Faculties, departments, research groups: the procurement risk of organizational silos in higher education

In brief: Universities are highly decentralized, and when faculties and departments procure independently, they can unintentionally breach the prohibition on splitting contracts - an infringement that stands even without intent to circumvent the rules. Complying requires aggregating the estimated value of similar procurements across the whole institution in real time, which fragmented Excel sheets and email chains cannot deliver. Fluenta One's centralized, API-first, microprocess-based architecture aggregates similar needs automatically, preserves each unit's own processes, and flags threshold breaches before they become infringements.

Few organizations are as decentralized as a university. Its faculties, institutes, departments, and research groups operate with a high degree of independence — one of the values of academic autonomy and a centuries-old foundation of how higher education works. That same independence, however, carries a procurement risk that most institutions underestimate.

The source of the risk is not intent, but structure.

The problem is simple: if individual units procure independently, unaware of one another, the institution can easily end up in a situation that public procurement rules explicitly prohibit — without anyone having meant any harm.

When even good intentions offer no protection

Suppose three departments, under three different projects, a few months apart, order the same type of laboratory equipment or IT service. Individually, each item stays below the national threshold, so at first glance it can be handled as a simple, fast purchase. Taken together, however, they would have required a public procurement procedure.

This is a breach of the prohibition on splitting contracts. According to the guidance of the Public Procurement Authority, establishing an infringement does not require that an intent to circumvent the rules be demonstrable. So even if no one meant to break any rule: if the value of procurements with the same or similar function is not aggregated, the infringement still stands.

This is exactly why decentralized procurement in higher education is a systemic risk, not an isolated error. Departmental autonomy and public procurement rules collide precisely where the left hand cannot see what the right hand is ordering.

The estimated value is only accurate once the full picture comes together

Complying with the prohibition on splitting contracts requires the institution to recognize procurements of a similar nature and aggregate their estimated value — well before any order is placed. But that requires visibility into the procurement needs of the entire institution, in real time and in one place.

This is exactly what's missing in the traditional way of working. If needs are scattered across Excel sheets, emails, and faculty inboxes, no one is in a position to notice in time that three units are ordering the same thing. The institution wants to follow the rule; it simply has no tool to do so.

Breaking down the data silos

Fluenta One answers this problem with centralized data management. Procurement needs flow into a shared data space, where the system aggregates items of the same or similar nature in real time and flags when a purchase in the making — together with the needs of other units — crosses the threshold. This way, the risk of splitting contracts can be caught before it ever becomes an infringement.

For this, the platform has to connect with the systems already in place. Fluenta One's API-first architecture makes this possible: it integrates with the student information system (HIR), and with financial and ERP systems, so duplicate data entry disappears and the institution gets a single, reliable picture of its own procurements. The data silos that create the risk dissolve.

The microprocess-based architecture also allows the different units to keep their own, distinct internal processes — the lab procures differently from the library — while the central framework rules (thresholds, aggregation obligations, mandatory approval points) apply to everyone uniformly and automatically.

Autonomy and compliance are not mutually exclusive

The real challenge of procurement in higher education is not a choice between departmental independence and legal compliance. The two can work together — but only if the institution can see how it operates. As long as needs are scattered across silos, compliance is left to chance. Once the picture comes together in one place, decentralized operations can be preserved while estimated values are aggregated accurately and the risk of splitting contracts becomes manageable.

For a publicly funded institution, where every procurement is a potential audit subject, this is the precondition for legal and financial security.

If you'd like to learn more about how Fluenta One supports procurement at higher education institutions, explore our higher education solutions. And if you'd like to see how the procurement of faculties and departments can be made transparent and auditable in a single system, book an informal conversation with one of our experts.

Sources:

Public Procurement Authority — guidance on applying the prohibition on splitting contracts