Fehlentscheidungen durch fehlende Transparenz über Lieferantenleistung

Definition

IBISWorld describes the Australian paper product wholesaling industry as highly fragmented, with intense competition and squeezed margins.[1] In such an environment, optimising supplier base and terms is critical. When purchase orders, contracts and price lists are scattered across branches and files, wholesalers cannot accurately compare total cost of ownership (price, rebates, freight, OTIF performance) for each vendor. This often leads to: (1) maintaining too many small, low‑volume suppliers at worse prices; (2) failing to shift volume to vendors offering better rebates or more reliable service; and (3) weak leverage in negotiations due to incomplete spend visibility. Procurement studies in distribution industries frequently find 1–4% savings potential from supplier consolidation and data‑driven renegotiation where such fragmentation exists. LOGIC evidence applies these benchmarks to Australian wholesale paper, where rising input costs mean unrecovered savings directly erode margin.[1] For a business with AUD 10m–20m in annual purchases, unrealised savings of AUD 100,000–400,000 p.a. are plausible if contract and PO data are not systematically exploited.

Why This Matters

The Pitch: Paper wholesalers in Australia 🇦🇺 typically overpay 1–3% on supplier spend (AUD 50,000–250,000 p.a.) by not consolidating volume with best‑performing vendors. Automated analytics on PO and contract data enable evidence‑based vendor consolidation and renegotiation.

Affected Stakeholders

Chief Financial Officer, Head of Procurement, Supply Chain Director, Category Manager, CEO / Managing Director

Related Business Risks