New Finance System Implementation: A Golden Opportunity to Cut Costs

When a Multi-Academy Trust (MAT) upgrades its finance software, all eyes tend to focus on the system’s new features and efficiencies. That’s understandable – but it misses half the opportunity. The trusts that get the most from a finance system upgrade don’t just implement new software. They use the process to audit their supplier base, consolidate spend, and renegotiate contracts. The result: savings that can offset the cost of the implementation itself.

The Overlooked Opportunity

A new finance system isn’t just an IT project – it’s a financial audit waiting to happen. Most MAT finance teams focus on go-live: getting the software running, improving reporting, strengthening compliance. Those are the right priorities. But the implementation phase also surfaces something more immediate: a complete, searchable view of your purchasing data. That view is the foundation for a supplier review that most trusts never make time for.

The reality is that most trusts have accumulated supplier lists that nobody has properly reviewed in years. Different schools using different vendors for the same service. Contracts rolled over on standard terms. Pricing that made sense three years ago but no longer reflects your purchasing volume. The new system doesn’t create these problems – it just makes them visible. And visible problems can be fixed.

What to Evaluate in a Supplier Review

A structured supplier review doesn’t need to be complicated. Three questions cut to the heart of it:

• Do we have too many suppliers for the same service? If several schools in your trust use different vendors for similar needs (like maintenance or office supplies), consolidating to one preferred supplier can increase your purchasing power. Bulk ordering with a single supplier often unlocks volume discounts and better rates, whereas fragmented spending misses out on those savings. For example, one multi-academy trust that unified its maintenance contracts with a single provider saw a first-year saving of £127,000 – about a 14% reduction in that spend category. This kind of consolidation not only reduces costs but also simplifies procurement admin and vendor management.
• Are we getting good value and service from each supplier? Now is the time to scrutinise performance. Identify any suppliers who consistently underperform – whether in service quality, reliability, or product longevity. If a vendor’s products don’t last (leading to frequent replacements) or their support is lacking, that’s a red flag. Keeping only high-quality, reliable suppliers ensures you’re not wasting money on subpar goods or services. It also strengthens your bargaining position: suppliers know they must compete on quality and price to keep your business.
• What are our current contract terms and can they be improved? Gather details on pricing, volume discounts, and payment terms for each supplier. Trusts often discover they are on out-of-date contracts or standard terms that could be renegotiated. Engage with your strongest suppliers and leverage the timing – the prospect of a fresh finance system and a trust-wide review – to negotiate better prices or more favourable terms. Vendors will vie to be part of your streamlined supplier roster, which can mean extended payment days, bulk purchase discounts, or value-add services at no extra cost.

Work through these questions systematically and the picture becomes clear quickly: which relationships deserve to continue, and which are costing more than they should. Fewer contracts to manage. Suppliers who know they’re competing for your business. And a procurement baseline that reflects what your trust actually needs – not what it inherited.

Savings That Offset Your Investment

The numbers make the case. Consolidate ten supplier agreements and negotiate even modest improvements – £5,000 per contract – and you’ve recovered £50,000. That’s before you account for the admin time saved through fewer supplier relationships, or the leverage that comes from committing higher spend to fewer partners.

The scale of opportunity is significant. UK education procurement data shows schools pay a fragmentation premium of 12–18% on identical products when buying across multiple smaller vendors rather than through a single consolidated supplier. For a trust with substantial annual procurement spend, that premium represents a material drain on budget that could be redirected to frontline educational priorities. One medium-sized MAT we worked with identified overlapping suppliers for ICT equipment and curriculum resources. After consolidating to a single supplier per category and negotiating trust-wide terms, the savings in year one covered the cost of their finance system implementation in full.

These aren’t exceptional outcomes. They’re what happens when a finance team treats the implementation as the strategic review it is – not just a technology change. The savings compound: better supplier terms in year one become the baseline for year two, and the trust’s purchasing position improves with every renewal cycle.

A Win-Win for Finance Transformation

The supplier review and the implementation share the same raw material: your purchasing data. That means the work is largely parallel, not additional. As you centralise data and configure new processes, you’re already reviewing how money moves through the trust. Running a supplier audit alongside that work ensures your new system doesn’t simply digitise old spending habits – it starts from a leaner, more deliberate baseline. The reporting and spend analysis capabilities you’ve invested in will be more powerful for it.

There’s a governance dimension here too. Trustees and school governors scrutinise capital spend carefully – and rightly so. A finance leader who can demonstrate that the system investment triggered meaningful procurement savings is shifting the conversation from cost to value. That’s a materially stronger position when presenting to a board or reporting to the DfE.

A finance system implementation is a strategic review with a technology component. The trusts that recognise this – and act on it – come out the other side with not just better systems, but a leaner, more accountable supply chain and a clearer line of sight into where every pound goes. That’s what responsible financial stewardship looks like in practice. If you’re planning an implementation and want to explore how a supplier audit could work alongside it, we’re happy to walk through the approach with your team.

Get in touch with us today or find out more about TSG Education.