FINANCIAL SERVICES: Harness your supply base to power your business

Driving more value from the supply market is a board level agenda item for Financial Services organizations around the world.

Discover how to effectively manage your supply base to deliver value to your business - above just cutting costs.

Click here to access our new Financial Services resource portal

Subscribe to our monthly e-newsletter

Connect with us

Subscribe to our RSS Feed

Your email:

Proxima Blog

Current Articles | RSS Feed RSS Feed

Global myths of procurement outsourcing - Myth 4: PO results in a loss of control and increased risk

  
  
  
  
John Mathew Client Services Director

This is often cited as a reason why people are reluctant to even consider procurement outsourcing. Yet it’s an unfounded fear.  As any CFO that has outsourced will tell you: control goes up.  Risk comes down.

For example, you will get full visibility of your spending behaviors across the business – something many businesses don’t have today.  You will then be able to have far greater control over it (if you can’t see it today, how can you be controlling it?). 

An effective procurement outsourcer will invest heavily in the business partnering aspect of procurement – ensuring that the good work that the procurement team does is a) aligned with the business’ need, and b) is adopted by the business.  It sounds simple, but this often doesn’t occur today.

Another benefit of using a third party to manage your cost base over an internal function, is that it’s much easier to hold a third party to account.  There are defined deliverables, processes and procedures – all of which increase the level of control you have over your function.  The outsourcer will go out of their way to demonstrate in real terms the benefits of their work. 

The issue of risk is different.  A business leader may be happy today in the belief that the level of risk the business faces is low.  However, they don’t know what they don’t know.  We typically find that the overall level of risk a business is aware of goes up after we become involved – because we make business aware of the risks in the supply chain.  And we then manage it down.  The question here is, what would you prefer:

  • A situation where you think your risk levels are low, but you actually face high levels of risk – you just can’t see them; or
  • An awareness of the actual level risk you face, and an action plan of how to mitigate it.

The truth: Procurement outsourcing increases the level of control a CFO has over his cost base, and reduces the level of risk the business faces.

In the next post, I’ll explore the myth that people have around outsourcing meaning off-shoring.

Click here to access the previous posts: Myth 1 - ROI comes from cost reductions, Myth 2: The ROI from procurement outsourcing is insufficient and Myth 3: PO damages stakeholder relationships

Comments

Agree completely
Posted @ Friday, December 07, 2012 12:02 PM by aura
There are two sides to this question. Are you talking about indirect spend or direct? For indirect, more and more studies show that outsourcing is the way to go. While it's important to have control of your direct spend, you actually mitigate risk for indirect by outsourcing. Sheena Moore of Spend Matters said this regarding the use of group purchasing organizations for indirect: 
 
"The next biggest benefit [of working with a group purchasing organization] comes with trusting a third party who has particular expertise and experience within a category to obtain the best deals. A large metal producer may have it made when it comes to sourcing their raw materials, employing commodity analysts to track the ups and downs of the daily markets to create detailed forecasting models. That same metal producer most likely does not employ a copy machine and printer expert, and even if they did, there is only a slim possibility they could bring the leverage and subject matter expertise that the best consortiums can offer." 
 
 
Here's the full article from the Corporate United newsletter: http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/340610a2#/340610a2/4
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 3:35 AM by Nicole Shedden
Potentially, yes. However, there are tools that can be applied at contract negotiation stage which can help to mitigate default risk by the overseas supplier. For example, the use of a Process Agent, which I don't believe is widely used in procurement contracts, can help to expedite process in the event of a default. If anyone would like further information, please contact me directly.
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 5:19 AM by Dr. Sara Macedo
I respectfully disagree with the proximagroup comment. Control goes down and risk goes up with outsourcing.
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 5:21 AM by Carey Plazak
Carey, please elaborate more why you think this is the case
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 5:23 AM by John Mathew
The typical problem and failure of any outsourcing is the reason why. If you outsource a croc then it will cost you money. 
 
If the reason you outsourced was because you didn't have the necessary skill sets in-house and you did not have the ability or time to train. Then the basic question is, do you have the capability to monitor and measure the outsource provider? 
 
If you do not adequately manage an outsource it will cost you money. 
 
It may well be worth employing one senior skilled person, probably on a part time basis, to manage the outsourced company. 
 
If you need further information on how this can be set up, then let me know. Regards
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 5:27 AM by David Taylor
I was against outsourcing when starting in my role but in a handful of programs we've made the change and it's worked out quite well. I continue to warm to the idea in more and more areas. It's certainly not for 100% of your programs, but depending on your resources can be a real win in some.
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 5:37 AM by Chris Oxford
OK. There are reasons why you might consider outsourcing the procurement function, but increasing control and/or reducing risk are not among those reasons. When you outsource procurement you are abdicating that function to people that you will never truely know as well as your own chosen staff or in some cases yourself. Since it is "people" that perform the procurement function, knowledge of their capabilities will factor into the risk and control dynamics. More knowledge of a person's capabilities...more control and less risk. Less knowledge...less control and more risk. I have had experience with outsourcing procurement and it was sold to us as an ideal solution, but fell way short on actual performance and delivery. I suspect the people performing the outsourced work for us were not as capable as they were respresented to be.
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 10:15 AM by Carey Plazak
Thanks Carey. I'm sorry you had a poor experience. I'm certainly not going to make excuses for others' poor performance. All I can say is that Proxima's offering results is a dramatic uplift in capability - not simply outsourcing capability. With us, organizations achieve something that is simply not replicable internally. Sure control goes down if you let it, but we work hard to ensure the level of control the client has goes up. 
 
Thanks for your clarification - and Happy Holidays. 
 
John
Posted @ Friday, December 21, 2012 11:30 AM by John Mathew
Outsource can only be for the non-critical project or product if you can't 100% control regarding the risk, however you can outsource everything if you can 100% control with almost 0 risk. Sign contract, 100% process review and management so as to control quality, cost, delivery etc. Of course the outsoruce cost must be competitive than build in house otherwise meanless. 
 
The partner selection and qualification is another critical factors for the outsoruce. 
 
Using total SCM(supply chain management) concept to decide the outsource strategy will be a good idea.  
Posted @ Wednesday, January 02, 2013 3:43 AM by Julienne Han
It may well not. It would depend alot on what measures were included in the SLA between the company and outsourcer, including the level of control and risk assurance activities to protect both parties.
Posted @ Thursday, January 03, 2013 3:12 AM by Alan J. Goldberg, CIA, CRMA, MBA
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

Allowed tags: <a> link, <b> bold, <i> italics