BME salary report reveals structural efficiency problem in procurement
83% of purchasing managers regularly work overtime, 42% of them without any compensation. These are not abstract figures from a report, they are everyday shopping. The current BME salary report makes visible what many have been feeling for a long time. The operational burden is high, consistently high, and has become the norm in many organizations.
Anyone who is responsible for purchasing today knows these evenings. After an already full working day, invoices are checked, order requests approved, new creditors are created in the system or inquiries from the accounting department are answered. Tasks that have to be completed, but are rarely the tasks for which purchasing was actually set up. Weekends are used to rework what has been left behind. Not out of ambition, but out of necessity.
The real problem isn't that these tasks exist. They are part of reality. It becomes critical where they tie up the majority of available capacity and displace strategic work.
Because while operational processes eat up time, issues remain that determine your competitiveness in the long term. Be it supplier development, risk management, digitization, sustainability or product group strategies. Purchasing reacts instead of designing. He manages rather than steers.
This is not an individual organizational failure, but a structural phenomenon. In many companies, purchasing staff is scarce, skilled workers are difficult to find and at the same time, requirements are constantly increasing. Modern purchasing work today requires not only negotiation skills, but also a deep understanding of ERP systems, interfaces, data quality and process logic. Operational tasks are becoming more complex, not less.
In this situation, purchasing is often still measured primarily on the basis of savings. More savings, better conditions, faster effects. But this focus falls short.
Anyone who exclusively tries to achieve further savings through additional pressure overlooks the actual leverage effect. The biggest efficiency reserve does not lie in the nearest percentage point in the price, but in relieving the burden on the organization. In clean processes, clear responsibilities and in the targeted separation of operational management and strategic management.
Purchasing that is constantly overloaded will necessarily act in the short term. Risks are identified later, supplier relationships remain reactive, innovation potential is not exploited. The costs for this are often invisible, but significant in the long term.
When strategic issues persist, this is not immediately reflected in key figures. However, there are real risks in the medium term. Dependencies on individual suppliers are not reduced, ESG requirements are only met selectively, digitization initiatives are fizzling out. Purchasing is losing influence both internally and externally.
At the same time, personal pressure on employees is increasing. Permanent overload leads to frustration, fluctuation and ultimately to further loss of know-how. A vicious circle that reinforces itself.
The decisive question is therefore not how to get more out of what already exists. A real solution to the problem only comes from the perspective of creating space for what really creates added value.
One answer to this may be to outsource operational load in a targeted manner. Not completely, not uncontrolled, but where it can be standardized. Models such as a 1-creditor approach, in which operational tasks relating to ordering processes are taken over centrally by time-consuming one-time requirements, are an example of how purchasing and finance can be noticeably relieved.
The effect is not just time savings. It is primarily mental relief. Capacity that is freed up for analysis, for management, for discussions with suppliers on equal terms. For strategic issues that would otherwise slide backwards again and again.
The figures from the BME report clearly show that overload is not a marginal phenomenon, but a reality. Anyone who wants to make purchasing fit for the future must take this reality seriously. Not with appeals for even more commitment, but with structural solutions.
Relief is not an end in itself. It is the prerequisite for purchasing to be able to do what it actually does — think strategically, manage risks, create value. Everything else is short term and expensive.
