Key Takeaways
- Email-based procurement lacks structure and scalability, hindering efficiency in manufacturing procurement operations.
- Manual vendor management introduces compliance risks due to untracked approvals and inconsistent documentation.
- Digital procurement systems offer standardized workflows, analytics, and real-time visibility into procurement status.
- Automation enhances vendor relationships by enabling timely, consistent, and transparent communication.
- The cost of manual procurement is high, both in terms of labor hours and financial opportunities lost.
Procurement is the lifeblood of manufacturing operations. Without timely and cost-effective acquisition of raw materials, components, and services, production halts and margins shrink. However, despite the advent of powerful procurement platforms and enterprise resource planning (ERP) tools, many manufacturers still conduct most of their procurement through a surprisingly outdated medium: email.
This blog examines the origins of this dependence on email, the hidden inefficiencies it creates, and the growing case for automation. We will walk through the manual vendor management lifecycle, highlight data-backed impacts, and propose a structured path toward procurement.
Understanding Procurement in Manufacturing
Procurement in manufacturing is the process of acquiring goods and services needed for production, maintenance, and other operational requirements. It involves identifying needs, selecting suppliers, negotiating contracts, purchasing goods, receiving them, and managing vendor relationships.
In manufacturing, the stakes are high. Even a single delayed purchase can impact an entire production line, making timely procurement essential. The complexity is further compounded by the volume of transactions, the diversity of suppliers, and compliance requirements.
Despite its strategic importance, procurement remains an under-invested area in many manufacturing firms.
Note: A 2023 survey by Deloitte revealed that only 32% of manufacturing companies consider procurement a strategic function. This lack of prioritization is reflected in outdated tools, chief among them, email.
The Email Dependence: A Legacy System
Emails were revolutionary at one time. They replaced faxes and paper-based communication, enabling faster interactions with suppliers. However, over time, emails became a default mode rather than a strategic tool.
Today, procurement teams send emails to request quotes, follow up on delivery schedules, resolve discrepancies, and even manage contracts. These activities, although simple in isolation, generate massive volumes of unstructured, difficult-to-track data.
Emails are not inherently flawed, but their lack of integration, visibility, and structure makes them inefficient for modern procurement needs. According to Ardent Partners’ 2024 Procurement Metrics That Matter report, over 68% of procurement teams still use email and Excel for core procurement tasks.
Vendor Management through Email: Process Breakdown
Let us take a closer look at what a typical email-based procurement flow looks like in manufacturing:
Step 1: Requisition Initiation
Process Description:
- A department (e.g., production, maintenance, or R&D) identifies the need for goods or services, such as raw materials, spare parts, or services.
- This need is communicated to the procurement team via email, often in an unstructured format.
- The email typically contains item descriptions, quantities, and, occasionally, information on urgency. However, there is no standardized requisition form, resulting in inconsistency.
Common Characteristics:
- Lack of drop-downs or structured fields (like item codes, units of measure).
- Ambiguities in descriptions (e.g., “5 large pipes” instead of part numbers).
- Attachments (if any) may include scanned images, PDFs, or previous purchase invoices.
Challenges:
- Time spent clarifying unclear or incomplete requisitions.
- Difficulty in prioritizing requisitions due to the lack of categorization or SLAs.
- Loss of historical context as requisitions are scattered across individual inboxes.
Step 2: Vendor Selection
Process Description:
- The procurement team attempts to identify suitable suppliers by referencing old email threads, Excel-based vendor lists, or past purchase history.
- They manually select vendors and send out Request for Quotations (RFQs) via email to multiple potential suppliers.
Common Characteristics:
- Vendor selection is based on tribal knowledge or personal email archives.
- No centralized supplier database with performance indicators or categories.
- RFQs are not templated — each email may differ in format, level of detail, or attachments.
Challenges:
- High dependency on individual procurement officers’ memory or spreadsheets.
- Risk of omitting reliable or approved vendors due to a lack of visibility.
- No automated tracking of RFQ status — follow-ups are manual.
Step 3: Quotation Review and Negotiation
Process Description:
- Vendors respond via email with quotes, but each quote differs in structure, format, and level of detail.
