CPO · Chief Procurement Officer
Are we buying and sourcing under control?
370 units of work on this desk right now — 192 moving, 52 stopped on a person, 130 past their service clock. 3 escalations open or acknowledged, 6 decisions overdue, 23 gaps still on the register. Scope: Procurement, Supply Chain.
Health
The four counts this chair opens on
Each one is the same figure its page shows. Where it is red, the chair opens on a problem.
Duty conflicts still only detected
Found by the platform. Nothing has been changed in a source system.
Boundary disputes open
Two owners, one piece of work, no agreement.
Vendor attestations current
The rest are expiring, expired, in progress or not held.
Shadow processes found
Work happening outside every modeled workflow.
Operations
How the work is running on this desk
Counted across 66 workflows in 2 of 14 functions. A unit past its service clock is counted as late whether or not anybody has noticed it.
in flight
of 370 units on this desk, moving with an agent now
stopped on a person
14% of the desk is waiting on a human decision
past the service clock
age has already exceeded the service level held against the unit
cleared without a person
against 86 that posted evidence but are not closed
mean autonomy
unweighted mean across 2 functions; touchless 77%
Function by function
Units on the desk, what is stuck, and the duty conflicts sitting under it
| Function | Units | Held | Late | Red | Esc | SoD | Autonomy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Procurement | 185 | 27 | 64 | 27 | 3 | 27 | 77% |
| Supply Chain | 185 | 25 | 66 | 25 | — | 26 | 72% |
Live observability
370 units, as the record has them this moment
Procurement is carrying the most stopped work on this desk: 27 units on a person and 27 showing red. None of this has been written back to a system of record.
What these numbers rest on
11 source systems feed this desk, 0 of them live
2 of 11 are already past the freshness their own contract commits to, and 0 have never delivered a sync at all. Every figure above this line was read through them.
feeds behind this desk
of 26 on the registry; 0 connected live, 0 not connected at all
feeds past their own commitment
worst is Transportation Management, late by 21.0 hr
feeds not healthy
9 healthy; health here is the state the registry records, not a check run this moment
business terms in scope
2 contested, 0 with no book of record, 8 open disagreements
Feed by feed, and how stale each one is
11 in scope, ordered by how far past commitment they are
| Source system | Connection | Health | Promised | Actual | Where that leaves it |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Transportation Management supply · owner Logistics Systems · 1 term bound | Modeled feed | Outside commitment | 12.0 hr | 33.0 hr | late by 21.0 hr |
Treasury and Cash Management banking · owner Treasury Operations · no term in this register points at it | Modeled feed | Behind commitment | 60 min | 71 min | late by 11 min |
Contract Lifecycle Management legal · owner Legal Operations · 1 term bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 2.0 hr | 1.6 hr | inside its own commitment |
Enterprise Data Warehouse analytics · owner Data Platform · 1 term bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 4.0 hr | 2.9 hr | inside its own commitment |
Group ERP — Financials ledger · owner Finance Systems · 2 terms bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 60 min | 38 min | inside its own commitment |
Group ERP — Materials and Inventory supply · owner Supply Chain Systems · 5 terms bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 4.0 hr | 3.2 hr | inside its own commitment |
Indirect Tax Engine tax · owner Tax Technology · 1 term bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 24.0 hr | 18.4 hr | inside its own commitment |
Invoice Capture and AP Automation procurement · owner Shared Services Technology · 2 terms bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 30 min | 27 min | inside its own commitment |
Product Lifecycle Management engineering · owner Engineering Systems · 1 term bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 8.0 hr | 6.7 hr | inside its own commitment |
Source-to-Pay Suite procurement · owner Procurement Technology · 3 terms bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 60 min | 52 min | inside its own commitment |
Supply and Demand Planning supply · owner Supply Chain Systems · 2 terms bound | Modeled feed | Inside commitment | 4.0 hr | 3.6 hr | inside its own commitment |
None of these 11 feeds is connected live. Every number on this page was read from a modeled copy of them, and the ages above are the ages of that copy. 1 of them carries no term that the register has defined, so nothing on this desk states what its fields mean.
The words these numbers use
7 in scope · 21 system bindings
Book of record Supply and Demand Planning. 2 of 3 bound systems read it differently. 1 open disagreement.
Book of record Source-to-Pay Suite. 2 of 3 bound systems read it differently. 1 open disagreement.
Book of record Group ERP — Materials and Inventory. 2 of 3 bound systems read it differently.
Book of record Product Lifecycle Management. 2 of 3 bound systems read it differently.
Book of record Invoice Capture and AP Automation. 2 of 3 bound systems read it differently.
Book of record Contract Lifecycle Management. 1 of 3 bound systems reads it differently.
Book of record Group ERP — Materials and Inventory. 1 of 3 bound systems reads it differently.
8 unsettled disagreements about what a word means on this desk
Every one is listed; none is summarized away
Group ERP — Financials says Revenue arises when the performance obligation is satisfied and the entry posts. Customer Relationship Management says Revenue arises when the opportunity is marked closed won.
Commercial reporting and statutory reporting move the same money into different periods, and the commentary written on the gap treats it as performance rather than timing. Not sized. Nobody has run the two populations side by side for a period.
Customer Relationship Management says A customer is a buying organization rolled to its ultimate parent. Group ERP — Financials says A customer is a payer, and a payer exists once per company code.
Customer counts, concentration analysis and credit exposure all depend on which one is asked, and no reconciliation exists between them. Not sized.
