At 29,028 feet and situated between Tibet and Nepal, Mount Everest today became a metaphor for data synchronization – in my mind, anyway.

Consumer Goods Technology magazine recently published part 2 of the results of research they performed in conjunction with GS1 US regarding adoption of global e-commerce standards.  While somewhat disappointing, I was not surprised to learn that over half of the respondents reported that less than 50% of their orders are based on synchronized data.

The article also indicated that there is a significant disparity between adoption within large, multinational organizations and smaller companies:  “The bigger firms account for the higher adoption levels while smaller companies still don’t embrace standards at all, resulting in an “all-or-nothing” scenario.”  I am not sure I agree with the statement, though I didn’t participate in the research and can’t say where this conclusion originated. What I do know, from the many small- to medium-size businesses (SMBs) I work with on a daily basis, is that they have a few distinct challenges that may or may not be shared by their larger competitors: 

·         They have extremely limited budgets and resources (many SMBs have a “one-person” IT department)

·         They are generally driven by hard mandates with monetary penalties  and tend to ignore “soft” requests for compliance

·         They do not have good return-on-investment (ROI) tools that are believable on a smaller scale.  For example, a large manufacturer recently presented that they had reduced freight costs by over $1 million dollars for one product they sell and had taken 90 trucks off the road by implementing rigorous data quality and data synchronization.  A small company may not even ship 90 truckloads of all of their products through the course of a year!

·         Many data synchronization initiatives focus on the “big fish” – large successes produce publicity buzz, and the smaller players are left to swim aimlessly with little education or implementation support  

In other words, they are facing their own Mount Everest and don’t have all the tools they need to successfully complete the climb.  What this means to me is that our mandate as standards organizations, technology providers, solution partners, and data synchronization fanatics is that we need to give some love to the thousands of SMBs out there waiting for a champion to bring their cause to the forefront.  We need to become sherpas and lead the charge up the mountain! 

I am making it my personal goal to push the SMB agenda this year – even if it only results in calling attention to their plight in every tradeshow, conference call, and global standards meeting I attend – I intend to be known as “that wacky SMB data sync activist”.  Well, something less colorful might be better, but increased public awareness is my objective, and I’ll take it any way I can get it.  Due to its proximity to China, Mount Everest has found itself featured in the political firestorm surrounding the Olympics.  I hope to take the cause of the SMB and shine the spotlight on it in a similar, if less sensational manner. 

Only 660 people have successfully climbed Mount Everest.  So, with over 15,000 participants, the Global Data Synchronization Network (GDSN) has already well surpassed the lofty dream of those who wish to scale the world’s tallest mountain.  However, with tens of thousands of additional companies around the globe still to make the climb, and the fact that the standards will continue to evolve, potentially making it more difficult as time passes (Mount Everest is also rumored to be growing a few millimeters a year due to geological factors), we can’t sit at base camp and watch the opportunity pass us by.  We need to pack on our gear – cleansed data, trading partner requirements, and strong enthusiasm – and head for the summit – a successful global data synchronization implementation!

For as much as the word collaborate elicits sighs and thoughts of “not that cliché word again!”, outside of the B2B integration space, most people don’t even know what it means.  Most of my family and friends tell people that I work in Accounting.  I guess the explanation that I help gather customer requirements for developing on demand software applications that allow trading partners to collaborate effectively and realize increased supply chain efficiency doesn’t really go down like a spoonful of sugar!

The power of collaboration within a trading partner community should not be underestimated.  Global Commerce Initiative (GCI) recently published a newsletter  updating the user community on the results of their first year’s work toward their 2016 value chain vision.  Two of the three key challenges they are attempting to address don’t surprise me, but maybe if you fall into the camp of covering your ears every time someone starts to say “collab…,” you might be somewhat shocked to know what they are:

1.       The industry should develop new ways of working together (emphasis THEIRS)
2.       The industry should more readily and freely share information (ditto)

The newsletter definitely warrants reading, as it touches on all the key buzz words and hot topics being bandied about in the B2B space today.  Many companies are concerned with social responsibility, sustainability, and bridging the cultural divide as well as cutting cost, increasing revenue, and improving time to market for new products and services.  GCI has done a great job of folding all of these disparate objectives into a unified vision.  And GCI set such a great example in the past several years of living the “working together” mantra, as they brought end user companies together to build input into the GS1 system of supply chain standards.

