Tara Buchler, Principal of Strategy at JBF Consulting, provides practical guidance for manufacturing leaders navigating complex technology decisions in a rapidly evolving market.
A STRATEGY-FIRST APPROACH TO TECHNOLOGY BUYING
Technology buying failures in manufacturing rarely occur because an organisation selects the wrong software or platform.
They happen much earlier – when companies enter the request for proposal (RFP) process without clear strategic alignment, defined operational priorities, or a shared understanding of how technology should support long-term business goals.
Manufacturers today operate in an increasingly complex environment shaped by global competition, margin pressures, labour constraints, supply chain disruptions, and accelerating technological change.
Digital transformation initiatives – from smart factories to advanced analytics – promise significant performance improvements, but they also introduce new risks when not guided by clear strategy.
Most manufacturing technology buyers only experience a limited number of operating models during their careers, often within a single company or industry segment. Whilst they develop deep expertise in their own environments, they may have limited visibility of what best-in-class operations look like across diverse manufacturing contexts.
Meanwhile, the pace of technology innovation continues to accelerate. Integrated planning systems, automation platforms, predictive analytics tools, and end-to-end visibility solutions are proliferating, often accompanied by increasingly ambitious vendor claims.
Against this backdrop, many organisations treat the RFP process as the starting point rather than the culmination of strategic planning. They focus heavily on documenting current processes and addressing immediate operational pain points, which can lead to predictable and costly mistakes.
Below are 10 common ways manufacturing leaders get technology buying wrong before the RFP even begins, and how a strategy-first approach produces stronger outcomes.
- STARTING WITH A SYSTEM OVER AN OUTCOME
Many initiatives begin with a predetermined conclusion: “We need a new enterprise resource planning system”, “We need automation technology”, or “We need a planning platform”.
When technology is treated as the objective, requirements focus on system capabilities rather than business outcomes. Organisations spend time defining features instead of clarifying what they truly need to achieve – improved margins, greater operational flexibility, reduced costs, or scalable growth.
A strategy-first approach begins with business goals and works backwards to determine the appropriate role of technology.
- ADRESSING SYMPTOMS RATHER THAN UNDERLYING CAUSES
Operational frustrations such as manual processes, delayed reporting, and inconsistent performance often dominate early discussions.
However, these issues frequently reflect deeper challenges such as outdated workflows, unclear decision ownership, or fragmented organisational structures.
Selecting technology to address symptoms rather than underlying causes often embeds inefficiencies into new systems.
- ASSUMING TECHNOLOGY WILL FIX BROKEN PROCESSES
Technology does not fix flawed processes – it accelerates them.
Automating inefficient workflows increases the speed at which those inefficiencies occur. Organisations may gain enhanced visibility but remain locked into ineffective operating models.
Redesigning processes before implementing technology ensures systems support optimal performance.
- SKIPPING THE TARGET OPERATING MODEL
Many manufacturers struggle to clearly define how they want operations to function in the future as digital transformation accelerates.
Without a defined target operating model, technology requirements often blend legacy practices with aspirational goals. Vendors are asked to support conflicting expectations such as centralised versus decentralised decision-making.
Clarifying future roles, decision rights, and performance expectations provides essential direction for technology investments.
- LETTING ONE FUNCTION DRIVE RFP
Technology buying is often led by a single group – IT, operations, finance, or engineering.
Optimising from one area frequently creates unintended consequences further in the operational process, limiting enterprise-wide benefits.
Cross-functional collaboration ensures technology supports end-to-end operational performance.
- OVERLOADING FEATURE LISTS
Extensive feature checklists rarely improve decision quality.
Organisations may select systems capable of numerous functions but are unable to meaningfully improve strategic and operational decision-making.
Technology should be evaluated based on its ability to support better decisions rather than its feature count.
- IGNORING CHANGE MANAGEMENT UNTIL AFTER SELECTION
Change management is often treated as an implementation issue rather than a strategic consideration.
New technologies frequently require adjustments to workflows, workforce skills, and organisational culture. Without adequate preparation, adoption can stall.
Aligning technology ambition with organisational readiness improves success rates.
- ASSUMING DATA IS GOOD ENOUGH
Manufacturing systems depend heavily on accurate, consistent, and well-governed data.
When data quality is poor, even advanced technologies struggle to deliver reliable insights or performance improvements.
Assessing data maturity early enables organisations to address gaps proactively.
- TREATING RFP AS A DOCUMENTATION EXCERSISE
RFPs often become static documentation exercises rather than strategic decision tools.
When organisations focus on gathering information instead of testing assumptions and clarifying priorities, they miss opportunities to strengthen their technology strategy.
Using the RFP process to challenge thinking produces better outcomes.
- RUSHING TO SHOW PROGRESS
Pressure to demonstrate progress often leads organisations to issue RFPs before strategic alignment exists.
Whilst this may create short-term momentum, shortcuts taken early frequently result in delays, rework, and missed performance expectations later.
Strategic alignment ultimately accelerates execution.
THE BOTTOM LINE
Most manufacturing technology failures are not the result of poor vendor selection. They stem from organisations being unprepared to make strategic decisions in increasingly complex and rapidly evolving environments.
A strategy-first approach ensures technology investments support long-term business goals, improve operational performance, and deliver a sustainable competitive advantage.
This article was contributed by a guest author and published by the editorial team at Manufacturing Outlook, part of the Outlook Publishing global network of B2B industry magazines.
Outlook Publishing features leadership insights, industry perspectives, and company stories from organisations shaping sectors including manufacturing, mining, construction, healthcare, supply chains, food production, and sustainability.
Manufacturing Outlook explores the companies, technologies, and leaders driving progress across the global manufacturing industry.
