Every procurement system fails.

Not once.

Not rarely.

Repeatedly.

The difference between strong and weak systems

is not whether failure occurs —

but how failure is handled.

Most systems don’t fail dramatically.

They fray.

________________________________________

The myth of the “perfect season”

At the start of every season, hope is high.

Rates are planned.

Quality norms are circulated.

Logistics is aligned.

And then reality intervenes:

• rain arrives early,

• heat stretches longer,

• labour disappears,

• markets turn volatile,

• cash tightens.

Something slips.

Governance that assumes perfection

is governance that collapses on contact.

________________________________________

A dispute near Bassi

It’s January.

Potatoes were procured at agreed rates.

Later, storage losses rise.

Quality complaints emerge.

The buyer wants deductions.

Farmers insist:

“Hamne toh sahi diya tha.”

Both may be right.

The problem is not the dispute.

The problem is who carries the loss.

Without pre-agreed failure logic,

every loss becomes a moral argument.

________________________________________

Failure becomes conflict when silence replaces clarity

Most conflicts escalate because:

• communication slows,

• explanations get delayed,

• and assumptions fill the gap.

Silence feels safer than honesty.

It is not.

Unexplained failure creates:

• suspicion,

• blame,

• and emotional narratives.

Governance insists on early explanation,

even when answers are uncomfortable.

________________________________________

Everyone fails differently

Farmers fail by:

• overestimating quality,

• harvesting at the wrong time,

• or hiding defects.

Buyers fail by:

• overcommitting,

• delaying decisions,

• or changing terms.

Staff fail by:

• cutting corners,

• improvising,

• or avoiding confrontation.

Transporters fail by:

• delaying,

• mixing,

• or mishandling.

Failure is distributed.

Blame should be too.

________________________________________

The danger of retroactive rules

One of the worst governance habits is:

changing rules after failure.

• “From now on, this will not be allowed.”

• “This time we will deduct.”

• “Earlier this was okay, now it isn’t.”

Retroactive governance destroys credibility.

Rules must be stable before stress arrives.

________________________________________

Loss is inevitable. Unfair loss is not.

Loss happens:

• through spoilage,

• stress,

• weather,

• and biology.

Governance cannot eliminate loss.

It can decide where loss lands.

A system that pushes all loss onto farmers

will not survive.

A system that absorbs all loss

will collapse financially.

Governance is the art of shared pain.

________________________________________

Conflict resolution is governance, not HR

Many organisations treat disputes as:

• interpersonal issues,

• behavioural problems,

• or attitude gaps.

They are not.

Disputes are signals of design failure.

Governance must create:

• clear escalation paths,

• known resolution forums,

• and predictable outcomes.

When conflict resolution is ad hoc,

trust erodes silently.

________________________________________

Live animals magnify failure instantly

With live animals:

• mortality,

• injury,

• and stress losses

are visible and irreversible.

Disputes escalate faster.

Emotions run higher.

Systems that survive live procurement:

• pre-define failure handling,

• compensate transparently,

• and communicate relentlessly.

Others exit quietly.

________________________________________

Failure without learning is waste

Every failure carries data:

• what went wrong,

• where assumptions failed,

• whose incentives misfired.

Systems that punish failure

bury learning.

Systems that analyse failure

grow resilient.

Governance insists that failure leaves a trace.

________________________________________

A simple failure governance test

Ask this:

“If the same failure occurs again next season, will our response be calmer?”

If the answer is no,

the system is not learning.

________________________________________

Why this chapter matters

Many procurement systems don’t die from corruption.

They die from accumulated unresolved failure.

Each conflict chips away at trust.

Eventually, relationships collapse without a single dramatic event.

Governance does not prevent failure.

It prevents failure from becoming fatal.

________________________________________

What comes next

Once systems accept failure,

they must learn to exit relationships ethically.

Because stopping procurement

can be as damaging as starting it badly.

That’s where we go next.