First, I want you to recognise that the statues depict a group of city leaders (the Burghers) with the keys of the CIty of Calais in their hands and ropes around their necks - ropes ready for the hangman.
The 100 years war was on. Things were not going well for France and the English had led a remarkably successful siege on Calais. Those inside the city walls had reached the end and total destruction looked likely. The English king, Edward III, gave the city a way out - send out six of your top men with nooses around their necks and carrying the keys of the city, and those who remain inside will be spared. Six leaders volunteered to give up their lives for the sake of the citizens. Could you visualise an equivalent sacrifice from modern day councillors? Nevertheless, fully expecting a brutal death, a message came through from the pregnant English Queen petitioning on their behalf. The Queen's view was that killing the Burghers would bring misfortune on her unborn child. Edward III, who I assume wasn't known for his softness, had a change of heart. He spared the six Burghers.
So now we have memorials throughout the world to the six Burghers. One, in Calais, depicting the pain, anguish and fatalism of the six Burghers. A second in Westminster depicting the King, having the power to kill, choosing not to - it is something similar to the image of the Caesars deciding on whether the gladiator should live or die.
So what on earth has all this got to do with procurement? Well it strikes me that on many occasions we can are faced with the option of 'beating suppliers up'. I am sure you all can think of an example of the 'bully boy' CPO - the tough guy who makes sure suppliers know who is in charge. But does that really make sense in the long run. There are no prefect CPOs - we all make mistakes and need to eat humble pie. When we need a supplier to help us out and the supplier has the choice of whether to be benevolent to the buyer in need, will that be pay-back time?
It has always struck me as strange that many buyers forget one of the worst things which could happen is that the market just decides it does not want to supply a particular buyer. The more I think of it, the person who gains most in the long-term, isn't the CPO who 'beats the supplier up' continually, but the buyer who shows benevolence and recognises that mistakes happen. That's the buyer who gets preferred customer status. That's not to say that we shouldn't be concerned about good supplier and contract management - no, it's to say that sometimes benevolence is the best strategy in the long term.
Think about it, nearly 700 years after the event you're reading a blog about six Burghers who made a sacrifice and a King noted for his military success and reigning over 50 years, who dealt out mercy.