At first I wondered why the paper wasn't published in one of the mainstream procurement journals, then I decided it may be the reported findings quite possibly jar against the message their editors generally want to accept.
Nevertheless the findings are important and certainly merit further debate and validation.
I am not going to steal the paper's thunder, but the key messages include that 47% of the respondents believe Purchasing (I take that also to cover the Procurement function) is not included in the strategic planning process, and 56% the purchasing are not focussed on long-term issues that involve risk and uncertainty. Furthermore that organisational structure tends to be either centralised or decentralised with little development of hybrid models.
Those findings certainly act as a reality check on the rhetoric but, I have to say find some resonance with what I have all too often seen in big household name companies. If the findings are reliable we need to stop the bluff and really get down to asking the serious question of why is Procurement still suffering from an identity crisis, despite almost 30 years of procurement's potential contribution having been identified, the financial crisis, and even the recent spate of procurement related supply chain risks manifesting themselves? Why are simplistic structural models still prevalent despite the benefits of hybrids? Is the problem that with the profession of those who look at the profession?
However, leaving solving the world's problems for another day, and getting back to the paper. In answering the core question the authors pose: Can we bridge the gap between strategy and daily reality? The authors use the case studies to demonstrate the answer is 'yes', and identify key pitfalls in bridging the gap, namely:
- No time for reflection;
- Lack of scale;
- Lack of scope;
- Unaligned incentives.
While I may question some of the content and approach, and feel there may be an over-simplification of the discussion and recommendations, I encourage you to give some thought to the findings.