Free CIPS L4M5 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 8

At the first stage of CIPS Procurement and Supply Cycle (Understand need and develop a high-level specification), procurement professional mainly negotiate with internal stakeholders. They have a duty to proportionately and constructively challenge specification if there's genuine doubt over the need or how the need is expressed. This is called demand management. Their first duty is to the organisation's treasury, not to functional managers.

Demand management including: negotiation/challenge between procurement and internal stakeholders over the need/requirement/specification. Remember that in any process or product, the greatest opportunity for cost reduction is at the design stage.

Effective negotiation preparation requires buyers to align pricing mechanisms with cost forecasts and risk exposure. Since copper prices are forecast to fall, fixing them would disadvantage the buyer; a variable price allows the buyer to benefit from market reductions. Conversely, where plastic component costs are expected to rise, fixing prices protects the buyer from inflationary increases. CIPS highlights the importance of selectively applying fixed and variable pricing to manage risk intelligently rather than adopting a single approach across all components. This mixed strategy demonstrates strong commercial awareness and supports value-for-money outcomes over long-term contracts.

Activity-based costing is an alternative approach to traditional absorption costing. The characteristics of these two methods are illustrated in the graph below:

Graphical user interface, text, chat or text message, website Description automatically generated

Variable costs change in proportion to production volume, such as packaging, raw materials, and delivery. Fixed costs (rent, insurance, loan repayments) remain constant regardless of output. Recognising the difference is crucial when negotiating supplier pricing, as variable costs are often more open to tradeable adjustments (e.g., bulk discounts). Buyers who understand cost structures can challenge inflated fixed allocations or negotiate on genuine variable elements. This knowledge is vital in price breakdown discussions and in cost-modelling negotiations.

With a collaborative supplier, the appropriate approach is Win–Win (integrative). Both sides aim to create savings while maintaining partnership value. Win–Lose would damage collaboration, while Lose–Lose sacrifices value on both sides. Win–Perceived Win is based on optics rather than actual balance. By adopting a win–win approach, Maria ensures sustainable cost reductions while protecting critical NHS supplier relationships.

Hearing is passive but listening is active, and some people need to learn to be a good, attentive listener. The following rules of attentive listening will help you to become a successful negotiator:

• Be motivated to listen

• Be alert to non-verbal cues

• Do not interrupt the other party when they are speaking

• Fight off distractions

• Write everything down

• Listen with a goal in mind

• Give the other party your undivided attention

• React to the message, not the person

LO 3, AC 3.3

According to Thomas-Kilmann conflict model instrument, there are 5 conflict management styles:

In this scenario, the buyer's bargaining power is stronger than suppliers', and the relationship is transactional. Therefore, to get the most preferable outcome, the procurement professional can take an assertive approach, while he doesn't need to co-operate closely with these suppliers. Competing will be the most appropriate approach to negotiation in this scenario so that the buying organisation can get a better deal.

A useful and simple shorthand for preferred negotiation styles is summarised by four simple descriptor: 'warm', 'tough', 'logical' and 'dealer', which can be applied to describe individuals' dominant preferred style in most circumstances.

Warm - a people person

Tough - a hard-nosed negotiator

Logic - a numbers person

Dealer - a trader who loves bargaining

Strengths, weaknesses of logical style are described below:

Table Description automatically generated

Competing is assertive and uncooperative, a power-oriented mode. When competing, an individual pursues his or her own concerns at the other person’s expense, using whatever power seems appropriate to win his or her position. Competing might mean standing up for your rights, defending a position you believe is correct, or simply trying to win. Competing will not allow long-term relationship to flourish.

Compromising is intermediate in both assertiveness and cooperativeness. When compromising, the objective is to find an expedient, mutually acceptable solution that partially satisfies both parties. Compromising falls on a middle ground between competing and accommodating, giving up more than competing but less than accommodating. Likewise, it addresses an issue more directly than avoiding but doesn’t explore it in as much depth as collaborating. Compromising might mean splitting the difference, exchanging concessions, or seeking a quick middle-ground position. It is a valid approach when long-term relationships are at stake and it is important to find some common ground on which to base an agreement. Both sides get something but not everything. Therefore, this is the most appropriate for this scenario.

Avoiding is unassertive and uncooperative. When avoiding, an individual does not immediately pursue his or her own concerns or those of the other person. He or she does not address the conflict. Avoiding might take the form of diplomatically sidestepping an issue, postponing an issue until a better time, or simply withdrawing from a threatening situation. In the scenario, both parties want to take the opportunity, then avoiding is not an appropriate solution.

Accommodating is unassertive and cooperative—the opposite of competing. When accommodating, an individual neglects his or her own concerns to satisfy the concerns of the other person; there is an element of self-sacrifice in this mode. Accommodating might take theform of selfless generosity or charity, obeying another person’s order when you would prefer not to, or yielding to another’s point of view. In the scenario, neither party shall concede all of their requirements, it is unnecessary to adopt this approach.

LO 1, AC 1.1

A monopoly exists when only one company can supply an essential product or service in a given region because of significant barriers to entry for any competitor. The barriers can be legal, regulatory, economic, or geographic. Ma Bell case is an example of monopoly. The company was broken up in 1982.

A monopsony is a market structure in which a single buyer substantially controls the market as the major purchaser of goods and services offered by many would-be sellers.

Pure or perfect competition is a theoretical market structure in which the following criteria are met:

- All firms sell an identical product (the product is a "commodity" or "homogeneous").

- All firms are price takers (they cannot influence the market price of their product).

- Market share has no influence on prices.

- Buyers have complete or "perfect" information—in the past, present and future—about the product being sold and the prices charged by each firm.

- Resources for such a labor are perfectly mobile.

- Firms can enter or exit the market without cost.

Monopolistic competition characterizes an industry in which many firms offer products or services that are similar, but not perfect substitutes. Barriers to entry and exit in a monopolistic competitive industry are low, and the decisions of any one firm do not directly affect those of its competitors. Monopolistic competition is closely related to the business strategy of brand differentiation