Monthly Archives: December 2025

Breaking Down the Risks: Loss of critical talent/limited talent availability

In our first series inspired by the latest and greatest CPO Survey that was just published by Deloitte, with the help of Spend Matters, which was designed to highlight, among other things, the latest and greatest “observations, challenges, and trends” in Procurement (and which included many survey results across enterprise priorities, focus, barriers to success, strategies, technologies, risks and competency gaps) we narrowed in on the top barriers to success that were common across all of the surveys and studies done by the big consultancies over the last five years. We presented you with a brief history, defined the core problem, and presented you with one more necessary realizations you need to make if you wish to make progress against the barriers.

In this series we will be tackling the risks, where we will be expounding on the pounding you are taking as a result of the risk as well as giving you some tips to reduce the risks. However, like the last series, in this series we will not be diving deep into the process upgrades or technological underpinnings you will need to adequately address them for the reasons discussed in the last series. Our goal is to give you the understanding you need to understand why the risks never change (and what realizations you first need to make if you want any hope of progress against them.)

Expounding the Pounding

As per one of our barriers to success on the talent gap in our first series, there is a talent gap which grows every year. This makes the loss of critical talent a major risk for many corporations who may only have one or two senior specialists capable of doing a specific, sophisticated, task that is vital to the organization. Especially when all of their organizational peers are in the same boat and there is a lack of replacement talent in the market.

This is especially true in sectors like manufacturing. As a result of decades of outsourcing and offshoring, and a lack of focus in the American (manufacturing) economy for decades, the number of senior, experienced resources in factory design and shop floor management is at an all time low and about to rapidly decrease in the next five years with the average manufacturing shop owner in the US being at least 62 years old. Let that sink in. A study by Crain’s Grand Rapids in 2021 found the average age four years ago was 62 and 70% of manufacturing business owners were over 59. (And America wants to bring manufacturing back? We applaud the vision, but we’re not sure how!)

Reducing the Risk

Unfortunately, in some industries, there is no way to reduce the risk. The talent is aging (rapidly) and the replacement pool is shrinking. (And with immigration being tightened in most countries, and forced deportations of all non-citizens in others, you can’t import the talent either.) The risk is only going to increase no matter what you do.

Therefore, you need to take steps to prepare for the inevitability and prepare your own critical talent (and ensure you have compensation programs and advancement opportunities in place that will make them want to stay once you embue them with the skills and knowledge they need).

In order to mitigate the risk to the extent possible, you need to do the following:

  1. install proper Knowledge Management Systems (KMS) and capture as much knowledge as you can from senior employees, document and institutionalize their processes, and capture their decisions and recommendations over time in the context of real world situations
  2. hire recent graduates or trainees with promise (and, preferably, not from business or procurement or operations backgrounds but from appropriate STEM (or Legal for contract negotiations) and have them mentored by a senior employee for at least a subset of the employee’s current role
  3. create, or (co-)sponsor, your own training programs (either internally or with partner educational programs) to ensure your next generation of talent is properly trained

That’s where you start. In our next post we will move onto the next major risk.

The Sourcing Innovation Source-to-Pay+ Cascading Mega Map! (2026 Edition)

 

(c) 2025-12-15

 

Still useless, but still slightly less useless than every other logo map that clogs your feed!

1. Every vendor offering verified as of 4 days ago!

2. Every vendor logo is clickable!

3. Every vendor is mapped to a meaningful category as of the last date of analyst investigation!

So what’s the point?

To again make it utterly clear you can’t select a vendor based on a random grouping of logos on a map, even if they are categorized!

Not even if the map categorizes the vendors by market size, industry, and/or geography. Those are just proxies for organizational spend, solution needs and cultural requirements. And not every mid-market manufacturing plant in the USA is the same.

The only way to select a good vendor is to follow a proper assisted process and engage an expert who understands what vendors are out there to identify the right vendors to invite to the RFP process once your true needs have been identified.

Especially considering the true number of vendors out there is many times more than what an average big analyst firm will tell you, especially when they restrict their recommendations to their paying clients in their maps, and multiples of what an average big consultancy will tell you, that only knows their partner solutions (that they need to maintain significant focus on to maintain their preferred partner status).

So let this be proof that there are a lot of logos and that, if you want logos, you got logos! 666 of them!

