KI im Einkauf Archives - targetP https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/tag/ki-im-einkauf/ Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:26:44 +0000 de-DE hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.6.1 https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/cropped-website_icon-32x32-1.png KI im Einkauf Archives - targetP https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/tag/ki-im-einkauf/ 32 32 Procurement AI Cost Shock https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/procurement-ai-cost-shock/ https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/procurement-ai-cost-shock/#respond Tue, 30 Jun 2026 12:10:54 +0000 https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/?p=5585 🚨 Procurement Is Not Exempt From the AI Cost Shock Procurement and supply chain are not exempt from the AI cost shock. Procurement is about cost management, and rising AI costs need to be professionally managed, too. Urgently! Most loud AI billing comes from software engineering. It is tempting for procurement leaders to assume this is someone else’s problem. It is not. The upside is real. Walmart’s work with the negotiation platform Pactum, as reported in a 2022 Harvard Business Review article and since expanded, is one of the better verified examples in procurement. Walmart used an AI chatbot to negotiate terms with tail-end suppliers, the long list too numerous for human buyers to handle individually. In the original Canadian pilot, the system closed agreements with 64 percent of the 100 suppliers invited, against a 20 percent target, and extended payment terms by 35 days. As the program expanded to the US, Chile, and South Africa, the close rate reached 68 percent. That is agentic AI doing in days what human buyers could not do at all. And costs have increased. ⚠️ The risk side deserves equal attention. In January 2026, supplier data firm Apexanalytix published a report titled Procurement AI has a Hallucination Problem. Its argument: most procurement organizations run AI on supplier data that is fragmented, duplicated, and often outdated. When AI reasons over records like this, it infers and guesses rather than stopping to ask. The output looks confident. It is not necessarily correct, and you paid lots of money for no or poor results! That matters more in procurement than most back-office work. A sourcing agent recommending a supplier from stale financial data, or an onboarding agent approving a vendor against an outdated sanctions list, can create exposure that surfaces months later in a stockout or compliance finding. Deloitte’s 2025 Global CPO Survey found 94 percent of procurement executives use generative AI weekly. Separate tracking puts real, governed, full-scale deployment at closer to 4 percent. That gap is where the token bill and data risk first surface. Do: ✅set a hard usage cap before the first agent goes live. ✅Clean supplier data first. Start with contained, low-risk spend. ✅Measure cost per task from week one. ✅Scope context deliberately. Keep a human in the loop for payment or contract terms. Do not: ❌roll out agentic AI tenant-wide before a contained pilot. ❌Let leaderboards reward token volume over correct outcomes. ❌ Point a frontier model at routine tasks a cheap model handles. ❌Trust a recommendation without checking the data behind it. ❌Assume a falling token price means a falling bill. It’s about time that procurement organizations ramp up capabilities to manage AI costs and contracts. It’s a totally different animal than buying SaaS solutions targetP evolving procurement. More than 35 digitalization projects in Procurement speak for themselves. So do decades of Procurement experience

The post Procurement AI Cost Shock appeared first on targetP.

]]> 🚨 Procurement Is Not Exempt From the AI Cost Shock

Procurement and supply chain are not exempt from the AI cost shock. Procurement is about cost management, and rising AI costs need to be professionally managed, too. Urgently!

Most loud AI billing comes from software engineering. It is tempting for procurement leaders to assume this is someone else’s problem. It is not.

The upside is real. Walmart’s work with the negotiation platform Pactum, as reported in a 2022 Harvard Business Review article and since expanded, is one of the better verified examples in procurement. Walmart used an AI chatbot to negotiate terms with tail-end suppliers, the long list too numerous for human buyers to handle individually. In the original Canadian pilot, the system closed agreements with 64 percent of the 100 suppliers invited, against a 20 percent target, and extended payment terms by 35 days. As the program expanded to the US, Chile, and South Africa, the close rate reached 68 percent. That is agentic AI doing in days what human buyers could not do at all. And costs have increased.

⚠ The risk side deserves equal attention. In January 2026, supplier data firm Apexanalytix published a report titled Procurement AI has a Hallucination Problem.

Its argument: most procurement organizations run AI on supplier data that is fragmented, duplicated, and often outdated. When AI reasons over records like this, it infers and guesses rather than stopping to ask. The output looks confident. It is not necessarily correct, and you paid lots of money for no or poor results!

That matters more in procurement than most back-office work. A sourcing agent recommending a supplier from stale financial data, or an onboarding agent approving a vendor against an outdated sanctions list, can create exposure that surfaces months later in a stockout or compliance finding.

Deloitte’s 2025 Global CPO Survey found 94 percent of procurement executives use generative AI weekly. Separate tracking puts real, governed, full-scale deployment at closer to 4 percent.

That gap is where the token bill and data risk first surface.

Do:

✅set a hard usage cap before the first agent goes live.

✅Clean supplier data first. Start with contained, low-risk spend.

✅Measure cost per task from week one.

✅Scope context deliberately. Keep a human in the loop for payment or contract terms.

Do not:

❌roll out agentic AI tenant-wide before a contained pilot.

