Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Chapter 7 Outline:
Purchasing
Introduction
Dell Computer Corporation
Cisco Systems
Why Purchasing is Critical
The Changing Global Competitive Landscape
Financial Impact
Performance Impact
The Sourcing Decision
Advantages and Disadvantages of Insourcing and Outsourcing
Total cost analysis
Boxed Example 7.1: Total cost analysis at ABC Company
Sourcing Strategies
Honda of America
The Purchasing Process
Needs Identification
Description
Supplier Identification and Evaluation
Supplier Selection
Purchase Order Preparation
Follow-Up and Expediting
Receipt and Inspection
Invoice Clearance and Payment
Records Maintenance
1
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Supplier Evaluation Systems
Boxed Example 7.2: Supplier Evaluation at Electra Company
Trends In Purchasing Management
Long-term Contracts and Consolidation
Supply Base Reduction
Global Purchasing
Supplier Performance Measurement
Supplier Technology
Information Technology
Professionalism in Purchasing
Chapter Summary
Discussion Questions
Exercises
2
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Chapter 7:
Purchasing
Introduction
One of the most important decisions facing any business is the question of whether to
produce some product or service internally or to purchase it from an outside supply chain
partner. In this chapter, we will discuss some of the important considerations
surrounding sourcing decisions, and how firms should go about managing the purchasing
process. But to start, let’s consider the very different experiences of Dell Computers and
CISCO Systems.
Dell Computer Corporation1
At first glance, Dell Computer would seem to be in a tenuous position. “Dell Computer
has no proprietary technology,” writes Charles Fine. “In fact, the company's position in
the supply chain has it squeezed between Intel and Microsoft upstream, two of the
computer industry's most powerful players, and a downstream market populated by
millions of well-informed consumers who can choose from dozens of computer
companies that assemble almost indistinguishable personal computers."
Yet Dell Computer has not only survived, but thrived. As of May 2000 Dell had a
market capitalization of nearly $130 Billion and a gross profit margin of over 20%. Dell
1 From: Book Excerpt: The Primacy of Chains, Charles Fine, Supply Chain Management Review, Spring, 1999. Pp. 79-91)
3
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
accomplished this feat primarily through superior supply chain management, including
effective purchasing of products and services. Dell buys state-of-the-art technologies and
logistics services, but internally handles its purchasing, order management, and assembly
activities. The company’s strategic reliance on superior supply chain partners, coupled
with its own core competencies, has made Dell a leader in a highly competitive industry.
Cisco Systems2
Perhaps no company underscored the unlimited potential of the New Economy more than
Cisco Systems, Inc. Cisco was poised to become the world’s first trillion-dollar
enterprise, wielding a market cap greater than that of General Electric in pursuit of annual
revenue growth projected at 30 to 40 percent.
Two of the things that gave Cisco its glow were its development of a virtual
supply chain with limitless capacity and its ability to provide extraordinarily high
reliability to its customers. Another apparent strength was its approach to manufacturing:
It didn’t build most of what it sold. John Chambers, president and CEO, once explained,
“Our approach is something we call ‘global virtual manufacturing.’ First, we’ve
established manufacturing plants all over the world. We’ve also developed close
arrangements with CEMs [contract equipment manufacturers]. So when we work
together with our CEMs – and if we do job right – the customers can’t tell the difference
between my own plants and my CEM’s in Taiwan and elsewhere.”
But in early 2000, shortages of memory and optical components began
paralyzing one path of production. For the first time, Cisco’s supply chain began to
2 This section is on Cisco is quoted nearly verbatim from “Why Cisco fell: Outsourcing and its perils”, Lakeman, Boy, and Frev. http:/www.strategy-business.com/strategy/01306/page1.html
4
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
experience the kind of growing pains that affected its earnings. When the
telecommunications infrastructure experienced a severe downturn, customer orders began
to dry up … and Cisco neglected to turn off its supply chain. Orders went out, parts
began to pile up. Its raw-parts inventory ballooned more than 300 percent from the third
quarter to the fourth quarter of 2000. Cisco’s problems culminated in a $2.25 billion
write-down. In short, Cisco simply wasn’t able to use outsourcing to scale up or down as
quickly as it thought it could.
This chapter is divided into two distinct, yet related, parts. In the first half of this
chapter, we will discuss the various issues surrounding sourcing decisions, including the
insourcing versus outsourcing debate, and various sourcing strategies. We will examine
how total cost analysis can be used to augment the strategic analysis of sourcing
opportunities.
The second half is devoted to the purchasing process itself. Purchasing includes
all those activities associated with identifying needs, locating and selecting suppliers,
negotiating terms, and following up to ensure supplier performance. Purchasing links a
company with its upstream supply chain partners. We take a look at the various activities
that make up the purchasing process, including product description, supplier evaluation
and selection activities. Finally, we discuss major trends that will affect purchasing
management in the years to come.3
3 Adapted from Monczka, R., Trent, R., and Handfield, R., Purchasing and Supply Chain Management, Southwestern College Publishing, Cincinnati, OH: 1997.
5
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Why Purchasing is Critical
Purchasing has always been an important, if under-appreciated, function in many
businesses. As the cases of Dell and Cisco illustrate, however, several trends have
worked together to push purchasing into the limelight. These include the changing global
competitive landscape, the financial impact of purchasing, and purchasing’s impact on
such performance dimensions as quality, delivery, and technology utilization.
The Changing Global Competitive Landscape
Firms do not just compete against global competitors, but against their competitors'
supply chains. Companies that were content to purchase services and goods from local
suppliers are now seeking to build relationships with world-class suppliers, regardless of
their location. Managers have come to realize that “to compete globally, you need to
purchase globally.”
To keep up with global competition and tap into the abilities of world-class
suppliers, many companies are putting in place global purchasing systems. GM is a
case in point. Harold Kutner is GM's vice president and group executive in charge of
world-wide purchasing. Every Friday morning at 6:30 am (Detroit time), Kutner
"presides over a global video conference in which dozens of purchasing executives share
information and coordinate strategy."4 In addition, a few years back a GM purchasing
team completed a 12-day mission to Thailand, Taiwan, South Korea and Japan. The
4 "General Motors Drives Some Hard Bargains with Asian Suppliers", WSJ, 4/2/99.
6
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
purpose of the trip was to evaluate 12 tool makers as potential sources of stamping dies,
but GM also developed valuable contacts at the same time.
Advances in information systems have served as a catalyst for global purchasing
efforts. Electronic "blueprints" can now be shared instantaneously with engineers and
suppliers around the world. Purchasing requirements for dozens of sites can be
consolidated into one large order, giving the organization maximum buyer power.
Companies can share anticipated requirements with key suppliers around the clock,
allowing suppliers to plan their activities accordingly.
Financial Impact
If you were to look at the financial statements of an average organization, how much
would you guess the company spends on purchased goods and services? In
manufacturing, the figure is astonishingly high: the average manufacturer spends
approximately 56 cents out of every dollar of revenues on goods and services (see Table
7.1). For some services, such as retailing or wholesaling, the figure can be even higher.
Table 7.1: Materials to sales ratios for different industries
Industry Materials to sales ratio
Food 65.4
Textiles 60.5
Furniture and fixtures 47.2
Chemicals 51.5
Rubber & plastics 50.1
7
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Stone/clay/glass 47.5
Primary metals 64.0
Fabricated metal 50.5
Machinery 47.8
Electrical equipment 43.1
Transportation equipment 60.0
Annual Survey of Manufacturers: 1985, U.S. Bureau of the Census, Government Printing
Office, Washington, D.C., 1987, p. 1-8.
When much of the firm’s revenue is spent on materials and services, purchasing
represents a major opportunity to increase profitability. Consider the following financial
information for Lowe's, a service firm in the home improvements retailing sector. Table
7.2 shows earnings for the company for the quarter ending January, 1999, as well as key
balance statement figures.
