Redress Compliance provides IT vendor management and procurement consulting from former vendor insiders, 100 percent buyer side. We build your renewal calendar, benchmarks and playbooks, and back the deals that matter, on a fixed fee or 25 percent of savings.
Redress Compliance provides IT vendor management and procurement consulting for enterprises whose software vendors outnumber and outprepare their buyers. Independent former vendor insiders build your renewal calendar, benchmarks and playbooks, and support the deals that matter. Build work is a fixed fee and deal support can run on 25 percent of savings, so governance produces leverage.
IT vendor management and procurement consulting is engaged when the QBRs happen, the scorecards exist, and nothing changes. Performance issues persist, pricing drifts, and every quarter brings quotes priced to test what the team will accept.
We connect governance to consequences. The scorecard feeds the renewal strategy and the renewal calendar follows your year, not the vendor's. Playbooks live in documents, not in the heads of people who may leave.
It fails when nothing the vendor does in governance changes what the vendor earns at renewal. The patterns we see most:
Procurement teams carry the whole portfolio with a fraction of the counterpart's staff. The engagement supplies the market data, structure and preparation the vendors already have.
A partner leads each engagement, and the partner who scopes it runs it. Morten Andersen leads Vendor Shield, our always on advisory program for contract negotiation, benchmarking, renewal preparation and audit defense, and Fredrik Filipsson leads the most complex multi vendor engagements.
Fredrik co founded Redress Compliance in 2018 and serves as Group CEO. His career began at Oracle, running audit and compliance engagements for Fortune 500 customers in license management services, followed by senior commercial roles at IBM and SAP. He leads the Oracle practice and the most complex multi vendor engagements.
Morten co founded Redress Compliance after senior commercial and licensing roles at IBM and Oracle. At IBM he ran enterprise licensing and audit engagements for some of the largest financial services and industrial accounts in EMEA. He leads the Vendor Shield subscription and partners on the largest IBM, Oracle, and cross publisher renewals.
Vendor practice leads join for their estates, including Ethan Mullins (Microsoft), Mietske van Ravesteijn (SAP) and Piaras McDonnell (IBM). See the Redress management team.
It runs from leverage map to working program in four workstreams, with deal support on live transactions throughout. The first baseline typically lands within 10 business days of complete data.
| Deliverable | What it contains |
|---|---|
| Vendor leverage map | Each vendor ranked by spend, renewal timing, switching cost and gap to market. |
| Renewal calendar | Dates, notice periods and auto renewal windows, with preparation start dates for each. |
| Scorecards and obligation tracker | Performance measures and contract obligations linked to commercial levers. |
| Benchmark library | Market reference points per vendor from comparable closed deals. |
| Negotiation playbooks | Per vendor sequencing, fiscal timing and prepared responses that stay with your team. |
Vendor pricing moved faster than most governance cycles. These are the shifts documented in current Redress research:
A vendor governance program built before 2025 probably tracks none of these.
Four published outcomes where portfolio discipline and preparation moved the number, each on its case study page:
A life sciences enterprise ran Oracle, SAP, Microsoft and ServiceNow renewals as one sequenced program and delivered double digit savings across the portfolio.
✓ Published case studyA global industrial services group took a $9.3M Workday renewal quote to $7.3M.
✓ Published case studyLuxury DigMedia cut Google Cloud spend 22 percent, with competitive benchmarking resetting the pricing floor.
✓ Published case studyA European insurance group saved about 30 percent by re scoping its OpenAI Enterprise engagement.
The core question is whether your advisor has a commercial relationship with the vendors you govern. A neutral comparison:
| Question | Independent advisor (Redress) | Big Four consultancy | Reseller or vendor partner | In house team |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Independence | Zero vendor affiliations, no reseller agreements, no referral fees | Advisory sits alongside implementation practices and publisher alliance programs | Commercial partner of the vendor, paid through margin or partner programs | Fully yours |
| Conflicts of interest | None from vendor revenue; paid only by the client | Implementation and alliance revenue on the same products can pull against a hard position | Earns more when you buy more | None, though bandwidth is limited |
| Vendor specific experience | Led by former vendor insiders; 11 vendor practices | Broad coverage; depth varies by team and engagement | Deep product knowledge, seen from the selling side | Deep on your own estate; sees each vendor event once every few years |
| Market view for vendor pricing | Benchmarks from comparable closed deals across 500+ enterprise clients | Varies by practice | Sees pricing from the vendor side | Your own history and last quote |
| How fees work | Fixed fee agreed up front, or 25 percent of savings on negotiation work; never hourly | Advisory fees, often alongside implementation work | Often no separate fee; paid through the transaction | Salary and opportunity cost |
The buyer's guide to choosing an advisor lists the conflict questions to ask any firm, and procurement platform versus advisory covers when software alone is enough.
Building the program, from leverage map to playbooks, runs on a fixed fee scoped to the portfolio and agreed up front.
Deal support on a specific negotiation can run on a success fee of 25 percent of what we save you, so you keep 75 percent and pay nothing if we save nothing. We never bill by the hour. Standing coverage is available through Vendor Shield.
It delivers capability that outlasts the engagement: a renewal calendar you own, benchmark libraries, negotiation playbooks per vendor, and scorecards tied to commercial consequences. On the transactions that matter, it also delivers deal support through signature.
Consequences make it effective: scorecards that feed renewal strategy, obligations monitored against the contract, escalations connected to commercial levers, and reviews run on your agenda with your data.
Directly. The governance record of performance, obligations and credits owed becomes negotiating currency at every renewal, and the renewal calendar decides where governance attention goes.
No, we build and arm it, and your team runs the relationships. We supply the governance model, scorecards, playbooks and market data, and the practice stands behind your team on the events that matter.
Yes. Any transaction can move into full negotiation support with baselines, benchmarks and written proposal assessments through signature.
Through triage and benchmarking. Benchmarks flag which renewals carry a material gap to market, those get full attention, and the rest renew deliberately; the Vendor Benchmark Program runs this continuously.
Building the governance model, calendar and playbooks runs on a fixed fee agreed up front. Deal support on a specific negotiation can run on a success fee of 25 percent of what we save you. We never bill by the hour.
Yes: zero vendor affiliations, no reseller agreements and no referral fees across all 11 vendor practices. Our advice on which vendor to keep, consolidate or replace carries no commercial interest of our own.
Baselines, benchmarks, and execution from the practice behind 500+ enterprise clients.
One letter a month. Negotiation moves, audit signals, and price book shifts.