The centralization of the procurement function within an organization, in which the purchase of goods and services is managed by a single department for all branches of the business, emerged in recent decades as a key operational strategy for increasing efficiency and reducing costs. This model makes it much easier for an organization to maintain policies and procedures that enable smarter buying across the company.
The results have been very positive. In addition to the financial benefits that centralized procurement has delivered to the bottom line, centralized procurement has also become a key business strategy for improving risk management. Seven out of 10 procurement officers surveyed by Deloitte for its 2019 Chief Procurement Officers Survey reported that “reducing costs” is a strong priority for their department this year and 55% said that “managing risk” is a strong priority for them, the top two objectives identified by survey respondents.
Unfortunately, the law firm sector has lagged behind its corporate peers when it comes to adoption of centralized procurement. While nearly all major U.S. companies employ centralized procurement teams, we estimate that roughly one-half of large law firms have made this transition so far. But the writing is on the wall: That number has risen sharply over the past five years.
Drivers of Law Firm Procurement Centralization
There are a variety of market forces driving law firms’ transition to centralized procurement:
Of course, there are challenges to centralization, as well, including the difficulty in determining what can or should be centralized among a number of offices and cultural challenges if a firm’s offices tend to operate independently and are therefore resistant to centralization. Given the converging forces listed above, however, most large law firms still using a decentralized procurement model are beginning to recognize that centralization is best way to address those pressures, regardless of the challenges presented.
The First Step: Prioritization
Once the decision is made to centralize, the first step is to identify and prioritize the areas that should be centralized. Priorities should emphasize two main factors:
There are some areas where centralization may not be necessary or may not be worth the effort (relatively unique or strictly regional purchases, for example), so firms should first look to those areas that trigger risk or that are fairly universal across their offices. Examples of likely candidates for centralization include technology and library needs.
Strategies for the Transition to Centralization
There are three primary strategic options for how law firms can successfully make the transition to a centralized procurement model.
HBR Consulting assists law firms that are interested in taking the next step toward centralizing their procurement functions and guides them toward the strategic approach that makes the most sense for their unique circumstances. The key is to get started and take action. Our research has found that organizations that actively manage their vendor base will realize a 5-7% overall reduction in costs, versus a 5-7% increase in year-over-year costs for those organizations that are not actively managing vendors.
For more information regarding steps that your firm can take, please contact me.