❌Let leaderboards reward token volume over correct outcomes.

❌ Point a frontier model at routine tasks a cheap model handles.

❌Trust a recommendation without checking the data behind it.

❌Assume a falling token price means a falling bill.

It’s about time that procurement organizations ramp up capabilities to manage AI costs and contracts. It’s a totally different animal than buying SaaS solutions

targetP evolving procurement. More than 35 digitalization projects in Procurement speak for themselves. So do decades of Procurement experience

The post Procurement AI Cost Shock appeared first on targetP.

]]> https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/procurement-ai-cost-shock/feed/ 0 Cost of AI https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/cost-of-ai/ https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/cost-of-ai/#respond Thu, 25 Jun 2026 11:00:53 +0000 https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/?p=5574 🚨Cost of AI and How Not to Go Bankrupt AI just hit the meter. Procurement is about cost management, and AI costs need to be managed, too. Urgently! Business Leaders who bragged about AI adoption rates in 2025 are the same ones quietly explaining 2026 budget overruns to their boards, because every leader now has to manage AI spend as deliberately as they manage its advantages, or watch a tool built to save money become the fastest way to burn it. Lately, Microsoft made Copilot Cowork generally available across MS 365, an agent that reads documents, pulls Excel numbers, writes in Word, and files the results in SharePoint from a single instruction. The interesting part is not what it can do. It is how it gets billed. On top of the existing Copilot license, Cowork bills by the task, from about 100 credits to well over 700, depending on the model, context, tools called, and runtime. Microsoft is not the exception; it is the pattern. GitHub Copilot moved its whole user base to usage-based billing on June 1. Cursor switched from fixed allotments to credit pools in 2025, an episode that ended in a public apology and refunds. Anthropic now layers credit pools for agentic work onto its subscriptions. A flat fee used to mean roughly unlimited use. Now it is closer to a starter pack. 📉 The paradox nobody budgeted for: token prices keep falling, by 9 to 900 times per year depending on the benchmark, per Epoch AI. Yet bills keep rising. Goldman Sachs expects AI agents to drive a 24-fold jump in token use by 2030. The reason is structural. A chatbot answers one question and stops. An agent plans, calls tools, checks its own output, sometimes redoes the work, and only then answers. The examples are no longer hypothetical. It’s said that Uber burned through its entire 2026 AI budget by April, helped by an internal usage leaderboard. Its COO has since said the company cannot link that spending to any measurable improvement. ⚠️ Axios reported an unnamed enterprise that ran up a 500 million USD Claude bill in one month, because nobody set usage limits on employee licenses. Amazon shut down an internal usage leaderboard after employees gamed it. JPMorgan flagged employees who are now spending more on tokens than their salary. These are not careless organizations. They are sophisticated buyers, and they still got surprised. ✅ The fix: stop asking which tool is most powerful. Ask what a finished task actually costs. Sort AI work into three buckets: 1. routine tasks for a cheap model, 2. valuable expert tasks where a stronger model earns its keep only if checked, 3. true agent tasks that should produce a clear lever in revenue or time saved, since they are also the most expensive to run. ✅Measure cost per task, time saved, output quality, and the share needing no rework. Without those numbers, you are running on vibes. targetP evolving procurement. 35+ digitalization projects in Procurement don’t lie. Either don’t decades in Procurement

The post Cost of AI appeared first on targetP.

]]> 🚨Cost of AI and How Not to Go Bankrupt

AI just hit the meter. Procurement is about cost management, and AI costs need to be managed, too. Urgently!

Business Leaders who bragged about AI adoption rates in 2025 are the same ones quietly explaining 2026 budget overruns to their boards, because every leader now has to manage AI spend as deliberately as they manage its advantages, or watch a tool built to save money become the fastest way to burn it.

Lately, Microsoft made Copilot Cowork generally available across MS 365, an agent that reads documents, pulls Excel numbers, writes in Word, and files the results in SharePoint from a single instruction. The interesting part is not what it can do. It is how it gets billed. On top of the existing Copilot license, Cowork bills by the task, from about 100 credits to well over 700, depending on the model, context, tools called, and runtime.

Microsoft is not the exception; it is the pattern. GitHub Copilot moved its whole user base to usage-based billing on June 1. Cursor switched from fixed allotments to credit pools in 2025, an episode that ended in a public apology and refunds. Anthropic now layers credit pools for agentic work onto its subscriptions.

A flat fee used to mean roughly unlimited use. Now it is closer to a starter pack.

📉 The paradox nobody budgeted for: token prices keep falling, by 9 to 900 times per year depending on the benchmark, per Epoch AI. Yet bills keep rising. Goldman Sachs expects AI agents to drive a 24-fold jump in token use by 2030. The reason is structural. A chatbot answers one question and stops. An agent plans, calls tools, checks its own output, sometimes redoes the work, and only then answers.

The examples are no longer hypothetical. It’s said that Uber burned through its entire 2026 AI budget by April, helped by an internal usage leaderboard. Its COO has since said the company cannot link that spending to any measurable improvement.

