<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!--Generated by Squarespace Site Server v5.5.4 (http://www.squarespace.com/) on Fri, 03 Jul 2009 09:45:02 GMT--><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="/universal/styles/feed.css"?><rss version="2.0"><channel><title>Procurement Leaders Network - Procurement Blog - Comments</title><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/</link><description></description><copyright>Sigaria Limited</copyright><language>en-GB</language><generator>Squarespace Site Server v5.5.4 (http://www.squarespace.com/)</generator><item><title>David Rae comments on Phrase wars: Vendors</title><author>David Rae</author><pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 08:58:23 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/19/phrase-wars-vendors.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4690376</guid><description><![CDATA[Thanks for that Roland - maybe we're missing something...]]></description></item><item><title>Roland V. Pedersen comments on Phrase wars: Vendors</title><author>Roland V. Pedersen</author><pubDate>Fri, 03 Jul 2009 08:49:42 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/19/phrase-wars-vendors.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4690281</guid><description><![CDATA[Aiming for the big kill in this interesting debate, I would like to draw your attention to the Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary, where the verb procure has a number of explanations/definitions but feast on the following: 2. ~ sb (for sb) (derog) find (prostitutes) for clients. It think it gives a nice perspective on our roles, images, and the title of the very informative magazine, ProcurementLeaders (!). Enjoy the season ;-)]]></description></item><item><title>Rakesh Shukla comments on One trillion dollars is a lot of cash to have tied up...</title><author>Rakesh Shukla</author><pubDate>Thu, 02 Jul 2009 14:00:37 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/16/one-trillion-dollars-is-a-lot-of-cash-to-have-tied-up.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4674828</guid><description><![CDATA[&quot;The problem is, of course, that by doing so there will always be a loser. Whether this is the customer, the buyer or the supplier.&quot;<br/><br/>How true.<br/><br/>In the financial supply chain, the classic tug o' war is buyers (AP) vs. sellers (AR) -- HOW FAST OR SLOW are invoices paid.<br/><br/>Discounts notwithstanding, buyers want to pay as late as possible while sellers want payment as early as possible.  Each party is trying to optimize working capital and when it comes to managing working capital - TIME IS MONEY.  The fact is that more businesses fail due to cash flow issues than due to lack of profits.<br/><br/>More here:<br/><br/><a rel="nofollow" href="http://blog.170systems.com/bid/7636/AP-vs-AR-A-Classic-Tug-O-War-over-Working-Capital">http://blog.170systems.com/bid/7636/AP-vs-AR-A-Classic-Tug-O-War-over-Working-Capital</a>]]></description></item><item><title>Sudripto De comments on Procurement and marketing - an unlikely match? Not at P&amp;G</title><author>Sudripto De</author><pubDate>Wed, 01 Jul 2009 16:44:26 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/5/21/procurement-and-marketing-an-unlikely-match-not-at-pg.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4670134</guid><description><![CDATA[It is so simple to say “apply procurement basics to marketing spend”. But if one does a simple Pareto of the marketing spend, the bulk is not in buying danglers, posters, billboards, backlits etc. The paper or fabric involved is a commodity which remain a miniscule of the spend contribution. It is the content, the presentation, the storyline, the endorser, the location, the television slot etc. which gets the larger share of the expense-pie. If the marketer believes that his wizardry on pruning costs will work here, then there is a Herculean task for him with no conclusive end. And many a times it would be counter-productive, as the “cut-cost syndrome” would lead to a sub-standard show, severely impacting the brand. <br/><br/>Having said that it is a no-brainer that agency costs can be curtailed in these trying times of stagnating demand, by eliminating wastes. Let us take the case of the Zoozoo ads of Vodafone, with these “live-animated” characters as endorsers, which you would love to watch in the breaks of the popular Twenty-twenty cricketing extravaganza. Even though the agency spent a fortune on costumes, props and the locale of Cape Town, they have eliminated wastes by virtually preventing any post-production work. (you would call it a rework in general parlance). And Vodafone had prepared budget accordingly. <br/><br/>For organizations with whopping marketing spends, there is a possibility of a volume game which comes into play, during marketing purchases. And our procurement experts who are the best in business would be the right fit. But this does not make procurement &quot;cut-coct syndrome&quot; the panacea of all marketing spend management. <br/><br/>The link below gives the clear prerequisites for any organization planning to jump into the marketing-procurement JV bandwagon. <br/><br/><a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.infosysblogs.com/supply-chain/2009/07/beware_do_not_mix_procurement.html#more">http://www.infosysblogs.com/supply-chain/2009/07/beware_do_not_mix_procurement.html#more</a><br/><br/>My experience both as a procurement practitioner and a stint in marketing &amp; sales, gives the clear difference in focus among these functional disciplines. Even though it is a “good-to-be” position, but necessary care and mastery in certain aspects of marketing spend analysis is required.]]