Supplier Relationship Management Study: Summary of Findings

Supplier Relationship Management Study: Summary of Findings By Ashley Hatcher and Jonathan Hughes The Vantage Partners Supplier Relationship Management Study is a global research study conducted by Vantage Partners from 2013-2016 to analyze supplier relationship management best practices, the value delivered by SRM programs, and the ROI associated with specific SRM practices. In the first in a series of reports comprising the results of the study, we highlight initial results from this research, focusing specifically on the investments companies have made in SRM, overall value generated, and the prevalence of SRM best practices at responding companies. Subsequent reports will provide in-depth analysis of the ROI associated with specific SRM practices. Business Case for SRM SRM Value and Benefits (to date) 35% reported that their companies SRM programs yield considerable value, whereas only 19% reported that their companies programs delivered little to no value. The top 1 of performers (in terms of value achieved through SRM) reported an average of US $304MM, inclusive of savings and other strategic and financial benefits, was achieved through their SRM programs in the prior year. Characterization of results achieved through SRM Please characterize the results achieved through your company s SRM program. 22% 13% 2 19% 26% Little or no value Modest, but difficult to measure, value Modest measurable value Considerable, but difficult to measure, value Considerable measurable value 1

Average total value achieved through respondents SRM program over the past year Please estimate, to the best of your ability, (in US dollars) the approximate total value (inclusive of savings and other financial and strategic benefits) achieved over the past year through your company's SRM program. Top 2-1 in terms of opportunity $179M Top 1% in terms of opportunity $1.7B Middle 7 in terms of opportunity $5.4M Lowest 2 in terms of opportunity $0M Strategic benefits of SRM Degree to which companies believe they get the best people, best pricing, and best ideas from their suppliers We consistently get the best people, best pricing, and best ideas from our key suppliers, thereby gaining an advantage relative to our competitors. 10 5 39% 61% 2

Extent to which companies believe suppliers are open and proactive about problems Our suppliers consistently come to us at the earliest sign of difficulty (e.g., production problems, financial difficulties in their business, shortages or quality issues in their own supply chain) so that we can jointly work to avoid or mitigate the costs of any problems. 10 5 42% 58% Degree to which key suppliers are perceived as fully transparent about strategies, cost structures, etc. Our key suppliers are fully transparent with us about their strategies, business models, cost structures, and pricing. 10 5 53% 47% 3

SRM investments The study data indicates that many companies are making investments in SRM and plan to continue doing so for the next several years. However, for most companies, investments in SRM to date have been low, relative to other investments, and relative to the potential benefits that could be realized through more effective supplier relationship management. On average, responding companies invested $17.3M in SRM during the past year, and an estimated $60.8M over time. Characterization of the level of investment made in SRM Please characterize the level of investment (e.g., dedicated headcount, staff time, software tools, etc.) your company has made in SRM. 13% 43% 42% Little to no investment Modest investment Considerable investment Average estimated total investment made in SRM: $60.1M Average estimated investment in SRM in the past year: $17.3M Allocation of the total investment (both money, and time and effort) in SRM Please indicate the approximate allocation of your company s total investment (both money, and time and effort) in SRM. Increasing e.g., new headcount; changing roles & responsibilities for staff the number of people & amount of time spent on SRM Defining & utilizing formal SRM governance mechanisms & business processes incl. joint strategic planning, performance reviews, etc. Individual SRM skill development training, coaching for staff who have significant interations, of any kind, with suppliers Software tools for SRM inclusive of development, configuration, implementation, and license fees To-date Ideal allocation over the next three years Other 1 2 3 4 5 Percentage of investment in SRM 4

Investments in SRM still fall short of other investments in procurement and supply chain effectiveness and capabilities (only 14% report SRM as one of their top areas of investment). Characterization of the level of investment made in SRM, compared to other investments Please compare the level of investment your company has made in SRM relative to other investments in procurement and supply chain effectiveness and capabilities. 13% 46% 41% One of our lowest areas of investment Neither at the top, nor the bottom of our investment areas somewhere in the middle One of our top areas of investment Investment of time, effort, and/or capital in helping key suppliers improve and grow Our company invests time, effort and/or capital in helping our key suppliers improve and grow their business, in order to increase the value our company realizes from them. 10 5 47% 53% 5

Potential (as yet unrealized) SRM Value Value currently realized from/with suppliers as a percentage of total potential value Consider the total potential value (financial and strategic) your company could realize in a hypothetical world of ideal collaboration with important suppliers. What percentage of that total potential value would you estimate your company currently realizes? 10 8 6 4 2 Average: 44% 0-26-5 51-76-10 Average potential value currently realized Estimated unrealized savings possible through ideal collaboration with suppliers In a hypothetical world of ideal collaboration with important suppliers, please estimate the approximate value (in US dollars) of additional savings (versus total value as per the preceding question) you believe your company could achieve beyond savings your company is currently capturing. 10 8 6 4 2 $1-999K $1M-99M $100M-1B More than $1B Potential additional savings 6

