Plus or PRO Content

The First Row Seat: Interpreting Q4 2017 SolutionMap Results With Jason Busch — SAP Ariba, Basware and Coupa [PRO]

The Q4 2017 SolutionMap was a major product release for Spend Matters. It included six individual functional product types, two suite areas and spanned 32 vendors. Despite our marketing claims of having invested “hundreds of hours” of analyst time in the process, the actual number felt like more in the thousands, by my own accounting. I told one of my colleagues I felt like I was “in the Matrix” at one would point when looking at technology provider demonstrations.

It was a Herculean effort here on the Spend Matters side by roughly a dozen people. I played my part, but so did so many others. And now we start all over again working on the Q1 2018 release, adding new providers and updating current participants. (We encourage existing participants to update their RFIs and provide new product demonstrations twice per year, although this is just a recommended level. As for submitting additional customer survey participants, we always welcome new ones on a quarterly basis and will be “self-sourcing” validated reviews starting in Q1, as well.)

While I have not yet fulfilled all of my own deliverable obligations for SolutionMap to our trusty editorial team — the final three pieces are coming by tomorrow, I promise! — I could not wait any longer to share my own interpretation of some of the results.

This Spend Matters PRO Research Note does not necessarily represent the views of Spend Matters or my colleagues. But as the founder of this thing, please grant me the license to share some personal opinions on what the results may tell us, including insights into some of the providers that are on the rise (and others potentially on the fall). Today I’ll share insights into three providers: SAP Ariba, Basware and Coupa. For each, I’ll provide SolutionMap interpretation, opinion, analysis and some succinct recommendations to customers, prospects and partners.

In a follow-up piece, I’ll share my thoughts on other providers. Finally, in the coming weeks, I’ll also offer my opinion about how to interpret the overall SolutionMap results and cases where practitioners really need to unpack each persona to identify the best-fit providers to support a given initiative.

SolutionMap is in many ways the new Spend Matters, and while it is designed to be data driven and equal parts expert and customer led, I built a large chunk of the original site on opinion. (And, I admit, sometimes gossip, though most of it proved true!) After all, Spend Matters was a blog for so long. So let me opine and share what I really think.

What is Your Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) Persona? Understand Your Requirements to Find the Best Technology Provider [PRO]

No two contracts are alike, nor are organizations’ requirements for managing those contracts. It stands to reason then that there’s no single contract management application that will magically meet all procurement organizations better than another. This philosophy underpins our approach to the Spend Matters SolutionMap, a comparative analytical framework for practitioners to evaluate relevant solutions to meet their needs.

Our SolutionMap approach depicts vendor rankings based on specific buyer personas to reflect the unique value proposition, solution strategy and customer segments served by that provider. Participating vendors are scored both on their Solution Value, which is technology based in this case, as well as on Customer Value, based on in-depth tech reviews (including deep dive demonstrations) by the Spend Matters analyst team and aggregated from direct customer feedback. Each SolutionMap is updated quarterly rather than in 12-month (or longer) cycles, to accurately reflect the pace of market developments.

As part of the first release of the contract lifecycle management (CLM) SolutionMap, the Spend Matters analyst team has developed unique organizational personas that we’ve most often seen in our decades of experience working with procurement organizations. We have used these personas to customize the weightings of the requirements that we used in the weighting of solution scoring (which is graphically depicted as the y-axis SolutionMap) and also of customer satisfaction scoring (the x-axis) by end user organizations.

Having collected feedback from hundreds of CLM users, vendors and consultants in recent months as part of our SolutionMap research, we developed these personas to serve as useful starting points for procurement organizations to classify themselves and help them gain more insightful solution rankings of providers in the market. As in some other areas, baseline functionality is fairly undifferentiated. All the providers will have decent support for contract clauses, templates, amendments, version/change control, access control, audit trails, file attachments, flexible workflow engines, role-based dashboards, modern IaaS infrastructure and partnerships with popular digital signature vendors.