8
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.2: Selected financial data for Lowe's Company (all figures in $000s)
Earnings & Expenses (Quarter ending January, 1999)
Sales $2,915,664
Merchandise costs $2,096,331
Pre-tax earning $168,253
Selected balance sheet items
Merchandise Inventory $2,104,845
Total assets $6,344,651
From the figures, we can see that the pre-tax profit margin for Lowe's is
($168,253/ $2,915,664) = 5.8%. This means that every dollar of sales generates a little
less than 6 cents in pre-tax profit. Furthermore, the quarterly return on assets (ROA) is
($168,253/ $6,344,651) = 2.7%. What can Lowe's do to improve these figures?
Note that every dollar saved in purchasing at Lowe's increases pre-tax profit by a
dollar. According to the above figures, Lowe's would have to generate about $17 in sales
to make the same improvement to the bottom line that saving one dollar in purchasing
costs would have. This profit leverage effect is particularly important for low margin
businesses, such as retailing. Also note that if Lowe's was able to cut its merchandise
costs, this would not only affect profits, but would also reduce the amount of money tied
up in inventory. The impact would be a higher ROA figure. To illustrate these points,
let's see what would happen if Lowe's was able to cut merchandise costs by just 3%:
9
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Earnings & Expenses (Quarterly)
Sales $2,915,664
Merchandise costs $2,096,331
minus 3% savings: - $62,890
$2,033,441
Pre-tax earnings $168,253
plus 3% savings: + $62,890
$231,143
Selected balance sheet items
Merchandise Inventory $2,104,845
minus 3% savings: - $62,890
$2,041,955
Total assets $6,344,651
minus 3% savings: - $62,890
$6,281,761
Pre-tax profits would increase 37%, and the new pre-tax profit margin for Lowe's
would be ($231,143 / $2,915,664) = 7.9%. Lowe's would have to increase sales by
10
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
($62,890 / 5.8%) = $1.1 billion to have the same impact. In addition, the new quarterly
ROA is ($231,143 / $6,281,761) = 3.7%.
Performance Impact
Purchasing also has a major effect on performance in such diverse areas as quality,
delivery and the ability of companies to exploit new technologies. Suppose, for example,
that Springfield Hospital has two dialysis machines, each with a special valve that must
be replaced every week. As a result, Springfield uses about 50 valves per year. The
hospital has two alternative sources for the valves. The cost, quality and delivery lead
times for these two suppliers are shown below:
Supplier A Supplier B
Cost per valve $10 $2
% Good 99.8% 95%
Delivery lead time Overnight delivery 1 day to 3 weeks
Defective valves cannot be identified until they are installed. Failures cause an
interruption in the treatment of patients, which lead to rescheduling nightmares, a
reduction in the effective capacity of the dialysis machines and may even result in a
medical emergency. The quality of the medical service will clearly fall if Springfield
goes with Supplier B.
Suppose now that Springfield management has estimated that the cost of a failed
valve is about $1000 per incident. Furthermore, if Springfield goes with Supplier A, then
11
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
they will be able to get by with one valve as a "back up", since overnight delivery is
guaranteed. But if Springfield uses Supplier B, they will need three "back up" valves
(about three weeks worth) to protect themselves against Supplier B's unreliable delivery
patterns.
Even before we calculate all of the costs associated with each supplier, we can see
that sourcing valves through Supplier B has the potential to seriously disrupt Springfield's
operations. These concerns are reflected in the following cost estimates:
Yearly Costs Supplier A Supplier B
Valve costs 50 * $10 = $500 50 * $2 = $100
Failure costs 0.2% of all valves fail: 5% of all valves fail:
0.2% * 50 valves *$1000 5% * 50 valves *
$1000
= $100 = $2500
Back-up
Inventory 1 valve * $10 = $10 3 valves * $2 = $6
Total Cost: $610 $1,106
Purchasing can also help an organization incorporate state-of-the-art technologies
into its products and services. When Chrysler introduced the Neon automobile, they
realized that suppliers would furnish 70% of the value of the car. In order to bring the car
out on schedule, the team invited 25 makers of key parts such as seats, tires, and
12
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
suspension components to send engineers to Chrysler’s engineering facility.5 What was
the result of this effort? The car cost less to produce and included all of the proposed
design features.
The Sourcing Decision
Before we get into a detailed discussion of the purchasing process, it makes sense to first
talk about the sourcing decision. At its most basic level, sourcing decisions address
which products and services will be provided in-house (known as insourcing) and which
will be provided by a firm’s supply chain partners (outsourcing). The sourcing decision
is also known as the make-or-buy decision.
Quite simply, sourcing decisions are critical to operations and supply chain
managers (including those in purchasing) because it tells them what they will and will not
be responsible for. Suppose, for example, that a company decides to insource a product
or service. In this case, operations and supply chain managers must determine the
capacity and resources they need, the most appropriate manufacturing or service
processes to use, and the information systems they need to coordinate operations. But if
the company decides to outsource the product or service, the emphasis shifts to the
purchasing activities associated with identifying the most qualified suppliers and
managing the buyer-supplier relationship.
Advantages and Disadvantages of Insourcing and Outsourcing
5 Woodruff, David, “Chrysler’s Neon: Is this the Small Car Detroit Couldn’t Build?”, Business Week, May 3, 1993, pp. 116-126.
13
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.3 summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of insourcing and outsourcing.
Insourcing gives a company a high degree of control over its operations, which is
particularly desirable if the company owns proprietary designs or processes. Insourcing
can also lower manufacturing costs, but only if a company enjoys the business volume
necessary to achieve economies of scale. Unlike many smaller pharmaceutical firms, for
instance, Merck is large enough to afford a sales force dedicated exclusively to selling
only Merck products. Finally, insourcing encourages the development of core
competencies. As we saw in Chapter 2, a major part of any business strategy
development effort is identifying and building core competencies—organizational
strengths or abilities, developed over a long period, that customers find valuable and
competitors find difficult or even impossible to copy. Products or processes that could
evolve into core competencies are prime candidates for insourcing.
On the downside, insourcing can be risky because it decreases a firm's strategic
flexibility. The semiconductor industry is a good example of the risks of insourcing. In
1995, at least a dozen new semiconductor plants were under construction in the United
States, including three for Intel and two for Motorola. At the time the average cost of a
chip fabrication plant was about $1.5 billion, and was expected to rise to $3 billion by
1999. To make matters worse, some of the associated manufacturing technologies had
life cycles as short as six months, after which they were expected to be superseded by
newer technologies. As a result, semiconductor manufacturers faced the very real risk of
investing in old process technologies just as newer ones emerged. To justify plant
14
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
expansions under these conditions, managers had to show that investing in new capacity
would bring a quick payback6.
Finally, if suppliers can provide a product or service more effectively than the
company itself, managers must decide whether to commit scarce resources to upgrading
their processes or to outsource the product or service. Attempting to catch up to suppliers
technologically can be an expensive proposition, which could restrict a firm’s ability to
invest in other projects, or even threaten its financial viability.
Outsourcing typically increases a firm's flexibility and access to state-of-the-art
products and processes. As markets or technologies change, many firms find changing
supply chain partners easier than changing internal processes. In addition to increasing a
firm's strategic flexibility and access to new technologies, outsourcing improves its cash
flow. With outsourcing, less investment is required up front in the resources needed to
provide a product or service. The benefits can be significant. By using contract
manufacturers, Dell Computer supported $3 billion in annual revenues with only $60
million of fixed assets7.
Of course, outsourcing has its risks. Suppliers may misstate their capabilities:
their process technology may be obsolete, or their performance may not meet the buyer’s
expectations. Consider the experience of Apple Computer. When demand for a new line
of Macintosh computers increased dramatically during the 1990s, Apple accumulated an
order backlog of more than $1 billion. The company could not obtain timely delivery of
critical parts, including modems and custom chips, because many of them had been
custom-designed and outsourced from a single supplier. Apple’s inability to deliver the
6 Source: Adapted from Erin Anderson and Barton J. Weitz, "Make-or-Buy Decisions: Vertical Integration and Marketing Productivity," Sloan Management Review, Spring, 1986, pp. 14-15.7 Shawn Tully, “You’ll Never Guess Who Really Makes...,” Fortune, 3 October 1994, 124.
