Procurement leaders are negotiating with confidence built on outdated signals
Senior procurement and category leaders in food and beverage manufacturing often enter negotiations assuming that volume, history, and strong supplier relationships still guarantee leverage. They once did, but markets now move faster than these internal reference points. Inputs shift quickly, supplier economics evolve, and information asymmetry is widening. Teams that rely on internal data alone enter discussions believing they hold all the knowledge they need, but there is a crucial factor missing from this equation: external market intelligence.
Internal anchors no longer reflect how markets behave
Benchmark files, should‑cost models, and historical run rates remain useful, but they were built for a more stable environment. When cost drivers move, these tools lag reality. Relationship strength may ease conversation, but it cannot compensate for missing context around cost shifts or capacity constraints. A negotiation can be well run and still mistimed if procurement is relying on data that is out of date or incomplete when the process begins.
- Read more about the increasing disconnect between legacy practices and modern volatility here, and what the consequences can be.
Markets are shifting faster than procurement’s review cadence
Across ingredients, packaging, and agrifood inputs, conditions turn rapidly. Suppliers adjust in real time because their margins depend on it. However, many buyers still operate on quarterly reviews or annual strategy cycles, creating an information gap that becomes immediately visible at the table, and rarely before that. That mismatch forces procurement into reactive, defensive positions.
Visibility gaps lead to decisions that cost the business
When procurement negotiates without up-to-date external insight, the consequences extend beyond price. Teams secure coverage at the wrong moment, choose contract structures that don’t match volatility, or hesitate during windows where decisive action would have improved position.
Expana sees this problem often: supplier data is accepted without question because it corresponds with historical decisions and relationships. But what happens if that supplier doesn’t disclose that an important commodity price dropped by 16% a year ago and continued to trend downwards for an entire quarter?
Without external market intelligence, the final piece of context is missing that gives procurement a complete view of the position and available options.
It’s not just externally that problems occur, either. Inside the business, finance and operations will lose confidence when procurement cannot explain shifts early or guide decisions with credible forward context. Current trends are pointing towards procurement leaders having more influence on holistic business outcomes, but that influence erodes quickly when outcomes surprise the business.
Anchor commercial decisions in the market, not in internal habits
Real leverage comes from a clear view of the market: what is happening, what is likely to move, and how that should shape commercial choices. High‑performing teams translate market context into decisions on term length, pricing mechanisms, and volume timing based on evidence, not assumption. This shifts negotiation from responding to supplier narratives to setting terms with confidence.
Build a decision system that responds to market movement
Teams navigating volatile environments effectively align their processes around external signals, not renewal dates. They validate supplier positions and prices with independent data, such as far-reaching forecasts, and they coordinate with finance and operations using shared indicators.
This shows up in a few consistent practices:
- Market‑first category planning: Strategies begin with market structure and cost drivers.
- Signal‑based actions: Meaningful market movements trigger reviews and decisions.
- Appropriate contract mechanisms: Structures reflect current volatility, not legacy defaults.
- Unified internal view: Cross‑functional teams operate from the same external intelligence.
These practices make procurement more responsive and more predictable. It means you’re more likely to avoid situations that we hear in the market, whereby a commodity price has risen over a quarter and internal teams, who don’t make best use of forecasting, are wondering how they’re going to explain that rise to internal stakeholders, how they’re going to reevaluate budgets and how to best organize internal review meetings.
Leadership sets the standard for information quality
Procurement’s leverage depends heavily on leadership’s expectations around visibility. If external context is optional, decisions default to internal files that no longer track market pace. Leaders who expect evidence‑based negotiation, and resource the intelligence required, enable teams to act earlier, communicate more clearly, and guide the organization through volatility with fewer surprises.
A practical posture for the next 12 months
Below are some practical steps to take to direct attention to the factors that materially influence outcomes:
- Prioritize categories where volatility or complexity creates the greatest exposure.
- Define the indicators that matter, align internally on their meaning, and link action to movement.
- Test supplier claims before they shape internal planning.
- Treat flexibility and protection as deliberate choices rather than inherited defaults.
Negotiate with full clarity
Leverage today comes from clarity, not assumption. It comes from getting the data you need quickly enough for you to act on it.
If you’re interested in the best way to gain that clarity and go into negotiations primed with the latest data, check out our thoughts on the importance of negotiation packs.
Written by Tom Owens