As such, this Spend Matters PRO analysis describes the CLM-focused requirements from these personas that differentiate the relevant solutions in the market. For each persona, we include full definitions, typical organizational priorities (based on each persona), functional/solution, and customer value emphasis and recommended selection processes. Comparative vendor rankings will be published for each persona next week on Spend Matters and updated quarterly.

Vendor Summary Report: Spend Analytics SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

This SolutionMapSM analyzes a select group of spend analytics providers. It includes coverage of spend analytics capabilities that encourages subscribers to “peel the onion” beyond cleansing, classification, enrichment and reporting capabilities alone. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring sourcing, supplier management contract management, e-procurement and invoice-to-pay providers. Our Q4 2017 release also features SolutionMaps for procure-to-pay and strategic procurement technology suites.

Spend Matters tracks more than 50 analytics providers with offerings targeting the procurement market today. This analysis features many of the largest spend analytics providers including AnyData Solutions, BravoSolution, Determine, GEP, Ivalua, Jaggaer, SAP Ariba, Sievo, Spendency, SpendHQ and Zycus. Among these providers it features select category, functional and industry capability of providers, although it does not highlight them in a specific persona.

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective.

Dive deeper with our full analysis.

Vendor Summary Report: Supplier Management SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

supplier network

This SolutionMapSM analyzes a select group of supplier management (SXM) providers. It includes coverage of supplier information management (SIM), supplier master data management (MDM), supplier performance management and broader initiative management (e.g., risk, third-party management) capabilities. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring spend analytics, sourcing, contract management, e-procurement and invoice-to-pay providers. Our Q4 2017 also features SolutionMaps for procure-to-pay and strategic procurement technology suites.

Spend Matters tracks more than 50 supplier management solution providers today. This analysis features many of the largest supplier management providers, including BravoSolution, Determine, GEP, Ivalua, Lavante (PRGX), Hiperos 3PM (Opus Global), Jaggaer, Jaggaer Direct (formerly Pool4Tool), SAP Ariba, State of Flux and Zycus. Among these providers it features select industry/specialty capability of providers, although it does not highlight them in a specific persona, a change from our last SolutionMap release.

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective.

Dive deeper with our full analysis.

What is Your Sourcing Persona? Understand Your Requirements to Find the Best Technology Provider [PRO]

No two procurement or supply chain organizations are alike. Each has its own persona that reflects not only its own value proposition and engagement approach but also the stakeholders it serves — and its supply base.

The same principle holds true of sourcing application providers. Each has a persona — or set of personas — that reflects its value proposition, solution strategy and targeted customer segments. Therefore, procurement organizations should seek providers whose personas best align to theirs. In other words, there is no “magic” solution provider, and finding the right fit is critical, because sourcing applications are critical to create value through savings, cost avoidance, risk management and value contribution to the business.

To that end, we are excited to preview our approach to Spend Matters SolutionMapSM, a comparative analytical framework for practitioners to evaluate relevant solutions to meet their procurement needs.

Our SolutionMap initiative depicts vendor rankings based on specific buyer personas to reflect the unique value proposition, solution strategy and customer segments served by a vendor. Participating vendors are scored both on their Solution capability as well as on Customer Value, based on in-depth tech reviews (including live demos) by the Spend Matters analyst team and aggregated direct customer input from surveys. Each SolutionMap is updated quarterly rather than in 12-month (or longer) cycles, to accurately reflect the pace of market developments.

As part of our second Spend Matters SolutionMap vendor comparison ranking for sourcing and other strategic procurement technologies, the Spend Matters analyst team has dedicated considerable time to developing the unique organizational “personas” that we’ve most often seen in our decades of experience working with practitioner organizations. We have used these personas to weight the requirements that we used in solution scoring, which includes customer satisfaction scoring by solution customers.

Having collected feedback from hundreds of sourcing users in recent months as part of our SolutionMap research, we see these personas as useful starting points for procurement organizations to classify themselves before looking at solution rankings of providers in the market. This Spend Matters PRO analysis shares six of the most common customer personas for sourcing buying requirements. Aimed at practitioners as well as vendors and the consultants advising them, this research brief will be helpful to drive the type of “mass customization” of strategic procurement technology solutions needed to meet specific organizational needs.