It’s not so much that they are giving us a new revelation – for example, they state that “information is the life blood of the value chain.”  I have always believed this to be true (anyone who’s read my past blog entries know this is an understatement).  However, when a group of companies meet together to talk about achieving a long-term value chain vision, and still arrive at this critical statement, it serves as a reminder that we often forget the basics as we try to blaze new frontiers in our B2B programs.  If we have fooled ourselves into thinking that we have already gotten it right – that information is always accurate across all of our internal systems, synchronized with all of our trading partners, and proliferating throughout all of our downstream supply chain transactions, we need to pinch ourselves a step back into reality.  We have a long way to go.  Just review the “current practices” bullets provided by GCI and you will see that a lot hasn’t yet changed in how we manage data.

What I take comfort in is that GCI and other groups have just as much passion about improving the foundations of supply chain collaboration as I do.  And they have participation from many multinational suppliers and retailers who join in their vision.  I look forward to 2016, when we have hopefully achieved the lofty goals they have set – and then perhaps I can retire early with a smile on my face!

2008 will be the year when companies finally understand that the real challenge holding their companies back in the automated supply chain is lack of data quality.  Information integrity issues associated with products and transactions reduce the ability of an organization to make appropriate short and long term decisions.  Corporations have been hording data for years while analysts and consultants told them to do something with it.  Now that business intelligence solutions are taking a primary place in the spotlight, companies are realizing that the data they’ve been hording is flawed.  And so is the data they are using to run their business on a day to day basis.

For years the retail and CPG space have struggled with new ways to share product data, only to be dismayed by the exorbitant costs and miniscule returns.  High-tech manufacturers scoff at the idea of trying to adopt the Global Data Synchronization Network because they see it for what it is: just another way, using another technology, to share data.  Sharing data isn’t the issue.  Making sure companies have complete and accurate data, and then keeping it that way, is the real challenge.

Leading companies will step up to the plate in 2008 and address the data quality issues by taking the first steps towards implementing solid B2B Data Management programs.  They will follow in the steps of a few groundbreakers that have already paved the way.  These data governance initiatives will need to address cultural, process and technical roadblocks that keep companies from successful supply chain execution.   Most important will be changing the cultural aspect, as data accuracy will need to become part of the fabric of the business.  The processes can be defined and supported by technology, but adherence and commitment will be the key to eliminating data quality problems.

While numerous tools have been introduced to address information management over the past several years, the focus of the tools themselves, those selling the tools, and the analysts covering them have been primarily on utilizing the tools to provide workflow for managing the flow of a subset of data within an enterprise (think Product Information Management in the B2B Data Management space).  Now we are starting to see (Gartner 30 November 2007 - Methodologies: Blueprints for Success With Data Quality Improvement) the focus of analysts shift to actually addressing data quality.  Smart executives will listen because this is something they can get their hands around.  If the decisions they are making are based on flawed data, if the financial statements they are signing are based on inaccurate numbers, if the deals they are agreeing too might not be what they think they are, then they and their companies are in trouble.

One of our other bloggers, Bryan Larkin, recently began using the phrase “B2B Data Management.”  I can’t say for sure if he coined it, but he’s the first person I ever heard say it.  And I absolutely LOVE it!  Because the truth is, data synchronization alone will not bring about world peace – though I expressed my hopes for this in a past blog.  True nirvana will only be achieved when a business takes all of the components into account – foundational data quality, continuous data synchronization, both internally and externally, transaction integrity for all downstream supply chain business interactions (more on this in a future blog – unless Bryan gets to it first), and 100% rollout to all trading partners.  Approaching any implementation initiative with all of these things in mind is having a true B2B data management strategy.  So, would you rather say, “let’s talk about improving B2B data management,” or “let’s talk about improving dataqualitydatasynchronizationtransactionintegrityandpartnerrolloutmanagement?”  And because I love clichés so much, I guess I should also point out that you don’t want to try and boil the ocean by solving all of these problems at once, but you definitely need to look at your requirements holistically.  Then, when you put the little “data quality” pot of water on the stove and see it start to bubble relatively quickly, you can take satisfaction in the accomplishment and move on to tackle the other gallons, liters, reservoirs, and seas of work ahead of you.

I have had the opportunity to discuss B2B data management with several customers in the past week.  Their needs are varied and vast, and this warms my heart as it will keep me busy thinking up new products and features for many months to come.  But I confess that I had a moment of panic in one of the meetings.  One client commented that they don’t think that integration is broken; they think the main problem lies in backend systems – or the lack thereof, particularly for many small-to-medium sized businesses.

