Most uses of "world-class procurement" are decoration. But the phrase has a real definition behind it, because The Hackett Group has been benchmarking procurement functions against it for years.
Their definition is deliberately hard to game. A world-class function is in the top quarter on business value: stakeholder experience, digital enablement and effectiveness. It is also in the top quarter on operational excellence, meaning efficiency and process automation. Both at the same time.
That double requirement matters. It is not difficult to be cheap if you do little, or to be effective if you spend heavily. Being both at once is the achievement.
The scorecard
Here is what the top group actually looks like compared with everyone else, from Hackett's July 2025 research.
| Measure | Leaders versus peers |
|---|---|
| Return on investment | 2.6 times higher |
| Cost of running procurement | 19% lower as a share of spend |
| Staff | 31% fewer full-time employees |
| Savings delivered | 2.03 times more as a share of spend |
| Savings lost to off-contract buying | 60% less |
| Requisition to purchase order | 58% faster |
| Sourcing cycles | 24% shorter |
| Training per person | 2 times more hours |
| Average manager tenure | 25% longer |
| Spend on procurement technology | 1.8 times more |
| Time spent analysing rather than collecting data | 26% more |
Read the last two rows next to the first three. These teams cost 19% less to run, with 31% fewer people, while spending 1.8 times more on technology. They did not get cheaper by spending less. They got cheaper by spending differently.
Four habits that show up repeatedly
1. They influence more spend, with fewer suppliers
Hackett's earlier analysis of the same group found they influence or manage 20% more spend than their peers, while using 3.6 times fewer suppliers per billion of spend.
Those two facts belong together. Fewer suppliers for the same spend means more volume per relationship, which means better terms, fewer records to maintain and fewer relationships to manage. It is the least glamorous advantage on this list and one of the largest.
For context on the starting point, Ardent Partners puts average spend under management at about 71%. Roughly three pounds in every ten are spent with nobody in procurement involved.
2. They are in the room earlier
Hackett's advisers noted that leading organisations get involved at the start of sourcing processes 15% more often than their peers. They are not handed a chosen supplier and asked to negotiate.
This is also where they are most likely to be seen as useful. The same research found leading teams are 86% more likely to be perceived as a valued business partner.
Being invited early is earned rather than mandated. Philip Ideson of Art of Procurement has worked in both kinds of organisation. He puts it plainly: even where using procurement is compulsory, stakeholders find ways around it if they do not see value in the work.
3. They automate the routine completely
Hackett's world-class group processes requisitions, purchase orders and purchase order change orders entirely electronically, and handles 27% more requisitions electronically than peers.
Complete is the operative word. A process that is 80% automated still needs someone watching the other 20%, which means the team cost never really falls.
4. They invest in people, and keep them
Twice the training hours. A quarter longer average manager tenure. Both matter more than they look.
McKinsey's research across more than 340,000 transformation initiatives found the same thing from a different angle: with dedicated training, more than half of procurement projects finished on time or early. Without it, only a third did.
The same picture from a different study
Deloitte's 2025 survey of over 250 chief procurement officers splits respondents into leaders and followers using a different method, and finds a similar gap.
| Met or beat plan for… | Leaders | Everyone else |
|---|---|---|
| Cost savings | 96% | 80% |
| Cost avoidance | 94% | 75% |
| Internal stakeholder satisfaction | 84% | 59% |
| Supplier performance | 84% | 59% |
| Enabling innovation | 56% | 24% |
The widest gap is the last row, and it is the most strategic item on the list. Enabling innovation is what a function does when it has capacity left over after the basics are handled.
Deloitte's leaders also put 24% of their budget into procurement technology, rising to a planned 26%. The rest were at 18% and 19%. And they said they would spend any extra budget on technology before headcount.
Should a mid-sized company aim for this?
Here is the part most articles skip.