></description></item><item><title>Gunilla Huddleston comments on Marketing procurement - does WPP news mean we've cracked it?</title><author>Gunilla Huddleston</author><pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:47:59 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/29/marketing-procurement-does-wpp-news-mean-weve-cracked-it.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4649768</guid><description><![CDATA[In the survey we conducted with the network members in 2008 (see the survey link at <a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.procurementleaders.com/news/network-research/hh-survey/),">http://www.procurementleaders.com/news/network-research/hh-survey/),</a>  the concept and creative category was identified by 64% as having the most potential for savings with procurement's involvement.<br/><br/>The economic downturn has no doubt escalated the involvement of procurement and it will be fascinating to see what best practices and measurements for success not only in procurement performance but also marketing planning will follow as a result.]]></description></item><item><title>John McPherson comments on Supply chain finance - future concerns...</title><author>John McPherson</author><pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2009 13:20:00 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/11/supply-chain-finance-future-concerns.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4617460</guid><description><![CDATA[Multi-bank SCF is probably the Holy Grail of SCF programs. In North America at least, the majority of SCF programs are being driven by the FI community and they are highly unlikey to offer multi-bank SCF solutions. Why would a Citibank, or a BofA deliver the capability to connect to their competition?  <br/><br/>So there are two ways in which a multi-bank SCF solution can be created; either directly by the large corporate ( and we all know the challenges there- mindshare, knowledge, technology, etc).  The second, and potentially more interesting scenario, would be the same sort of program as the Bank of England is looking at delivering.  A nationalized SCF.<br/><br/>Do we know if there are other countries looking into a nationalized SCF scenario?]]></description></item><item><title>Andrew Daley comments on The Big Debate: If sales earn commission, so should procurement</title><author>Andrew Daley</author><pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:20:14 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/10/the-big-debate-if-sales-earn-commission-so-should-procuremen.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4601267</guid><description><![CDATA[From a recruiters perspective this is a very interesting question.<br/><br/>In over 10 years of recruiting procurement specialists I have never had a role where there is a bonus directly linked to savings achieved.  There have been many variations but nothing really close to the classic commission structure available for sales people.<br/><br/>However, I have had many many job seekers suggest that if they were to get such a bonus structure, they would seriously consider a lower basic salary such was there confidence that they would be better off overall.<br/><br/>I think it could be a very popular move amongst the profession but it would take a significant cultural change in many companies for it to happen.<br/><br/>Andrew Daley, Edbury Daley]]></description></item><item><title>David Rae comments on Phrase wars: Vendors</title><author>David Rae</author><pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:22:17 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/19/phrase-wars-vendors.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4601051</guid><description><![CDATA[Thanks for the comments. The word itself, I guess, isn't the issue - it's more the image it portrays to the scores/hundreds or thousands of buyers who act on a companies behalf. <br/><br/>If they see the relationship as one sided as a vendor-client relationship then the benefits of an equal partnership (innovation, flexibility, collaborative improvement...) will be completely lost. <br/><br/>It can be a subtle change of behaviour or corporate philosophy but one that makes a huge difference.]]></description></item><item><title>T. Applegate comments on Phrase wars: Vendors</title><author>T. Applegate</author><pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:33:46 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/19/phrase-wars-vendors.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4601005</guid><description><![CDATA[I believe the term vendor is an old school term that conjures up a vision of a hot dog cart with the barker selling!  I also believe that an organization that uses the term is probably a bit old school and had not fully developed in business maturity as it relates to Procurement and Supply Chain.  I do not think you can mandate the change, just influence it, or look for a company that understands the benefits of Supply Chain a bit better!]]></description></item><item><title>Herb Shields comments on Phrase wars: Vendors</title><author>Herb Shields</author><pubDate>Mon, 22 Jun 2009 22:25:30 +0000</pubDate><link>http://blog.procurementleaders.com/procurement-blog/2009/6/19/phrase-wars-vendors.html#comments</link><guid isPermaLink="false">24789:786461:comment/4591030</guid><description><![CDATA[I agree that the term vendor creates a poorer image than the term &quot;supplier&quot;.  I encourage clients and my Purchasing students to try and use the word suppliers.  Especially when you talk about supplier relationship management, the term vendor seems out of place.]]></description></item></channel></rss>