I have played tennis since I was knee high to a grasshopper. My dad was my coach and when he knew I had the basics and was able to return his serve, he went all out. He did not believe in pulling his shots even though his baby girl was on the other side of the net. I soon learned that in order to have a good game against him I needed to be faster, be sneakier in hiding and executing my shot selection and use power when he believed he had me on the back foot (pardon the mixed metaphors). What my dad taught me on the tennis court was you play your strengths and make no excuses if you do not win. Practice made perfect and I spent hours outside of my dad’s sessions practising drills and applying these in my on-court game. I learned the lesson of persistence, learning from my mistakes and getting better with each game played. I was 8.
What my dad’s methods taught me was that although he was older, stronger and had more years’ experience that me, I was able to look at his weaknesses and build on my strengths every time I played him. I also learned from the greats by watching a lot of tennis and seeing how Billy Jean, Arthur Ashe, Chrissie Evert, Martina, Lendl, McEnroe, Connors, Boris, etc were fighting it out. I was not only looking at their shots or how they moved the ball across the court, but was also looking at their body language, how they changed their game through the sets, what tactics they used to unsettle their opponent’s game on and off court and how they capitalized on every opportunity they created on the court. The tennis stars of today are great – I mean who does not love the Williams sisters and what they have brought to the game – let’s not talk about the Great RF, but my generation of tennis players had more strategic plays in their game than I would say today’s players do. It was not all about the power. Just my opinion.
In a Procurement context playing the power game i.e. Transactional Procurement can be enough if you are in it for a quick win and really do not care about the long term consequences – as long as you win the match today i.e. deliver savings. Category Management does take a more strategic approach to the game and does, sometimes, consider the longer term consequences to the organization, its supply partners etc. The players do get a win/win, but more than often it is a win/lose result. Collaborative Procurement, on a Strategic level, is not that widespread or accepted and organizations still have the idea that in order for us to win, they will have to lose. I wonder what the next generation of Procurement Professionals are going to point to and remember about this generation of Procurement Professionals.
Another issue here is that most organizations do not invest in their Procurement people and the Procurement people invest very little time in the study of their profession either by obtaining a CIPS* diploma or equivalent qualifications and even less by studying the great plays of earlier generations of Procurement Professionals. My gosh I have been in Procurement departments where people in the same team do not want to learn from their colleagues who were sitting right next to them. Is it any wonder that CPOs polled say that getting the talent is their biggest challenge? It is time for all of us to stand up and be counted when it comes to taking the Profession of Procurement to the next level by leading by example, be the best at what you do and teach/show the next generation the way to becoming even greater than today’s Procurement Professionals.
*UK qualification
We are a Global Procurement, Supply Chain and Business Consultancy specialising in Supplier Vetting and Management, Business Analytics, Business Interpretation and Translations, Contracts Management,…
Post articles and opinions on Manchester Professionals
to attract new clients and referrals. Feature in newsletters.
Join for free today and upload your articles for new contacts to read and enquire further.
