In short: In a Romanian public institution, a purchase request (referat de necesitate) starts in the department that needs something and then goes through procurement, the finance and accounting department and preventive financial control before reaching the authorising officer. The procedure is rarely the problem; the route is. Papers wait on a desk, checks happen too late and the same data is typed several times. Below are the steps that shorten the route without skipping any control.
Where a purchase request gets stuck
Ask colleagues where a request is and the answers repeat in almost every institution:
- nobody knows for sure what stage the document has reached and who signs next;
- available budget is only checked by the finance department, after the request has already collected other approvals;
- the request comes back because of a wrong CPV code, a missing funding source or a value that is not in the annual procurement plan;
- the signatory is on leave and it is not clear who stands in;
- the same data (subject, value, budget line) is typed again in the justification document, the commitment and the payment authorisation.
Each of these adds days. The good news is that all of them can be fixed through organisation, not through more signatures.
1. Map the real workflow, not the one in the procedure
Take three or four recent requests and follow them from creation to approval: who received them, in what order, how long they stayed at each step and how many times they were sent back. Then compare the real route with the internal procedure. You will usually find approvals given out of habit, steps that could run in parallel and situations the procedure does not cover at all, such as replacing an absent signatory.
The result should be a written workflow for each type of request: who approves, in what order, which approvals are mandatory and which are optional, and who replaces whom. The workflow must follow the institution’s internal control procedure; the aim is not to skip a control, but to stop waiting for it for no reason.
2. One form, with fields that check themselves
Most returns come from fields filled in wrongly or left empty. A single form, with mandatory fields and lists to choose from instead of free text, removes many of them:
- the subject and quantity, with specifications attached;
- the estimated value, explicitly with or without VAT;
- the CPV code, chosen from the list, not typed;
- the funding source and the line in the budget classification;
- the position in the annual public procurement plan, or a note that the plan needs to be changed.
3. Check available budget while filling in the request
The most expensive return is the one from the finance department, after the request has already collected several signatures. If the person filling in the request can see, for the chosen budget line, the total, how much is already reserved or committed and how much is still available, many of these returns disappear. The final check still belongs to the finance department and to preventive financial control, but surprises become much rarer.
4. Parallel approvals, with clear rules
Not every approval depends on the previous one. For example, procurement and the legal department can sometimes check at the same time. For each step, decide:
- whether it comes after the previous step or runs in parallel with it;
- how many signatures are needed (for example, one of two people in the same department);
- who signs when the usual signatory is absent, and how this shows in the document’s history.
5. Electronic signatures instead of a paper file
Under Regulation (EU) No 910/2014 (eIDAS), a qualified electronic signature has the same legal effect as a handwritten one. If the people in the workflow already have qualified certificates, the request no longer has to travel on paper: each person signs the PDF with their own certificate and the signed document moves automatically to the next step. Keep on paper only what the procedure or the law explicitly requires on paper.
6. The data travels with the document
The approved request is the starting point for the justification document, then for the budget and legal commitment and finally for the payment authorisation. When each document takes its data from the previous one, differences in value or budget line between them disappear and the whole file can be followed from a single place.
7. A history visible to everyone in the workflow
A log showing who approved, when and with what remarks saves a lot of phone calls and e-mails. It is also exactly what you are asked for during an audit or a Court of Accounts review: the full history of each document.
What to measure to see if it worked
- Average time from creating the request to final approval, by type of request.
- Number of returns and their reasons: if the same few reasons dominate, the form or the training still needs work.
- The step where requests wait longest: there is usually one, and that is where you gain the most.
- Requests pending at any given time, by department.
How to start
Don’t change everything at once. Pick one department and two or three frequent types of request, map their workflow, introduce the form and the checks above and watch the indicators for a few weeks. What works is then extended to the rest of the institution, with the right workflow for each department.
Frequently asked questions
Is an electronically signed purchase request legally valid?
Yes. A qualified electronic signature has the same legal effect as a handwritten signature under the eIDAS Regulation. The institution’s internal procedure should provide for electronic signing of the documents in the workflow.
Who has to approve a purchase request?
It depends on the institution’s internal procedure and on the type of expenditure. Usually the request starts in the specialist department and goes through procurement, finance and accounting and preventive financial control before the authorising officer approves it.
Can we keep the paper workflow in parallel at first?
You can, for a short period and in a single department, so that people gain confidence. A double workflow in the long run, however, means extra work and the risk that the two versions no longer match.
How long does it take to change the purchase request workflow?
Analysing and mapping the workflow for one department usually takes a few days. Results show after a few weeks of working in the new flow, when you can compare times and returns with those from before.
In DataFlows ALOP, the purchase request, the justification document, the commitments and the payment authorisation are linked in a single file. Approval workflows are configured on the institution’s internal control, and available budget per line is visible while filling in the form. The application can be purchased through SEAP. Get in touch and we will show you the workflow on your institution’s own requests.
