Risks throughout the purchasing process

1. Regulatory Concept & Core Standards

In this video we will work through a concrete decision: identify risks from the initial need through to 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. Risk arises from defining a need through payment and contract changes. For public procurement, check ZJN-3 and current official guidance. Recommended private-purchasing controls do not create identical statutory duties.

Risk extends beyond supplier selection. It can begin with an artificial need, tailored requirement, manipulated assessment or later change. Receipt and payment can conceal undelivered services. Examining only the signed contract misses decisions that shaped the result.

Apply the following rule: ZZPri covers information about breaches of rules applicable in Slovenia obtained in a work-related context. Protection requires reasonable grounds for believing the information true at the time of reporting and use of a route under the Act. Article 5 excludes protection where the report is made two years or more after the breach ceased. This is not a retention period. Relevant previous and developing relationships, facilitators and connected persons are covered under statutory conditions.

2. Practical Implementation & Procedure

Map need, specification, selection, approval, performance, receipt and payment. At each stage identify decision-makers, possible improper benefits and verification evidence. Consider exceptions and urgent purchases. A permissible simplified procedure still needs reasons and controls. 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

Several bids arrive but the specification includes an unjustified feature available in only one product. The team checks origin and necessity. 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: Do three bids alone eliminate favouritism risk? 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. Review specification preparation and criteria. Formal bid numbers do not replace substantive assessment.

One mistake to avoid is: concentrating prevention only on contract signature.

Now apply the national rule to a second decision. The system automatically marks a report protected because it contains the word corruption. What has it not checked?

Assess facts, the work-related context, reasonable grounds at reporting, the chosen route and statutory conditions, including time since the breach ceased. The label does not determine protection. Clarify missing information safely and proportionately.