The hidden bias in procurement

There have been some great opportunities presented my way over the years to work with pharmaceutical companies, but I have swerved them. You wanna know why? Because I don’t believe I should have to wait 90 days for payment. Our business payment terms are very clear. We do thirty days, or there is no delivery. I don’t care what the name is at the top of the building. What I do care about is holding our ground, and getting our solicitors to look through contracts, and if there is no alignment, then we keep it moving.

It’s possible that I have missed out on some great business opportunities with this stance. But how great are they, though? My feeling is, why should smaller businesses roll over every time a larger one wants to tickle their stomach?

Quite recently, I walked away from a coaching opportunity to work with a senior leader at a large brand consultancy. I can’t lie I was not happy to do this as I really wanted to work with the leader, but I moved on because the consultancy’s process for securing the work was laborious. One of the many sticking points for me was the need to prove myself in a thirty-minute demo session and to also give reflection notes as part of the process. This is before I am even “approved” to work with the client. There were other queries I found quite intrusive too. Bearing in mind we have testimonials, are VAT registered and have all the relevant insurances in the millions that other large firms require of us before we move forward.

Now for others, particularly larger companies, this is not a problem. They have the resources to dedicate the ridiculous amounts of time these processes devour - all in the name of securing a coveted brand to showcase to the next client. I and many other small businesses can’t afford to dedicate enormous amounts of time to ONE potential client. For me, this is just another example of the hidden biases that prevent many small companies from engaging in more lucrative procurement processes.

One of the reasons I look beyond the talent piece when talking about #inclusiveleadership is to get organisations to understand how many of their processes already limit and exclude people from certain processes. #Procurement and #supplychainmanagement is one of the areas that too many organisations have not thought through.

As a coach and advisor, I ask clients to carefully examine how onerous the process is and whether it is positioned as an invitation to treat and pitch for business or a burdensome admin process. Do payment terms work for small businesses for whom cash flow is critical? Outside of bids, do companies create space to upskill those who don’t know about proposals, tenders, or other means of being considered for the supply pipeline?

I am quite privileged to have a client roster that includes several blue-chip companies and influential brands. But having such brands is nice to have, rather than a necessary part of the work I do globally. I would like to think my work speaks for itself. But every now and then, I walk away from opportunities that have us needing to prove ourselves. For many of us, we are left thinking, “You came to me, based on my reputation. So why am I jumping through hoops for you?”

For many underrepresented groups, there is already an internal dialogue that many have to quieten down about being good enough. About being more qualified or “having to prove” that we are right for the task at hand. It matters not to some that there are results from our clients on how our services have saved money, improved employee experiences, worked with senior executives, and consistently churned out results.

For many of these suppliers who speak about innovation and representation, the opportunities to reduce barriers to entry and to have a bit more nuance on who they work with is a blindspot. For those of us working on the ground with underrepresented business owners who want to get a piece of the pie, it can be tiring to see orgs who, on the one hand, win awards for, publish content and talk a great game about representation and inclusion ignore the basics.

There is an opportunity for many to reduce those blind spots, mainly by asking the right people the right questions.

• Suppliers who abandoned your process; ask them why they dropped out.
• Suppliers who made it through the process; ask them what worked well or if they experienced any friction during the process.
• Create feedback loops for underrepresented suppliers; what challenges do they face with the process?

Also (this one isn’t a question), inform those who didn’t make it through the process why they didn’t make the cut. Provide feedback so that they can improve and approach their next tender better equipped.

Without this progressive broader thinking across all areas of the business, be it talent, procurement or other organisational departments, inclusive leadership is a nice to have rather than a systemic way of working.

It shouldn’t have to take a bot like the one that called out companies on gender pay disparities last year, when the answer is right in front of our faces. If we just looked.

#braveleadership #inclusion #procurement