I have a friend and occasional wise sage of business who says we provide Customer Service that is too good. This got me to thinking, is it possible to provide customer service that is too good?? Can it be that by constantly trying to go "above and beyond" for our customers we are not helping them to help themselves??
I know that for me personally I value customer service very highly. I am one of those people that will not tip if the service in a restaurant has not been as I believe it should be. I get infuriated when left hanging by some outsourced call centre, whatever the location, or I get to talk to some disembodied voice that I can tell does not give a damn about my account. And I get even more annoyed if I think we have let a customer down. But is this going too far?
In our job we get the "privilege" of working with some of the largest names in IT and IT consultancy and it always astounds us that the level of service they provide to their customers is sometimes shockingly bad. But by dint of the fact that they are a "Big Name" they get away with it. Don't get me wrong, we make mistakes occasionally as we are human, but we always have an in depth enquiry afterwards to try to ensure it does not happen again. But these larger organisations don't seem to have the same fear of poor customer service that we do. I can tell you absolute horror stories of call centres and voice-mail systems.
If their server goes down they get round to fixing it, in time. They then tell everybody else to rush to resend the messages they didn't receive or lost. The other day I was called to a meeting by a customer. The meeting was to explain what we were doing about all the server outages that we have experienced in the last two weeks, not our outages but the big expensive consultancy firms outages. This big consultancy firm was offering no explanation or apology, just a warning that our customers messages were delayed and they should stop this happening. But it was the big consultancy firms servers that were the problem!!! They should know how to stop the problem, fix your damn servers. But we are the ones being asked what we are doing to stop the outages. Go figure.
But I still think that you cannot provide customer service that is too good. Yes I try to ensure we over specify servers and back-ups and comms. But I still fret that we have not got enough, that we might let a customer down. We try to ensure we won't, put systems in to try to prevent it, but I still worry.
And I am glad I do, and we do as a company, because I would like to think that if I was a customer I would be happy to, metaphorically, pay that 20% gratuity for good service. Because I would like to think that our customers are treated as I would like to be treated. It cannot be wrong to strive to be the best, to try to do the best for someone paying you to do a job.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Sunday, March 16, 2008
The Complexities of EIPP or EDI make it prime for Outsourcing
Last week I had a review of our mapping process with our lead data mapper. Ken is a man of over 20 years experience in the EDI and data mapping world. He has contributed to international EDI standards and even written a standard for the Paper industry. He knows what he is talking about. He is also a strange being who delights in the minutiae of data mapping and he enjoys nothing better than solving the problems inherent in getting one computer system to talk to another.
We were looking, as we do on a regular basis, at how we could improve the mapping process, automate more and therefore offer a better service for our customers, which of course leads to better profit. One thing we homed in on was the number of different mappings we have created for our customers and their partners.
Having looked at that number, we then looked at the number of standards available that users either are or could use. The numbers are staggering. In EDI in the UK and Europe we mainly see Tradacoms and EDIFACT. Of course there are various versions of each and in particular with EDIFACT one persons EDIFACT D96a order is not the same as another persons.
We then looked at XML, once touted as the great hope for simplifying EDI. Over 500 standards, and a lot of the standards are varied by the end user.
We then looked at ways we send and receive messages, 10 basic methods (AS2, EDI VAN, FTP, email etc) and most FTPs have slightly different requirements (e.g. do we delete the file when download or archive it) and HTTPS is different for each user we implement for.
Now we actually enjoy all this variety but we then thought about users, not our users, but users that were trying to implement EDI themselves. Don't get me wrong, we do not do anything our users could not do for themselves BUT the question is at what cost. Given the variety of message standards and comms methods around your average customer that either buys or supplies goods to and from various parties will need at least one, more likely two specialist to handle any significant EDI initiative.
If they have an IT department the skills may be present but here's the question. If you business is buying, selling, manufacturing or distributing widgets do you want your IT team spending their time trying to integrate with one of your trading partners or do you want them to concentrate on adding value to your core business activities? Integrated EDI will add to your bottom line, but not if it is diverting you and your team from your main business.
