Risks throughout the purchasing process

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: recognise risks from needs definition through payment. The aim is to explain the criterion used and apply it to a workplace situation. We will start with the concept, move to the procedure and finish with a case to solve. Distinguish general purchasing controls from statutory public procurement. Latvian procurement law requires openness, competition, equal treatment and effective use of resources. Examples impose no identical procedure or threshold on every purchase.

Risks arise in specifications, selection, changes and payment. Checking only the scoring table misses other stages. Section 2 objectives and procedural requirements concern the material decision chain, not merely final formalities.

Apply the following rule: The law covers work-related information about breaches that may harm the public interest. It is not limited to the Directive’s listed EU-law fields. Purely personal grievances and knowingly false information are excluded; sections 2–3 also contain specific limits.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Map decisions and owners and assign controls. Check public-procurement coverage and internal or other private-purchase duties. Include exceptions and urgent orders. Before moving on, turn this procedure into a sequence you could explain to a colleague. Identify the first check, the action that depends on its outcome and the record that allows the decision to be reconstructed. Follow the sequence on screen and identify the point where an error would change the result.

3. Case Study & Compliance Action

Unjustified specifications fit one supplier only. Correct final scores do not remove the risk of distorted competition from the start. Now read the case carefully. Separate established facts from information you would still need to confirm. Do not add motives or events that have not been described. This distinction matters when choosing a response proportionate to the information available.

The exercise is as follows: Does a correct table cure earlier bias? Choose an answer and write one sentence explaining it. During the pause, compare your choice with the criteria we have just considered. Also think about the material you would retain to explain the decision later.

No. Specifications and procedural basis need separate assessment. Openness and competition concern the material decision chain.

One mistake to avoid is: checking only final award.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. A report is automatically recognised as protected because it contains the word corruption. What check is missing?

Check work context, possible public-interest harm, belief in truth and statutory conditions. A category does not replace sections 1–3 assessment. A personal complaint may also contain a public-interest breach; assess facts rather than title. Record reasons and necessary clarification.