Honestly, this caught me by surprise.  I mean, I work for a company that is in the B2B integration space, so if integration isn’t broken, how do I have any chance of coming up with new ways to help drive GXS into the future?

Another GXS blogger helped bring me back to reality.  It’s not necessarily that integration is broken, but that many companies still have a long way to go.  Thank you John, for reminding me that we still have great work to do.  And our customer was definitely also correct – backend systems are pretty much a mess.  I could probably write a novel on that topic, but let’s save that for another day and a different blog!

On a side note, I also wanted to point out that I really enjoyed John’s post on Cub Scouts and Continuous Visibility for two reasons: 1) it’s heartwarming to see that there are still people out there investing in our kids and teaching them survival, readiness, and social skills, and 2) he pointed out how any error early on in the process can lead to multiple challenges downstream.  A simple compass exercise shows that one mistake begins to accumulate as further points are plotted erroneously.  Luckily, in the case of the Cub Scouts, they have John to keep them on course.  And, fortunately for businesses, a sound B2B data management strategy can keep you on track for reduced costs, greater profits, increased productivity, and the whole ball of wax, too!

Efforts to further the practices of data quality and data synchronization have received worldwide attention.  Groups of people gather on weekly conference calls and attend physical meetings to talk about global standards for exchanging accurate product information.  I’m sure by now you have a mental image of thousands of people wandering around in Star Trek-like uniforms looking for members of like-kind, anxious to share stories.  “Did you hear the one about what happens when you try to stack bags of semi-sweet chocolate chips on store shelf with the package front facing the aisle instead of the ceiling?  Those package dimensions really sent me for a loop on that one!”  Another groupie chimes in with, “oh yea, that’s nothing!  Have you ever taken a soda out of the six pack ring and seen the confusion that ensues when a grocery store cashier tries to scan it for a single purchase?”

It really isn’t like that at all.  We are a group of extremely normal (and intelligent) people who are on a mission to see that businesses can achieve the ever-elusive goal of maximum supply chain efficiency.  We believe that if you can exchange product information accurately and quickly and keep that information up to date over time, you can ensure that all of your downstream supply chain transactions will also be correct.  This leads to faster purchase order processing, swift shipping and transit, speedy movement of product from truck to store to selling floor, prompt remittance from retailer to supplier (with less chargebacks deducted from the payment, by the way), and rapid receipt of the latest must-have products by the consumer.  When put that way, don’t you want to sign up to be part of furthering this utopia, also?

Okay, perhaps it’s a little dry arguing whether a particular product attribute should be free text or be restricted by a code list of acceptable values.  And sometimes I’ve seen conversations where word-smithing three sentences took two hours.  Global standards rely on consensus and voluntary participation.  Since the participants volunteer, each is entitled to his or her opinion and the right to share it, and consensus sometimes takes a while.

One organization with which GXS participates extensively is GS1.  GS1 manages the GS1 system, a set of standards to improve supply chain management employed by companies in over 20 different industry sectors worldwide.  GS1’s global office operates out of the U.S. and
Europe, with over 104 participating countries known as membership organizations (MOs).  GXS has partnered with over 25% of these MOs, 27 countries, to provide the underlying data pool technology for their data synchronization solutions.  While countries like the United Kingdom, Spain and Australia are well down the path of rolling out data synchronization initiatives, it is our hope that one day others like Zimbabwe and Myanmar will be able to follow in their footsteps due to the extensive groundwork being laid by today’s standards working groups.

One ambitious participant in the global data quality arena decided that a music video would be a great medium to promote our cause.  Thanks to the fact that YouTube is now basically ubiquitous, you can escape from my long‑winded ramblings and take a peek for yourself at his data quality rap.  I hope you will find it entertaining and thought-provoking, as well as remember that data quality supporters know how to have fun, too!

The interesting thing about a root canal is that while everyone approaches the procedure with trepidation, it’s actually not that bad.  And once the process is over with, you feel so much better.  What tends to be overlooked is that the pain associated with a root canal is really about the bad tooth that hurts so much before you go in to get it fixed.

