When a reverse auction is not really a reverse auction
When is a reverse auction not really an auction?
Maybe I'm a purist, but a number of people are talking about reverse auctions that aren't real auctions.
When I think about a reverse auction I think about a buyer holding a competition between providers of commodities where the primary, if not exclusive, criteria for supplier selection is price.
At least this is the definition of reverse auctions in my lexicon.
But I keep hearing about this heresy, where companies are operating reverse auctions that aren't real auction.
They are creating sheep in
wolves clothing.
Instead of running ruthless reverse auctions based on price, these companies are incorporating complex variables like inventory, quality, delivery time, supplier ratings, and much more.
These companies are buying complex products where price is often far from the primary consideration.
If you ask me, this whole thing is just wrong. Don't get me wrong; I have no problem with using the reverse auction infrastructure to conduct automated requests for quotation (RFQ), which is what this is.
I just think that we should call it what it is. The term
eSourcing is another name that is more appropriate than an auction.
The reality is that the reverse auction infrastructure can be quite helpful to the RFQ process. It helps provide a great deal of structure to the process, often times resulting in a more efficient and timely process. Using these sourcing tools, companies can weight
the variables appropriately and organize the process to start and conclude on time.
But if the primary criterion isn't price, then it isn't an auction.
Tangential Rant
While I'm on this subject, I have tangential rant.
When is a sport not really a sport? I'll tell you when; a sport is not a sport when
the sole criterion for deciding the winners is subjective judging.
You guessed it, I'm talking about ice-skating. If you ask me there are a number of ice sports like curling, speed skating, hockey, even ice fishing. In these sports, there is a clear winner as defined by objective criteria.
Ice-skating is simply not a sport and, as such, should not be in the Olympics. Sure it requires a great deal of athleticism. There is even
some risk of bodily injury, which weighs strongly in its favor. But it's still not a sport any more than ballet. I enjoy watching ice-skating.
It is quite artistic. In fact, my first crush as an impressionable young lad was for the lead skater in an Ice Capades show.
I would certainly miss ice-skating were it not in the Olympics, but that doesn't change the fact that it isn't really a sport according to my lexicon.
I don't know whether it is a good or a bad thing, but my purist views on these topics clearly aren't going to change anything.
People will continue to call ice-skating a sport. It will remain the most popular event in the Winter Olympics.
Furthermore, people will continue to have "reverse auctions" to purchase goods that are not commodities
and where price is way down the list of selection criteria.
I just wish that we could call them what they really are, namely an exhibition and an automated RFQ respectively.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Magnoliacom
Newsvine
Furl
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
Comments
Post new comment