Gaurav Sharma recently penned a truly great post on LinkedIn on 5 dated procurement processes/setups you can get rid of without AI or any tool whatsoever. This is the type of post we need more of because AI isn’t always the answer (and in fact, it’s rarely the answer), and AI shouldn’t even be considered until the technological needs are identified (which, if the right process is followed, require AI a lot less than the hype machine would lead you to believe).

Not only should you not have the five processes he outlined if you are a best-practice Procurement department, but 4 of them wouldn’t exist in the first-place if you built your Procurement programs off of Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing.

Let’s take them one-by-one.

Spend it or Lose it at the end of the year.

Proper Procurement, and the proper business operations it would dictate, would never have this because budgeting based on historical spend is bad budgeting, as is pricing based on historical price points. The era of global stability is over, natural disasters are on the rise, critical resources are becoming scarcer by the day, and logistics becoming uncertain and unpredictable due to the fallouts of sanctions, wars, disasters, strikes, and uprisings. As a result, what you will pay this year, and what you will have to charge to maintain a fair profit margin, will not necessarily have any correlation to what you paid last year, especially in categories where more than half of supply comes from a single country (such as rare Earths from China) or flows through a single chokepoint (like oil, fertilizer, etc. through the Strait of Hormuz).

Budgets need to be based on expected costs using the most up to date data at the time, and revisited every time a category comes up for (re)sourcing. And, most importantly, be based on forecasted demand, which needs to be up-to-date when budgets are created and updated regularly based upon category velocity and actual sales/utilization over a typical, statistically significant, time window (which will be different for every category). This is the key: budgets should be based on expected, and approved, demand and cost ranges — not fixed spend buckets.

And you need to make three critical changes to budget management to be successful.

1. If the purchases are needed (i.e. buying less will shutdown a production line, result in a costly stockout, etc.), the expected spend can be exceeded (as long as all efforts are made to keep it as low as possible) and the organization will react by either increasing pricing or cutting elsewhere if they can’t.
2. If the forecasted demand has been reached, it cannot be increased without approval (or approved forecast updates for input components), even if the expected spend hasn’t been reached.
3. For discretionary categories, if the organization was able to delay demand (by finding a way to get one more year out of that cell phone or laptop, delaying hiring through better automation and occasional overtime, or simply pushing off MRO restock until the next major project started), expected baseline demand is NOT reduced for the next year. In fact, if a valid argument exists, unused demand may even be carried over. Organizations that can reduce or defer demand need to be rewarded. In the long term, you’ll save money if you encourage delay of spend until absolutely necessary.

And if you use Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing, you’ll have an infrastructure where you are able to re-compute forecasts as needed, query current pricing as needed, monitor for events in high risk or highly volatile categories, get alerted when you may need to accelerate an event, and have an infrastructure to take the right action at the right time where you aren’t sourcing based on a fantasy budget but a real, up-to-date, demand with real, up-to-date, market pricing.

Approval Chains

If you’re using Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing, you have regularly updated, agreed upon, forecasts and expected demand. You have pre-vetted suppliers. You have market pricing, contracts, purchase orders, and m-way match. Once the demand, suppliers, and contracts / bids have been accepted and approved, if everything matches, there is no need for a human in the loop. You configure the (A)RPA and let it issue the okay-to-pay to the payment system and let the payment happen. Unnecessary approvals add unnecessary time, create unnecessary work, and potentially cost you not only the opportunity for early payment discounts, but even fines if you don’t make the payment windows mandated by the UK, EU, and other countries for paying small suppliers.

PowerPoint Category Strategies

A PowerPoint dies as soon as it is presented. No one ever goes back to it. With Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing, for any high complexity, high risk, or high impact category (which are 7 of the 8 categories), you setup the necessary price, risk, quality, delivery, etc. monitoring systems from day one. You have alerts whenever a significant event occurs that could significantly impact your pricing, quality, or supply. And, for any category that is high impact, you have mitigation or response strategies already defined in your procurement systems that you can action.

KPIs that incentivize activity

In Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing, you define KPIs based upon success factors, NOT activity factors. You’re concerned with savings against market (i.e. cost avoidance), not historical budgets. If market prices went up 15%, you’re not saving over last year in any managed category. But if market prices went down 10%, you shouldn’t count any decrease in spend against last year’s spend of less than 10% as savings, because if you didn’t reduce spend by 10%, you’re doing a lousy job. It’s not resolved issues, it’s straight through processing. And so on. With Busch-Lamoureux Exact Purchasing, you don’t have worthless KPIs in the first place.

The only process/setup it doesn’t eliminate is tolerating underperformance. That’s entirely a people issue, and if you have people that tolerate underperformance, they need to go. No process can fix that. Only your willingness to take action can.

^* as a certain Western society does everything it can to pretend climate change doesn’t exist while its greatest ally does everything it can to bomb us to the next great flood as it unleashes over 2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (tCO₂e) a month with the bombs it uses in a single conflict — a measurable level of emission equal to 0.05% of total monthly (tCO₂e) global emissions