An Academic's Take on Optimization and Competition
They're some blogs that I should add to my "everyday" reading list, but I usually only get to a few times a week. And one of those -- which will soon be on my official bookmarks -- is CombineNotes. Paul Martyn, CombineNote's blogger-in-chief, has had some great posts of late. And even if they're self-trumpeting, I think the pragmatic thought leadership that well-argued vendors blogs can generate is great for everyone. In fact, my only beef with CombineNotes is that there's not more of it! Like Tim Minahan and David Bush, two other vendor bloggers, it would be great to see Paul move to a daily publication schedule (even if most of what he writes under this scenario is just commentary, not analysis).
A recent CombineNotes entry that is worth spending a few minutes reading features an interview with MIT’s and Harvard’s Professor David Parkes. Parkes is a computer scientist, engineer and fellow who has taken an interest in optimization and strategic sourcing. When questioned about the importance of market feedback in optimization -- rather than a "sealed" environment which is more typical of optimization approaches from other vendors -- Parkes notes that "Feedback to suppliers, be it in the form of target prices, information about whether (and on what) a supplier is leading, or information about the volume currently awarded, helps a supplier refine their bid across rounds of an event. Bid refinement might add additional coverage or make a supplier's bid more competitive for some piece of the spend. Perhaps a supplier will be better able to embrace business rules or preferences of the buyer, or make improved use of expressive bidding."
Parkes supports the notion of competitive feedback and related market mechanisms (unlike some academics, who think the anti-lean-anti-Christ himself is responsible for the creation of reverse auctions): "Through feedback, the bid taker (buyer in reverse auctions) can best leverage the power of competition by allowing suppliers to get a better measure of the market and understand what they must do to win an event. Through feedback, the bid taker can help to reduce mistaken, or 'irrationally exuberant' bids from suppliers and drive more realistic expectations about where the market will clear. Through feedback, the bid taker can help suppliers make decisions on how to best use their own competitive advantage and supply characteristics to win business."
- Jason Busch
A recent CombineNotes entry that is worth spending a few minutes reading features an interview with MIT’s and Harvard’s Professor David Parkes. Parkes is a computer scientist, engineer and fellow who has taken an interest in optimization and strategic sourcing. When questioned about the importance of market feedback in optimization -- rather than a "sealed" environment which is more typical of optimization approaches from other vendors -- Parkes notes that "Feedback to suppliers, be it in the form of target prices, information about whether (and on what) a supplier is leading, or information about the volume currently awarded, helps a supplier refine their bid across rounds of an event. Bid refinement might add additional coverage or make a supplier's bid more competitive for some piece of the spend. Perhaps a supplier will be better able to embrace business rules or preferences of the buyer, or make improved use of expressive bidding."
Parkes supports the notion of competitive feedback and related market mechanisms (unlike some academics, who think the anti-lean-anti-Christ himself is responsible for the creation of reverse auctions): "Through feedback, the bid taker (buyer in reverse auctions) can best leverage the power of competition by allowing suppliers to get a better measure of the market and understand what they must do to win an event. Through feedback, the bid taker can help to reduce mistaken, or 'irrationally exuberant' bids from suppliers and drive more realistic expectations about where the market will clear. Through feedback, the bid taker can help suppliers make decisions on how to best use their own competitive advantage and supply characteristics to win business."
- Jason Busch
















(link: http://www.combinenotes.com/SyndicationService.asm...), but I think you're setting yourself up for disappointment if you check daily.
Of course, it could all be my fault. :-( Everytime Paul rushes out a post that I feel is not the absolute best that I believe he can do, I end up picking on him in my never-ending CombineNet series. I apologize.
http://blog.sourcinginnovation.com/2006/11/02/comb...
http://blog.sourcinginnovation.com/2007/01/15/comb...
http://blog.sourcinginnovation.com/2007/01/17/comb...
etc.
I knew you would respond to this, but it took you longer (at least an hour longer) than I was betting on. On a more serious note, I think Paul has a grounded business-driven perspective on optimization. You know more about optimization than anyone else I've known over the years, but the fact remains that CombineNet has done a tremendous job at commercializing what was an esoteric and limited area. And in my view, CombineNotes explains much of their learnings in a distilled manner. I'd love to see more of it, but unlike you, I'm not disappointed in what I read.
In a decade of covering the technology in this sector, I've learned one thing. And that's sometimes less can be more -- especially when explaining topics to busy executives who give two figs about the technology and want the Cliff notes.
- Jason
My point is that I don't think we'll ever see daily posts from Paul, and I don't want people to get their hopes up. That being said, it has been in my RSS feed since Paul started posting, and I intend to keep it there.
It's too bad Paul hasn't taken up your offer on open weekend postings - because his posts need exposure. That's one of the reasons I keep picking on CombineNet. They're one of the few companies in the world with real optimization capabilities in sourcing - but I feel, even though they've survived a decade, no one really understands what they do.
I am looking forward to continuing our series on different feedback mechanisms (some optimization based, some not) AND Dr. George Nemhauser has provided me with some interesting material for upcoming blog entries.
Stay tuned, more fun with optimization coming...