Building a Relationship and Managing to Scope Are Not Mutually Exclusive - AARM
discussion of this question from the perspective of commercial trans actions in the United rhetorical device for exploring the nature of the relationship between trust and that trust and contract are mutually exclusive?a view which implies that contract is, at .. which existed (if it did) between Carnegie management and the. supplier management. 1. Establish mutually beneficial relationships with key suppliers. 1 4. Case study: SRM enhancements at a Global Consumer Business Company. 5 . non‑mutually exclusive ways to get started: starting internally by. Advances in interactive technology first gave us the CRM ("customer relationship management") revolution, allowing businesses to track the needs and desires.
Effective SRM requires not only institutionalizing new ways of collaborating with key suppliers, but also actively dismantling existing policies and practices that can impede collaboration and limit the potential value that can be derived from key supplier relationships.
Organizational structure[ edit ] While there is no one correct model for deploying SRM at an organizational level, there are sets of structural elements that are relevant in most contexts: A formal SRM team or office at the corporate level. The purpose of such a group is to facilitate and coordinate SRM activities across functions and business units.
SRM is inherently cross-functional, and requires a good combination of commercial, technical and interpersonal skills. Such individuals often sit within the business unit that interacts most frequently with that supplier, or may be filled by a category manager in the procurement function. This role can be a full-time, dedicated positions, although relationship management responsibilities may be part of broader roles depending on the complexity and importance of the supplier relationship see Supplier Segmentation.
An executive sponsor and, for complex, strategic supplier relationships, a cross-functional steering committee. Effective governance should comprise not only designation of senior executive sponsors at both customer and supplier and dedicated relationship managers, but also a face-off model connecting personnel in engineering, procurement, operations, quality and logistics with their supplier counterparts; a regular cadence of operational and strategic planning and review meetings; and well-defined escalation procedures to ensure speedy resolution of problems or conflicts at the appropriate organizational level.
Further, suppliers can be segmented by the degree of risk to which the realization of that value is subject. Executive-to-executive meetings Strategic business planning meetings, where relationship leaders and technical experts meet to discuss joint opportunities, potential roadblocks to collaboration, activities and resources required, and share strategies and relevant market trends.
Joint business planning meetings are often accompanied by a clear process to capture supplier ideas and innovations, direct them to relevant stakeholders, and ensure that they are evaluated for commercial suitability, and developed and implemented if they are deemed commercially viable. Some perspectives At its best, management consulting can be a noble calling. It's a high-minded endeavor, requiring enormous amounts of both talent and integrity as well as a strong sense of mission and urgency.
At its worst, it is an embarrassment and a scandal. To be honest, there have been some spectacular failures in consulting projects. Whatever your view, the emergence of supply chain management as the business focus of the new century has attracted consultants of every imaginable variety.
Some have been at it for years, evolving along with the field. Others are new to the game, and they seem to think that adding supply chain management to their list of service offerings is enough to get onto the playing field. The difference between consultants and advisers There was a time when great care was taken to distinguish management consulting services from management advisory services. The distinction has faded with time. But the implication is that advisers provide feedback and informed opinion, and that consultants take a more active role.
Consultants make decisions, acting on behalf of the client. They design and implement processes, facilities, and systems—in short, they do the hands-on work. Consultancies offer a diverse collection of different business models as well as approaches to problem solving. Let's begin by trying to sort out some of the fundamental types. The mega-firms This category is made up of huge organizations with thousands of people.
They may be partnerships; they may be corporations. They are increasingly multinational. Many of the mega-consultants have their origins in the giant public accounting firms.
Several years ago, each of the so-called "Big Eight" U. They generally attempted to be all things to all clients, and they would undertake consulting in any channel that held the promise of growth or profit. As they created multinational accounting conglomerates, their consultancies likewise added the appearance of international capability, which tended to be more promise than practice. Today, after mergers, acquisitions, and divestitures, their former consulting entities are barely recognizable.
Accenture spun off from Arthur Andersen, which itself disappeared, thanks to Enron. Deloitte Consulting, product of yet another merger and acquisition, retains its corporate identity but is legally a separate LLC entity.
The overall business model consists of a hierarchical, pyramidal organization, dependent on sales generation by a relatively small number of rainmakers to provide billable hours for large numbers of analysts and managers.
Thorough methodology and process development is supposed to allow relatively inexperienced consultants to tackle complex problems in consistent ways. This model has been likened to bringing in busloads of bright kids, who have been both indoctrinated into the corporate culture and provided with workbooks full of process descriptions and solutions.
They must then hope to come across a client who is asking the right questions. Few of these firms were willing to bring in more seasoned, more experienced, more independent-minded, and more expensive old pros. It's not so much an age issue as a business model issue, abetted by a cultural conformity. Some independent consultancies have become mega-firms. Some of the early leaders, such as Booz Allen Hamilton, continue to prosper, while some others have fallen on hard times or have been sold off.
Big and important, but not huge A handful of consulting firms concentrated on strategy but took differing directions. Some tried their hands at tactical implementations, and they remain successful in addressing operational issues with strategic implications.
Others focused on taking equity positions and managing corporate operations. Several entities focused on performance standards, productivity, and cost reduction. A few pioneers survive, but just barely.
Their business model tended to be based on the engagement of contractors, who are off the payroll as soon as they've completed their assignments. The permanent cadre comprises successful salespeople along with a handful of top executives.
There were dozens of such firms, the majority of which have disap peared. One of the biggest was United Research, which has dropped off the map. But a few have survived. For example, the engineered standards and method ology-based consultancy H.
