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

What CFOs can learn from Einstein

  
  
  
  
Tom Lawrence - Chief Communications Officer, Proxima

“If you always do what you always did, you will always get what you always got” – Albert Einstein. Time and time again organizations launch into programs with the aim of reducing costs from the supplier base.  It’s a perfectly rational thing to do.  Who wouldn’t want to get the cost base in a fitter state?

The trouble is, before long, finance realizes that what they were promised isn’t being seen on the bottom line, and pressure starts to mount on the team – and they eventually get divested in (i.e. moved on).  Time passes – and before long, the same process starts again.

So what’s wrong?  Why is this happening?  Why is finance not getting what it wants, and what it needs?

The answer lies in what the expectations are at the outset.  The standard response is to think – “What we need to do is invest in the procurement department.”  Right?  Wrong.  Procurement is too narrow an area to effectively deliver what is needed.

It typically focuses on only part of the process, which is unfortunate in two ways: 1) it’s the part that adds the least value, and 2) it’s at the back end of the process.  It forgets the most important aspect of managing the cost base.  It misses the upfront area of understanding what is the business need, challenging internal behaviors for how they are being serviced, and the cultural and behavioral change that is needed to bring it all together.

You can do the greatest sourcing exercise ever done by mankind, but if you are not meeting the business need, and aligning activities with corporate objectives, then its set up to fail.  It also ignores what is needed at the back end of the process: on-going active management to ensure the evolving business need is continuously served by the evolving supplier base.

What’s needed is a paradigm shift to understand that a much wider remit is required to successfully manage an organization's cost base.  To mobilize the supplier base in your favor.  To provide the span of control needed.  To manage the inherent risks in the supplier base (as the recent horse meat scandal has very elegantly exposed).  What seems to be overlooked is that for most large corporates, the total amount of money spent with suppliers outweighs labor costs by a factor of 3-5 times.  Similar to the boiling frogs metaphor*, management practice it seems has not kept up with the fact that over the last 50 years, the cost base has been externalized.

The reality is that businesses spend on average two thirds of their revenue on non-labor costs.  And these third party costs often drive the value created by the labor which sits within the business.  They therefore offer the greatest opportunities for driving productivity, and ultimately profitability.

So what’s needed?  Well, it certainly “isn’t doing what you always did”.  And we know the reason why.

* The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually.


Comments

Many times in the past seen that hitting the supplier for most cost reduction is a panacea for aliments of currecny, low market and high labour costs. Now seeing a more open view of look internally at costs and see what can be removed or reduced to aid the bottom line and also work with suppliers to take out costs.
Posted @ Monday, March 04, 2013 6:28 AM by Neil Williams
Beautifully expressed article and has applications to politics as well. Politics seems to have an equally incorrect understanding of its product. Politicians would be well advised to read the article and redefine their 'product' as well as the contingent 'costs' of that product. The result might be profitable governance. 
 
Slightly off subject, but politicians are CFO's as well.  
Posted @ Monday, March 04, 2013 6:34 AM by Jim Freeman
Many stakeholders in the total process chain often appear not to be measured on financial effectiveness , nor on cost optimization, on projects and/or related recurring costs. 
 
When Top management is focusing on partial results and not on integrated control across borders of the entire supply chain, it is often ' bringing water to the sea ' . 
 
So, it starts with the top and organize simple and direct, in terms of ownership and accountability.  
Posted @ Monday, March 04, 2013 6:35 AM by Jelmer J. Reitsma MScBA
One of the most amazing human beings to have lived was Albert Einstein and he focused on the World his Entire Life and ended up going back to his faith as he felt compassion for who suffered because of The Manhattan Project. Great Post and Failure Breeds Character and Character is what we all aspire to be no matter how successful you are. With all these Fancy Words we need to keep it simple. Get the Job Done without Causing Harm!
Posted @ Monday, March 04, 2013 6:35 AM by Kenneth Sull
Except for some low hanging opportunities, in my experience, costs are what they are for deeper underlying reasons - an equilibrium.  
 
Finance can influence lasting reductions by analyzing how well the business owner incurring the expense understands the process, constraints and assumptions driving those costs and be a partner in challenging those assumptions/norms/constraints. 
 
The Lean 5-Why methodology that I used in a heavy manufacturing environment was a great help. It provided a mutually acceptable and disciplined process to get past knee-jerk answers and get to the root cause (equilibrium) driving those costs. Finance has to be seen as a partner trying to help break the old equilibrium and find a new one. 
 
When done right, it is amazing how much this approach by Finance is appreciated by other functions !  
Posted @ Monday, March 04, 2013 6:37 AM by RAVI MANGIPUDI
I agree that "Procurement" is too narrow a field of focus to deliver maximum enterprise value.Procurement has a role in leading and facilitating "commerciality" for all 3rd party spend and must be an integral part of a transparent budgetting process, aligning closely with Finance. Savings will hit the bottom line( and generate top line growth / business productivity)where Finance and Procurement work closely together on a joined up cost down budgetting approach.
Posted @ Wednesday, March 20, 2013 5:00 AM by Colin Davies
In all the discussions above, no one mentions the apparently unimportant fact that nothing internally grows the business if the customer is not in the equation. 
The incessant "buy it cheaper" mantra immortalized by Wal-Mart and other big box retail stores, brings supposedly ever cheaper products (supply line management) often at the cost of losing local suppliers of better products (supply line mismanagement) and leaves the customer with no choice in quality because the bean counters are driving the process. 
"Always low prices" is not always the best answer.
Posted @ Wednesday, April 17, 2013 12:56 PM by Tom Dewell
Post Comment
Name
 *
Email
 *
Website (optional)
Comment
 *

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