Regional Category Manager - Indirect APAC
About this opportunity
规划和领导全球明确定义的子类别或一个国家/地区或所有类别或一个国家/地区的多个跨部门类别的类别的类别计划;制定子类别战略，作为更广泛的类别战略的一部分; 领导主动采购项目、规范定义和需求管理，以及管理子类别特定供应商绩效和创新活动。
Major Accountabilities~ 将全球部门类别战略转化为全球、部门、子类别战略，或将区域采购战略转化为国家战略和地方实施。 ~ 领导实施子类别的采购计划，并在参与目标设定过程后实现次类别储蓄目标。 ~ 提供有关关键供应商关系细分和确定的总体类别或子类别战略的投入，并领导业务规划活动，并确保这些项目按照目标及时配备和执行。 ~ 管理战略次级供应商关系，为子类别实施一致的关键绩效指标，确保及时解决任何供应商的绩效风险和问题，最终实现用户满意度。 ~ 可直接控制国家一级的采购，包括供应商的选择、时间和商业条件（可能因控制方式而异）。 ~ 收集来自部门、国家、网站、类别团队和业务合作伙伴的供应商信息和反馈，并为相关子类别提供采购平衡记分卡指标。 ~ 创建、申请、完成和审查子类别的主要合同，并确保为子类别领域明确传达谈判合同，并确保这些合同得到一贯应用[跨部门/制药支出 2500 万至 1 亿美元 NCH/SDZ/NVD/NIBR 花费 2000 万至 8000 万美元]。 ~ 管理责任领域的预算/资源分配。 ~ 管理直接报告的绩效和人才发展，促进间接报告（直接报告 5-10 或间接报告最多 30）的人才发展。 ~ 收到后 24 小时内报告与诺华产品相关的技术投诉/不良事件/特殊情况 ~ 营销样本的分发（适用）Key Performance Indicators规划和领导全球明确定义的子类别或一个国家/地区或所有类别或一个国家/地区的多个跨部门类别的类别的类别计划;制定子类别战略，作为更广泛的类别战略的一部分; 领导主动采购项目、规范定义和需求管理，以及管理子类别特定供应商绩效和创新活动。Work Experience~行业/业务接触~运营管理和执行~关键谈判~行业/业务接触~项目管理~职能广度~跨文化经历Skills~内部和外部客户需求分析和满意度研究~有效沟通~财务管理~资产管理~谈判Language英语
Job details
How this role compares
Computed from every other active Procurement role in our database, not just this employer's listings.
We currently track 39 comparable Manager Procurement roles across 10 biopharma companies.
Salary context
3 of 39 peers report a salary range (USD, annualized)
Peers share this role's job function and a matching or adjacent seniority level -- not necessarily the same therapeutic area or country.
Where these roles are based
Top locations among the 39 comparable roles
+ 5 more countries
Seniority mix
39 of 39 peers have a known seniority level
Therapeutic area mix
0 of 39 peers have a known therapeutic area; the rest are genuinely unlabeled, not hidden
No peers with a known therapeutic area yet.
Similar opportunities
The closest matches from our peer group, ranked by how similar they are, not how well you'd qualify for them -- treat this as market context, not a guaranteed shortlist; a weak match is labeled as one below.
How we calculate "similar"
No black box, no LLM guesswork: a deterministic score built from four normalized attributes. Here's this role's own peer group at different match levels, so you can see the mechanism, not just the result.
Every comparison starts from the same 100-point budget: 25 for working in the same function, 40 for the same therapeutic area, 20 for the same or adjacent seniority, 15 for the same country. A dimension we can't confirm on both sides contributes nothing, never a guess, never a free pass.
0 points, never a partial guess. A role we know almost nothing about beyond its function bottoms out at 25%; it never inflates to 100% just because there's little to compare against. Seniority uses a defined ladder (Associate → Manager → Associate Director → Senior → Principal → Director → Senior Director → Executive/VP) so "Director" and "Senior Director" count as adjacent, but "Director" and "Executive/VP" do not.