New CIPS Chair Faces Challenges - Competition, Content and Community Top the List
Last week, Alison Barto took over as the new chair of the Global Board of Trustees for CIPS (the Chartered Institute of Procurement and Supply). As CIPS no longer has a President, this is THE key “volunteer” role, making her one of the two key people, along with the CEO, who can have the biggest impact on the development and performance of the Institute.
Barto rose through the procurement ranks in banking giant HSBC, and ended up outgrowing procurement, taking on a senior role in Corporate Banking. She has recently stepped down from that role, and I understand she intends to pursue a career in non-exec, advisory and similar work. She takes over from Paul Thorogood, who was Chair of CIPS through the difficult last two years.
To be blunt, I don’t believe he made much of an impact in terms of profile with the general CIPS membership or the Institute’s direction. But it has been a challenging time, and he has without a doubt been a sensible, safe pair of hands. CIPS members should be grateful for his contribution.
Barto has really impressed me based on our limited contract to date. She clearly has a deep understanding of the profession, is direct and focused, and while she appears to have strong people skills, I get the impression she does expect action and performance. CIPS has a senior team going through some change – for instance, the well-respected Duncan Brock, a key executive for many years, retired recently – so that is both an opportunity and a challenge for her and the CEO, Malcom Harrison. And generally, she is taking on the hot seat as the Institute faces its biggest ever challenges.
CIPS did not really develop its profile through the pandemic. Part of that was the difficulty the Institute always has in taking public positions on sensitive issues. Criticise UK PPE procurement, for instance, and CIPS would be criticising many of its own members who worked on that programme! And of course, the UK government is probably CIPS’ largest source of revenue, so that will always be a potential conflict of interest if CIPS does enter the public eye.
The challenges to the Institute run deeper though. When I was President 20 years ago, CIPS felt like it was at the heart of the procurement world (I’m not claiming any credit for that, I should stress!) But it was THE source of information about procurement good practice. Supply Management magazine was actually read carefully by most members, as there wasn’t much else around, and carried many pages of job adverts. CIPS was the leading events “business” in the sector. The Institute had close links with professors in academia and played a role in determining research priorities. There was a range of working groups across topics and sectors, as well as the geographical branches. Some were an irritant to the Council and Board, to be honest, but that was a sign that there were many members who really cared about the Institute.
Now, in part because of the growth in interest in our profession, the landscape is broader and very different. Practitioners can join, obtain information from or work with Procurement Leaders, Procurious, the Sustainable Procurement Pledge, Procurement with Purpose, WCC, SIG, Spend Matters, Proctopus, ProcureTech and many others. There are great podcasts every week from the Art of Procurement, the Procurement Show, World of Procurement, Dial P for Procurement, and more. Procurement events are provided literally every week – many of them free of charge, like this week’s Proactis event – with speakers of similar standard to the expensive CIPS events!
Everyone listed above – and other similar organisations – will claim they aren’t competing with CIPS, because it suits them to be seen as collaborative. But of course they are competitors, at least for people’s time and attention, but often for money too. CIPS has not helped itself by failing to get on the front foot in the case of some key emerging issues, allowing others to capture the space – consider digitisation of procurement, contract management or sustainable procurement.
As well as this competitive landscape, most members are not particularly engaged with CIPS. Their employer probably pays the annual fee, and the MCIPS letters help with credibility and career. But few attend branch meetings or events, or really contribute at all. Again, CIPS has not helped itself here (I suspect Haymarket, partners for events, publications, and so on shares some blame too). The fact that there is no facility for members to comment on articles on the Supply Management website, or engage in social media discussions, shows that CIPS has not moved into the 21st century in terms of building communities and member engagement.
From an IP (intellectual property) point of view, CIPS again has gone backwards in my view. There appears to be little linkage with universities – although there are more “procurement professors” than ever, which is great news, I don’t see much cross-fertilisation between that community and CIPS or its members. Most of the “thought leadership” material CIPS promotes now is paid for by sponsors (software firms, consultants etc). I don’t know if it is Haymarket or CIPS that apply quality control here, but the quality of the “white papers” and webinars that CIPS puts its name to is highly variable, ranging from very good to embarrassingly poor. There is reputational risk here.
