Every procurement failure has a beginning.

It does not start with bad quality

It does not start with delayed payment.

It does not even start with price disputes.

It starts with the wrong person deciding to buy.

________________________________________

The most underestimated decision in procurement

Buying feels operational.

Routine.

Almost clerical.

Someone sees produce.

Someone quotes a rate.

Someone says yes.

But that “yes” carries consequences that unfold over weeks:

• payment obligations,

• quality liabilities,

• rejection conflicts,

• storage losses,

• and relationship damage.

And yet, in many systems, this decision is made:

• informally,

• under pressure,

• by people who will not carry the long-term cost.

That is not decentralisation.

That is abdication.

________________________________________

A familiar scene

It’s late September, near Phagi.

The mustard harvest has started early.

Kailash, a field coordinator, calls his manager:

“Sir, crop looks good. Farmers are sitting.

If we don’t take today, someone else will.”

The manager hesitates.

Stocks are already high.

Cash is tight.

Warehouse space is limited.

But the pressure is real:

• farmers are present,

• competitors are nearby,

• and delay looks like insensitivity.

So the manager says:

“Theek hai, le lo. Dekh lenge.”

That sentence — dekh lenge — is where governance quietly exits.

________________________________________

Why field-level buying is the most dangerous temptation

Field staff live closest to pain.

They see:

• farmers waiting,

• produce deteriorating,

• weather turning,

• emotions rising.

Their instinct is to solve the immediate problem.

But procurement decisions are not emergency relief actions.

They are system commitments.

When field staff decide to buy without authority:

• cash planning breaks,

• quality filters weaken,

• rejection becomes personal,

• and accountability evaporates.

Good intentions do not reduce risk.

They often amplify it.

________________________________________

Authority is not about power. It is about insulation.

Many people misunderstand authority.

They think:

“Centralizing decisions is about control.”

In reality, it is about protecting everyone involved.

A clear procurement authority:

• protects farmers from arbitrary acceptance and later rejection,

• protects staff from pressure-driven improvisation,

• protects buyers from emotional commitments,

• protects the system from silent drift.

Authority creates delay where delay is necessary.

________________________________________

The silent cost of “just this once”

Most procurement disasters don’t come from policy violations.

They come from exceptions.

• “Just this once, accept slightly wet produce.”

• “Just this time, pay a little later.”

• “Just today, skip the paperwork.”

Each exception feels harmless.

Together, they rewrite the system.

Within one season:

• farmers learn which rules bend,

• staff learn what can be bypassed,

• and governance becomes optional.

A system that survives only by constant heroics is already broken.

________________________________________

Who must never decide to buy

Let’s be explicit.

The following roles must never have final buying authority:

• Field coordinators stationed at collection points

• Transport supervisors

• Temporary staff and aggregators

• Individuals paid purely on volume targets

Not because they are untrustworthy —

but because they are structurally exposed to pressure.

Governance does not test character.

It designs around reality.

________________________________________

Who should decide to buy

Final procurement authority must sit with people who:

• see inventory and cash together,

• are insulated from on-ground emotional pressure,

• carry accountability beyond the day,

• and can say no without personal confrontation.

This may be:

• a central procurement desk,

• a senior manager,

• or a small, clearly defined committee.

The exact structure matters less than one thing:

The decision-maker must live with the consequences.

________________________________________

Buying is not kindness

One of the hardest truths in procurement is this:

Buying is not always the kindest act.

Accepting produce when:

• you cannot pay on time,

• you cannot process properly,

• you cannot store safely,

is not empathy.

It is deferred harm.

Governance allows compassion without recklessness.

________________________________________

The difference between rejection and refusal

This distinction matters.

• Refusal happens before buying.

• Rejection happens after buying.

Refusal may hurt pride.

Rejection destroys trust.

Strong decision governance increases refusal —

so that rejection becomes rare.

________________________________________

A simple governance test

Before anyone says yes to procurement, one question must be answerable:

If everything goes wrong after this purchase, who is answerable?

If the answer is unclear,

the decision should not be taken.

________________________________________

What the next chapter will do

Now that we know who should decide,

the next question is when and how that decision should be taken.

Because timing, seasonality, and context

often matter more than intent.

That is where we go next.