spend matters spend matters About this site
Advertise with Spend Matters
Advertise with Spend Matters
 

July 04, 2009

 

"In-sourcing" Outsourcing

While I'm not sure if I agree with all of the logic in this Supply Management article, I nonetheless found the argument creative. In the piece, Rich Simmonds, a consultant, is quoted as suggesting that procurement organizations "match the outsourcers by adopting their best practice to become an internal outsourcer." According to Simmonds, the advantage of this approach is that "removes some of the perceived disadvantages of outsourcing, such as lack of flexibility and reliance on a third party". The article goes onto argue that to get the most from this structure, the internal outsourcer should be a "separate legal entity with incentive to drive profits ... they should report to the board, have service and operating level agreements and build long-term relationships with customers."

After reading the short piece, I must commend Simmonds for such creativity, but in the practical world, I think his concepts would not work as envisioned. I doubt, for example, that most procurement organizations could obtain the level of year-over-year savings on indirect spend that the top outsourcers can achieve, especially given third-party category expertise and leverage. But for direct materials, I think his argument could hold true, especially for companies like Alcoa with significant category scale in aluminum and the internal expertise of both procurement and trading operations. For example, if Alcoa were able to create an internal "outsourced group" with accountability for castings spend, they could in theory provide better results than any outsourcer and could spin-out these capabilities to the external market. For procurement leaders looking to capitalize on their organization's IP, the other option is to invest in internally developed technology and then spin-out these capabilities to the external marketplace. In fact, this is the exact story behind Akoya which spun out of Caterpillar's procurement operation.

- Jason Busch

Related Blog Entries

Comments
With regard to the Alcoa suggestion, a procurement group utilized in this manner should absolutely expect to be spun off.

It appears that is what happened with Akoya and they were prepared to be their own independent company. But that wasn't the case with Bayer.

Bayer corporate did exactly as you suggested - invested in leveraging their internal expertise to provide procurement services to external companies. But its not difficult to recognize that procurement services aren't exactly synonymous with Bayer's brand.

With companies wanting to focus on core competencies and divesting the rest, being in a procurement group who is being partially utilized for serving other companies is a very tenuous place to be. So when the axe fell from Bayer's management, the group simply disbanded.

The lesson is: be prepared to be independent if your procurement group takes that form of profit center.

Good topic, Jason!
# Posted By Charles Dominick, SPSM | 7/31/06 6:39 PM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us   © 2004-2009 Spend Matters, LP All rights reserved