The contradiction is easy to miss until someone states it plainly. A procurement professional is required to be physically present in a service centre or office, while the travel budget that would put them in front of a supplier or on an operational site has been cut. As Linda Tomsone, a strategic indirect procurement partner, framed the problem: that is optimising for presence, not value. Her stakeholders, suppliers, and markets are spread across the world. The office is in a different country from the plant. Most of the work with suppliers and key stakeholders already happens by phone or online. So what exactly is the desk achieving?
The question landed because it names a policy most functions have accepted without examining. Procurement is built on relationships, trust, and influence. Physical presence genuinely matters. The argument is not against presence. It is against presence in the one location where it produces the least return.
The discussion that followed produced broad agreement, one genuinely uncomfortable rebuttal, and a set of operating questions the original framing left open.
The Rebuttal Worth Taking Seriously
The sharpest challenge came from Aleksandr Bondarenko, a manufacturing procurement leader, and it deserves airing in full because it exposes the weakest part of the case.