These benchmarks come from large enterprises. Hackett's own illustration of the cost advantage is worth about $6 million a year for a typical $10 billion company. Scale that down to a company with £50 million of revenue and the absolute numbers are small, while the effort to reach top-quartile on eleven measures at once is not.
There is also a capability point. Deloitte found only 4% of chief procurement officers have complete confidence that their team can execute their current strategy. If large organisations with dedicated teams feel that way, a company with two people in procurement should be careful about which target it chases.
A more useful goal for most mid-sized companies is a staged one:
| Stage | What it looks like | What it takes |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum viable | You know what you spend and with whom. Contracts are in one list with end dates. Purchase orders exist for significant spend. | A few weeks of data work and one owner |
| Good | Most spend runs through agreed suppliers. Requests become purchase orders in under two days. Top suppliers are measured. Invoices mostly match automatically. | Six to twelve months, and taking the paperwork off your specialists |
| Excellent for your size | Category plans for your largest areas. Renewal calendar owned. Reporting in more than one currency of value. Procurement asked before suppliers are chosen. | A further year, and earned credibility rather than a mandate |
| World-class as benchmarked | Top quartile on business value and efficiency at once, across eleven measures | Enterprise scale, sustained investment, and a reason to need it |
Most mid-market companies get the majority of the available benefit by reaching the second row and holding it.
What the leaders' practices look like at smaller scale
The habits translate even where the budgets do not. The US Government Accountability Office studied how leading companies buy services, among them Boeing, Dell, Pfizer and Walmart. It found four tactics, tailored to each market rather than applied uniformly. Standardise requirements. Understand cost drivers. Use scale. Pre-qualify suppliers.
Those officials reported savings of 4% to 15% over prior-year spending from sourcing services this way. Treat the range with care — it was self-reported by seven companies in 2013, and GAO called the sample not generalisable — but the tactics themselves cost nothing to copy.
None of the four requires enterprise software. All four require knowing what you buy and from whom, which brings the argument back to data.
The order to build in
- Measure the baseline: spend by supplier and category, cycle times, invoice volumes and error rates, and how the team spends its week.
- Get the routine work off the specialists, so there are hours available for anything else.
- Reduce supplier count where it is safe to do so, and bring more spend under agreed contracts.
- Make the compliant buying route the fastest route, through catalogues and sensible approval thresholds.
- Measure your most important suppliers, and review them on a rhythm.
- Report in more than one currency of value — margin, cash, risk and speed.
- Then, and only then, consider what technology would extend.
That order is deliberate. Every step makes the next one cheaper. Reversing it — buying the system first — is the most common and most expensive mistake in this field.
We have no client results to point to yet, so take the sequence on its logic rather than on our say-so, and measure your own baseline before you change anything.
Common questions
What does world-class procurement actually mean?
It is a measured definition rather than a compliment. The Hackett Group defines it as top-quartile performance on business value — stakeholder experience, digital enablement and effectiveness — and top-quartile on operational excellence, meaning efficiency and process automation, at the same time. Being cheap or being effective alone does not qualify.
How do world-class procurement teams compare with everyone else?
In Hackett's July 2025 research they achieve 2.6 times the return on investment, run at 19% lower cost as a share of spend with 31% fewer staff, deliver 2.03 times more savings, lose 60% less to off-contract buying, process requisitions to purchase orders 58% faster, run sourcing cycles 24% shorter, and give twice the training hours — while spending 1.8 times more on procurement technology.
How can leading procurement teams cost less while spending more on technology?
Because the technology replaces effort rather than adding to it. The same teams have 31% fewer staff and spend 26% more of their time analysing data rather than collecting it. They are not cheaper because they spend less overall; they are cheaper because the routine work no longer consumes people.
What do world-class procurement functions do differently?
Four habits recur: they influence about 20% more spend while using 3.6 times fewer suppliers per billion of spend; they are involved at the start of sourcing 15% more often; they process requisitions, purchase orders and change orders entirely electronically; and they invest in people, with twice the training hours and 25% longer average manager tenure.