- Procurement professionals manually open and compare quotes — often side-by-side in Excel — to assess pricing, delivery timelines, payment terms, and specifications.
- Follow-up negotiations or clarifications also occur over separate email threads.
Common Characteristics:
- Quotes arrive as PDFs, Word documents, or plain-text emails.
- The procurement team may create a comparison matrix manually in Excel.
- Final negotiated details may not be documented uniformly.
Challenges:
- Increased risk of human error during manual comparison.
- Miscommunication due to disjointed email threads.
- Lack of audit trail for negotiation history or approvals.
Step 4: Purchase Order Issuance
Process Description:
- Once a vendor is selected, a Purchase Order (PO) is created using an ERP system (if available) or a manually created Excel or Word document.
- This purchase order (PO) is then emailed to the vendor as an attachment.
- Any post-issuance changes (quantities, delivery date, payment terms) require a new thread or email chain, often without version control.
Common Characteristics:
- POs are not generated from RFQ data; they are often retyped.
- Sometimes, purchase orders (POs) are printed, signed, and scanned before being sent.
- Email delivery status is not tracked unless it is manually followed up on.
Challenges:
- Rework due to incorrect PO details (e.g., incorrect vendor address or price).
- Lack of version control — it is unclear which email holds the final PO.
- No integration between email communication and procurement systems.
Step 5: Delivery and Issue Resolution
Process Description:
- As goods arrive at the factory or warehouse, they are checked against the purchase order (PO) to ensure accuracy and completeness.
- Any shortages, damages, or delays are flagged to procurement via email.
- Procurement then communicates the issue back to the vendor, again via email, and coordinates resolutions (such as replacement, re-delivery, or credit note).
Common Characteristics:
- Delivery details are manually recorded (often on paper or spreadsheets).
- Supporting documents, such as delivery challans or inspection reports, are scattered across inboxes or printed forms.
There is no centralized ticketing or tracking system for issue resolution.
Challenges:
- Delays in escalating or resolving delivery issues often result from fragmented communication.
- Difficult to measure vendor responsiveness or issue frequency.
- Lack of structured feedback or incident logs for performance evaluation.
Step 6: Vendor Performance Tracking
Process Description:
- Vendor performance feedback — such as delays, quality issues, or responsiveness — is shared informally, often embedded within email messages or verbal exchanges.
- There is rarely a formalized review process or scoring system for vendor performance.
- Some organizations maintain Excel sheets with comments, but they are rarely updated consistently or used for strategic decisions.
Common Characteristics:
- Vendor performance discussions typically occur reactively, rather than proactively.
- Feedback is stored in silos and inaccessible to other departments.
- Renewal decisions are often based on gut feeling rather than data.
Challenges:
- Inability to conduct a supplier risk assessment.
- No data for creating preferred vendor lists or benchmarking.
- Missed opportunities for continuous supplier improvement and compliance.
Summary Table: Email-Driven Vendor Management Pain Points
| Step | Process | Major Tools Used | Key Bottlenecks |
| 1 | Requisition Initiation | Email, ad hoc templates | Unclear needs, no standard format |
| 2 | Vendor Selection | Email, Excel | Manual, slow, non-transparent |
| 3 | Quotation Review | Email, Excel | Format inconsistency, time-consuming |
| 4 | PO Issuance | ERP, Excel, Email | Manual tracking, version issues |
| 5 | Delivery & Issues | No centralized documentation | |
| 6 | Performance Tracking | Email, Word, Excel | No visibility, informal data |
Despite being a universally accessible tool, email is fundamentally ill-suited for managing structured procurement processes. Its use introduces inefficiencies, risks, and scalability issues that undermine the strategic role of procurement in the business. Below is a detailed breakdown of the significant challenges:
Challenges of Email-Driven Procurement
While email is accessible, its use in procurement creates severe process bottlenecks:
1. Lack of Process Standardization
Description:
- Each procurement request, quotation, and vendor response follows its own ad hoc format.
- There is no use of structured fields, predefined templates, or workflow guidance.
