CONTRIBUTION BY NIELS VAN HOVE – FOUNDER AND DIRECTOR TRUEBRIDGES CONSULTING
Sales & Operations Planning (S&OP) as a business process is just over 30 years old. A lot has been written about why S&OP implementations succeed or fail and why many organization are stuck in their maturity. Recently Supply Chain Insights published a report with the 5 top challenges on why S&OP is a tough nut to crack.
- 72% has difficulty getting to the right data in a timely fashion.
- 53% is off balance, not aligned.
- 50% lack of understanding from the executive team.
- 50% lack of skilled resources (to do what-if scenario’s).
- Multiple S&OP processes (on average 4).
The observations from Supply Chain Insights are similar to my own S&OP research from  2010, 2011 and 2012 and 2014. The top roadblocks in my surveys were:
- Senior leadership support (lack of executive understanding).
- The organizational silo’s (lack of alignment).
- Process discipline.
- People skills / resources.
After almost 20 years of practicing S&OP and researching and writing about it for the last 5 years, these observations make sense and seem valid. We can learn from them and try to influence them to get better at S&OP.
But the last years I started to take a different view. To me, these obstacles seem to be side effects and not the real challenges. If we step back and look from a system and macro perspective at S&OP and have a really hard and honest self reflecting look in the mirror, we might get to other conclusions. We find some hidden and uncomfortable S&OP challenges.
I’ll share with you my view on the hidden challenges why S&OP is so hard to implement, maintain and mature. Secrets no one seems to dare talk openly about. Let’s call them the dirty little secrets of S&OP:
S&OP is not motivational
Senior leaders are clever enough to understand the concept of S&OP, that doesn’t necisarrlity makes them motivated to support ot even lead it. Why should they be motivated to implement S&OP? This question has obvious answers for the supply chain and operations function where S&OP originated and they are motivated to do so. But it is less obvious for other functions.
If we are motivated by autonomy, mastery and purpose, as Dan Pink’s book ‘Drive’ suggests, we need to find these motivational elements in S&OP for all business functions.
It is questionable if anybody feels more autonomy with a monthly requrring request for data, reports and renewed plans. Often you hear a sigh of relieve in a business when there is a 5 week month and the 5th week doesn’t have an S&OP meeting. ‘Finally a week of peace to do my own stuff’.
A sales person is more likely to want to master relationship management and negotiation tactics to make deals with great sales terms. Which sales person wants to master sales plans and forecast accuracy? A marketer wants to master shopper and consumer insights, building brands and categories, not a monthly reporting fest on all NPD projects.
The purpose or ‘Why’ for most people goes beyond a monthly business process like S&OP. So for most business functions outside supply chain, S&OP is not really motivational. The real challenge is not that of executive understanding, it is defining and selling S&OP in a way that it becomes motivational for all functions. In this way we would get senior leaderhsip understanding and support. I developed the S&OP leaderhsip quadrant, to help plot during an implementation if you have critical mass in leadership support.
S&OP is not clearly defined
After 30 years of S&OP development, there is not a single S&OP definition that wins the heart and minds of every business function. As Patrick Bower point out correctly is his article ‘Integrated Business Planning: is it a hoax or here to stay’, there are no common agreements, definitions, metrics, certifications and there is not a global S&OP governing model. There are many different process and maturity models. I even published an article with my own 4 step maturity model!
In the last 30 years, the supply chain function thought leaders and academics – and I incude myself here – have not been ably to clearly define and sell S&OP. How can we expect other business functions to understand and lead?
Without clear definition and agree maturity criteria it is hard set set clear maturity goals. My own research shows that only 34% of companies that are implementing S&OP have clear maturity goals and check and update those yearly. How can we succesfully align supporting people, process and system needs and assign resources if we’re not clear on our S&OP goals? It is hard to be aligned without clear definitions.
People are not made for S&OP
S&OP is a business process where you have to share your plans openly across functions and compare them with your functional budget and strategic inittiatives. It requires to cross the functional silo’s pro-actively to solve business issues. It requires honest and transparant reporting of your gaps versus budget in front of the whole business. It requires empathy for the other business function, holistic thinking and actively seeking alignment, even more so when KPI’s are contradicting.
We have to realize that is not a natural behavioural choice for human beings. Historically we are wired to stay in our silo. That’s just our survival instincts. Staying in our own clan or herd, means risk reduction, certainty, safety and a higher change to survive. On top of this there is research that indicates that only 50% of people cooperate naturally and 30% behaves selfish.
The skill challenge is not to get better at scenario planning. The real challenge is to create a critical mass in the workforce with a specific mindset and set of softskills. This critical mass is not available in businesses unless there are active recruiting, leadership development and training policies to address this.
Our S&OP expectations are too high
Change is hard! We know that the average success rate of business transformations is roughly 30%. John Kotter measured it in his book ‘Leading Change’ in 1996. In 2009, McKinsey confirmed this number in a questionnaire across 3200 CEO’s and the 2012 book ‘Beyond Performance’ mentions agains that ‘70% of transformations fail, due to an organization inability to adopt the required new behaviours quickly’.
S&OP is a massive change effort. However, it seems many of us expect S&OP to do better than this 30% success rate. Without motivation, a clear ‘why’, without clear definition, governance, maturity targets and oppropriate soft skills? As it stands now, we might have to be pleased with a 15% success rate. That means roughly 1 in 7 companies will implement it succesfully. Not a proposition you will hear from the average S&OP consultant.
Maintaining S&OP is a pain in the butt!
There! I said it! S&OP is a monthly recurring data gathering, reporting and meeting pain. There is no easy solution to it and no other way of putting it. A marketing director once told me just before the executive meeting; ‘it is like going to the dentist every month’. Even companies with years of experience will tell you privately that every month it is a struggle to get all the data aligned, commercialized and scenario planned. An experienced planning manager from a business that has held the ‘Class A’ accreditation for many years, told me quietly that; ‘every thing looks nice from the outside, but internally it is a monthly struggle’. If the best of the best struggle to get data and plan scenario’s in a timely fashion, who doesn’t?
[blockquote style=”3″]S&OP is still valid and valuable as a business process and has more potential. Surveys are still valuable to get insights in S&OP obstacles. But after 30 years, it is also time to start scratching the survice and address some of the the underlying challenges S&OP is struggling with. Let’s not keep them a dirty little secret.[/blockquote]
