There is a reason these lists all look the same. They are usually written by a vendor, and the trend is usually the thing the vendor sells. The number attached to it, if there is one, tends to come from another vendor's blog, which got it from a third.
So this list works differently. Every trend below has a figure taken from a named study we read, with the source printed next to it. And every trend gets a verdict:
- Happening now
- The evidence shows it is already changing how normal companies work. Plan for it this year.
- Starting
- Real, measurable, but still early. A minority are doing it properly. Worth watching and worth a small bet.
- Mostly talk
- Loudly discussed, thinly done. The gap between what companies say and what they have actually changed is large.
Three of the ten come out as mostly talk. Those are the useful ones, because they are where everyone else is wasting money.
1. AI stops being a project and becomes plumbing
Verdict: starting.
The number everyone quotes is adoption. The number that matters is scale, and the two are very far apart.
The Hackett Group's 2026 research found 43% of organisations actively pursuing AI, close to double the year before. But only 12% have it running at large scale. Most are not building anything at all: 69% get their AI through features added to software they already own.
The 2026 ProcureCon CPO report puts it more bluntly. Only 11% of procurement leaders say they are using AI with measurable impact, while 89% describe themselves as ready for it. That gap between feeling ready and showing a result is the real state of AI in procurement right now.
The reason is not the software. Gartner found that 74% of procurement leaders say their own data is not ready for AI. You cannot analyse spend that has never been sorted into categories, or check a supplier list full of duplicates.
What to do about it: stop evaluating tools until your spend is classified and your supplier records are clean. That work is boring, cheap and decides whether anything you buy afterwards works.
2. More work, less help
Verdict: happening now.
The same Hackett research expects procurement workload to rise about 8% in 2026, while both headcount and operating budgets fall. Secondary reporting puts the detail at roughly 0.9% fewer people and 0.4% less budget, leaving gaps of about 8.9% in productivity and 8.4% in efficiency.
Compare that with the year before, when the same study expected work to rise 9.8% and staffing to rise 1%. The direction has flipped. Last year you got more work and a little more help. This year you get more work and less.
This is the trend underneath most of the others. A team that is short of hours does not do less of everything evenly. It quietly drops whatever nobody is watching, which is almost always supplier data, catalogue upkeep, contract checks and small suppliers.
3. Supplier financial health becomes a live number, not an annual check
Verdict: starting, and further behind than people admit.
RapidRatings surveyed over 200 suppliers and procurement and risk professionals in late 2025. Two-thirds of enterprises rate the supply environment as high or very high risk for 2026, up from 62% the year before. And 82% of enterprises reported a material supplier disruption in the previous twelve months.
Then the finding that matters more than either of those:
So most companies know the risk is high. Most have been hit. And most still do not feed what they know about a supplier's finances into the decisions where it would help.
There is also a perception gap worth knowing about. In the same survey 66% of buyers reported disruption, but only 35% of suppliers did. RapidRatings' chief executive Charlie Minutella described it as "a perception gap where two groups are looking at the same supply chain and seeing different things". Your supplier may not think anything went wrong.
4. Tariffs stop being an event and become a condition
Verdict: happening now.
QIMA surveyed more than 1,000 businesses that buy internationally. More than 90% of US- and China-based sourcing networks were hit by tariffs in 2025, and 43% of supply chains shifted where they buy from during the year.
The scale is easy to under-read. The Allianz Risk Barometer 2026 surveyed 3,338 risk experts across 97 countries. It reports that trade restrictions have tripled. They now cover an estimated US$2.7 trillion of goods, close to 20% of everything traded.
The practical change is in how contracts get written. If duty rates can move inside a contract term, then who absorbs that movement has to be written down rather than assumed. Most existing contracts are silent on it, which means the buyer pays by default.
5. Nearshoring: talked about far more than it is done
Verdict: mostly talk.
This is the clearest gap between what companies say and what they do.
QIMA's barometers have tracked it for years. Back in late 2023, 57% of companies said nearshoring was a key part of their supply chain strategy. By 2024, nearshore and reshore regions still accounted for only about 10% of what US and EU buyers actually procured. QIMA's own summary was blunt: US interest is high, and implementation lags.
Moving a supply base is slow, expensive and touches quality, tooling, logistics and cash. Intent is cheap; qualification is not.
What to do about it: treat nearshoring as a multi-year programme with a named owner and a cost model, or do not start it. Something smaller helps more in the meantime. Qualify a second source for the parts that would stop production. That is worth having whether or not it is nearer.
6. Sustainability rules get narrower, not softer
Verdict: happening now, but for fewer companies than expected.