Source-to-Pay Suite says A supplier is the legal entity contracted to supply. Invoice Capture and AP Automation says A supplier is whoever the money is sent to.
Where receivables are factored the two diverge, which is precisely where payment risk concentrates. Spend by supplier and payments by supplier cannot be reconciled today. Not sized. The factored population has never been counted.
Enterprise Data Warehouse says A transaction is a completed unit landed from a tower into the warehouse. This platform says A transaction is whatever each tower declares it processed.
This is the estate disagreement already published on the throughput pages: 200,240 items a week declared against 1,463,698 summed. The gap is a definition problem, not an arithmetic one, and nothing on either page resolves it. Sized and published. 1,263,458 a week between the two, which is 86.3 percent of the summed figure.
IT Service Management says The target is the resolution time held against the priority band. Contract Lifecycle Management says The target is the number written into the service schedule of the contract.
Where the two differ the group reports itself against the softer of them without saying so. Twelve of the twenty-eight service levels this platform carries have no function attached at all, so nobody owns the comparison. Not sized. No extract of contractual thresholds exists to compare against.
Supply and Demand Planning says Elapsed calendar days from confirmed need to goods available. Group ERP — Materials and Inventory says Working days maintained on the material master.
A ten in one system is a fourteen in the other before anybody is late. Supplier performance conversations run on whichever figure was pulled that morning. Not sized.
Group ERP — Financials says Direct cost only, mapped to towers by a spreadsheet held outside every system. Planning and Consolidation says Cost at the tower node inclusive of allocated corporate overhead.
Unit cost per transaction, which is one of the most quoted figures on this platform, changes materially depending on which of the two was used, and the source is not stated where it is quoted. Not sized. The hand-kept mapping has never been reviewed by anybody outside the team that maintains it.
Reporting Semantic Layer says A measure is one governed object holding formula, population and period together. Enterprise Data Warehouse says A measure is whatever the view computes, and several views compute the same one.
The same named measure is calculated in two places with no test that the two agree. Which report a reader opened decides which answer they were given. Not sized. No comparison of the duplicated calculations has been run.
Governance
58 things in this chair's scope are open, late or breached
Counted from the registers that name a function. Nothing here has been closed in a source system, because nothing writes back to one.
escalations past SLA
of 3 open or acknowledged, already older than their clock
incidents not closed
of 2 recorded in scope
duty conflicts open
of 56 detected; none proven closed in a source system
service level breached
of 2 named to this scope; 0 overdue for review
The control register names no function on any of its entries, so it cannot be cut to this chair. These are the enterprise figures, shown here because these controls gate work on this desk. 12 of the service levels on the register name no function either, and are not in the count above.
Escalated
3 escalations are open or acknowledged in scope
Ordered by whether the clock has already run out, then by how much work sits behind it. The agent's recommendation is shown as written.
Savings Assurance: PR11B-1001 held at recover
26h lateDirector, Value Assurance recommends approving a partial and holding the remainder.
Sourcing & RFx: PR3A-1000 held at recommend
16h lateRequirement Capture Agent recommends rejecting and returning to the requester with the gap named.
Payment Interlock: PR10C-1004 held at treasury review
13hDirector, Payment Operations recommends rejecting and returning to the requester with the gap named.
Decisions waiting on an executive
12 open, 6 overdue, 114 records blocked behind them
Two source systems have no feed at all
overdueChief of Staff to the CEO, on behalf of the CFO · $84k a week to wait · 3 blocked
Order to Cash inference is running at the cap
overdueFinance Business Partner, Operations · $28k a week to wait · 1 blocked
Nine reconciliation breaks have no owner
overdueGroup Financial Controller · $13k a week to wait · 9 blocked
Seven controls have never been tested
overdueHead of Internal Audit · $10k a week to wait · 9 blocked
Promotion slate agent is running at an adverse-impact ratio of 0.74
overdueChief People Officer · $0 a week to wait · 2 blocked
The decision register carries no function scope, so this list is the enterprise list. It is not filtered to this chair.
What needs improving
23 entries on the register, 0 closed, covering 26,887 records
Facts standing on an inference rather than a read
overdue5,581 facts · unassigned · open
Duty conflicts that have only been detected
overdue291 conflicts · Control owner · in-progress
Checks where the checker is the author
overdue189 checks · Finance · open
Service levels being missed
overdue12 service levels · Function Leader, Revenue Operations · open
Positions that failed and nothing was written down
overdue11 failures · Recorder · open
Control exceptions still open
overdue11 exceptions · customer · in-progress
Not one entry on this register has ever been closed. The register is enterprise-wide and is not filtered to this chair.
Is policy and strategy coming to fruition
7 of 14 checked positions held
Strategy positions and policy items written inside the functions this chair carries, read against their own outcome checks.
Partly holding on the record
29
positions written
14
ratified
7
still in challenge
15
never outcome-checked
7
held
4
partially held
3
did not hold
56
policy items active
15 of the 29 positions on this desk carry no outcome check at all, so most of what this chair set out cannot be said to have worked or failed. 9 policy items are under review against 56 active ones. Every check here was written by the same platform that wrote the position.
Go deeper
The pages this chair works from
Grouped the way this chair reads them. Each opens the page that produced the numbers above.
Separation of duties
Supply and sourcing
The third parties
The work elsewhere
What this chair cannot say
Conflicts are detected against the modeled role set, not a live entitlement extract, and not one of the 385 has been proven closed in a source system. There is no purchase order, no supplier master and no spend figure anywhere in this platform, so this chair reads buying through duties, third parties and boundaries only.