Managing Ecommerce Vendors

Understanding the SAP MM Procure to Pay Process! The procure-to-pay (P2P) process in SAP MM is integral to efficient procurement and payment management. It seamlessly integrates multiple critical business functions, from requisitioning to payment processing, ensuring streamlined operations and smooth transactions. Here's an in-depth look at the P2P process: Requisitioning: The process begins with a requisition, a formal request for goods or services. This document details the specific items or services needed, their quantities, and the required delivery date. Requisitions can be created manually or automatically based on MRP (Material Requirements Planning) outputs, making it easier to keep track of requirements across the organization. Sourcing: Once a requisition is approved, the sourcing process begins. This involves identifying and evaluating potential suppliers. Supplier selection is critical and can be supported by SAP's vendor evaluation functionalities, which help in comparing supplier performance and reliability. Effective sourcing ensures that the best suppliers are chosen based on quality, cost, and delivery performance. Purchase Order Creation: After selecting a supplier, a purchase order (PO) is created. The PO is a formal document sent to the supplier, detailing the agreed terms and conditions, such as quantities, prices, and delivery dates. SAP MM allows for the easy creation and management of POs, ensuring that all necessary information is accurately captured and communicated. Goods Receipt: When the ordered goods arrive, the goods receipt process involves checking the received items against the purchase order. This step ensures that the correct items in the correct quantities have been delivered. Any discrepancies are recorded and managed, ensuring accurate inventory records and preventing payment for incorrect deliveries. Invoice Verification: The supplier sends an invoice based on the delivered goods or services. The invoice verification process involves matching the invoice with the purchase order and goods receipt. This three-way match is crucial for ensuring that payments are only made for received and correctly invoiced goods and services. Payment Processing: After successful invoice verification, the payment process is initiated according to the agreed payment terms. This final step completes the procurement cycle, ensuring timely and accurate payments to suppliers, which helps maintain good supplier relationships and credit terms. #SAPMM #ProcureToPay #SupplyChain #Procurement #BusinessProcess Follow NagaSindhuja Methuku

If you can’t prove your supplier can be verified, whether by contacting them by phone or finding their website, you’re at high risk of having their invoices rejected by Amazon. This, in turn, could quickly lead to account deactivation. This trend has been building since earlier this year and peaked over the summer. Amazon wants to avoid issues with counterfeit, mislabeled, or improperly packaged products entering the U.S. market. They’re also not interested in letting resellers determine which suppliers are “reliable” for sourcing legitimate items. To minimize counterfeit and IP complaints, Amazon is pushing resellers to source directly from brands (with their own LOA) or from authorized distributors who can provide their own LOA for resale. In some cases, you may also need to provide your "supplier's supplier" invoices to trace the supply chain back to the brand itself. In Amazon’s ideal future for the 3P marketplace, most resold items will come directly from brands or authorized distributors, avoiding the risk of inventory changing hands multiple times through “middlemen.” They want fewer resellers sourcing from general wholesalers or suppliers without direct brand or manufacturer relationships. Long term, it appears Amazon is moving toward cutting ties with sellers lacking LOAs for the brands they sell. This approach may reduce counterfeit claims, IP complaints, negative reviews, and the perception that Amazon can’t regulate its own marketplace. However, it may also lead to the suspension or permanent closure of sellers without a solid history of compliance. Take this trend seriously: Avoid suppliers without an established online presence, and don’t buy from sources lacking a direct link to the brand or an authorized distributor. Anything less is now extremely high risk. Amazon is clearly doubling down on requiring “verifiable suppliers” and top-notch invoices to keep their marketplace clean.

Not all labs are meeting Amazon’s standards, and starting July 13, that will matter more than ever.   Not all compliance documents are created equal and it is easy to assume that if a lab can give you a certificate, you’re good to go.   However, Amazon is changing how it validates risk by tightening control over where your compliance documentation originates. If your lab is on the suspended list, even if your product is safe, your document will be rejected.   Starting July 13: • Amazon will only accept product test results from labs that meet internal safety and authenticity standards. • Documents issued by labs flagged as non-compliant will be automatically rejected. • Sellers who previously used banned labs may be required to resubmit documentation to avoid listing removal. • The list of suspended labs will continue to evolve, it's your responsibility to monitor it.   Two suspended labs already include: • Bay Area Compliance Laboratories Corp. (Dongguan) • Shenzhen LCS Compliance Testing Laboratory Ltd.   Amazon is no longer treating compliance as a check-the-box exercise. They’re treating it as a trust signal, a way to score your product, your supplier, and your risk to the platform.   So it's time to think of it from the safety and defensibility side, because the wrong lab doesn’t just slow your listing approval, it signals to Amazon that your documentation chain is weak, and we all know how bad it can turn.   So what should sellers and agencies do? • Review your past compliance submissions. If they came from now-suspended labs, be proactive. • Bookmark and regularly check Amazon’s approved lab directory: https://lnkd.in/gU2pAgeG • When sourcing new documents, confirm the lab meets Amazon's current requirements before you pay.   The cost of using the “easy” lab isn’t worth the operational risk, if your backend can’t stand up to audit, your brand won’t scale.   #AmazonCompliance #MarketplaceOps #AmazonSellers

𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 - 𝗰𝗮𝗻 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗮𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗱 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸-𝗶𝗻 𝗼𝗿 𝗶𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝗮 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲𝗻? There is a compelling case for off-the-shelf Procurement solutions. But there are potential downsides to consider. 𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗳: ▪️ new features are tied to hefty price hikes ▪️ evolution to changing business needs is not possible ▪️ architecture options are dictated by vendor upgrade plans ▪️ product roadmap do not align with your specific plans and needs ▪️ the flexibility promised through rich functionality does not materialise Yes, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗶𝗳, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗼𝗳 𝗿𝗮𝗽𝗶𝗱𝗹𝘆 𝗱𝗲𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘀𝗼𝗹𝘂𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗻𝘀 𝗶𝗻𝘁𝗼 𝗮 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝗶𝗰 𝗿𝗶𝘀𝗸? Talking to many companies on their Digital Procurement, this major worry is real. Given the long range of investment payback, it would be an illusion to bet on building own solutions. 𝗙𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗶𝘀 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝗻 𝗮 𝘁𝗼𝗸𝗲𝗻 in this case - 𝗶𝘁'𝘀 𝗰𝗲𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗹 𝘁𝗼 𝗮 𝘁𝗲𝗰𝗵𝗻𝗼𝗹𝗼𝗴𝘆 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗼𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗳𝗼𝗿𝗰𝗲 of a company. Find here a few points which come to mind to 𝗮𝘃𝗼𝗶𝗱 𝗮 𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹 𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸-𝗶𝗻 but build a stable Digital Procurement architecture, while keeping flexibility: ✅ Build a 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗹𝗮𝗿 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗿𝗲𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 choosing solutions with an API-first to easily integrate or replace components over time. Modern solutions can be integrated and orchestrated without hard dependencies! ✅ 𝗛𝘆𝗯𝗿𝗶𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗮𝗰𝗵 by buying core capabilities like Source to Contract solutions but build or extend AI plug-ins or custom Automations. Intelligent Automation & Orchestration solutions provide extra flexibility and not just a patch. ✅ 𝗘𝘅𝗶𝘁 𝗦𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗱𝗮𝘆 𝟭, factoring in possible migration paths to prevent costly transitions later. For example ingesting the data of your Spend Analytics provider regularly into your own data lake. ✅ 𝗠𝘂𝗹𝘁𝗶-𝘃𝗲𝗻𝗱𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗴𝘆 which does not overcommit to a single provider but uses a mix of best-of-breed tools where flexibility matters most. Rationalising your vendor choice can bite you down the line. Procurement Tech should evolve at pace with your business needs, not lock you into someone else’s roadmap. The best strategy here is: Flexibility as a principle. ❔What's your view on this challenge. Anything missing on the picture? ❔Can vendor lock-in be minimised.

