Category: Ethics

Communication, Ethics, Leadership, Procurement, Transformation

Procurement and Public Trust: Transparency, Communication, and Community Impact

By Lourdes Coss, MPA, NIGP-CPP, CPPO

Public procurement is more than a system of rules, contracts, and transactions. It is a mechanism through which government agencies serve their communities, uphold public values, and build trust.

And trust—once lost—is difficult to regain.

As stewards of public resources, procurement professionals must understand that every action, every document, and every decision contributes to a bigger story: how the public perceives the integrity and value of government.

Why Trust Matters

Public procurement decisions affect schools, infrastructure, public health, housing, and more. Citizens want to know that:

  • Public dollars are being used wisely.
  • The process is fair and open.
  • Local needs are being prioritized.
  • Agencies are acting in the public’s best interest.

When procurement lacks transparency or communicates poorly, even legally compliant decisions can appear suspicious. Perception becomes reality.

Procurement’s Role in Shaping Public Confidence

Here are three powerful ways procurement contributes to—or erodes—public trust:

1. Transparency in Process and Purpose

Openness isn’t just about posting bid notices. It’s about making processes understandable, timelines clear, and decisions traceable.

Best practices:

  • Use plain language in public communications.
  • Explain evaluation criteria and how decisions are made.
  • Make contract award data easily accessible.

2. Effective Communication

Technical correctness is not enough. Procurement must communicate with elected officials, internal stakeholders, vendors, and the public in a way that builds clarity and confidence.

Best practices:

  • Prepare talking points for controversial decisions.
  • Create briefing memos that explain procurement strategy in non-technical terms.
  • Respond to public inquiries respectfully and thoroughly.

3. Community Impact

Procurement can be a powerful tool for social and economic impact—supporting local businesses, advancing equity, and ensuring the public gets lasting value.

Best practices:

  • Track and publish spending with local, minority-owned, or small businesses.
  • Engage communities early in projects that affect them.
  • Align procurement strategies with community development goals.

Trust Is Built Through Everyday Actions

It’s not just about big scandals or high-profile awards. Trust is built—or broken—through the small things: timely responses, clear documentation, respectful treatment of vendors, and consistency in how policies are applied.

The professionalism of your team reflects on the whole agency.

Final Reflection

In this season of gratitude and reflection, let’s remember that trust is procurement’s most valuable currency. It can’t be legislated or fast-tracked. It’s earned—day by day, contract by contract, conversation by conversation.

As public procurement professionals, we’re not just buying goods and services. We’re helping shape how our communities view government itself.

Let’s lead with transparency. Let’s communicate with integrity. And let’s never lose sight of the people we serve.

Communication, Ethics, Leadership, Procurement

Supplier Relationships Are a Strategic Asset: How to Build Them Without Compromising Fairness

By Lourdes Coss, MPA, NIGP-CPP, CPPO

In public procurement, there’s a long-standing tension between relationship-building and the duty to maintain fairness and competition. For years, procurement professionals were taught to maintain a wall between themselves and suppliers—no favorites, no influence, no informal discussions.

While the core principles of fairness and transparency must remain non-negotiable, it’s time to modernize how we view supplier relationships. When managed with integrity and clarity, supplier engagement is not a risk—it’s a strategic asset.

Why Relationships Matter in Public Procurement

Suppliers are not just vendors; they are partners in delivering public services. The success of a capital project, technology implementation, or public health initiative depends on more than contract terms—it depends on trust, communication, and collaboration.

Here’s why supplier relationships matter:

  • They improve outcomes. When vendors understand your goals, constraints, and success measures, they’re better equipped to meet them.
  • They foster innovation. Early engagement allows suppliers to share new ideas and technologies before procurement documents are finalized.
  • They reduce risk. Proactive relationship management helps resolve issues early, prevents miscommunication, and improves compliance.
  • They enhance market competitiveness. When new or small suppliers feel welcome and informed, they’re more likely to participate in future solicitations.

Balancing Access and Equity

Public procurement professionals often hesitate to engage suppliers out of fear of appearing biased. But fairness is not about avoiding contact—it’s about ensuring equal access to opportunities and information.