Anyone who built a plan around the original European due diligence rules should re-read them, because the scope changed substantially.
The EU's Omnibus I package narrowed both main directives. The Council approved it on 24 February 2026 and it came into force on 18 March 2026. Due diligence now applies to EU companies with more than 5,000 employees and turnover above €1.5 billion. For non-EU companies the test is €1.5 billion of turnover inside the EU. Reporting under CSRD now starts at 1,000 employees and €450 million.
Just as important, the due diligence obligation now focuses on direct suppliers, with deeper checks further down the chain only where there is concrete evidence of a risk. Transposition is due by 26 July 2028 and application from 26 July 2029.
That is a real reduction in scope. It is not the same as the subject going away. Most large buyers pass their own requirements down by contract, whether or not the law names you. And the underlying reality has not changed. CDP found that a company's supply chain emissions average 26 times its own direct emissions.
| What changed | Before Omnibus I | After Omnibus I |
|---|---|---|
| Due diligence threshold (EU companies) | 1,000 employees / €450m | 5,000 employees / €1.5bn |
| Depth of supply chain covered | Full value chain | Direct suppliers, deeper only on evidence of risk |
| Reporting threshold (CSRD) | 250 employees | 1,000 employees / €450m |
| Climate transition plan obligation | Required under CSDDD | Removed from CSDDD |
7. Cash becomes procurement's second number
Verdict: starting.
Most procurement teams report one number upward: savings. Finance cares about a second one at least as much, and procurement rarely claims it.
The Hackett Group's 2025 working capital survey looked at the top 1,000 US listed non-financial companies and found $1.7 trillion tied up unnecessarily, equal to 35% of their combined working capital. Average payment terms stood at 59 days.
Payment terms, early payment discounts and stock levels are all set by decisions procurement makes or influences. A team that reports the cash effect of its contracts alongside the price effect is having a different conversation with its CFO from one that reports price alone.
8. Software spend gets its own discipline
Verdict: happening now.
Software has quietly become one of the largest lines of indirect spend at most companies, and one of the worst managed.
Most of that renews because nobody looked. The fix is not a platform. It is one list of every contract, showing its end date, its notice period and whether it renews itself. Give the list a named owner. Book a review 90 days before each deadline.
This is the cheapest item on this entire list and usually the most profitable.
9. The front door: intake and orchestration
Verdict: starting.
Intake is the newest category in procurement software. The idea is simple and correct. Give the business one place to ask for something. Route it properly behind the scenes, instead of making people learn which of six systems their request belongs in.
It matters because speed is what earns procurement a place earlier in decisions. Procurify's data across more than 250 mid-sized companies shows requisition-to-purchase-order times of about 58 hours in companies of 100 to 500 people and 65 hours in those of 500 to 2,000. Their own guidance is that past 72 hours, the waiting becomes the problem.
The Hackett Group's leading procurement organisations run that step 58% faster than their peers.
Where the caution belongs: an intake tool placed over a slow approval chain gives you a nicer-looking slow approval chain. Fix who approves what and at which value first. That part costs nothing.
10. Teams get redesigned rather than recruited
Verdict: mostly talk, so far.
Everyone reports a talent shortage, and hiring surveys have said so for years. We are not quoting a figure for it here, because the ones in circulation come from sources we could not open and check.
But look at what has actually been asked of the role. Roland Berger's research on procurement in 2030 found nearly 90% of leaders saying complexity has increased and 93% saying stakeholder contact is at an all-time high. The job now includes analytics, sustainability reporting, risk work and AI, while in most companies the pay band, the tools and the title have not moved.
Deloitte's 2025 survey of more than 250 chief procurement officers found only 4% had complete confidence that their team could deliver the strategy they had set.
The honest reading is that this is often a design problem being described as a hiring problem. Very few companies have actually rewritten the roles, split the work differently, or moved the transactional load somewhere else. Until that happens, recruiting harder just moves the same shortage between employers.
The three that are mostly talk, and why that is useful
Nearshoring, team redesign, and — on the evidence of the scale numbers — most of what is claimed about AI. Each is discussed far more than it is done.
That is not a reason to ignore them. It is a reason to be careful about which part you buy. In all three, the expensive version is the one being marketed and the cheap version is the one that works:
| Trend | The expensive version | The version that works first |
|---|---|---|
| AI | A platform bought before the data is usable | Classify the spend, deduplicate the suppliers, then buy |
| Nearshoring | A supply base relocation programme | A qualified second source for the parts that stop production |
| Talent | Recruiting for a role nobody can fill | Moving the transactional work off the specialists you already employ |
What all ten have in common
Read the list again and one thing runs through it. Almost every trend here needs the same two things underneath it: spend you can actually read, and enough hours in the week to act on what it tells you.