Degree of change at our company required to fully capture currently unrealized value with/from suppliers To what extent would policies, procedures, attitudes, and behaviors at our company need to change to take full advantage of this opportunity? 10 8 6 4 2 Little to no change Moderate change Major change Total transformation SRM Benchmarking SRM Importance and Focus The study results highlight an overwhelming belief that SRM will be important or very important to a company s success over the next 3-5 years, suggesting that companies should carefully consider increasing investments in SRM in the near future. Predicted importance of SRM over the next 3 5 years Please indicate the extent to which you believe SRM will be important to your company s success over the next 3 5 years. 3% 7 27% Of little or no importance important Very important 7

Objectives for SRM over the next 3 5 years Please indicate which of the following objectives will be a significant focus for your company s SRM program over the next 3-5 years. Cost savings through joint, collaborative efforts with suppliers Reduction in supply chain risk Enhancing our own organizational productivity through better supplier service, support and innovation Incremental revenue growth through joint innovation with suppliers (e.g., technology, products, business processes) Other 2 4 6 8 10 Self-reported SRM Program Breadth and Maturity While 8 of respondents indicate that their company has some form of SRM program, fewer than 1 of these individuals rate their company s approach to SRM as mature and highly effective. Existence of a formal, enterprise-wide, supplier relationship management program Our company has a formal, enterprise-wide, supplier relationship management program. 10 5 4 6 8

Description of SRM program Please describe your company s SRM (Supplier Relationship Management) program. 46% 8% 22% 24% We don t have a formal SRM program Not very systematic or effective Evolving and somewhat effective Mature and highly effective Scope of SRM program Please indicate the scope and focus of your company s SRM program. 2 29% 51% Primarily focused on our most strategic suppliers (~top 1 or fewer) Focused on a significant portion of suppliers (significantly more than top 1), but not on transactional or commodity suppliers. Focused on most or all suppliers (though level of SRM investment and nature of activities vary by type of supplier) 9

How companies believe their suppliers perceive working with them Our company is perceived by our suppliers as easier to do business with, and as more collaborative, than our competitors. 10 5 39% 61% SRM Best Practices The results of this study and our work with clients have shown that SRM can deliver significant value. Which investments will yield the highest returns varies by company and depends on multiple factors, including a company s individual business model and strategy, as well as its current level of SRM maturity. In the section that follows, we provide benchmarking data on the prevalence of SRM best practices across the companies in our data set. We also evaluated the extent to which these practices are aligned with category strategies, and overall business strategy, as well as a company s organization structure, culture, and people. The figure below outlines one framework for understanding the links between various SRM best practices. Enterprise business strategy and objectives Category strategies SRM Program Governance Supplier segmentation Individual Relationship Processes Individual supplier governance Cross-supplier collaboration Measurement of SRM program value Joint strategic planning Supplier negotiations and contracting Supplier performance measurement and management Organization, culture and people 10

Integration of SRM with corporate objectives and overall business strategy Alignment of sourcing and SRM strategies and policies with our go-to-market strategies Our company s sourcing and supplier relationship management strategies and policies are fully aligned with our company s go-to-market strategy. 10 5 44% 56% Active involvement of suppliers in research, design, and development of new products/solutions Our company actively involves suppliers in research, design, and development of new products/solutions. 10 5 36% 64% 11

Integration of programs on corporate social responsibility with SRM Our company s programs on corporate social responsibility (including local community development) and sustainability are fully integrated with our supplier relationship management program. 10 5 54% 46% Alignment of SRM with category strategies Alignment of strategic sourcing, category management, contracting management, and SRM Strategic sourcing, category management, contracting and contract management, and supplier relationship management at our company are fully aligned and integrated. 10 5 53% 47% 12

SRM Program Governance Tracking and measuring the total financial and strategic value delivered by suppliers Our company tracks and measures the total financial and strategic value delivered by our SRM program. 10 5 55% 45% Supplier segmentation Our company systematically segments suppliers based on the degree and specific nature of opportunities (potential for new value) and risk (potential for loss of value) with each. 100 5 35% 65% 13

Definition of supplier segmentation implications Different implications for negotiation strategy, contracts, relationship governance, and policies and procedures for supplier engagement are clearly defined and distinguished for each segment of our supply base. 10 5 41% 59% Degree to which SRM includes multi-supplier collaboration Our SRM efforts are not only focused on individual relationships with suppliers, but also include systematic engagement with multiple suppliers to jointly pursue opportunities that require, or could benefit from, collaboration amongst multiple parties in the supply/value chain. 10 5 54% 46% 14

Individual Relationship Processes Use of dedicated supplier relationship managers for important suppliers Our company has dedicated supplier relationship managers for important suppliers. These individuals spend a minimum of one third of their time managing one or more supplier relationships. 10 5 48% 52% Use of designated executive sponsors for important suppliers Our company has dedicated executive sponsors for important suppliers. Executive sponsors engage in regular strategic conversations with counterparts at suppliers, and ensure resources and support are made available for joint initiatives with suppliers, and ensure collaborative resolution of escalated issues or conflicts. 10 5 48% 52% 15

