Policymaking in Public Procurement: The Challenge of Institutional Differences

• In Event: Poster Session: Political Economy

Abstract

Governments around the world struggle to purchase technologically complex products (ICT systems, military equipment, transport and energy infrastructure) within time and budget. Policy researchers combine knowledge from economics and political science to enable procurement policy to respond to a variety of interests and institutional requirements. However, most public procurement policy guidelines seem to be better suited for the procurement of standardized, mass-produced items rather than large and technologically complex product systems. Why are rules-based frameworks criticized- and sometimes even pushed to the side- in the procurement of the latter?
This paper examines four major projects undertaken by the UK government in recent years to identify the conflicts and challenges in procurement of technologically complex product systems like aircraft carriers, armoured vehicles, and high-speed trains. Content analysis and semantic analysis of documents published by the government departments involved (Ministry of Defence, Department for Transport), reports by the National Audit Office on the projects, and the transcripts of parliamentary select committee hearings reveal the existence of multiple and conflicting institutional logics. The interaction of different logics is the source of instability and conflict in procurement projects and may create isomorphic pressures for change (assimilation, homogenization) or motivate resistance to change among the different professional and organizational groups (institutions) involved.
From a policymaking perspective, the findings suggest rethinking procurement policy according to the complexity of products and services being procured in order to reconcile the existing conflicts. The paper thus contributes to the discussion in academia and policymaking circles on how to design procurement policy that can efficiently distinguish between public procurement projects, balancing between the two extremes of ‘one-size-fits-all’ and uniqueness bias. This research is also interesting from the perspective of comparative studies as it compares military and civilian procurement practices and bureaucracy.

Authors

• Oishee Kundu, University of Manchester

• Anthony John Rigby