The key is to create transparent, structured engagement that gives all vendors a level playing field.

Here’s how to do that:

  • Host Supplier Outreach Events. Invite potential vendors to learn about your procurement pipeline and priorities. Ensure broad outreach—especially to underrepresented and small businesses.
  • Use Pre-Solicitation Conferences. These sessions allow for dialogue and clarification before a solicitation is finalized, giving suppliers insight and input without compromising fairness.
  • Publish Questions and Answers. Any questions submitted by vendors during the solicitation phase should be answered publicly and simultaneously.
  • Rotate One-on-One Meetings. If individual supplier meetings are appropriate, use a transparent scheduling process and keep records of what was discussed.

Building Trust with Incumbents and Newcomers

Strategic supplier relationships require maintaining credibility with both current contractors and potential bidders.

  • With incumbents: Hold regular performance reviews, invite feedback, and jointly discuss process improvements.
  • With prospective vendors: Make it easy to register, understand procurement policies, and navigate your systems. Avoid jargon and bureaucracy where possible.

Transparency + Access = Trust.

Key Practices for Strategic Supplier Engagement

Here are practical ways to foster relationships while protecting the integrity of your process:

  1. Create a Vendor Engagement Policy. Set expectations, outline protocols, and train staff on appropriate interactions.
  2. Recognize Supplier Contributions. Publicly acknowledging good performance builds goodwill and encourages others.
  3. Leverage Technology. Use e-procurement platforms to post forecasts, facilitate communication, and gather vendor feedback.
  4. Diversify Your Supplier Base. Track and analyze who you’re buying from—and who you’re not. Then take action to reduce barriers.

Final Thought

The public procurement profession is evolving. Integrity, fairness, and competition remain our foundation—but relationship management is now part of our strategic toolkit. The public sector cannot meet its goals without strong supplier partnerships.

Let’s move beyond the myth that distance ensures fairness. Instead, let’s practice ethical transparency and intentional engagement—because when supplier relationships are built with trust and purpose, everyone wins.

Ethics, Leadership, Procurement, Transformation

The Power of Saying No: Guarding Procurement Integrity in a Political Environment

By Lourdes Coss, MPA, NIGP-CPP, CPPO

Public procurement professionals operate at the intersection of governance, finance, and politics. As stewards of public resources, we are entrusted with decisions that must uphold fairness, transparency, and value to the taxpayer. Yet, in politically charged environments—especially during budget cycles or high-visibility projects—procurement integrity is often tested.

In these moments, saying “no” is not a sign of resistance or insubordination. It is a hallmark of professional courage and ethical leadership.

The Hidden Pressures in Public Procurement

Political pressure in procurement can show up in subtle and overt ways:

  • A request to “fast-track” a vendor before proper vetting.
  • Influence to award to a preferred supplier despite evaluation results.
  • Pushback when compliance delays a politically favorable project.

These pressures don’t always come from bad intentions. Elected officials, department heads, or community stakeholders may see procurement as a barrier rather than a strategic partner—especially when they’re under pressure to deliver results. That’s why it’s critical to create a culture and process that resists shortcuts and safeguards trust.

Why Saying “No” Matters

Saying “no” isn’t about confrontation—it’s about protecting the integrity of the process, the confidence of the public, and the credibility of your procurement office.

When we make decisions outside of procurement rules or succumb to influence, we:

  • Undermine public trust.
  • Risk audit findings and legal consequences.
  • Set damaging precedents that weaken the procurement function.

Conversely, when we say “no” with professionalism and clarity, we:

  • Reinforce the role of procurement as a neutral, value-driven function.
  • Build respect from stakeholders, even if they disagree.
  • Create a buffer that allows for better planning, strategy, and results.

How to Say “No” with Authority and Diplomacy

Here are strategies procurement professionals can use to protect integrity without burning bridges:

1. Ground It in Policy and Law

Rather than framing it as a personal stance, refer to the regulatory framework:

“In order to remain in compliance with our procurement code and ensure a fair process, we cannot proceed without a formal solicitation.”

2. Offer Alternatives

Saying “no” doesn’t mean shutting down the conversation. Reframe it:

“We can’t bypass this step, but here’s how we can expedite the timeline within the rules.”

