To continue our previous discussion on global process ownership, let’s now break down the concept into 3 dimensions.
The first dimension of global process ownership is process breadth/scope. We’ve already discussed it in Part 1, but the concept also applies very well to strategic procurement processes such as category management. As I’ve written previously, category management is defined by managing a spend category across an end-to-end process that includes customer/demand management, sourcing, contract management, P2P and ongoing supplier management. This broader scope is much more powerful then just scoping it to category sourcing (i.e., managing a spend category within the confines of the sourcing process).
The second dimension of global process ownership is the organizational breadth/scope (or “reach”) that defines how broadly and deeply into the organization the process reaches. You can define a very broad scoped process such as source-to-pay, but if you are only implementing it globally for one spend category, you do not have a very broad organizational reach. For procurement, this broadens the conversation widely of spend influence to go beyond measuring the “quantity of influence” by which procurement was involved during the contracting process, and also looks at the “quality of influence” as measured by process ownership of source-to-contract at a minimum, and end-to-end category management as a maximum. In other words, it becomes less about a point-in-time influence model and more about designing and executing a portfolio of spend and processes that become increasingly broader in process scope and broader/deeper in organizational reach.
The ability to increase this process influence then leads to the third dimension of global process ownership. This third dimension is also key to solving what I call the “global category management problem,” which is when procurement tries to frame global category management as how to manage a category as a “global category” with a single global supplier. It is framed as an “either/or” problem where either corporate procurement manages the global category or it’s left to local groups to figure it out. The problem with this is that you are framing category management only through the lens of category sourcing with a focus on spend aggregation via supplier rationalization as the only lever. The solution lies in the third dimension of global process ownership.
There are many issues bound up in this concept that marries organizational design and process design (enabled with good technology, of course, too), and it’s important to “unpack” them so that you can figure out how to go broader and deeper with your process ownership in order to drive better competencies… and better performance outcomes. If you want to discuss this topic, please feel free to comment or reach out to me directly.