ExplainedOther/ 18 August 2026/ 2 min read
Large UK charities (annual income above £1m) operate procurement under explicit Charity Commission scrutiny: trustees have personal duty to ensure spend is in charity's interest, conflicts of interest are disclosed, and procurement processes are documented. The trustee-board signoff layer adds 30-90 days to vendor selection cycles.
Large UK charities (annual income above £1m, and particularly those above £10m) operate procurement under explicit Charity Commission scrutiny. The Commission expects trustees to oversee material spend, declare conflicts of interest, document decision-making, and act in the charity's best interest. Procurement processes are formal as a result.
Trustees have personal duty under the Charities Act 2011. They cannot delegate the duty even when they delegate the day-to-day execution to the chief executive. The practical effect: substantive commitments require board approval, not just executive signoff, and the board is genuinely scrutinising rather than rubber-stamping.
The board's typical signoff threshold for vendor contracts varies by charity. A charity with £10m income might delegate up to £25k annually to the chief executive; above that, board approval is required. A larger charity might set the threshold at £100k or £250k. Vendors should ask early what the threshold is for the specific charity they are selling into.
UK charity trustee boards typically meet quarterly. A few large charities meet more often (some monthly during active periods, others bi-monthly). The board agenda is set 2 to 4 weeks before the meeting; vendor decisions need to be in the agenda paper at that point.
The practical implication for vendors: the board cycle, not the charity's fiscal cycle, sets the floor on procurement timing. Missing a board meeting slips the deal a quarter (or more if the next board has a full agenda already). Vendors should track each target charity's board schedule and plan commercial close to land in the agenda window.
Boards reading a vendor procurement paper scrutinise against a recognisable set of questions:
Vendors should equip the executive with a board paper that answers these questions directly. Vendors who provide marketing material and expect the executive to translate it into a board paper slow the cycle.
Charity Commission guidance expects trustees to document procurement decisions in board minutes: the decision made, the reasoning, the conflicts considered, the alternatives examined. Vendors should expect this documentation to happen and should provide written material that can be referenced in the minutes.
Signal
AI tooling has begun to reshape how UK B2B sellers practise the methodologies they have been trained on. Specific patterns: AI-augmented MEDDPICC scoring against deal data, AI-driven discovery question suggestions, AI-summarised call analysis against methodology checkpoints, AI-generated business cases and value framing. The methodologies themselves are largely unchanged; the practice of them is being rebuilt around AI augmentation.
Explained
There is no universally best sales methodology. The right choice depends on segment, deal size, cycle length, buyer sophistication, team experience, and existing infrastructure. A practitioner walkthrough of the choice criteria, with honest assessment of where each major methodology fits.
Explained
GAP Selling (Keenan, 2018) is a problem-centric sales methodology that emphasises deep discovery of the gap between the buyer's current state and desired future state. The methodology pushes hard against feature-led pitching: the seller must understand the buyer's situation more thoroughly than competing methodologies typically demand. Adopted by a meaningful share of UK B2B SaaS sales teams since 2020.
The auditor (most charities above £1m income are audited) will review procurement decisions during the annual audit. Vendors whose contracts are referenced in audit findings (positively or negatively) become a matter of board attention.