- Information can vary drastically even for similar items — for example, one requester might specify a part by model number, another by brand name, and a third by a photo attachment.
Consequences:
- Procurement professionals spend significant time deciphering vague or inconsistent requisitions.
- Vendor responses are difficult to compare due to a lack of uniformity (price per unit, freight charges, delivery time, taxes, etc.).
- The risk of miscommunication increases, especially when language or terminology is unclear or inconsistent across departments and suppliers.
Example Scenario: A requisition email says, “Need 10 pressure valves urgently”—with no details on specifications, acceptable brands, or delivery expectations. This results in multiple email clarifications and delays in issuing the Request for Quotation (RFQ).
2. Visibility Gaps
Description:
- Since procurement interactions are buried in personal or shared email inboxes, real-time visibility is severely limited.
- There is no centralized dashboard or tracking system to display the current procurement status, vendor response times, bottlenecks, or approval delays.
- Managers must manually request updates from team members or search through lengthy email chains.
Consequences:
- Procurement leadership cannot effectively monitor progress or intervene early in stalled transactions.
- Stakeholders (like requesters or finance teams) are often “in the dark” about procurement timelines or order status.
- SLA breaches and vendor delivery failures often go unnoticed until end-users or production teams escalate them.
Example Scenario:
A vendor has not responded to an RFQ sent 5 days ago. Without a system-generated reminder or visual tracker, no one notices the delay until a line manager flags a stockout.
3. Audit and Compliance Issues
Description:
- Procurement via email offers poor auditability. Approvals, quote comparisons, and negotiations are not formally logged.
- Email records can be lost, deleted, archived, or corrupted, creating data gaps during audits or dispute resolution.
- Regulatory and internal compliance standards often require traceability, multi-level approvals, and document retention, which emails alone cannot enforce.
Consequences:
- High risk of non-compliance with procurement policies (e.g., skipping mandatory quote comparison or single-vendor justification).
- Auditors face difficulty reconstructing procurement history, especially when key personnel leave the organization.
- Inability to prove proper due diligence or adherence to budgetary controls.
Example Scenario: An audit reveals that a high-value purchase order (PO) was issued without competitive bidding. The buyer insists that quotes were received and compared, but the emails have been deleted, and no records exist to support this claim.
4. Version Control Conflicts
Description:
- Multiple back-and-forth email threads for a single procurement cycle result in conflicting documents and details.
- It becomes hard to determine the final agreed-upon terms, especially when multiple stakeholders are copied across emails.
- Revised purchase orders or updated quotes may not be tracked or appropriately labeled.
Consequences:
- Vendors may fulfill outdated orders, leading to disputes, rework, or financial losses.
- Internal teams may act on outdated information (e.g., warehousing expecting one delivery date when the vendor has promised another delivery date).
- No clear audit trail of changes made to purchase terms.
Example Scenario: Procurement agrees to an updated price with a vendor via email, but forgets to reflect the change in the final purchase order (PO). The vendor ships at the new price; finance processes payment at the original rate, leading to a dispute.
5. Delays and Follow-Ups
Description:
- Email does not support automated workflows, such as reminders, escalations, or approval triggers.
- Vendor delays or internal approvals often go unnoticed unless someone actively monitors each thread.
- The process is entirely reactive, depending on the vigilance of individuals rather than system alerts.
Consequences:
- Critical purchases get delayed due to a lack of proactive follow-up.
- Vendor relationships often suffer due to miscommunications and a perception of disorganization.
- Timelines for production or maintenance may be missed due to procurement lag.
Example Scenario: A vendor fails to confirm PO acceptance. Since there is no automated check or system acknowledgment, the team assumes the order is in process until the vendor finally responds a week later, stating they cannot fulfill it.