Should a mid-sized company aim to be world-class?
Usually not as a first goal. These benchmarks come from large enterprises — Hackett's own cost illustration is worth about $6 million a year to a typical $10 billion company, which scales down to very little for a mid-sized firm while the effort does not. A staged target works better: know your spend, get most of it under agreed suppliers, turn requests into purchase orders within two days, and measure your top suppliers.
How much should procurement spend on technology?
Deloitte's 2025 survey found leaders putting 24% of their budget into procurement technology, rising to a planned 26%, against 18% and 19% for everyone else, and saying they would put extra budget into technology before headcount. Below enterprise scale the ratio is a poor guide, because licence cost is the smallest part of the bill compared with implementation, data cleansing and ongoing administration.
Why does supplier count matter so much?
Hackett's leading group uses 3.6 times fewer suppliers per billion of spend while influencing about 20% more spend. Fewer suppliers for the same money means more volume in each relationship, better terms, fewer records to maintain and fewer relationships to manage. It is one of the least glamorous and largest advantages available.
How long does it take to build a strong procurement function?
For a mid-sized company, a few weeks establishes the basics — knowing your spend, listing contracts with end dates, issuing purchase orders for significant spend. Reaching a genuinely good state usually takes six to twelve months and depends on moving routine paperwork off the specialists. Category planning and earned early involvement typically take a further year.
What practices can small teams copy from large ones?
The US Government Accountability Office found leading companies used four tactics, tailored to each market rather than applied uniformly: standardise requirements, understand cost drivers, use scale, and pre-qualify suppliers. Those officials reported 4% to 15% savings over prior-year spend, though that was self-reported by seven companies in 2013 and GAO called the sample not generalisable. None of the four tactics needs enterprise software.
What is the first step?
Measure the baseline: spend by supplier and category, cycle times, invoice volumes and error rates, and an honest view of how the team spends its week. Every later step is cheaper once that exists, and without it no improvement can be proven afterwards.
Sources
- The Hackett Group, 2025 Digital World Class Procurement research, 14 July 2025. 2.6× ROI; 19% lower cost; 31% fewer FTEs; 2.03× savings; 60% less savings lost; 58% shorter requisition-to-PO; 24% shorter sourcing cycles; 2× training hours; 25% longer manager tenure; 1.8× technology spend; 26% more time on analysis.
- The Hackett Group, What's the Digital World Class Procurement Advantage?, 24 October 2023. The definition (top quartile on business value and operational excellence); 21% lower cost and a $6m advantage for a typical $10bn enterprise; 32% fewer FTEs; 86% more likely to be seen as a valued business partner; 20% more spend influenced; 3.6× fewer suppliers per $bn; 100% electronic processing; 27% more requisitions processed electronically.
- The Hackett Group, Digital World Class Procurement: Latest Benchmark Metrics and Key Findings (podcast transcript), 22 October 2024. Leaders involved at the start of sourcing processes 15% more often.
- Deloitte, 2025 Global Chief Procurement Officer Survey, 250+ CPOs, 40 countries. Performance table p.20; technology budget share Figure 8 p.9; only 4% with complete confidence in execution Figure 20 p.17.
- Ardent Partners, The Metrics that Matter in 2025 (Part One) — CPO Rising, 20 October 2025. Spend under management about 71%.
- McKinsey & Company, Aim higher and move faster for successful procurement-led transformation, June 2025. With dedicated training more than half of procurement projects finish on time or early, against one-third without.
- US Government Accountability Office, GAO-13-417, 15 April 2013. Four tactics — standardise requirements, understand cost drivers, leverage scale, prequalify suppliers; 4–15% savings, self-reported by seven companies, nongeneralisable sample.
- Art of Procurement, 5 Keys to Early Stakeholder Engagement, Philip Ideson on earned versus mandated engagement.
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
