<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Who Wants a Green Supply Chain?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://purchasingtransformation.ibxeurope.com/2008/10/20/who-wants-a-green-supply-chain/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://purchasingtransformation.ibxeurope.com/2008/10/20/who-wants-a-green-supply-chain/</link>
	<description>Challenges and possibilities within sourcing, procurement and supply chain management.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jun 2011 02:51:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Torbjörn Thorsen, IBX Group AB</title>
		<link>http://purchasingtransformation.ibxeurope.com/2008/10/20/who-wants-a-green-supply-chain/#comment-278</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Torbjörn Thorsen, IBX Group AB]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:30:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abernhard.wordpress.com/?p=355#comment-278</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I definitely agree here - still I fear that there is a gap between the strategies (at the management level) and the actually doing (at organization level). And this applies to purchasing as well - as you say; purchasing should: &quot;eliminating leakage and wastage, providing data that can be acted on instantly to eliminate unnecessary spend&quot;. But if the information from management is not clear enough - or if the function has a cost at all costs approach - chances are that long acting strategies; such as sustainability; get lost in the hunt for quick savings.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I definitely agree here &#8211; still I fear that there is a gap between the strategies (at the management level) and the actually doing (at organization level). And this applies to purchasing as well &#8211; as you say; purchasing should: &#8220;eliminating leakage and wastage, providing data that can be acted on instantly to eliminate unnecessary spend&#8221;. But if the information from management is not clear enough &#8211; or if the function has a cost at all costs approach &#8211; chances are that long acting strategies; such as sustainability; get lost in the hunt for quick savings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Peter Wognum</title>
		<link>http://purchasingtransformation.ibxeurope.com/2008/10/20/who-wants-a-green-supply-chain/#comment-276</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Peter Wognum]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 13:18:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://abernhard.wordpress.com/?p=355#comment-276</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The question is not &quot;Who Wants a Green Supply Chain?&quot; but instead &quot;Who Needs a Green Supply Chain?&quot;

I agree that the main driver for those organisations that have implemented any form of &#039;green&#039; or &#039;climate-friendly&#039; initiative has, so far, been internal...

But that is a good thing, as a growing number of companies are coming to realise that the mantra of corporate &#039;tree-huggers&#039;, such as our own organisation - Reduce, Reduce, Recycle - applies to a commercial strategy to, first and foremost, reduce consumption.

This can only be achieved by having full visibility and control of spend. In an ideal world your employees would only buy what you want them to buy from pre-approved suppliers and at prices negotiated and agreed centrally. Using technology, that&#039;s what we help companies to do - eliminating leakage and wastage, providing data that can be acted on instantly to eliminate unnecessary spend, etc., etc. with clients saving upwards of £500,000 per annum.

And there is technology which out there, which does not have to cost more than &#039;non-green&#039; technology (when are the large suppliers going to realise that green can no longer command a &#039;trendy buy&#039; premium?!) which reduces energy consumption, uses less consumables, lasts longer, etc. which, by its nature is xetremely climate-friendly and so reduced costs.

Your question at the end of the article, &quot;[] will customer demands for lower prices knock environmental issues down the corporate agenda?&quot; is easily answered... if you want survive and thrive, especially in this current economic climate of panic-mongering, implementing climate-friendly will reduce your cost-base and allow you to meet those (short-term) demands from customers to reduce your price; win them with a fair-profit price nad keep them with a demonstration of climate-friendly action that is genuine to them and sustainable for you.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The question is not &#8220;Who Wants a Green Supply Chain?&#8221; but instead &#8220;Who Needs a Green Supply Chain?&#8221;</p>
<p>I agree that the main driver for those organisations that have implemented any form of &#8216;green&#8217; or &#8216;climate-friendly&#8217; initiative has, so far, been internal&#8230;</p>
<p>But that is a good thing, as a growing number of companies are coming to realise that the mantra of corporate &#8216;tree-huggers&#8217;, such as our own organisation &#8211; Reduce, Reduce, Recycle &#8211; applies to a commercial strategy to, first and foremost, reduce consumption.</p>
<p>This can only be achieved by having full visibility and control of spend. In an ideal world your employees would only buy what you want them to buy from pre-approved suppliers and at prices negotiated and agreed centrally. Using technology, that&#8217;s what we help companies to do &#8211; eliminating leakage and wastage, providing data that can be acted on instantly to eliminate unnecessary spend, etc., etc. with clients saving upwards of £500,000 per annum.</p>
<p>And there is technology which out there, which does not have to cost more than &#8216;non-green&#8217; technology (when are the large suppliers going to realise that green can no longer command a &#8216;trendy buy&#8217; premium?!) which reduces energy consumption, uses less consumables, lasts longer, etc. which, by its nature is xetremely climate-friendly and so reduced costs.</p>
<p>Your question at the end of the article, &#8220;[] will customer demands for lower prices knock environmental issues down the corporate agenda?&#8221; is easily answered&#8230; if you want survive and thrive, especially in this current economic climate of panic-mongering, implementing climate-friendly will reduce your cost-base and allow you to meet those (short-term) demands from customers to reduce your price; win them with a fair-profit price nad keep them with a demonstration of climate-friendly action that is genuine to them and sustainable for you.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

