Linking Nico Bac’s and Dr. Elouise Epstein’s solution map providers to real world practitioners

The following post is to determine which ProcureTech solution providers from Nico Bac’s 2025 spider map and a 2023/24 map from Dr. Elouise Epstein best align with each company listed in the previous post. This preliminary Level 1 assessment is based on the AI maturity of the individual practitioner’s procurement complexity and innovation readiness, employing a fit-for-purpose matching approach.

MAP 1 (NICO BAC)

MODEL 1

Matching Framework

We consider:

• Procurement AI maturity and ambition (from previous matrix).
• Solution category (e.g., S2P Suites, Supplier Risk, Intake, Contract, Analytics).
• Company scale and sector-specific fit (e.g., CPG, food, cosmetics, beverages).
• Need for AI-driven insights, ESG alignment, or advanced sourcing.

---

Best-Fit ProcureTech Solution Matches (Greatest to Least)

---

Summary by Segment

• Best aligned with enterprise S2P + AI leaders:
  Coupa, Ivalua, SAP Ariba, GEP, Jaggaer
• Best for autonomous negotiation and AI-driven sourcing:
  Pactum, Keelvar, Fairmarkit, Craft
• Best for ESG alignment:
  EcoVadis, DitchCarbon, Supplier.io
• Best for data analytics + supplier intelligence:
  Robobai, SpendHQ, Akirolabs, Mithra, Ignite
• Best for intake + workflow orchestration:
  Zip, Tonkean, ConvergentIS

MODEL 2

Approach

• High-Scoring Companies (85.4–100): Likely need comprehensive, AI-driven, end-to-end solutions (e.g., S2P Suites, Analytics) to enhance procurement efficiency and innovation, aligning with their advanced tech adoption.
• Mid-Tier Companies (61.9–82.7): May require balanced solutions, including e-Sourcing, Contract Management, or Supplier Data tools, to build on existing systems.
• Lower-Tier Companies (25.8–57.1): Likely need foundational or niche solutions (e.g., Sustainability, Payables) to address basic procurement challenges or specific sector needs.

Ranked Alignment of ProcureTech Providers

Below, each company is paired with the most suitable ProcureTech provider(s) from the map, ranked from greatest to least based on their “Score 2025.” The selection considers the provider’s focus and the company’s inferred procurement priorities.