15
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
highly valued product alienated many customers, who were not willing to wait for the
new computers8.
Control is also an issue in outsourcing. Buying firms may need to create costly
safeguards to regulate the quality, availability, confidentiality, or performance of
outsourced goods or services. At the extreme, they may lose key skills and technologies
that are part of their core competencies. To counteract such threats, many companies
oversee key design, operations, and supply chain activities and keep current on what
customers want and how their products or services meet those demands9. Table 7.3
summarizes the advantages and disadvantages of insourcing and outsourcing.
Table 7.3: Advantages and disadvantages of Insourcing and Outsourcing
INSOURCING
Advantages Disadvantages
• High degree of control. • Reduces strategic flexibility.
• Ability to oversee the entire process. • Requires high investment.
• Economies of scale and/or scope. • Potential suppliers may offer superior
products and services.
OUTSOURCING
Advantages Disadvantages
High strategic flexibility. • Possibility of choosing a bad supplier
Low investment risk. • Loss of control over the process
8 “Is Spindler a Survivor?,” Business Week, 2 October 1995, 62.9 “The Internet Age”, Business Week, October 4, 1999, pp. 103-104.
16
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Improved cash flow. • & core technologies
• Access to state-of-the-art • "Hollowing out" of the corporation
products and services.
Table 74 looks at the debate from another angle: What factors will influence the
decision to insource or outsource? As the table suggests, insourcing will generally be
more favorable in situations where environmental uncertainty is low (thereby reducing
the risk of investing in capacity), supplier markets are not well developed, and the
product or service being considered is not directly related the buying firm’s core
competencies. In contrast, outsourcing becomes more attractive as competition in
supplier markets increases, the product or service is not seen as strategically critical, and
environmental uncertainty makes internal investment a risky prospect. Given this, it
makes sense that a lot of high tech companies, facing short product life cycles and
uncertain market conditions, outsource more often than firms in more stable industries.
Table 7.4: Factors That Affect the Decision to Insource or Outsource
Factor FavorsInsourcing
FavorsOutsourcing
Environmental uncertainty High Low
Competition in the supplier market Low High
Ability to monitor supplier’s performance High Low
Relationship of product / service to buying firm’s core competencies.
High Low
17
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Total Cost Analysis
Ultimately, managers must understand the cost issues associated with insourcing versus
outsourcing. Determining the actual cost of a product or service is a complicated task
requiring both good judgment and the application of sound quantitative techniques. In
this section we will first examine the direct and indirect costs managers must consider in
making such decisions. Then we will run through a simple cost analysis.
Table 7.5: Insourcing and outsourcing costs
Insourcing Outsourcing
Direct Costs Direct materialDirect laborFreight costsVariable overhead
Price (from invoice)Freight costs
Indirect Costs SupervisionAdministative support SuppliesMaintenance costsEquipment depreciationUtilitiesBuilding leaseFixed overhead
PurchasingReceivingQuality Control
18
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.5 identifies the major cost categories associated with insourcing and
outsourcing decisions. As the table shows, these costs are typically divided into direct
and indirect costs. Direct costs are those costs that are tied directly to the production of a
good or service, such as materials costs, labor costs, and variable overhead. If, for
example, a product requires 1.3 square feet of sheet metal, and the cost of sheet metal is
$0.90 per square foot, the direct cost of the sheet metal is:
$0.90 * (1.3 feet) = $1.17
Indirect costs, as the name implies, are not tied directly to production levels.
Building lease payments, depreciation of equipment, and staff salaries are classic
examples of indirect costs, which in essence represent the price of doing business. To
understand the true total cost of insourcing or outsourcing, managers must assign, or
allocate, indirect costs to individual units of production. That task is not as easy as it
may sound, however. Suppose managers are trying to decide whether to make a product
in house or outsource it. They estimate they will need to spend $600,000 just to design
the new product. If they plan to produce 200,000 units, they might assign the design cost
as follows:
$600,000 / 200,000 units = $3.00 per unit.
But what if the results of the design effort could be applied to future products?
Should part of the design cost be assigned to those future products, and if so, how? For
19
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
this reason, outsourcing costs are usually easier to determine than insourcing costs. With
outsourcing, the indirect costs are included in the direct purchase price shown on the
supplier’s invoice. Generally, the only additional costs that need to be considered in the
outsourcing decision are inbound freight (a direct cost) and administrative costs
associated with managing the buyer-supplier relationship (such as purchasing and quality
control). In contrast, the bulk of insourcing costs may fall into the indirect category,
making the task of to estimating the true total cost more difficult.
In determining total costs, managers must consider the time frame of the
sourcing decision. If an insourcing arrangement is expected to be of relatively short
duration, as it might be for a product with a limited life cycle, then perhaps only direct
costs and some portion of the indirect costs should be applied. In the short run, firms are
better off recovering their direct costs and some portion of their indirect costs than risking
a significant decline in their business. However, if managers expect an insourcing
arrangement to become part of ongoing operations, they should consider all relevant costs
that might reasonably be incurred over the long term, including all indirect costs. In the
long run, a firm must recover all its costs or go out of business.
************************************************************
Boxed Example 7.1: Total cost analysis at the ABC Company
With this background, let's walk through a cost analysis of a simple sourcing decision at
the ABC company. One of ABC's Taiwanese suppliers has bid on a new line of molded
plastic parts that are currently being assembled at ABC’s facility. The supplier has bid
$0.10 per part, given a forecasted demand of 200,000 parts in year 1, 300,000 in year 2,
20
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
and 500,000 in year 3. Shipping and handling of parts from the supplier’s facility is
estimated at $0.01 per unit. Additional inventory handling charges should amount to
$0.005 per unit. Finally, purchasing costs are estimated at $20 per monthly purchase
order.
Although ABC’s facility is capable of producing the part, it is currently running at
95% capacity. Investing in another machine will cost $10,000, depreciated over the life
of the product. Direct materials can be purchased for $.05 per unit. Direct labor is
estimated at $.03 per unit plus a 50% surcharge for fringe benefits; indirect labor is
estimated at $.011 per unit plus 50% for benefits. Up-front engineering and design costs
will amount to $30,000. In addition, the comptroller has insisted that overhead (an
indirect cost) be allocated to the parts at a rate of 100% of direct labor cost.
Table 7.6: Total Cost Analysis for the Sourcing Decision at ABC
21
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
INSOURCING
Operating Expenses:Direct labor $0.0300Fringe (50%) $0.0150Direct materials $0.0500
Indirect labor $0.0110Fringe (50%) $0.0055Equipment depreciation $0.0100 ($10,000 depreciated over 1 mill. units)Fixed overhead $0.0300Engineering / design $0.0300 ($30,000 over 1 million units)
TOTAL INSOURCINGCOSTS
$0.1815 (1)
OUTSOURCING
Purchase price $0.1000Shipping and handling $0.0100Inventories $0.0050Administrative costs $0.0072 ($20 X 12 X 3 / 1,000,000)
TOTAL OUTSOURCINGCOSTS
$0.1222 (2)
SAVINGS((1) - (2)) X 1,000,000 $59,300
Table 7.6 shows one possible analysis of the costs of insourcing versus
outsourcing this part; different managers might come up with a slightly different analysis.
For example, ABC’s managers might want to experiment with different allocation rates
for overhead and depreciation expense, to see how a change in the rate might affect the
decision. They might also want to consider the effect of exchange rates on the supplier’s
costs. Suppose, for example, that the outsourcing costs are based on an exchange rate of
30 Taiwanese dollars to one U.S. dollar. If the exchange rate were to fall to 25 to 1,
ABC’s outsourcing costs could rise by 20%. The point is that even a relatively simple
cost analysis requires managerial judgment and interpretation. Cost analyses are most
useful when they are considered jointly with strategic factors.
