At Bridge Coffee Roasters, we have been supplied coffee to UK businesses for over 40 years. In that time, we’ve worked with universities, contract caterers, workplaces, and hospitality operators, often through formal procurement processes and established frameworks.
With that experience, we have spent a good amount of time responding to tenders and in conversations with procurement teams, whilst also spending time on site tasting coffee, testing machines, and working with the teams who actually serve drinks to customers and students every day. That combination gives us a clear view of where coffee procurement works well, and where it can unintentionally fall short.
In this article, we’re going to outline some of the areas in which procurement teams often focus on the wrong metrics when buying coffee, and how those decisions can unintentionally impact quality, operations, and long-term profitability.
Treating Coffee as a Commodity
In procurement, coffee can often be viewed as a swappable input. If one supplier can meet the same specification at a lower price, the assumption is that the end result will be broadly the same and the more affordable option is the better choice.
In reality, coffee is one of the most visible and frequently judged elements of a catering offer. Customers actively decide whether to buy it, whether to buy it again, and whether it reflects positively on the organisation providing it.
When coffee is treated purely as a commodity, those behavioural factors are ignored. The focus shifts to inputs rather than outcomes, and quality becomes secondary to cost.
A Hesitation to Move Away From Big Brands
In many complex organisations, there is often a strong reluctance to move away from established high-street coffee brands. These brands feel safe. They are recognisable, easy to justify internally, and have often been in place for many years.
The assumption is that brand recognition is what drives sales.
What we are increasingly seeing, is that this is no longer the case. Younger demographics are far more engaged by independent and specialty coffee brands, especially those with strong sustainability and ethical credentials. Corporate ownership, supply chain transparency, and environmental impact matter far more than they once did.
We work with a large number of Universities, and have consistently found that Universities who decide to move away from global brands find that students respond positively, not negatively. Engagement increases because the coffee feels more authentic, more considered, and more aligned with their values.
Focusing Primarily on Cost
Catering teams are often working within tight budgets, and coffee is frequently treated as a controllable cost rather than a strategic category. As a result, many tenders and procurement frameworks place heavy emphasis on price, with cost regularly accounting for 50% or more of the overall weighting.
This makes price the easiest way to differentiate between suppliers, but it also shapes the outcome before the process has really begun.
Cost will always be a factor in procurement, and rightly so. The problem arises when cost becomes the dominant, or even overriding, decision-making criteria. When that happens, short-term savings are prioritised over long-term performance, leading to compromises in quality, service, and commercial return.
Cost Per Cup Over Commercial Performance
One of the most common mistakes is focusing on cost per cup rather than total performance. A cheaper cup of coffee is meaningless if fewer cups are sold.
Taste, speed, and consistency all directly influence volume. A coffee that costs slightly more but is of greater quality, more traceable, and carries certifications will likely sell significantly more units, therefore outperforming a cheaper alternative in terms of revenue and profit.
Compromised Coffee Quality
When price pressure increases, bean quality is often the first casualty. Dark, commodity-grade coffees are chosen because they are cheaper and easier to standardise, not because customers enjoy them.
Over time, this leads to indifference. Customers stop buying coffee on site or seek alternatives elsewhere, quietly eroding sales.
Under-Specified Coffee Machines
Cost-driven decisions also affect equipment choice. Machines are selected because they meet a price point, not because they are capable of handling real demand.
The impact is usually felt at peak times: slower service, longer queues, inconsistent drinks, and increased breakdowns. What looked like a saving upfront becomes a bottleneck that limits revenue.
Reduced Service and Support
Lower-cost solutions often come with minimal service provision. Proactive maintenance is reduced, response times are longer, and downtime becomes more frequent. The hidden cost of lost sales during breakdowns is rarely accounted for in the original procurement decision.
A simple truth is that offering a high quality level of service costs time and effort, and fundamentally price driven contracts will be severely lacking in this department.
Utilising Overly Strict Tenders and Procurement Frameworks
Formal tenders and procurement frameworks exist for good reasons. They ensure fairness, transparency, and governance. However, when applied rigidly to coffee, they can create unintended consequences.
A Process Driven by Compliance, Not Expertise
Procurement teams are rarely coffee specialists, yet tender documents require detailed specifications to be set upfront. Without early supplier input, those specifications are often based on assumptions rather than insight.
Suppliers are asked whether they can meet the brief, rather than being invited to help improve it. Innovation is limited, and organisations often end up buying the same solutions repeatedly.
No Consultation-Led Process
Procurement frameworks, when overly strict, can even prevent potential suppliers from engaging meaningfully with on-site teams. In many cases, we are not allowed to speak directly with catering managers or baristas, and engagement is delayed until late-stage tastings.
By that point, decisions are largely fixed. Suppliers lack the context needed to fully understand operational challenges, customer expectations, or opportunities for improvement.
Disconnect From On-the-Ground Reality
When suppliers cannot work closely with the teams actually running the coffee operation, critical information is missed. Peak-time pressures, queue formation, staff frustrations, and customer feedback rarely make it into a spreadsheet.
Coffee decisions made without this context tend to be cautious and generic, rather than tailored and effective.
A Race to the Bottom on Price
As tenders become increasingly price-driven, suppliers who invest heavily in sourcing, sustainability, training, and service are gradually excluded. There is a limit to how far quality-focused businesses can reduce pricing.
What remains is a small pool of suppliers competing aggressively on cost, often at the expense of quality and long-term performance.
How to Get the Best Outcomes
The most successful coffee procurement processes strike a balance. Cost is considered, but it is not treated in isolation. They allow room for consultation, encourage suppliers to share expertise, and assess long-term ROI rather than just headline pricing.
In order to get a result that benefits both Brand and Bottom Line, a coffee procurement or tender process should be a collaborative effort. They should ask how coffee quality, speed of service, reliability, and sustainability will impact sales, not just how much the beans cost, and they should require proof of their claims in the form of case studies and sales data from existing customers.
When coffee is treated as a commercial opportunity rather than a compliance exercise, the results are markedly better.
How the University of Warwick Did It
The University of Warwick provides a strong example of this approach in action.
Historically aligned with a major high-street brand, Warwick was understandably cautious about change. However, when they went to tender, they chose not to be driven purely by price.
Instead, they embraced a consultation-led process. We carried out tastings, demonstrated equipment, and worked closely with stakeholders to understand both operational needs and student expectations.
Warwick ultimately moved away from a global brand and selected a triple-certified coffee that is Fairtrade, Organic, and Rainforest Alliance certified. Students have embraced the change, and the university has seen increased engagement and higher coffee sales as a result.
By prioritising long-term value over short-term cost, Warwick achieved exactly what procurement is meant to deliver: better outcomes for the organisation as a whole.
