The Power of Competition: Lessons from Sport and Procurement

Author: Peter Walsh

Practice Lead, Organisational Integrity

The past couple of weeks of grand finals has reminded us why Australians love sport. From the AFL to the NRLW and NRL, the games have been a celebration of competition at its very best, with the very best rising to the top. The Lions and Broncos delivered incredible performances that made Queensland proud and showed what happens when skill, preparation and competitive spirit come together.

It is interesting how much those same principles apply outside the stadium. Competition brings out the best in teams, whether they are on the field or in the marketplace. It drives excellence, innovation and resilience. It also ensures that the best possible result is achieved on the day.

In procurement, that competitive tension is what keeps the process fair, transparent and value-for-money driven. It is the mechanism that ensures government and the community get the best outcomes for every public dollar spent.

When competition disappears: the risks of sole sourcing

In procurement, the equivalent of playing without an opponent is sole sourcing (sometimes referred to as direct sourcing). This is when a contract is awarded to a single supplier without open competition.

There are times when sole sourcing is entirely appropriate, such as:

• Low-value procurements where the administrative cost of a full process outweighs the benefit
• Where only one supplier can reasonably deliver the required product or service
• Where the engagement is made under a pre-established panel or arrangement that has already been competitively established

However, outside these circumstances, bypassing competitive processes can carry serious risks, including:

• Reduced confidence that value for money has been achieved
• Limited access to innovative ideas or proprietary solutions
• The potential engagement of suppliers who may not be the most capable or cost-effective
• Increased exposure to conflicts of interest risks or perceptions of favouritism
• Reputational and audit risks if the process cannot withstand scrutiny

Procurement shortcuts are often taken under pressure to meet program or budget deadlines, but they rarely save time in the long run. Once an audit, media inquiry or supplier complaint lands, the time spent justifying decisions can far exceed the time that would have been required for a proper approach to market.

Planning for probity and performance

The good news is that these risks can be managed. The key is to plan procurement activities early, allow realistic timeframes for market engagement, and seek probity advice during the planning, approach to market, and during the evaluation process.

At Centium, we have seen the difference that good planning and governance make. We work with agencies across Australia to strengthen procurement integrity, improve transparency and help ensure that public confidence in government spending is maintained.

Our recent appointment to the Queensland Government Professional Services Panel reflects our commitment to supporting Queensland agencies with local expertise and national experience. Our qualified Probity Advisors and Auditors can provide independent oversight to help ensure your procurement process stands up to any level of scrutiny. If your agency needs experienced support to oversee procurement processes or provide probity advice, Centium’s Queensland team is ready to assist.