Public procurement: professionals without a profession Free

It is common for academics to ponder trivial matters, so, to add to this cavil at foolishness, this essay attempts to answer the question: Is public procurement a profession, and are those who practice public procurement professionals? The short answer is that, after 25 years of pondering this question, we still equivocate. But as academics, we have some ideas to offer. What we propose is a grand theory, the public procurement liminal space theory, that considers the roles and responsibilities of procurement practitioners within a matrixed model of legitimate organizational duties, political authority and societal expectations. Our theory draws from anthropological concepts of liminality, which represent the transitional state between established social categories, to examine how public procurement is at the margins of professional recognition. We base this argument on the idea that a key contradiction exists: procurement practitioners are responsible for managing substantial public resources while protecting democratic values, yet they lack the social and political recognition necessary to be considered professionals.

Our public procurement liminal space theory considers two fundamental dimensions of a profession wherein, first, we identify the basic archetypal traits of a profession, and second, we argue that professionalism in public procurement should not be viewed as only adhering to technical standards, ethical norms or formal qualifications. Professionalism is also a social construct shaped by collective perceptions of legitimacy, competence and authority. These social markers can either reinforce or challenge traditional notions of what a “professional” looks and acts like, revealing the implicit biases embedded within professional norms, institutions and social expectations.

Thus, professionalism cannot be fully disentangled from questions of belonging and representation because, in our humble opinions, how procurement practitioners are perceived politically and socially impact their organizational power structures, credibility in decision-making and the discretion to exercise autonomy. Understanding these intersecting dynamics (technical/operational and social/interpretative) is crucial for evolving legal mandates, institutional goals and changing expectations by government stakeholders. Our theory offers a conceptual lens to analyze and support this professional evolution, recognizing that the legitimacy and effectiveness of public procurement depend not only on compliance and efficiency, but also on the cultivation of an ethos competency suited to the changing demands of modern governance.

“There is no less definitive term than ‘profession’,” observed Mosher in 1973, “and its derivatives, ‘professional,’ ‘professionalism,’ and ‘professionalization’ suffer from the same ambiguity” (p. 21). Mosher’s observation remains remarkably relevant today. Over the course of decades of scholarship, the concept of professionalism has been variously defined, debated and operationalized, particularly concerning its origins within the broader discipline of public administration.

A profession, according to the seminal work of Abraham Flexner (1915), represents a distinct occupational category characterized by six essential traits that differentiate professional work from other forms of employment. Flexner’s foundational traits include the knowledge dimension, which represents the specialized expertise that forms the core of professional practice, similar to what Max Weber referred to as the division of labor. This involves both a specialist area of knowledge and the technical competence to apply that knowledge to solve complex problems. The knowledge dimension is closely tied to the jurisdictional dimension, which represents professionals’ efforts to establish and maintain authority over problem domains and areas of expertise, or what Abbott (2018) emphasized as occupational jurisdictional control over particularized services and activities, making jurisdictional competition a central organizing principle of professional identity.

The autonomy dimension represents another trait of a profession, enshrined in multiple levels of self-governance and proclaimed independence. Research identifies three key types of professional autonomy: “clinical, economic, and organizational,” reflecting the professionals’ ability to control their work environments, economic arrangements and institutional relationships. This “technical autonomy granted by the state allows professionals to exercise a monopoly over knowledge in their jurisdiction and to not be subjected to outside control of content” (Sapiro, 2020). The autonomy dimension is intrinsically linked to the regulatory dimension, which includes “self-governing and self-policing approach to regulation, principally through professional associations” and “control over certification or licensing for new entrants” – often legitimated through the state.

The ethical dimension typically involves explicit written codes that establish standards for practitioner behavior, outlining obligations to their clients and, more generally, society and provides mechanisms for disciplinary action when standards are violated. Finally, the authority dimension reflects the social and cognitive authority that professions exercise over both their domains of expertise and their relationships with clients and other stakeholders. This authority manifests in several ways: cognitive authority derives from professionals’ specialized knowledge and expertise, allowing them to define problems, propose solutions and make judgments that others accept as legitimate; social authority stems from the profession’s institutionalized position and legal recognition, granting professionals the right to make binding decisions within their jurisdiction; and cultural authority enables professions to shape public understanding of issues within their domain.

Contemporary scholarship recognizes “remarkable consistency across competing theoretical traditions within the sociology of the professions as to the ideal-typical traits that render ‘professions’ a distinct category in the division of labour” (Tidmarsh, 2022), suggesting that while specific theoretical approaches may vary, these fundamental traits anchor our understanding of professional organization. However, we assert that things are not so simple because contemporary scholarship has said little about the importance of society’s perception of professional status.

