• Thursday, March 28, 2024
businessday logo

BusinessDay

Juggling many balls – quality

Procurement perception – the elephant in the room

When I think of the multifaceted stakeholder relationships a procurement professional must manage effectively to be regarded as a success on the job, the image that forms in my mind is that of a ball juggler. The skills required of such a performer are that he/she must have some balls in hand and some in the air at any point in time.

To catch one ball, you must let go of the other and deftly repeat this manoeuvre consistently. A good juggler never “drops the ball.”

This is the case with procurement. There are mainly 6 imperatives we are tasked to deliver – quality, quantity, price, place, source, and time.

At first glance, these objectives appear uncomplicated and easy to attain. In a live scenario, however, you will appreciate the difficulty of meeting every one of these requirements to the level of satisfaction your stakeholders expect.

This is because one target is usually compromised so the others can be achieved. There is no such thing as a “perfect procurement request.” If you had all the money to pay for the right quality and quantity of a needed item/service from your supplier of choice, you obviously don’t all the time you need to secure it, or all the space to store it in your preferred location. These “balls” are moving targets, and as such must be balanced to the extent that the circumstances allow. I will address them one by one.

Read also: Nigeria is 97% ready for 5G network – NCC

Quality

Asking some user departments to “spec” their requests clearly is an ongoing battle. They usually either insist on top quality brands (which cost way more than the business can afford), or they send unclear parameters which put procurement in a ping pong match with suppliers seeking clarity. Some ill-intentioned users go as far as using a specific suppliers’ design in their requests which makes it impossible for other vendors to quote correctly. My recommendation is for user departments to define the outcome they desire; this will allow some flexibility with determining which solution best meets those needs.

Quality must also be measured in terms of the following:

Quality of relationships – Are we in bed with the right partners, and are those relationships such that they deliver value for all parties?

Quality of communication – is Is communication transparent and timely? Do our users share sudden changes in plans and business requirements, and do we manage communications with vendors fairly?

Quality of the process – are our procedures set up to deliver the best outcomes, or do we confuse our users with multiple hoops and surprises.

Quality of management – are we investing in our people such that they feel competent and capable to handle the value and volume of spend we commit to them. Are we also dealing with suppliers who have the required maturity at senior levels to make the right decisions that meet our needs?

Quality of (company) image – have we dealt with our suppliers and communities such that we are a trusted player? Do we attract the kind of collaborations that drive value?

You will often find that using this approach, it is possible to deliver the same quality at lower cost, higher quality at the same cost, or higher quality at a lower cost.