Below, we present our six personas for sourcing. For each, we include full definitions, typical organizational priorities (based on each persona), functional/solution and customer value emphasis and recommended selection processes. Comparative vendor rankings are published for each persona separately on Spend Matters (and updated quarterly).

Vendor Summary Report: Sourcing SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

This SolutionMapSM analyzes a select group of sourcing providers. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring spend analytics, contract management, supplier relationship management and risk (SRM), e-procurement and invoice-to-pay providers. SolutionMap also features procure-to-pay and strategic procurement technology suites.

Spend Matters tracks more than 40 sourcing solution providers today. This analysis features many of the largest sourcing providers, including BravoSolution, Coupa, Determine, EC Sourcing, GEP, Ivalua, Jaggaer, Jaggaer Direct (formerly Pool4Tool), Keelvar, SAP Ariba, Scout RFP and Zycus. Among these providers, the Sourcing SolutionMap features select industry/specialty capability of providers, although it does not highlight them in a specific persona, a change from our last SolutionMap release.

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective.

Dive deeper with our full analysis.

Q4 2017 SolutionMap E-Procurement, Invoice-to-Pay and Procure-to-Pay Release Notes [PRO]

The Q4 2017 SolutionMap release for E-Procurement, Invoice-to-Pay (I2P) and Procure-to-Pay (P2P) saw a number of changes from the Q2 2017 release. This includes the addition of new providers and updated buying personas.

In addition, as new providers joined the process, solution innovation increased among existing participants and the number of customer references grew — approximately 150 customers in total for E-Procurement, I2P and P2P are now included in the SolutionMap benchmark — the overall SolutionMaps and scores changed considerably.

This Spend Matters PRO Release Note provides insight into the Q4 2017 SolutionMap release for E-Procurement, I2P and P2P, focusing on what changed from the previous release, including detailed analyst insights, updated persona definitions and vendor scoring criteria.

Vendor Summary Report: E-Procurement SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

This SolutionMap℠ analyzes a select group of E-Procurement solution providers. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring Spend Analytics, Sourcing, Supplier Management, Contract Management and Invoice-to-Pay providers. Our Q4 release also features SolutionMaps for Procure-to-Pay and Strategic Procurement Technology suites.

Summary

Spend Matters tracks over 50 procure-to-pay solution providers. This analysis features many of the largest e-procurement providers, including Basware, BuyerQuest, Coupa, Determine, GEP, IBX, Ivalua, Nimbi, SAP Ariba, Vroozi, Wescale and Zycus. Data from other providers is also included in our SolutionMap scoring benchmarks. Among the providers featured, this SolutionMap release includes select industry and specialty capability of providers, although it does not specifically highlight them in a specific “Persona” (a change from our last SolutionMap release).

