BRM Argues Middlemen Inflate Prices
James McGillicuddy, CEO of BRM, on the problem with “little P” procurement
The key strategic point is that BRM is trying to replace procurement labor, not insert another toll collector into the deal. A negotiation service sitting between buyer and seller has to get paid somehow, which usually means a fee layered onto the transaction or a higher effective price. BRM is positioning instead as software and agents that help the buyer do the work in house, alongside tools like Coupa, Zip, and Ironclad, so savings come from lower labor and better decisions rather than from a brokered transaction.
-
Big P procurement tools like Coupa and Ariba are built to run formal sourcing events, approvals, and supplier onboarding. They centralize process for finance and procurement teams. That can reduce cost through competition and control, without adding an outside intermediary who needs a cut.
-
CLM tools like Ironclad are narrower. Their core object is the contract, not the vendor. They store agreements, route approvals, and manage signatures and renewals. BRM describes its wedge as building one identity for each vendor across ERP, email, spend, and contracts, then automating the work around that vendor.
-
That distinction matters most in the lower end of the market, where a 3 person or 60 person company may not have a procurement team at all. For those customers, a service heavy middle layer can be expensive relative to contract value, while software priced per vendor under management can look more like replacing a hire than paying a broker.
The market is heading toward more automation inside the buyer workflow. As AI gets better at gathering vendor data, drafting requests, checking compliance, and preparing renewals, more of the work that once justified human negotiation intermediaries can be absorbed into software. That shifts value toward systems that reduce transaction cost directly, and away from models that monetize by standing in the middle.