While many organizations have already captured the most accessible savings, additional opportunities remain. Even highly disciplined organizations continue to encounter structural and operational gaps that limit the full potential of standardization efforts.

Facing renewed margin pressure alongside continued organizational growth, health systems are revisiting standardization efforts as a lever for additional savings. This next phase of standardization is less about broad consolidation and more about targeted refinement, such as identifying sites or practices that exceed spend benchmarks, standardizing purchasing across additional product categories, or working with vendors that offer a broad portfolio of products across categories.

Health systems are also looking to expand standardization efforts beyond simply reducing the number of vendors or SKUs. Many are finding additional savings by aligning purchasing processes to support long‑term, repeatable success. These process‑focused approaches are designed to embed standardization into day‑to‑day operations, rather than treating it as a one‑time initiative.

Key opportunities to drive this next phase of standardization:

• Centralizing the procurement function at the system level
• Aligning purchasing workflows across ambulatory sites with the broader health system
• Matching data infrastructure across sites, including EHRs and enterprise research planning (ERP)
• Automating purchase order workflows to reduce manual effort and variability
• Standardizing request for proposal (RFP) templates to streamline sourcing and improve comparability

The COVID‑19 pandemic and other logistical disruptions in the early 2020s exposed substantial vulnerabilities across the healthcare supply chain. Shortages, delays, and stockouts underscored how fragile sourcing and distribution models had become. In response, health systems across the country moved quickly to make supply chain resilience a strategic priority rather than a secondary operational concern.

To strengthen resilience, organizations expanded the number of vendors they rely on for critical items, reducing dependence on any single source. Others invested in deeper, more collaborative partnerships with suppliers to improve visibility and ensure continuity of supply during periods of disruption. In some cases, health systems went a step further by dedicating full‑time roles to supply chain resilience, signaling that preparedness and risk mitigation should not sit on the margins of leadership responsibilities. These efforts are intended to help organizations better withstand future disruptions, whether caused by natural disasters, labor actions, or other public health emergencies.

The most common way health systems are strengthening supply chain resilience today is by optimizing internal processes. Many organizations are focusing first on improvements they can control directly, using better data and more disciplined operating practices to reduce risk and variability across their supply chains. Common internal actions include:

• Developing more accurate demand forecasts
• Investing in analytics that provide greater visibility into inventory levels
• Adjusting storage and delivery strategies based on whether items are classified as critical or noncritical

These investments are designed to improve resilience while also driving efficiency. By strengthening internal capabilities, health systems can reduce the need to choose between business continuity and cost savings — they can support both objectives simultaneously.

When it comes to upstream supply chain resilience, health systems continue to rely on their GPO, distributor, and manufacturer partners. In these relationships, organizations are prioritizing partners who can offer diverse manufacturing or warehousing footprints, as well as stronger capabilities to anticipate and react to disruptions.

While it is possible for health systems to develop this level of upstream visibility on their own, many struggle with the cost and data limitations required to do so. As a result, supplier partnerships remain a primary path for gaining broader insight and resilience across the supply chain.

Recently, many health systems have scaled back environmental sustainability initiatives. With leadership attention focused on margin preservation and care performance, sustainability efforts have become harder to prioritize. This shift has been reinforced by changes in the federal administration, which have reduced government incentives and funding for climate‑focused initiatives, further limiting the resources available to support these programs.

Although emerging pressures have taken priority over the past year, leaders continue to see environmental sustainability as pillar of broader supply chain success. Many health systems recognize that sustainability initiatives can support both environmental and financial performance at the same time, particularly when they are closely tied to efficiency and waste reduction.

In practice, organizations are finding opportunities to advance both objectives by:

• Eliminating supply waste that drives unnecessary spend and may ultimately end up in landfills
• Remanufacturing or repurposing products to reduce costs while extending the useful life of equipment

Nearly half of health systems have already adopted AI in procurement, while another 44% are actively exploring its use. That said, only 18% have fully implemented it across procurement functions.

While health systems frequently cite AI as a priority for future investment, many organizations are still in the early stages of adoption. Thus, current efforts are focused less on full deployment and more on foundational work, including establishing governance models, strengthening IT infrastructure, and investing in data assets. Along the way, health systems are prioritizing low‑risk, high‑return use cases that allow them to test these preparations and build confidence before pursuing broader AI transformation.

Health system leaders view procurement as an ideal area for their businesses to pilot AI tools because existing use cases are relatively simple and low risk from an implementation, governance, and adoption standpoint. As a result, the most common applications in procurement today focus on inventory management and product or vendor identification. These use cases rely on simpler data integration, limit AI’s direct influence over patient care, and allow organizations to demonstrate value quickly while managing risk.

As organizations strengthen data governance and modernize infrastructure, the next wave of AI in purchasing is poised to move beyond basic visibility and into decision support. Leaders are particularly focused on tools that can:

• Leverage demand signals to streamline contracting and ordering, improving speed and accuracy while reducing manual effort
• Inform product purchasing decisions by analyzing product value and comparing options across vendors
• Detect upstream disruptions early and recommend real‑time responses that protect supply continuity