This is where the value of outsourced EDI can be found. Firstly does EDI make sense for your business. We do a simple activity based costing exercise with some of our customers to identify when EDI will add to their bottom line. Once this is done we can then look at the costs of "Do it yourself" against outsourced EDI. For any significant EDI program, outsourcing wins easily.
A friend of mine in the pub on Friday asked me why I don't do DIY at home. My answer was simple, I know what I am good at, and DIY isn't one of those things. When I did try DIY in the past I would find I would have to buy tools and materials, most of which I would never use again and then I would have to pay someone else to correct what I have done anyway, so there is no saving. The same should apply in business, do what you are good at, and leave the nasty world of EDI to someone that enjoys it, it will save you money.
We were looking, as we do on a regular basis, at how we could improve the mapping process, automate more and therefore offer a better service for our customers, which of course leads to better profit. One thing we homed in on was the number of different mappings we have created for our customers and their partners.
Having looked at that number, we then looked at the number of standards available that users either are or could use. The numbers are staggering. In EDI in the UK and Europe we mainly see Tradacoms and EDIFACT. Of course there are various versions of each and in particular with EDIFACT one persons EDIFACT D96a order is not the same as another persons.
We then looked at XML, once touted as the great hope for simplifying EDI. Over 500 standards, and a lot of the standards are varied by the end user.
We then looked at ways we send and receive messages, 10 basic methods (AS2, EDI VAN, FTP, email etc) and most FTPs have slightly different requirements (e.g. do we delete the file when download or archive it) and HTTPS is different for each user we implement for.
Now we actually enjoy all this variety but we then thought about users, not our users, but users that were trying to implement EDI themselves. Don't get me wrong, we do not do anything our users could not do for themselves BUT the question is at what cost. Given the variety of message standards and comms methods around your average customer that either buys or supplies goods to and from various parties will need at least one, more likely two specialist to handle any significant EDI initiative.
If they have an IT department the skills may be present but here's the question. If you business is buying, selling, manufacturing or distributing widgets do you want your IT team spending their time trying to integrate with one of your trading partners or do you want them to concentrate on adding value to your core business activities? Integrated EDI will add to your bottom line, but not if it is diverting you and your team from your main business.
This is where the value of outsourced EDI can be found. Firstly does EDI make sense for your business. We do a simple activity based costing exercise with some of our customers to identify when EDI will add to their bottom line. Once this is done we can then look at the costs of "Do it yourself" against outsourced EDI. For any significant EDI program, outsourcing wins easily.
A friend of mine in the pub on Friday asked me why I don't do DIY at home. My answer was simple, I know what I am good at, and DIY isn't one of those things. When I did try DIY in the past I would find I would have to buy tools and materials, most of which I would never use again and then I would have to pay someone else to correct what I have done anyway, so there is no saving. The same should apply in business, do what you are good at, and leave the nasty world of EDI to someone that enjoys it, it will save you money.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
The way to profit in EIPP is Systems and Quality
I was reading the postings of another blogger the other day, regarding EIPP. Quick note; For most people EIPP is a re-branding of the most basic of EDI, the supplier sends an invoice. We're great in IT at making up new acronyms or names for old processes in the hope of selling more.
Anyway back to the subject of the post. The blogger in question was bemoaning the fact that whilst there is a lot of interest and "new" players in EIPP, few if any make a profit. One company in question has a turnover of £3.5 Million but loses approximately £7 million per annum. Its P&L account reserve is -£27 million. Another has turnover of £1 Million and loses of £3 million, P&L reserve of -£23 million.
Now here I show my limited knowledge of the practice of Venture Capital and high finance. Both these organisations are backed by VC's and so they are NOT insolvent. But... when are the investors going to get their money back? Or to put it more accurately when are the VC's going to get a return on their investment of other peoples money? I make it that break even is 200% of current turnover, assuming costs do not rise with increased turnover. To get the £27 million pounds back at current growth rate you are looking at a minimum of 10 years. Given that the turnover of the smaller company above went down slightly last year it and that costs increased ahead of turnover at the larger company it could take longer. This is almost "Dot Com" optimism.