Drawing on Schneider and Ingram (1993), the concept of salient target populations provides a framework to better understand the notion of a profession. Salient targets refer to specific groups within society that become prominently featured and socio-politically relevant due to their socially-constructed characteristics and perceived political power. These subpopulations are categorized along two key dimensions: their socially-constructed public images and their differential power or abilities to achieve political outcomes. The theory identifies four primary types of target populations: the “advantaged” (high power, positive image), “contenders” (high power, negative image), “dependents” (low power, positive image) and “deviants” (low power, negative image).

This framework starkly elucidates the unique position of public procurement professionals within government and society. Unlike many other professional groups, procurement specialists occupy a somewhat ambiguous space in the public consciousness, often operating behind the scenes in government agencies while managing significant amounts of public resources. Based on the two salient target dimensions, public procurement specialists generally fall into the “dependents” category, characterized by relatively low political power despite maintaining a largely positive or neutral public image.

Many people typically view procurement work as a necessary administrative function focused on ensuring the efficient use of taxpayer dollars and maintaining fairness in government contracting processes. However, this positive perception is often overshadowed by practitioners’ limited visibility and influence within political decision-making processes. Unlike professions such as medicine or law, procurement professionals lack strong professional associations with significant lobbying power, comprehensive licensing requirements or widespread public recognition of their specialized expertise.

This labor force’s relatively weak political position becomes evident when examining policy debates about government efficiency, transparency and reform. While procurement practitioners possess specialized knowledge about complex contracting processes, supply chain management and regulatory compliance, their voices are often marginalized in favor of political appointees, external consultants or representatives from more established professions. This dynamic is particularly pronounced during reform initiatives, where procurement processes may be restructured without meaningful input from the procurement practitioner who understands the practical implications of proposed changes. Their dependent status means they must rely on political allies and supportive leadership rather than wielding direct influence over policies that affect their work.

However, recent trends suggest that the public procurement field is experiencing a gradual shift in its target population status, particularly in response to crises that highlight the critical importance of effective procurement systems. Events such as the COVID-19 pandemic, natural disasters and supply chain disruptions have elevated public awareness of procurement’s role in emergency response and government effectiveness. This increased visibility creates opportunities to enhance both its image and political power through demonstrated competence, professional development initiatives and a stronger collective organization.

Liminal space theory, rooted in the anthropological work of Arnold van Gennep (1908) and later developed by Victor Turner (1974), explains the transitional phase that individuals or groups experience when they are between established social categories or institutional structures. The word “liminal” comes from the Latin limen, meaning threshold and describes the ambiguous state of being neither fully within one category nor another. In traditional anthropological contexts, liminality demonstrates rites of passage where individuals temporarily exist outside normal social hierarchies and role expectations. During these transitional periods, participants often face uncertainty and ambiguity, along with a pause in routinized social rules, but they also gain access to new knowledge, relationships and opportunities for transformation. Turner emphasized that liminal spaces are not just empty gaps between categories but are productive zones for creating new social arrangements and identities.

Our public procurement liminal space theory applies these anthropological insights to explain why procurement practitioners remain “professionals without a profession.” They operate in the threshold between administrative compliance and strategic decision-making, technical expertise and political judgment, internal organizational duties and external public accountability. This liminal position clarifies the ongoing contradiction we observe: procurement professionals manage significant public resources and navigate complex ethical issues, yet they lack the social recognition and institutional authority that established professions receive. The tradition of social invisibility becomes clear when procurement functions run smoothly, and society hardly notices procurement practitioners’ contributions, while failures tend to attract disproportionate negative attention. The space they occupy is neither temporary nor accidental but reflects the inherent complexity of their role in balancing competing institutional demands, democratic values and technical requirements within modern governance systems.

The framework we propose offers a valuable way to understand how public procurement can evolve as both a technical function and a public-facing profession that generates social capital. Traditionally viewed through the lens of compliance and efficiency, public procurement has often been confined to rigid procedural roles. However, we expand this view by recognizing that professionalism in public procurement should integrate a broader set of values, transparency, accountability, equity and civic responsiveness, into both everyday practice and a deliverable “professionalism” that is more widely understood and supported. This shift reframes procurement professionals as manufacturers of public trust, capable of aligning procurement decisions with societal goals. By embedding ethical considerations and public values into procurement processes, practitioners can build social capital, strengthening the relationships, norms and trust that underpin effective public institutions.

