On October 18, 2017 PSF hosted an enormously successful IT Symposium. Over 500 participants from more than 140 different organizations (I think). Lots of great discussion. What I want to comment on is TENDERING. More specifically, do more bidding events with more bidders add value. The implicit and often explicit belief from my exposure to supply management professionals (especially in the public sector) is an unequivocal yes!
But are we confusing means and ends? 40 years of supply management experience in practice, consulting and academia have taught me that our job is to improve outcomes / add value by reducing total cost of ownership and / or increasing innovation. Biddings relationship to these outcomes varies from directly beneficial to murky to counter-productive. Serious / effective / efficient supply management goes WAY beyond massaging an approved vendor’s list. (BTW, let’s starting saying “supplier”?) Not withstanding the sanctity of tenders, the only correlation between greater competition over ever shorter time horizons with more and more suppliers and superior outcomes is likely inverse. So, why is this your goal?
I’m a big fan of Deming. Much of business practice and education is little more than a footnote to Deming. I’ve attached the short wiki Deming overview covering his famous 14 points and 7 deadly sins. Always a good read.
Michigan State University