In many UK food businesses, the reality is:

👉 Spend is still decentralised across sites
👉 Supplier bases have grown organically over time
👉Categories like PPE, couriers, labs and chemicals are lightly managed
👉Data exists but isn’t actionable

That’s not control, its just visibility.. at best. And even that is often delayed.

Meanwhile, external pressure continues:

‼️Input costs still rising in key categories
‼️Labour and compliance costs increasing
‼️Retailers resisting further price increases

So the margin gap has to come from somewhere.

In many cases, procurement maturity hasn’t kept pace with financial expectations, and that gap is now visible at EBITDA level.

Business leaders are making decisions every single day.

Some are straightforward. Others have the potential to save (or cost) hundreds of thousands of pounds.

When it comes to making important business decisions, what do you rely on most?

📊 The data?
or
💡 Your experience and intuition?

Having spent years helping food manufacturers reduce indirect overhead costs, we’ve seen both approaches in action.

The data tells us what is happening. It highlights spending patterns, supplier inconsistencies, contract leakage, price anomalies and opportunities that would otherwise remain hidden.

But data on its own rarely tells the whole story.

Experience adds context. It helps you understand why something is happening, whether a supplier relationship is worth preserving, when a saving is too good to be true, or when the lowest price isn’t actually the best commercial decision.

At Pare, every procurement project starts with the numbers because they provide an objective picture. But the recommendations we make are always shaped by commercial judgement, operational realities and years of procurement experience.

The best decisions rarely come from relying on one or the other.

They come from combining solid evidence with practical experience.

👉 When you’re making significant business decisions, do you trust the data first, or do you tend to follow your instinct?

In food manufacturing, pest control isn’t optional. It’s a critical service that protects product quality, compliance, and brand reputation.

But when businesses grow through acquisitions or sites manage suppliers independently, it’s common to see multiple pest control providers, different contract terms, and inconsistent service levels across the business.

That’s exactly what we found when we started working with one of our clients.

Across their manufacturing sites, they were using three different pest control providers, all with different service agreements, pricing structures and contract terms.

The result?

• Inconsistent service across sites.
• Limited visibility of overall spend.
• Missed opportunities to leverage their buying power.
• More complexity than was necessary.

Rather than simply asking the existing suppliers for a discount, we took a strategic approach.

We:

• Reviewed the service requirements at every site.
• Worked with the client to align and standardise the specification where appropriate.
• Ran a competitive commercial tender to benchmark the market.
• Recommended a solution that retained part of the incumbent provider, making the transition smoother while ensuring continuity of service where it mattered most.

The results?

• 33% reduction in annual pest control costs.
• Standardised service levels across multiple manufacturing sites.
• Simplified supplier management.
• A low-risk implementation with minimal operational disruption.

Why Stakeholder Engagement Delivers Better Cost Reduction

When many businesses think about procurement, they picture a tender exercise – sending out a specification, collecting supplier bids and selecting the lowest price.

In reality, that’s only one part of the process.

A successful procurement project isn’t defined by how well the tender is written. It’s defined by the outcome it delivers. Did it achieve meaningful cost reduction? Did it improve supplier performance? Did it reduce risk? Was the implementation successful? And perhaps most importantly, did the business actually adopt the new solution?

The difference between a procurement exercise that delivers lasting value and one that falls short often comes down to one thing: stakeholder engagement.

At Pare, we’ve seen first-hand that the most successful indirect spend reduction projects are those where the right people are involved from the very beginning. Procurement should never happen in isolation. It is a collaborative process that combines commercial expertise with operational knowledge to achieve the best possible outcome.

Why Procurement Isn’t Just About Cost Reduction

Cost reduction is often the catalyst for reviewing supplier spend, particularly when it comes to indirect spend categories such as PPE, waste management, cleaning services, mobile communications, laboratory testing, stationery, utilities and facilities management.

However, selecting the cheapest supplier doesn’t necessarily represent the best value.

A lower-cost product that fails to meet operational requirements can quickly create hidden costs through increased consumption, reduced productivity, employee dissatisfaction or quality issues. Likewise, choosing a supplier without considering service levels, delivery performance or implementation support can lead to disruption that outweighs any initial savings.

Effective procurement balances commercial savings with operational suitability, supplier capability and long-term value.

That’s why stakeholder involvement is so important.

Your Stakeholders Are the Subject Matter Experts

Procurement professionals understand the sourcing process, supplier negotiation and commercial evaluation.

Your stakeholders understand how the products and services are actually used within the business.

Neither perspective is sufficient on its own.

Operations teams understand practical requirements.

Finance teams understand budgets and invoice processes.

Quality teams understand compliance.

Health and Safety teams understand legislative obligations.

