E&I Members: Make Your Voice Heard in Less Than a Minute! Help us improve your experience-fast, simple, and meaningful.
Maverick spending is a problem, especially when budgets are tight. Research shows that organizations can lose up to 16% of negotiated savings when internal stakeholders purchase from suppliers outside approved agreements.
Among other challenges, maverick spending leads to:
In higher education, where purchasing is often decentralized across departments, maverick spending can be difficult to detect and challenging to control. Faculty, staff, and administrators frequently make purchasing decisions based on urgency or convenience, which can unintentionally bypass a formal procurement process.
Maverick spending does not always appear as a major policy violation. More often, it shows up in everyday purchasing behavior.
Departments may buy from non-preferred suppliers because they are familiar or easier to access. Staff may use purchasing cards or other payment methods to expedite orders. In some cases, urgent needs lead to bypassing procurement entirely.
These transactions are often small and frequent, which makes them difficult to track individually. Over time, however, they add up to a significant portion of institutional spend that falls outside managed procurement channels. An example might be shipping costs. Without parcel spend management, institutions often lack visibility into shipping costs, carrier usage, and delivery patterns. Yet, parcel spend management controls can result in significant savings when using negotiated contracts.
When purchases occur outside of negotiated agreements, institutions lose the benefits of volume pricing and contract terms. This leads to higher purchasing costs and less predictable budgets. Without consistent pricing, it becomes more difficult for finance teams to forecast spending.
Rogue spending also increases the administrative workload. Procurement and finance teams must reconcile transactions from multiple sources, often without standardized documentation. There are also compliance and risk considerations. Working with unapproved suppliers can expose institutions to quality issues, contractual risks, and audit challenges. Over time, these risks can have both financial and reputational consequences.
Maverick spending is often viewed as a compliance issue, but in reality, it is usually driven by gaps in systems and processes. 75% of procurement professionals say a lack of self-service or guided buying tools is one of the biggest causes of maverick purchases. eProcurement tools with approved suppliers and punch-out catalogs can go a long way in solving this problem.
Procurement teams also cite the following reasons for why maverick spending remains prevalent:
When procurement processes are perceived as difficult or time-consuming, users are more likely to find alternative paths. Convenience often outweighs compliance.
The first step in addressing maverick spending is identifying it. By analyzing spend data across tech stacks, institutions can identify patterns. These might include frequent purchases from non-preferred suppliers or spending outside negotiated contracts. By comparing negotiated agreements with actual usage, institutions can identify areas where savings opportunities are missed.
Reducing this type of spending requires a balanced approach that addresses both process and behavior. The goal is to make compliant purchasing the easiest option for users.
When purchasing workflows are clear and efficient, users are more likely to follow them. Reducing unnecessary steps and standardizing approvals can significantly improve adoption.
Guided buying tools also play an important role. By directing users to approved suppliers and contracts, institutions can align convenience with compliance. Catalogs and punch-out systems make it easier for departments to find what they need without leaving approved channels.
Increasing spend under management is another key strategy. Expanding the use of contracts and improving visibility into purchasing activity helps ensure that more transactions align with procurement goals.
Stakeholders need to understand how to follow procurement processes and why it matters. Providing support and clear guidance can help shift behavior over time.
Cooperative purchasing provides a practical way to reduce maverick spending by making compliant purchasing more accessible. With pre-negotiated contracts, institutions can offer departments a wide range of approved suppliers and solutions. This reduces the need to seek alternatives and simplifies purchasing.
Cooperative agreements also align convenience with policy. When it is easy to access approved contracts, users are less likely to bypass procurement processes. In addition, these contracts provide better visibility into purchasing activity. Centralized reporting allows procurement teams to track usage, identify gaps, and take action to improve compliance.
E&I Cooperative Services helps institutions reduce maverick spending and strengthen procurement control through a more structured approach to sourcing. E&I’s contract portfolio supports standardization by giving institutions access to competitively solicited agreements across key categories. This makes it easier for departments to purchase within approved channels.
Strategic Spend Assessments can also identify areas where off-contract purchasing is occurring and highlight opportunities to improve compliance. These insights provide a clear starting point for reducing maverick spend.
See how E&I Cooperative Services can help your institution reduce maverick spending and regain control of your procurement budget.