AMR Research’s annual Supply Chain Top 25 has put Apple at the top of the tree, up from number 2 last year and knocking Nokia off the number 1 slot.

The makers of the iPod came out on top by “winning on all fronts”, recording excellent revenue growth, return on assets and inventory turns.

You can hear a podcast summary of the AMR report findings here.

Whilst the credit squeeze has forced many organisations to focus sharply on cost savings in purchasing and procurement, the effects are felt the other way too for many smaller companies as suppliers begin to limit the availability of commercial credit. 

A recent poll of 400 British companies by Graydon UK found that 56% would become more picky about who they offer credit to during the rest of 2008. Martin Williams, Graydon UK's managing director, said a "safety first" culture was now widespread with lenders raising the cut-off point on companies' credit scores. "Suppliers are looking long and hard at those companies who are asking them for credit," he said. "People are asking for better credit scores and so rejecting more companies." 

Businesses that have been trading for less than 20 months were bearing the brunt of tighter credit policies because they are perceived as the most risky, according to Mr Williams. "Some people are simply saying no to new businesses".

OK, so I’ve harped on this message before, but whenever I come across releases/news like the one I’ve just read on bobsguide, an excerpt from which features below, I can’t help but shake my head in wonder: 

“A majority of UK businesses are planning to automate supplier invoice processing within their Account Payable (AP) function, according to a new survey from ITESOFT, the leading developer of electronic document capture and automatic invoice processing solutions.”

I can’t tell you the number of businesses we subsequently work with that have implemented invoice processing systems in isolation and find themselves really wishing they hadn’t bothered.

Process automation can deliver huge benefit, but only if you capture the whole process, not the tail end of it.  

For a start, automating invoice capture does nothing to control spend. Sending invoices for approval is after the fact – the goods or services are already bought, the money committed.

Furthermore your approvers know this. The result is they are deluged with invoices to approve and simply do so without so much as a second glance.

A full P2P (purchase-to-pay) platform captures every stage of the lifecycle, from order – validated, authorised and audited before it is committed – to accurate goods receipting and invoicing.

Only by capturing the whole process lifecycle can you realise the benefits and genuinely drive error down, efficiency and savings up.

Much has been written on the subject of procurement outsourcing in recent years, and the tide had appeared to be shifting inexorably in this direction, but in the last 12 months we have seen a considerable movement the other way – with many organisations that had experimented with outsourcing choosing to insource again.

A recent study published by the Everest Research Institute bears up this trend, highlighting the fact that fewer procurement outsourcing deals were struck in 2007. In the group’s Procurement Outsourcing Annual Report Katrina Menzigian, vice president, wrote “Buyers are able to ‘experiment’ with procurement outsourcing as they potentially migrate towards a full Source-to-Pay (S2P) strategy.”

“This phase-in approach is allowing the opportunity for testing of synergies, scaling up operations, developing industry-specific capability which, in turn, delivers better results and savings.”

Part and parcel of most purchase-to-pay solutions we deliver is a big piece around supplier adoption, collaboration and communication. From orchestrating tailored seminar programmes to distributing email broadcasts and hosting webinars, Wax Digital is often heavily involved in promoting the step-change in the way that buyers and suppliers work together as part of our wider solution delivery remit.

French supermarket giant Carrefour has recently taken this process to its ultimate conclusion with the launch of a new global supplier website, as part of a strategy designed to improve communication between the company and its 62,000 suppliers across the world.

It's exactly the kind of initiative that we promote, delivering a single central point not only of order to invoice management, but also for displaying KPI's, allowing participation in tenders and auctions, and delivering a channel for news, updates and information.

It’s often easy to get wrapped up in the buy-side of the purchasing equation, acting as we do for the purchaser most of the time. However, it’s critical to remember that there are two sides to every trading relationship and the procurement solutions we put in place are designed to deliver benefit to supplier too. Often one of the key benefits revolves around process efficiencies that deliver big reductions in stopped and blocked invoices, ensuring that suppliers get paid more quickly and with fewer costly manual interventions.

However, whilst a joined up eProcurement or purchase-to-pay solution can bring major process efficiencies to bear, it isn’t always the case that the benefits are passed on to the supply chain and the Institute of Credit Management have recently published a league table charting the time every single UK public limited company takes to pay its bills – see the FT article here for full details.

At the top of the tree companies like easyJet and Northumbrian Water score well, with payment in under 10 days, but the worst offender by far is United Utilities, where suppliers have to wait an average of 99 days for their bills to be paid. Of the 350 large and medium-size companies listed on the FTSE 100 and FTSE 250, Aga Foodservice Group, the manufacturer, was shown to take 81 days on average to pay invoices, while Carillion, the construction company, takes 80 days. Some of the slowest payers, among Britain’s 11,000 plcs, take more than a year to pay bills!

A recent survey by Supply Management magazine suggests that nearly three quarters of buyers are looking to make cuts to their vendor list and use fewer suppliers.

77 of the 100 buyers surveyed said consolidation would make the supply base more manageable and cost-effective, and while there is no doubt this is true it beholds organisations to make sure they don’t simply take a knife to the vendor list without careful analysis of the risks involved. Supplier rationalization efforts can increase supply risk as well by limiting a company's options and back-up plans if a disruption, quality issue or supplier bankruptcy occurs.

A clear and accurate picture across the supply chain is an essential pre-requisite, which is of course where purchase to pay systems play a significant part, but category expertise can be equally important and companies considering supplier rationalisation should draw heavily on the experience of their eProcurement vendors or advisers.  

The rise and rise of raw material costs around the world are creating waves even among European companies whose purchasing power is bolstered by a strong Euro. Henkel KGaG, the German maker of Persil detergent, is blaming commodity price rises for plans to shed up to 3,000 jobs, or nearly 6% of its total workforce.

In the UK, with less in the way of currency protection, making savings across organisations is becoming the only conversation business wants to have – nobody wants job cuts, which puts the spotlight on purchasing practices and driving efficiencies in the supply chain.

It seems even Ryanair, the stellar performer of the industry in recent years, can’t quite shake the city’s entrenched concerns about the airline industry; concerns founded largely on the difficulty all airlines have in forward forecasting passenger numbers. 

And accurate forecasting makes a huge difference to the bottom line in pretty well all areas of purchasing – from bums on seats to boxes on shelves. Organisations that don’t have clear visibility of demand and supply through the whole chain can get badly damaged quickly through stock-outs or over-stocks. 

Whether for direct or indirect spend, the right on-demand purchase-to-pay system can integrate with legacy systems to deliver that kind of visibility in a way that can transform buying activities.