⚠ Axios reported an unnamed enterprise that ran up a 500 million USD Claude bill in one month, because nobody set usage limits on employee licenses. Amazon shut down an internal usage leaderboard after employees gamed it. JPMorgan flagged employees who are now spending more on tokens than their salary.

These are not careless organizations. They are sophisticated buyers, and they still got surprised.

✅ The fix: stop asking which tool is most powerful. Ask what a finished task actually costs. Sort AI work into three buckets:
1. routine tasks for a cheap model,
2. valuable expert tasks where a stronger model earns its keep only if checked,
3. true agent tasks that should produce a clear lever in revenue or time saved, since they are also the most expensive to run.

✅Measure cost per task, time saved, output quality, and the share needing no rework. Without those numbers, you are running on vibes.

targetP evolving procurement. 35+ digitalization projects in Procurement don’t lie. Either don’t decades in Procurement

The post Cost of AI appeared first on targetP.

]]> https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/cost-of-ai/feed/ 0 Guided Buying, eigentlich eine tolle Sache, aber…. https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/guided-buying-eigentlich-eine-tolle-sache-aber/ https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/guided-buying-eigentlich-eine-tolle-sache-aber/#respond Wed, 07 Aug 2024 14:35:23 +0000 https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/?p=3943 👉 Guided Buying – Prima Idee……..aber nur bei Transparenz… und dem richtigen Ansatz & Partner…und dem Verständnis was man erreichen will….und…und…. Danke an Sabine Ursel für einen spannenden Artikel und die richtigen Fragen zu einem sehr aktuellen Thema und die Möglichkeit ein paar Gedanken beitragen zu können. ⏩Die ganze elektronische Angebotswelt lässt sich individuell an den einzelnen Bedarfsträger oder an Bedarfsträgergruppen anpassen. Mit Hilfe der Funktion „Guided Buying“ (Geführter Einkauf) wird der Mitarbeiter dann smooth durch den Einkaufsprozess geführt. Liest sich einfach, oder? ⏩Im echten (Arbeits-)Leben hat – wie immer – alles zwei Seiten. Für das Magazin C.ebra (Wiesbaden) hat Sabine recherchiert und nach Empfehlungen gefragt. Schließlich soll das angepriesene Potenzial ja hinreichend zur Entfaltung kommen. ⏩ Meine Gedanken gibt es dann im Artikel. Link zum vollständigen Artikel in den Kommentaren. Lust es näher zu beleuchten, Vorteile und Grenzen zu verstehen und es umzusetzen? 👉Dann sprechen Sie mich gerne an. Bei weit über 30 digitalen Projekten trennen wir Hype und Blabla von Funktionierendem und setzen es um. Von Digitalstrategie (inkl. was heisst es für uns eigentlich, was wollen wir damit erreichen und was nicht), über Digitalarchitektur, Systemauswahl und die Implementierung bis es läuft. Quelle: Artikel von Sabine Ursel, in: C.ebra (1/2 2024, Seiten 6-8) Foto: Sabine Ursel

The post Guided Buying, eigentlich eine tolle Sache, aber…. appeared first on targetP.

]]> 👉 Guided Buying – Prima Idee……..aber nur bei Transparenz… und dem richtigen Ansatz & Partner…und dem Verständnis was man erreichen will….und…und….

Danke an Sabine Ursel für einen spannenden Artikel und die richtigen Fragen zu einem sehr aktuellen Thema und die Möglichkeit ein paar Gedanken beitragen zu können.

⏩Die ganze elektronische Angebotswelt lässt sich individuell an den einzelnen Bedarfsträger oder an Bedarfsträgergruppen anpassen. Mit Hilfe der Funktion „Guided Buying“ (Geführter Einkauf) wird der Mitarbeiter dann smooth durch den Einkaufsprozess geführt. Liest sich einfach, oder?

⏩Im echten (Arbeits-)Leben hat – wie immer – alles zwei Seiten. Für das Magazin C.ebra (Wiesbaden) hat Sabine recherchiert und nach Empfehlungen gefragt. Schließlich soll das angepriesene Potenzial ja hinreichend zur Entfaltung kommen.

⏩ Meine Gedanken gibt es dann im Artikel. Link zum vollständigen Artikel in den Kommentaren.

Lust es näher zu beleuchten, Vorteile und Grenzen zu verstehen und es umzusetzen?

👉Dann sprechen Sie mich gerne an. Bei weit über 30 digitalen Projekten trennen wir Hype und Blabla von Funktionierendem und setzen es um. Von Digitalstrategie (inkl. was heisst es für uns eigentlich, was wollen wir damit erreichen und was nicht), über Digitalarchitektur, Systemauswahl und die Implementierung bis es läuft.

Quelle: Artikel von Sabine Ursel, in: C.ebra (1/2 2024, Seiten 6-8) Foto: Sabine Ursel

The post Guided Buying, eigentlich eine tolle Sache, aber…. appeared first on targetP.

]]> https://interim-manager-einkauf.de/guided-buying-eigentlich-eine-tolle-sache-aber/feed/ 0