As a both a supply chain industry analyst and technology product marketing expert, I’ve seen my share of various software demonstrations that were designed to either be incorporated in the product marketing toolkit or help prospects and analysts understand the depth of functionality in a given software suite.  From my experience, these demo utilities can tend to be either too complex or detailed, to being too scripted and non-impressive.

As product marketing professionals, we can sometimes tend to concentrate too much time cycles in being impressed with the latest demo technology vs. spending time reflecting on the objective, cost and design needs of what a demo is suppose to accomplish.

When I occasionally come across a web-based demo that is impressive, I take notice.  That recently occurred when I viewed the latest demo featured on the MCA Solutions web site.

I was impressed with this demo because:

It is clear, concise and easy to understand and follow.

The length is just-right, between 4-5 minutes

It provided me an essence of the company, its capabilities, and the overall capabilities of the technology.

It included animated visuals which are pleasing to the eye.

It ended with a call to action and where to find additional information.

After viewing the MCA demo, I made it a point to speak with Tim Andreae, the very able Senior VP of Marketing of MCA.  Tim informed me that the demo itself was designed and implemented in less than four weeks, and the overall cost was rather reasonable, quite reasonable I might add.  Considerably less than the cost of designing, sponsoring and delivering a webcast to a broader audience.

The demo itself comes from Autodemo, and a visit to their website uncovers quite a list of technology-oriented customers.  If you need more specific information regarding the design and delivery of the demo, I’m sure Tim would be willing to share information.

Bob Ferrari

Disclosure: Neither MCA Solutions nor Autodemo have any financial association with this author, the Supply Chain Matters blog, or its parent company.

July is normally a quiet period in the world of supply chain technology as vendors and employees wind down from the Q2 quarter-end revenue push, as well as the need to take some summer vacation time.  This has not been the case in the service parts planning domain.

In case you missed the July 9^th announcement, Marlin Equity Partners acquired Servigistics, a prominent service parts planning and management software provider.  This acquisition is an obvious strategic follow-on to Marlin’s previous acquisitions related to Click Commerce. 

In May, Marlin announced the acquisition of three operating units of Click Coomerce, which included the Service Network Solutions (SNS) business and Contract Service and Management (CSM) business.  The Click SNS business consisted of the aggregation of many former service parts planning providers, the most notable being the former Xelus. Other former names included World Chain and Optum. Marlin also communicated that the CSM business would be integrated with Emptoris, a new equity partnership that Marlin established back in December. Supply Chain Matters has previously commented on the implications of the CSM assimilation within Emptoris.

If your brain is spinning trying to understand all of this, you may not be alone.  There has been some interesting commentary being generated in the blogsphere and among industry analysts, and I will add my perspective as well.  Bruce Richardson of AMR Research noted in his The Future of Enterprise Software blog that this combination of Servigistics and SNS will bring a stronger vertical industry presence and provides this market with a clear leader. On the other hand, competitor MCA Solutions penned on its Service Matters blog (no relation whatever to Supply Chain Matters) some very thought provoking comments that urge existing customers and prospects to exercise caution. While MCA is obviously protecting its own market interests, it does provide some pragmatic arguments.

There is no doubt in my mind that Marlin’s recent acquisition moves are opportunistic, taking advantage of strategic market opportunities to potentially consolidate the service management planning, services  and management software segment. Both Servigistics and SNS have been challenged of late in profitability and sales growth, in a market that provides a rather strong value proposition for investment. Both had initiated staff reductions and expense controls.

A significant evidence point for me supporting opportunism was the fact that in the May announcement, Marlin indicated that Dave Barboro will continue as President of the SNS group, yet in the recent announcement, Eric Hinkle, CEO of Servigistics, will assume the role of CEO, with Barboro assuming the role of Executive Vice-President. One could speculate that these two existing or former chiefs may not necessarily have the same views on future integration of customers, technology platforms, and strategic direction, and this new management team has to “flush out” direction.  The presence of Bill Atkinson of marlin in the role of Chairmen of the newly formed company is a critical one to watch.

