Theranos And Procurement


Anyone who has followed this blog for any length of time, knows that I have always believed that the media coverage in the procurement world was generally weak and perhaps even a little suspect.

Based on not wanting to bite the proverbial hand that feeds them, industry experts and publications – including analyst firms – have usually avoided covering the real stories, particularly when they reflected poorly on service providers.

Obfuscated by manufactured praise in the form of Magic Quadrant selection and largely irrelevant Top 50 rankings, procurement professionals were put in the unfortunate position of having to make decisions with limited information and insight.

This is why the Theranos story is so interesting.

The failure of the Silicon Valley media to ask the tough questions reflects a similar reluctance on the part of the procurement industry to do the same.

While the consequences of the lack of meaningful and unbiased coverage of Theranos is obviously far more serious and broader in its impact, the challenges with procurement’s media is still troubling. Ultimately, this was the motivation for my series on Theranos.

May 6th, 2016 – Answer: Theranos coverage . . . Question: What does the Silicon Valley press and the procurement industry’s media have in common?

May 9th, 2016 – Theranos and procurement continued . . .

May 10th, 2016 – Do those in the media really compete with solution providers for practioner attention?

May 19th, 2016 – Has the Theranos shoe finally dropped, and what it means to procurement

June 16th, 2016 – Theranos Update: “Celebrity” Boards And Their Negative Impact On American Business

IACCM New Logo

During our recent IACCM Webinar, Kelly Barner and I posed the question does procurement need (deserve) independent media coverage? The response was somewhat surprising, as the majority indicated that they not only need but want an independent media.

Take a few seconds to cast your vote, and let me know what you think.



%d bloggers like this: