anonymised

7 case studies

Percentage values are example corridors from typical project situations –
depending on category, baseline, market window, data situation and implementation discipline.

Negotiation Consulting & Closing
„Talked for months – gained nothing“

Invisible
Starting situation

Price increases were „passed on“, internal teams were at odds, the supplier dictated the rules of engagement. Result: many rounds, little progress, no closing momentum – and costs continue to rise, as everyone hopes „it will settle down“.

Procedure
  • Target values, red lines, and package logic defined (price, term, service, risk)
  • Anticipate supplier arguments, prepare counter-arguments
  • Roles and decision points established (who decides finally when)
  • Negotiation tactics, timing and closing windows planned
  • High-Pressure Preparation: Calmness, Focus, Completion Ability – ensuring you don't falter under pressure
  • as needed: accompaniment/guidance at the negotiating table until conclusion
Results (example)
  • 9–14% Cost reduction in the negotiated set
  • Significantly more stable runtime/price logic (fewer later surprises)
  • Degree in 3–5 weeks instead of endless rounds

Indirect Spend / Tail Spend & Maverick Buying:
„A lot of work, little effect.

Invisible
Starting situation

Typical in indirect spend: Procurement is busy, but not controlling. Conditions are inconsistent, contract compliance is weak – and maverick buying (off-contract) eats into savings and governance.

Procedure
  • Transparency about volume and effort (ABC/Cluster: Where is the money, where is the effort?)
  • Supplier pyramid: Core suppliers vs. the rest, clear rules per segment
  • Bundling and standardisation corridors defined (establishing comparability)
  • Framework agreements + call-off logic + control (Increase contract compliance, reduce maverick buying: who is allowed how, for what purpose, under what conditions?)
  • Quick-win bundling sets implemented immediately
Results (example)
  • 10–18% Savings in bundling categories
  • 30–45% fewer suppliers in affected segments
  • 20–35%: reduced administrative burden (Order processing/handling, framework agreements)

Supplier Risk / Resilience
„Known – but not controlled“

Invisible
Starting situation

Delivery failures, quality issues or price risks are visible – but without clear priorities, a logical approach to action, or a decision-making chain. In an emergency: frantic last-minute purchases, expensive express solutions, internal finger-pointing.

Procedure
  • Risk Matrix: Criticality, Dependency, Response Time, Impact
  • Measures packages: Alternatives, testing/qualification, contractual logic, inventory/supply concepts
  • Escalation paths + fixed control rhythm (making decisions plannable)
  • Lean KPI Early Warning System (Supplier Risk Analytics): few signals that truly steer (Impact, Response Time, Single Source Score)
Results (example)
  • 15–30% reduced dependence in critical categories
  • improved security of supply (fewer emergency purchases)
  • Faster response: Days instead of weeks

Procurement Transformation
„Shopping exists – but doesn't lead“

Invisible
Starting situation

Unclear roles, unclear decision-making authority, inconsistent processes. Each unit does it differently. Result: slow decisions, inconsistent conditions, low spend under management, and too much purchasing outside of contracts.

Procedure
  • Maturity and competency check (organisation, processes, data capability, people)
  • Vision + Procurement Leadership Mandate (measurable: what does procurement deliver?)
  • Roadmap: Quick Wins alongside structural work
  • KPI Systematics + Control Routines (Leading Instead of Reporting): Spend Under Management, Contract Compliance, Maverick Buying, Supplier Count, Cycle Time
  • Skills: Negotiation, Category Management, Supplier Management, Data Logic
Results (example)
  • 5–12% Quick-Win Leverage through initial category and award initiatives
  • significantly faster decisions (clear decision mandate)
  • Higher compliance and controllability

Single Source/Monopoly
„The supplier dictates“

Invisible
Starting situation

A supplier is set. Price, delivery time, terms: „take it or leave it.“ Internal fear of switching, high switching costs. Risk premiums are accepted because alternatives are lacking – until it eventually escalates.

Procedure
  • Dependency quantified (volume, criticality, changeover time, substitutability)
  • Alternative strategy: Dual/multi-sourcing, specification/material alternatives, outsourcing options
  • Supplier scouting + qualification (shortlist, capability checks, tests per category)
  • Contract/Pricing Mechanics New: Performance Parameters, Delivery Capability, Escalation
Results (example)
  • 12–20% better terms upon establishing real alternatives
  • Significantly reduced risk exposure (genuine choice)
  • Higher delivery capability / predictability

Tender Management & Bundling:
„Volume available – but scattered“

Invisible
Starting situation

Multiple locations, parallel contracts, different specifications. Everybody buys „their“ own package. Comparability is missing, synergies are left untapped, procurement cannot leverage its influence.

Procedure
  • Spending Consolidation + Harmonisation Corridors
  • Package/Lot + clear evaluation logic (enforce comparability)
  • Tender with Rules of the Game (Dates, Offers, Evaluation) – optional in Logistics (Freight Tender) or IT/SaaS, depending on the category
  • Framework agreement + Governance + KPI rhythm for management
Results (example)
  • 8–16% Savings by bundling/standardisation
  • 25–40%: less complexity in the supplier portfolio
  • Higher compliance and controllability

Supplier Day:
„Suppliers are managed – but not led.“.

Invisible
Starting situation

Performance fluctuates, escalations are reactive, expectations are vague. The relationship feels „nice“ but not in control. Suppliers don't know what matters – and internal teams lack a format to lead consistently.

Procedure
  • Supplier Day as a leadership format: Expectations, consequences, roadmap
  • Segmentation (strategic/critical/development/phase-out)
  • Preparation with performance and risk data
  • Action plan per supplier + Review rhythm (KPIs)
  • Improvement of delivery performance including OTIF (On-Time-In-Full) as a key performance indicator
Results (example)
  • 10–25% improved delivery performance (On-Time In-Full / Quality depending on measurement logic)
  • faster escalation and higher commitment
  • Supplier management becomes predictable and measurable
  • Measurable cost and price effects through focused supplier discussions, bundling, standardisation and consistent negotiation along defined performance and risk levers.
  • Supplier base transforms from a disorganised contact list into a controllable supplier pyramid: strategic partners, critical suppliers, development fields, and phase-out candidates are clearly visible and prioritised.

Do you recognise your pattern again?

Book Executive Clarity Call

We will clarify which levers are realistic for you – and which are not.