So much for high finance.
I think there is a different approach that can lead to a profitably growing company. It may grow slower but note the word profit. That way is to concentrate of quality and systems. Quality because that leads to better systems requiring less resource to manage the processes. Quality because it leads to fewer remedial actions, which always cost more. Get it right first time and it's always cheaper. Quality because any business must concentrate of delighting it's customers. Delighted customers lead to higher retention rates and easier new business sales because of customer referral. My other point is systems. Quality systems. If you can systematise a process rather than having to add more support staff for each new customer then you gain a much bigger return on the investment and, sorry to say, but the fewer humans involved in a process the lower the error rate so the higher quality.
The only downside to the quality and systems approach is that you cannot make a quick "land grab" for a market. But it a lot less stressful for you and your trading partners.
Here's an interesting question for you. If a new customer came to you and asked for 30 days credit, with their company finances in the state described above, would you extend them credit? If not then why would you put important business relationships between you and your business partners in their hands.
Far better to put it in the hands of a company making a profit and dedicated to a quality implementation. Preferably one with a recognised accreditation for quality. Business relationships are hard won and even something as seemingly simple as sending invoices to your customers or receiving invoices from your suppliers deservers to be handled in a quality manor that does not put the relationship at risk.
Anyway back to the subject of the post. The blogger in question was bemoaning the fact that whilst there is a lot of interest and "new" players in EIPP, few if any make a profit. One company in question has a turnover of £3.5 Million but loses approximately £7 million per annum. Its P&L account reserve is -£27 million. Another has turnover of £1 Million and loses of £3 million, P&L reserve of -£23 million.
Now here I show my limited knowledge of the practice of Venture Capital and high finance. Both these organisations are backed by VC's and so they are NOT insolvent. But... when are the investors going to get their money back? Or to put it more accurately when are the VC's going to get a return on their investment of other peoples money? I make it that break even is 200% of current turnover, assuming costs do not rise with increased turnover. To get the £27 million pounds back at current growth rate you are looking at a minimum of 10 years. Given that the turnover of the smaller company above went down slightly last year it and that costs increased ahead of turnover at the larger company it could take longer. This is almost "Dot Com" optimism.
So much for high finance.
I think there is a different approach that can lead to a profitably growing company. It may grow slower but note the word profit. That way is to concentrate of quality and systems. Quality because that leads to better systems requiring less resource to manage the processes. Quality because it leads to fewer remedial actions, which always cost more. Get it right first time and it's always cheaper. Quality because any business must concentrate of delighting it's customers. Delighted customers lead to higher retention rates and easier new business sales because of customer referral. My other point is systems. Quality systems. If you can systematise a process rather than having to add more support staff for each new customer then you gain a much bigger return on the investment and, sorry to say, but the fewer humans involved in a process the lower the error rate so the higher quality.
The only downside to the quality and systems approach is that you cannot make a quick "land grab" for a market. But it a lot less stressful for you and your trading partners.
Here's an interesting question for you. If a new customer came to you and asked for 30 days credit, with their company finances in the state described above, would you extend them credit? If not then why would you put important business relationships between you and your business partners in their hands.
Far better to put it in the hands of a company making a profit and dedicated to a quality implementation. Preferably one with a recognised accreditation for quality. Business relationships are hard won and even something as seemingly simple as sending invoices to your customers or receiving invoices from your suppliers deservers to be handled in a quality manor that does not put the relationship at risk.
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
How hard can it be to integrate two systems?
Earlier this week I was working with a particular mapping for a client. They required to send invoices to one of their customers and we were already processing the same invoices for this client from a different (Older) system. The idea was that the client was migrating from their old system to the brand new shiny system.
Not a problem one might think, as a newer system should have better abilities to trade electronically than a system well over 10 years old. We live in the modern, integrated world.
