Does unique earn its complexity?
Customer need, technical requirement, regulation or genuine process constraint? Engineering owns the technical need. Sourcing makes the supply consequence visible.
We spent an hour on my background. I kept thinking about the role afterwards. My read is that the job is not to standardise DTO. It is to stop every customer-specific project from automatically creating a new supplier logic, commercial model and risk path.
Early supplier involvement, modular thinking, framework structures for volatile demand, commonality and a scalable supplier base are not separate topics to me. They are different parts of the same sourcing decision.
Customer need, technical requirement, regulation or genuine process constraint? Engineering owns the technical need. Sourcing makes the supply consequence visible.
Capability, usable capacity, quality, validation, evidence, compliance and ramp-up. A quotation is an offer, not proof of readiness.
Price, TCO, call-off logic, allocation, lead time and capacity commitment have to fit the uncertainty instead of pushing it into stock or disruption.
Can a component, interface, source, qualification or commercial structure serve more than one project? If not, what makes this one genuinely different?
It is to stop every DTO project from automatically becoming a new supply chain. Unique customer value can stay unique. The surrounding sourcing logic should only be unique when there is a reason.
NOVENCO is also recruiting around DTO R&D, Operational Excellence and IFS. From the outside, those roles show the same pressure from different angles: handle growing complexity while making the systems behind it more scalable and repeatable. I would not pretend to know the internal programme behind that. It is simply the pattern I see.
A motor / drive choice is a simple example. If the source changes efficiency, validation, certification, package fit, lead time or system performance, supplier choice belongs in the product trade-off early. Engineering owns the technical solution. Sourcing makes the options and consequences visible while there is still room to choose.
These are not NOVENCO-scale DTO stories. They are proof of how I already work when the sourcing decision has to survive uncertainty, suppliers and internal authority.
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.
With a surface-treatment supplier, quality, documentation and reference misunderstandings kept returning. I created a more consistent contact route, clearer requirement checks and repeatable follow-up between the companies.
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.
You told me the paper profile is not the whole decision. I did not hear that as a lower bar. I heard a different bar: judgement, learning speed, trust, and whether the person can grow with the direction of the team.
It is useful because I can see what a sourcing decision does downstream. NOVENCO already separates strategic sourcing from daily operational purchasing. I would use that operational depth to make better upstream decisions, not to turn this role into a PO-follow-up job.
If I come to you, I want the problem defined, the business impact visible, the facts checked, my recommendation ready and the decision I need from you clear.
Not another scorecard for the sake of having one. A short view that makes a DTO trade-off decision-ready across the affected functions.
What customer, technical or regulatory value would be lost by simplifying?
Capability, capacity, quality, validation, evidence and realistic ramp-up.
Price / TCO, call-off structure, lead time, capacity commitment and escalation.
Component, interface, source, qualification or terms that can support more than one project.
NOVENCO stayed with me because this is the right kind of step-up: dedicated Global Sourcing, technical products, early R&D involvement, international suppliers and a role where supplier strategy has visible business consequence.
The way you described working matters too. Clear direction, direct feedback, problems surfaced early, then trust and ownership. Same direction does not require the same personality. I want to understand the goal, challenge constructively and own my part.
I do not know NOVENCO's supplier portfolio yet. I would need to learn the architecture, supplier history, segmentation, IFS and governance. That is the learning curve. What I can bring before that is sourcing judgement: make uncertainty visible early, test supplier reality, structure commitment around demand, respect technical authority and follow the decision through.