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

Making sense of stagnation

  
  
  
  
Guy Strafford - Proxima

January, traditionally long and cumbersome, seems to have raced by this year and to exhibit classic stagnation characteristics. The best evidence of stagnation is conflicting economic indicators. If the economy is flat, this is not actually because nothing changes. The average is a net of things improving and things deteriorating, which in this instance are cancelling each other out.

This post was taken from our latest e-newsletter, click here to read the full issue and to subscribe to upcoming e-newsletters.

The GDP figures released on 25 January confirmed what many feared;  that the UK economy, despite stimulus in the shape of the Olympic and Paralympic Games, showed no forward momentum at all.  A 0.3% contraction in the fourth quarter neutralized the net gain in the third, highlighted by a dismal Christmas on the high street, continuing moribund levels of inward investment and very little to excite economists about how the trend will be reversed.   On the other hand the stock market has soared forward, I suspect because some of the fears which investors had about the political climate (fiscal cliffs, euro split etc.) have not manifested themselves.

As we mentioned in a post last week, Proactive protection amid uncertain times, the reasons for the stagnant conditions are increasingly macro in nature. The London School of Economics Growth Commission last month found that businesses did find the UK's political system a real turn-off. While this might not be a surprise to many parts of the electorate, it is a finding that must resonate through the business community. We have a Government with an overtly pro-business stance, but if this does not translate to potential inward investment, then there is a hurdle that must be overcome.

Similarly, the Deloitte CFO Survey found that wider economic uncertainty is a greater hindrance to business growth than access to capital or financial performance. The onus, then, is on business leaders to find ways of circumventing the economic impasse and establish a means of delivering for shareholders whatever the conditions.

I think that the interesting element is that businesses are grappling with productivity improvements. New indicators suggest that this gauntlet is being picked up. In our arena, IbisWorld data suggests that procurement outsourcing is on the up, which points to a move towards proactively bringing costs under control. The Economist's recent Outsourcing & Off-shoring report also suggests that the American trend of bringing jobs back into the locality is growing. As we suggested last year, the difference in costs between off-shoring and on-shoring is shrinking. Productivity growth at home, which can and should be driven by the smarter use of suppliers, means that for many employers, the potential productivity benefits of re-shoring parts of the workforce are becoming compelling.

The obstacles to longer term, sustained growth, then, are large, but not insurmountable. We are coming into a new corporate reporting season, so we will be watching to see how closely shareholders analyze prevailing cost structures and how they are being managed. The debate about senior corporate pay, particularly in the light of some regulatory developments, is likely to intensify for a spell, but regular readers will know that we at Proxima believe that there is a bigger prize on offer.

With our work in North America growing, we have also been thinking about the potential differences between the corporate cost bases of UK and US companies, and how they are managed. What, if any, do you expect the differences to be?


Your thoughts on the spend behaviors of the U.S. Fortune 500

We will shortly be releasing our next big research, this time investigating the spend behaviors of the U.S. Fortune 500. Keeping in mind the FTSE 350 spent 12.9% of revenues on labor and 68.3% on non-labor - what portion of revenues do you expect to see distributed to the same spend buckets amongst the Fortune 500?

  1. More on labor, less on non labor
  2. Less on labor, more on non-labor
  3. Roughly the same

Click here to vote

 

 


Comments

I think than you never can stop to improve productivity with the fast growing from some countries plus the competition always pushing, if you didn’t improve before could be a trouble now. 
 
Definitely always is good moment for to improve productivity.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:29 AM by Tony Flores Aranda
U.S businesses are sitting on large cash flows. Macro uncertainty in the U.S. has contributed to stagnation which resulted in a sluggish GDP. If by way of productivity, businesses should do more with less, this has been done. When businesses resume normal spending, this will tremendously boost the economy.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:31 AM by Frances Jean-Louis
Not sure what productivity means but if we were to substitute reduce unit of sales cost it would make more sense. Something any good business should be doing whatever the economic climate I would have thought!
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:32 AM by Chris Parrack
This is a very true observation. What we try to convey to those we work with in senior management is to turn to empowering the workforce by engagement. It remains an asset still under the control of the business owner, CFO and HR. Many research companies have reviewed the stats, as well as in our experience, that programs that recognize and reward improve productivity.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:33 AM by Tai Aguirre
I think that the difference between this recession and the last is that there has been no drive for efficiency savings and no de-regulation. 
 