Well it turned out not to be quite that simple. First we had an email to our mapping project system to say that the new system could not produce a particular piece of data, rather it provided a piece of data that was incorrect. We found a work around for this using our facility to treat message data as look-up data and so we were able to agree how we could process the data and produce the correct information for the recipient. All a standard part of the service.
We had the software vendors file specification and we had sample data so, on we go. Then we stopped. A quick check by the mapping engine highlighted that the sample file did not match the specification. Close but no cigar.
So we requested, and were sent, two files contains not one but two specifications. We were also sent two sample files. So we now have a quandary. If we choose, we have a 50% chance of getting the wrong specification. No problem, quick chat with the client and they point to the latest specification. Couple of hours later and we have a mapping of the input data, a mapping of the output data and we can test to make sure that the documents match business rules, add up etc.
Guess what, they don't. Well if everything worked first time there would be no need for testing. We changed some of the mapping, checked the arithmetic of the data and it just did not make sense, did not have tax totals and so was basically totally invalid.
After further discussion with the customer we find the root cause of the problem. You will remember we received two specifications and two sample files. It turns out that one of the sample files, sent by the software house, had nothing to do with the final specification and between us we had contrived to choose the wrong sample. Such is Sods Law.
This is the work of data mappers, and this is not a whinge about wrong specification etc. The work of data mapping involves detailed data analysis. Yes we at least have tools that speed that process up significantly but never the less it is detailed work and we love it. After completing the mapping, in less than 8 hours including dodgy files and specification, we had a laugh with the customer, a promise of a pint owed and a happy customer.
But here's the thing. Without the tools that we have built the data analysis and mapping process would take days, in fact we have heard competitors quote large sums of money for such work, if they do not already know the file standard, and I can understand why. Some people believe there cannot be much to sending a file of invoices from one company to another, but the devil is in the detail and that is why EDI or EIPP is becoming more and more a Software as a Service arena. Without the specialist skills and tools it is the Total Cost of Ownership of EDI or EIPP, the costs of skilled data analysts, mapping tools, testing teams and support, that more and more Financial Directors are saying is too expensive to do in house. The sending and receiving of physical files is easy, but the set-up of the variety of communication processes is not. What a lot of companies are now saying is get somebody else to cope with the messy bit, we just want to send and receive one file format and use one communications method.
After all, if you distribute building materials do you want to spend your money on making the distribution more efficient and selling more OR staffing up the IT team to have data analysts, EDI experts, XML experts, communications experts, oh and have them also run you IT systems as well?
Not a problem one might think, as a newer system should have better abilities to trade electronically than a system well over 10 years old. We live in the modern, integrated world.
Well it turned out not to be quite that simple. First we had an email to our mapping project system to say that the new system could not produce a particular piece of data, rather it provided a piece of data that was incorrect. We found a work around for this using our facility to treat message data as look-up data and so we were able to agree how we could process the data and produce the correct information for the recipient. All a standard part of the service.
We had the software vendors file specification and we had sample data so, on we go. Then we stopped. A quick check by the mapping engine highlighted that the sample file did not match the specification. Close but no cigar.
So we requested, and were sent, two files contains not one but two specifications. We were also sent two sample files. So we now have a quandary. If we choose, we have a 50% chance of getting the wrong specification. No problem, quick chat with the client and they point to the latest specification. Couple of hours later and we have a mapping of the input data, a mapping of the output data and we can test to make sure that the documents match business rules, add up etc.
Guess what, they don't. Well if everything worked first time there would be no need for testing. We changed some of the mapping, checked the arithmetic of the data and it just did not make sense, did not have tax totals and so was basically totally invalid.
After further discussion with the customer we find the root cause of the problem. You will remember we received two specifications and two sample files. It turns out that one of the sample files, sent by the software house, had nothing to do with the final specification and between us we had contrived to choose the wrong sample. Such is Sods Law.
This is the work of data mappers, and this is not a whinge about wrong specification etc. The work of data mapping involves detailed data analysis. Yes we at least have tools that speed that process up significantly but never the less it is detailed work and we love it. After completing the mapping, in less than 8 hours including dodgy files and specification, we had a laugh with the customer, a promise of a pint owed and a happy customer.