Source-to-Pay
Souce-to-Contract Procure-to-Pay Intake-to-Orchestrate
Sourcing + SXM + CLM Sourcing + Analytics SXM + Analytics e-Procurement Invoice-to-Pay / AP Expenses Payments (& P-Cards) Training
Sourcing + SXM Sourcing + CLM SXM + CLM Sourcing SXM CLM Analytics
Direct Supply Chain Cyber Monitoring ESG / Carbon Marketplaces Legal Marketing SaaS Intelligence

Source to Pay
corcentric coupa ebidtopay effigo
gep ivalua jaggaer onemarket onventis
raindrop sap simfoni synertrade zycus

Source to Contract
curtisfitch deepstream ensolva lgx
mercanis mercell merlin procol scanmarket
vendorpanel

Sourcing + SXM + CLM beneering buyingstation c1 cotiss
delta esm felix fullstep gainfront
intenda ionwave ispnext krinati lightsource
marketdojo marketplanet medius oalia oneadvanced
penny proactis proculy prokuria readytech
sourcingforce supplyon sustainment tradeinterchange vortal
workday zapro

SXM + CLM anydata birdseye brooklyn certa
convergepoint gatekeeper ignite itbid knovos
weproc

Sourcing + CLM aufait axya bidiful bonfire
cobblestone maistro prm360 safesourcing tradogram

Sourcing + SXM aerchain apadua archlet cimmra
cirplus cofactr inpromax k2 livesource
newtron oboloo opentrd pinpools pratis
procurekey procurementexpress promena prospeum qad
qcsolver sourcedogg srmeprocurement supplios teamprocure
tradebeyond truevaluehub valdera vendorful

Sourcing & Analytics curvo levadata requis

SXM & Analytics coglegal costbits everstream flowie
hivebuy lytica softconcis spendqube veridion

Contract Lifecycle Management (CLM) apporchid aavenir agiloft airflip
arteria atamis avvoka bonterms brightleaf
cipherace concord conga contracthound contractai
contractbook contractlogix contractpodai contracts365 contractsafe
dealsign docfield docjuris docusign dsilo
ebrevia evisort eyvo icertis inhubber
intelagree ironclad joro lawgeex legalrobot
legalsifter legartis lexcheck linksquares litera
luminance malbek opengov getoutlaw pocketlaw
pramata relativity simplicontract sirion spotdraft
terzo thinkingmachine thoughtriver tomorro trackado
trakti trueledger unimarket whitevision

Sourcing aestiva alpega amplio bamboorose
bestauction bideg bidlock bidso brainal
cosmoone enverus esupplier expenzing fairmarkit
keelvar lhotse loopio mysupply nextenders
onemoresource pagerduty partanalytics ply postrfp
procurementflow protendering responsive serex solvoz
sorcity supplychaincube supplyframe transfix wantex
zivio

Supplier Management (SXM) achilles adaptone agora alpas
apexanalytix aravo askafox auditcomply avetta
axiscope bedrock canopy cmx craft
creditriskmonitor enlightaspice eProcure eved exigis
franconnect ghx globality graphite grms
haloai hellios hicx informatica integritynext
interos isnetworld itesoft jiga kodiakhub
kyriba leanlinking lexisnexis linkana lupr
matchory mycomplianceoffice meshworks mfg opuscapita
orbweaver partnerelement paymentworks perimeter planergy
processunity procurence qmsc relatico resilinc
riskledger scoutbee silex smartkyc sourcemap
sphera stateofflux stimulus suppeco supplhi
supplierday supplierio suppliersoft supplyhive supplyrisksolutions
tacto tealbook thomasnet transcepta transparencyone
trustyoursupplier vendorapp vendorscoreit venminder zumen

Analytics acquireinsights aera akirolabs alteryx
analytics8 anaplan anvilanalytical calculum creactives
cxonexus deliciousdata digitate electrifai greencabbage
hunterai ivoflow kiresult metricinsights mithra
neqo onetrust oversight partnerling prgx
proaact procurevue pulse robobai rosslyn
scalue sievo silvon sourcinginsights spendata
spendboss spendedge spendhq spendkey smartcube
spendscape spendworx sps suplari tamr
vanta

Procure-to-Pay (P2P) b2be birchstreet b1p compleat
curemint dynatos elcom equallevel esker
ezatlas fraxion inbuild kissflow marketboomer
modernpo oracle orderco pagero pairsoft
payem precoro proceedo procuredesk procurenode
ramp settle softco sutisoft tradecentric
tradeshift vroozi

eProcurement bellwether bill brex causeway
controlhub cordis enkash factwise unanet
finexio fluentcommerce idas inorder lojistic
markit nimbi openenvoy payhawk procurementpartners
punnchoutcatalogs purchasingplatform sovra spendmap spendwise
teampay uppler vurbis yaydoo

