Procurement data presents a great opportunity for any large-scale operation to identify where supplier contracts can be re-negotiated, predict price and availability fluctuations, and tie into broader financial reporting.

‍

The problem: it's rarely usable as-is. Two systems not speaking to each other, multiple teams and buyers with best practices. Line items arrive in different formats, descriptions vary by supplier, and the same product appears under multiple names across systems, teams, and locations. On paper, there is a lot of data. In practice, there is very little clarity.

This matters because procurement decisions are only as good as the data behind them. Without a structured view of spend, teams negotiate in fragments. Opportunities stay hidden. Margins leak quietly through inconsistency rather than bad intent.

Getting procurement right starts with understanding what is actually being bought.

Step 1: Define how you want to see your spend

Before categorisation starts, there needs to be agreement on the lens. Some organisations use an internal categorisation that reflects how they operate. Others use standards like UNSPSC to enable benchmarking and comparability. The choice matters less than consistency. Once the structure is defined, everything else becomes possible.

Step 2: Structure line-item data at scale

Procurement data lives at line level. This is where clarity is won or lost. Manually categorising tens of thousands of lines is slow, expensive, and error-prone. By combining automation with validation logic, large datasets can be structured quickly and consistently, even when supplier descriptions are messy or incomplete.

In practice, a monthly set of 20,000+ lines that would normally take an additional two FTE to clean manually can be processed in days. Accuracy improves with use, reaching up to 95% correct categorisation as the system learns from feedback and patterns.

Step 3: Create a trusted spend baseline

Once data is structured, teams gain a baseline they can actually rely on. This is not a one-off exercise, but a reusable foundation that can absorb new suppliers, new contracts, and new datasets without starting from scratch. Quality checks are put in place. Procurement teams stop reconciling spreadsheets and start working with insight.

Step 4: Analyse what really drives cost and exposure

With clean data, procurement can finally see what was previously hidden. How the same product is priced across suppliers. Which items are bought in which volumes and where. Where fragmentation prevents scale advantages. Where long-term contracts make sense and where competitive sourcing is more effective.

This is where procurement shifts from processing purchases to shaping outcomes.

Step 5: Turn insight into negotiation power

When procurement knows exactly what is being bought across locations, teams, and projects, conversations with suppliers change. Discussions move away from individual invoices and towards patterns, volumes, and performance. Negotiations become structured rather than reactive.

In real terms, this means fewer one-off deals, stronger framework agreements, and measurable improvements in cost control. For large organisations, this level of clarity can unlock savings in the millions — not through aggressive cost-cutting, but through informed negotiation.

Step 6: Connect procurement insight to the wider business

Procurement data doesn’t live in isolation. A clean spend baseline feeds finance with reliable inputs for forecasting and cost control, and supports leadership with defensible numbers. For many organisations, this is part of a broader initiative to give CFOs confidence in cost exposure without adding reporting overhead.

The results are tangible. Tens of thousands of procurement lines no longer need manual categorisation, freeing up the administrative burden of on average 1.7 FTE. Procurement teams spend less time cleaning data and more time negotiating. Accuracy increases over time instead of degrading. Decisions become faster, clearer, and easier to defend.

Procurement stops being a reporting function and becomes a source of leverage. Not by adding tools, but by finally making the data work.

‍