Centralized vs. decentralized purchasing: current trends in governmental procurement practices

Abstract

Today most public sector purchasing processes are in transition. In the face of growing uneasiness by elected officials, service delivery managers, and citizens about rule-driven processes, inefficient systems, and poor management of resources, purchasing professionals are being challenged to develop new dynamic, adaptable structures. In this article, the current state of decentralization is examined and the roles of purchasing professionals in the purchasing process are presented. Specifically, this research attempts to answer the following questions: What changes have governments implemented in policy making, organization structure, personnel recruitment and training, expenditure authorization levels, review and oversight as they decentralize purchasing authority? And, what are the projected trends that will impact the success or failure of the decentralization issues over the next decade? Administration, Florida Atlantic University. His teaching and research interests are in public budgeting, accounting, financial management and government procurement.

A field-level examination of the adoption of sustainable procurement in the social housing sector

“…Research from the private sector contexts finds leveraged volumes provide commercial savings averaging at 10-15%, with some sectors reporting 20-35% (Nollet and Beaulieu, 2003). Less tangible benefits are claimed in relation to process efficiencies (Trautmann, Bals and Hartmann, 2009) and knowledge sharing (McCue and Pitzer, 2000).…”

Purchasing Organization and Design: A Literature Review

“…A closer look at the literature reveals that two different definitions are frequently used to measure the degree of (de-)centralization. The first definition refers to the concentration of decision-making authority and measures the extent to which authority is aggregated in a single organizational unit (Pugh, Hickson, Hinings, Macdonald, Turner, and Lupton 1963;Price 1972: 43-57;Germain and Dröge 1998;McCue and Pitzer 2000). The position of the organizational unit(s) in the overall hierarchy of the organization is irrelevant in this context, wherefore highly centralized units may also be found on low hierarchical levels.…”

The Organization of Purchasing at German Universities: An Empirical Investigation

“…In addition, several studies explicitly addressed the organization of purchasing in public institutions. McCue and Pitzer (2000), for example, analyzed the degree of centralization of purchasing in municipalities in the United States and found out that the majority of institutions participating in the survey used a hybrid purchasing organization which combined centralized and decentralized structural elements. Further, the authors showed that no distinct tendency towards centralization or decentralization could be identified, which illustrates that purchasing organizations have to be adapted to changing conditions and requirements over time and that a single optimal organization that leads to an efficient purchasing process in every context does not exist.…”