My view for customers and prospective buyers tends towards caution as well.  If you are an existing Servigistics or Click SNS customer, you should be seeking clarity in the overall product integration and development strategy, and what that means to your existing investment  This is especially important since the web-native Servigistics platform is different than existing SNS software components, and decisions will have to be made regarding what scope of integration will be supported by the combined group.  Since profitability remains an objective, some structural decisions will be forthcoming.  I would also recommend you probe on levels of customer maintenance and service support, since its unclear whether this consolidation move is about purely consolidating customer maintenance revenues.

If you are contemplating a near-term investment in service parts planning software, you should step-back and take a second look.  The market landscape has clearly changed, and there is a bit more fuzziness related to composition of longer-term players. If you are seeking more specific assistance or counsel, let us know.  You can email bferrari at blog1 dot com.

Bob Ferrari

In December of 2008, I penned comments on this blog related to reports that indicated that a U.S. government audit agency had determined that the U.S. Navy had $7.5 billion (yes that is billions with a “B”) in excess spare parts.  My comments reflected on how the Navy needed to get serious about investing in modern service parts business processes and supporting technology.

I was therefore somewhat pleased to read an MCA Solutions press release this week that indicated that the U.S. Navy’s Naval Inventory Control Point had successfully implemented spare parts inventory optimization software.  The release further indicates that the MCA software is expected to be integrated with the Navy’s ongoing SAP ERP implementation project, scheduled for completion in early 2010. 

The next phase for service parts modernization is the Navy’s maritime and base operating stock inventory.

It’s good to see that the Navy is serious about moving forward and I applaud their team efforts and progress to date.  The previous audit identified almost $1.9 billion of spare parts inventory with no projected demand.  Perhaps those parts can now be put to alternative use.

A final related note.  There are few blogs that are solely focused on the service management and service parts planning area.  If you’re looking for a good listing, you can review a posting by Tim Andreae on the Service Matters blog.  Service Matters is not related to Supply Chain Matters, but MCA was nice enough to seek my opinion before naming their blog.

Bob Ferrari

An article in this morning’s Boston Globe caught my attention.  A recent government audit identified the fact that the U.S. Navy has at least $7.5 billion worth of excess spare parts stored in government warehouses.  Yes, that number reads “billion”, or the equivalent of half of the bailout money being requested by the U.S. Big Three Automotive companies. The article indicates specific examples, and notes that the Navy has nearly 2 million more aircraft parts than its own parts demand forecasts deem necessary, while storing more than 10 million ship parts designated as excess. Also noted was that last year the Navy had 85,700 “unique items” in its spare parts inventory, valued at $1.9 billion, for which there is no projected demand.

The Navy, like other military agencies, has come a long way in the understanding of world-class supply chain and inventory management techniques.  I have often run into military logistics officers at supply chain professional conferences such as CSCMP and SCOR.  Military logistics officers have degrees from the finest universities focusing on supply chain management disciplines. 

Investment in modern technology should also be a non-issue.  In 1999, the Navy chose SAP to power its Navy Enterprise Resource Planning Program, and according to an SAP brochure, has been working toward agency-wide convergence and standardized processes.  An initial investment in advanced service parts planning came with the selection of MCA Solutions, as a sub-contractor to CACI International, Inc. in 2006, supposedly to help the Navy modernize its inventory control system for, you guessed it, the F/A 18 fleet.

Auditors apparently claim several factors contributed to the unnecessary purchases, including inefficiency in inventory management and a limited ability to accurately forecast equipment needs.  While that may well be the obvious no-brainer conclusion, I suspect that given the evidence above, there is more to this than meets the eye.  If these modern systems are in place, where is the breakdown?  Which Navy entity isn’t listening to its skilled leadership?  Is it strategy, tactical planning, out-of-control procurement, or just inertia? Rather than speculate any further, I’ll defer to those with more inside knowledge of how all of this came about.  Perhaps specific individuals with this inside  knowledge would like to add additional background comments to this post.

In the meantime, perhaps the Navy would entertain a massive recycling program to recover some of its obvious excess parts. Interested in a radar system for your pleasure boat???

Bob Ferrari