The reality of working with #Amazon has changed dramatically for brands in 2024. The online retailer focuses on: 💵 Optimising margin structures 💵 Reducing headcount resources 💵 Automating repetitive processes The list goes on. 🚩 Yet, most suppliers continue with business as usual. They keep deploying the same investment principles as in offline channels. And they keep their teams locally organised, ignoring Amazon's regional (pan-EU) expansion focus. This creates a gap between the reality of brands and Amazon, where brands increasingly invest in staffing while Amazon dramatically reduces its headcount. So how can brands ensure they align their organisation with the new reality Amazon is creating in 2024 and beyond? ✅ By following a simple 3-step approach: 𝟭. 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝘆𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗼𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘀𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝘀𝗲𝘁𝘂𝗽 Amazon's retail workforce is in decline. Layoffs and Automation have made many Vendor Managers redundant. As a result, Amazon has begun to focus its buyer resources at a regional EU level. Instead of 9 Vendor Managers covering each European marketplace, one Vendor Manager manages the EU9 trade relationship today. This requires brands to adjust their organisational structure to navigate the online retailer effectively. Brands that maintain a localised approach risk losing access to a dedicated Vendor Manager in 2024. 𝟮. 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗶𝗴𝗻 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗼𝘂𝗿𝗰𝗲𝘀 Aligning teams at a regional level can help brands achieve significant economies of scale. Centralising resources can help avoid duplication of work when it comes to negotiation or reporting processes, while the virtual shelf and shopper activation management can be maintained at a local level. Brands that successfully shape their business relationship with Amazon in 2024 will excel in realigning existing workflows at a regional level while meeting and considering the demands of local markets. 𝟯. 𝗔𝘂𝘁𝗼𝗺𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳𝗳𝘀𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗲 With Amazon increasing its efforts to offshore and automate tasks in its retail business, brands have to shoulder more tasks that Vendor Managers and Brand Specialists previously owned. This means that offshoring and automation must become a top priority for 1P suppliers themselves if they want to avoid a significant increase in their cost to serve. It's good practice for brands to start capturing repetitive workflows currently done manually and either outsource them to cost-efficient service providers or automate them completely. After all, the size and complexity of Amazon's business will only increase in the years to come. --- How are you adapting your organisation to Amazon's automation and offshoring focus in 2024? Let me know in the comments! #amazonvendor #amazonstrategy

GRC vendors are playing the wrong game. The losing strategy: Be everything for everyone. Compete on dashboards, workflows, integrations, AI features. Result: Feature parity race. Acquisition or death. The winning strategy: Be a lego-block. Own ONE vertical so completely that you're embedded in 80% of companies without competing directly. Examples? Assurance-driven TPRM - Telemetry nobody else captures, insights nobody else offers, integrate to procurement for tracking Workflow orchestration - Focus on getting work done, not reporting work done Data transformation - AI-ready GRC data at scale (framework become only translation layers) Agnostic trust networks - Verification infrastructure making third-party attestations obsolete The protection: Companies use you PLUS whatever else. You're infrastructure, not application. They can vibe-code dashboards. They can't vibe-code your proprietary telemetry or deep vertical capability. Like Stripe for payments. Everyone uses it. Nobody competes with it. Too embedded to replace. If your main USP is "GRC automation platform with AI," you don't have a USP. Own a vertical. Become infrastructure. Be a lego-block. Which vertical is most defensible? #GRCEngineering #VendorStrategy

𝐈𝐧 𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐫 𝐧𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬, 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐨 𝐤𝐧𝐨𝐰 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐧𝐮𝐦𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐣𝐞𝐜𝐭’𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬. Preparation is the backbone of every successful vendor negotiation. When you understand your costs, set clear terms, and align on value, you’re building not just a contract but a reliable partnership. Here are some of the best practices we have learned for effective vendor negotiations at Venwiz: 1. 𝐃𝐚𝐭𝐚-𝐃𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐧 𝐄𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬: Arriving at project cost estimation through detailed cost analysis sets a solid foundation. Use methods like Zero-Based Costing for detailed estimations, apply inflation adjustments to the last purchase cost, or use weighted averages from multiple quotes. When vendors see that you know your numbers, it builds credibility and respect, setting the stage for more productive discussions.     2. 𝐒𝐞𝐭 𝐂𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫, 𝐀𝐜𝐡𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐓𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐬: Define concrete targets for service levels, timelines, and ceiling costs. A well-defined service agreement—including specifics like payment schedules, quality & safety standards, and warranty terms—establishes a strong foundation. This clarity avoids misunderstandings and creates a structure that supports efficient, respectful negotiations.     3. 𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐤 𝐁𝐞𝐲𝐨𝐧𝐝 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐠𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐨 𝐅𝐨𝐜𝐮𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐕𝐚𝐥𝐮𝐞: Budget matters, but so does value alignment. Quality vendors look for clients who understand this. Show commitment by offering flexibility in terms, such as adjusting payment timelines or considering future projects. If a vendor can provide an extended warranty or additional service terms, it may justify a slightly higher costs if it aligns with your project’s goals.     4. 𝐇𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐁𝐀𝐓𝐍𝐀 (𝐁𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐀𝐥𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐚 𝐍𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐀𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭): Always have a clear fallback plan. A strong BATNA isn’t just a backup; it’s a powerful leverage tool that ensures you’re negotiating from a position of confidence rather than necessity. In vendor relationships, the best negotiations are built on value, transparency, and mutual respect. When both sides understand the stakes and goals, you pave the way for enduring partnerships that drive long-term results. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐠𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐟𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐭 𝐞𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐠 𝐯𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩𝐬? 𝐋𝐞𝐭’𝐬 𝐥𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐞𝐚𝐜𝐡 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫—𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮𝐫 𝐭𝐢𝐩𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐰! #Venwiz #CapEx #Procurement