Supplier risk work needs to know which suppliers matter. Tariff modelling needs to know what you buy and from where. Working capital needs payment terms by supplier. Software waste needs a contract list. AI needs all of it.
None of that is a trend. It is the floor the trends stand on, and it is where a mid-sized team gets the most from the next twelve months.
Common questions
What are the biggest procurement trends in 2026?
On the evidence: AI moving from pilots toward everyday use, rising workload against falling headcount and budgets, supplier financial health becoming a live metric, tariffs becoming a permanent condition rather than an event, narrower but still binding sustainability rules, working capital becoming procurement's second reported number, software spend getting its own discipline, intake and orchestration tools, and the redesign of procurement roles. Nearshoring is widely discussed but still thinly executed.
Is AI actually being used in procurement in 2026?
Widely tried, rarely at scale. The Hackett Group found 43% of organisations actively pursuing AI but only 12% running it at large scale, with 69% reaching it through features in software they already own. The 2026 ProcureCon CPO report found only 11% using AI with measurable impact despite 89% describing themselves as ready. Gartner found 74% of procurement leaders say their data is not AI-ready, which is the main reason for the gap.
How much is procurement workload rising in 2026?
The Hackett Group projects an increase of about 8% while both headcount and operating budgets decline — roughly 0.9% fewer people and 0.4% less budget according to reporting on the same study, leaving gaps of about 8.9% in productivity and 8.4% in efficiency. The previous year's study had expected work to rise 9.8% with staffing rising 1%, so the direction has reversed.
Is nearshoring really happening?
Far less than the coverage suggests. QIMA's barometers found 57% of companies calling nearshoring a key part of their strategy back in late 2023, while nearshore and reshore regions still accounted for roughly 10% of what US and EU buyers actually procured in 2024. QIMA's own summary is that interest is high and implementation lags. Moving a supply base touches quality, tooling, logistics and cash, so intent moves much faster than volume.
Did the EU scrap its supply chain due diligence rules?
No, it narrowed them. The Omnibus I package, in force from 18 March 2026, raised the due diligence threshold to EU companies with more than 5,000 employees and €1.5 billion turnover, limited the obligation to direct suppliers unless there is concrete evidence of risk further down, raised the CSRD reporting threshold to 1,000 employees and €450 million, and removed the climate transition plan requirement from CSDDD. Transposition is due 26 July 2028 and application 26 July 2029. Large buyers still pass requirements down by contract regardless of whether the law names you.
How exposed is procurement to tariffs now?
Structurally rather than occasionally. QIMA found more than 90% of US- and China-based sourcing networks were hit by tariffs in 2025 and 43% of supply chains shifted sourcing locations during the year. The Allianz Risk Barometer 2026 reports trade restrictions have tripled to cover an estimated $2.7 trillion of goods, close to 20% of everything traded. The practical consequence is contractual: if duty rates can move mid-term, the contract should say who absorbs that.
Why should procurement report working capital?
Because it is a large number that procurement decisions move, and finance already watches it. The Hackett Group's 2025 working capital survey found $1.7 trillion tied up unnecessarily across the top 1,000 US listed non-financial companies, 35% of their combined working capital, with average payment terms at 59 days. Payment terms, discount capture and stock levels all follow from procurement's contracts. One caution: extending terms uniformly is the quickest way to damage a supplier you depend on.
What is intake management in procurement?
One place for the business to ask for something, which then routes the request correctly behind the scenes rather than expecting people to know which system to use. It matters because speed is what gets procurement involved earlier in decisions. Mid-market requisition-to-purchase-order times sit around 58 to 65 hours, and past roughly 72 hours the waiting itself becomes the bottleneck. The caveat is that an intake tool over a slow approval chain just makes the delay prettier — fix approval thresholds first, since that costs nothing.
Is there really a procurement talent shortage?
Partly. Hiring surveys have reported difficulty for years, though we do not quote a figure because the ones in circulation come from sources we could not open and verify. What is verifiable is that the role has quietly grown to include analytics, sustainability, risk and AI while pay bands, tools and titles mostly have not moved, and Deloitte found only 4% of CPOs have complete confidence their team can deliver their strategy. In many companies this is a role-design problem described as a hiring problem, and recruiting harder simply moves the shortage between employers.
Which trend should a mid-sized company act on first?
None of them directly. Almost every trend on this list depends on two things underneath it: spend you can actually read, and enough hours in the week to act on it. Supplier risk work needs to know which suppliers matter, tariff modelling needs to know what you buy and from where, working capital needs payment terms by supplier, and AI needs all of it. Classify the spend and free up the hours first; the trends become actionable after that, and mostly cannot be acted on before.