But here's the thing. Without the tools that we have built the data analysis and mapping process would take days, in fact we have heard competitors quote large sums of money for such work, if they do not already know the file standard, and I can understand why. Some people believe there cannot be much to sending a file of invoices from one company to another, but the devil is in the detail and that is why EDI or EIPP is becoming more and more a Software as a Service arena. Without the specialist skills and tools it is the Total Cost of Ownership of EDI or EIPP, the costs of skilled data analysts, mapping tools, testing teams and support, that more and more Financial Directors are saying is too expensive to do in house. The sending and receiving of physical files is easy, but the set-up of the variety of communication processes is not. What a lot of companies are now saying is get somebody else to cope with the messy bit, we just want to send and receive one file format and use one communications method.
After all, if you distribute building materials do you want to spend your money on making the distribution more efficient and selling more OR staffing up the IT team to have data analysts, EDI experts, XML experts, communications experts, oh and have them also run you IT systems as well?
Saturday, February 02, 2008
ISO 9001 can improve your business profitability
We have recently been going through the process of achieving ISO 9000 accreditation for our Software as a Service EDI/EIPP offering. It has been a fascinating process. I had always believed that one of the secrets of a successful outsourcing or SaaS offering is to reduce the number of support calls to a minimum. I know this is a statement of the blindingly obvious but you would be amazed the tales we hear from customers moving to our service from other offerings.
When we started out on the route to ISO 9001 accreditation I thought it would have some benefit in terms of seeing where we were making mistakes, correcting them and of course there is the marketing benefit, but mainly in making sure that we continued to provide a quality service for our customers. I believe we are the only SaaS EDI or EIPP provider to be accredited for ISO 9001.
But the more I, with the help of our ISO 9001 consultant, got in to the depths of understanding ISO 9001 it became clear that whilst ISO 9001 does highlight the quality of whatever systems are being measured, the major benefit is the application of the continuous improvement principle.
We have been accredited for our data mapping processes and our systems and support processes for the provision of EDI data mapping, translation and transportation. In my next blog I will discuss the application of process to data mapping and translation, but today I want to concentrate on support.
When I look at a lot of our competitors, especially in the SaaS EDI or EIPP space, I notice that whilst the are bigger than us in terms of turnover, they are typically making huge losses. Some have accumulated losses of over 26 million and yet they still have turnover that is substantially less than their costs.
Looking at it even closer you can see that whilst they increase turnover they are increasing staff, and staff costs, much faster. To me this leads to the conclusion that whatever systems and support they have are not efficient enough. And that is one of the major benefits of the ISO9001 process.
What we have found is that every time we have have a support call/system issue the ISO process of continuous improvement has helped us to eradicate that error/issue for the future. It does not mean that we never get errors but analysis shows use that over 85% of all support calls/issue we received are outside of our service. They are either errors with the data sent to us or the comms of the sender or the recipient.
By concentrating on the ISO 9001 continuous improvement process we are able to keep our support costs to a minimum, we are able to handle millions of transactions per annum with a much smaller team than any of our competitors and we are able to keep improving the experience for our customers and their trading partners.
ISO 9001 does not make you infallible, but it helps you to learn from each mistake and improve your business and profitability.
I did have a cheeky thought though, should I go to the bigger players making all the losses and offer that we do the product, service and support for them, there will of course be an element of cost for them ;-). We could then show them how to make money instead of burning it. Just a thought....
When we started out on the route to ISO 9001 accreditation I thought it would have some benefit in terms of seeing where we were making mistakes, correcting them and of course there is the marketing benefit, but mainly in making sure that we continued to provide a quality service for our customers. I believe we are the only SaaS EDI or EIPP provider to be accredited for ISO 9001.
But the more I, with the help of our ISO 9001 consultant, got in to the depths of understanding ISO 9001 it became clear that whilst ISO 9001 does highlight the quality of whatever systems are being measured, the major benefit is the application of the continuous improvement principle.