The Untapped Risk in Marketplace-First Brands... Marketplace Dependency Risk — and it quietly compounds as you scale. Here’s the math: 1️⃣ Topline Fragility  If 70–80% of your revenue comes from Amazon, Flipkart, or Myntra... One algorithm tweak, penalty, or policy shift — and your revenue can drop by 30–40% overnight. 2️⃣ Pricing and Margin Squeeze  Marketplaces push for discount parity.  They want the lowest prices and commissions.  You can’t easily raise prices, but your costs (logistics, returns, ads) keep rising quietly. Margin compression isn't a phase. It's structural. 3️⃣ No Consumer Ownership  Even after selling 10,000+ units, you don’t own the customer data.  You can’t remarket. You can’t build loyalty.  You are permanently renting traffic—on someone else’s terms. 4️⃣ Working Capital Traps  Longer payment cycles + return risks = working capital nightmares.  Every rupee stuck in the system delays scale. 5️⃣ Exit Valuation Hit  Brands with over 60% marketplace dependence often get lower valuations.  Investors penalize the "platform risk" by adjusting down the revenue multiple. This is the advice I've seen the smart founders share: - Balance marketplace sales with your own website D2C channel. - Invest in brand-building early—even when marketplace sales look tempting. - Build retention engines (email, WhatsApp) off-platform. - Negotiate smarter platform deals once you have leverage. 📌 What's one thing a founder should do to de-risk their channel dependence? Picture - Inc42 FAB MAVEN

For AI to be truly adopted at work, we need more than technology — we need transformation. New tools are launching every week. Investors are flooding the space. Budgets are open up for experimentation. That’s all exciting. But no AI vendor will succeed in the workplace by simply delivering an out-of-the-box solution — unless they also: Deeply understand their customers' existing business processes and design use cases into the platform where AI agents can drive real value. Lead internal change management, helping teams adopt, experiment, and evolve their workflows and culture. Build community, creating space for shared learning and new playbooks that extend beyond one customer’s walls. The vendors who win won’t just sell software — they’ll position themselves as partners in AI transformation, guiding customers from the old way of working to the new.

The most valuable AI asset isn't a wildly intelligent model. It's the capability you build to use it. After observing dozens of AI implementations, a pattern emerges that mirrors another domain near to my heart: trading. The most successful trading desks don't just subscribe to external data feeds—they build proprietary analysis capabilities that transform common information into uncommon insights. Similarly, leading firms in AI adoption aren't merely licensing algorithms; they're developing institutional knowledge that turns vendor solutions into competitive advantage. This capability-building happens across three critical layers: 1️⃣ At the strategic level, cross-functional AI steering committees ensure alignment between technical possibilities and business realities—particularly important in regulated financial environments. 2️⃣ For technical depth, structured upskilling creates "T-shaped" AI professionals who understand both financial context and technical implementation. 3️⃣ On the operations front, internal AI champions translate between quants, technologists, and business stakeholders—bridging the communication gaps that derail most implementations. In capital markets, sustainable AI advantage requires institutional knowledge that can't be purchased off-the-shelf. The most effective vendor engagements deliberately build this knowledge with: → Pilot-as-a-Service projects where your team shadows vendor experts, creating internal runbooks → Hybrid Pod structures pairing vendor technical leads with your domain specialists → Capacity-Ramp Engagements that financially incentivize knowledge transfer by shifting payment from vendor MSAs to internal headcount For executive teams and boards, this approach demands different oversight questions. Does the vendor own integration outcomes with SLA-backed timelines? Is there contractual clarity on explainability and audit trails that satisfy regulators? Does indemnity cover third-party models and user prompts? How many internal staff will shadow the vendor, and for how long? At what capability threshold do we insource or dual-source? Each successful implementation should leave your organization more capable than before — lowering the cost and time required for the next project. This transforms vendor selection from a procurement exercise into a talent strategy that acknowledges the real source of lasting value: not just what the system does, but what your organization learns. Sustainable advantage in financial technology is fundamentally about capability development, not vendor selection. #governance #fintech #ai #startups