eProcureAI / Resources / Analysis
AnalysisSavings programmes usually start with negotiation, which is the hardest lever and the slowest. Four other sources are easier to find, easier to quantify, and rarely looked at first.
Ask a procurement team where savings come from and most will say negotiation. Ask where they found savings last year and the answer is usually different.
Negotiation is real but slow. It needs a baseline, leverage and a renewal date, and it delivers once a cycle. The four sources below deliver faster because they are about finding money already leaking rather than extracting better terms.
They also have a property finance likes. Each one can be quantified from your own transactions, which means the number survives a conversation with somebody sceptical.
Work from most quantifiable to least. Duplicate suppliers first, because the evidence is unambiguous. Off contract buying second, because the premium is calculable. Then licences, then volume breaks, both of which need a little more judgement.
Doing it in this order matters because the first finding buys credibility for the rest. A duplicate supplier with two years of parallel payments is difficult to argue with.
The same company on your supplier list twice, usually under spelling variants or through two accounts created by different people at different times.
Cost comes from three places. You lose volume leverage because spend is split. You pay different prices under each record. And you carry double the administration for a single relationship.
Find them by tax identifier rather than by name. Names produce false positives, identifiers do not.
| Source | How it is found | Why it costs you |
|---|---|---|
| Duplicate suppliers | Shared tax identifier or bank details | Split volume, inconsistent pricing, double administration |
| Off contract buying | Purchases in a category avoiding the contracted supplier | A premium over rates you already negotiated |
| Unused licences | Provisioned seats against active users | Paying for headcount you no longer have |
| Missed volume breaks | Spend split across departments below a threshold | A discount you qualify for and do not claim |
All four are findable from transaction data you already hold, which is what separates them from negotiation savings.
This is the one that hides best, because the supplier name on the report looks entirely correct. You have an agreement with them, so nothing appears wrong. The purchase simply was not made at the agreed rate.
The premium is usually in single figure percentages, which sounds small until you apply it to a full category.
Worth understanding the cause before fixing it. Off contract buying is rarely defiance. It is usually a catalog gap, meaning the contracted item was not available in the place people buy from, so they bought it elsewhere.
Software seats provisioned when somebody joins and almost never removed when they leave. The count only ever rises, and the difference between provisioned and active is money.
The fix is timing rather than negotiation. Reductions have to happen at renewal, which means the review needs to occur before the notice period rather than after the invoice arrives.
This is why a renewal calendar tracking notice periods matters more than one tracking renewal dates.
Your total spend with a supplier would qualify for a better tier, but it is spread across departments or entities that each buy independently and none of them reaches the threshold alone.
Finding these requires spend grouped by supplier across the whole organisation, which is exactly the view most companies lack. Once you have it, the conversation with the supplier is straightforward, because you are not asking for a discount, you are pointing out that you already qualify for one.
A savings figure that cannot be traced to transactions gets discounted the moment somebody senior questions it, and rightly so.
Three things make a number hold. Attach the transactions behind it, so anybody can check. State the baseline explicitly, meaning what you actually paid over a defined period rather than a list price. And separate identified from realised, because a duplicate supplier found in March is not a saving until the accounts are actually merged.
Identified savings and realised savings are different numbers. Reporting them as one is the fastest way to lose a finance director's confidence.
A four week sequence for de-duplicating and consolidating.
Read it AnalysisWhy recording spend at approval removes month end surprises.
Read it GuideChoosing the category and writing a specification suppliers can bid against.
Read itThe duplicate supplier number surprises most teams. Bring twelve months of spend and we will run it with you.
Book a demoBack to all resources