New CIPS Chair Faces Challenges - Competition, Content and Community Top the List

Last week, Alison Barto took over as the new chair of the Global Board of Trustees for CIPS (the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply).?As CIPS no longer has a President, this is THE key “volunteer” role, making her one of the two key people, along with the CEO, who can have the biggest impact on the development and performance of the Institute.

Barto rose through the procurement ranks in banking giant HSBC, and ended up outgrowing procurement, taking on a senior role in Corporate Banking. She has recently stepped down from that role, and I understand she intends to pursue a career in non-exec, advisory and similar work. She takes over from Paul Thorogood, who was Chair of CIPS through the difficult last two years.

To be blunt, I don’t believe he made much of an impact in terms of profile with the general CIPS membership or the Institute’s direction. But it has been a challenging time, and he has without a doubt been a sensible, safe pair of hands. CIPS members should be grateful for his contribution.

Barto has really impressed me based on our limited contract to date. She clearly has a deep understanding of the profession, is direct and focused, and while she appears to have strong people skills, I get the impression she does expect action and performance. CIPS has a senior team going through some change – for instance, the well-respected Duncan Brock, a key executive for many years, retired recently – so that is both an opportunity and a challenge for her and the CEO, Malcom Harrison. And generally, she is taking on the hot seat as the Institute faces its biggest ever challenges.

CIPS did not really develop its profile through the pandemic. Part of that was the difficulty the Institute always has in taking public positions on sensitive issues. Criticise UK PPE procurement, for instance, and CIPS would be criticising many of its own members who worked on that programme! And of course, the UK government is probably CIPS’ largest source of revenue, so that will always be a potential conflict of interest if CIPS does enter the public eye.

The challenges to the Institute run deeper though. When I was President 20 years ago, CIPS felt like it was at the heart of the procurement world (I’m not claiming any credit for that, I should stress!) But it was THE source of information about procurement good practice. Supply Management magazine was actually read carefully by most members, as there wasn’t much else around, and carried many pages of job adverts.?CIPS was the leading events “business” in the sector. The Institute had close links with professors in academia and played a role in determining research priorities. There was a range of working groups across topics and sectors, as well as the geographical branches. Some were an irritant to the Council and Board, to be honest, but that was a sign that there were many members who really cared about the Institute.??

Now, in part because of the growth in interest in our profession, the landscape is broader and very different. Practitioners can join, obtain information from or work with Procurement Leaders, Procurious, the Sustainable Procurement Pledge, Procurement with Purpose, WCC, SIG, Spend Matters, Proctopus, ProcureTech and many others. There are great podcasts every week from the Art of Procurement, the Procurement Show, World of Procurement, Dial P for Procurement, and more. Procurement events are provided literally every week – many of them free of charge, like this week’s Proactis event – with speakers of similar standard to the expensive CIPS events!

Everyone listed above – and other similar organisations – will claim they aren’t competing with CIPS, because it suits them to be seen as collaborative. But of course they are competitors, at least for people’s time and attention, but often for money too. CIPS has not helped itself by failing to get on the front foot in the case of some key emerging issues, allowing others to capture the space – consider digitisation of procurement, contract management or sustainable procurement.

As well as this competitive landscape, most members are not particularly engaged with CIPS. Their employer probably pays the annual fee, and the MCIPS letters help with credibility and career. But few attend branch meetings or events, or really contribute at all. Again, CIPS has not helped itself here (I suspect Haymarket, partners for events, publications, and so on shares some blame too). The fact that there is no facility for members to comment on articles on the Supply Management website, or engage in social media discussions, shows that CIPS has not moved into the 21st century in terms of building communities and member engagement.

From an IP (intellectual property) point of view, CIPS again has gone backwards in my view. There appears to be little linkage with universities – although there are more “procurement professors” than ever, which is great news, I don’t see much cross-fertilisation between that community and CIPS or its members.?Most of the “thought leadership” material CIPS promotes now is paid for by sponsors (software firms, consultants etc). I don’t know if it is Haymarket or CIPS that apply quality control here, but the quality of the “white papers” and webinars that CIPS puts its name to is highly variable, ranging from very good to embarrassingly poor. There is reputational risk here.

Let’s finish with the positives though - after all, I don’t want our new chair to reconsider her decision! CIPS retains strengths, above all its education and qualifications portfolio, still probably the strongest of any procurement Institute globally. It also carries a lot of goodwill in many countries around the world – witness its successful growth in the Middle East in recent years. Whilst the governance changes were handled badly, the new Membership Committee has a chance to establish an important role, and the Board looks strong too. The Fellows community is more active than ever and can be utilised further. And CIPS’ new technology platform which went live earlier this year should be good news in a number of areas.

Finally, the new Chair takes over as procurement has a higher profile than ever. That is in part because of difficult global issues, but it does put the profession at the heart of business and indeed government activities and objectives. I do think Alison Barto will be great news for CIPS and the profession – I hope she enjoys her tenure and wish her good luck and every success. ?

#Procurement