The following article was posted on LinkedIn by Brooke Love more than a year ago. It was sent to me the other day, and I thought I would share it and provide my tech on what the author was talking about and its relevance today.
In many of my writings, spanning my blog and related media, I frequently address CIOs in the context of procurement transformation and technology adoption.
For instance, I often explored how CIOs must collaborate with Chief Procurement Officers (CPOs) and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) to navigate modern challenges, such as the shift from traditional SaaS to AI-driven systems, aligning with discussions around Satya Nadella’s “SaaS is dead” stance. By the way, one of my articles from yesterday – How Do You Reconcile Procurement Actions Beyond Internal And External ROI Silos?, emphasizes the urgency of C-Suite collaboration.
My other posts, sometimes written with tongue-in-cheek, such as “Breaking News from Gartner: Neil Armstrong walks on the Moon” (2013), critique the analyst’s belated recognition of CIOs engaging with startups, suggesting a lag in acknowledging their procurement influence—a theme consistent with my skepticism of analyst-driven hype. Similarly, “Never Mind Being a CFO, CIO or for that matter CPO, 2015 is the Year of the RMO” (2015) proposes a Relationships Management Officer role, implying CIOs’ traditional boundaries are expanding, which was a forward-looking take on their strategic pivot. Brooke’s article seems to suggest the same, but in a much more instructive form and spirit.
In “Zycus LinkedIn post uses the equivalent of Sandberg’s ‘bossy’ term to describe procurement professionals?” (2014), I referenced CIOs redefining their enterprise roles, urging procurement to emulate this shift. In short, highlighting a mutual evolution.
In a broader commentary, such as in “Procurement Media through the Years” (2022), I critique past ERP-centric failures where CIOs’ tech decisions sidelined procurement, advocating for a collaborative mindset. The 2025 post “What is the difference between a ProcureTech analyst, consultant, salesperson, and marketing person?” further includes CIOs among ProcureTech C-Suite roles, underscoring their relevance in modern procurement ecosystems. Unfortunately, there is still a significant gap in collaboration between the C-Suite and middle managers, as well as frontline procurement professionals responsible for ensuring that ProcureTech initiatives deliver the expected results. Research in 2025 indicates that 70% of the decision on which procurement technology the enterprise will acquire is made at the C-Suite/Boardroom level. This means that those who shoulder the majority of responsibility for making it work in the real world are rarely engaged in the decision-making process for the tools they will be expected to use to deliver those results. Once again, this is a long-standing industry problem that has yet to be fully addressed. However, it appears that many C-Suite leaders are starting to engage with the overall procurement team, and that CIOs are now realizing they are no longer the sole gatekeepers to tech expertise and insights.
Of course, and as demonstrated by the tone of discussion in procurement social media platforms and communities, there is still the need to challenge the establishment’s tech-first narrative. The emphasis is not a simple call-out for change, but a recognition that CIOs’ success hinges on aligning with practitioner needs—echoing the Hansen Fit Score (HFS) principles like Strand Commonality—rather than relying solely on technological prowess. While not exhaustive, the dialogue rightfully suggests that as pivotal figures in procurement’s future, CIOs must step out of the comfort of the IT department and see technology as an essential extension of human capability, not a replacement for it.
Returning to Brooke Love’s post, which I believe is a must-read, even though it was originally published a year ago, we need more voices like hers to help us reach our desired destination as a profession, both individually and collectively.
30
BONUS COVERAGE
QUESTION 1 – Estimated CIO Time Allocation by Department/Role (2025)
Notes and Context
IT remains the main focus. Most CIOs still devote the bulk of their time to direct IT oversight, operations, talent, and innovation—even as the CIO role diversifies.
C-level engagement (CEO, Finance, Board) is on the rise, especially as digital mandates, risk, and technology strategy intersect the entire executive team.
Procurement, Marketing, and Sales interactions are increasing, but typically get less direct CIO attention than IT, Finance, and the CEO unless there are major transformation projects.
Sales usually gets the smallest share of CIO time except in organizations where the CIO is also a Chief Digital Officer or executive sponsor for digital front-end/customer initiatives.
These allocations fluctuate week-to-week—for example, budgeting or RFP season may boost Finance/Procurement time, whereas digital transformation efforts drive up CEO and Board engagement.
In summary: The average CIO spends the largest share of time within IT, followed by Finance and the CEO, with Procurement, Board, Marketing, and Sales comprising smaller but important portions of their collaborative schedule in 2025. The trend is toward greater cross-functional engagement, but IT and digital planning remain core.
QUESTION 2 – What percentage of revenue and profitability do each of the following departments contribute to the enterprise: Finance, Procurement, CEO, Marketing, Board Room, IT, and Sales?
Here’s a research-based, 2025-aligned estimate regarding the percentage of enterprise revenue and profitability contributed by each of the following departments: Finance, Procurement, CEO, Marketing, Board Room, IT, and Sales.
Revenue Contribution (% of Enterprise Revenue)
Explanation:
In nearly all for-profit companies, Sales delivers the majority of reportable revenue, followed by indirect contribution from Marketing (as “pipeline”).
Procurement, Finance, IT, CEO, and Board provide enabling, controlling, or governance roles. They are essential for ensuring revenue is managed well, but their “contribution” to revenue is reflected in efficiency, compliance, or strategic value, not as a reportable revenue stream.
Profitability Contribution (% of Total Profit/Cost Influence)
Explanation:
Sales directly impacts profit through gross margin, but high cost of sales can reduce profit share.
Procurement is typically the single biggest profit lever after sales because every dollar saved on company spend is a dollar to the bottom line. Effective procurement is crucial for enhancing profitability, especially in high-cost industries.