We have been accredited for our data mapping processes and our systems and support processes for the provision of EDI data mapping, translation and transportation. In my next blog I will discuss the application of process to data mapping and translation, but today I want to concentrate on support.
When I look at a lot of our competitors, especially in the SaaS EDI or EIPP space, I notice that whilst the are bigger than us in terms of turnover, they are typically making huge losses. Some have accumulated losses of over 26 million and yet they still have turnover that is substantially less than their costs.
Looking at it even closer you can see that whilst they increase turnover they are increasing staff, and staff costs, much faster. To me this leads to the conclusion that whatever systems and support they have are not efficient enough. And that is one of the major benefits of the ISO9001 process.
What we have found is that every time we have have a support call/system issue the ISO process of continuous improvement has helped us to eradicate that error/issue for the future. It does not mean that we never get errors but analysis shows use that over 85% of all support calls/issue we received are outside of our service. They are either errors with the data sent to us or the comms of the sender or the recipient.
By concentrating on the ISO 9001 continuous improvement process we are able to keep our support costs to a minimum, we are able to handle millions of transactions per annum with a much smaller team than any of our competitors and we are able to keep improving the experience for our customers and their trading partners.
ISO 9001 does not make you infallible, but it helps you to learn from each mistake and improve your business and profitability.
I did have a cheeky thought though, should I go to the bigger players making all the losses and offer that we do the product, service and support for them, there will of course be an element of cost for them ;-). We could then show them how to make money instead of burning it. Just a thought....
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Free EDI Podcasts
A while ago we had the idea of a series of short documents that would show people the technology behind EDI and the benefits EDI could bring to their organisations.
Now in the age of You Tube and podcasts we are launching a series of podcasts about EDI. They are not designed to go in to the intricacies of EDI technology but rather provide a Free introduction to EDI, where it came from, how it is used and the benefits that can be accrued for a business using it.
These podcasts will not turn you in to an EDI expert, rather we hope we will give you an insight in to how EDI can and is being used to bring benefits to a large number of companies world wide.
To hear the first podcast please click here. The Podcasts are FREE and you are not asked for any personal details to listen to them. Alternatively please click on this link for an RSS feed for the podcasts.
Now in the age of You Tube and podcasts we are launching a series of podcasts about EDI. They are not designed to go in to the intricacies of EDI technology but rather provide a Free introduction to EDI, where it came from, how it is used and the benefits that can be accrued for a business using it.
These podcasts will not turn you in to an EDI expert, rather we hope we will give you an insight in to how EDI can and is being used to bring benefits to a large number of companies world wide.
To hear the first podcast please click here. The Podcasts are FREE and you are not asked for any personal details to listen to them. Alternatively please click on this link for an RSS feed for the podcasts.
SaaS adds more value to EDI
With more and more off our customers we are happily finding ways to add value to the normal EDI processing that has been experienced with older, on-site solutions.
Firstly new acronyms are appearing, for example EIPP (Electronic Invoice Presentation and Payment). Sceptics might call this EDI invoices and BACS. I shall explore the differences in a future post.
For a lot of our users, up until about 18 months ago, traditional EDI with a hint of XML for spice, was just fine. But we have started to notice a sea change in the requirements for EDI. Obviously there is the move towards AS2 and other methods of sending and receiving data. We have been using AS2 for our customers for nearly 4 years but in the past 18 months the adoption rate has accelerated markedly. This is a great move, it reduces the costs of EDI and adds value by removing the latency built in to most EDI processes by the nature of the timed connections.
We have also seen a move to increased data requirements. This has proved difficult for some users as it was not always easy, as I am sure you will realise, to modify their ERP system to process the additional data. However they often had the additional data in "Non EDI" data, for example catalogues, or even the incoming documents such as Purchase Orders.
Because of the nature of our SaaS solution, being based around the concept that all data has value whatever the format, plus the fact that the solution is based on a repository we have been able to take these disparate data sources and merge them to create enhanced EDI messages that the recipient requires. This would be a real struggle with traditional on-site systems.
