For years, the received wisdom in procurement tech has been straightforward: go all-in-one, have an integrated suite, avoid the complexity of stitching together multiple platforms.
The sales pitch practically writes itself: one login, one data model, one vendor relationship, every section is detailed, and everything works perfectly. It almost sounds like it’s too good to be true.
Well, that’s because it is.
And although it may hurt to admit… it’s not uncommon for teams to feel let down but what their P2P tool actually delivers.
Now we’re not saying throw away your P2P solution. P2P systems remain a strong backbone in most organisations. They anchor finance, purchasing, and help maintain operational control. But as procurement expectations evolve, many teams are realising that the all-in-one solution cannot do everything equally well.
The “Jack of All Trades” Problem
The promise of the all-in-one suite has always been cohesion. But the biggest trade-off has often been depth. Broad platforms must cover a wide functional range. As a result, they can struggle to excel in the areas that
matter most to your specific organisation.
The criticism of best-of-breed solutions has always been that you’re creating a fragmented landscape i.e. multiple vendors, contracts, integrations to maintain, and points of failure. That’s a legitimate concern. But it’s worth asking whether the alternative – a sprawling suite that does fifteen things adequately and nothing brilliantly – is really the safer bet.
The Myth of the Seamless Suite
Ask any CPO who’s worked with major P2P solution for a few years and they’ll tell you the same thing. Yes, everything is technically “connected.” But connected doesn’t mean seamless, and most of these platforms still have you navigating between modules that feel like they were built by different teams in different decades (because often, they were). They were acquisitions bolted together and rebranded. The integration you were sold is, in practice, a shared login and a common colour scheme.
The historical warning against best-of-breed solutions was fragmentation. Today, that argument is a lot weaker. Modern tools are built to coexist and sit cleanly alongside your existing P2P. Data integration standards are stronger, and many platforms are designed specifically to complement P2P environments rather than replace them.
The Best Way Forward
Now, none of this is an argument against P2P tools. If you’ve got one that’s working, great – use it for what it’s good at. And none of this is an argument for building an unmanageable ecosystem of X number of different platforms with no one owning the architecture. It’s an argument for finding a balance.
Increasingly, procurement teams are choosing to layer specialist tools alongside their P2P to strengthen specific capability gaps. Rather than replacing the core, they are extending it.
Common extensions include:
- Enhanced orchestration capabilities
- Spend analytics platforms that give insights into your non-obvious savings opportunities
- Carbon modules designed to help your track your emissions and make actionable steps to fulfil your ESG commitments
- Market data platforms that help you track price trends
- AI-powered tools that automate classification from your pdf invoices
Of course, additional tools introduce cost, but a well-chosen specialist tool should produce measurable ROI and pay for itself.
If you’re feeling underwhelmed by your current tech stack, you’re not stuck with it. There are plenty of specialist tools designed to strengthen specific capabilities, and many are built to integrate cleanly alongside your existing P2P tool.
