When it comes to implementing an effective S&OP process, do we need a hard-driving commander or a consensus driven committee?  After all, S&OP is about collaboration, right?  Well, yes and no.  An S&OP process must be collaborative.  But the implementation need not be heavily committee-based.

The Tony award winning musical Memphis includes a song titled “Change Don’t Come Easy”.  Oh how true that is.  In social norms and in business, change can be slow and painful.  So what’s a successful recipe for S&OP change?  Although every enterprise has its own unique characteristics that will influence its approach, here are five observations we see when assisting clients to employ best practice S&OP processes and tools.

Top Management Support: Do your senior executives know what S&OP is?  Do they understand the value of S&OP?  How committed are they to making S&OP truly ingrained in the culture of your organization?  When S&OP implementations fail, often the root cause can be traced back to a lack of senior leadership.  At all levels of the organization, it must be clear that the whole organization is committed to making necessary changes.

Company Goals Above Individual or Department Goals: What’s the goal of S&OP?  It should be to drive strategic business decisions that benefit the entire company NOT one employee or department.  Too often personal goals conflict with the greater good.  Strive to minimize such incentives that detract from the overall goals.

Make Decisions and Keep Moving Forward: Cross functional representation is required to get buy-in from all business disciplines.  One person will not implement S&OP on her own.  Assemble a group of knowledgeable doers who have the company’s interests at heart and know their functional area well.  When this group reaches an impasse, a single S&OP sponsor/leader should step in and make key decisions. …

Those following Supply Chain Industry Analyst Lora Cecere’s new Supply Chain Shaman blog (http://www.supplychainshaman.com) have read with keen interest her observations about SAP’s progress in the area of Supply Chain Planning.  Lora points out that while  SAP has made tremendous progress in many areas it is also struggling with integrating its many components – specifically Lora says that the “integration of business intelligence and performance management is moving [too] slowly.”    Her notes on the growing disappointment with SAP APO – from within and outside the SAP organization – are also worth noting (http://www.supplychainshaman.com/2010/04/inside-insider:

“I leave the event with two major disappointments.  The first is that the integration of business intelligence and performance management is moving slowly. …too slowly for this curmudgeon analyst.  I was hoping to see the results of the Teradata/SAP Business Objects integration and the launch of a new generation of predictive analytics.  While there is some progress in Performance Management, it is largely traditional reporting/dashboards.

The second is that SAP APO—SAP’s supply chain planning suite—was  largely business as usual. At the event, I saw small, incremental changes, but no major innovation like I saw in MII, PLM and transportation management.  I keep crossing my fingers. I would love to see  SAP have the courage to blow up APO and start again.  Who knows if it works for PLM, maybe there is a chance to bring innovation to a solution — and the larger Supply Chain Planning (SCP) market– that sorely needs to be redefined.”

As SAP friends and partners know, SAP has some truly outstanding employees and the SCM Product Group continues under the brilliant leadership of Lori Mitchell-Keller.  Yet, overcoming legacy products and dated, mis-guided inertia is difficult for even the most effective of executives.  The great news is that a whole new generation of cloud-based supply chain planning…

Implementing an effective S&OP process requires effective management of personnel, systems, and process issues. Of these three areas, the change management aspects of personnel issues are often the most challenging. Organizational change strategies fail most frequently due to the inability of management to lead their teams through the transition process. Are supply planners and demand planners communicating? Is sales operations providing timely input? Are issues being resolved in a timely manner? How will disagreements be resolved?

As a corporate process, S&OP requires strong leadership and a keen understanding of change management.

Understand Change

There are two elements to organizational change: Personal transitions and Organizational transitions.

An old paradigm in change management was that it was only the organizational that was going through the change, de-emphasizing the personal aspect. But an organization is made up of a triad of people, process and technology. We understand that the only part of that triad that might have resistance to change is the personal. As a result, an organizational change strategy must focus not only on organizational transitions; it must also focus on personal transitions. From a leadership perspective, this means proactively understanding the affect on various stakeholders and leaders, for example looking at:

• Who in the organization is going to gain and lose power – S&OP team? Supply team? Demand Team? Sales. Has a fully powered S&OP team been created?
• Who in the organization might experience a positive or a negative careers move
• Who might be exposed when the changes show how poorly things were done in the past
• Who has the most to risk by making these changing and why

In order to understand, from each of their perspectives the perceived risk, time should be spent conducting interviews as well as a leader and…

SAS70 has become the gold standard for the auditing of service organizations,  especially for providers of Software as a Services (SaaS). Steelwedge, the leading provider of Cloud based Sales and Operations Planning (S&OP) Services, has successfully completed the SAS70 Type II audit.

The SAS70 Audit is performed in two steps, each resulting in a report that’s issued by an independent and certified auditor.

The Type I Report describes the control objectives and controls that have been put in pace by the SaaS provider. The auditor renders an opinion on whether these objectives and controls are suitable for the type of operation the SaaA provider is offering. As Steelwedge’s controls and objective have been based on relevant ISO and COBIT guidelines, a positive SAS70 Type I report was easily issued in August 2009.

The Type II Report investigates actual compliance with Type I controls. In the Type II Report, issued to Steelwedge in January 2010, the auditor confirms Steelwedge’s adherence to established and documented industry standard processes. The auditor’s opinion was formed over a five month period through on-site visits, investigations and reviews.

The SAS70 audit offers piece of mind for our customers, knowing that their data is secure with Steelwedge. Our data center, our applications and our processes conform to the highest level of industry standards, and will continue to do so as Steelwedge continues to undergo Type II Audits in regular six month intervals.
Steelwedge customers and prospects alike can rely on the opinion of a certified and independent auditor to ensure compliance with their internal data and security needs. This eliminates the need to conduct individual custom audits, saving both time and money.

Steelwedge’s regular SAS70 Audits do more than simply check the box on the currently popular topic. As the business world evolves and security requirements…