CIPS L5M6 Category Management Exam Practice Test

In construction, indirect costs include items like workshops, safety facilities, and design engineers. These are necessary for operations but not directly tied to a single output.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.90 – Indirect cost examples by industry]

A Direct Category refers to spend on items that are directly linked to the production of goods or delivery of services. For manufacturers, this includes raw materials, components, and items required in high volumes that form part of the finished product. These categories are critical because supply disruptions or price volatility can have significant impacts on production and customer delivery. Conversely, Indirect Categories refer to goods and services not directly linked to production, such as cleaning services, IT systems, or office supplies. Effective management of direct categories often involves long-term supplier relationships, strategic sourcing, and risk management. Since they directly affect business continuity, procurement strategies must prioritise availability, cost stability, and quality. Category managers often use Kraljic’s Matrix and forecasting tools to design robust sourcing strategies for direct categories.

Output image

Supplier 1 → Star Category + Profitability Concern

Supplier 1 holds a large market share in a growing market, which places it in the Star category of the BCG Matrix. Stars are typically leaders in expanding markets and require continuous investment to maintain their dominance. The concern here is not competitive weakness but profitability. Although revenue potential is strong, Supplier 1’s costs have increased by 36% due to rising raw material prices. This erodes margins and threatens profitability despite growth. Stars often generate high cash inflows, but if costs spiral out of control, their ability to sustain investment weakens. Profitability management (e.g., through cost reduction, supplier negotiations, or efficiency gains) is critical to ensuring Supplier 1 continues its growth trajectory and avoids slipping into the “Cash Cow” or “Dog” quadrants in the future.

(Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.117 – BCG Matrix application)

Supplier 2 → Question Mark Category + Gearing Concern

Supplier 2 operates in a fast-growing market but has only a small share, making it a Question Mark in the BCG Matrix. Question Marks are high-risk: they may grow into Stars or fail and become Dogs, depending on how they perform and whether investment supports expansion. The major financial concern here is gearing—Supplier 2 has taken out significant loans and a large mortgage, meaning it is heavily leveraged. High gearing increases financial risk, as debt repayments must be met regardless of market conditions. In rapidly growing markets, high gearing can restrict reinvestment and leave firms vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations or downturns. For Trydo, this means Supplier 2 could face difficulties sustaining its growth, posing supply chain risk. Monitoring debt levels and financial stability is essential before committing to long-term contracts.

(Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, pp.117–118 – Question Marks and financial analysis)

Supplier 3 → Cash Cow Category + Liquidity Concern

Supplier 3 operates in a small, stable market but commands a strong market share. This places it firmly as a Cash Cow—a business that generates consistent revenue without requiring major investment. Cash Cows fund other areas of a portfolio but face limited growth prospects. The concern here is liquidity. An Acid Test reveals that Supplier 3’s current liabilities are four times greater than its assets, suggesting it lacks sufficient short-term liquidity to meet obligations. This imbalance can result in cash flow problems, even if long-term profitability remains sound. For Trydo, the risk is that Supplier 3 may fail to pay debts or manage day-to-day operations, creating supply disruption. Procurement managers must ensure financial health checks are conducted regularly and consider diversification strategies if reliance on Supplier 3 is high.

(Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.117 – Cash Cows and liquidity issues)

Supplier 4 → Dog Category + Efficiency Concern

Supplier 4 operates in a shrinking market and already holds a low market share, placing it in the Dog category of the BCG Matrix. Dogs are generally unattractive, offering little growth and limited returns. The key concern here is efficiency. Supplier 4 is struggling with capital management issues, such as poor stock turnover and prolonged debtor days. These inefficiencies damage competitiveness and further weaken financial stability. For Trydo, relying on Supplier 4 poses significant risk because inefficiency can lead to delays, reduced quality, and increased total cost of ownership. Unless Supplier 4 improves performance, it may eventually exit the market, leaving Trydo vulnerable. In procurement terms, buyers should avoid long-term commitments with such suppliers and instead focus on exit strategies or alternatives.

(Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, pp.117–118 – Dogs and efficiency management)

Kearney’s 7 Step Strategic Sourcing Model provides a structured, step-by-step approach for managing sourcing activities. The steps include profiling the category, assessing the supply market, developing sourcing strategies, and implementing them. This model ensures that sourcing is systematic, evidence-based, and aligned with strategic objectives. Unlike tools such as the Kraljic Matrix, which classifies items by risk and impact, Kearney’s model provides an end-to-end process framework for sourcing execution. Similarly, Pareto and Porter’s 5 Forces are useful analytical tools but not procedural sourcing frameworks. For category managers, the Kearney Model is valuable because it emphasises cross-functional collaboration, data-driven decision-making, and continuous improvement. Its structured approach reduces risks of ad-hoc decision-making and ensures alignment with organisational goals. This is why it is a central feature of L5M6 study material and often tested in exams.

A Category Board [sometimes called a Category Council or Committee] is a cross-functional group of stakeholders responsible for overseeing the development and implementation of a category strategy. It brings together representatives from procurement, finance, operations, and other relevant departments to ensure that sourcing decisions align with overall business objectives.

While boards may also review spending or risk, their main role is strategic governance. They provide input into category planning, approve strategies, resolve conflicts, and ensure stakeholder buy-in. This collaboration is essential, as category management is a cross-functional discipline that cannot succeed if procurement operates in isolation.

Options A and B are too narrow, while option D is unrealistic—no body can “mitigate all risks.” Instead, the board ensures risks are recognised and addressed within the strategy.

The study guide highlights the importance of such structures in embedding category management within an organisation’s governance framework.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, pp.614 – Category Boards and governance in category management]

The correct answer is Maturity. In the industry lifecycle model, markets evolve through stages: birth, growth, maturity, and decline. Tulipa Ltd initially saw high growth, reflecting the growth stage, where demand is rising, and market share is expanding. However, for the past two years, share has plateaued, suggesting the market has stabilised, which is a key characteristic of the maturity stage.

At maturity, the market is often saturated, with limited opportunities for expansion. Competition becomes more intense, innovation slows, and firms compete largely on efficiency, branding, or incremental improvements. Unlike decline, the market is still viable and profitable, but growth rates are flat.

The study guide also introduces an intermediate stage called shakeout, occurring between growth and maturity, where weaker competitors exit. Tulipa’s situation has passed growth but has not yet entered decline, making maturity the correct classification.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.175 – Industry Lifecycle and Procurement Strategy]

Cost-out is the most effective approach for reducing supplier costs while increasing value. It involves redesigning products or services collaboratively with suppliers to eliminate costs before they occur. For example, altering product design to use fewer materials can reduce overall costs without compromising quality. This differs from price acceptance (simply accepting a supplier’s offer), price management (controlling or negotiating pricing), or cost-down (gradual cost reduction). Cost-out is proactive and strategic, focusing on long-term value creation rather than short-term savings. For category managers, adopting cost-out strategies requires close supplier collaboration, innovation, and joint investment in process improvements.

Survival of the fittest in supplier management means driving competition by focusing heavily on price reduction, with minimal emphasis on building long-term relationships. This approach treats suppliers as interchangeable, encouraging them to compete aggressively for contracts.

It can yield short-term cost savings but risks damaging supplier collaboration, innovation, and resilience. It is suitable for commodities or non-strategic items where price is the dominant factor.

Other approaches differ:

Trust-based or partnership models balance price with collaboration.

No-cost modelling focuses on process transparency.

Strategic alliances prioritise innovation and value creation.

Category Managers must carefully choose when to apply “survival of the fittest” as it may undermine long-term supplier stability if used indiscriminately.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.160 – Supplier relationship models]

Pareto Analysis identifies the “vital few” issues that cause the majority of problems, usually presented as the 80/20 rule. While it is useful for prioritisation, its limitation is that it only highlights the frequency of issues and not the root causes behind them. In James’s example, identifying that “website errors” are the top cause of complaints is useful, but it doesn’t explain why the errors occur. Therefore, further investigation such as root cause analysis or process mapping is required to implement corrective action. Another limitation is that Pareto analysis is based on quantitative data only, not qualitative, meaning it cannot capture customer perceptions or subjective insights. This reinforces the need to use Pareto in conjunction with other diagnostic tools for effective problem solving. In practice, category managers must use Pareto as a screening tool to highlight priorities and then follow with more detailed analysis to ensure improvements are sustainable.

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.

The correct score is 25, which is the highest possible risk score on a 1–5 scale. This reflects a major risk with both severity [5] and likelihood [5] rated as high. The risk assessment methodology multiplies these two factors [5 × 5 = 25] to produce a risk rating.