Invoice-to-Pay (I2P) / Accounts Payable (AP) abby airbase apexpress appzen
aria avidxchange basware billtrust bluechain
candex concur coreintegrator corpay dataserv
directcommerce dooap edenred edicom emburse
ezcloud fiscal freshbooks getpaid glean
ipayables iqinvoice lexmark makershub mineraltree
nipendo nium opentext paid photoncommerce
procurify relish rillion sage servicenow
snapb2b snowfox sourceday spendconsole spendesk
stampli symbeo taulia tipalti xelix
xsuite yooz

EXPENSE airwallex deem expensify finetune
navan pleo pluto tangoe travelperk
worktrips

PAYMENTS & V/P-CARDS bluebean bottomline enable finix
payoneer previse transactis transfermate wise

Intake-Manage-Orchestrate
appian arkestro automationanywhere capto
celigo convergentis corvolo elementum focalpoint
levelpath netfira omnea ontra opstream
oro P2Cnnct pega pipefy pivot
procureai provalido qntrl sudozi tonkean
workfellow zflow zip

ESG/Carbon Scope 3
carbmee carbonaltdelete carbonanalytics carboncare
carbonchain carboncloud carbonfit carbonminds circularise
circulartree circulor climatecamp co2ai conserviceesg
cozero ctrls daato ditchcarbon ecovadis
emitwise greenkpi makersite measurabl minespider
responsibly sustainalytics trustrace veriforce verso
vertaeon watershed

Cyber Monitoring
cybersecurityintelligence securityscorecard

Direct Supply Chain
approve athingz contingent ensun
exiger exostar findmyfactory facturee frdm
genlots kreatize marvo gosupply nimbly
omx overhaul owlsolutions partfox partspace
prewave qstrat rapidratings sayari shouldcosting
supplywisdom trademo versedai visotrust whistic
wholechain xometry zetwerk

Legal
apperio brightflag bryter fulcrum
lawvu mitratech persuit thomsonreuters wolterskluwer

Marketing
agencymania alliansis decideware hhglobal
mtivity moosh rightspend

SaaS
appdirect apptio auvik beamy
bettercloud calero cledara cloudeagle diminish
entrio flexera flywl hudled lightyear
lumos nachonacho najar npi productiv
saasrooms sastrify setyl spendflow substly
torii trelica trgscreen tropic varisource
vendr vertice viio zluri zylo

Training
eveneum lavenir positivepurchasing

MarketPlaces
auxionize axiom bizeebuy cimple
collectivespend droppe faire growinco iap
joor kaleida mercadolibre partstrader procureafrica
produceiq rheaply smartequip sourceit unite
wescale

Intelligence
apriori aranca beroe bipsolutions
brightfield buynamics capella chai consource
convergencedata costdata cottrillresearch covalyze diprima
dnb easykost evpsolutions expana fareye
freightos freightender fuelme importyeti magayz
metalminer mtisystems nvelop pando paxly
moodysanalytics procureforce procurementiq shipsta sourceintelligence
sourceful sovos spikefli totalbid trax
truevaluehub trustpair xeneta

Does ProcureTech Generate Billions While Practitioners Lose Trillions?

A couple of weeks ago, THE REVELATOR, in his AI Whispering asked Why does the ProcureTech solution side of the table make billions, while the practitioner side loses trillions (and more)? And it’s a fair question. Because even though the practitioners don’t lose trillions on ProcureTech and ProcureTech consulting (as that’s only in the Billions), they DO lose Trillions on Tech and Tech Consulting that the ProcureTech Consulting and ProcureTech providers SHOULD be helping them save money on.

To be precise, at least 1.8 Trillion is going to be lost by Practitioners this year on Technology and Technology Consulting. Earlier this year, in our post on SaaS Spending, we predicted that at least 1.5 Trillion would be wasted based on total industry spend and an average waste of AT LEAST 30% (due to overspend, unused applications and project failure), but we are now revising that up to 1.8 Trillion based upon a minimum projected spend of 5.4 Trillion based on recent Gartner estimates.

To put this in perspective, only 15 countries have a GDP in excess of 1.8 Trillion! In other words, the total technology spend wasted is greater than the individual GDP of 92% of the countries on earth.

But it gets worse.

If you add up the global revenue of the 23 Big Consultancies, which you will be using for ProcureTech, FinTech, and related consulting, it comes to 551 Billion.

