{"id":3407,"date":"2021-01-17T16:17:16","date_gmt":"2021-01-17T21:17:16","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.certitrek.com\/nlpa\/2015\/03\/17\/changing-your-buyers-titles-a-procurement-war-story\/"},"modified":"2023-11-30T11:09:08","modified_gmt":"2023-11-30T15:09:08","slug":"changing-your-buyers-titles-a-procurement-war-story","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.certitrek.com\/nlpa\/blog\/changing-your-buyers-titles-a-procurement-war-story\/","title":{"rendered":"Changing Your Buyers’ Titles: A Procurement War Story"},"content":{"rendered":"
I recently had an inquiry from a procurement leader at a client\u2019s organization.\u00a0 She was tasked with standardizing the titles of procurement team members from two organizations that were merging into one.<\/p>\n
So, what\u2019s better:\u00a0 Buyer I\/Buyer II\/Buyer III or Purchasing Agent\/Senior Purchasing Agent?<\/p>\n
If there\u2019s one thing that is true about our profession, is that we have very few standard naming conventions. We tend to use different words to refer to the exact same thing.\u00a0 Think purchasing\/procurement\/supply management.\u00a0 Or sourcing<\/a>\/competitive bidding\/tendering.\u00a0 Or suppliers\/vendors\/contractors.\u00a0 Or\u2026well, you get the idea.<\/p>\n If I were to direct this procurement leader to five different people to share their opinions on what titles to give her staff, she\u2019d likely get five different suggestions and none of them would be authoritative or any better than the other!<\/p>\n For example, personally, I would choose \u201cProcurement Specialist\u201d and \u201cSenior Procurement Specialist\u201d for a department with two levels, and \u201cJunior Procurement Specialist,\u201d \u201cProcurement Specialist,\u201d and \u201cSenior Procurement Specialist\u201d for a department with three levels. That\u2019s because I see \u201cprocurement\u201d being increasingly used vs. \u201cpurchasing\u201d in departments that have renamed themselves in the past 10 years. I don\u2019t have statistical data to back that up, only an observation.<\/p>\n Someone else may totally disagree.\u00a0 Ten years from now, the word \u201cprocurement\u201d may be out of fashion.<\/p>\n My opinion is also slightly influenced by an article \u201cBuyers need not apply\u201d that I read just yesterday in which the author, Jon Hansen of Procurement Insights, writes \u201cnew solutions render the low-level buyer position dispensable.\u201d\u00a0 People that share Mr. Hansen\u2019s views may begin to associate the word \u201cbuyer\u201d with 2007-era procurement.<\/p>\n So, basically, I\u2019d say that whatever titles you give your team is simply a matter of personal preference. I did offer this procurement leader the advice to survey members of both groups and ask them if they had a preference on what to be called. Titles can affect morale and morale can affect performance. People don\u2019t like change, especially change that feels imposed on them for something as personal as one\u2019s job title.<\/p>\n In the \u201890\u2019s when I worked in US Airways\u2019 purchasing department, there was a bit of an uproar when a new leadership (VP and Directors) came in and wanted to change some things. We had three levels under the purchasing manager level: \u201cPurchasing Associate,\u201d \u201cPurchasing Representative,\u201d and \u201cPurchasing Executive.\u201d The new leadership wanted to change these to \u201cJunior Buyer,\u201d \u201cBuyer,\u201d and \u201cSenior Buyer. (creaturefacts.com<\/a>) \u201d I clearly remember a big, all-hands meeting where a Purchasing Representative stood up and said to the new Director who was giving the presentation on the changes, \u201cI think the new titles make us sound less professional. \u2018Buyer\u2019 is a title that someone working at a liquor store would have.\u201d<\/p>\n I don\u2019t think the titles were the cause of resentment so much. I think it was more the fact that the leadership imposed the new titles without seeking the input (or getting the buy-in) of the rank-and-file.<\/p>\n So, if you, too, are considering changing the titles of your procurement staff, I caution you not to make that same mistake that I witnessed close to 20 years ago.<\/p>\n Get buy-in.<\/p>\n And remember that there is no perfect set of titles in our profession that doesn\u2019t restrain business decisions by arbitrary standards.<\/p>\n