Into the Mirage of Vendor Rationalization
Written by: Jon HansenArticle Overview: In yet another example of the "when will they ever learn" category, About.com's Martin Murray's article "Kraft To Rationalize Vendors" reported that the company "announced that it is planning to cut its supplier base in half, affecting more than 30,000 businesses, but possibly saving Kraft more than $300 million a year." Putting aside for a moment that enterprise-wide rationalization strategies rarely deliver the sustainable savings that are expected - it would be interesting to see how the $300 million per year number was actually calculated - history has shown that the "sifting" process usually results in a supply base composed of the least desirable vendors.
![]() |
Free Download - Is supplier incumbency a major problem with government contracting? By Jon Hansen |
Kraft Buys Into the Mirage of Vendor Rationalization
"How important is effective internal collaboration? Just ask a
candy company in the U.S. mid-west. As the manufacturer of a number of
leading brands, this organization grew dramatically in a very short
period of time through a series of acquisitions. Unfortunately, an
extemporal supply base was a byproduct of the transactions leaving the
acquiring company with a highly suspicious, deeply segmented group of
suppliers.
The biggest challenge as expressed by a senior procurement
manager for the parent organization was convincing the former suppliers
of the acquired companies that becoming part of a larger pool would
expose them to opportunities for increased sales.
Their suppliers weren't buying the "increased opportunity" mantra
and as a result, the transition process was challenging to say the
least.
from Yes Virginia! There is more to e-procurement than software (Part 2), Procurement Insights - Sept. 20, 2007
In yet another example of the "when will they ever learn" category,
About.com's Martin Murray's article "Kraft To Rationalize Vendors"
reported that the company "announced that it is planning to cut its
supplier base in half, affecting more than 30,000 businesses, but
possibly saving Kraft more than $300 million a year."
Putting aside for a moment that enterprise-wide rationalization
strategies rarely deliver the sustainable savings that are expected -
it would be interesting to see how the $300 million per year number was
actually calculated - history has shown that the "sifting" process
usually results in a supply base composed of the least desirable
vendors.
Consider the negative vendor response regarding the Procter &
Gamble save money “plan,” through which the industry heavyweight is
looking to reduce the number of production companies with whom it’s
brand agencies can deal from a current 125 to 30 through what they are
referring to as a “preferred vendor” status.
Or the precipitous collapse of the GM North American supply base
through the implementation of misguided mainstream strategies that also
included a“drive on price reduction, low cost country (LCC) sourcing,
and extension of terms.”
In other words, there is no shortage of case references or research
material to clearly demonstrate to Kraft Foods that the over-utilized,
under-achieving rationalization approach delivers anything more than a
eroding supply base that once lost, is not easy to rebuild.
In my September 27, 2009 post "The Continuing Dangers of Vendor
Rationalization," I had cited that "while advocates point to several
commonsense reasons for a reduced or rationalized supply base, such as
lower administrative and operational costs, increased quality control
through more strategic relationships, and the ever popular volume
discount savings, tangible statistical support has been less than
convincing. In fact, when broadly applied across an enterprise's
entire spend, statistics clearly indicate that the practice of
rationalizing the supply base will actually lead to increased costs in
areas such as Indirect Material procurement."
I now find myself asking the same question almost 2 years later . .
. why? "Why continue to perpetuate a practice that has yet to deliver
the promised results, while simultaneously alienating key stakeholders
such as regional or local buyers and suppliers?"
The only answer besides an unimaginative, and short-sighted
executive vision is that the common denominator has and continues to be
linked to an adjunct IT or ERP-centric strategy. One that is built
upon a somewhat static foundation that fails to recognize and therefore
adapt to the dynamic realities of what are today increasingly complex,
global supply chains.
An irony of course is that while pursuing a rationalization
strategy, real supply chain risks that pose a serious threat to supply
and profitability are by and large being ignored.
A 2008 Aberdeen study found that 99% of supply management executives
reported disruptions in their organization's supply chain in the
previous 12 month period. The reported disruptions negatively impacted
key areas including customer relations, earnings, time to market
cycles, sales, and overall brand perceptions.
However, and despite the frequency of the disruptions and far
reaching negative consequences, the survey reported that 84% of
executives believe that their company is not prepared to respond to a disruption in their organization's supply chain.
A further consideration when contemplating a rationalization
strategy is that pricing risks and risks/delays with suppliers were
identified as the top two concerns of the majority of executives who
responded to the poll.
Against this backdrop, one cannot help but wonder how a
rationalization strategy that alienates rather than engages suppliers
could be pursued as a sound approach to achieving decreased costs and
increased savings?
Perhaps I will have to accept the likely reality that we will find
out how they get the "caramel into the Caramilk bar" long before a
logical explanation will be given for pursuing an enterprise-wide
rationalization strategy in the absence of any tangible supporting data.
|
About the Author: Jon Hansen RSS for Jon's articles - Visit Jon's website Personal Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/jwhansen Click here to visit Jon's website A Perfect Vision and Determined Execution Laying the Foundations for Sustainable Success Perfect Commerce Profile Metric Synchronization Versus Standardization The Real Value Behind IEE Smarter Solutions Profile In the Year 2020 Government Market Guest Post Optimizing Value in the Economic Downturn and Recovery Dangerous Supply Chain Myths Part 7 |
Related Forum Posts
Share this article with your friends. Fund someone's dream.
Leave a comment below or share on the left and you'll help support entrepreneurs in Africa through our partnership with Kiva. Over $50,000 raised and counting - Please keep sharing! Learn more.
Get advice & tips from famous business
owners, new articles by entrepreneur
experts, my latest website updates, &
special sneak peaks at what's to come!
Why Use an Advertising Agency
SEO Gurus, Software and Ebooks
B2B PR – Planning for Success
Email us your ideas on how to make our
website more valuable! Thank you Sharon
from Toronto Salsa Lessons / Classes for
your suggestions to make the newsletter
look like the website and profile younger
entrepreneurs like Jennifer Lopez.



