Got something to say to this podcast? Send a voicemail, and you might hear yourself on the next episode!

Five evaluators read the same AI-generated summary before scoring a tender. By the time the panel meets, their scores are remarkably similar. Did five people independently reach the same decision, or did one AI interpretation shape five opinions?

In October 2026, Anthropic published a study of 50 professional analysts working with an AI agent that had been secretly given a randomly chosen preference. Across four analytical choices, the analysts followed the agent's preferred option 86% of the time, compared with around 50% if it had no influence. This episode looks at what that finding does and doesn't tell us, why a questionable assumption is harder to spot than a factual error, and what procurement's practice of individual scoring before consensus can teach any function using AI for important decisions.

In this episode:

• Why approving an AI recommendation isn't the same as deciding

• What the Anthropic study found, and its limits

• Why independent first views give an evaluation panel its value

• A hypothetical sourcing decision where a $120,000 price saving becomes around $44,000 in extra annual cost, before the one-off qualification cost and any resilience benefit

• What a 2026 study of trainee teachers suggests about forming your own view before seeing AI advice

• Why this isn't an argument against AI, and how to test when AI improves your decisions

View Before Review, for decisions that need judgement:

1. Before reading the AI's recommendation, record a short initial view: what you would choose, your main assumption, and what evidence would change your mind.

2. Ask the AI for its analysis, the assumptions behind its recommendation, and the strongest reasonable case for a different option.

3. Compare the positions. Which differences are facts you can check, and which are assumptions that need a decision-maker's judgement?

4. Record the final choice, why you made it, and how you will review the outcome.

The tender panel and manufacturer examples in this episode are hypothetical.

Sources

Anthropic, How AI agents shape experts' judgment calls (27 October 2026):

https://www.anthropic.com/research/agents-judgment-calls

Yan, D., Independent judgment before viewing generative AI recommendations reduces susceptibility to misleading advice: a randomized scenario-based experiment with preservice teachers, Frontiers in Psychology (28 September 2026):

https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/psychology/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2026.1936522/full

Procurement Services SA, Evaluation Process Guideline, version 1.1 (2023):

https://www.procurement.sa.gov.au/documents2/guidelines2/Evaluation-Process-Guideline.pdf

Episodes and resources: https://www.kaizina.com.au/podcast

Procurement at AI Speed is hosted by Zina Amir Moafi and produced by KaiZina.

General information only, not legal or financial advice.

Got something to say to this podcast? Send a voicemail, and you might hear yourself on the next episode!

Some of the AI in your business didn't arrive through a sourcing decision. It arrived through a renewal.

From 1 July 2026, Microsoft increased prices on several Microsoft 365 commercial plans, with existing customers moving to the new pricing at renewal, and the update included Copilot Chat enhancements. In January 2025, Google brought Gemini into its Workspace Business and Enterprise plans. Your incumbent supplier may still be the right choice.

But convenience isn't the same as a commercial assessment.

In this episode:

• How AI arrives inside contracts you already have, without a sourcing decision

• Capability overlap versus supplier dependency, including suppliers that may rely on the same underlying AI models

• Two things to get documented before you renew

• Why APRA's April 2026 letter makes this a regulatory concern for Australian banks, insurers and superannuation trustees

Before your next software renewal, get in writing:

1. Which AI features are included, which cost extra, and how usage affects what you pay.

2. What happens if the supplier changes the AI features, the price, or how your data is handled.

The insurer example in this episode is hypothetical.

Sources

Microsoft, Microsoft 365 packaging and pricing updates (February 2026):

https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/licensing/news/2026-M365-Packaging-Pricing-Updates

Google Workspace Updates, The best of Google AI, now included in Workspace Business and Enterprise plans (15 January 2025):

https://workspaceupdates.googleblog.com/2025/01/expanding-google-ai-to-more-of-google-workspace.html

APRA, Letter to Industry on Artificial Intelligence (AI) (30 April 2026):

https://apra.gov.au/news-and-publications/apra-letter-industry-artificial-intelligence-ai

Episodes and resources: https://www.kaizina.com.au/podcast

Procurement at AI Speed is hosted by Zina Amir Moafi and produced by KaiZina. General information only, not legal or financial advice.

Got something to say to this podcast? Send a voicemail, and you might hear yourself on the next episode!

Your leverage isn’t what your supplier saved. It’s what you could do instead.

AI is changing how suppliers deliver work, but that doesn’t automatically mean their productivity saving belongs to the buyer.

In Episode 4 of Procurement at AI Speed, I look at a more useful commercial question:

Is the price still right for the service we would buy today?

AT&T’s move to bring more routine legal work in-house with AI provides a useful example. Rather than simply negotiating a lower hourly rate, some of the work itself moved.

That changes the sourcing conversation.

In this episode, I explore three questions to bring into your next renewal:

1. Under the deal we signed, who keeps the efficiency gain?
2. Which parts of this service would we buy differently today?
3. When is our next real chance to reprice — and what needs to be ready by then?

The episode also looks at why longer-term contracts may need a price review when AI materially changes how the service is delivered — not as an automatic price cut, but as a reason to reopen the commercial discussion.

And there’s an important caution: a low price built on future AI productivity that hasn’t actually materialised may simply move the commercial problem into delivery.

The practical takeaway:

Don’t start by trying to prove how much AI saved the supplier.

Start with something you can actually test:

What would we buy differently today?

Procurement at AI Speed is a short-form series on what AI changes commercially for procurement — and where human judgement still matters.

Hosted by Zina. By KaiZina.

Explore KaiZina kaizina.com.au

Sources & further reading

Reuters — How AT&T is using AI to reduce its reliance on law firms, 8 October 2026.

Reuters — AI reshapes India’s IT services sector contracts as clients demand more for less, August 2026.