Finance and IT drive profit indirectly by ensuring compliance, risk management, and digital efficiency.
CEO and Board Room contribute via strategic/leadership value rather than discrete profit shares.
Marketing supports profit by fueling pipeline, pricing power, and customer retention.
Key Takeaways
Sales and Marketing are central to revenue, with Sales far ahead.
Procurement and IT are the pivotal drivers of profitability through spend control and operational efficiency, often generating the highest “controllable” profit impact after Sales.
Finance, CEO, and Board Room are critical enablers, with their profit/revenue influence manifesting through strategic, governance, and regulatory value—not in line-item P&L.
In summary:
Sales: 60–85% revenue generation, high profit impact.
Procurement: No revenue, but controls 50–70% of spend, making it pivotal to profit.
IT: No direct revenue, but major efficiency/profit driver.
Finance, CEO, Board Room: No direct revenue/profit, but vital to enablement, compliance, and strategy.
These percentages are general benchmarks and can shift by sector, company size, or business model, but they reflect standard 2025 enterprise operating realities.
Procurement Insights
The Procurement Industry’s View Of The CIOs “New Role.”
Posted on August 1, 2025
0
The following article was posted on LinkedIn by Brooke Love more than a year ago. It was sent to me the other day, and I thought I would share it and provide my tech on what the author was talking about and its relevance today.
In many of my writings, spanning my blog and related media, I frequently address CIOs in the context of procurement transformation and technology adoption.
For instance, I often explored how CIOs must collaborate with Chief Procurement Officers (CPOs) and Chief Financial Officers (CFOs) to navigate modern challenges, such as the shift from traditional SaaS to AI-driven systems, aligning with discussions around Satya Nadella’s “SaaS is dead” stance. By the way, one of my articles from yesterday – How Do You Reconcile Procurement Actions Beyond Internal And External ROI Silos?, emphasizes the urgency of C-Suite collaboration.
My other posts, sometimes written with tongue-in-cheek, such as “Breaking News from Gartner: Neil Armstrong walks on the Moon” (2013), critique the analyst’s belated recognition of CIOs engaging with startups, suggesting a lag in acknowledging their procurement influence—a theme consistent with my skepticism of analyst-driven hype. Similarly, “Never Mind Being a CFO, CIO or for that matter CPO, 2015 is the Year of the RMO” (2015) proposes a Relationships Management Officer role, implying CIOs’ traditional boundaries are expanding, which was a forward-looking take on their strategic pivot. Brooke’s article seems to suggest the same, but in a much more instructive form and spirit.
In “Zycus LinkedIn post uses the equivalent of Sandberg’s ‘bossy’ term to describe procurement professionals?” (2014), I referenced CIOs redefining their enterprise roles, urging procurement to emulate this shift. In short, highlighting a mutual evolution.
In a broader commentary, such as in “Procurement Media through the Years” (2022), I critique past ERP-centric failures where CIOs’ tech decisions sidelined procurement, advocating for a collaborative mindset. The 2025 post “What is the difference between a ProcureTech analyst, consultant, salesperson, and marketing person?” further includes CIOs among ProcureTech C-Suite roles, underscoring their relevance in modern procurement ecosystems. Unfortunately, there is still a significant gap in collaboration between the C-Suite and middle managers, as well as frontline procurement professionals responsible for ensuring that ProcureTech initiatives deliver the expected results. Research in 2025 indicates that 70% of the decision on which procurement technology the enterprise will acquire is made at the C-Suite/Boardroom level. This means that those who shoulder the majority of responsibility for making it work in the real world are rarely engaged in the decision-making process for the tools they will be expected to use to deliver those results. Once again, this is a long-standing industry problem that has yet to be fully addressed. However, it appears that many C-Suite leaders are starting to engage with the overall procurement team, and that CIOs are now realizing they are no longer the sole gatekeepers to tech expertise and insights.
Of course, and as demonstrated by the tone of discussion in procurement social media platforms and communities, there is still the need to challenge the establishment’s tech-first narrative. The emphasis is not a simple call-out for change, but a recognition that CIOs’ success hinges on aligning with practitioner needs—echoing the Hansen Fit Score (HFS) principles like Strand Commonality—rather than relying solely on technological prowess. While not exhaustive, the dialogue rightfully suggests that as pivotal figures in procurement’s future, CIOs must step out of the comfort of the IT department and see technology as an essential extension of human capability, not a replacement for it.
Returning to Brooke Love’s post, which I believe is a must-read, even though it was originally published a year ago, we need more voices like hers to help us reach our desired destination as a profession, both individually and collectively.
30
BONUS COVERAGE
QUESTION 1 – Estimated CIO Time Allocation by Department/Role (2025)
Notes and Context
In summary:
The average CIO spends the largest share of time within IT, followed by Finance and the CEO, with Procurement, Board, Marketing, and Sales comprising smaller but important portions of their collaborative schedule in 2025. The trend is toward greater cross-functional engagement, but IT and digital planning remain core.
QUESTION 2 – What percentage of revenue and profitability do each of the following departments contribute to the enterprise: Finance, Procurement, CEO, Marketing, Board Room, IT, and Sales?
Here’s a research-based, 2025-aligned estimate regarding the percentage of enterprise revenue and profitability contributed by each of the following departments: Finance, Procurement, CEO, Marketing, Board Room, IT, and Sales.
Revenue Contribution (% of Enterprise Revenue)
Profitability Contribution (% of Total Profit/Cost Influence)
Key Takeaways
In summary:
These percentages are general benchmarks and can shift by sector, company size, or business model, but they reflect standard 2025 enterprise operating realities.
Share this:
Related