Scoring and Ratings Inputs

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective. It provides a breakdown of Solution scoring for each vendor on an overall category level. This includes each provider’s comparative capability to support:
  • Catalog management
  • Shopping / requisitioning
  • Ordering / order management
  • Receiving
  • Supplier network
  • Configurability
  • Technology / architecture
  • Services
Solution scoring is based on analysis of individual vendor capability, including in-depth technology reviews, a highly detailed Spend Matters RFI and live demonstrations and Q&A by the Spend Matters team. The Customer Value score stems from aggregated direct customer input (survey-based). The SolutionMap also provides insight into how customers scored each Supplier Management vendor based on a Customer Value scorecard (e.g. likelihood of recommending the provider, level of value perceived, business value, ability to meet expectations, deployment speed, ROI, TCO and innovation). Spend Matters SolutionMap database includes over 275 customer references collected in 2017. Intentionally our “map” approach does not “co-mingle” Solution and Customer Value scoring, allowing readers to prioritize what matters most to them. Using SolutionMaps While Spend Matters does not recommend that existing and potential customers of providers use technology and customer scoring alone to shortlist and/or evaluate technology providers, the insight, along with SolutionMap persona-based ratings, provides a point-in-time perspective which may be useful as either a starting point in an evaluation or a contributing factor to a formal software selection process. Going Deeper in the Data Spend Matters reserves its most granular level of scoring and analysis for our practitioner advisory clients, and we invite procurement organizations to contact us for more information. For example, Spend Matters maintains detailed scoring insights and ratings in specific areas such as shopping / requisitioning (e.g., requisitioning set up, marketplace user interface, marketplace dashboard, profiles, search engine, third-party content, requisitioning process, systems integration, non-catalog, services requisitions, preferred supplier management, repetitive requisitions, help and support, shopping cart / checkout process, approval process / approval engine, guided buying, sourcing integration, requisitioning budget checking process, requisitioning inventory checking process, mobility, analytics, multi-currency / languages). This allows us to provide highly granular insight into how specific solutions compare to both an industry standard Spend Matters benchmark and peer group / competitive vendors, for each of these areas to support technology selection processes. We allow PRO subscribers — and on a much deeper level, our practitioner advisory clients within procurement organizations going through a selection process — to get into the data as much or as little as they require.

Vendor Summary Report: Invoice-to-Pay SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

e-invoicing

This SolutionMapSM analyzes a select group of invoice-to-pay solution providers. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring spend analytics, sourcing, supplier management, contract management and e-procurement providers. Our Q4 release also features SolutionMaps for procure-to-pay and strategic procurement technology suites.

Summary

Spend Matters tracks more than 50 procure-to-pay solution providers. This analysis features many of the largest invoice-to-pay providers, specifically Basware, Coupa, Determine, GEP, Ivalua, Invocus (Zycus), SAP Ariba, Taulia, Tradeshift and Vroozi. Data from other providers is also included in our SolutionMap scoring benchmarks. Among the providers featured, this SolutionMap release includes select industry/specialty capability of providers, although it does not highlight them in a specific persona, a change from our last SolutionMap release.

Scoring and Ratings Inputs

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective.

It provides a breakdown of Solution scoring for each vendor on an overall category level. This includes each provider’s comparative capability to support:
  • Invoice structure/capture
  • Invoice collaboration
  • Compliance
  • Additional invoicing technology components
  • Financing
  • Payment
  • Supplier network
  • Configurability
  • Technology/architecture
  • Services
Solution scoring is based on analysis of individual vendor capability, including in-depth technology reviews, a highly detailed Spend Matters RFI and live demonstrations and Q&A by the Spend Matters team. The Customer Value score stems from aggregated direct customer input (survey based).

The SolutionMap also provides insight into how customers scored each Supplier Management vendor based on a Customer Value scorecard (e.g., likelihood of recommending the provider, level of value perceived, business value, ability to meet expectations, deployment speed, ROI, TCO and innovation). The Spend Matters SolutionMap database includes more than 275 customer references collected in 2017.

Our SolutionMap approach intentionally does not “co-mingle” Solution and Customer Value scoring, allowing readers to prioritize what matters most to them.

Using SolutionMap

While Spend Matters does not recommend that existing and potential customers of providers use technology and customer scoring alone to shortlist or evaluate technology providers, the insight, along with SolutionMap persona-based ratings, provides a point-in-time perspective that may be useful as either a starting point in an evaluation or a contributing factor to a formal software selection process.

Going Deeper in the Data

Spend Matters reserves its most granular level of scoring and analysis for our practitioner advisory clients, and we invite procurement organizations to contact us for more information.

For example, Spend Matters maintains highly granular scoring insights and ratings in specific areas such as invoicing collaboration and compliance (e.g., core collaboration, invoice validation, invoice approvals, invoice integrations and invoice compliance).

This allows us to provide highly granular insight into how specific solutions compare to both an industry standard Spend Matters benchmark and peer group/competitive vendors for each of these areas to support technology selection processes. We allow PRO subscribers — and on a much deeper level, our practitioner advisory clients within procurement organizations going through a selection process — to get into the data as much or as little as they require.

