In a message dated 7/3/00 12:58:11 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Re: Are there really any benefits
This particular thread seems to bounce around the difficulty of truely and
totally automated transactions between trading partners. I submit: IMHO,
this is a "programmer" point of view, "IT" perhaps. But the marketing
management (those who really have the "ear" of not only management, but the
ear of the stockholders and those who analyze all of "that"), of the
"seller", is simultaneously promoting new software applications to "manage
the relationship" with the "buyer". Notice the word "relationship". It
alludes to "Relationship Selling"; that is, recognizing that the buyer must
"buy" something from some seller PRONTO! Or he's outa there! If they don't
need it RIGHT NOW, they will choose to deal with it later, bc. LOTS of things
must be tended to in the now (you can't change the past, the future never
gets "here", so .... live in the now). Very often the buyer doesn't even
have a clue what it is he must buy, just a part number, nebulous (seller
centric) description, etc. (ask any true "junior buyer", those who dare not
reveal their dilemma to anyone on either "side"). Thus, they desperately and
immediately need to contact a "source" they truely trust to get the right
thing to the right place at the right time, for the continuance of their
career ability to feed themselves and their family. They cut a PO to a
trusted vendor and "rely" on him/them to do do that voodoo that they do.
That that vendor has no marketing representation for such a product line,
whatsoever, should never be the point/stall-the-deal. Any more moments spent
rectifying any objections to this method, at that point and place in time,
waste lots of cash in lots of ways, places, etc. Trust has been extended,
and is relied upon to prevent any "career breaker". Period. The
"relationship" attribute of business transactions proves it's primacy, again.
The "package" gets there on time. Post "game" analysis should be obviated
by the realization of the fact that it was a "realtionship(sic) deal" entered
into by trusted parties by their trusted personnel. You don't trust'em? Why
you still got'em? Wouldn't that reveal that you're the failure there?
That's doin the biz. It's FAST! A "field expedient". This all presupposes
you knew what you were doing (getting into) when you re-upped for the job;
evaluating your "men", and managing their assignments (truely; duties).
Along comes supply chain management to cut the costs of such transactions not
delivering the savings of not spending the payroll for "shopping" a deal to
death (tho those "deals" are the ones that "saved the ship", so the bean
counters could "reveal" how savings were not optimized) at the expense of
saving the ship. Be alert when they whip out the spread sheet that flawlessly
proves that keeping the Company operating is clearly unnecessary (and
therefore illegitimate) risk taking; and pay attention to the part where they
recommend maximum savings; SHUT THE SUCKER DOWN! NOW! Save all the money.
Hence, (most) marketing managers are aware of things like "order
verification" (as policy; ALL ORDERS) and the real world anguish of delays in
achieving same. My own experience is that I wanted to know ASAP!! when a
deal I had busted my heart to get, instance or ongoing - no matter, got got.
And let me calculate my cut (try and stop me). I won't let an incorrect
price, quantity, margin or detail put my now realized gain in jeopardy, or my
long term trust relationship w/the client. Yes, my management might want the
time I just spent to do that validation (with more care and raw speed than
anyone else could be relied on for) as quality face time in front of the next
prospect, but as I said, other validators will make mistakes I would not, as
a matter of vested interest (we're talking the underpinnings of reliability
here). All entities have ugly stories of deals that were mis-valuated and
the profit leak that had to be swallowed to support the relationship with the
client; some can speak further of how such bad deals were then automatically
perpetuated by (soulless) software. IMHO, a substantial number if IT,
accounting, programming, etc., folks have no real world experience of
"getting" caught in a bad relationship; which obviates that both side suffer
terribly.
So in conclusion, serve your stewardship well. Get Marketing the tools that
produce the income for us to covet, on the reliable and regular basis our own
spending needs truely depend. Until they successfully sell something,
everybody stay home; there's no money to pay you and nothing of real value
you can do for us.
Regards,
Jim Cunningham
P.S.
My own experience of 8 yrs. outside selling to all size companies (few don't
have at least one torch outfit from a welding/industrial supply company, and
so many purchase lots of such things), then trying to manage that work of
others, and then trying to code both the activities and management of all
that has left me with the notion that Sales people should be held responsible
(directly) for the margin/bottom-line they produce for the sharing in, and
rewarded accordingly. Tho their special talent seems maximized in quality
face time before a prospect, that is an illusion brought on by the fact that
there are to few of them; which is bc. of a lack of realistic co-op (shall we
say) training. "Inside sales" desks, Marketing clerk pools etc. all exist to
such ends, but I have always proposed cloning the "apprentice" program that
not only built this country and it's world dominance, but filled higher ranks
with true experience and value. A "journeyman" marketeer, coupled with an
"apprentice" who aspires to the same level of income and clout (rhymes
w/expense account) seems to have the "greatness" of incentive that seems to
be sought in such activity. Then, cloning their synergy in software tools
that "vault" their influence non-linearly by further augmenting the ways they
can "mine" to make more money (for us all to actualize a completely natural
interest in).
Then, automate the maintenance. Empower them to hang on to what they have
won us all from current competition and you do your part to protect us all
from the innovative competition sure to come (like; our EDI/XML is "bigger"
than theirs?). More, better faster; starts with not more, not better, not
faster, but more/better/faster (synergy, exponentiation).
Good hunting, hunters. Those of you who also eat, don't let the meat spoil
and don't let ANY of the tribe go without. Neither let the tribe next door
get big.
------ XML/edi Group Discussion List ------
Homepage = http://www.XMLedi-Group.org
Unsubscribe = send email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Leave the subject and body of the message blank
Questions/requests: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To receive only one message per day (digest format)
send the following message to [EMAIL PROTECTED],
(leave the subject line blank)
digest xmledi-group your-email-address
To join the XML/edi Group complete the form located at:
http://www.xmledi-group.org/xmledigroup/mail1.htm
