I belong
to a Vistage Chief Executives Group which provides its members with the
opportunity to hear expert speakers, to share issues with other Chief Execs
from different unrelated sectors and industries, and coaching. I attended a
session yesterday with a workshop on negotiation run by Malcolm Smith. He was
one of the best speakers I've heard and his style, passion and energy were very
impressive. A couple of things seem worthy of mention.
We hear a
great deal about large retailers exploiting smaller suppliers by demanding long
and extended payment terms, and one of the things I always say is that this
behaviour isn't restricted to the issue of credit. Buying power will manifest
itself across all areas including credit terms, margin, price, rebates,
packaging and so much more.
Malcolm
shared a story from earlier this decade about how a supplier in the US was put
out of business by the behaviour of a large retailer. I don't want to go into
too much detail here but, in essence, a small supplier won a contract to supply
the retailer with its pickled onions which would retail at their almost
standard price. Buoyed by the prospect of massively increased sales, the
company expanded by setting up new processing plants and scaling up to meet the
expected demand and everything went well. Two years later, after a process
involving merchandisers, auditors (who were on the supplier's site for eighteen
months), and procurement experts, the selling price was reduced to less than
half and the quantity for that price was increased from a small jar of a few
grams to one the size of an aquarium that was too big to carry in one hand and
was branded as a 'gallon jar of pickles for $2.97'. Not surprisingly, we
were told, the company went out of business and I guess it's a case of the
classic ‘if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is’.
I
understand how difficult it must be to resist the demands of a large customer
when that customer might be the gateway to a brilliant future but, if the
ultimate price is too great, what's the point? I've been quoted frequently
saying that businesses shouldn't just roll over. First say no, then get back to
the table and negotiate what can be obtained in return, before finally walking
away if that's the only option. Accepting business, however good it seems, at
suicidal terms can only be a recipe for disaster.
One of the
things Malcolm talked about yesterday was the need to have a list of ‘tradables’
that could be introduced to prevent the negotiation being only about price. I
was delighted that one of the key ‘tradables’ on his list was payment terms –
"yes, I can reduce the price by x% if you guarantee to pay me within 14
days rather than your standard 30, 60, or 90 days". The thing he clearly
understands that so many businesses, politicians and others do not is that
payment terms are as much a part of the overall business transaction as price,
colour, delivery or anything else. When payment terms are left to be discussed
after everything else has been put to bed, the only loser is likely to be the
supplier!
No comments:
Post a Comment