Summary: Why Email Alone Fails Procurement (H2)
| Challenge | Description | Risk Level | Impact |
| Process Standardization | No consistent format for requisitions or RFQs | High | Inefficiency, errors |
| Visibility | Procurement status hidden across inboxes | High | Poor decision-making |
| Audit & Compliance | Difficult to track approvals, deleted emails pose a risk | Very High | Audit failures, policy breaches |
| Version Control | Multiple document versions without clear traceability | Medium-High | Confusion, disputes |
| Delays and Follow-Ups | No automation, relies on human memory or attention | High | Missed deadlines |
While email remains a valuable communication tool, it is not a process management system. Procurement operations, especially in large or growing manufacturing organizations, demand structured workflows, centralized data, real-time visibility, and compliance enforcement — all of which email-based processes fail to deliver effectively. The need for digitized procurement platforms or intelligent automation is no longer optional; it is mission-critical for modern efficiency, resilience, and scalability.
The Cost of Manual Procurement
Manual procurement is not only inefficient but also expensive. Let us explore the cost implications:
| Cost Factor | Impact |
| Labor Costs | Time-intensive email handling increases the need for full-time equivalent (FTE) headcount. |
| Error Correction | Mistakes due to miscommunication or incorrect data entry require rework. |
| Missed Discounts | A lack of data can lead to missed early-payment or bulk-order discounts. |
| Stockouts or Overordering | Inaccurate tracking leads to supply imbalances. |
Note: A 2022 Hackett Group report stated that world-class procurement organizations operate at 21% lower cost and with 29% fewer staff per billion dollars of spend compared to peers using manual processes.
Impact on Vendor Relationships and Compliance
Procurement is not just transactional—it is relational. Poor communication, often resulting in fragmented email threads, damages trust and collaboration.
Vendors often complain about:
- Delayed RFQ responses
- Repeated requests for the same information
- Lack of clear feedback post-quotation
In regulated industries such as automotive or aerospace manufacturing, email-driven vendor interactions can also lead to non-compliance. Regulatory audits require a clear trail of communication, approvals, and transaction history—something email systems simply do not provide.
The Case for Digital Procurement Transformation
Transitioning to digital procurement tools addresses almost every pain point of email-based processes:
Benefits of Automation:
- Centralized Communication: All vendor interactions in one place
- Template-Based RFQs and POs: Standardized formats reduce errors
- Real-Time Tracking: Dashboards for order and vendor status
- Automated Alerts: Notifications for delays, exceptions, or required approvals
- Performance Analytics: Vendor scorecards based on actual data
Technologies Available:
- Procurement modules in ERP systems (SAP Ariba, Oracle Procurement Cloud)
- Best-of-breed platforms like Coupa, Jaggaer, and Ivalua
- AI-based tools for invoice matching, supplier risk scoring, and contract analytics
Case Study: Auto Parts Manufacturer
A mid-sized auto parts supplier switched from email-driven procurement to SAP Ariba. Results after 12 months:
- PO cycle time reduced by 45%
- Supplier dispute resolution time cut by 60%
- Early payment discounts improved by 25%
Key Industry Stats
- 70% of organizations using digital procurement report improved compliance (McKinsey, 2023)
- Only 26% of organizations believe their procurement function is highly efficient if it is still email-based (Gartner, 2024)
Transitioning from Emails to Automation
Shifting away from emails does not happen overnight. Here is a phased approach:
Phase 1: Process Mapping
Document existing procurement workflows, identify email dependencies, and map out redundancies or bottlenecks.
Phase 2: Platform Selection
Select a digital procurement tool aligned to business size, complexity, and integration needs.
Phase 3: Change Management
Engage stakeholders, provide training, and appoint champions to drive adoption and implementation.
Phase 4: Pilot and Scale
Begin with one category or supplier segment. Measure success and scale gradually.
Phase 5: Continuous Improvement
Use analytics to refine processes, negotiate better contracts, and forecast procurement needs more accurately.
Conclusion
espite advancements in procurement technology, manufacturing firms continue to rely heavily on email, a tool never designed for complex supply chain workflows. This dependency leads to inefficiencies, compliance risks, and missed opportunities for strategic growth.
The path to procurement excellence lies in digital transformation. By moving away from email-based processes and adopting modern procurement tools, manufacturers can unlock efficiency, strengthen vendor relationships, and gain the agility needed to thrive. It is time to hit “delete” on outdated procurement practices—and “send” on the future of innovative, scalable supply chain management.
