Measuring the performance of a procurement department

December 8, 2006

I’ve recently put together a list of measurable procurement team activities and a suggested metric for each activity. It’s by no means revolutionary but you may find it useful in your organisation.

Listed below are the activities and metrics. Note that your team’s metrics will differ from those listed below based on the behaviour you are attempting to drive within your team, your organisation, and your supply base.

  1. Spend analysis: Enriched addressable spend mapped to the organisational hierarchy (as a percentage of total addressable spend)
  2. Sourcing: Savings, total and savings divided by the sum of procurement staff salaries.
  3. Ordering: Spend through Procurement-controlled channels (e.g. e-catalogues) divided by the sum of P2P staff salaries
  4. Deliveries: Metric: Average elapsed time from supplier dispatch to end user receipt
  5. Invoicing and payment: Metric: Percentage of invoices paid on the date due (or before with negotiated discount)
  6. Contract administration: Metric: Percentage of total addressable spend under contract
  7. Supplier management: Metric: Spend covered by suppliers providing simple cost and SLA reporting back to the procurement department divided by the sum of supplier management staff salaries.

You’ll have noticed that some of the metrics are ratios between the objective and the cost of staff. I find this useful in focusing staff not on the limitations of our resourcing but on the efficiency of the resources we do have, and to constantly search for ways to make themselves more efficient.

Entry Filed under: Management, Procurement. .

13 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Austine  |  April 15, 2007 at 1:52 pm

    These are good thoughts
    Please send me the templates

    Thanks

  • 2. hudgeon  |  April 16, 2007 at 7:22 am

    Hi Austine,

    Sent.

    Cheers,

    Doug

  • 3. aconris  |  May 21, 2007 at 11:42 pm

    Hello Doug, I agree most of your metrics, but I miss quality. Btw, contract mgmt is especially in ANZ important based from our reaerch. Please send me the templates
    http://aconris.wordpress.com

  • 4. hudgeon  |  May 22, 2007 at 7:19 pm

    True, quality is missing as a measure, primarily because of the cost of measuring it to a useful significance level. Instead, I tend to track quality as a satisfied/dissatisfied measure used to guide our behaviour rather than describe our performance.

  • 5. ykrause  |  July 12, 2007 at 8:00 am

    Good insight. Can you please send me the templates. Thanks!

  • 6. I. Makgill  |  August 7, 2007 at 12:11 am

    Doug,

    I’m interested that you include prompt payment, isn’t this an A/C payable function?

    Ian

    ps. If you get a moment, I’d appreciate a copy of the templates too.

  • 7. hudgeon  |  September 3, 2007 at 8:50 pm

    In my opinion, the line between Procurement and AP will over the coming years blur to the point of disappearing. Are there any reasons, other than maintaining the status quo, for separating the two functions?

  • 8. jakymec  |  October 19, 2007 at 6:51 am

    Please send me the templates I am intrigued by your thoughts

  • 9. avinnair  |  November 27, 2007 at 10:49 pm

    nice real thoughts, can you please send me the templates for this id - avin.nair@gmail.com

  • 10. Loselo  |  March 11, 2008 at 8:31 pm

    These metrics sound quite interesting. I fully agree partuclularly with regard to cost benefit analysis b/t cost of procurement staff and the savings derived from SMO.

    Please send me the templates.

  • 11. Jeff Gordon  |  March 15, 2008 at 11:47 pm

    Doug:

    I have to agree with aconris - and in fact, your own About paragraph on this page suggests that contract terms are important: “At the heart of my work is my belief… continuously improving contractual relationships.” Are you only focused on the spend portion of the relationship?

    Perhaps, as you’ve said in a more recent post, you’ve become quite focused in your expertise. This would typically have the effect of encouraging you to discount things other than spend. But I urge you not to ignore the value of the contract terms themselves.

    My reasoning for this is that without assessing that value, you are forever dividing Purchasing from Contracting. And to become a true “Vendor Management” organization, those functions probably need to come together (I can’t say that they must, as I’ve never seen it successfully work).

    [I’m interested in whether they have at most places, so I’ve started a survey on my own blog to find out: http://www.licensinghandbook.com.

    In the meantime, please rethink the lack of metrics on the contracting piece.

    :)

    ~Jeff

  • 12. Ruud Altena  |  March 20, 2008 at 11:08 pm

    Dear Doug,

    Would you be so kind to send me a copy of your templates? I;m currently involved in the restructuring of the procurement department and your templates could be very helpful.

  • 13. Ruud Altena  |  March 20, 2008 at 11:09 pm

    Dear Doug,

    Would you be so kind to send me a copy of your templates? I’m currently involved in the restructuring of the procurement department of my company. I am of the opinion that your templates could be very helpful.

    Thanks in advance.

Leave a Comment

Required

Required, hidden

Some HTML allowed:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


About Doug Hudgeon

I am a vendor management specialist based in Sydney Australia.

At the heart of my work is my belief that it is possible to structure harmonious, continuously improving contractual relationships between purchasers and vendors.

For more information, please contact me at:

Feeds

Top Posts

Recent Comments

Links

Meta

Archives