22
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
******************************************************************
Sourcing Strategies
Once the decision has been made to outsource a product or service, firms still face some
choices. In single sourcing, the buying firm depends on a single company for all or
nearly all of a particular item or service. In multiple sourcing, the buying firm shares its
business across multiple suppliers. The advantages and disadvantages of each are shown
in Table 7.7.
In the past, very few North American organizations would have considered
voluntarily using a single supplier due to the inherent risks. This perception has changed
somewhat because of the example set by Japanese firms who have used single sourcing to
achieve continuous price, quality and delivery improvements. Today, companies must
consider both multiple sourcing and single sourcing, and the advantages and
disadvantages of each approach.
23
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.7: Advantages and disadvantages of multiple / single sourcing
Multiple Sourcing Single Sourcing
Advantages Disadvantages Advantages Disadvantages
Create competition Reduces supplier loyalty – suppliers may not be willing to “go the extra mile” for the purchaser
Volume leveraging – as volumes go up, cost per unit decreases as supplier spreads fixed costs over larger volume.
Knowing they have the business, suppliers can actually increase prices in the short term
Spread risk (in event of a fire, strike, etc. at one supplier)
Can increase risk in the event of a shortage – supplier may only supply preferred customers
Transportation economics – fewer shipments and lower per unit transportation costs
Increased supply risk – if a disaster occurs, the buyer can be left without a source of supply
Required if the purchased volume is too great for one supplier
May result in different product attributes with varying quality
Reduce quality variability, and have a standardized product
Buyer can become “captive” to a supplier’s technology – while other suppliers are surging ahead with newer technology that has better performance
Desired if firm wishes to meet obligations to support minority suppliers
Can actually result in increased prices over time, as suppliers are reluctant to provide cost savings ideas
Build stronger relationship with supplier, and gain access to design and engineering capabilities
Do not know if you have the “best” supplier available
Can ensure that suppliers do not become “complacent”
Suppliers can let performance slide if volume is not high enough to merit their attention
Required when supplier has a proprietary product
Dangerous strategy if the supplier has limited capacity – may “shut down” the buyer if takes on too much business
Required when volume is too small to split between two suppliers
24
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
One way that companies can overcome the dilemma of the single sourcing /
multiple sourcing decision is through a compromise known as cross sourcing. In this
strategy, the company uses a single supplier for a certain part or service in one part of the
business, and another supplier with the same capabilities for a similar part in another area
of the business. Each supplier is then awarded new business based on their performance,
creating an incentive for them to improve. This also provides for a backup supplier in
case the primary supplier cannot provide the required volume. At Honda of America,
cross-sourcing is extensively used as part of their purchasing strategy (see boxed insert at
end of chapter).
A similar purchasing strategy is dual sourcing. This strategy is exactly what it
sounds like – two suppliers are used for the same purchased product or service.
Typically, the split of the business is 70% to Supplier A, and 30% to Supplier B. In this
manner, Supplier A is “looking over his shoulder”, knowing that if performance suffers it
will lose the business to Supplier B. Dual sourcing in some ways combines the best of
both worlds.
To cap off our discussion of the sourcing decision and sourcing strategies,
consider the purchasing efforts of Honda of America, described below. Honda has
integrated single and dual sourcing, as well as supplier development and integration, into
its sourcing efforts. Also notice how Honda has "gone global" by expanding the number
of North American suppliers.
25
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Honda of America
Honda manufactures almost everywhere in the world, including Japan, the U.S.,
Germany, Mexico, the United Kingdom, and Brazil. When Honda first started building
cars in Ohio in 1982, the company would import car kits from Japan, and assemble them.
In the late 1980’s, Honda changed this philosophy to “We will build where we sell, and
buy where we build.”
Suppliers are evaluated according to the QCCD-M approach: Quality, Cost,
Delivery, (Product) Development, and Management. The last element refers to the
supplier's management attitude. Honda emphasizes that this is the most important part of
the equation: if a supplier has quality, cost, delivery, or development problems, they can
be improved through joint effort. However, if management’s attitude is not positive and
they are not willing to work in a cooperative manner with Honda, they can never become
a Honda supplier. To provide feedback to suppliers on a regular basis, suppliers receive a
“report card” that provides a “grade” on each of the areas of QCCD-M. This helps
suppliers to analyze, control, and improve their performance.
When a problem occurs with a supplier, Honda follows the “Three A” rule: That
is, go to the “Actual Place”, touch the “Actual Part, and view the “Actual Situation.”
Honda will even send in teams of experts to help the supplier improve their operations.
In addition, Honda also holds an annual supplier conference to inform, inspire, challenge,
and reward suppliers.
Nevertheless, competition in the supply base is very important. Honda believes in
using a single source for the majority of their parts purchased, yet they will dual source
by platform. An example of this strategy is as follows: Supplier A sources steering
26
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
wheels for Civics, and Supplier B sources steering wheels for the Accord. Either supplier
can make either part, but each is a single source by platform. When a new model is
introduced, both suppliers may bid on the extra volume, with the best price and best
performing supplier likely to get the business.
The Purchasing Process
Now that we have described the issues surrounding sourcing decisions, let’s examine in
detail the purchasing process, which includes all the steps that must be completed when
someone within the organization requires some product, material or service. Some
people also refer to this as the purchasing cycle to emphasize the iterative nature of these
activities. These activities, or steps, are highlighted in Figure 7.1.
There are two things to keep in mind as we describe the purchasing process.
First, how much effort a company spends on these activities will differ greatly from one
situation to the next. The purchasing process leading to a $3 Billlion contract for 100 jets
is much different than that for a routine purchase of office supplies!
Second, as you look at Figure 7.1, recognize that companies can often gain a
competitive advantage by performing these activities better than their competitors. Many
organizations, for example, use information systems to automate routine purchase order
preparation, while others use sourcing management teams to improve the outcome of
supplier evaluation and selection efforts.
Needs Identification
27
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
The purchasing cycle begins with the identification of a need (i.e. a requirement). In
some cases, this need may take the form of a component, raw material, sub-assembly, or
even a completely finished item. In other cases, the need may be a service, such as
consulting or building maintenance. Because purchasing is responsible for acquiring
products and services for the entire organization, the information flows between
purchasing and other areas of the organization can be extensive.
Figure 7.1: The purchasing process
28
Needs Identification
Description
Source Identification& Evaluation
Supplier Selection
Purchase Order Preparation
Follow-up & Expediting
Receipt & Inspection
Invoice Clearance & Payment
Records Maintenance
Is there a preferred supplier?No
Yes
OrderCycle
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Internal users communicate their needs to purchasing in a variety of ways. For routine
items and services, users often use purchase requisitions or reorder point systems to
communicate their needs to purchasing. A purchase requisition is an internal document
completed by a user that informs purchasing of a specific need. Although a variety of
formats exist, at a minimum a purchase requisition should include a detailed description
of the material or service, the quantity and date required, estimated cost, and
authorization.
A reorder point system is another method to “kick-off” the purchase of routine
items. Each item in a typical reorder point system has a predetermined order point and
order quantity. When inventory is depleted to a given level, the system signals the
material control department (or the buyer in some organizations) to issue a request to the
supplier. While requisition forms and reorder point systems have traditionally been
paper-based, this is changing quickly as more firms switch to computer-based processing
for routine items and services.
Description
Whatever the good or service, purchasing must ensure that the user's needs get
communicated to potential suppliers in the most efficient and accurate way possible.
How purchasing accomplishes this will differ dramatically from one situation to the next.
A variety of methods exist for communicating the user's requirements10. Description by
market grade or industry standard might be the best choice for standard items, where
10 For more information on the purchasing process, see Monczka et. al., 1997.
29
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
the requirements are well understood and there is common agreement between supply
chain partners about what certain terms mean. Description by brand is used when a
product or service is proprietary, or when there is a perceived advantage to using a
particular supplier's products or services. A builder of residential communities, for
example, might tell his purchasing staff to purchase R21 insulation for walls and finish-
grade lumber for the trim and fireplace mantles. In addition, he might also specify
Georgia-Pacific's Catawba® hardboard siding, Kohler® faucets, and TruGreen-
Chemlawn® lawn treatment for all the homes. As you can see, the use of brand names,
market grades, or industry standards provides purchasing with an effective and accurate
"shortcut" for relaying user's needs to potential suppliers.
