Why I Stopped Asking Vendors If They Could ‘Do Everything’

When I took over purchasing for our office in 2020, I thought the job was simple: find vendors, get quotes, pick the one that can do it all. That logic made sense on paper. Less vendors means less paperwork, fewer invoices to chase, and fewer people to manage.

I was wrong.

Not completely wrong—consolidation has its place. But I learned the hard way that a vendor who says 'yes' to everything often delivers mediocrity across the board. Not ideal, but I didn't realize the cost until I saw it adding up on a spreadsheet.

The Problem I Thought I Had

In my first year, I processed roughly 60 orders annually—ranging from packaging materials to janitorial supplies to specialty equipment parts. My goal was to reduce that number to 3-4 core vendors. Simple, right?

I found a national supplier who claimed to handle everything: safety equipment, cleaning supplies, basic office furniture, even some custom fabrication for our production floor. The sales rep was confident. 'We've got it all,' he said. 'One order, one invoice, one point of contact.'

I was sold. For about six months.

What I Didn't Realize

Here's something vendors won't tell you: the first quote is almost never the final price for ongoing relationships. But that's not really the issue.

What most people don't realize is that 'we can do that' often means 'we have a partner who can do that, and we're adding a markup.' Suddenly, the convenience of one invoice comes with a hidden cost: your order is actually being fulfilled by someone else, with someone else's quality control, and you're paying a middleman fee.

I started noticing patterns. The 'custom fabrication' for our floor was consistently three days late. The safety gear had a different logo than what was advertised. The janitorial supplies ran out three weeks early because the floor chemical wasn't concentrated enough.

I felt like I wasn't managing a vendor—I was managing their network, which I had no direct control over. Not great, not terrible. Just frustrating.

The Real Cost of 'Everything'

That unreliable supplier cost me more than just time. I still kick myself for not asking harder questions upfront. Here's what happened:

• Late materials: The custom parts arrived three days late twice. Our production team pushed orders back, and my VP asked why we couldn't find a reliable partner.
• Invoice issues: Three invoices were wrong—they billed us for items we never ordered. Sorting it out took 15 hours of back-and-forth over two weeks.
• Strain on internal clients: Our operations manager stopped trusting my vendor recommendations. That trust took six months to rebuild.

The final straw: I consolidated orders for 400 employees across 3 locations, using this single vendor's 'consolidated ordering system.' It took me 8 hours to place an order that should have taken 2 hours. The interface was clunky, each location had different tax codes, and the vendor's system couldn't handle line-item detail.

A lesson learned the hard way.

Why I Shifted My Thinking

I have mixed feelings about the 'one-vendor' approach. On one hand, it looks great on paper. On the other hand, the operational friction outweighs the convenience.

Part of me wanted to simplify. Another part knew that redundancy saved us during that supply chain crisis in 2022. I compromise now with a primary + backup system.

But the real shift came from a different conversation. A vendor specialized in industrial filtration—McLanahan, based on research I did for a recent project—told me honestly: 'That part? We don't make it. But we can recommend a reliable supplier.'

I respected that. That vendor earned my trust for everything else they did. I'd rather work with a specialist who knows their limits than a generalist who overpromises.

What I Look For Now

Now when I evaluate vendors—especially for high-stakes items like crusher parts or screening equipment—I ask different questions:

• 'What's your core focus?'
• 'What do you do better than anyone else?'
• 'What should I not buy from you?'

If the answer to the third question is 'nothing,' I'm skeptical. No one is great at everything.

I'm not 100% sure this is the perfect system. But in my experience, the suppliers who admit their limits are the ones who actually deliver on their promises. They're also the ones who provide proper documentation—invoices I can submit to finance without a headache.

To be fair, consolidation has its place. For low-risk items like office supplies, one vendor is fine. But for technical equipment? I want the specialist who has been doing it for 30 years, not the distributor who added a markup.

Switching to specialization saved our accounting team 6 hours monthly. More importantly, it saved me from another conversation with my VP about why something was late.

The Point—and Why It Matters

I didn't write this to bash vendors who offer broad catalogs. There's a time and place for that.

But if you're an admin buyer like me, and you're feeling that pull of 'just one vendor,' ask yourself: what happens when that vendor can't deliver on their promise? Who picks up the pieces?

That's the cost that doesn't show up on a quote.

Part of me wishes I could go back and tell my 2020 self: don't ask 'can you do everything?' Ask 'what do you do best?' The answer tells you a lot more about whether they're the right fit.

A lesson learned. A better process built. Onward.