More About the "Influence Model"
My last post was on the influence model applied to product design for the supply chain, following an interview with an engineer. A prior post a few months ago also referenced the importance of working with stakeholders in category management.
Clearly, this is a topic that has generated a lot of interest, as the headline article in this month’s copy of Inside Supply Management also discusses the influence model. The article “Building Relationships…Measuring Satisfaction” discusses how important it is to identify stakeholder feedback on sourcing. They recommend using face to face discussions, surveys, cross-functional teams, and other ways to ensure that the voice of the stakeholder is heard.
Former CPO of Ministry Health, Tom Nash, was interviewed for the article. Tom has been extremely supportive of the Supply Chain Resource Cooperative at NC State, and during his stint at Ministry, involved many of our students in projects with his staff. Tom is quick to point out that “supply management doesn’t own internal stakeholders’ budgets, we don’t own their spend, and we don’t run their business unit/functions. Supply management provides stakeholders with fact-based proposals on how to better manage their spend based on reality, our expertise, and best practice.”
Well said Tom. This blogger couldn’t agree with you more. And I also experienced first hand another method of eliciting feedback that wasn’t mentioned in the article. This occurred during a visit to a large pharmaceutical company’s annual meeting of Supply Directors. A new CPO had just come on board, and sat his entire team down in a room to make sure they were very clear on what his expectations were. But he didn’t express them directly to them. Instead, he brought in the Senior VP’s of Finance, Marketing, R&D, and Manufacturing to come in and tell the people exactly what kind of a job they were doing. I saw them at the end of the day – and needless to say, it wasn’t a pretty sight. Having been run through the wringer, they recognized that they were not only falling short, but actually doing a darn right poor job.
No survey was needed in this case.
