When in doubt
19 July 2007 | Steve Bagshaw
This week SM’s adviser panel was asked for help from a reader about one of his staff…
A buyer in my team is extremely protective of one of his suppliers to the point that questions are being asked about “dodgy dealings”. There is no evidence of corruption and he is always very professional. How should I proceed?
Experts replied:
- Ensure you have a robust system of internal controls, such as fit-for-purpose processes and aligned expectations.
- Publicise the company’s tough stance on corruption.
- Review the allocation of buyers to suppliers regularly.
What do you think?
![[Bloglines]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/bloglines.png)
![[del.icio.us]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[Google]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/google.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[Twitter]](http://blog.supplymanagement.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
Sounds like the strategic sourcing process needs to be more transparent. This includes the supplier selection process. Using an eSourcing suite with eRFX capability would make your sourcing decisions far more transparent.
Its too easy to forget that teamwork relies on good communication. Do the questions of dodgy dealings originate externally or internally? If external, the orginator is unlikely to have sufficient information to form a valuable judgement but the concern must be acknowledged and dealt with internally – if internal, discuss in the team meeting and validate the decision making process, or otherwise – then provide feedback to the originator.