More detailed and expensive methods of description will be needed when the
items or services to be purchased are more complex, when "standards" do not exist, or
when the user's needs are harder to communicate. Three common methods include
description by specification, performance characteristics, and prototypes or samples.
In some cases, an organization may need to provide very detailed descriptions of
the physical characteristics of an item. We refer to such efforts as description by
specification. Specifications can cover such characteristics as the materials used, the
manufacturing process required, and physical dimensions of the product. Consider one
extreme example: the special heat shield tiles used on NASA’s space shuttles. Each tile
has a unique shape and location on the space shuttle. Furthermore, each shield must be
able to protect the space shuttle from heat generated by reentry into the Earth's
atmosphere. In providing a description of these tiles, NASA will almost certainly include
specifications regarding the exact dimensions of the tiles and the composite materials to
30
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
be used in making them. Such information might be relayed in the form of detailed
blueprints and supporting documentation. Furthermore, NASA will likely specify the
precise manufacturing steps and quality checks to be performed during the manufacture
of the tiles
In contrast, description by performance characteristics focuses attention on the
outcomes the customer wants, not on the precise configuration of the product or service.
The assumption is that the supplier will know the best way to meet the customer's needs.
A company purchasing hundreds of PCs from Dell Computer might demand 1) 24-hour
support available by computer or phone, and 2) 48-hour turn-around time on defective
units. How Dell chooses to meet these performance characteristics is their choice.
Firms often develop prototypes or samples to share with their suppliers.
Prototypes can provide critical information on the look or feel of a product or service.
Such information is often difficult to convey in drawings or written descriptions. Note
that prototypes or samples are not limited to physical products. An excellent example is a
prototype information system that a company might share with potential software
vendors. The prototype may include sample output screens and reports. Through the
prototype, the company can give its software vendors a clearer idea of how the company
expects its users to interact with the system.
Supplier Identification and Evaluation
Once a decision is reached to outsource a product or service, the firm must identify and
often evaluate external sources. The purpose of this section is to describe major areas of
31
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
supplier evaluation. You should recognize, however, that the amount of effort will
increase as:
The complexity of the product or service increases
The amount of money that is committed increases
The length of the proposed buyer-supplier relationship increases.
A full-blown evaluation process begins with the development of a list of potential
suppliers. This list may be generated from a variety of sources, including market
representatives, information databases, and trade journals. Some of the different criteria
that a company may use to assess potential suppliers include, but are not limited to, the
supplier’s:
Process and design capabilities
Management capability
Financial condition and cost structure
Planning and control systems
Environmental regulation compliance
Longer-term relationship potential
These criteria are worth talking about in more detail.11 Although it may not be
possible to obtain all the relevant information, data that can be obtained will help the
buying firm assess the potential for a successful match.
11 Adapted from Monczka, R., Trent, R., and Handfield, R., Purchasing and Supply Chain Management, Southwestern Publishing, 1997.
32
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Process and Design Capabilities. As we discussed earlier in the book, processes
consist of the technology, equipment, people and information systems used to
manufacture a product or deliver a service. Since different process types have various
strengths and weaknesses, the buying firm must be aware of these characteristics up
front.
When the buying firm expects suppliers to perform component design and
production, it should also assess the supplier’s design capability. One way to reduce the
time required to develop new products is to use qualified suppliers who are able to
perform product design activities.
Management capability. Assessing a potential supplier’s management capability is a
complicated, but important, step. Different aspects of management capability include
management's commitment to continuous process and quality improvement, overall
professional ability and experience, ability to maintain positive relationships with its
workforce, and management’s willingness to develop a closer working relationship with
the buyer. Some questions that might be asked include:
What is the professional managerial experience?
Is there a high degree of turnover among managers?
Has management committed itself to total quality management and continuous
improvement?
33
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Has management prepared the company to withstand the competitive challenges of
the next two decades?
Financial Condition and Cost Structure. An assessment of a potential partner’s
financial condition almost always occurs during the evaluation process. Selecting a
supplier who is in poor financial condition presents a number of risks. First, there is the
risk that the organization will go out of business, disrupting the flow of goods and
information in a supply chain. Second, suppliers who are in poor financial condition may
not have the resources to invest in required personnel, equipment or improvement efforts.
In cases when the supplier is a publicly traded company, specific financial
information can be obtained from sources such as 10-K reports, Moody's Industrials, and
Dunn and Bradstreet. Many key financial ratios can also be calculated using income
statements and balance sheets. In technology-intensive industries, the buying firm might
also look at the company's research and development (R&D) expenditures as a percent of
sales. Moreover, the firm should track such ratios for possible "red flags" that may
signify a potential financial difficulty.
Understanding the supplier’s cost structure also helps determine the effectiveness
and efficiency of the potential partner’s operations. The cost structure includes labor
costs, material costs, manufacturing or process operating costs, and overhead costs.
Collecting this information can be a challenge during the initial evaluation
process. A potential supplier may not have a detailed understanding of its costs at the
level of detail required. Furthermore, many companies consider cost data to be
34
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
proprietary. Even when little or no data is available, some understanding of a potential
partner’s cost structure is a critical part of the evaluation process.
Planning and Control Systems. Planning and control systems includes those systems
that release, schedule, and control the flow of work in an organization. As we shall see in
later chapters, the sophistication of such systems can have a major impact on supply
chain performance. Among the questions the buying firm should ask:
Does the supplier have computerized systems for planning material, personnel and
capacity needs? If not, why not? If so, does the supplier use these systems?
Does the supplier track key performance measures, such as throughput time, quality
levels, and costs? Are these measures compared to performance objectives or standards?
How easy is it for customers to interact with the supplier’s planning and control
systems?
This last point is particularly important to organizations interested in effective
supply chain management. When interaction is high, information about the customer’s
needs flow easily to the supplier, and the customer can, in turn, retrieve important
information from the supplier. Consider the relationship between Wal-Mart and Proctor
and Gamble (P&G). When a Wal-Mart store sells a particular P&G item, the information
flows directly to P&G’s planning and control systems. P&G can then plan production
35
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
and schedule shipments accordingly. Furthermore, Wal-Mart can easily find out when a
P&G shipment will arrive at one of its distribution warehouses, thereby allowing Wal-
Mart to consolidate this shipment with others on the way to individual stores.
Environmental Regulation Compliance. The 1990s brought about a renewed
awareness of the impact that industry has on the environment. The Clean Air Act of
1990 imposes large fines on producers of ozone-depleting substances and foul-smelling
gases, and governments have introduced laws regarding recycling content in industrial
materials. As a result, a supplier's ability to comply with environmental regulations is
becoming an important criterion for supply chain alliances. This includes, but is not
limited to, the proper disposal of hazardous waste.
Longer-Term Relationship Potential. In some cases, a firm may be looking to develop
a long-term relationship with a potential supplier. Perhaps the supplier has a proprietary
technology or foreign market presence that the sourcing firm wants to tap into.
Regardless of the reason, a firm that wants to establish a longer-term relationship with a
supplier must go beyond evaluating the areas just discussed. The firm will need to ask
some additional questions12:
Has the supplier signaled a willingness or commitment to a partnership-type
arrangement?
12 Spekman, Robert E. "Strategic Supplier Selection: Understanding Long-Term Buyer Relationships,"Business Horizons, July-August, 1988., pp. 80-81.
36
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Will the organization immediately revert to a negotiated stance if a problem arises?
Does the supplier have a genuine interest in joint problem solving and a win-win
agreement?
Will there be free and open exchange of needed information across the organizations?
How much future planning is the organization willing to share with us?
Is the need for confidential treatment of information taken seriously?
This is not a complete list of questions that can be asked when evaluating the possibility
of a closer longer-term relationship. This list does provide, however, a framework
concerning the types of issues that are important in this area.
