This blog post is the third part of a series highlighting the best practices for EDI-as-a-Service in planning and evaluation.
As past entries in this series pointed out, determining if EDI-as-a-Service is right for your business, and which provider solution makes the most sense, requires some careful consideration. Two very important caveats are to be sure to choose a solution based on requirements instead of provider capabilities, and approach your selection with a broadened view of total cost of ownership (TCO).
Pick EDI-as-a-Service for Requirements, Not Provider Capabilities
When EDI-as-a-Service offerings initially became available, “on-network translation” were the provided capabilities which hosted on Value Added Networks (VANs). Data format flexibility was minimal due to limited EDI translation options, where direct integration with enterprise applications and data resources could be offered, but came with a large price tag for the customization. Continue reading
This blog post is the second part of a series highlighting the best practices for EDI-as-a-Service in planning and evaluation.
As we discussed in the first post of this series, there are more deployment options to consider to most effectively and efficiently manage your EDI. It’s important to fully understand these alternatives before making a decision.
Take Inventory of Current and Future Needs
If you’ve decided that EDI-as-a-Service is best for your business needs, it’s important to think about what your current needs are and future needs will be in order to most accurately assess what services you require.
This blog post is the first part of a series highlighting the best practices for EDI-as-a-Service in planning and evaluation.
With more and more options than before for EDI, it’s important to know options come with positives and negatives in order to evaluate before making a decision.
One offering on the market is called EDI-as-a-Service, also known as EDI outsourcing or EDI managed services. What this service does is enable delegation of Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) to an outside service provider for provisioning, implementation and management activities. By utilizing a third party, businesses are able to focus on other activities while the provider can produce results rapidly while avoiding common errors. Continue reading
Last year, I attended a thought-provoking supply chain conference hosted by an industry analyst organization. The agenda was packed with interesting supply chain topics – cost-to-serve strategies, supply network optimization, S&OP integration, demand shaping tactics, etc. However, the event gave almost no attention to the foundation upon which advanced supply chain planning and execution strategies rest: supply chain integration.
Puzzling. Automated processing of supply chain transactions based on electronic data interchange standards and technologies makes it possible for even small and mid-sized businesses to process thousands of orders each day, accurately, at low cost, and with complete auditability. Without such automation, many companies, especially those with close-to-cost business models, would be unable to operate profitably. Yet supply chain integration is something we take for granted.
Understanding the Value of Automation
According to a 2014 Supply Chain Insights benchmark study of businesses with annual revenues of $250m or more, the majority of order-to-cash and procure-to-pay processes are not fully automated. Only “34% of [sales] orders are moving through the systems hands-free” (p. 7), and “36% of purchase orders are handled through EDI [electronic data interchange] without manual intervention” (p. 8). Another 39% of sales orders and 34% of purchase orders were found to be partially automated, still requiring some manual processing steps. Continue reading
This blog post is the final part of a series highlighting the three keys to rapid EDI modernization for JD Edwards users.
Because standard EDI integrations provide predictable patterns, reuse is especially effective in reducing EDI migration costs. While true that some reuse actions require manual development due to individual trading partner requirements, for example, automation still plays a big role in cost savings. In fact, automation can account for the highest project cost and time savings.
Custom mapping to meet the needs of each trading partner typically requires manual intervention and takes time. But configuring acknowledgements, creating new projects from templates, configuring routing, etc. are not only well-suited for automation from a cost-savings perspective but also eliminate many forms of manual errors that can lengthen testing time and contribute to runtime exceptions as well. Continue reading