Procurement Intelligence Unit

The problem is other departments want to see procurement teams deliver value for money and being forward thinking and the modern day procurement should be having the skill base to deliver value and in practice most procurement teams do not have that skill base ie in the NHS. As a result of that there is a question of credibility of Procurement teams that are still growing, they spend much time worrying about what Finance or Engineering teams think about them.

my opinion is that procurement should take a leadership role and clearly let the organisation know what the function contributes to business objectives. Further, key stakeholders should have a clear idea of how procurement can contribute to achieving their objectives and been seen as partners. If the purchasing department/organisation is concerned about its credibility they need to create a plan and work to change the perception through clear communication, publication of results achieved and partnering with senior management to engage them in their investment/development plans regularly.

Tim, I agree and disagree. Communication of achievements is key but they should not become routine and cause a "so what?" reaction. Full stakeholder engagement in order to find out what matters to them is vital as this will not always equal savings. Finally, we cannot simply "take a leadership role, we have to earn it and that is where the difficulty often arises: until we've earned it we do not get stakeholder attention yet without the latter we cannot fully achieve results that matter to them. Hard work and patience will eventually pay dividends.

You can't "earn" early involvement, which is what it takes to run an effective procurement. Upper management support is the primary tool to get stakeholders to tender and procure the requirement through the procurement process. Upper management shouldn't endorse a spend decision without having it competitively bid through normal supply channels. Seems like a simple concept. Although unintentional, Ops and Engineering add cost to their bottom line when they force procurement to negotiate without competition.

Probably however, the economic climate and changes in technology mean the Procurement function has an opportunity to re-invent itself and become a full service orientated organisation. This means proactively supporting other departments to source business inputs in most cost effective manner and for best value and delivering Board level cost base reductions. Now is the time for procurement face its critics and deliver value were never before.

Thanks for the additions Bob, I think we are on the same line and agree with your points. Of course adopting a leadership role does mean earning the it and often can be incremental

Purchase departments are notoriously poor at self-marketing and showing the business what is has achieved. Its like the old saying goes "you can have the best product in the World but if nobody knows about it nobody will buy it".
I always devote time to improving the status of the Purchasing department by working on marketing our achievements to our stakeholders.

I really hope not. Like Gavin said this is our time to deliver value like never before. Back office is now front and center. We are putting on our new dresses (or pants, tie, etc), shining up our shoes (or just buying new ones) and doing what we have been trained to do. No chips at all.

@Ronny We should be delivering value for money if we are not then we want kicking out. After 40 years in procurement I should hope I know what I am doing. I personally have never worried about other teams but worked cohesively with them.

Job #1: The procurement organization must serve the needs of its internal customers, thereby sourcing those services and materials, directly in line with the requirements, expectations, and timeliness of the departments with which it serves. All departments depend on procurement, as procurement is the "power cog" in the gears of the organization. 
Do some procurement organizations have a chip on their shoulder? Perhaps some do have a chip on their shoulder, especially after challenging sourcing events where the ceiling may have fallen upon them due to poorly administered requirements gathering where procurement is externally dependent, in many cases, upon their internal customers needs .vs. wants... so getting enough buyers in the room is part of the battle. Getting buyers in-sync with suppliers and internal customers is the "crucial procurement triad" that needs constant managment and business process improvement. 

The only authority given to procurement by the Board of Directors is to issue purchases orders within specific guidelines. Other than that we have to get our supply chain initiatives bought into by other partners, etc., thru our use of influencing skills. Bottom line. Get really good at 1) influencing and 2) finding a "hook" that solves a problem for a partner so that they will get something out of the initiative.

From my position, Procurement has always had to defend its existence. It has long been considered an impediment in getting the work done from the program side. However, most Procurement shops have saved their respective organizations many dollars and they often have helped the program offices procure the items they really needed not just wanted. 
Yes, Procurement has to worry about what other departments think of it because they are following company policy, ensuring compliance with various laws, regulations, etc. and still making sure their clients get what they need when they need it. Effectively they have to satisfy many bosses that aren't even in their chain of command. 
However, how do you define "too much time"? I think it is a daily concern.

Most likely yes. In our department, you have to look at every aspect of the job. It is critical to maintain communication between other departments. We do not "have a chip on our shoulder" but rather an open eyes and mind awareness to the needs of all involved.

Interesting question. I think procurement suffers from an identity crisis, often known as imposter syndrome. Rather than worry about what other departments think, suggest spending more time thinking about the difference between what departments currently do and what they think they need procuremetn to do for them, and what procurement could actually do if they focused on the outcomes of the business activity of each department and built a service that gave them strategic support to deliver their goals. 

think the better question is "Does procurement have a clearly defined marketing and communication strategy to manage its internal brand?"
Until procurement is accepted as a 'must get right' business process defined by the value it creates and not the money it saves, procurement will always need to over compensate for its lack of status through a clearly defined strategy to expand its scope of influence.

Even when this is achieved my observations in large businesses is that the most influential CXO's are those who are good at promoting their functions value to the business.

I agree with Dave 100%. Today's procurement professionals need to be part marketer in order to change the perception many have about the function and related value it delivers. Procurement leaders must focus on re-defining their value proposition in terms that are relevant to their constituents and company culture. In my opinion, must include value beyond cost savings. Changing the paradigm of senior leaders and having them support in their organizations will go a long way in changing the game. Then its just a matter of delivering against the new paradigm. Exciting times!!

I think in order to gain respect and attention a good Purchasing team needs to be proactive in rendering market information to their internal customers all the time. One must
get early involvement in the users' business plan and to engage the right vendors to the discussion table for architecting the viable projects. In most Companies the Human Resource Department plays a role by setting strict rules to direct user departments to the Purchasing Department for goods and services to be bought. Thorough negotiations and well written contract terms would help deliver value and good perfomance from the supply chain.