Pablo Otero Mendez
Looking beyond Procurement Savings
A few months ago, I went into an executive review with a procurement result I was pleased with. We had found real savings in several categories, improved our supplier terms, and strengthened our sourcing position. Then someone asked, ‘How much of that actually becomes profit?’
I did not have a clean answer, and it was exactly the right question.
In food manufacturing, a procurement saving and a margin improvement often turn out to be two different things. A lower ingredient price can get eaten up by freight, exchange rates, tariffs, inventory carrying costs or inefficiencies on the production floor. Customer pricing commitments and shifts in demand can take the rest. A saving that looks great in a sourcing report may leave very little in the P&L. That meeting changed how I think about the job.
Protecting the Economics of the Business
Procurement is not really about buying for less. It is about protecting the economics of the business.
This matters most when Commodity markets remain highly volatile, which is most of the time. Butter, flour, sugar, oils, cocoa, packaging, shipping and exchange rates can all change fast. If your team does not start planning until a supplier sends a quote, you are already playing catch-up with the market instead of staying ahead of your risk.
Good strategy starts well before that. Before a negotiation begins, you should know which way commodities are heading, how your suppliers' costs are built, when your contracts roll off, what you are holding in inventory, what alternative sources exist, and what the total landed cost looks like. You will not predict every move, and that is not the goal. The goal is to have options, so you are never forced into a decision when conditions are at their worst.
The savings figure you present in the meeting is not what counts. What counts is the margin the business actually keeps.
This matters so much in food manufacturing because the lowest unit price is rarely the lowest cost. A cheaper supplier may need longer lead times, bigger minimum orders, or more safety stock. An offshore source can look attractive until you add freight, duty, currency exposure, service risk and the cash tied up in inventory. A spot purchase might beat your contract price one month and lose to it the next. Consolidating suppliers can give you leverage, but only if you do not sacrifice continuity, quality or responsiveness to get it.
From Savings to Margin Management
I have stopped asking my team, ‘I no longer stop at asking whether we can reduce the price’, the better question is, ‘which mix of price, timing, terms, supply security and flexibility protects the most margin?’
Answering it takes procurement working much more closely with finance, sales, operations and R&D than most organizations are used to. If we land a lower cost and the full benefit goes straight to the customer through pricing, the business should see it. If an ingredient or packaging change sits in R&D approval for six months, someone should be able to say what that delay cost. If production schedules lead to extra storage, rush freight or surplus inventory, those costs belong in the same conversation as the savings.
That is the point where procurement stops being a savings function and becomes a margin-management function.
Tracking Value beyond Savings
The best procurement teams I have seen tie their sourcing decisions directly to the P&L. They track value captured as well as negotiated savings. They can tell you how much reached gross margin, how much went to keeping customers competitive, how much inflation or operating costs absorbed, and where value leaked out after the deal was signed.
It also changes how you approach suppliers. A strong negotiation is not just about pushing someone to a lower number. It means understanding your leverage, checking prices against market indices, questioning premiums, improving payment and freight terms, matching contract length to market risk, and building credible alternatives before you need them.
Commodity buying works the same way. Nobody buys at the very bottom of the market consistently, so that is an unfair standard. A better test is whether the team had a clear position, understood its exposure, set decision thresholds in advance, and shielded the business from volatility that could have been avoided.
Food manufacturers will keep dealing with commodity swings, trade uncertainty, labor pressure and customers whose expectations keep shifting. All of that makes procurement more important, not less.
Cost savings will always matter. But the bigger opportunity is building a procurement organization that understands where margin is created, where it gets lost, and how decisions across the supply chain shape the final result.
The savings figure you present in the meeting is not what counts. What counts is the margin the business actually keeps.