Vendor Summary Report: Procure-to-Pay Suites SolutionMap℠ Q4 2017 [PRO]

purchasing

This SolutionMapSM analyzes a select group of procure-to-pay solution providers. It is part of our Q4 2017 SolutionMap report series, also featuring spend analytics, sourcing, supplier management, contract management, e-procurement and invoice-to-pay providers. Our Q4 release also features SolutionMaps for Strategic Procurement Technology suites.

Summary

Spend Matters tracks more than 50 procure-to-pay solution providers. This analysis features many of the largest invoice-to-pay providers, specifically Basware, Coupa, Determine, GEP, Ivalua, SAP Ariba, Vroozi and Zycus. Data from other providers is also included in our SolutionMap scoring benchmarks. Among the providers featured, this SolutionMap release includes select industry/specialty capability of providers, although it does not highlight them in a specific persona, a change from our last SolutionMap release.

Scoring and Ratings Inputs

SolutionMap ratings provide comparative rankings and insight into how each provider scored from a Solution perspective and Customer Value perspective.

It provides a breakdown of Solution scoring for each vendor on an overall category level. This includes each provider’s comparative capability to support:
  • Catalog management
  • Shopping/requisitioning
  • Ordering/order management
  • Receiving
  • Invoice structure/capture
  • Invoice collaboration
  • Compliance
  • Additional invoicing technology components
  • Financing
  • Payment
  • Supplier network
  • Configurability
  • Technology/architecture
  • Services
Solution scoring is based on analysis of individual vendor capability, including in-depth technology reviews, a highly detailed Spend Matters RFI and live demonstrations and Q&A by the Spend Matters team. The Customer Value score stems from aggregated direct customer input (survey based).

The SolutionMap also provides insight into how customers scored each Supplier Management vendor based on a Customer Value scorecard (e.g., likelihood of recommending the provider, level of value perceived, business value, ability to meet expectations, deployment speed, ROI, TCO and innovation). The Spend Matters SolutionMap database includes more than 275 customer references collected in 2017.

Our “map” approach intentionallt does not “co-mingle” Solution and Customer Value scoring, allowing readers to prioritize what matters most to them.

Using SolutionMap

While Spend Matters does not recommend that existing and potential customers of providers use technology and customer scoring alone to shortlist or evaluate technology providers, the insight, along with SolutionMap persona-based ratings, provides a point-in-time perspective that may be useful as either a starting point in an evaluation or a contributing factor to a formal software selection process.

Going Deeper in the Data

Spend Matters reserves its most granular level of scoring and analysis for our practitioner advisory clients, and we invite procurement organizations to contact us for more information.

For example, Spend Matters maintains highly granular scoring insights and ratings in specific areas such as supplier network capability (e.g., supplier on-boarding, supplier information management, supplier performance and risk management, catalog management, order management, invoicing, other supplier network value-added services and ability to connect to multiple networks).

This allows us to provide highly granular insight in how specific solutions compare to both an industry standard Spend Matters benchmark and peer group/competitive vendors for each of these areas to support technology selection processes. We allow PRO subscribers — and on a much deeper level, our practitioner advisory clients within procurement organizations going through a selection process — to get into the data as much or as little as they required.

What is Your E-Procurement Persona? Understand Your Requirements and Mass Customize Your Vendor Shortlist (Q4 2017 Update) [PRO]

No two procurement organizations are alike. Each has its own persona that reflects not only its own value proposition and engagement approach but also the stakeholders it serves.

The same principle holds true of procure-to-pay (P2P) application providers. Each has a persona (or more than one persona) that reflects its value proposition, solution strategy and targeted customer segments. Therefore, procurement organizations should seek providers whose personas best align to theirs. In other words, there is no “magic” solution provider, and finding the right fit is critical, because a P2P application represents the main interface for most of procurement’s internal customers.