1. L’Oréal SA (Score: 100)
   • Best Fit: SAP Ariba, Coupa
   • Rationale: As a cosmetics leader with a perfect score, L’Oréal likely needs robust S2P suites for end-to-end procurement and sustainability (e.g., SAP Ariba) and AI-driven analytics (e.g., Coupa) to support innovation and supply chain efficiency.
2. Coca-Cola Co. (Score: 90.8)
   • Best Fit: SAP Ariba, Ivalua
   • Rationale: Coca-Cola’s Microsoft partnership suggests a need for integrated S2P solutions (SAP Ariba) and scalable procurement platforms (Ivalua) for its complex beverage supply chain.
3. Unilever plc (Score: 89.7)
   • Best Fit: SAP Ariba, Jaggaer
   • Rationale: Unilever’s AI supply chain focus aligns with SAP Ariba’s comprehensive tools and Jaggaer’s sourcing expertise for household product diversity.
4. Procter & Gamble Co. (Score: 86.9)
   • Best Fit: Coupa, Ivalua
   • Rationale: P&G’s innovation in household products suits Coupa’s AI analytics and Ivalua’s end-to-end procurement capabilities.
5. Nestlé SA (Score: 85.4)
   • Best Fit: SAP Ariba, Zycus
   • Rationale: Nestlé’s food products and Azure analytics align with SAP Ariba’s integration and Zycus’s S2P suite for food safety and efficiency.
6. Colgate-Palmolive Co. (Score: 82.7)
   • Best Fit: Coupa, Jaggaer
   • Rationale: Colgate’s household focus benefits from Coupa’s analytics and Jaggaer’s sourcing for product innovation.
7. Beiersdorf AG (Score: 74.9)
   • Best Fit: Ivalua, Zycus
   • Rationale: Beiersdorf’s cosmetics sector suits Ivalua’s scalability and Zycus’s S2P for sustainable sourcing.
8. Diageo plc (Score: 69)
   • Best Fit: Jaggaer, Basware
   • Rationale: Diageo’s beverages need Jaggaer’s sourcing and Basware’s payables for cost management.
9. PepsiCo Inc. (Score: 65.6)
   • Best Fit: Ivalua, SpendHQ
   • Rationale: PepsiCo’s logistics benefit from Ivalua’s platform and SpendHQ’s spend analytics.
10. Monster Beverage Corp. (Score: 61.9)
    • Best Fit: Zycus, Fairmarkit
    • Rationale: Monster’s smaller scale suits Zycus’s S2P and Fairmarkit’s sourcing for agility.
11. Mondelez International Inc. (Score: 59.8)
    • Best Fit: Coupa, Tradeshift
    • Rationale: Mondelez’s food products align with Coupa’s analytics and Tradeshift’s supplier network.
12. Hershey Co. (Score: 57.1)
    • Best Fit: Zycus, Tungsten Network
    • Rationale: Hershey’s food focus fits Zycus’s S2P and Tungsten’s supplier finance.
13. Estée Lauder Companies Inc. (Score: 51.9)
    • Best Fit: Ivalua, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Estée Lauder’s cosmetics need Ivalua’s platform and EcoVadis’s sustainability focus.
14. Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Score: 48.2)
    • Best Fit: Basware, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Henkel’s household products suit Basware’s payables and EcoVadis’s sustainability.
15. Danone SA (Score: 43.5)
    • Best Fit: Tradeshift, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Danone’s food products align with Tradeshift’s network and EcoVadis’s sustainability.
16. Kimberly-Clark Corp. (Score: 40)
    • Best Fit: Basware, DitchCarbon
    • Rationale: Kimberly-Clark’s household focus fits Basware’s payables and DitchCarbon’s carbon tracking.
17. Brown-Forman Corp. (Score: 36.1)
    • Best Fit: Fairmarkit, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Brown-Forman’s beverages need Fairmarkit’s sourcing and EcoVadis’s sustainability.
18. Constellation Brands Inc. (Score: 33)
    • Best Fit: Tungsten Network, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Constellation’s beverages suit Tungsten’s finance and EcoVadis’s sustainability.
19. Anheuser-Busch InBev SA (Score: 29.1)
    • Best Fit: Tradeshift, DitchCarbon
    • Rationale: Anheuser-Busch’s scale fits Tradeshift’s network and DitchCarbon’s carbon focus.
20. Pernod Ricard SA (Score: 26.9)
    • Best Fit: Fairmarkit, EcoVadis
    • Rationale: Pernod Ricard’s beverages need Fairmarkit’s sourcing and EcoVadis’s sustainability.
21. Reckitt Benckiser Group plc (Score: 25.8)
    • Best Fit: Basware, DitchCarbon
    • Rationale: Reckitt’s low score suggests a need for Basware’s payables and DitchCarbon’s sustainability basics.

Rationale

• Top Companies: Require advanced S2P suites (SAP Ariba, Coupa, Ivalua) and analytics (Zycus, SpendHQ) to match their innovation and scale.
• Mid-Tier: Benefit from sourcing (Jaggaer, Fairmarkit) and contract tools (Basware, Tungsten) to build capacity.
• Lower-Tier: Need foundational (Tradeshift, Basware) or niche solutions (EcoVadis, DitchCarbon) for cost or sustainability focus.

MODEL 3

MODEL 4

(LEVEL 2 ASSESSMENT)

MAP 2 (DR. ELOUISE EPSTEIN)

MODEL 1

MODEL 2

Rationale

• Top Companies (Scores 85.4–100): Paired with advanced Data & Intelligence (SAP Ariba, Coupa) and Sourcing & Supplier Management (Ivalua, Jaggaer) to match their innovation and scale.
• Mid-Tier Companies (Scores 61.9–82.7): Aligned with Spend Analytics (Coupa, SpendHQ) and Sourcing (Zycus, Fairmarkit) to build capacity.
• Lower-Tier Companies (Scores 25.8–57.1): Matched with foundational Payment Solutions (Basware, Tungsten) or niche Risk Management (EcoVadis, DitchCarbon) for cost or sustainability focus.

MODEL 3

MODEL 4

(LEVEL 2 ASSESSMENT)

TODAY’S TAKEAWAY

Solution Maps without practitioner customer alignment (connection) are nice, but for all intents and purposes, they are siloed logos on a map.

With the Level 2 assessment, we will leverage RAM 2025’s self-learning algorithms to access Procurement Insights’ proprietary archives.

Here are example excerpts of the kind of market intelligence that Procurement Insights has captured over the years:

Through our proprietary archives, the RAM 2025 self-learning algorithms can analyze the progression of the Hershey digital strategy from 1997 to 2025 and provide a reasonably accurate estimate of the best course of action to take with current and anticipated future technologies (including which ProcureTech solution providers are the best with which to align). The projected accuracy rate is expected to fall between 80% and 95%, and it is expected to improve with each loopback.

30