This scoring system enables supply chain managers to rank risks and prioritise mitigation strategies. A risk scored at 25 requires urgent attention, such as developing contingency plans, dual sourcing, increasing safety stock, or renegotiating terms with suppliers.

Lower scores such as 1, 5, or 10 indicate lower overall risk exposure, but in this case, the combination of long geographical distance, reliance on a low-cost country supplier, and criticality of the order elevates the risk to the maximum score.

Risk assessment tools like this are central to category management because they support proactive risk mitigation rather than reactive crisis management.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.56 – Risk assessment scoring and protocols]

A General Ledger [GL] is the central accounting record used by businesses to prepare financial reports. It categorises all financial transactions into cost codes, allowing managers to track expenditure, revenue, assets, and liabilities.

For category managers, the General Ledger provides visibility into spend categories. This information supports spend analysis and helps in mapping organisational costs against suppliers, categories, and business functions. It differs from line item detail by offering a higher-level financial view.

Other options are misleading:

Option A [tenders] relates to e-procurement platforms, not financial records.

Option C [catalogue] refers to item listings, not ledgers.

Option D [supplier lists] relates to approved supplier databases.

By using GL data, procurement can ensure alignment with finance, strengthening compliance, budgeting, and strategic sourcing decisions.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.135 – Use of General Ledger in procurement analysis]

Analytics data refers to data models and predictions, often generated through statistical methods or advanced software, that provide insights into future trends. Unlike historical data, which looks at past performance, or known data, which describes current realities, analytics projects what is likely to happen in the future. For example, predictive analytics can identify demand spikes based on past seasonal behaviour, consumer sentiment, or economic indicators. In category management, such predictive models are invaluable for anticipating supply shortages, managing risks, and planning procurement strategies. Analytics data allows procurement professionals to move from reactive decision-making to proactive and strategic management. The integration of analytics into forecasting also supports better negotiation with suppliers, as buyers can demonstrate awareness of future trends and cost drivers. In today’s fast-changing markets, reliance solely on historical data is insufficient—analytics data gives procurement a competitive edge.

SIC [Standard Industrial Classification] codes are numerical codes used to classify industries. For example, 1000 = mining, 1500 = construction. These codes help in categorising spend, benchmarking, and market analysis but are not intended for memorisation.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.82 – SIC codes]

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]

Buyer strength increases when order volumes are large, as this gives leverage in negotiations and can improve pricing and terms. The other options do not necessarily strengthen buyer power.

The correct stage is Market/commodity and options [including make vs buy assessment], which is Stage 2 of the CIPS Procurement and Supply Cycle. This stage focuses on analysing the external market, internal requirements, and identifying whether to make a product in-house or source it externally.

A Make vs Buy assessment helps determine whether the organisation has the capacity, skills, and resources to produce the item internally, or whether outsourcing would deliver greater value. Factors such as cost, risk, quality, lead time, and strategic alignment are evaluated.

Other stages differ:

High-level specification [Stage 1]: Focuses on defining what is needed, not sourcing decisions.

Develop strategy/plan [Stage 3]: Comes after options are analysed, where the sourcing path is chosen.

Market engagement [Stage 4]: Involves engaging suppliers, which cannot happen until the Make vs Buy decision is made.

This makes Stage 2 the most accurate point for such an assessment.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, pp.35–36 – Procurement Cycle, Make vs Buy analysis]

The United Nations Standard Products and Services Code (UNSPC) provides a universal taxonomy for classifying goods and services. Some organisations adopt UNSPC as a standard way of grouping categories for procurement, while others create their own frameworks tailored to business needs. Unlike tools such as the Kraljic Matrix, which is used to assess risk and value, UNSPC is a classification system designed for spend categorisation and reporting. Using standardised codes ensures better data consistency, benchmarking, and spend visibility across organisations, especially in global supply chains. By adopting UNSPC, procurement teams can reduce ambiguity in spend analysis and ensure categories are aligned with recognised frameworks.