Let’s finish with the positives though - after all, I don’t want our new chair to reconsider her decision! CIPS retains strengths, above all its education and qualifications portfolio, still probably the strongest of any procurement Institute globally. It also carries a lot of goodwill in many countries around the world – witness its successful growth in the Middle East in recent years. Whilst the governance changes were handled badly, the new Membership Committee has a chance to establish an important role, and the Board looks strong too. The Fellows community is more active than ever and can be utilised further. And CIPS’ new technology platform which went live earlier this year should be good news in a number of areas.
Finally, the new Chair takes over as procurement has a higher profile than ever. That is in part because of difficult global issues, but it does put the profession at the heart of business and indeed government activities and objectives. I do think Alison Barto will be great news for CIPS and the profession – I hope she enjoys her tenure and wish her good luck and every success.
#Procurement
Hi Peter, an insightful and balanced perspective, and reflecting our conversation with other colleagues in London recently. I would add, perhaps, a fourth "C": Character. My experience of CIPS in the last decade has been of an organisation chasing money (what for, given its Charitable status?) at the cost of being in the forefront of creative and intelligent contribution to the many critical supply-side factors increasingly affecting society. In addition, many constituencies that could provide it with the uniqueness that would have enabled it to achieve its ambitions seem to have been alienated - of course, these might also have provided the essential insights, checks and balances that underpin sound organisations and reinforce their direction. Having spent many years with British Airways, I am reminded of the slogan "The World's Favourite Airline", great until you are the only one who still believes it! In conclusion, having spent nearly 3 decades as Member and Fellow, sat on the Board of Management, Chaired the CIPS Pensions Trustees Group and worked actively on CIPS education programmes, I recently resigned from the Institute with a heavy heart. Hopefully, however, I am not following Paul Rogers to the cemetery...just yet!
I would tend to agree. CIPS, in my mind, represents three things: 1) one of the best known, perhaps the 'default', certification; and, 2) a sometimes used Procurement function framework for entities to implement if they need a more structured approach. 3) A series of industry awards that are, at times, perhaps not as I think they should be. (I am trying to be careful with my wording here!) If I look at the competitors, I see: - A very different branding 'vibe'. - A more network related focus (they are good at this part) - Some quite bespoke training, with online training/discussions as well. - For one, also being a well-used source for finding (normally more senior) Procurement staff. These jobs tend to be off-market and not found elsewhere, and quite a few of the better roles are filled this way. Once one exec moves, they may then help find another exec to fill the empty space. And around and around it goes. MCIPS is a useful qualification, and the face to face training is especially useful for people new to Procurement. The others have chipped away at CIPS and, more importantly - and I hate this word - 're-imagined' what an entity like CIPS in Procurement should be. It is time to (cringe) pivot!
Supply Chain Manager - North East and Cumbria
2yVery fair and measured as ever, Peter, and spot on with the areas that CIPS needs to improve. Having dealt with CIPS as a member and in trying to engage as a procurement-related business, I can say that the Branch Chairs were excellent and very welcoming, in marked contrast to trying to do anything with the Central company. The events have long been a gripe of mine, especially when it renders almost impossible to earn ‘chartership’ points if you live in most parts of the country. Without shelling out considerable sums of money at least. It’s a real shame as CIPS had a huge opportunity to reach the profession and set the standard in the past two years but has dropped the ball. I look on with envy at other professional associations and how they support their members. That said, I’ll be happy to step up to support the new leadership!
Category Manager Data Analytics IT Procurement at Aviva
2yVery insightful Peter, as always, and I've witnessed these changes both good, and mainly bad, first hand in my 23 years as a Branch chair.
FCIPS Chartered Procurement Professional
2yGreat analysis as ever Peter Smith. I run a local branch and we do struggle with the balance between in person events (low numbers but a chance to meet local procurement people) and virtual events (much higher numbers but no ability to network). Some of the logic of CIPS is astounding, colleagues have been told they have too much experience to do a level 4 apprenticeship (fair enough) so should go straight to level 5/6 apprenticeship which is in the pipeline. But they won't be able to use the MCIPS letters unless they pass the level 4 exams.