spendmatters
 

February 08, 2012

 

LIVE Dispatch: Ariba's Third Transformation

It's my opinion that Ariba is about to embark on its third transformation. And this one will prove no less challenging -- though perhaps significantly longer-lived -- than the first two. But if Ariba gets this one right, they'll have a huge Blue Ocean ahead of them loaded with opportunity rather than competition. And in the process, they'll transform not only their face to the market, but how customers will ultimately work with and use their capabilities. What is this third transformation I speak of? Well, let's label it as the "Networked Platform Ariba" placeholder for now (even though the actual name is a bit irrelevant, it's as good as any that I can think of).

But before we get to the new era of an Ariba Networked Platform, I'll first touch on the two earlier transformations which the provider went through. The first was its move to emerge as a suite-driven Spend Management provider out of its legacy cocoon as a focused eProcurement and marketplace player driven more by hype than business processes or customer value. The success of this transformation should not go un-noted in the annals of enterprise software history. Many other vendors of the time like Commerce One failed to make this transition (and one could argue that even i2 became largely irrelevant outside of a dozen or two custom solution-driven accounts in the post-marketplace era).

Ariba's second transformation -- which is not yet complete -- was the move from selling traditional licensed software and day- and blended-rate driven services to a subscription-based, On Demand business model. As noted, this transformation is a work in progress, but appears to largely be progressing forward. I base this on the fact that the bottom has not fallen out of Ariba from a revenues perspective (everything is relative and even though Ariba's revenue has declined, it's not been a death-blow of a drop). Granted, the transition has not been as smooth as it might have been, but Ariba is still standing (which is not something you can say about many other vendors who grew up in the same era).

Ariba's third transformation -- which I've already hinted at before -- places a networked business model at the center of the strategy rather than at the periphery. Granted, this transformation will take years to pull off. And at times, I'm guessing that you'll still see more of the "old Ariba" going head-to-head against SAP, Oracle, Emptoris, Ketera, Procuri and others in the Spend Management space rather than the new, new Ariba. But in the end -- maybe five years from now, if they're still independent -- I'm guessing Ariba's traditional applications business will be largely irrelevant from a core perspective, especially as they embrace new revenue opportunities such as supply chain finance and network-driven RFQs. In this new era, the applications and services become merely a hook to get customers into the Ariba ecosystem where the real value -- and revenue -- will be created.

One could easily imagine second generation "applications" -- either provided by Ariba or partners within the ecosystem -- that could be created and developed out of a networked-based business model. Consider the following possibilities:

- A bottoms-up, Google-esque network and index driven approach to data gathering, cleansing and classification, not to mention automated analysis (Pierre Mitchell should get the original credit for coming up with this idea, BTW).

- Next level supply chain finance (i.e., the selling of capacity and the trading of risk and the components of contracts); I've also suggested that MFG.com get into this business as well.

- A network-based risk predictive risk management solution (think eBay meets Open Ratings meets the extended supply chain).

- Fully or partially outsourced supplier enablement and management (what ADP did for payroll, Ariba could do for complete SRM).

- Network- and content-driven consulting and services with a focus based on such areas as benchmarking and analysis.

- Intelligent matching services for suppliers, employees, expertise, etc.

- Community owned and shared content (e.g., RFQ templates) with a subscription business model.

- Online learning, training and education (think something like an Ariba flavor of the University of Phoenix meeting -- and beating -- ISM with both academic and peer-based certifications and credentialing).

- Recruiting and talent management (why not partner or work with Linked-in to build a specific procurement and supply chain talent exchange?)

- Trading services and enablement for outside third parties who want to come in and either use aggregate network information and trends to make investment decisions or to take positions or make investments within the network (i.e., in individual payables / receivables, in commodities, etc.)

These ideas are just a start. But one thing's for sure. And that's the Ariba of tomorrow -- if it is to succeed and stay independent -- will look very different from the solution provider of today. Let's hope they pay more than lip service to the massive opportunity at hand.