Also worrying is that the prime minister believes he is cutting the UK's debt rather than reducing the annual deficit which just means that debt doesn't go up as fast as before.  
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 AM by Brian Sandilands
Take a long view and prepare for a long haul. e.g. laying off skilled employees, will improve productivity short-term, but not long-term. Similarily building new export markets are expensive short-term, but pay-off long term. This looks like stagnation, but is not.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:34 AM by John Stewart
Guy, from the perspective of marketing spend I cannot agree with you more. As increased pressures are placed these days on marketing departments to achieve more growth with less resources, this presents a great opportunity for marketers to commit resources to identifying and articulating productivity gains, rather than cost savings. In our experience procurement leaders are well positioned to shift the discussion of marketing performance to one of productivity measurement for the business. Marketing is an investment after all and productivity should be a valid ROI metric in marketing.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:35 AM by Tom Denford
In my client work, when profits are not satisfactory, we go in without preconceived notions and test two hypotheses: 
 
1. There is a revenue/growth problem. 
2. There is a cost/productivity problem. 
 
Both are testable and business leaders often jump to the wrong conclusion. For instance, in many health systems, the leadership team believes that they have a revenue problem when benchmarking productivity shows a clear cost/productivity issue.  
 
And often, it is not either/or, but an issue where both have opportunity to improve.  
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:38 AM by Andrew Neitlich
I would say yes to that. Its the only way to remain profitable or gain any sort or profitabilty is the market is dry.
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:39 AM by Greg Chilowa
Guy, 
 
When capital/debt is cheap, it's easy to boost output by adding capacity. Productivity improvement is out of favor because it is comparatively a hard row to hoe. Why struggle with behavioral change and discipline when you can add another process circuit or piece of equipment? Lazy balance sheets are ubiquitous globally at this time. Capacity utilization is at historic lows. The Fed balance sheet is fat with debt and as a result, the USD Index has fallen nearly 40% since 2002.  
 
Courtesy of the world's central banks, the cost of debt has plummeted all over the world. For 2 decades since Alan Greenspan was appointed, the Fed funds rate has fallen from 10% to near zero in a misguided attempt to force feed consumers debt (which the banks see as synonymous with growth). 
 
We desperately need to dislodge the central banks (the banking cartel in the US), from their activist role in the capital markets. Like some sort of fourth arm of government they are now responsible for maintaining price stability, keeping inflation low and lifting employment. Yet, they have failed miserably on all fronts and all of them are appointed without any accountability to the public. They have followed an interventionist path to spur growth which has resulted in one asset bubble after another (the stock market is bubbling away at the moment) and now we share a near zero interest rate environment which is almost impossible to turn around. 
 
Don't hold your breath waiting for productivity improvement to come back into vogue. Productivity will return with a vengeance when the Fed starts to remove liquidity and lift the price of debt. But, how can it do that without bankrupting the US?  
Posted @ Wednesday, February 20, 2013 3:39 AM by Bill James
Bill - I agree that productivity improvement is a comparatively tough row. 
 
Also, instead of focussing on productivity improvements and cost control companies should should concentrate more on service/product differentiations, empowering employees to make decisions, pick and service a set of customers (that may include letting go of customers that do not fit).
Posted @ Monday, February 25, 2013 4:12 AM by Chris Wakare
I agree that increasing productivity is important. In my mind productivity is a combination of cost, quality and customer service, and it's what businesses should be focusing on whatever the economic circumstances. However, that is only part of the equation, the other component is innovation. Effective innovation should also feature in tight economic conditions when the need to differentiate from your competition becomes even more acute.
Posted @ Monday, February 25, 2013 4:18 AM by Learie Attzs FCIPS, CEng MIMechE
Can you cite any research on this?  
Posted @ Monday, February 25, 2013 4:30 AM by Robert Ewalt
Is the statement a polite way of saying more for less (people). increase productivity while reducing headcount.  
Posted @ Monday, February 25, 2013 4:34 AM by Ian Parkes
Economic Stagnation is one of the best motivations to improve efficiency and productivity. Every company I know is doing more with less. Constraint and need is the mother of innovation.  
Posted @ Monday, February 25, 2013 4:38 AM by Gabe Zubizarreta
Higher productivity is a linchpin of a growing economy or business – and the comments above only emphasise what an evocative subject this is. Since I write my original blog, an article in the UK’s The Times drew attention to research which suggests that UK productivity might be declining (on the basis that employment figures are improving even though the economy is not).  
 
I argue that mobilizing your suppliers better can unlock productivity improvements. But this needs a mind-set change to happen, both in terms of internal behaviors and in terms of how to use and think about the ‘supplier’.  
 
What’s interesting is that it is not just a corporate issue, but it is also a government and even macro-economic issue. I agree with several of the sentiments posted by others, that if animal spirits are not going to revive, then perhaps the governments of UK and US need to think about how to lead a productivity revolution. 
 
Guy 
Posted @ Thursday, February 28, 2013 6:20 AM by Guy Strafford
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

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