I have noted that many LinkedIn posts regularly mention the belief that the C-Suite continues to see procurement primarily, if not solely, as a cost-savings function.
“A 2023 survey by KPMG highlights this transition, revealing that procurement leaders are now focusing on supply chain resiliency (68%), introducing new products or expanding into new markets (65%), and improving margins through cost reduction (71%). This broader agenda suggests that while cost savings remain important, procurement’s role has expanded to include value creation and strategic partnership.”
Considering the above KPMG findings, the focus of this post is not to prove or disprove whether said beliefs are valid. Instead, I will focus on a new way of thinking or mindset regarding shifting how the C-Suite views procurement.
Understanding The Metaprise Models
Does the C-Suite understand the differences between an internal and external metaprise and its impact on procurement?
The C-Suite’s understanding of an internal versus external metaprise—and how it affects procurement—really depends on the specific executives and their exposure to modern enterprise concepts. Generally, though, many C-level leaders might not explicitly frame things in terms of a “metaprise,” since it’s a bit of a niche or emerging term. Let’s break it down naturally.
An internal metaprise is essentially the interconnected ecosystem within a company—think of it as all the departments, systems, and processes working (or sometimes clashing) together. Procurement here is about optimizing what’s already inside: managing internal resources, streamlining vendor relationships, and keeping costs in check. The focus is on efficiency and control.
An external metaprise, on the other hand, extends beyond the company walls. It’s the broader network of partners, suppliers, customers, and even competitors that the business interacts with. For procurement, this means navigating a more complex web—sourcing from a global supply chain, balancing strategic alliances, and adapting to market shifts. It’s less about control and more about agility.
If the C-Suite gets this distinction, they’ll see procurement not just as a cost-cutting function but as a strategic lever. An internal focus might prioritize short-term savings, while an external one could push for resilience—like diversifying suppliers to dodge disruptions. Misunderstanding the two could lead to misaligned priorities: choking innovation by over-focusing inward or exposing the company to risks by leaning too hard on external dependencies.
In practice, some C-Suite executives—especially in procurement-heavy industries like manufacturing or tech—likely grasp this intuitively, even if they don’t use the lingo. Others in less supply-chain-driven sectors might still see procurement as a back-office chore rather than a strategic dance between internal and external forces. What’s your take—do you see this playing out differently where you’re at?
My Take On The Metaprise Models
My work often emphasizes the evolution of procurement from a transactional, cost-focused function to a strategic, process-driven one. The “metaprise” idea—rooted in Mohanbir Sawhney and Jeff Zabin’s 2001 concept of a real-time, interconnected business ecosystem—fits into this thinking. For me, an internal metaprise represents the synchronized interplay of a company’s internal systems, people, and processes—like procurement, finance, and operations—working as a cohesive unit. When I talk or write about an external metaprise, I extend the model to the broader network of suppliers, partners, and market dynamics that procurement must engage with.
You can read more about my view of the Metaprise in the following Procurement Insights post: What Is The Difference Between An Internal And External Metaprise And Why It Matters To Procurement.
Procurement’s success, ongoing viability, and relevance depend on understanding and aligning these two spheres.
The Risk Of Metaprise Misunderstanding
Those who have followed this blog for many years know I am skeptical of one-size-fits-all procurement strategies pushed by big vendors or consultants.
Failing to distinguish between internal optimization and external agility leaves companies vulnerable—either too inward-focused to adapt or too reliant on external networks without a solid internal backbone. As a result, I want to challenge procurement pros to rethink their role as strategic orchestrators, not just buyers, bridging these two metaprises to deliver real value.
What is your take?
30
Procurement Insights
How to get the C-Suite to see procurement as a strategic lever versus a cost-savings function
Posted on February 27, 2025
0
I have noted that many LinkedIn posts regularly mention the belief that the C-Suite continues to see procurement primarily, if not solely, as a cost-savings function.
“A 2023 survey by KPMG highlights this transition, revealing that procurement leaders are now focusing on supply chain resiliency (68%), introducing new products or expanding into new markets (65%), and improving margins through cost reduction (71%). This broader agenda suggests that while cost savings remain important, procurement’s role has expanded to include value creation and strategic partnership.”
Considering the above KPMG findings, the focus of this post is not to prove or disprove whether said beliefs are valid. Instead, I will focus on a new way of thinking or mindset regarding shifting how the C-Suite views procurement.
Understanding The Metaprise Models
Does the C-Suite understand the differences between an internal and external metaprise and its impact on procurement?
The C-Suite’s understanding of an internal versus external metaprise—and how it affects procurement—really depends on the specific executives and their exposure to modern enterprise concepts. Generally, though, many C-level leaders might not explicitly frame things in terms of a “metaprise,” since it’s a bit of a niche or emerging term. Let’s break it down naturally.
An internal metaprise is essentially the interconnected ecosystem within a company—think of it as all the departments, systems, and processes working (or sometimes clashing) together. Procurement here is about optimizing what’s already inside: managing internal resources, streamlining vendor relationships, and keeping costs in check. The focus is on efficiency and control.
An external metaprise, on the other hand, extends beyond the company walls. It’s the broader network of partners, suppliers, customers, and even competitors that the business interacts with. For procurement, this means navigating a more complex web—sourcing from a global supply chain, balancing strategic alliances, and adapting to market shifts. It’s less about control and more about agility.
If the C-Suite gets this distinction, they’ll see procurement not just as a cost-cutting function but as a strategic lever. An internal focus might prioritize short-term savings, while an external one could push for resilience—like diversifying suppliers to dodge disruptions. Misunderstanding the two could lead to misaligned priorities: choking innovation by over-focusing inward or exposing the company to risks by leaning too hard on external dependencies.
In practice, some C-Suite executives—especially in procurement-heavy industries like manufacturing or tech—likely grasp this intuitively, even if they don’t use the lingo. Others in less supply-chain-driven sectors might still see procurement as a back-office chore rather than a strategic dance between internal and external forces. What’s your take—do you see this playing out differently where you’re at?
My Take On The Metaprise Models
My work often emphasizes the evolution of procurement from a transactional, cost-focused function to a strategic, process-driven one. The “metaprise” idea—rooted in Mohanbir Sawhney and Jeff Zabin’s 2001 concept of a real-time, interconnected business ecosystem—fits into this thinking. For me, an internal metaprise represents the synchronized interplay of a company’s internal systems, people, and processes—like procurement, finance, and operations—working as a cohesive unit. When I talk or write about an external metaprise, I extend the model to the broader network of suppliers, partners, and market dynamics that procurement must engage with.
You can read more about my view of the Metaprise in the following Procurement Insights post: What Is The Difference Between An Internal And External Metaprise And Why It Matters To Procurement.
Procurement’s success, ongoing viability, and relevance depend on understanding and aligning these two spheres.
The Risk Of Metaprise Misunderstanding
Those who have followed this blog for many years know I am skeptical of one-size-fits-all procurement strategies pushed by big vendors or consultants.
Failing to distinguish between internal optimization and external agility leaves companies vulnerable—either too inward-focused to adapt or too reliant on external networks without a solid internal backbone. As a result, I want to challenge procurement pros to rethink their role as strategic orchestrators, not just buyers, bridging these two metaprises to deliver real value.
What is your take?
30
Share this:
Related