Supplier Selection
Final supplier selection begins once the firm completes the activities required of the
supplier evaluation process. For some items, firms may maintain a list of preferred
suppliers who receive the first opportunity for new business. A preferred supplier has
demonstrated its performance capabilities through previous purchase contracts. By
maintaining a preferred supplier list, purchasing personnel can quickly identify suppliers
with proven performance capabilities. Competitive bidding and negotiation are two
methods commonly used for final supplier selection when there is not a preferred
supplier.
Competitive Bidding. Competitive bidding in private industry entails a request for bids
from suppliers with whom the buyer is willing to do business. This process is typically
37
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
initiated when the purchasing manager sends a request for quotation (RFQ) form to
qualified suppliers. Purchasers often evaluate the resulting bids based on price. If the
lowest bidder does not receive the purchase contract, the buyer has an obligation to
inform that supplier why it did not receive the contract. Competitive bidding is most
effective when13:
The buying firm can provide qualified suppliers with clear descriptions of the items
or services to be purchased.
Volume is high enough to justify the cost and effort.
The firm does not have a preferred supplier.
Buying firms use competitive bidding when price is a dominant criterion and the
required items or services have straightforward specifications. In addition, government
agencies often require competitive bidding. If major non-price variables exist, then the
buyer and seller usually enter into direct negotiation. Competitive bidding can also be
used to identify a short list of suppliers with whom the firm will begin detailed purchase
contract negotiation.
Negotiation. Negotiation is a more costly, interactive approach to final supplier
selection. Face-to-face negotiation is best when:
The item may be a new and/or technically complex item with only vague
specifications.
13 Dobler, Lee, and Burt, Purchasing and Materials Management, 1990, Irwin:Homewood, Illinois, p. 204.
38
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
The purchase requires agreement about a wide range of performance factors.
The buyer requires the supplier to participate in the development effort.
The supplier cannot determine risks and costs without additional input from the
buyer.
One thing is certain--the process that firms use to select suppliers can vary widely
depending on the required item and the relationship that a firm has with its suppliers. For
some items, a buyer may know which supplier to use before the development of final
specifications even occurs. For standard items, the competitive bid process will remain
an efficient method to purchase relatively straightforward requirements. The bid process
can also reduce the list of potential suppliers before a buyer begins time-consuming and
costly negotiation.
Purchase Order Preparation
Once performance of the contract begins, the buyer must periodically signal to the
supplier that delivery of the product or service is required. The most common way of
doing this by releasing Purchase Orders (P.O.s)
More and more, POs are released through electronic data interchange (EDI), the
instantaneous electronic transfer of purchase documents between the buyer and seller.
By eliminating the time associated with the flow of physical documents between supply
chain partners, EDI can reduce the time it takes suppliers to respond to customers needs.
This, in turn, leads to shorter order lead times, lower inventory, and better coordination
39
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
between the supply chain partners. Not surprisingly, as Table 7.8 shows, the use of EDI
has increased significantly over the last several years. 14
Table 7.8: Transmitting material requests to suppliers through EDI
• 74 percent of firms currently have EDI capability with some part of their supply base.
• In 1997, firms using EDI had electronic linkage with 60 percent of their total supply
base (versus 18 percent in 1993). This 60 percent of the total supply base will
represent 70 percent of total purchase dollars.
Almost 65 percent of total purchasing transactions (purchase orders, amendments,
shipping notices or schedules) are linked directly with suppliers through EDI in 1997
Source: 1998 Executive Purchasing and Materials Management Seminar,
Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan
Follow-up and Expediting
Someone (typically Purchasing) must monitor the status of open purchase orders. There
may be times when a purchaser has to expedite an order or work with a supplier to avoid
14MSU Purchasing and Materials Management Executive Seminar, Michigan State University, 1996. This study used data collected by researchers at The Eli Broad Graduate School of Management at Michigan State University and Lehigh University from the MSU Executive Purchasing and Materials Management Seminar. Data were collected by having seminar participants complete a questionnaire prior to attending the seminar. The respondents were primarily from large manufacturing firms.
40
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
a delay in a shipment. A company can minimize order follow-up by selecting only the
best suppliers and developing internally stable forecasting and ordering systems.
In proactive follow-up, managers track orders and stay in touch with suppliers, to
ensure that they are making good progress on the open purchase order. This can help
prevent problems before they occur. On the other hand, reactive follow-up occurs when
an order doesn’t show up, and the buyer must discover what happened, if the shipment
left the supplier’s plant, and why it hasn’t arrived. This type of follow-up typically
results in expediting the shipment, usually at substantial additional costs.
Receipt and Inspection
When the order for a physical good arrives at the buyer’s location, it is received and
inspected to ensure that the right quantity was shipped, and that it was not damaged in-
transit. Assuming that the delivery occurred on-time, it will be entered into the
company’s inventory database, and become part of the company’s working inventory.
In cases when the supplier is performing a service, the buying company must
ensure that the service is being delivered according to the Statement of Work issued in
the Purchase Order. That may mean checking with the actual users within the
organization who requested the service in the first place, and ensuring that all is going as
planned. Deviations from the Statement of Work must be noted and passed on to the
supplying organization.
41
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Invoice Clearance and Payment
Once the item or service is delivered, the buying firm will issue an authorization for
payment to the supplier. Payment is then made through the organizations’ “Accounts
Payable” department. This is increasingly being accomplished through electronic means.
Suppliers are more often being paid through electronic funds transfer (EFT), which
automatically sends a payment from the buying organizations’ bank account to the
suppliers’ bank account. More and more organizations are moving to integrated systems
where all purchase orders, receipts, and payments are made electronically. This form of
business is generally referred to as electronic commerce.
Records Maintenance
After the product or service has been delivered and the supplier paid, a record of critical
events associated with the purchase is entered into a supplier performance database. The
supplier performance database accumulates critical performance data over an extended
period of time, helping purchasing identify trends or patterns in supplier performance.
These data are often used in future negotiations and dealings with the supplier in
question. In the next section, we discuss how such performance evaluation systems
function.
42
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Supplier Evaluation Systems
The purchasing process does not end with the receipt of an ordered item or the selection
of a supplier. Buyers need some way to identify areas requiring attention and to track
supplier performance improvement over time. A supplier evaluation system supports the
continuous management and improvement of suppliers.
Monitoring supplier progress is especially critical if the supplier is developing a
new product or process technology. The buyer must be sure that a supplier can meet
timing targets throughout each phase of the development process. Without a
measurement system, a buyer has little insight into supplier performance over time, and
would lack the quantitative data necessary to support future purchase decisions.
A major issue when evaluating supplier performance is the frequency of
evaluation and feedback. For example, should a buyer receive a daily, weekly,
monthly, or quarterly supplier quality performance report? While most firms recognize
the need to notify suppliers immediately when a problem exists, there is little consensus
about the frequency for conducting routine or scheduled supplier evaluation. For many
firms, this overall evaluation may occur only 1-2 times a year.
In some cases, companies use supplier evaluation systems to develop an overall
summary score of a given supplier’s performance. Scoring systems can provide the
buyer with quick, summary information on suppliers. The buyer (and sometimes the
supplier) can quickly see how the supplier stacks up against other suppliers. Such scores
can serve as input into future negotiations and purchasing decisions. The following
example provides an illustration of how the supplier evaluation process takes place, using
a weighted-point evaluation system.
43
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
***********************************************************************
Boxed Example 7.2: Supplier Evaluation at Electra Company
The Electra Company has decided to re-evaluate the performance of three of its suppliers
of integrated circuit boards (ICBs). In the past, the company has shared all business
equally with the suppliers, and has amassed a significant amount of information on their
performance history. It must now award a large contract for 500,000 ICBs to be
delivered over the next year for a new product they are building. Table 7.9 summarizes
the performance of its three major suppliers with regard to price, quality, and delivery.
Table 7.9: Summary data for three possible suppliers
Criteria Aardvark
Electronics Beverly Hills Inc.
