Initial Questions Regarding Spend Matters SolutionMap

Sure, Jon, I’m happy to respond and clarify:

1. How is the SolutionMap different from say a Magic Quadrant? A couple of things:

– We have a lot of respect for other approaches. But we believe our approach is more appropriate for today’s technology buying climate. Instead of 1 “2/2” chart, there are 6 for the E-Procurement SolutionMap based on different procurement personas to take organizational requirements into account – as well as the vendor’s unique value proposition and solution strategy. We are also publishing (this month) different views just for Invoice-to-Pay (a separate solution area) and procure-to-pay (P2P) which includes E-Procurement and Invoice-to-Pay — so 18 different charts in total! It sounds like a lot, but this is the type of detail that allows organizations to “self-select” for their own needs and persona(s).

– Each participating vendor completed an extensive RFI including a mandatory 90-minute live demo — in certain cases, the demonstrations were longer and carried out over multiple sessions

– In addition to the analyst rating, SolutionMap includes a customer rating based on real-life experiences with the solution

– Any vendor can request to participate in the RFI process (start by creating a free http://spendmatters.com/almanac/ listing)

– The comparative, persona-based graphics are available for free to everyone (https://tinyurl.com/eProcSM)

– Finally, SolutionMap is updated quarterly post launch to actively reflect market developments (and more and more vendors participating in the process). In a cloud world, vendors often update their solutions monthly or quarterly — and analyses should reflect this.

2. Reference is made to “rankings (that) are based equally on demonstrated technology/solution capability as well as on customer input.” I realize that “customers” respond to certain “questions,” but how do you identify and engage the customers who participate in this exchange? In other words, how do you source or solicit these customers?

The vendors identify the customers during the RFI process (and I imagine they’d send us their favorites). The customers shared their real-life experiences through a survey which results are used in an anonymized format to inform the customer scores – and never attributed to a specific customer. It’s the kind of insight every procurement pro seeks when assessing a solution or tool. We’ll be adding “self-sourced” RFI responses from our direct practitioner relationships to complement the vendor references in the future.

3. Reference is made to an interpretation of the rankings. What is the basis of this “interpretation?” For example, is an algorithm utilized to weight the responses?

Frankly, Jon, as head of marketing I don’t make the sausage – the analyst team does…But I do know solution scoring is based on analysis of individual vendor capability, including in-depth tech reviews, a highly detailed Spend Matters RFI and live demonstrations and Q&A by the Spend Matters team. The Customer Value score stems from aggregated direct customer input (survey-based). A lot of effort has gone into creating the personas and assessment framework – more details are published on PRO, e.g.:

https://spendmatters.com/2017/03/31/e-procurement-persona-understand-requirements-mass-customize-vendor-shortlist/

AND

http://spendmatters.com/2017/04/10/vendor-summary-report-e-procurement-solutionmap-q2-2017/

In these, we share the specific solution/technology and customer input emphases for each persona — it’s transparent (that’s our aim!)

4. How large is the customer pool upon which the “interpretation” is based?

Some vendors only submitted a handful, others 20+ references – all sharing relevant insight on how the solution (and implementation process) works in real-life.

5. Finally, let’s consider the following disclaimer; “Spend Matters does not endorse any vendor, product or service depicted in SolutionMap and does not advise users to select only those with the highest ratings or other designation.” How do you believe that objectivity can be maintained when some of the companies that are referenced in the SolutionMap are also sponsors of the Spend Matters blog?

That’s a fair question, Jon, and I know you hold somewhat of a black-and-white view on this yourself. I can assure you that Spend Matters is not dependent on any one revenue stream or any one customer (or set of customers) — we have no customer concentration whatsoever in our business. And it’s in our best interest to objectively report on procurement technology of all colors to safeguard our credibility within the procurement industry. We’re aiming for a new level of transparency – and would welcome suggestions on how we can be even more transparent into our SolutionMap process.

Best,

Carina