- Jason Busch


Commodity Edge Conference

TweetBacks
Comments
SpendFool's Gravatar By George, I think he's got it! Right on Jason. Funny how you're putting this out there and all we get from A.T. Kearney et al on the Future of Procurement is watered down platitudes on increased supply risk management, supplier collaboration, supply chain design, CSR support, etc. The problem is that Ariba has so much potential, but it's run by an accountant, which was good 3 years ago, but...

I was talking to a well-known CPO and he mentioned that he was talking to said executive and said... "You need to focus on PROCUREMENT!" (which the executive said that's what he thought he was doing), and what he meant was that there was so much more value for Ariba to generate and capture beyond selling $x per seat per year. Sell the network intelligence. Work with Private equity firms for a cut. Create a trading company. Partner with Google. Set up a subsidiary to do contingency-based sourcing. Form a GPO. Whatever. The firm is indeed some need of vision and thought leadership. Ariba's core competency has been it's nimbleness to adapt, and if that's gone, well, the money will sit on the table until someone else picks it up. If rises to the challenge, then, to quote Bruce Richardson, quoting the late Ken Sharma, "All things are possible".
Keep up the great work. You're the pacesetter in blog land.
# Posted By SpendFool | 5/31/07 4:40 PM
Was there...'s Gravatar Too bad they no longer have the people to pull off something like this. It's a nice idea but sounds like a lot of work. Today, Ariba has become more of a tool that lets several select execs get wealthy on $0 shares. All the good folks are gone and you need those people.
# Posted By Was there... | 5/31/07 6:28 PM
SpendFool's Gravatar Yep, couldn't agree more. There's a lot of that 'golden rule' stuff going around these days. It's sad really.
# Posted By SpendFool | 6/1/07 5:19 AM
Was there too...'s Gravatar It's a bit of an exaggeration to say that all of the good folks are gone. There are plenty of good folks left. The real problem is there is alot of bloat at Ariba now, and a good idea can take 18-24 months of "talking" before anybody gets to any doing. So Jason's target of 5 years sounds about right. It will be a couple years before they start working on this.
# Posted By Was there too... | 6/1/07 6:02 AM
Jason Busch's Gravatar Fool et al,

Great ideas ... the GPO one is one that they should have done a while ago with the mid-market and the network. Heck, buy corporate united (which gives them some revenue and a base to build from).

The proverbial sky is the limit for Ariba, but they've got to start acting -- not just thinking -- outside of the giant box of that Sunnyvale campus.

Regarding executive talent, Solomon, Crandell and Shecterle all have excellent and creative ideas for where to take the place (I've talked to each individually in the past couple of months). But turning the tanker takes time. Let's hope -- to borrow another overused metaphor -- they don't run aground by taking too long to do it.
# Posted By Jason Busch | 6/1/07 6:43 AM
A friend of the space's Gravatar Jason,

Certainly a provocative topic as suggested by the number of comments already. This is a great strategy white board session, but at the same time, the idea of creating a powerful set of network services is not new. The challenge continues to be around creating a critical mass of TRANSACTING buyers and suppliers. Therefore, for the proviers to succeed on behalf of our constituency (buyers and SUPPLIERS), we need to come together and drive true efficiency across multiple networks/platforms that are supporting both content and transactions. Think about it - Suppliers are required to use multiple methods/connections to transact commerce with their customers. Buyers and suppliers each manage much of the same basic content, yet on their respective platforms. Some serious inefficiency.

All the things you mentioned make sense and can be realized through a robust network, but I really think we will need to work together to get that done.
# Posted By A friend of the space | 6/1/07 7:06 AM
Was there too...'s Gravatar "Think about it - Suppliers are required to use multiple methods/connections to transact commerce with their customers."

This is clearly the biggest challenge for the network approach. Even if a supplier joins the largest network, they will likely also be required to join numerous other smaller networks. If getting suppliers to join all these networks was something they wanted to do, would it require so many "supplier enablement services" to get it done?
# Posted By Was there too... | 6/1/07 7:50 AM
Eric Strovink's Gravatar This is the second time in just a few days that I've seen the idea of "automated analysis" pop up on this blog. Now that I know it's Pierre's idea, that makes it more fun to criticize (joke).

