Sinking Ship?

Ex RM Manager · Post by **Ex RM Manager** » 28 Oct 2008, 21:46

"Richard Boyce leaves Royal Mail

Royal Mail's head of procurement has left the organisation.
Richard Boyce, group procurement director, exited the group earlier this month after stepping down for family reasons. Peter Williams, a founding partner of NewDawn Partnership and former CIPS president, has taken over in the interim.

Boyce joined Royal Mail in November last year as its acting procurement chief after Ninian Wilson was promoted to operations director for the letters division. He later took on the role permanently.

Mark Higson, managing director of Royal Mail, said Boyce's decision to leave was difficult. "This has been a very tough decision for Richard but one that we fully understand and respect. We want to thank Richard for his contribution during his time with Royal Mail and wish him well."

A spokesman for Royal Mail said the company would continue with its purchasing overhaul, but would not comment further on the issue. The Procurement Transformation Project, launched in late 2006, aims to turn the group's buying function into one of the top three in Europe within three years (News, 21 September 2006). It is also targeting savings of £300 million over five years on its £2 billion annual spend."

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 28 Oct 2008, 22:34

Just a thought

F0zziebear · Post by **F0zziebear** » 28 Nov 2008, 16:01

I think the 'rat' joined the ship when it was sinking rather than the other round.

This transformation programme is vital to the company and frontline jobs. Unless its a success more pressure will mount to reduce frontline roles. RM's procurement of supplies and general spend has been very inefficient, and is only now being addressed.

BELIAL · Post by **BELIAL** » 28 Nov 2008, 20:50

F0zziebear wrote:I think the 'rat' joined the ship when it was sinking rather than the other round.

This transformation programme is vital to the company and frontline jobs. Unless its a success more pressure will mount to reduce frontline roles. RM's procurement of supplies and general spend has been very inefficient, and is only now being addressed.

Would that be "vital "to the 30,000 jobs lost in the last 5years or to the 25,000 redundancies planned? Those last 200 posties will make a mint on OT ,unless they beef up the flexibility agreement of course

axeman · Post by **axeman** » 28 Nov 2008, 21:26

just the two rats at the top to go ................one is destined for march can't see the other lasting much after that as soon as the skeletons are let out of the cupboards

norbert · Post by **norbert** » 28 Nov 2008, 22:09

axeman wrote:just the two rats at the top to go ................one is destined for march can't see the other lasting much after that as soon as the skeletons are let out of the cupboards

"for family reasons " :

DGP1 · Post by **DGP1** » 28 Nov 2008, 22:29

What do you think the odds are that we'll end up with a load of failed bankers coming onto the board

PS I said failed bankers which I suppose is interchangeable with the rhyming slang

axeman · Post by **axeman** » 28 Nov 2008, 22:34

Ex RM Manager · Post by **Ex RM Manager** » 07 Dec 2008, 19:15

... the careerist egotist Wilson was jumped as he told he was going to be pushed. And his successor, well, I wonder if the selection panel for him was the same as itw as for Wilson, and chose a lame duck twice? As I always suspected, with a redundancy exercise, the interesting and talented people get poached, and those not so stay. RM Procurement's may have been efficient, but their current administration seemed to fetishise change for changes sake without rationale or logic .