AI for insights and analytics
A contract claimed 480,000 of savings; the invoices show 296,000, because one site never switched and another bought elsewhere. AI analytics reads the purchase order, invoice and contract files, and answers the category manager's question: what was actually saved, who is buying off contract, and which suppliers are slipping.
These are the questions procurement teams ask. Each one maps to a measure our tools compute from your files. The AI model chooses the measure and explains the result; the arithmetic is done by our code, and every total is checked.
| The question | The measure behind it | What comes back |
|---|---|---|
| How much of the claimed saving actually landed? | Savings realised against claimed | Invoiced volume at the new price against the forecast, with the volume at old prices and off contract, by site. |
| Who is buying off contract, and what? | Maverick spend by requester | Spend outside contracted suppliers by requester, site and category, with the items. |
| How much of each category is under contract? | Contracted share by category | Spend with contracted suppliers over category spend, with the tail of suppliers behind the rest. |
| Are we paying to the agreed terms? | Payment terms compliance | Invoices paid inside terms over invoices, by supplier, and the early payments' cost. |
| Which suppliers are deteriorating? | Supplier performance against own baseline | Delivery, quality and price against each supplier's own history, with the ones sliding. |
| Which contracts expire with no plan? | Contract expiry coverage | Contracts expiring in the window against those with a renewal or tender under way, by category. |
Every figure below was computed by a tool from the rows and checked before it was shown. The lines sum; the percentages match; each line opens to the rows that make it.
How much of last year's claimed savings was realised?
Savings not realised against claims total $381k across 3 categories, where volume went to the old price, another supplier or another item. Packaging accounts for $184k, 48% of the shortfall.
| Packaging | $184k | 48% of the total |
| Logistics services | $121k | 32% of the total |
| MRO supplies | $76k | 20% of the total |
| The 3 lines sum to | $381k | 0 unexplained |
Where did the packaging saving go?
3 causes account for $184k of the $184k shortfall in Packaging, 100% of it. One site never switched to the new price, and one requester kept ordering from the previous supplier.
| Riverside site at old price | $84k | 2.1m units never repriced |
| Off-contract supplier, one requester | $61k | 1.9m units bought elsewhere |
| Volume below forecast | $39k | 12m forecast, 11.4m bought |
| These 3 are | $184k | 100% of Packaging |
What does the category manager do?
Fix the price on the Riverside site's item master, take the maverick spend to the requester's manager, and report realised savings beside claimed from now on. The tool shows the same three lines next quarter.
| Category manager, packaging | Correct the Riverside price and block the old supplier | This week |
| Site procurement leads | Review maverick spend by requester monthly | Monthly |
| Head of procurement | Report realised against claimed to finance | Quarterly |
Each measure has one formula, one source and one meaning. They are computed per category and requester and in total, and every one carries an identity that must hold before it is shown.
| Measure | Formula | From | What it tells you |
|---|---|---|---|
| Spend under management | Invoices with a contracted supplier, in force, covering the category, through the agreed channel ÷ addressable spend | Payables ledger; contract file | What procurement has really seen |
| Contracted share by category | Spend with contracted suppliers ÷ category spend | Payables ledger; contract file | Categories with a contract and low compliance |
| Maverick spend by requester | Off-contract spend in contracted categories, by requester and cost centre | Payables; purchase orders | Where off-contract buying comes from |
| Savings realised against claimed | (Baseline price − price invoiced) × volume invoiced under the agreement ÷ savings claimed | Invoice lines; sourcing records | Whether the savings reached the ledger |
| Suppliers per category and the tail | Suppliers making up the last 5 percent of category spend; transactions and cost to process | Payables ledger | A tail that costs more to run than it buys |
| Payment terms compliance | Days paid against contracted terms, value-weighted; invoices paid early | Payables ledger; contract terms | Working capital given away |
| Supplier performance against own baseline | OTIF, defects and lead time against the supplier's trailing 12 months | Receipts; quality file | Suppliers that have changed |
| Contract expiry coverage | Contracts expiring in 180 days with a sourcing plan ÷ contracts expiring, by spend | Contract file | Renewals that will be rolled over by default |
| Price variance on like items | Highest ÷ lowest unit price paid for the same item across sites and suppliers | Invoice lines with item codes | The same item bought at three prices |
| Supplier concentration | Largest supplier's share of category spend; single-source categories | Payables ledger | Dependence, and negotiating position |
Each measure is worked through, with the export it comes from and what to drop, in KPIs for procurement teams.
From your question and the measures declared for procurement, the model picks the one that answers it, and the period and comparison the question implies.
Deterministic code reads the rows, computes the measure, and checks the identities below. The same question on the same data gives the same answer, every time.
The AI model writes the sentence around the result, naming the category or account behind it. It states no figure that is not in the result, and every figure links to its rows.
| Spend | Total spend = addressable + excluded; addressable = managed + unmanaged |
| Categories | Category spend sums to addressable spend; every supplier in one primary category |
| Savings | Volume forecast = bought at new price + bought at old price + bought elsewhere + not bought |
| Contracts | Contracts = in force + expired + no end date recorded |
The exports procurement teams already produce. Column names are mapped once and the mapping is reused. A file is the way in; scheduled delivery and connections to your systems come with the plan, and every source is listed here.
An answer is a list with an owner and a cadence, or it is a chart nobody works.
| Measures | Owner | Cadence |
|---|---|---|
| Maverick spend; payment terms compliance | Category managers; accounts payable | Monthly |
| Supplier performance; contract expiry coverage | Category managers | Monthly |
| Savings realised; price variance | Chief procurement officer; finance | Quarterly |
| Spend under management; tail; concentration | Chief procurement officer | Quarterly |
By reading the invoices. Units bought at the new price times the price difference is the realised saving; units still at the old price, bought elsewhere, or never bought are the shortfall, each as its own line. The claim came from a forecast; the realisation comes from the ledger, and the two are shown together.
When the purchase order or invoice file carries the requester, yes. Spend outside contracted suppliers is listed by requester, site and category with the items, so the conversation is specific. Names can be replaced with identifiers before upload, and are on Enterprise.
Purchase orders and invoices with supplier, item, price and site, the contract file with prices and terms, and receipts for supplier performance. Payment dates add terms compliance. Every file is one the ERP and accounts payable already produce.
Invoiced spend by supplier sums to the AP file's total, and every saving or shortfall line is a set of invoices. Where the category manager's spreadsheet disagrees with the tool, the difference is a list of invoices, not a debate.
Spend under management · Off-contract spend · Contract compliance · Price variance · Concentration · Control total
Asset managers · Commercial banking · Compliance · Construction and building materials · Consulting and advisory · Customer service · Distributors · Education · Finance and FP&A teams · Financial services · FMCG and CPG brands · Foodservice distributors · Freight brokers and 3PLs · Healthcare and med-tech · Hospitality · Industrial distributors · Industrial manufacturers · Insurance brokers · Investment banking · Law firms · Oil and gas services · Pharma · Retail banking · SaaS · Sales teams · Shipping and logistics · Sports · Supply chain · Tax and accounting · Telecoms and connectivity · Trading · Wealth managers
Bring a few thousand rows. The data map opens next, every column mapped once, and the first question is answered in minutes. Free, in your browser, no account.