How purchasing outside of procurement leads to higher costs, greater risks and a loss of control
A pattern that exists in every organisation
A manager urgently needs an external party for a project. The internal procurement procedure takes too long, so they reach out directly to a supplier they already know. A department signs up for a software subscription without involving procurement at all. A technical specialist picks their own supplier based on personal preference and past experience.
Situations like these — purchases that take place outside the structured buying channels — are known as maverick buying or rogue spending. They occur in virtually every organisation, and they are rarely the result of bad intent. More often they stem from time pressure, unfamiliarity with the procedure, or a lack of confidence that procurement adds any value.
The consequences are real nonetheless. Maverick buying undermines the effectiveness of the purchasing process, drives up costs and increases risk for the organisation — and it does so in a way that is hard to make visible.
Why buying outside of procurement is so widespread
Maverick buying is not an occasional occurrence. It is a structural pattern, fed by a combination of organisational, cultural and process-related factors.
Speed beats process
The most common reason employees buy outside of procurement is speed. Purchasing procedures are experienced as slow, bureaucratic and as an obstacle to day-to-day operations. When someone needs a solution quickly and the internal route takes longer than they would like, the temptation to arrange it themselves is strong.
This is not purely a perception problem. In some organisations, purchasing processes really are designed too rigidly for the pace of the operation. But the workaround — buying outside the system — creates bigger problems in the long run than it solves.
Procurement is not seen as a partner
Maverick buying also thrives in organisations where procurement is not experienced as a valuable counterpart. When internal customers feel that procurement only checks and delays without offering substantive value, their willingness to follow the process drops.
This creates a downward spiral: the more that is bought outside of procurement, the less visibility procurement has into what is going on, and the less able it is to offer proactive support.
Lack of visibility and enforcement
Where clear rules are missing or are not enforced, room opens up for personal interpretation. In many organisations a purchasing policy has been formally established, but the mechanisms to monitor compliance and course-correct are absent. Employees who have bought outside the process once without consequence will do it again more readily.
The financial impact: higher than expected
The cost of maverick buying is difficult to quantify precisely, but the direction is clear: buying outside the structured purchasing channels is structurally more expensive.
Missed volumes and discounts
Procurement negotiates contract prices based on expected volumes. When part of the spend falls outside those contracts, the volume comes in lower than anticipated — with direct consequences for pricing.
On top of that, maverick buying often means paying higher prices, because:
- framework agreements go unused
- no rigorous quote comparison takes place
- suppliers know the buying party has considered few alternatives
Administrative extra costs
Buying outside the system also increases the administrative burden. Invoices that do not match a purchase order, suppliers who are not in the system, approval processes set up after the fact — all of these cost time and money and raise the likelihood of errors in financial processing.
Hidden commitments
A particular risk of maverick buying is that it creates commitments that are not centrally recorded. Orders are placed without clear terms and without exit clauses. These hidden omissions can have significant consequences when a supplier relationship does not go as hoped.
The risks beyond price
Alongside the direct financial consequences, maverick buying carries broader risk implications that are less immediately visible.
Supplier qualification and compliance
Organisations typically work with a qualified supplier base: suppliers who have been assessed on financial stability, quality standards, sustainability criteria and compliance requirements. When buying happens outside that base, those safeguards fall away.
This means that:
- products or services are sourced from suppliers with no agreements on quality assurance
- compliance risks arise where suppliers do not meet applicable laws and regulations
- sustainability objectives are undermined because the origin of products is unknown
Reputational and legal risks
When buying happens outside the process, there is a greater chance of mistakes in contractual agreements, of intellectual property not being properly protected, or of unknowingly entering into contracts that conflict with existing exclusivity arrangements. The legal and reputational fallout can be considerable.
From control to connection: reducing maverick buying structurally
Reducing maverick buying takes more than enforcement. The most effective approach targets the underlying causes.
Make processes more accessible
When following the purchasing procedure becomes faster and simpler, the temptation to bypass it fades on its own. That calls for a critical look at the purchasing processes themselves: are they genuinely proportionate, or are they more complex than they need to be?
Digital ordering portals, pre-approved supplier lists and clear threshold values per category can improve the usability of the purchasing process considerably.
Position procurement as an enabler
The most durable solution is for internal customers to experience procurement as a partner that helps them buy faster and better — not as a controlling gatekeeper. This requires a proactive stance from procurement towards the business: understanding what is at play, matching the urgency, and delivering demonstrable value.
Once procurement has a reputation for speeding processes up rather than slowing them down, the dynamic shifts. Employees start coming to procurement instead of going around it.
Create visibility through data
It is hard to steer on what you cannot see. Organisations that want to reduce maverick buying structurally invest in spend analysis: knowing where the money goes, to which suppliers, and whether it flows through the right channels. That insight makes it possible to intervene in a targeted way and to measure progress.
Conclusion
Maverick buying is one of the most underestimated cost factors in procurement. It is everywhere, it is rarely measured explicitly, and it is too often treated as an unavoidable side effect of being a large organisation.
Yet the impact is substantial: higher purchasing costs, greater risk and a loss of grip on the supplier relationships the organisation depends on. It also undermines the credibility and impact of procurement as a function.
Organisations that take this seriously do not just improve their cost control — they also lay the groundwork for a procurement function that is genuinely seen as a strategic partner by the rest of the organisation.