Over the next few months we intend to expand the use of such solutions to both enhance customer data, add functionality to the user experience of the service and to provide translations of product codes, units of measure, delivery points and many other requirements that are becoming the norm for the modern EDI message exchange.
By adding more value to EDI messages we believe that adoption will accelerate through the next 10 years.
Firstly new acronyms are appearing, for example EIPP (Electronic Invoice Presentation and Payment). Sceptics might call this EDI invoices and BACS. I shall explore the differences in a future post.
For a lot of our users, up until about 18 months ago, traditional EDI with a hint of XML for spice, was just fine. But we have started to notice a sea change in the requirements for EDI. Obviously there is the move towards AS2 and other methods of sending and receiving data. We have been using AS2 for our customers for nearly 4 years but in the past 18 months the adoption rate has accelerated markedly. This is a great move, it reduces the costs of EDI and adds value by removing the latency built in to most EDI processes by the nature of the timed connections.
We have also seen a move to increased data requirements. This has proved difficult for some users as it was not always easy, as I am sure you will realise, to modify their ERP system to process the additional data. However they often had the additional data in "Non EDI" data, for example catalogues, or even the incoming documents such as Purchase Orders.
Because of the nature of our SaaS solution, being based around the concept that all data has value whatever the format, plus the fact that the solution is based on a repository we have been able to take these disparate data sources and merge them to create enhanced EDI messages that the recipient requires. This would be a real struggle with traditional on-site systems.
Over the next few months we intend to expand the use of such solutions to both enhance customer data, add functionality to the user experience of the service and to provide translations of product codes, units of measure, delivery points and many other requirements that are becoming the norm for the modern EDI message exchange.
By adding more value to EDI messages we believe that adoption will accelerate through the next 10 years.
Friday, January 11, 2008
EDI as a Supplier: Brownie Points or Valuable Benefits?
A simple sum, taking the numbers of keystrokes saved through integrated EDI and multiplying them by the keystroke cost quickly determines the viability of each electronic trading relationship.
This has proven to be very useful. It makes assessing whether eBusiness is actually saving the company any money as well as showing up any benefits and what those benefits are worth.
All well and good for a giant, but how is a smaller company able to know things are moving in the right direction, if there are simply insufficient resources to measure these things for you?
What are the opportunities for improvements if you are a supplier to a customer requiring EDI?
Here are a few:
Integrated EDI improves the certainty of delivery for your invoices. You can avoid the “Haven’t received the invoice. Send a copy!” conversation when you enquire what the Devil has happened to your money!
It also improves the timing of invoice delivery, which is very helpful as:
(i) closer invoice timing to goods delivery improves the likelihood of trouble free delivery (GRN) approval
(ii) the earlier invoices are produced & delivered the earlier the “payment due date” clock starts ticking
You are doing the invoice input for the customer, which leads to better information quality going into your customer’s ERP and ensures 100% data integrity across the supply chain!
Your integrated EDI will reduce the likelihood of delayed payments because errors are flagged up earlier, on processing the invoice, rather than as a result of chasing non-payment. A faulty invoice sent via EDI is rejected by the system and you can know in seconds. A faulty paper invoice might remain undetected by you until well after the end of your agreed payment terms with the customer!
You may not have the resources for obtaining detailed measurements of the effect of EDI on your business but you can still determine if things are going in the right direction for you. All you need do is watch one or more of some easily ascertained Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)…
- Improved Process Effectiveness – watch to see if the numbers of Day Sales Outstanding are reducing.
- Improved Productivity – is the number of invoices (or detail lines) processed per fiscal period increasing?
- More Automation – is the proportion of transactions that are processed automatically increasing?
- Improved Quality 1 – check that the ratio of credit notes raised to invoices produced is decreasing!
- Improved Quality 2 – is the number of rejected invoices decreasing?
- Improved Quality 3 – is the number of queries raised also decreasing?
- Cost – is the average cost of processing a transaction decreasing?
So, even with limited time and resources available to you, a glance at any one of these can reassure you that you, as well as your customers, can benefit from integrated electronic trading.
Next time we can look at the same subject from the customer's perspective
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