3. Document and Communicate Early

Proactively document decisions and communicate procedures to leadership and stakeholders before issues arise. Clarity prevents misinterpretation later.

4. Build Trust Through Education

Help non-procurement stakeholders understand the “why” behind your decisions. Invite them to trainings or briefings. When people understand the guardrails, they’re less likely to push past them.

5. Support Each Other

Procurement professionals should work together to develop consistent responses, share stories, and offer backup when one team member faces pressure. There is strength in unity.

Creating a Culture That Supports Integrity

Procurement leaders can build resilience by:

  • Setting the tone that integrity is non-negotiable.
  • Celebrating employees who stand by ethical decisions.
  • Including procurement integrity scenarios in team training.
  • Establishing escalation procedures that protect staff from undue pressure.

Final Reflection

In a political environment, the temptation to bend the rules or look the other way can be strong. But procurement’s value lies not in saying “yes” to every request—it lies in providing a process that is defensible, equitable, and trusted.

Sometimes the most powerful thing a procurement professional can do for their agency is to say “no”—clearly, respectfully, and with the full weight of their expertise and ethics behind it.

Because when you protect the process, you protect the people it serves.

Ethics, Leadership, Procurement

Perspectives on Ethics

By Lourdes Coss, MPA, CPPO

Ethics is very important in every field, particularly in procurement. I want to first acknowledge the high ethical standards that my colleagues live by in the performance of their duties as public procurement officials. Many states and municipal level governments have adopted their own ethics laws. These laws generally prescribe principles that all public officials must abide by.  

Ethics has been talked about since ancient times. In Ancient Greece, Socrates was and still is considered the Father of Ethics. The ancient Greek term for ethics is êthos, which refers to character. Socrates’ teachings focused mostly on good and bad character traits; on virtues and vices. Plato also spoke about ethics from a virtue-based perspective. He argued that happiness and well-being are the highest goals of moral thought and conduct. Well-being is the result of a virtue-based pursuit of higher knowledge and fulfilling man’s social obligation to the common good.

Ethics shows up in your decision-making.  Twenty-five-hundred years after the eloquent work of the great thinkers, Larry Chonko, PhD, Professor of Business Ethics at the University of Texas, Arlington, defines four categories of ethical theory associated with decision making. Not everyone has the same ethics filters when making decisions.  

  • Deontology: People should adhere to their obligations and duties when making decisions.  
  • Utilitarianism: It is based on one’s ability to predict the consequences of an action. 
  • Rights: The highest priority is to protect the rights established by society or community.
  • Virtues: Focuses on a person’s character rather than any action that may deviate from normal behavior.

Three of these categories deal with the external aspect of ethics and what it looks like to be ethical. One of them focuses on the person and his/her core values.  Our interpretation of ethics is important because there are two different perspectives: policies and people. 

The first perspective deals with acceptable behavior based on external parameters, whether law or policy. These laws or policies help define how an action would be interpreted by others and what the potential consequences might be. Organizations have institutionalized ethics to establish principles that govern the behavior expected of its members.  This is often referred to as the code of ethics. In some jurisdictions, ethics is handled by the attorneys. I have nothing against that, someone needs to oversee that function. The point that I want to make is that ethics is not just about what’s legal or not. It is about what’s right and what’s wrong, which the law attempts to codify from the perspective of legality. 

A second perspective deals with a person’s character and the values that they live by. Integrity plays a big role in the result of an established ethics code.  Integrity is the person’s moral compass that guide their every action. It guides them in their decisions between what’s right and what’s wrong, even when no one is watching. Without minimizing the value of a code of ethics as guidance based on principles of good conduct and the behavior expected from each individual, people ultimately dictate the level of effectiveness of such ethics policies and laws.

A solid character makes trust possible. Character communicates consistency, potential, and respect. This is true for everyone, especially leaders.  It is hard, if not impossible, to trust a leader who does not consistently show inner strength. A person who is talented but has a weak character is like a time bomb that can cause significant damage. Having talent is not enough because people with weak character are not trustworthy. A person who does not have a strong inner compass cannot earn the respect of others. To achieve ethical behavior in an organization, personal inner values must align with ethics principles.  

