Services

A structured advisory service for multi-site supplier dependency.

One core service, scoped to fit the engagement. We review how your operations depend on their suppliers across sites, identify where fragmented contracts or undocumented relationships create risk, and produce clear output your team can act on directly.

The core service

Multi-Site Supplier Resilience Review

This is the primary engagement Northmere Procurement undertakes. It's designed for operations directors who are responsible for supplier relationships across more than one site and need an independent, structured view of where dependency, fragmentation or documentation gaps create risk.

The work is advisory and operational in nature. We don't supply goods, manage procurement on an ongoing basis, or deliver a transformation programme. We provide the analysis and structured output that gives your team a clear, documented picture — and the judgement to act on it.

Scope and approach are agreed at the outset. Most engagements combine all four working methods — interviews, document review, market sense-checking and practical comparison — though the weighting depends on what will be most useful in your situation.

Common triggers
  • A supplier failure or near-miss has surfaced how dependent one or more sites are on a single relationship
  • Contracts have accumulated over time and no one has a complete view of the portfolio across sites
  • The internal team knows the situation needs attention but doesn't have capacity to conduct a structured review
  • A change in ownership, leadership or operational structure has made existing supplier arrangements harder to manage
  • A particular category or relationship is under pressure and a market reference point would be useful before any conversation with the supplier
What the work involves

Four methods, combined to fit the engagement.

Every resilience review draws on the same four elements. The emphasis on each depends on the scope agreed at the outset and what the situation calls for.

Interviews

Structured conversations with the people who manage supplier relationships day-to-day — operations managers, site leads, internal procurement contacts. These reveal dependency patterns, informal arrangements and operational assumptions that contracts and documents rarely capture. Where relevant, we also speak with supplier contacts directly.

Document review

A systematic review of the existing contract portfolio, service records and any relevant internal documentation. We map what's formally in place across sites, identify where terms are unclear, undocumented or inconsistently applied, and flag where the gap between the written agreement and operational reality creates exposure.

Market sense-checking

A check of how incumbent arrangements compare to the current market — pricing, service scope, terms and switching considerations. This is not a competitive tender process. It's a practical reference point: enough information for your team to understand whether existing arrangements are broadly reasonable, and to inform any supplier conversations that follow.

Practical comparison notes

Where relevant alternatives or options exist, we produce structured comparison notes in plain terms — setting out the material differences without the editorial layering that makes a consultant's recommendation difficult to challenge or adapt. These sit alongside the other outputs as a working reference, not a prescription.

What you receive

Documented output your team can use without us.

Every engagement closes with one or more of the following. Which documents you receive, and how they're structured, is agreed as part of the scope.

Brief

A concise, structured summary of the engagement — what was reviewed, what was found, and what warrants attention. Written for an operations director who needs to understand the picture clearly without reading every underlying document. Suitable for sharing internally or as a basis for further decision-making.

Decision record

A documented account of the analysis, the options considered, and the recommended course of action on a specific question. Written to hold its value over time, so the reasoning is traceable if the decision is revisited — by the same team or a new one. Particularly useful where there is meaningful uncertainty or more than one reasonable path forward.

Service note

A working document covering a specific supplier relationship, contract, or category — setting out the current position, key risks or observations, and any action recommended. Intended for use by whoever manages that relationship going forward, whether or not they were involved in the original engagement.

Structured recommendations

Where the engagement covers multiple areas, suppliers or sites, we produce a prioritised set of recommendations in plain language — with enough context for each to be acted on independently. No jargon, no slide deck requiring a separate explainer. A document your team can pick up, challenge, and use.

Get started

The first conversation is free.

If multi-site supplier dependency is something your team needs to address and you want an independent view, get in touch. We'll tell you honestly whether what we do fits what you need.

Start a Conversation