Conan the
Electrician
Price $4 / unit $5 / unit $2 / unit
Quality 5% defects 1% defects 10% defects
Delivery 95% on-time 80% on-time 60% on-time
The process begins by developing a weight for each of the criteria used. The sum
of the weights must equal 1. In this case, the sourcing team assigned to evaluating
suppliers for the new contract has decided that Quality is the most important criteria,
followed closely followed by Delivery and Price. Thus, the team assigns the following
set of performance weights, based on a consensus among the group (note that the exact
criteria and weights may vary, depending on the product or service being purchased).
44
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Price = 0.3
Quality = 0.4
Delivery = 0.3
Total = 1.0
Next, the sourcing team evaluates each supplier’s performance on each of the criteria,
using the following scale:
5 = Excellent. Performance greatly exceeds our expectations.
4 = Good. Performance clearly meets our expectations.
3 = Average. Performance barely satisfies our expectations.
2 = Fair. Performance falls just below our expectations.
1 = Poor. Performance falls well below our expectations.
Based on the product design team's specifications, the Electra sourcing team has
determined that the minimum allowable performance for ICBs is $4.80 per unit, 4%
defects, and 90% on-time delivery. Thus, they proceed to assign performance scores for
each criterion, as shown in Table 7.10. Finally, they calculate a weighted performance
score for price, quality, and delivery, by multiplying the weight for each criteria weight
by each supplier's respective performance score (e.g. the weighted price performance
score for Aardvark is (.3 X 4 = 1.2). Finally, the total score for each supplier is
calculated by adding up the price, delivery, and quality scores (e.g. Total Score for
Beverly Hills = 0.9 + 2.0 + 0.6 = 3.5).
45
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.10: Weighted performance for three possible suppliers
Criteria (Weight) Aardvark
Electronics Beverly Hills Inc.
Conan the
Electrician
Price (.3) $4 / unit
(4)
Price Score = 1.2
$5 / unit
(3)
Price Score = 0.9
$2 / unit
(5)
Price Score = 1.5
Quality (.4) 4% defects
(3)
Quality Score = 1.2
1% defects
(5)
Quality Score = 2.0
10% defects
(1)
Quality Score = 0.4
Delivery (.3) 95% ontime
(4)
Delivery Score =
1.2
80% ontime
(2)
Delivery Score =
0.6
60% ontime
(1)
Delivery Score =
0.3
Total Score Total = 3.6 Total = 3.5 Total = 2.2
Based on the results in Table 7.10, the Electra team must now decide on which
source to use. Conan the Electrician is clearly out of the running. While this supplier has
the lowest price by far, their delivery and quality record is abysmal. This leaves
Aardvark and Beverly Hills. Aardvark has a lower price, but needs to improve its
quality. Beverly Hills has excellent quality, but they have a problem delivering on-time,
and must also find a way to reduce their prices. Because the final scores for the two
suppliers are so close, the result of this decision might be one of the following outcomes:
Award the contract to Aardvark, after a detailed negotiation in which they are asked
to provide details on how they will improve their quality.
46
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Award the contract to Beverly Hills after a detailed negotiation in which they are
asked to reduce their price and explain how they will improve delivery performance.
Award a dual source contract, in which 50% of the business goes to each of the two
suppliers. The contract might state that future volumes will be assigned according to
which supplier improves their performance most quickly.
***********************************************************************
Clearly, supplier evaluation requires a significant amount of judgment in
awarding points and assigning weights. However, the process of identifying key criteria
and assigning numerical scores to performance allows purchasers to be more objective
and comprehensive in their decision-making. Furthermore, conscientious purchasers will
make every effort to back up their ratings with hard data.
Trends in Purchasing Management
Our chapter would not be complete without a look ahead to the trends affecting
purchasing management. The trends and changes we describe here are based on survey
data collected annually at Michigan State University from firms worldwide. As the
findings suggest, the changes occurring within purchasing are as dramatic as those in any
business area.
47
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Long term Contracts and Consolidation
A steady increase in the use of longer-term contracts (2 or more years) has occurred since
1990. The percentage of longer-term contracts to total contracts has increased from
approximately 24 percent in 1990 to 40 percent of total contracts currently. Additionally,
the dollar value of purchases represented by longer-term contracts has increased from 34
percent to 45 percent of total purchase dollars. Within the next several years, at least half
of all contracts should be longer-term, representing two-thirds of the total value of all
purchases.
The pressure to reduce costs has had a major influence on the growth of longer-
term agreements. The use of longer-term agreements can reduce dramatically the costs
associated with maintaining a relationship between a buyer and supplier.
Supplier reduction efforts often precede the development of longer-term purchase
agreements with the remaining suppliers. This way, firms can establish long-term
relationships with a few, high performing suppliers. Also, longer-term purchase
agreements are often a prerequisite to activities requiring closer interaction and
cooperation between a buyer and supplier. As purchasers pursue activities that require
closer relationships, such as early supplier involvement and EDI, expect the use of
longer-term agreements to increase.
The use of longer-term contracts is paralleled by an increase in the number of
purchase consolidation efforts. Purchase consolidation is the pooling of purchasing
requirements by multiple areas in a company, or even across companies. By
consolidating their needs, businesses can achieve higher overall purchasing volumes and
leverage their purchasing efforts. Consolidation provided tremendous cost savings
48
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
opportunities throughout the 1990s and beyond. In fact, most firms have achieved only a
moderate level of consolidation, even when opportunities for consolidation exist.
Supply Base Reduction
In 1990, the average buyer in an organization was responsible for 126 suppliers. By the
late 1990s, buyers regularly did business with about 46 suppliers, representing a decline
of 63 percent from 1990 levels. Note that a reduction in the number of suppliers a firm
maintains is often just a reduction in the total number of first tier suppliers (see Chapter
1). A trend within the automotive industry, for example, has been to rely on larger
suppliers to design and build entire subsystems, such as the automobile’s electrical
system. Instead of dozens of smaller suppliers providing components for the subsystem,
the purchaser uses one major supplier, who then uses dozens of suppliers to help build the
system.
Global Purchasing
In the US, purchases from foreign sources increased from 9 percent in 1990 to 14 percent
of total purchases in the late 1990s. Cost reduction pressures along with a need to gain
worldwide access to process and product technologies continue to push this trend. These
factors will help ensure that a gradual increase in total purchases from international
sources will continue.
49
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Supplier Performance Measurement
By the late 1990s, more than one half of all firms surveyed had defined minimum levels
of acceptable supplier performance, up from one-third of firms in 1990. These levels,
often established as part of the performance benchmarking process, are meant to reflect
best-in-class or world-class performance standards. The growth in acceptable supplier
performance levels is consistent with the growing number of firms maintaining formal
supplier performance measurement systems. The number of firms using formalized
systems to measure supplier performance has increased dramatically, from 47 percent in
1990 to more than 80 percent in the late 1990s. As we have discussed, without these
systems it becomes difficult to make supplier selection decisions, determine where to
commit supplier development resources, and track supplier improvement efforts.
Supplier Technology
Firms forecast a 20-30 percent average increase in their reliance on product and process
technology bought from suppliers. There are four major reasons behind this trend. First,
more firms are focusing on their core competencies, thereby leading them to off-load
non-critical activities to suppliers. Second, there is growing worldwide competition with
accompanying cost and quality pressures. Tapping into the best suppliers helps firms
meet these cost and quality requirements. Third, nearly every organization is feeling
pressure to innovate rapidly and continuously upgrade their performance in critical areas.
Suppliers' design and technical expertise can help meet these needs.
A fourth reason is that many companies now view time-related capabilities as
critical to their success. For instance, in some industries the ability to take new products
50
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
from concept to customer in the shortest possible time will rival the highest perceived
product quality and the lowest product price in importance.
Firms responding to a recent Michigan State survey expected to reduce
development times by 40 to 45 percent over the next several years. To achieve this,
purchasing must pursue activities that support development time reduction, such as early
supplier involvement with computer design interfaces.
