Back to Hub

SirionLabs: Vendor Analysis (Part 2) — Product Strengths & Weaknesses

07/21/2016 By

Image by Bruce Shippee sourced from Adobe Stock

Many procurement organizations looking at SirionLabs for the first time might be surprised at the level of depth the solution goes to around enabling better savings, outcomes and value centered on a single type of spending: highly strategic, highly complex and often highly fluid services relationships. Compared with other source-to-pay (S2P) solutions in which organizations engage and manage categories and spending across dozens, hundreds or even thousands of suppliers, some SirionLabs customers often use it for just a single supplier (although many use it for more than this).

For those that manage truly strategic services suppliers, this should not be a surprise. Just as there is not a one-size-fits-all strategy to achieving savings in procurement, there is not a one-size approach to managing suppliers that procurement can apply across the lifecycle of relationships from pre-contracting to post-contracting. Moreover, by the same token, the value levers that we can pull most effectively vary dramatically by category and spend/supplier characteristics as well.

This Spend Matters PRO vendor snapshot explores SirionLabs’ strengths and weaknesses, providing facts and expert analysis to help procurement organizations decide if they should shortlist the vendor as a potential provider. Part 1 of our analysis comprised a company and detailed solution overview, a SWOT analysis and a summary recommended fit suggestion for what types of organizations should consider SirionLabs. The final installments of this multipart series will offer a user selection guide, user interface (UI/UX) analysis, competitive alternatives and evaluation and selection considerations.

This article requires a paid membership that has access to Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM).
Please log in or create an account to view this article
Vendor Analysis