To that end, we are excited to preview our approach to Spend Matters SolutionMapTM, a comparative analytical framework for practitioners to evaluate relevant solutions to meet their procurement needs. Our SolutionMap initiative depicts vendor rankings based on specific buyer personas to reflect the unique value proposition, solution strategy and customer segments served by a vendor. Participating vendors are scored both on their solution as well as on customer value, based on in-depth tech reviews (including live demos) by the Spend Matters analyst team and aggregated direct customer input from surveys. Each SolutionMap is updated quarterly rather than in 12-month (or longer) cycles, to accurately reflect the pace of market developments.

As part of our second Spend Matters SolutionMap vendor comparison ranking, the Spend Matters analyst team has dedicated considerable time to developing the unique organizational “personas” that we’ve most often seen in our decades of experience working with procurement organizations. We have used these personas to weight the requirements that we used in solution scoring, which includes customer satisfaction scoring by solution customers.

Having collected feedback from hundreds of e-procurement users, vendors and consultants in recent months as part of our SolutionMap research, we see these personas as useful starting points for procurement organizations to classify themselves before looking at solution rankings of providers in the market. This multi-part Spend Matters PRO analysis shares five of the most common customer personas in e-procurement and invoice-to-pay (the two segments that comprise the P2P market), with a look here at e-procurement. Aimed at practitioners as well as vendors and the consultants advising them, this research brief is the first step in the “mass customization” of procure-to-pay solutions to meet specific organizational needs.

Below, we present our five personas for e-procurement. For each, we include the following: full definitions, typical organizational priorities (based on each persona), functional/solution and customer value emphasis and recommended selection processes. Comparative vendor rankings are published for each persona separately on Spend Matters (and updated quarterly).

What is Your Procure-to-Pay Persona? Understand Your Requirements and Mass Customize Your Vendor Shortlist (Q4 2017 Update) [PRO]

No two procurement or finance organizations are alike. Each has its own persona that reflects not only its own value proposition and engagement approach but also the stakeholders it serves — and its supply base. The same principle holds true of procure-to-pay (P2P) application providers. Each has a persona (or more than one persona) that reflects its value proposition, solution strategy and targeted customer segments. Therefore, companies should seek providers whose personas best align to theirs. In other words, there is no “magic” solution provider, and finding the right fit is critical, because a P2P application represents the main interface for most of procurement’s internal customers — and a common face to suppliers, as well.

To that end, we are excited to break down our approach to Spend Matters SolutionMap, a comparative analytical framework for practitioners to evaluate relevant solutions to meet their procurement needs. Our SolutionMap initiative depicts vendor rankings based on specific buyer personas to reflect the unique value proposition, solution strategy and customer segments served by a vendor. Participating vendors are scored both on their Solution as well as on Customer Value, based on in-depth tech reviews (including live demos) by the Spend Matters analyst team and aggregated direct customer input from surveys. Each SolutionMap is updated quarterly rather than in 12-month (or longer) cycles, to accurately reflect the pace of market developments.

As part of our second Spend Matters SolutionMap vendor comparison ranking, for procure-to-pay solutions, the Spend Matters analyst team has dedicated considerable time to developing the unique organizational “personas” that we’ve most often seen in our decades of experience working with procurement organizations. We have used these personas to weight the requirements that we used in solution scoring, which includes customer satisfaction scoring by solution customers.

Having collected feedback from hundreds of P2P users, vendors and consultants in recent months as part of our SolutionMap research, we see these personas as useful starting points for procurement organizations to classify themselves before looking at solution rankings of providers in the market. This Spend Matters PRO analysis shares five of the most common customer personas for procure-to-pay, spanning both e-procurement and invoice-to-pay solution areas. Aimed at practitioners as well as vendors and the consultants advising them, this research brief is the first step in the “mass customization” of procure-to-pay solutions to meet specific organizational needs.

Below, we present our five personas for procure-to-pay. For each, we include the following: full definitions, typical organizational priorities (based on each persona), functional / solution and customer value emphasis and recommended selection processes. Comparative vendor rankings are published for each persona separately on Spend Matters (and updated quarterly).