Bridging the gap between procurement and event planners to improve collaboration

Procurement and event planners often find themselves working towards the same outcome from opposite ends of the table, and that tension can make them look more like rivals than colleagues. Yet, as industry voices told Skift Meetings, the real issue is not conflict so much as timing, language and a mismatch in what each side is trying to protect.

For procurement teams, the priority is clear: reduce exposure, prove savings and secure contracts that stand up to scrutiny. That mean...

s looking beyond headline rates to concessions, liability clauses, cancellation terms, force majeure language, payment schedules and service levels. Brian Santor, general manager at Event Procurement, said the biggest gains are often found in those details rather than in room rates alone. He argued that a single meeting may seem minor from the organiser’s perspective, but to a hotel, production company or caterer it can represent meaningful revenue, especially when large organisations scatter spending across multiple business units.

Planners, by contrast, are judged on whether the event works. Their remit is to deliver a seamless experience, on time and within budget, while also satisfying softer measures such as attendee feedback and broader return on investment. That difference in emphasis can create friction, particularly when procurement is introduced late and begins questioning decisions already made.

Virginie Raimondi, global procurement director at EGG Events, said the earlier procurement enters the process, the more useful it can be. Early involvement, she said, allows teams to challenge assumptions, choose better partners and avoid rushed choices that increase cost or risk. She also stressed the importance of clear objectives, realistic budgets, timelines, decision criteria, sustainability goals and stakeholder expectations, all of which help procurement source strategically rather than simply react.

The relationship is also shaped by corporate process. Bev Allen, senior director of global accounts at HelmsBriscoe, said planners sometimes underestimate how rigid purchasing workflows can be, especially where approval chains run through finance or accounting. Attempts to hurry documents through the system can backfire if they do not follow internal procedure. She also noted that procurement and planners can clash over terminology, with purchasing sometimes feeling obliged to recheck terms that planners believe they have already covered.

Small mistakes can add to the frustration. Therese Jardine, formerly a procurement manager at Microsoft and now founder of Strategic Event Procurement, said minor oversights such as broken links, missing artwork or leftover references to a previous client can push requests to the bottom of the queue. In a crowded approvals environment, those errors matter.

Across the wider events sector, the conversation is moving towards more collaborative models. Recent industry coverage has pointed to a shift from purely transactional supplier relationships towards more strategic partnerships, with vendors brought in earlier so they can help shape the brief rather than simply execute it. That mirrors a broader trend in which organisations are applying more discipline, data and procurement oversight to their meetings programmes, while also recognising that successful events still depend on creativity, trust and live delivery.

Santor said regular meetings, internal training and supplier education can help bridge the divide. His point was simple: buying event services is not the same as purchasing stationery or software. It requires an understanding of live delivery, shared expectations and, above all, a common vocabulary.

Source: Noah Wire Services