Moreover, the model acknowledges that public procurement exists within a dynamic space where legal requirements, institutional goals and public expectations frequently interact and often conflict. Navigating this space requires more than technical skill; it demands a high level of social and cultural interpositional literacy. Practitioners must engage with a wide range of stakeholders including vendors, civil society, government officials and the communities served. Doing so effectively requires strong communication skills, ethical reasoning and an appreciation of the diverse contexts in which procurement decisions are made. In this way, the evolving role of public procurement professionalism mirrors broader shifts in what it means to be a professional today: not simply mastering a technical domain, but also actively contributing to the public good by building institutional trust, encouraging civic engagement and fostering equitable outcomes.

As we mentioned earlier, these crosscutting ambiguities of the public procurement field have now reached a point where we propose a framework for understanding why public procurement is at a liminal point. Based on the six professional traits (knowledge, jurisdiction, autonomy, regulation, ethics and authority) and the two social legitimacy dimensions that include social power and image, Table 1 presents our interpretation of converging traits that will strengthen the shift within public procurement toward broader political and societal recognition, and hence, the maturation of a professional ethos and social legitimation.

Our public procurement liminal space theory highlights a fundamental paradox at the heart of contemporary governance: procurement practitioners operate as essential guardians of public resources while promoting democratic values; however, they remain suspended in a transitional state between technical expertise and professional recognition. This liminal positioning, which exists at the threshold between established professional categories, illuminates why traditional frameworks for understanding professionalism have failed to adequately capture the unique challenges facing our field and perhaps, more generally, many other occupations.

The public procurement liminal space theory helps explain this persistent ambiguity by recognizing that procurement practitioners are neither purely administrative functionaries nor fully autonomous professionals. Instead, they occupy a unique interstitial position that requires them to simultaneously demonstrate technical mastery, ethical judgment and political acumen while operating within constrained institutional frameworks that limit their professional autonomy. We are agnostic as to whether this liminal state is a temporary phase to be overcome or if it must remain a defining characteristic that shapes how procurement professionals understand their role and how others perceive their contributions.

Indeed, our theory suggests that the liminal nature of public procurement may actually be a source of strength rather than weakness. The ability to operate across traditional boundaries, between technical and political domains, between internal administrative rule-driven processes and external stakeholder relationships, between compliance requirements and strategic innovation, positions procurement practitioners as essential mediators in complex governance systems. Their liminal status enables them to bridge different organizational cultures and competently transform competing priorities while maintaining a delicate balance between efficiency and equity that characterizes effective public administration.

The practical implications of the public procurement liminal space theory extend beyond academic understanding to inform strategies for professional development and institutional reform. Rather than attempting to force procurement into traditional professional molds, we should embrace its liminal characteristics and develop new frameworks for recognition that acknowledge the unique value of boundary-spanning roles in public governance. This might involve creating hybrid forms of professional credentialing, developing cross-national competency frameworks and building institutional structures that support rather than constrain the distinctive contributions of liminal professionals.

For practitioners, understanding their liminal status can provide both validation and strategic insight. The persistent sense of professional uncertainty that many practitioners experience is not a personal failing but rather a structural consequence of operating in a common agency space that defies traditional professional categorization. This recognition can inform more effective approaches to professional development, career advancement and collective organization that work with – rather than against – the liminal nature of the field.

Ultimately, we posit that our public procurement liminal space theory challenges the academy to reconsider fundamental assumptions about professionalism in the public sector. As governance becomes increasingly complex and interconnected in a space of competing loyalties, the ability to operate effectively in liminal spaces may become more rather than less important. Rather than viewing the ambiguous status of procurement professionals as a problem to be solved, recognizing the strengths of adaptive response capabilities within a liminal environment may help navigate the evolving demands of democratic governance. In doing so, we can begin to develop more nuanced and effective approaches to supporting the procurement practitioners who occupy these critical transitional spaces in our public institutions.

The future of public procurement professionalism lies not in achieving traditional professional status but in pioneering new forms of professional identity that embrace the unique nature of public procurement’s liminality. Through continued theoretical development and empirical research, we can better understand how to support and empower the professionals who navigate these spaces in service of the public good.

The authors acknowledge the use of artificial intelligence (AI) tools that include Google, Microsoft tools like thesaurus and Copilot, Grammarly, Claude and ChatGPT, in the preparation of this manuscript. All AI-generated content was critically reviewed, fact-checked and verified by the authors. Any errors, omissions or misinterpretations remain solely the responsibility of the authors. The use of AI tools did not substitute for the authors’ original intellectual contribution, critical analysis or interpretation of results. All references and/or text suggestions were independently verified by the authors, and the AI assistance did not systematically influence the research design, data collection, statistical analysis or primary conclusions. This work complies with the ethical guidelines and AI use policies of JoPP and their submission requirements.