Free CIPS L5M6 Practice Exam with Questions & Answers | Set: 2

The correct response is No – rivalry between existing suppliers is high. Exit barriers refer to the difficulty suppliers face when attempting to leave a market or industry. These barriers may include high investment in specialised assets, contractual obligations, redundancy costs, or reputational damage. When suppliers are unable or unwilling to exit, they remain within the industry regardless of declining profitability. This forces them to compete aggressively to retain market share, which increases rivalry among existing firms.

Options A and B are incorrect because the question relates to rivalry, not directly to buyer or supplier power. Option D is also incorrect because exit barriers do not influence new suppliers entering; they affect current suppliers trying to leave.

A practical example is the oil and energy industry, where huge capital investments make it very costly to exit. Companies stay even during downturns, resulting in fierce rivalry.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.114 – Porter’s Five Forces: Exit Barriers and Rivalry]

The first stage of Kearney’s 7 Step Model is profiling the category, where data is gathered about spend, suppliers, and demand. This profiling provides the foundation for preparing future projections and budgets. It ensures that procurement understands not only how much is currently being spent, but also the likely future requirements of the organisation. While finding alternative suppliers and benchmarking may emerge later in the process, the primary outcome of category profiling is reliable information for budgeting and strategic decision-making. This stage links procurement with financial planning and helps build business cases for category strategies. Without accurate data profiling, subsequent sourcing strategies may be flawed.

The services industry does not have a specific SIC code because it is highly diverse, spanning multiple activities that do not fit neatly into a single classification.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.88 – SIC classification limitations]

The correct term is Cost Out, a proactive cost management approach where the buyer collaborates with the supplier during the design phase to eliminate unnecessary costs before they arise. This ensures efficiency and value creation throughout the product lifecycle. For example, designing packaging to minimise waste or using standardised components to avoid expensive customisation.

This differs from:

Cost acceptance, where the buyer accepts the supplier’s price without analysis.

Cost engineering, a broader process of optimising costs through design and process evaluation.

Cost down, which typically involves reducing costs after production by analysing processes, renegotiating contracts, or improving efficiency.

Cost Out is especially relevant for strategic or high-value categories where innovation and collaboration with suppliers can generate long-term savings. It is consistent with category management’s emphasis on strategic supplier partnerships.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.80 – Cost Out vs Cost Down strategies]

A Category Plan is a strategic document that sets out how a category will be managed to deliver organisational objectives. It typically includes:

Supply market analysis to understand supplier dynamics, competition, and risks.

Category objectives, which align with organisational strategy and specify what procurement aims to achieve.

Category risks, which outline potential threats and mitigation strategies.

HR information and a full history of the category are not required, as the plan is forward-looking, focusing on strategy rather than operational details. While historical context may be summarised in an executive overview, it does not form a full section. A well-structured Category Plan supports better decision-making, stakeholder engagement, and ensures consistent management of spend. It provides a roadmap for how value will be captured, risks managed, and supplier relationships developed. Without it, category management risks becoming reactive and fragmented.

Line item details provide specific transactional information about a purchased product, such as the quantity ordered and the price paid. This information is critical for category managers who rely on spend data to analyse patterns, negotiate supplier agreements, and benchmark costs.

Other details such as functionality or components are not typically captured in line item data. These relate more to specifications and technical design documents rather than financial records.

By analysing line item data across multiple purchases, category managers can identify trends such as bulk-buying opportunities, price fluctuations, and supplier performance. It also assists in spend analysis, which is a fundamental step in category management for mapping categories and identifying cost-saving opportunities.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.134 – Line item detail in spend analysis]

This is an exploitable customer, according to the Supplier Preferencing Model. Suppliers may attempt to increase profit margins with customers they perceive as less important but who have fewer alternatives and can afford to pay more.

The key barrier is language and the use of acronyms. In cross-functional, international, or virtual teams, communication challenges can hinder collaboration. Procurement often uses specialised terminology and acronyms that other functions or non-native speakers may not fully understand. This can create confusion, misalignment, and inefficiency.

Geography is less of an issue in virtual teams, as digital platforms enable collaboration across locations. Time and cost can be challenges, but the study guide specifically identifies language and acronyms as barriers.

Effective category managers overcome this by using clear, simple communication and ensuring shared understanding of procurement terms. This reduces misunderstandings and ensures that all team members—finance, engineering, operations—can contribute effectively.

Cross-functional teamwork is central to category management success, but only if barriers to collaboration are proactively addressed.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.64 – Cross-functional teams and barriers]

Industries differ in terms of barriers to entry, which are obstacles that make it difficult for new competitors to enter a market. The restaurant industry has relatively low barriers—it requires less upfront capital, fewer regulatory approvals, and allows easier entry compared to industries such as airlines or pharmaceuticals. In contrast, pharmaceuticals involve stringent legal regulations, high R&D costs, and patents, while airlines require massive capital investment and regulatory compliance. The soft drinks industry, while not as capital-intensive, has strong barriers due to brand loyalty, global supply chains, and marketing costs. For procurement, recognising barriers to entry is important because it affects supply market competitiveness. In industries with low barriers like restaurants, buyer power is generally higher because new suppliers can enter easily. In high-barrier industries, suppliers hold greater power due to limited alternatives. This ties directly into Porter’s Five Forces, which procurement professionals use to evaluate market attractiveness and develop category strategies.

This situation represents a Threat within SWOT analysis. SWOT distinguishes between internal and external factors. Strengths and weaknesses are internal to the organisation, while opportunities and threats are external.

Here, the short-term spike in demand is external to Callie’s business. It is also potentially harmful because increased competition for raw materials [rubber, metal, etc.] can lead to higher prices, longer lead times, and supply shortages. Therefore, this is categorised as a threat.

It cannot be an opportunity, as the increase in demand benefits suppliers rather than Callie’s firm. Nor is it a strength or weakness, as those describe factors within the company such as production capabilities or financial resources.

Using SWOT in category management allows managers to anticipate and mitigate external risks while leveraging internal strengths. Recognising this threat means Callie may develop strategies such as dual sourcing, supplier collaboration, or forward buying to reduce exposure.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.122 – SWOT analysis in category management]