Most procurement firms are built to sell hours. TPP was built to close the gap between the recommendation and the number in the P&L, because that gap is where 25 years of watching good strategy die taught the hardest lessons.
TPP is led and delivered by one person, and that is the point. Twenty-five years across industry leadership and top-tier consulting, 130+ projects executed, more than $20 billion of category spend addressed, and $1.5 billion in savings documented to client P&Ls.
The industry half of that career was spent inside businesses under real pressure: regional procurement leadership for APAC at Mondelez, and senior roles across packaging and manufacturing at Pact Group. Budget owners, boards, plant managers, and suppliers who knew exactly how much leverage they held. The consulting half, at Infosys Portland and through engagements with top-tier strategy firms, was spent where the analysis is world class and the implementation is somebody else's problem.
Both halves taught the same lesson from opposite directions. In industry, the strategy was usually right and the execution capacity was missing. In consulting, the deck was excellent and nobody stayed long enough to land it. The savings that showed up in the accounts were never the ones that looked best in the steering committee pack. They were the ones somebody stayed to implement.
TPP exists to be the party that stays.
Not a methodology. A pattern library. When your situation walks through the door, the odds are it has walked through before, and the useful question is which version of it this is.
Knowing which stakeholder will quietly stall a category strategy, why the plant will not switch suppliers in Q4, and what a procurement team can realistically absorb while still running the day job. Advice that ignores this is theatre.
Spend analysis, category strategy, negotiation design and post-merger integration, run at the pace a fund or a board expects. The analytical rigour is table stakes. It just isn't the finish line.
Suppliers know when a buyer has no alternatives, no deadline and no mandate. Two decades of sitting across that table means reading which concessions are real and which are theatre, and where a locked contract still has give in it.
Not every situation has $1M sitting in it, and not every business is ready to go after it. The pattern shows up early if you have seen enough of them. The expensive version of finding out arrives with an invoice attached and a quarter already gone.
FMCG, packaging, manufacturing, retail, QSR, healthcare and IVF. Engagement types span post-merger integration, private equity value creation, category transformation, and building procurement functions from a standing start. Australian mid-market businesses between $50M and $800M in revenue, frequently PE-backed, are where the method fits best.
Each of these costs us money in the short run. That is why most firms do not do them.
The person who scoped it does the work. There is no leverage model quietly billing you to train somebody's first-year analyst, and no handover to a team you never met after the sale is signed.
Savings are counted when they are contracted, implemented and signed off by finance. Not when they enter a pipeline, and not when they appear in a slide. If it cannot survive a CFO's questions, it does not go in the number.
We work alongside your people rather than around them, so the method stays in the building after the engagement closes. Procurement Superheroes exists for the businesses that want to go further with that.
TPP delivers the outcome. Procurement Superheroes builds the practitioners who deliver it. Operating in the Margins is where the thinking behind both gets published, free and unfiltered.
Tell us the situation and we will tell you straight whether there is a number in it, roughly how big, and what it would take to get at it. If the answer is that you do not need us, you will hear that too.