In category management, forecasting is a critical tool for anticipating future requirements and managing supply markets. The three types of recognised forecasting are: demand forecasting (predicting organisational needs), supply forecasting (assessing availability and supplier capabilities), and price forecasting (estimating future price movements based on trends and market conditions). “Quantity forecasting” is not recognised as a distinct type, because quantity requirements are inherently part of demand forecasting. By separating demand, supply, and price forecasts, procurement professionals gain a holistic view of market conditions, ensuring they can secure the right goods at the right time and price. Effective forecasting also reduces risk by ensuring that category strategies account for volatility, seasonality, and inflation. Organisations that fail to forecast accurately may face supply shortages, overstocking, or missed opportunities for cost savings.

This is a bottleneck item. According to the Kraljic Matrix, bottleneck items are characterized by high supply risk and low profit impact, which makes them difficult to source. Holding contingency stock is a recommended strategy for such items.

Category Management delivers multiple benefits for organisations, including:

Fewer supplier contracts, achieved by consolidating spend and reducing fragmentation.

Improved supplier relations, as suppliers are engaged strategically rather than transactionally, enabling stronger collaboration.

Increased innovation, which arises when procurement works closely with suppliers to develop new solutions and efficiencies.

Other benefits highlighted by CIPS include better pricing, improved terms and conditions, stakeholder satisfaction, enhanced risk management, and improved spend visibility. The incorrect options—“less staff required” and “better use of IT systems”—may result indirectly from streamlined procurement, but they are not primary benefits recognised in the category management framework. The true value of category management lies in shifting procurement from a transactional function to a strategic enabler of value. By grouping spend into categories and applying tailored strategies, organisations achieve economies of scale, better market intelligence, and stronger alignment with business objectives.

Goodwill is found under Non-current assets in a balance sheet. Goodwill arises when one company acquires another for a value greater than its tangible assets, reflecting intangible benefits such as brand reputation, customer loyalty, patents, or strong supplier relationships.

For example, if a company is valued at £10 million based on tangible assets but is purchased for £15 million, the £5 million difference is recorded as goodwill. This asset remains on the balance sheet until impaired [e.g., if the acquired brand loses value].

It is not a current asset because it cannot be quickly liquidated within one year. Nor is it a liability [current or non-current] since it represents value, not debt.

For procurement and category managers, goodwill can signal a supplier’s market position, brand strength, and long-term stability. It highlights how intangible assets, though harder to measure, play a role in supplier evaluation and business acquisitions.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.183 – Financial terms and balance sheet analysis]

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.

A Bull Industry is one that is experiencing strong growth, with positive demand and market expansion expected in the future. In financial terms, “bull” markets are characterised by optimism, rising investment, and business confidence.

For ABC Ltd, operating in a high-growth IT sector, this categorisation is appropriate because demand is projected to increase. This means opportunities exist for innovation, supplier partnerships, and long-term strategic sourcing.

By contrast:

Bear industries represent declining markets, where firms face shrinking demand.

Dog and Cow industries are not recognised terms within category management; they are distractors in this question.

Identifying whether an industry is in a bull or bear phase helps Category Managers assess market risks, supplier relationships, and investment priorities.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.150 – Market classifications: bull vs bear industries]

The correct terminology is bargaining power of buyers, not "threat of buyers". Porter’s Five Forces are:

Threat of new entrants

Bargaining power of suppliers

Bargaining power of buyers

Threat of substitutes

Leverage items [low supply risk, high financial impact] are best suited for e-auctions. Buyers can use competitive bidding to drive down prices when multiple suppliers exist.

By contrast:

Bottleneck items [low value, high supply risk] are not suited as choice is limited.

Strategic items require partnership and collaboration, not price-only competition.

Non-critical items don’t justify the effort of auctions.

[Ref: CIPS L5M6 Study Guide, p.97 – Kraljic Portfolio Matrix]

In category management, grouping is most effective when based on similar usage characteristics. This means materials or services are categorised by how they are used within the organisation, rather than simply by spend or supplier. For example, in healthcare, personal protective equipment (PPE) forms one category, while surgical instruments or bedding may be separate categories. This approach ensures that category managers have a clear understanding of functional requirements, demand patterns, and value drivers. Grouping only by spend might overlook strategic importance, while grouping by supplier or geography can miss opportunities for cross-functional efficiencies. Usage-based categorisation allows for tailored procurement strategies that align with business objectives and ensure effective stakeholder engagement. It also enables organisations to identify synergies across business units and improve supplier management. By aligning categories to organisational needs rather than just financial or structural dimensions, procurement creates more value and achieves better alignment with corporate strategy.