Procurement of Packaging Materials in the Vaccine Industry: More Planning Than Procurement

During my four years in materials planning and procurement for packaging materials in the vaccine industry, one realization stood out very early — the role was far more planning-intensive than traditional procurement.

On paper, procurement appears to be about raising purchase orders and negotiating with suppliers. In reality, especially in a highly regulated industry like vaccines, procurement becomes an extension of production planning, inventory management, supplier capacity planning, and stakeholder coordination.

As a Procurement Executive, my responsibility started much before issuing a Purchase Order.

The process began with receiving a three-month rolling filling plan from the Sales & Operations Planning (S&OP) team. This plan included the projected production schedule for multiple vaccine SKUs across filling plants.

The next step was to map each product with its corresponding packaging materials such as:

• Glass vials

• Rubber stoppers

• Ampoules

• Diluent bottles

• Labels

• Cartons

• Inserts

Based on the product mix and batch sizes, we converted the production plan into a detailed Material Requirement Plan (MRP) for the upcoming months.

The planning horizon itself required careful synchronization:

• Materials with a 45-day lead time were planned for M1 and M2 during M0

• Materials with a 90-day lead time were planned for M3 during M0 itself

This meant that procurement decisions were effectively dependent on forecast accuracy, production stability, supplier reliability, and inventory visibility.

In many situations, stakeholder coordination became more critical than procurement execution.

For example:

• Packaging material consumed at subcontracting filling plants was often not directly visible in the central inventory system

• Stocks transferred to substores were sometimes unavailable in real-time inventory reports

• Production plan changes required immediate remapping of packaging material demand

• Any mismatch between production scheduling and packaging material availability could directly impact vaccine dispatch timelines

Below is a simplified representation of how planning was typically structured:

FG Product

Filling Plant

Material Required

Min RL

Max RL

Subcontracting Plant

Current Stock

Filling Plan (June)

Filling Plan (July)

Lead Time

Supplier Status

Key Risk

Action Taken

Vaccine A

P2

10ml Glass Vials

60

90

-

52

20

24

45 Days

On Track

Capacity Constraint

Blanket PO Released

Vaccine B

P1

Rubber Stoppers

40

70

P5

28

18

22

45 Days

Delayed

QA Rejection Risk

Alternate Vendor Activated

Vaccine C

P3

Printed Cartons

100

160

-

82

40

35

30 Days

On Track

Artwork Revision

Revised Forecast Shared

Vaccine D

P4

Ampoules

50

80

P2

20

16

24

90 Days

Critical

Import Delay

Internal STO Planned

Vaccine E

P2

Labels

75

120

-

64

32

28

20 Days

Stable

Demand Volatility

Safety Stock Increased

Once the plan was finalized, it went through approvals from:

• Team Leads

• Department Heads

• S&OP stakeholders

Post approval, we validated:

• Open Purchase Orders

• Current inventory

• In-transit stock

• Reorder levels

• Pending Purchase Requisitions (PRs)

For high-volume and fast-moving SKUs, we often created blanket Purchase Orders aligned with annual demand projections received from the S&OP team. This reduced procurement cycle time and helped suppliers reserve production capacity in advance.

The Purchase Orders then moved through multiple release stages involving:

• Audit teams

• Team Leads

• HOD approvals

Only after these approvals were POs released to suppliers.

However, supplier management truly began after PO release.

We regularly conducted supplier alignment calls to discuss:

• Production schedules

• Dispatch planning

• Capacity bottlenecks

• Batch prioritization

• Upcoming demand spikes

Whenever a supplier was unable to meet the committed schedule, we generally explored two contingency options:

1. Procurement from another approved vendor

2. Internal stock transfer between plants

Both options came with operational complexities.

Internal stock transfers required alignment between:

• Product stakeholders

• Warehouse teams

• S&OP teams

• Logistics teams

In certain cases, stock transfer from SEZ units to EOU units was restricted due to EXIM compliance limitations.

Alternate sourcing also had its own challenges.

Some stakeholders strongly preferred specific vial vendors because of historical quality performance and process familiarity. Even when alternate vendors were technically approved, operational teams were sometimes hesitant due to previous rejection experiences.

In situations where:

• Alternate vendors were unavailable

• Stock transfer was not feasible

• Demand was business critical

…the only remaining solution was supplier capacity negotiation.

Since we maintained long-term strategic relationships with several packaging vendors and committed significant annual business volumes, we were often able to negotiate additional production allocation during critical demand periods.

Before dispatch, suppliers typically shared pre-dispatch documentation such as:

• Delivery Challans

• Test Certificates / COA (Certificate of Analysis)

• E-way Bills

• Packing Lists

• Invoice Copies

• Batch Traceability Documents

After verification, we coordinated dispatch confirmation and informed warehouse teams to prepare for Goods Receipt (GR) processing and inward inspection.

Looking back, the role taught me that procurement in the vaccine industry is not merely transactional purchasing. It is a continuous balancing act between:

• Forecast accuracy

• Inventory optimization

• Supplier capacity

• Regulatory compliance

• Production continuity

• Cross-functional stakeholder management

The real value was not in placing Purchase Orders, but in ensuring that a single missing packaging component never became the reason a vaccine batch could not be filled or dispatched.