Talk:Integrated business planning/Archives/2012

Biography

I was wondering why the "Biography's" section on the "Integrated business planning" page was deleted. I had all the correct references as well as the appropriate links for each. Please let me know if there is something about the formating that I need to correct in order for it to stay up on the Integrated business planning" page.

Thanks --Travis.a.buckingham (talk) 19:24, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

• If any of the people in your list already have Wikipedia articles then links in both directions would be OK. But otherwise, I do not think a list of names adds any useful information to the article. (Also you should have provided an introductory sentence explaining what these people are. And formatting as a bulleted list would have been better.) — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 00:20, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

Article tagged

I tagged the article with three tags:

• Multi issue : This article pretends to be about a general subject from the start, but turns out to be about one very specific planning method by Robert C. Whitehair of River Logic.
• Advert : The second part of the history section seems to completely relate to Sales and Operations Planning, and seems a listing of five commercial companies adverticing Sales and Operations Planning
• Verify : This article is in need of independed sources, confirming the statements given.

-- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Moved advert section to the talkpage

As a start I moved the advert section to the talkpage here. -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 14:07, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Advert section

As stated below, industry analysts such as Aberdeen and Gartner, believe Integrated Business Planning evolved from Sales and Operations Planning (S&OP). In 2006 Nari Viswanathan, Research Analyst at Aberdeen, identified the top five pressures for improving S&OP processes as: rising customer order fill rate expectations, better return on net assets, shrinking profit margins, customer retention pressures, and extended lead-times due to global sourcing. Viswanathan compares the key differences between traditional IBP and S&OP in the table below:

Area	Traditional S&OP	Integrated Business Planning
Business Objective	Supply/demand balancing	Not simply about matching demand and meeting customer needs. Considers several plan alternatives and chooses one that best represents the business drivers. Objective is revenue and profit.
Process	Rigid and prescriptive	Process is more rules and exception based
Technology	Weak and non-integrated	Technology enables the processes through workflows
Frequency	Monthly and quarterly	Still monthly in many cases but with the ability to rapidly handle exception situations
Focus	Inward focused	Collaborative and outward focused

Aberdeen

"Sales and Operations Planning has evolved to become Integrated Business Planning. It is a truly cross-functional, multi-dimensional process that includes all elements of demand, supply and financial analysis in relation to the business goals and strategy."

AMR

The sales and operations planning (S&OP) process has always been a battleground for synchronizing supply constraints with demand opportunities. The measure of a successful S&OP process is its ability to create an actionable consensus plan that provides the operational blueprint for profitably matching supply to demand. Traditionally, S&OP was viewed as a senior management decision-making process that ensured tactical plans in all business functions—sales, marketing, and demand and supply management—were aligned and loosely supported the overall business plan. But recently, it has evolved into the concept of integrated business planning, which is the process of constantly realigning decisions within these business functions as well as synchronizing with the strategic financial plans to create a consensus operational plan for supply and demand matching.

Gartner

IBP is the strategic modeling the strategic planning and consistency framework that unifies the plans across business functions and integrates those plans to the corporate key performance indicators. One of its key outputs is to convert the strategic plans into meaningful financial plans that show the impact of the high-level strategies on the key financial reports of the organization. IBP, therefore, has a very strong connection into the company's CPM strategy and processes. The S&OP process sits under the IBP layer and connects the integrated, and financially validated, strategic plans (an output of the IBP process) with the operational plans at the functional/business operations level in the company. Having these three process layers (CPM, IBP and S&OP) in place provides an integrated top-down and bottom-up performance management and planning environment that will significantly improve the overall supply chain performance of an enterprise through shared metrics, strategic what-ifs, evaluations and alignment, and integrated operational planning.

"Integrated Business Planning will enable companies to model and align business strategies, ensuring significantly improved supply chain and business performance."

Ventana Research

Ventana Research believes that managing business performance effectively requires the right software to align people, resources and business processes. Just addressing performance issues in just one or two areas will not fulfill on the complete needs for business performance management. To complete the three-step performance management process – the Ventana Research PerformanceCycle Align, Optimize and Understand - companies need software that not only identifies constraints and root causes of individual problems but goes one step further, modeling the impact of all strategic actions simultaneously.