“Joël Collin-Demers this is what I have exactly done over the last decade in both the public and private sectors. Unfortunately, the companies get ahead of themselves and market what is in progress and market themselves trying to gain clients!” – Jenti Vantertuig’s response to the following comment from Joël Collin-Demers.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Given our professional agree-to-disagree discussion over the weekend, it may surprise some that, in this instance, I agree with Joël’s comment.
When a market hits a tipping point like this, it just means you can/should change your approach in my view.
Instead of asking what the market can do for you and then building your strategy around those constraints, you can instead establish your strategy and ask the market: “Who can do this for me?” (And you will get a good answer).
More people working on the same problem accelerates innovation.
My Response
Jenti Vandertuig, you are spot on!
Here is an excerpt of how the Commonwealth of Virginia‘s eVA initiative successfully worked with solution providers – https://bit.ly/3SUWxml
“As a result, they avoided the trap of eVA becoming a software project, as Bob put it, and were thereby able to shift the emphasis from an exercise in cost justification to one of process understanding and refinement. And while the Ariba application has done the job it was required to do, eVA’s effectiveness has little to do with the technology and more to do with the methodology the Virginia Brain Trust employed. When technology (nee software) is seen as the primary vehicle to drive results, it becomes ineffectual and mostly irrelevant. The 75 to 85% e-procurement initiative failure rate gives testimony to this fact.”
Virginia “owned” their success and continually evolved their platform, replacing old solutions (and, when necessary, providers) with new ones.
You were always trying to do the same thing. Unfortunately, most solution providers and those supporting them were more interested in landing contracts and meeting revenue targets. So, to your point, it is like standing before a beautiful-looking buffet of undercooked or expired food (solutions).
Jenti Vandertuig: The only thing I would add is why successes like the Commonwealth of Virginia‘s eVA initiative are not taught in a course or are not a core part of a procurement industry education curriculum. I would even be happy to provide Forrester‘s detailed analysis of eVA, which was done when the continuation of the initiative was challenged. – https://bit.ly/3ydyeXk
One thought that came to mind, and I would invite everyone in this discussion stream to share their thoughts, is something one of the top execs from Virginia told me:
“Jon, considering the size of your readership, the solution provider read your review, and while it is 100% on the money, they asked that you find a way to elevate “their role” in our success.”
My response was, “Why? After lengthy discussions and research of the eVA initiative, it was made clear that while SAP Ariba did the job it was supposed to do, you could have used any solution provider’s platform and achieved the same results.”
The executive’s response was, ” That’s true, but you know I had to ask.”
So, why should we care about an overcrowded solution map?
As I wrote in 2000, technology is irrelevant if practitioners don’t take ownership and the lead for their “own success.” In that expanded context, the report released by Kearney at the recent DPW Amersterdam that most practitioners are moving toward a “build versus buy” strategy makes sense – to the right degree – (emphasis on the term RIGHT DEGREE).
30
Procurement Insights
Building The Bridge Between The Build Versus Buy Debate
Posted on October 14, 2024
0
“Joël Collin-Demers this is what I have exactly done over the last decade in both the public and private sectors. Unfortunately, the companies get ahead of themselves and market what is in progress and market themselves trying to gain clients!” – Jenti Vantertuig’s response to the following comment from Joël Collin-Demers.
EDITOR’S NOTE: Given our professional agree-to-disagree discussion over the weekend, it may surprise some that, in this instance, I agree with Joël’s comment.
When a market hits a tipping point like this, it just means you can/should change your approach in my view.
Instead of asking what the market can do for you and then building your strategy around those constraints, you can instead establish your strategy and ask the market: “Who can do this for me?” (And you will get a good answer).
More people working on the same problem accelerates innovation.
My Response
Jenti Vandertuig, you are spot on!
Here is an excerpt of how the Commonwealth of Virginia‘s eVA initiative successfully worked with solution providers – https://bit.ly/3SUWxml
“As a result, they avoided the trap of eVA becoming a software project, as Bob put it, and were thereby able to shift the emphasis from an exercise in cost justification to one of process understanding and refinement. And while the Ariba application has done the job it was required to do, eVA’s effectiveness has little to do with the technology and more to do with the methodology the Virginia Brain Trust employed. When technology (nee software) is seen as the primary vehicle to drive results, it becomes ineffectual and mostly irrelevant. The 75 to 85% e-procurement initiative failure rate gives testimony to this fact.”
Virginia “owned” their success and continually evolved their platform, replacing old solutions (and, when necessary, providers) with new ones.
You were always trying to do the same thing. Unfortunately, most solution providers and those supporting them were more interested in landing contracts and meeting revenue targets. So, to your point, it is like standing before a beautiful-looking buffet of undercooked or expired food (solutions).
Jenti Vandertuig: The only thing I would add is why successes like the Commonwealth of Virginia‘s eVA initiative are not taught in a course or are not a core part of a procurement industry education curriculum. I would even be happy to provide Forrester‘s detailed analysis of eVA, which was done when the continuation of the initiative was challenged. – https://bit.ly/3ydyeXk
One thought that came to mind, and I would invite everyone in this discussion stream to share their thoughts, is something one of the top execs from Virginia told me:
“Jon, considering the size of your readership, the solution provider read your review, and while it is 100% on the money, they asked that you find a way to elevate “their role” in our success.”
My response was, “Why? After lengthy discussions and research of the eVA initiative, it was made clear that while SAP Ariba did the job it was supposed to do, you could have used any solution provider’s platform and achieved the same results.”
The executive’s response was, ” That’s true, but you know I had to ask.”
So, why should we care about an overcrowded solution map?
As I wrote in 2000, technology is irrelevant if practitioners don’t take ownership and the lead for their “own success.” In that expanded context, the report released by Kearney at the recent DPW Amersterdam that most practitioners are moving toward a “build versus buy” strategy makes sense – to the right degree – (emphasis on the term RIGHT DEGREE).
30
Share this:
Related