Engineering teams understand technical compatibility.

Together, these insights create a specification that genuinely reflects the needs of the business rather than assumptions.

Stakeholder Engagement Should Start Before the Tender

One of the biggest mistakes organisations make is involving stakeholders only once supplier proposals have been received.

By then, many key decisions have already been made.

Instead, stakeholders should be engaged from the outset to help define:

• Why the spend category is being reviewed.
• The objectives of the procurement exercise.
• Existing supplier challenges.
• Operational requirements.
• Mandatory product specifications.
• Compliance requirements.
• Potential suppliers.
• Risks that need to be considered.

Taking the time to gather this information early creates a far stronger foundation for the procurement process.

Stakeholders Play a Role Throughout the Entire Procurement Process

A successful procurement project relies on collaboration at every stage.

Defining the Business Need

Every procurement project should begin by asking a simple question:

Why are we reviewing this spend?

Is the objective purely cost reduction?

Are service levels poor?

Is supplier performance inconsistent?

Has the market changed?

Understanding the reason behind the project helps shape the procurement strategy and ensures success is measured against the right outcomes.

Building the Specification

Stakeholders help define what is actually required.

This prevents suppliers from quoting against assumptions and ensures all participants are pricing against the same requirements.

A clear specification also makes supplier responses easier to compare, creating a genuine like-for-like evaluation.

Providing Information and Data

Procurement decisions are only as good as the information available.

Stakeholders often provide:

• Current supplier spend.
• Usage volumes.
• Product specifications.
• Existing contracts.
• Supplier performance data.
• Site-specific requirements.
• Access permissions.

Without accurate information, meaningful cost reduction opportunities can easily be missed.

Reviewing Tender Documents

Before a tender is issued, stakeholders should review the documentation to ensure nothing has been overlooked.

Small omissions at this stage can lead to supplier confusion, inaccurate pricing or unsuitable proposals.

A second pair of eyes often identifies practical issues that procurement alone may not recognise.

Evaluating Supplier Responses

Price should never be the only evaluation criterion.

Stakeholders assess whether suppliers genuinely meet operational needs.

For example:

• Does the proposed PPE meet the required specification?
• Will cleaning products satisfy hygiene standards?
• Is the proposed software compatible with existing systems?
• Can the supplier deliver within required lead times?

This practical assessment helps avoid costly mistakes.

Supporting Contract Negotiations

Stakeholder involvement doesn’t stop once a preferred supplier has been selected.

They often provide valuable input into:

• Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
• Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
• Implementation plans
• Transition timelines
• Risk mitigation measures

These details help ensure the contract supports the business long after the procurement exercise has finished.

Implementation and Supplier Management

Changing supplier is only the beginning.

The real value comes from ensuring implementation is successful and supplier performance continues to deliver.

Ongoing supplier management, performance reviews and regular reporting ensure savings are maintained and opportunities for continuous improvement are identified.

Procurement Delivers More Than Savings

When procurement is managed effectively, businesses typically achieve benefits that extend well beyond immediate cost reduction.

These include:

• Reduced indirect spend.
• Better supplier performance.
• Improved visibility of organisational spend.
• Reduced operational risk.
• Stronger supplier relationships.
• More efficient internal processes.
• Increased compliance.
• Time savings for finance and operational teams.

The result is a procurement function that supports business performance rather than simply processing purchases.

Procurement Is a Team Sport

The most successful procurement projects are never delivered by procurement alone.

They succeed because procurement professionals bring commercial expertise, while stakeholders contribute operational knowledge that ensures the right decisions are made for the business.

Engaging stakeholders from day one leads to better specifications, stronger supplier participation, more informed evaluations and smoother implementation.

Ultimately, it delivers better outcomes, greater cost reduction and sustainable indirect spend reduction.

At Pare, we work closely with our clients throughout every stage of the procurement process. By combining procurement expertise with stakeholder collaboration, we help businesses reduce indirect spend, improve supplier performance and achieve lasting value—not just lower prices.

If you’re looking to unlock cost reduction opportunities across your indirect spend, we’d be happy to discuss how a structured procurement approach can help your business achieve measurable, sustainable savings.

A familiar pattern in UK food manufacturing right now:

Costs rise → budgets get cut → spend slows → pressure eases (briefly) → costs return.

This isn’t control, it’s a cycle. And many leadership teams are stuck in it, because cost cutting doesn’t change how spend behaves.

• Cost cutting doesn’t fix:
• Decentralised purchasing
• Poor demand discipline
• Lack of category ownership
• Weak supplier management

So the system resets… and the costs come back.

If your only lever is “cut the budget,” you don’t have control, you only have a temporary brake and brakes don’t steer the business.