Here is the idea this whole article turns on: you can centralise the sourcing route without restricting access to the venue market. Consolidation and choice are usually framed as opposites. For events, they needn't be.
Does consolidating event suppliers mean using fewer venues?
Why consolidation gets resisted
When teams hear 'consolidation', they often hear 'you'll be forced to use suppliers you don't like'. If a consolidation programme is designed badly — too narrow, too rigid, imposed without consultation — that fear is justified, and the result is maverick spend.
Consolidate the base, not the choice
Good supplier consolidation reduces the total number of suppliers the organisation contracts with — but keeps genuine choice within each category. Teams still choose their caterer, venue or agency; they simply choose from a curated, competitively-sourced network rather than the entire open market.
Four design principles
- Offer choice within categories — more than one option per need, so teams still decide.
- Keep an exception route — a clear, fast path for genuinely bespoke requirements.
- Involve teams in selection — those who run events help choose the network, building ownership.
- Make it the easy option — faster and better-priced than going it alone, so adoption is natural.
Consolidation should feel like an upgrade — a curated shortlist with agreed rates — not a confiscation of choice.
The reward for getting it right
Handled this way, consolidation delivers the commercial benefits — leverage, consistency, visibility — without the cultural cost. It becomes the foundation for a preferred supplier programme teams actively want to use, and it sidesteps the resistance that sinks so many procurement initiatives.