How much software spend is wasted?
Zylo's 2025 SaaS Management Index found 53% of paid licences sitting unused across the average portfolio, costing a typical organisation around $21 million a year, up 14.2% year on year. Most of it renews because nobody reviewed it. The fix needs no software: one list of every contract with its end date, notice period and auto-renewal status, a named owner, and a review booked 90 days before each deadline.
How should I judge a procurement trends list?
Check who wrote it and whether each claim carries a source you can open. Vendor trend lists tend to name the trend the vendor sells, and the supporting number often traces to another vendor's blog rather than to a study. Ask three questions of any trend: what is the figure, who measured it, and what share of companies have actually done it rather than planning to. The gap between planning and doing is where most procurement budgets are wasted.
Sources
- The Hackett Group, 2026 Procurement Agenda and Key Issues Study (news release), 8% workload rise against falling head count and budgets; 43% pursuing AI, 12% at large scale; 69% using embedded AI.
- Ironclad, 6 Takeaways from the 2026 Procurement Agenda and Key Issues Study, Secondary reporting of the Hackett study: head count −0.9%, budget −0.4%, 8.9% productivity gap, 8.4% efficiency gap; the prior year's 9.8% volume and +1% staffing projection.
- RapidRatings, Annual Risk Report 2026, 200+ suppliers and procurement professionals, fielded late 2025, published 2 March 2026. 66% high/very high risk; 82% material disruption; 15% integrating financial health into payment terms; the 66% vs 35% buyer/supplier perception gap.
- Allianz Commercial, Allianz Risk Barometer 2026 — Business interruption, 3,338 risk experts across 97 countries, January 2026. Trade restrictions tripled to an estimated US$2.7trn, near 20% of global imports; 3% rate supply chains very resilient.
- QIMA, 2026 Global Sourcing Survey, 1,000+ businesses with international sourcing networks. Over 90% of US- and China-based networks hit by tariffs in 2025; 43% shifted sourcing locations.
- QIMA, Nearshoring and reshoring trends, Q4 2023 barometer: 57% call nearshoring a key part of strategy. Q1 2024: nearshore and reshore regions about 10% of US and EU procurement. QIMA's own note that US interest is high while implementation lags.
- Accountancy Europe, Omnibus explained: key changes to the CSRD and CSDDD, CSDDD thresholds 5,000 employees / €1.5bn; CSRD 1,000 employees / €450m; direct-supplier focus; transposition 26 July 2028, application 26 July 2029.
- DLA Piper, EU Council approves Omnibus I Directive, Council approval 24 February 2026; Directive (EU) 2026/470 published 26 February 2026, in force 18 March 2026.
- CDP, Corporates' supply chain Scope 3 emissions are 26 times higher than their operational emissions, 25 June 2024, based on 23,000+ disclosing companies.
- The Hackett Group, 2025 Working Capital Survey, 18 August 2025. Top 1,000 US listed non-financial companies. $1.7 trillion trapped, 35% of gross working capital; DPO 59 days.
- Zylo, 2025 SaaS Management Index, 53% of licences idle; about $21 million average annual waste, up 14.2% year on year.
- 2026 Annual ProcureCon CPO Report, via Icertis, 11% implementing AI with measurable impact against 89% self-reported readiness.
- Art of Procurement, State of AI in Procurement in 2026, Source for Gartner's finding that 74% of procurement leaders say their data is not AI-ready (2025 Leadership Vision for CPOs).
- The Hackett Group, 2025 Digital World Class Procurement research, 14 July 2025. 58% shorter requisition-to-purchase-order cycle times among leading organisations.
- Procurify, 2026 Mid-Market Procurement Benchmark Report, Three years of platform data across 250+ mid-market organisations. Requisition-to-PO 58 hours (100–500 employees) and 65 hours (500–2,000); the 72-hour guidance.
- Roland Berger, Navigating procurement's human renaissance: skills and strategies for 2030, Nearly 90% of leaders reporting increased complexity; 93% reporting record stakeholder interaction.
- Deloitte, 2025 Global Chief Procurement Officer Survey, 250+ CPOs across 40 countries. Only 4% report complete confidence in execution (Figure 20, p.17).
Want this run for you?
We take on the transactional half of procurement — invoices, purchase orders, supplier data and indirect spend — inside your own systems and under your approval rules. Start with a free spend audit: we measure your volumes, cycle times and exception rates, and the report is yours whether or not you go further.
Book a free spend audit
