This cost-first orientation created a blind spot for:
Building long-term supplier partnerships
Funding strategic procurement capabilities
Modeling risk in sourcing or logistics design
The result? Procurement became reactive, not proactive — tactical, not transformative.
10
Procurement Is on the Line: How Tariffs Are Exposing Strategy Gaps in 2025
The pandemic should have been the tipping point. For a brief moment, procurement
entered the boardroom. Risk became the headline. Supply chain visibility became a board-
level KPI.
But the lesson didn’t stick. As disruptions faded, many companies reverted to legacy
behaviors: centralized sourcing, minimal diversification, lowest-bid supplier selection.
As WashU’s 2025 research concluded: “The problem with global supply chains isn’t
globalization — it’s the lack of strategic foresight embedded within it.”
The COVID Catalyst: A Lesson Half-Learned
Procurement’s historic underinvestment is now costing companies dearly:
Tens of millions lost to delayed shipments or re-sourcing under duress
Market share lost to more agile competitors with diversified sourcing
Brand damage from supplier failures in ESG compliance, labor issues, or geopolitical
entanglement
The Price of Procurement Neglect
If procurement had been empowered earlier — not just operationally but strategically
— the impact of 2025 tariffs could have been absorbed, not escalated.
Reframing the Past to Redesign the Future
This chapter isn’t about blame. It’s about insight. Strategic procurement requires different
metrics, mindsets, and mandates. To lead in 2025 and beyond, companies must:
Move from cost-centric KPIs to resilience-adjusted ROI
Institutionalize supply chain risk modeling into procurement governance
Elevate procurement leadership to core decision-making bodies
The world didn’t stumble into this moment — it was steered here by systemic choices. It’s
time to choose differently.