Getting a new supplier and phasing out an old one are hard work. We tend to put the decision off much too long. Actually, the decision itself is separate from the action. We may decide that a new vendor is in order, but we put off implementing the plans to make that happen as long as possible.
Why would we do that? There are several reasons I have seen over the years. Personal relationships can be a huge problem in this area. If a Buyer has become fond of a sales rep, it can be like losing a friend. Another gigantic obstacle can be the personal and business relationships of senior management. I've seen that play a factor in very poor business decisions too many times. The fact that senior managers play golf with the owner of the supply company should not have any bearing on the choice of vendor. If you are allowing that kind of interference in your Purchasing Department, it is time to make a change in policy.
Another reason change decisions are delayed is because nobody in the Procurement Department wants to take responsibility for managing or bringing in what is now considered a bad vendor. They try to cover up the problems or put band-aids on gaping wounds, hoping nobody will notice. Unfortunately, the longer the inadequate supplier is kept around, the worse the problem gets. Overall, Commodity Managers will look like heroes more often if they get suppliers with whom everyone is genuinely happy.
All these issues that interfere with positive change can be overcome by having objective criteria against which to measure vendors. Policy should state (and actually follow) that meeting the criteria is the only factor in determining whether vendors stay or are replaced.
Comment Preview