Strategic Sourcing - Overused and Little understood

The ‘S’ word is getting a real hammering these days, often wantonly, often inappropriately, and often - just plain too often. If people thought more clearly about its real definition, then we would all be better off – so here is a view.
Most people sprinkle ‘strategic’ around in the context of having some sort of plan – ie ‘We have done a strategic category review’. This is not really a good use of the word – it is simply using a fancy word when ‘plan’ would do just fine. Of course it should be well thought through, be linked to the business needs, and have a longer term perspective – that doesn’t really qualify for the strategic title.
Secondly it is used to as a plea to become more involved – ‘we need to do more strategic purchasing’. Most of the time this just means that buyers don’t really get involved early enough, and want to be more a part of the business. Fair call – and not strategic.
There is only one clear definition of a strategic action:
Deferred Pleasure.
A strategic decision is one that, on the face of it, only makes sense in the longer term. If in military terms a location is deemed to be strategic, that means you should put disproportionate effort into defending or gaining it. The same is true in purchasing. You could take a position on a category, or with a supplier, where you are taking the risk that in the longer term you will be better off. Committing to 100% supply ( or indeed deliberately taking a supplier off your supply list ), taking a long term price fix and investing in joint development are all examples of strategic purchasing.
The interesting challenge lies for the wider business – just how many business unit managers would thank you for saying ‘I know you are paying more for this than you have to right now – but its strategic!’
We may want purchasing to be more strategic, and if we really mean it – are we or others actually ready for it yet?