1. What does the steering committee actually need? Explicit needs: • Clear next steps and feeling of moving in the right direction (Head BU) • Clarity on procurement's role and extent of support expected (Procurement) • Concrete deliverables for the upcoming period (IT) • Full understanding of current status and clarity on next steps (Person Head) Underlying needs they truly require: • Simplicity over complexity - Person Head's visceral reaction to the cause-effect diagram ("it drives me crazy") reveals deep frustration with overcomplicated approaches • Internal ownership - Procurement's blunt statement about developing strategy in-house shows fear of consultant-driven solutions • Quick tangible wins - Person Head explicitly wants to identify where DSH can "generate the first real tangible benefits" • Alignment without lengthy processes - Multiple stakeholders emphasize existing knowledge but lack of execution 2. What are they missing now? Critical gaps identified: • Process automation and self-service capabilities - explicitly called out as lagging • Alignment between BU and IT - described as "disconnect" or "misalignment" • Process management maturity - Person Head notes "immaturity on case management" • Strategic use of existing IT capabilities - "outstandingly good functionalities... but we're not using them strategically" • Integration of procurement in innovation - tension around underutilizing integrated utility advantages • Clear ownership model - Person Head asks "what is my role here?" 3. What context is needed for Phase 1 proposition? Key contextual elements: • Organization operates on thin margins, requiring high efficiency (Person Head's emphasis) • One shared IT platform across countries - major competitive advantage not fully leveraged • Strong push for 5 concrete topics: sourcing strategy, supplier strategy, AI, integrated utility, automation • AI should be a component, not the umbrella - Person Head explicitly rejects AI as overarching theme • Need for harmonized hardware portfolio with limited international suppliers • Balance between pioneering spirit (past) and corporate structure (present) 4. What approach should we continue with? Recommended approach: 1. Abandon complex methodologies - The cause-effect diagram approach clearly failed 2. Simple three-step process: o Define 5-year desired state in simple words o Identify path from current to desired state o Agree on concrete milestones 3. Focus on facilitation, not direction - Enable internal teams to develop strategy 4. Start with pilot use cases - Demonstrate value through quick wins 5. Weekly alignment sessions rather than extensive analysis phases 5. How do we identify deliverables at the right level? Framework for right-level deliverables: • Not too high: Avoid "TED talk" level abstractions about AI transformation • Not too low: Don't dive into technical specifications immediately • Sweet spot: Process-level improvements with clear business impact o Example: "AI agent automating specific process X with human check cycle" o Example: "Procurement harmonization saving €X through Y suppliers" • Test: Can Person Head explain it to his team in 2 minutes and show value? • Milestone-based: Each deliverable should show progress within 3-4 weeks 6. How should we shape the next offering? Phase 1 offering structure: Week 1-2: Alignment Sprint • Workshop with all stakeholders to define 5-year vision (max 2 pages) • Identify 5 priority areas with owners • Create simple one-page roadmap Week 3-6: Quick Win Identification • 2-3 concrete AI/automation use cases • 1 procurement harmonization opportunity • 1 integrated utility leverage point • Each with clear business case and 90-day implementation plan Week 7-8: Capability Building Plan • How to build AI capabilities internally • Process management improvement approach • Alignment mechanisms between BU/IT/Procurement Deliverables format: • No complex diagrams - Simple lists and tables • Executive summaries - 1-page max per topic • Action-oriented - Every document ends with "who does what by when" • Co-created - Stakeholders involved in creation, not just validation Critical success factors: • Person Head and Head BU must see themselves as co-authors, not recipients • Procurement must feel their expertise is driving sourcing strategy • IT must own the technical roadmap • Consultants act as facilitators and capability builders, not strategy definers 7. Seven Major Topics to Focus On Based on stakeholder input, consolidate around these priorities: Process Automation & Self-Service Current gap: Manual processes, poor user experience Quick win: 2-3 specific process automations within 90 days Strategic Sourcing Harmonization Leverage international scale for hardware procurement Define supplier strategy (sophisticated platforms vs. commodity) AI Integration (Targeted) Not as umbrella, but specific use cases Focus: Process efficiency, not transformation theater Integrated Utility Leverage Underutilized competitive advantage Cross-selling and customer loyalty opportunities BU-IT Alignment Address "disconnect" explicitly mentioned Create structured collaboration mechanisms Process Management Maturity Pair process managers with developers Build case management capabilities Utilization of Existing IT Capabilities "Outstandingly good functionalities" not strategically deployed Quick win: Activate underused features