To "automated analysis," let's be honest and admit that in most cases this is a pipe dream. Even PRG-Schultz and their competitors don't do fully automated AP duplicates review, and if there's any analysis that should be automatable, it's that. At the end of the day, the real work has to be done by humans who know what they're doing. If automation alone could solve the problem, PRGX would be out of business.

As far as "automated analysis" on the back of a spend cube is concerned, there's been a lot of noise about this from various sources -- but my first question is, "on what cube?" If you believe that only an AP cube is useful, you're looking at just the tip of the iceberg (there are dozens of commodity-specific cubes to build). And, if you believe that AP cube structure is static, you're missing a whole universe of useful analyses (we strongly believe that useful spend analysis requires real-time changes to the dataset schema, making "automated" reports inapplicable within the first five minutes).

Finally, I can't help noticing that a lot of the ideas listed in this post are hauntingly similar to ideas that were floating around back at the beginning of the B2B bubble. Sure, Ariba could be a source of benchmark data. Sure, they could trade risk information. Sure, they could become a one-stop outsourcing shop for Procurement.

But I actually think Ariba could run into trouble if they try to broaden the proposition too far. Do we really believe that Ariba's benchmarking data would be better than, say, Denali's? How much trust should be placed in a single vendor? From a sourcing perspective, a single vendor soup-to-nuts Procurement solution just doesn't look optimal.
# Posted By Eric Strovink | 6/1/07 8:16 AM
vert watcher's Gravatar I dont think ARIBA will make it another 2 years without their shareholders forcing them to sell and be a complimentary produt. Their lack of revenue growth and decreasing margins will force this hand.
# Posted By vert watcher | 6/1/07 10:14 AM
Pierre Mitchell's Gravatar Someone sent me this post and I figured I'd come out of seclusion (especially after a few beers on a Friday night). Having read through it, there's indeed a lot of thoughtful content, except maybe from Erik (please take no offense Erik).
I'm not sure how Erik's stuff about automated analysis is relevant to the main discussion though. It's a bit like Gary Hare saying all the problems will be solved by real-time agents. Just kidding Gary! Don't get me wrong, the Vinimaya agents and Zycus' real-time auto-classification are key technologies to solving the "guided buying" problem. And, there's nothing wrong with having a vision. People poo-poo'd shop floor optimization engines 15 years ago, and they quickly became standard fare. Same will happen with sourcing optimization. Inference engines and web-agents seemed far-out, but are also becoming commonplace. This industry needs more innovation and less crumudegony-ness (is that a word?). B2B is actually happening, and many of the important ideas are being implemented, they just take a while to implement (aka a lot slower then the VCs hoped for).
I do think it's a nice idea to combine different combine analytics with workflow/alerts and/or programming to let the systems do the work for more repetitive analysis. And I also don't think anyone is saying that an A/P cube is the path to enlightenment. The really interesting analytics will be forward looking and fed by content outside the firewall. And in terms of, say, pricing/discount data, I'd take Ariba over Denali data anyday. And yes, all of this is indeed powered by people. It certainly doesn't have to be from one company, and I think the 'spend fool' rant was less about one vendors' "solution" than a set of industry capabilities that are developing too slowly. This is what I think Jason's main thrust was and I too very much enjoy his posts. Great job Jason.
# Posted By Pierre Mitchell | 6/1/07 6:47 PM
Clark Kent's Gravatar Careful. I'm not sure, but I think commenting to your own secret alter-ego, might be a sign of 'Dissociative identity disorder'. Either that or your a superhero. :)
# Posted By Clark Kent | 6/2/07 7:25 AM
Charles Dominick, SPSM's Gravatar To me, the suggested new services sound like entering a dozen "red oceans" rather than finding one "blue ocean."

A multiple red ocean strategy did pay off for Wal-Mart. Would it pay off for Ariba, though?

I know that most commenters here are marketers, but for those readers that aren't, you can find an explanation of the "ocean" concept here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Ocean
# Posted By Charles Dominick, SPSM | 6/5/07 10:05 AM
About Us | Advertising and Sponsorships | Advisory Services | Contact Us    © 2004-2012 Azul Partners, Inc. and Spend Matters. All Rights Reserved.