Maynard remains an active player in the world of work measurement. Some consultancies focused on such operations as manufacturing and logistics in the early days. One leader in the movement survived an unfortunate acquisition, and has rebounded as a broad-based global consultancy. Others, including some specializing in physical distribution, have disappeared. Small and mid-sized firms The small and mid-sized consultancies tend to be built upon limited but deep functional experience.
They come and go, but some have remarkable staying power. Too numerous to cite here, they can be local, national, or global in coverage. They may be franchises, or they may be real companies.
They may affiliate with "stringers" in several locations, handing out business cards to anyone with a suit and a laptop.
Or they may grow more organically. Some achieve greater functional breadth through working partnerships with other consultancies and achieve geographic coverage with multinational alliances.
They may follow the hierarchical organization model, or they may be flatter partnerships with more hands-on consulting involvement from senior partners.
- Supplier relationship management
- Relationships for supply chain success
The supply chain field has spawned many of these operations, and many of them deliver cost-effective and sustainable results. Some are highly specialized, while others offer a broad range of supply chain strategy, planning, and execution services. Sole practitioners Next come the sole practitioners. The range of services they deliver is staggering; they cover everything from freight-bill audits to supply chain strategies.
The solos run the gamut from internationally renowned specialists to prematurely retired managers to out-of-work inebriates. These sub-categories are not mutually exclusive. Unlike in aviation, no lessons are required, and there is no meaningful certification and licensing process. The only barrier to entry in the consulting marketplace is a failure of nerve. There are many, many really excellent one-man and one-woman shops. For the right kind of problem, they can often offer an on-target solution at the right price.
The best of them recognize their limitations, and they are brilliant at enlisting other specialists to work on solving the fundamental problems. The worst of them believe their own press clippings. Because of their egos, they hesitate to bring in people smarter than themselves to help deliver the right answers. The recently unemployed complicate the picture considerably. They typically have no training and little real experience in being a consultant. They generally have no idea of how to price services or of what's involved in scoping and executing analyses and solution development.
They often don't understand the subtleties of communications, client relationships, and selling.
Exclusive Relationship Sample Clauses
The academics Many respected academics practice consulting on either an institutional or a private basis. Often their consulting includes a research component directed at a technical solution to a specific problem. Sometimes they are able to assemble study and research teams of graduate and undergraduate students to observe and assess operational problems and practices.
Other times they might conduct and analyze industry surveys. Sometimes they are called as expert witnesses in litigation. There are times when the right approach to a problem is to build a team with academic and consulting components.
That way there's an effective blend of both esoteric and practical solutions. Turnaround specialists and litigation support Turnaround management specialists are not really consulting firms, although they employ many consulting techniques in their cost-slashing blitzkriegs.
Exclusive Relationship Sample Clauses
Two well-known leaders in the field have senior management with extensive backgrounds in cost management consulting. They also manage either organic or affiliated investment partnerships. Aside from competency, what's important in a consulting relationship are "chemistry," style, and comfort. Technically speaking, litigation support isn't really management consulting either. But many very senior consultants deliver litigation support. Usually this service consists of providing expert witness input for a case, which could take the form of testimony at trial, depositions, or written summaries of observations and conclusions.
Other roles, which may get a little nearer to consulting, include topical education for attorneys, collaboration on case strategy, deposition preparation for either attorneys or deponents, and offers of proof development.
It is quite common for opposing experts in a case to be well-acquainted with one another and with their likely expert positions. The real pros are those who turn down a lucrative expert role when they are not persuaded of the merits of the case or when a negotiated settlement would be both achievable and an obviously better solution for all parties. Conflicts of interest For some reason, there's a peculiar notion out there that all business services ought to be considered consulting.
In our view, that's ludicrous. Organizations whose revenue streams are derived from performing services—whether warehousing or running IT departments—aren't really consultants, either. Ross Perot's billions, ventured into operational consulting through acquisition. The firm Accenture presents an interesting meld of service delivery and consulting. Real estate companies that do network design make some people feel uncomfortable, and parcel shipping companies that want to design supply chains raise some nagging questions of independence.
LSPs are often guilty of delivering what they call consulting solutions as part of their business activities. We have nothing against any of them.
But at some point the solutions they propose are likely to lean toward their mainstream service offerings, aren't they? Although there have been some instances of vendors actually charging money to recommend their own products, it is possible for a service provider to dispense honest, independent advice.
Does the "consultant" describe and offer up competitive alternatives to its own service? Why do we need consultants? There are lots of reasons to make use of consultants. How do they apply to supply chain management specifically? Supply chain management is not unique; it can benefit from the tactics and techniques applied across all types of business operations.
But there are some specific examples within the supply chain community that illustrate areas where honest-to-goodness management consultants can add genuine value: The trick is to find the right consultant for the right problem. How do you select a consultant? What's important in a consulting relationship? Aside from competency, the issues are "chemistry," style, and comfort.
Typically, you are going to be working with the consultant s for some time. If there's a style mismatch, tolerance wears thin very quickly. If your organization is culturally welded to a megafirm approach, it's usually pointless to open the bidding to a lot of solo practitioners. On the other hand, if the organization is confident and secure and wants to cut through the fog to get the answer, the solo practitioner can be marvelously effective in terms of time and cost.
If the problem has some size or complexity, the small or mid-sized firm, or a team of solo practitioners, can be the right way to go. Competence can be evaluated from references and from experience. Experience means work that the people who are actually on the job have actually done, hands-on, not an endless list of organizational qualifications. There are a few additional points. As you evaluate the possibilities, look for a good listener, one who's more interested in you and your business than in his or her own credentials.
Take that a step farther.