Accenture 65
Bain 7
BCG (Boston Consulting Group) 13
Capgemini 25
Cognizant 20
Deloitte 67
E&Y 51
Fujitsu 26
Genpact 5
HCL Technologies 14
Infosys 25
Kearney 2
KPMG 38
McKinsey 19
Mercer 2
NTT Data 30
Oliver Wyman 3
Publicis Sapient 18
PWC 55
Recruit 23
BAH (Booz Allen Hamilton) 1
Tata 31
Wipro 11

And if you add up the global revenues of the 9 big analyst firms, which you will be using for ProcureTech and Fintech advisory, it comes to 51.5 Billion.

Clarivate 0.5
Forrester 0.5
Gartner 6.5
Hackett 0.5
IDC 4.0
IQVIA 15.0
Kantar 3.5
Moodys 7.0
S&P 14.0

That’s a total of 602.5 Billion you’re spending for ProcureTech and FinTech consulting and advisory in return for a loss of roughly 1.8 Trillion!

In other words, for every dollar you spend, you lose three. That’s the reverse of the ROI you should be expecting. You should NOT be investing in Technology or Technology Consulting unless you will get a 3 to 1 return. But what you ARE doing is investing in Technology Consulting and Advisory for a 3 to 1 LOSS! That is the EXACT OPPOSITE of what you should be doing.

So what should you do? STOP!

Or, if you can’t stop, change the game. More to come …

The Major Procurement Risks with High or Moderate Impact

In our last series, which kicked off with our post where we told you that you don’t need to read another state of procurement study for the next 5 years, we noted that Deloitte recently released their annual latest and greatest CPO Survey with the help of Spend Matters, that was designed to highlight, among other things, the latest and greatest “observations, challenges, and trends” in Procurement, but that, in reality, just highlights the same problems, priorities, and barriers it found in the past 9 editions, just like every other annual survey in Procurement.

There’s no embellishment here. We mean every other study that has come before for years because:

  1. the doctor has been reading them.
  2. the doctor went back through 15 studies in detail that were released in the past five years and a few other related papers published in the same timeframe.

As part of this in-depth review, the doctor pulled out, for each of these 20 papers (which included papers from the usual suspects like Kearney, CapGemini, E&Y, PWC, and Everest), the

  • Top Barriers/Roadblocks to Success/Challenges
  • Major Procurement Risks with High or Moderate Impact
  • Primary Concerns/Strategic Priorities for Procurement Leaders
  • Significant Skill Competency Gaps/Support Needs

After doing so, the results were that, for the Deloitte study, analyzing the:

  • top barriers, of the 10 quoted in 2 or more of the papers, 7 are in the Deloitte study,
  • major procurement risks, of the 7 quoted in 2 or more of the papers, 5 are in the Deloitte study, and
  • primary concerns, of the 13 quoted in 2 or more of the papers, 8 are in the Deloitte study.

Moreover, if we were to abstract the barriers, risks, and concerns one level and start looking at the underlying systems or processes that would need to be addressed, the similarities would be even more significant.

More importantly, they aren’t changing much year to year, and aren’t going to change much for the next decade at least.

A year ago I penned a post where I pointed out that before you get all excited to learn about trends for fall conference season, with the exception of:

  • Gen-AI being the new fluffy magic cloud
  • Fake-take (sorry, intake) being the new dangerous and dysfunctional dashboard

the majority of trends that have been discussed for the past year are the same trends that were discussed ten years ago (and SI has the blog history to prove it, especially since it doesn’t purge over half of the blog history on a site upgrade and/or migration).

This is because the core purpose, and thus the core priorities, challenges, and risks, of Procurement haven’t changed in decades. The systems have evolved, the processes have become more complicated, and the global supply challenges haven’t been this bad since the nineties, but the core HAS NOT changed (and, to be fair, has NOT changed since the first manual was published in 1887 and has NOT changed much since cross-continental trade began thousands [and thousands] of years ago).

Which means we don’t need any more annual surveys on these issues (every 5 years would be more than enough, and even then you might find that the only movement is related to the hot tech of today vs. the hot tech 5 years ago, as SI did when it did its trend analysis last year).

In our last series, we also noted that we weren’t going to bore you by digging up two decades of studies and showing the same issue lists again and again, because that’s not the problem. The real problem is that these core issues still aren’t adequately addressed after decades of these “studies” being published, even though it’s the same issues again and again that come back year after year after year, sometimes with a vengeance when an unexpected natural disaster or pandemic strikes, a war breaks out, or a fan of the Gilded Age believes that tariffs are the cure-all and starts global trade wars.

