Buyer information asymmetry in procurement
James McGillicuddy, CEO of BRM, on the problem with “little P” procurement
This claim points to the real opening for buyer side procurement software, the sales stack has spent years turning scattered buyer signals into a machine, while most buyers still manage renewals and vendor decisions with spreadsheets, inboxes, and hallway conversations. In practice, that means the seller often knows renewal timing, likely champions, and expansion paths before the customer has assembled its own internal view of usage, compliance needs, and switching leverage.
-
BRM is built around vendor identity, not contracts or intake forms. It pulls records for the same vendor across ERP, email, spend tools, contracts, and other systems, so a buyer can see one profile with usage, owners, renewal dates, and compliance context before talking to the seller.
-
That differs from CLM tools like Ironclad, where the core object is the contract document. Ironclad is strong at version control, approvals, and legal workflow, but the broader buyer problem is knowing everything tied to the vendor relationship, not just what is written in the agreement.
-
The economic prize is renewals. BRM argues most spend is on existing vendors, and buyers rarely enter renewals with the same preparation sellers do. Software that automatically gathers usage, stakeholder input, notice periods, and negotiation prompts turns a passive renewal into an active sourcing event.
The market is heading toward buyer systems that act like a mirror image of CRM. Instead of helping reps decide who to call and when to upsell, these tools will help customers decide what to keep, what to cut, and when to push for better terms, shifting more power and margin back to the buy side.