Organizations Saving 42% on Procured Goods and Services

With new procurement technology and best practices, organizations are reducing their costs while gaining full accountability , total transparency, thorough data collection, stronger quality controls and greater efficiencies.
 
March 15, 2011 - PRLog -- Procurement can be the hero for organizations looking to boost their bottom lines and gain purchasing efficiencies.

According to CAPS Research's January 2011 benchmark report on corporate approaches to measured procurement savings, the average saved by the organizations surveyed was 4.26%. However, that number is skewed, because of the 78 companies responding some have little or no "direct spend" as part of their purchasing mission.

CAPS Research is an arm of the Institute for Supply Management and Arizona State University. To compile its benchmark report, CAPS surveyed mostly large companies across a variety of industry sectors from across the globe. Respondents ranged from 3M (industrial conglomerate) to General Mills (consumer package goods) to IBM (high tech), Warner Brothers (entertainment), and PriceWaterhouseCoopers (professional services).

Had those surveyed, even those reporting little direct spend, been using an optimal procurement process the 4.26% reported in savings may have been improved tenfold to 42%, according to William Gindlesperger, chief executive officer of e-LYNXX Corporation.   "That is the average in measured savings that large organizations in the USA and Canada are reporting when they use a patented automated vendor selection procedure and related best practices," he said.  "In addition to impressive cost reductions, they are reporting full accountability for both buyer and vendor stakeholders, total transparency, thorough data collection, stronger quality controls and greater efficiencies."

To get a feel for the impact, look at just one major area of procurement – printing.  Organizations spend approximately $90 billion on outsourced printing in the United States each year.  If 42% of that could be saved annually, that would be $38 billion that could be redirected for other purposes such as new jobs, new facilities, increased marketing and direct mail, employee health care, product development, debt reduction and profit.  

Savings at this level are achievable when the following are applied, Gindlesperger outlined:  

(1) AVS TechnologyTM – This patented procedure automates the selection from the buyer’s own vendor pool those vendors of custom goods and services (such as printing, textiles, temp services and machined parts) that are qualified to produce a given project when compared to the exact requirements of the project specifications. This procedure applies to all computer-operated systems that match vendor attributes with project specifications to identify vendors qualified to bid on custom goods and services.

(2) Vendor pool – Vendors must be uniformly and objectively evaluated. Only those meeting buyer-established criteria are acceptable.  Numerous vendors must be maintained to assure competition.

(3) Equal opportunity – Qualified vendors matching project specifications should be invited to submit a bid. No vendors should be arbitrarily added or removed on a job-by-job basis.  In this way vendors have the freedom to bid low margin rates without negative consequence and without being held to the low price next time.  

(4) Budget development – An estimate methodology should be used for projects that lack complete specifications such as quantities or final schedule.  

(5) Request for pricing (RFP) – RFP’s should be released only after finalizing specifications. This allows vendors to plan and price on the basis of available capacity and resource.

(6) Timely award – As soon after bid closing as possible, projects should be awarded to the qualified vendor that has submitted the lowest price. Vendors need to understand that performance is required to receive opportunities, while price is the criteria to win work.

(7) Results disclosure – Following award, responding vendors should be provided with a list of vendors that bid, the prices submitted and the winning bidder. This full transparency allows vendors to see competition and market dynamics, promoting improved future competition.        

(8) Accountability – Buying organization needs to complete responsibilities on time. Costly production delays should be avoided due to buyer issues.

(9) Vendor performance – Poor delivery, non-responsiveness, lack of attention to detail, or failure to meet commitments is not tolerated under any circumstances.


About e-LYNXX Corporation
e-LYNXX Corporation patented the technology integral to e-commerce.  Endorsed by Educational & Institutional Cooperative Purchasing (E&I) and Printing Industries of America (PIA), e-LYNXX drives results through its three divisions.  ● AVS TechnologyTM licenses the patented* automated vendor selection procedure used in e-commerce and procurement systems.  ● American Print Management provides web-based system, services and patented AVS TechnologyTM to reduce substantially the procured costs of direct mail, marketing, publications, packaging, labels and other procured print.   ● Government Print Management offers effective U.S. GPO bid services and strategies.  www.e-LYNXX.com – 888-876-5432

*U. S. Patent No. 6,397,197, Patent No. 7,451,106, post-Bilski Patent No. 7,788,143, and Continuing Application 12/855,423 (collectively, the AVS TechnologyTM) – This thicket of patents covers all custom goods and services, not just print.  To inquire about licensing, contact Anthony Hawks at 888-876-5432 or Michael Cannata at 905-773-2207.
End
Source: » Follow
Email:***@e-lynxx.com Email Verified
Zip:17201
Tags:Automated Vendor Selection Technology, Procurement Savings, Innovation
Industry:Business, Technology, Services
Location:Chambersburg - Pennsylvania - United States
Account Email Address Verified     Account Phone Number Verified     Disclaimer     Report Abuse
e-LYNXX Corporation News
Trending
Most Viewed
Daily News



Like PRLog?
9K2K1K
Click to Share