However, before you can solve these problems, or anyone can put forth a solution, you need to understand what these issues are, why they keep coming back, and acquire some insight into how you might deal with them once and for all and finally move the needle forward.

In our last series, we focussed on the barriers to success. In this series we are going to address the risks. The seven risks that keep coming up over and over again, where five of them are top risks in the Deloitte study, from most referenced to least referenced, were:

  • Loss of critical talent/limited talent availability. ([00], [04], [05], [12], [19])
  • Natural/Man-Made Disasters ([04], [12], [14], [19])
  • IP/cyber attacks ([00], [03], [10], [12])
  • Rising cost/ spend pressures/inflation ([00], [04], [19])
  • Supply shortages/constraints / Competitive Alternatives ([00], [04], [12])
  • Regulatory compliance issues ([00], [04], [12])
  • Corruption/Fraud ([02], [04])

It is hoped that you enjoy the coverage!

Finally, remember to review our article on why You Don’t Need To Read Another State of Procurement Study for the Next 5 Years! if you want to dig up the referenced papers.

Breaking Down The Barriers: Insufficient Business-Wide Support/Resistance to Change

We’re continuing our foray into the top barriers to success that we outlined in our top barriers post that chronicles the barriers that keep coming up over and over again in every Procurement survey in our effort to ensure that you don’t have to read another state of procurement study for the next 5 years. Finally, we have to deal with the Resistance!

A Brief History …

As per our discussion of the Organizational and/or Technical Execution Support Capability barrier, and the siloed ways of working barrier, with each successive innovation, business, and process improvement, processes and tasks became more complex and required more education and experience to perform. As a result, with each successive innovation, each department became more and more narrowly focused on their functions, and, correspondingly, educational programs became more and more focused, the employees of each department learned less and less about the other functions, tasks, and requirements outside of their domain.

Simultaneously, as organizational departments diverged further and further apart as their processes, equipment, software, and budgetary needs became more and more distinct, the share of the pie each received decreased. The departments were stretched thinner and thinner, and their ability to adequately function was often at risk as much as that of Procurement and Supply Chain.

The Problem

As a result, stretched thin and without a deep understanding of Procurement operations, most departments have little incentive or capability to properly support Procurement.

The Necessary Realization

You scratch my back and I’ll scratch yours, first.”

You have to demonstrate how you can make their jobs easier and get better results. They won’t learn Procurement because, until they understand why it exists and what value it can deliver, they don’t even want to give you the time of day.

This means that you will have to learn their functions, understand their major pain points, and which of Procurement’s capabilities and values to promote to that department.

For example, Marketing doesn’t care about saving money — if they have the budget, they have the budget — because their metric is eyeballs and engagement and inbound uptick, and that requires creativity — and the best creatives cost the most, so, dear Procurement, please go away. It’s up to Procurement to understand that and explain to Marketing that they’d have more money for creative if they broke the quotes down into creative and non-creative expenses, and understood the market rates for standard services and consumables and only paid market rates, not ridiculous mark-ups as part of bundled quotes. It’s up to Procurement to explain to Marketing that 200 GSM C2S sheer finish paper is 200 GSM C2S sheer finish paper. Recording equipment is very comparable as well. There are average labour rates for recording engineers, camera people, etc. And that they can save Marketing money where talent doesn’t count so that Marketing can hire better talent or do more campaigns.

This also goes for Legal, R&D, Manufacturing, HR, and every other department that needs to procure goods and services. Legal will need help with understanding not only standard rates for standard services but how matter costs break down. HR will need to understand average rates for consultants in IT, Utilities, etc. where there are average rates. R&D will need to understand which suppliers can produce similar custom parts with better assurance of supply (and Procurement can steer to the subset that are more cost competitive). Etc.

The Technological Requirements

The technological requirements are considerable and require supply chain aware sourcing and sourcing aware supply chain and expertise from source to sink and back again on both sides.*

This concludes our initial series on the top Procurement barriers that keep getting repeated in every survey, and now you don’t need to read another survey on procurement barriers for at least five years! After a short break, we’ll be back with the major procurement risks!

*A final reminder that if you want guidance in the short term, hope that your favourite provider reaches out to Bob Ferrari of Supply Chain Matters or the doctor and enables us to focus on writing the series (or in-depth e-book) explaining what modern Procurement and Supply Chain Tech needs to look like (and how it needs to be implemented) to address the challenges, reduce the risks, and address the priorities versus just dripping out tidbits as free time permits.