Given the high rate of GenAI ProcureTech implementation failures, I have been expecting that larger enterprises will start to repatriate the development of procurement and supply chain solutions in-house. I even wrote several articles going back a decade or so – the most recent one from 2023 is included later in this post.
Speaking about this post, here is my response to Michael Lamoureaux’s great comment on my post from earlier this morning.
The practitioner side of the industry is likely to go back further than a single step – at least in their engagement with and use of solution providers.
The only question—and there might be a few more—is whether the practitioner side of the table has the experience and expertise to build an in-house solution.
I bet they do, which raises another question: How will this impact an already overcrowded solution provider landscape?
Of course, when large practitioner companies build their “in-house” solution, they will unlikely want it to be scalable beyond their organization because it will be viewed as a competitive advantage.
For example, American Express‘ acquisition of Nipendo. What happened to the great work Nipendo did before the acquisition? You should look into that 😉 I know that not enough solution providers are paying attention to what happened in that case.
There are so many and, at times, seemingly non-related moving parts in the ProcureTech industry today, and too many people are working with an incomplete picture.
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the DPW conference.
Procurement Insights
Is it time for practitioners to build their “own” ProcureTech solutions?
Posted on October 7, 2024
0
What’s old is new again.
Given the high rate of GenAI ProcureTech implementation failures, I have been expecting that larger enterprises will start to repatriate the development of procurement and supply chain solutions in-house. I even wrote several articles going back a decade or so – the most recent one from 2023 is included later in this post.
Speaking about this post, here is my response to Michael Lamoureaux’s great comment on my post from earlier this morning.
Michael Lamoureux, regarding a step back, you reminded me of the following post I wrote last November – https://bit.ly/3ZSEqD4
The practitioner side of the industry is likely to go back further than a single step – at least in their engagement with and use of solution providers.
The only question—and there might be a few more—is whether the practitioner side of the table has the experience and expertise to build an in-house solution.
I bet they do, which raises another question: How will this impact an already overcrowded solution provider landscape?
Of course, when large practitioner companies build their “in-house” solution, they will unlikely want it to be scalable beyond their organization because it will be viewed as a competitive advantage.
For example, American Express‘ acquisition of Nipendo. What happened to the great work Nipendo did before the acquisition? You should look into that 😉 I know that not enough solution providers are paying attention to what happened in that case.
There are so many and, at times, seemingly non-related moving parts in the ProcureTech industry today, and too many people are working with an incomplete picture.
It will be interesting to see what comes out of the DPW conference.
30
Share this:
Related