The same can be said for bad data.  It’s like an abscess that radiates throughout the organization, leading to lost orders, missed shipments, irreversible deductions, and grouchy executives – tell me those things aren’t painful!  Yet many companies are horrified by the idea that they should engage in a data clean up effort.  If you compare it to a root canal, first of all you’ll get a few chuckles from the cross-functional team, and then you can point out my astute observation that all the pain is actually already going on.  That if you engage in a data quality initiative, it would actually be a lot less painful, and in the end, when the data is clean and continues to be monitored, corporate life can become a state of near-bliss (okay, well that’s probably stretching it a bit).

The GXS community relies upon data to transact business all over the world.  Supply chain processes, the order to cash lifecycle, financial services transactions – they all share and consume large amounts of data.  Without the tools to ensure the integrity of the data, companies who implement electronic methods of communication are just subscribing to the now oft-spoken adage of “garbage in, garbage out FASTER.”  I am certainly not an advocate of this, but I will tell you that it takes partnering by all of the parties involved in efforts to improve supply chain efficiency – the manufacturers, suppliers, software providers, and retailers.  The attempt to achieve the exchange of accurate and up to date information does not happen passively.  It requires digging to the “root” of the problem, rather than just putting band-aids on the symptoms.  Similarly, motrin is a wonderful pain reliever for a toothache, but the pain comes shooting back 4 to 6 hours later – hence the reason the root canal is the only viable long-term solution.

I recently read an article about one apparel manufacturer that saw a drastic reduction in their compliance charges.  By creating a team of people to manage issues internally, to assess inter-organization challenges, and to partner with key customers, they achieved incredible gains.  The clip doesn’t reference any trips to the dentist, but I am pretty sure the participants could at least concede I might be partially right in comparing their efforts to that dreaded trip to the dental chair!

I strolled into an airport convenience store the other day to purchase a candy bar, a vice I only allow myself when traveling.  Perhaps it’s unfortunate that I travel a lot, but this justification allows me to sleep at night.

Anyway, I happened to walk up to the register just as the cashier was celebrating just having sold four 256MB USB memory sticks.  The two management employees conversing with her were amazed that a passenger had bought such a large quantity, but the cashier said, “well, they were $5.99 – you don’t see a deal like that every day.”  The discussion quickly turned from celebratory to disastrous (keep in mind I am standing at the register waiting to pay $2 for a candy bar this whole time – gradually feeling more and more ashamed that I’m even in the place).  The cashier grabbed one of the remaining items hanging on the wall and flipped it over to look at the price sticker, which stated “$59.99”.  Oops!  Someone, in their zeal to finish tagging the memory stick boxes with price stickers and move on to more exciting products (like Butterfinger Crisp candy bars), forgot a ‘9’ – and what a faux pas that turned out to be!

I won’t go on to tell the rest of the story, as it became sad watching the cashier argue that she just did her job and rang the items up at the price that was stuck on the back.  By this time they finally realized they needed to get me out of the store before continuing and so finally took my money and relinquished me to go off and eat my way into a state of chocolate-peanut butter bliss.  Of course, by this time I had lost interest in the candy and rather wanted to ponder what led to such a terrible hit to this little store’s profitability.  Was it the fact that instead of linking the barcode on the package to an electronically-stored price in the computer system, someone was relying on one clerk to properly tag the item using a manual pricing gun, and another clerk to properly enter the price when ringing up the item?  Or was it that the manual process at point-of-sale was the result of incomplete or inaccurate data provided to the store by the memory stick manufacturer?

You see, I like these little retail mysteries.  Because they make clear the everyday examples of why data quality and data synchronization are so important.  If a manufacturer can provide pricing electronically when sending the product information to the retailer, linking the UPC number to the price, the retailer can then flow this data automatically to their point-of-sale system, use scanning equipment to scan the UPC, and see the price come up for them, rather than each of these steps being handled manually.  GXS is in the business of providing services to help customers gather data, audit it for accuracy, transform it into electronic formats, and transmit it to trading partners – providing visibility throughout the process, and ensuring that what arrived at the end was intended and intact.  This is a fascinating concept.  Creating efficiency in the exchange of business documents.  Okay, maybe it’s not awe-inspiring to you.  But it’s certainly clear to me why it’s so mission-critical.  Because when a customer goes to buy a leather cover for their handheld PDA, and ends up receiving an IBM server instead (a story relayed to me by a colleague which has P&L problems that reach far beyond my memory stick example), the consumer may win, but the retailer certainly doesn’t.  And you can believe that the manufacturer will feel the upstream effects of that as a reduction in future purchase orders.  So, how much is bad data costing you?