In some instances, fraud, abuse, misconduct and overall unethical behavior still occur despite the ethics codes adopted by the organization. We have seen cases come up in the business world, government, media, entertainment, and even in the religious area. Most of the organizations where high profile scandals occurred had a code of ethics of some sort. Yet, those policies did not stop the wrongdoing that cost many their careers, reputation, and even freedom. Sure, anyone can make a mistake.  But these cases are not the result of a one-time mistake. They were the result of a series of  repeated actions… the wrong actions. The State of  Illinois took on an ethics reform initiative after corruption at the highest level planted doubt and distrust in government in general. Like Illinois, there have been other states and municipalities that have fallen victim of a scandal and tightened their ethics rules as a result.

These were actions by individuals who perhaps lost their way at some point in time and were overcome with the dark thoughts that they held deep inside.  What may lead a person to lose their way? Perhaps it is greed, the desire to get ahead at all cost, the thought that they will not get caught, or simply a weak moral compass. One can only speculate what the reasons might be.  I’m not here to judge their actions. I am sure there is more to the story than what’s been shared in each case. Why did they consider deceit as the best choice? Did they think they were choosing between right or wrong or did it not cross their mind? How did they justify the actions in their conscience? Were they not aware that the choice could harm others? These are questions that linger in my mind.  In each case, the fraudulent and deceitful actions were kept from public knowledge. I think that the reason why these actions were hidden is because those involved knew they were wrong. Perhaps their motives were stronger than their values, or maybe it is simply a character weakness.

Every profession has a code of ethics. As we have likely all observed first-hand or read about cases of unethical behavior, we know that a code of ethics may not prevent an individual from wrongdoing. But a formalized code provides guidance and a reminder of the type of behavior expected.

Ultimately, ethics is a personal matter. A person’s moral compass must point in the right direction for ethics policies to be truly effective. Having integrity, character, and being trustworthy is about the small things. Trust has a compounding effect. If a person can’t be trusted with small things, they definitely can’t be trusted with bigger things. A strong foundation can withstand the challenges of temptation. A reason why some people may struggle with issues of integrity is because they look outside themselves to explain character deficiencies. Integrity commits to character over personal gain. A person of high integrity will adhere to moral and ethical principles whether written or implicit.  

Most people want to do the right thing or at least, I choose to believe that. They want to live in peace and harmony with others. Then, what is the solution to minimize ethics breaches?  I don’t think that anyone has found the solution yet, but the reactionary approach is to enact more laws and implement tighter policies. These are all external solutions.  I don’t think that the problem is that people chose to conduct themselves unethical due to the lack of policies and laws.  No, I think it is a values issue. As such, it is an inside job.  

It starts with all of us and the behavior that we model for our children, particularly in their formative years. Perhaps we don’t think much of small infractions like cutting a line, forgetting to pay for an item and not rectifying the situation, watching a second movie while at the movie theater without paying for the second one, or telling the little white lies to get by or avoid an undesired task. It is about the little things. If the little things compound to build trust, they can also compound to build distrust. I believe that we should raise our awareness and take inventory of these small infractions. Even though these small infractions from a consequential perspective did not significantly harm anyone, we need to be intentional about taking action to keep these little wrongs from potentially having a negative effect in society.  I think that we are all responsible. Do I think there will no longer be a breach? No, I think that there will always be someone whose unchecked ambition will drive him/her to deceive others.  But any effort that we make will move our community in the direction for a better future and a make this a better place for future generations.

To conclude, people have different filters when it comes to ethics. There is an external perspective that focuses on the actions that we see and judge; and there is the internal factor that relates to our core values. Both perspectives are valid, and they complement each other. I don’t believe that you can have an effective ethics policy without people’s good moral compass. Ideally, external, prescribed behaviors and internal, personal values align to create a self-perpetuating ethical culture. Individual decisions and actions that consistently reflect institutionalized norms and personal value are the basis of integrity. Integrity fosters trust. And trust is the foundation of our relationships, society and government. 

I think a better way to look at ethics is by simply following the golden rule. “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” Ethics is really about the golden rule!