1
|
|
2
|
|
3
|
- Over 40% of the utilities, and 38% of the suppliers believe double-digit
price/cost reductions are available in their major equipment purchases
if more advanced sourcing strategies, including total life cycle cost
techniques were incorporated. The
balance believe a 3-8% price/cost reduction exists.
- 75% of the suppliers believe the reductions could be achieved if lowest
total life cycle cost (LTLC) sourcing strategies were used. On the other hand, 38% of the
utilities believe LTLC and 25% believe equipment standardization would
yield the best results.
Cross-functional teaming, supplier alliances and supply base
improvements were sighted as offering the best returns by the balance of
the utilities
|
4
|
- Key Findings: (continued)
- 78% of suppliers and 66% of utilities report utility engineers and end
users exert the most influence on the major equipment buys. Cross-functional teams were noted as
having the most influence by only 11% of the suppliers and 17% of the
utilities.
- Only 13% of utilities report purchasing involvement up front in the
requirements definition and functional analysis phases of the sourcing
process, indicating lowest total life cycle cost evaluations are being
ignored at the beginning of the sourcing process.
|
5
|
|
6
|
|
7
|
|
8
|
- Limited
- Maintenance Focused
- Operations Focused
- Cross-functional
Integration
- Life Cycle Cost
|
9
|
|
10
|
|
11
|
|
12
|
- Needs identification
- Functional analysis/design specification
- Supplier research, evaluation, and selection
- Price and terms establishment
- Order processing and delivery
- Installation and service
- Maintenance, performance measurement, and disposal
|
13
|
|
14
|
- End User (Operations and/or Maintenance)
- Senior Management
- Plant Management
- Engineering
- Purchasing
- Cross-functional Teams
|
15
|
- End User (Operations and/or Maintenance)
- Senior Management
- Plant Management
- Engineering
- Purchasing
- Cross-functional Teams
|
16
|
- 0%: We can’t do any more
- 1-3%: We’ve pretty much explored
all total cost reduction areas
- 4-8%: We see some fairly good
opportunities
- 9-15%: We see some very good
potentials
- + 15%: We can do much better, the
potential is significant
|
17
|
- 0%: We can’t do any more
- 1-3%: We’ve pretty much explored
all total cost reduction areas
- 4-8%: We see some fairly good
opportunities
- 9-15%: We see some very good
potentials
- + 15%: We can do much better, the
potential is significant
|
18
|
|
19
|
|
20
|
- Nonexistent: We are primarily driven by immediate
business needs, and strategic sourcing is not at the top of the list.
- Operating Budgets: Each year we
talk about capital equipment strategic sourcing, yet really focus on
buying on price versus total cost.
- Annual Plans – In additional to an annual budget, each department
involved with major equipment develops annual department goals. The
various departments’ goals are typically not linked.
- Planned – We do go through a cross-functional, goal-oriented sourcing
strategy development process. Our
plans are terrific, it’s operating to the plan that we struggle with.
- Fully Planned and Integrated – Strategic sourcing is a systematic, cross-functional and
operational process. Our strategy
is written, business driven and includes active supplier contribution. We operate according to the plan.
|
21
|
- Non-existent
- Operating Budgets
- Annual Plans
- Planned
- Fully Planned and
Integrated
|
22
|
|
23
|
- Standardization
- Supplier Alliances
- Supply Base
- Outsourcing
- Cross-functional Teaming
- Total Cost Focus
- E-procurement
|
24
|
- Standardization
- Supplier Alliances
- Supply Base
- Outsourcing
- Cross-functional Teaming
- Total Cost Focus
- E-procurement
|
25
|
|
26
|
|
27
|
|
28
|
|
29
|
|
30
|
|
31
|
|
32
|
|
33
|
|
34
|
|
35
|
|
36
|
|
37
|
|
38
|
|
39
|
|