Information Technology
Within the next several years, firms expect to establish electronic linkages with more than
60 percent of their supply base, compared with 20-25 percent today. Furthermore, 65
percent of total purchase transactions (purchase orders, amendments, shipping notices or
schedules) should link directly with suppliers through EDI.
Perhaps a more important trend is the emergence of Internet-based business-to-
business exchanges (B2Bs). B2Bs are on-line trading communities that put hundreds or
even thousands of potential buyers and suppliers in touch with one another, and automate
the flow of information between the trading parties. A major advantage of B2Bs over
EDI is that B2Bs take advantage of standardized Internet protocals to make data
interchange much simpler than ever before. This allows even small companies to
participate. Public B2Bs are open to any company that meets certain criteria and is
willing to pay the fees necessary to join and/or transact with other parties. An excellent
example of a public B2B is Ariba (www.Ariba.com). Private B2Bs, in contrast, limit the
trading partners to only a selected group.
51
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Professionalism in Purchasing
In the future, purchasing professionals will perform fewer day-to-day buying activities,
and spend more time on strategic activities such as supplier evaluation and selection, new
product development, and insourcing / outsourcing decisions. To illustrate, many
organizations now issue credit cards to selected users. These cards allow the user
purchase what they require directly from approved sources. The credit card company
issues reports, performs billing, and assumes many responsibilities performed previously
by purchasing.
Information technology will further reduce the clerical burden placed on
purchasing professionals. By relying on information systems, users can order directly
what they require through their computer terminal. Also, production planning and
control systems will generate orders automatically, based on production requirements.
These systems will use EDI to forward component requirements immediately to
suppliers, reducing the need for managerial oversight.
Another development that will reduce the clerical work assumed by purchasing is
the use of suppliers to manage inventory at the customer's site. This is a classic example
of an out-sourced activity that was previously performed by purchasing or materials
management professionals.
These changes concern some purchasing professionals. If, for many years, an
individual’s primary responsibility has been to place purchase orders routinely, what
happens when job requirements shift or even disappear? The purchasing group at a large
Midwest chemical company is currently in transition from “order placing”
responsibilities to more strategic activities.
52
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Table 7.11 summarizes the major changes that are occurring in the area of purchasing
management.
Table 7.11: Trends in purchasing management
Area of Purchasing Traditionally. . . … In the Future
1. Contract length Competitive bidding, renewed annually or semi-annually.
Long-term contracts (more than 2 years) with performance improvement clauses.
2. Purchase consolidation Products and services purchased by individual business units.
Purchases consolidated across business units to leverage volumes and purchasing efforts.
3. Number of suppliers Suppliers switched often, many suppliers used for each purchased product or service.
Firms more likely to single-source or dual-source products or services, to improve performance and reduce costs.
4. Location of suppliers Primarily domestic, or even local.
Global sourcing by the best suppliers in the world
5. Top management's perception of purchasing
Purchasing seen as a “nuisance” or non-value-added activity.
Purchasing seen as a way to harness suppliers' capabilities, especially in new product development.
6. Importance of time Long cycle times tolerated; little involvement of suppliers in new product development process.
Cycle time a critical order-winner; suppliers cooperate in new product development to reduce product development time.
7. Improving supplier’s capabilities
Suppliers expected to improve … or else!
Buying organizations improving supplier performance through supplier development programs
8. Supplier performance measurement
Random or nonexistent monitoring of supplier’s quality, delivery, and price over time
Detailed, formal performance measurement systems to track price, delivery, quality, and other measures.
9. Supplier performance standards.
Low standards if any Increasing levels of performance expected.
53
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
10. Reliance on supplier product and process technology.
Little to none. Suppliers expected to deliver exactly what was asked and no more.
Suppliers active in new product/process development.
11. Electronic information systems linking buyers and suppliers.
Little or none. Increasing use of EDI, B2Bs, CAD/CAM, and web to link supply chain partners.
12. Purchasing responsibilities
Primarily clerical – processing purchase orders.
Increased use of technology for routine activities; more time spent on managing relationships with key suppliers.
Chapter Summary
Purchasing can contribute significantly to profitability, quality performance, speed of
product development, and technological innovation within a firm. Furthermore, executives
have come to recognize the important role purchasing plays in importing value in the form
of supplier’s capabilities into the organization.
However, satisfying internal organizational needs is only part of the buyer's task.
There is an external dimension which makes the task even more complex. The size of the
supply base, as well as the availability of local suppliers, can limit the number of options
available to a buyer. Contemporary supply chain responsibilities require that the purchasing
professional act as an initiator and facilitator of strategic supply chain relationships. The
increasingly critical task domain of the purchasing field has finally led to management
recognition and appreciation of the field’s potential for contributing to long term
competitive advantage.
54
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Discussion Questions
1. What are some of the pros and cons of outsourcing? Why do you think many firms
are experiencing an increase in their levels of outsourcing?
2. Describe the problems associated with the allocation of indirect costs to a product or
service. How does this complicate total cost analyses of sourcing decisions?
3. Someone says to you, “All purchasing does is place orders for goods. What’s the
big deal?” Is this true? What is the big deal?
4. What is a preferred supplier? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using
preferred suppliers?
5. Under what conditions might a company prefer to negotiate rather than use
competitive bidding to select a supplier?
6. In the chapter, we suggested that advanced information systems will automate some
of the more routine purchasing activities. What are the implications for purchasing
professionals? Is this a good time to join the purchasing profession? Explain.
55
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Exercises
Dulaney’s Department Stores has posted the following yearly earnings and expenses:
Earnings & Expenses (Year ending January, 2004)
Sales $50,000,000
Merchandise costs $30,000,000
Pre-tax earning 5,000,000
Selected balance sheet items
Merchandise Inventory $2,500,000
Total assets $8,000,000
1. What is Dulaney’s current profit margin? Its current yearly ROA?
2. How much would Dulaney’s pre-tax earnings increase if merchandise costs were cut
by 10%? What would the impact be on the yearly ROA?
3. How much sales would Dulaney have to generate in order to have the same effect on
pre-tax earnings as a 10% decrease in merchandise costs?
4. What would the yearly ROA be after a 10% cut in merchandise costs?
5. Looking back at Boxed Example 7.2, suppose Conan the Electrician has implemented
a Total Quality Management (TQM) program, and as a result has brought defect levels
down to just 1%, the same as Beverly Hills Inc. Recalculate the weighted performance
score for Conan the Electrician using the weights provided in the boxed example. Should
Electra change their preferred supplier, based on these results?
56
Bozarth and Handfield, Chapter 7 (3/3/03)
Flynn Industries has outsourced the delivery of its products, and now wants to develop a
tool to help it evaluate its transportation carriers. The first table shows the rating values
associated with different levels of price, quality, and delivery performance, as well as
criteria weights that reflect the relative importance of these dimensions. To illustrate how
the ratings work, suppose a carrier has a damage level of 0.82%. This would fall between
0.75% and 1.0%, thereby garnering a rating of 2. The second table shows actual average
performance levels for three carriers.
6. Calculate the weighted average performance for each carrier. Who is “best”?
7. How would the results change if the weights for price, quality, and delivery shifted to
0.6, 0.2 and 0.2 respectively?
8. Based on the results in Problem 1, should Flynn Industries single source or not?
What might stop them from single sourcing?
Rating Values:Suppliers are rated on a scale of 1-5, depending on their specific performance levels
Criterion(weight) 1 2 3 4 5
Price 0.20) > $2.50/lb $2.01-$2.50/lb $1.51-$2.00/lb $1.00-$1.50/lb < $1.00/lbQuality (0.20)
Damage > 1%
Damage 0.75-1.0%
Damage 0.5-0.74%
Damage 0.25-0.49%
Damage < 0.25%
Delivery (0.60)
< 82% on-time 82-84% on-time 85-90% on-time 91-95% on-time > 95% on-time
Carrier A Carrier B Carrier C
Price $1.98/lb Price $2.02/lb $98.00/100lbs
Quality 0.35% damaged Quality 0.26% damaged 0.86% damaged
Delivery 93% on-time Delivery 98% on-time 83% on-time
57
Top Related