Use of a two-way performance management process with suppliers Our company has a two-way performance management process in which we: (1) provide feedback to our suppliers on their performance; (2) solicit feedback from our suppliers on our performance as a customer and business partner; (3) jointly diagnose areas of underperformance and develop improvement plans. 10 5 46% 54% Use of supplier scorecards Our company has scorecards in place for all suppliers with which we regularly conduct business. These scorecards provide comprehensive measurement of supplier performance, and of total financial and strategic value delivered by key suppliers. 10 5 45% 55% 16

Existence of multi-year strategic plans with important suppliers Our company has multi-year strategic plans in place with our most important suppliers. These plans are jointly developed, and enable us to do things like align technology road-maps and go-to-market strategies, and make long-term investments in our business relationship. 10 5 52% 48% Alignment of SRM programs with the Strategic Account Management programs at key suppliers Our supplier relationship management program is fully aligned and formally integrated with the Strategic Account Management (SAM) programs at key suppliers. 10 5 63% 37% 17

Use of apples to oranges comparisons when evaluating competitive suppliers Our company regularly and effectively conducts apples to oranges comparisons when evaluating competitive suppliers proposals thereby enabling us to take maximum advantage of suppliers unique expertise and capabilities. 10 5 36% 64% Organization, Culture and People Perceptions of the role of procurement The role of the procurement/supply chain organization at our company is to advance enterprise strategy and competitive advantage by leveraging supplier assets, resources and capabilities (versus focusing more narrowly on sourcing and purchasing goods and services). 10 5 42% 58% 18

Perceptions of procurement by business unit leaders and end users Business unit leaders and end users at our company see the procurement (and/or supply chain) organization at our company as a strategic business partner. 10 5 41% 59% Perceptions of suppliers as partners who can help improve performance and increase value Suppliers are seen, throughout our company, as business partners who can help us gain and maintain competitive advantage, and differentiate ourselves in the marketplace (versus simply as vendors from which we purchase goods or services). 10 5 41% 59% 19

Commitment to the long-term success of key suppliers Our company is committed to the long-term success of our key suppliers; we focus on reducing costs through joint efforts that preserve, or even enhance, their profitability. 10 5 41% 59% Degree to which procurement incentives reward a focus on maximizing total value from suppliers Incentives within our procurement organization reward people for achieving the lowest cost of ownership and maximizing total value from suppliers (versus getting the lowest price). 10 5 58% 42% 20

Degree to which individuals consistently treat suppliers with a high degree of professionalism and respect Individuals across our company consistently treat suppliers with the same degree of professionalism and respect with which we treat internal colleagues. 10 5 36% 64% 21

About the Research Methodology The full dataset includes responses from 956 respondents representing more than 500 companies. (Not all respondents disclose their company, so an exact count of participating companies is not possible.) Data was collected between 2013 and 2015. 811 responses were collected via a survey where individuals were asked 27 Likert-scale questions on SRM practices, as well as eight multiple choice and eight open-ended questions about the specific kinds of value SRM generates, how they are measuring that value, and what challenges and barriers companies are encountering as they seek to enhance supplier relationship management effectiveness. An additional 145 responses were collected via the Vantage Partners Online SRM Maturity assessment, which included identical questions as the primary survey. In addition, follow-up interviews were conducted with a cross section of survey respondents, and in-depth case study analysis conducted with multiple companies. Respondents, by region 53% 21% 15% 3% 5% 3% Respondents, by revenue 7% 24% $50B+ $10B - $50B Note: 457 respondents did not provide their companies revenue data. 37% 7% $1B - $10B $500M - $1B < $500M 22

Respondents, by industry Manufacturing Life Sciences and Healthcare Finance and Insurance Mining, Quarrying, and Oil & Gas Extraction Information and Telecommunications Electronics and Semiconductor Equipment Utilities Consumer Packaged Goods Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services Other Services (except Public Admin) Transportation and Warehousing Chemical Manufacturing Retail Trade Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Educational Services Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation Wholesale Trade Accommodation and Food Services Construction Public Administration Management of Companies and Enterprises Real Estate, Rental and Leasing 5% 1 15% 2 3 Respondents, by job title 2% 3% 23% 35% 31% 6% Chief Executive EVP/SVP VP/Director Senior Manager Manager Individual Contributor Note: 25 respondents did not provide their job titles 23

About Vantage Partners Vantage Partners works with clients to help them achieve world-class procurement and supply chain management performance through strategic advice, organizational transformation, hands-on advisory support, and design and delivery of training and coaching programs. To learn more about Vantage Partners or to access our online library of research and white papers, please visit www.vantagepartners.com.

Brighton Landing West 10 Guest Street Boston, MA USA 02135 T +1 617 904 7800 F +1 617 904 7850 www.vantagepartners.com