After our conversation

Not another interview recap.

We already spent an hour on my background and sourcing experience. I did not want to send you the same answers again. This is the part we did not have time to test: how I would think inside the role when Engineering intent, supplier reality and growth pull in different directions.

My thesis: keep the engineering custom. Make the sourcing decision repeatable.
Private working note · not a NOVENCO document
PurposeAdd to the conversation, not repeat it
RoleSourcing Manager · DTO
ManagerStina Bredahl
My angleSupplier judgement + business consequence
01 · The operating idea

One tension. Four decisions.

Customer-specific engineering is the point of DTO. That does not mean the surrounding sourcing route should become unique by default. The discipline is deciding where flexibility creates value, and where it simply creates cost, risk or fragility.

01 / VARIATION

Why is it unique?

Customer value, technical requirement, regulation, supplier process or legacy? Protect the reason. Challenge the habit.

02 / SOURCE

Can we rely on it?

A quotation is not capability. Process, capacity, quality, evidence and ramp-up decide whether a supplier is usable.

03 / COMMITMENT

Does the deal fit demand?

Price matters. So do call-off logic, lead time, allocation, capacity commitment and the cost of being wrong.

04 / HANDOFF

Will the decision survive?

Revision, supplier data, Quality evidence, Planning assumptions and ownership have to reach execution cleanly.

The point is not to standardise DTO.
Standardise the decision quality around it.

That keeps Engineering room to create customer value without asking the rest of the business to rediscover the same sourcing questions on every project.

02 · Where I would push

Before adding another route, I would diagnose what is actually weak.

A shortage, a unique part and a poor commercial setup can all arrive in Production as the same urgent problem. The response should follow the cause, not the symptom.

Supplier reality

Capability and capacity are different problems.

A technically strong supplier at its volume limit needs a different response from a supplier that cannot meet the requirement.

Diagnose before replacing.
Option readiness

A supplier name is not resilience.

An alternative only matters when approval, tooling, documentation, lead time and real capacity are far enough along to carry demand.

Names are easy. Qualified options are hard.
Commercial structure

Volatile demand needs more than a good unit price.

The agreement should absorb uncertainty through cadence, commitments, lead time and escalation instead of simply moving uncertainty into stock.

Use the whole deal.
03 · Proof, not vocabulary

Three decisions from my own work.

Different context, smaller scale. The point is not to pretend A.K.S. was NOVENCO. The point is to show that commercial judgement, evidence discipline and authority boundaries are already part of how I work.

Commercial structure

I did not buy the whole forecast.

Recurring demand could move. I used consumption, Production, stock, expected demand, supplier capability and lead time to shape the purchase. Negotiation covered price, quantity, cadence, lead time and conditions. Staged call-offs protected availability without taking the full forecast into stock.

Flexibility was part of the commercial solution, not an afterthought.
Commercial truth

I did not trust the ERP because the screen looked official.

When pricing did not reconcile, I traced the commercial basis before moving forward. A wider check exposed conflicting cost and sales-price information that had to be corrected with the right owners before a major quotation.

100+ items affected
Data supports the decision. It does not replace judgement.
Judgement + authority

I challenged the timing, then supported the decision.

On a steel order, I checked market and Production information, made the risk visible and gave my recommendation. My manager made the final call. I respected it and kept monitoring the risk afterward.

Challenge hard. Keep authority clear. Own the follow-through.
One rule I do not negotiate with myself:Missing required origin or conformity evidence meant stop, not “probably fine”. Quality owned the technical disposition. I owned the supplier and supply follow-through.
04 · The real step-up

I know what transfers. I also know what I would have to learn.

I would rather make the learning curve explicit than disguise it. The scale and formal Global Sourcing environment are the step-up. The operating logic is not.

Useful immediately

The sourcing habits already exist.

  • Supplier evaluation, RFQs, negotiation and source decisions
  • Framework and call-off logic around uncertain demand
  • Supplier recovery, development and selective reallocation
  • Engineering, Quality and Production coordination around change
  • Documentation discipline, ERP challenge and execution handoff
  • Independent day-to-day ownership with clear escalation boundaries
What I would learn here

NOVENCO-specific depth.

  • Product architecture, DTO patterns and technical language
  • The supplier portfolio, category history and current priorities
  • IFS, data ownership and internal workflows
  • Global Sourcing governance, contracts and approval structure
  • NOVENCO / SCHAKO interfaces and market-specific sourcing logic
  • The team's rhythm, expectations and way of making decisions
05 · Working with you

You said you are not simply looking for the best person on paper.

I heard that as a question of judgement, learning speed, ownership and whether the person can work in the direction you are building.

I am not trying to write myself into seniority I have not earned. The step-up is real. So is the transfer. I learn fast, I ask questions early, and once expectations are clear I want ownership.

I also do not need us to agree on everything. If I see a risk, I will bring the facts, the consequence and my recommendation. Once the decision is made, I move with it.

Ask early. Own after.I would rather clarify once than hide uncertainty.
Challenge with facts, not ego.The point is a better decision, not winning the argument.
Bring the problem with a recommendation.What happened, impact, checks, recommendation, next action.
Learn the system before trying to change it.Understand first. Own second. Improve third.
06 · One useful first output

Make the supplier decision visible.

Not another scorecard for the sake of a scorecard. One short view that makes the trade-off clear enough for Sourcing and the affected functions to choose a route, owner and next action.

DTO Supplier Decision BriefQuestion → evidence → route → owner
01 · Reason

Why unique?

What customer, technical or regulatory value requires the exception?

02 · Reality

What is weak?

Capability, capacity, quality, lead time, commercial setup or visibility?

03 · Option

What is actually ready?

Approval, tooling, documentation, capacity, switching time and first supply.

04 · Execution

Will it survive handoff?

Revision, supplier data, Quality evidence, Planning assumptions and ownership.

KeepDevelopSplit selectivelySimplifyReplacePay for reliability when it earns it
Why I sent this

I told you I had become more selective. I meant it.

NOVENCO stayed with me because the role sits where I work best: supplier decisions with technical and operational consequences, in a business moving fast enough that Sourcing has to mature with it.

A.K.S. closing so suddenly made me more careful about where I invest the next years of my career. I want somewhere I can learn the business properly, stay, earn trust and take on more sourcing responsibility over time.

The direction you described is one I can align with: stronger supplier capability, earlier sourcing, international execution and operating habits that can scale without killing the flexibility DTO needs.

I would need to learn NOVENCO's product architecture, supplier history, IFS and governance. I would not need to learn from zero why a supplier decision can fail after the negotiation.

The scale is new.
The sourcing logic is not.
Understand → Own → Improve
Romaric Clementi · Greater CopenhagenPrivate follow-up · September 2026