Professionalising public procurement through certification

3. How to design a certification framework that is fit for purpose?

3.1. Designing a certification framework

The design of a certification framework is critical for professionalising public procurement, as it strongly shapes the culture and behaviour of the national procurement system. In fact, the content and orientation of the certification syllabus are strongly linked to the effectiveness and efficiency of the public procurement system. The focus of the certification programme — be it legal compliance, procedural control, strategic management, or value-for-money — shapes the way procurement is understood and implemented across the administration. If the certification syllabus is predominantly formalistic and centred on procedural correctness, the entire procurement system is likely to become more formal and compliance-driven. On the other hand, if the certification process emphasises strategic thinking, performance management, and results orientation, it will foster a procurement environment that is more agile, outcome-focused, and innovative by nature.

There are many elements to consider when designing a certification framework. These elements include, but are not limited to, (i) its purpose, (ii) the classifications defined in it, (iii) the conditions for obtaining it, and (iv) its validity and the conditions of renewal. Figure 4 illustrates these factors in a structured way.

Figure 4. Factors to consider when designing a certification framework

Source: Prepared by the author based on (OECD, 2023[3])

3.2. Types of certification frameworks  

When setting up a certification framework, it is always important to have a clear idea on why a certification framework is necessary, or how it is meant to be used. Indeed, a certification framework serves different human resource management purposes: professional development, license to perform a certain task, and recruitment.

Function of the certification framework

A certification framework can have different functions. As Figure 5 shows, 73%, or 11 out of 15 countries that responded to the survey, make it mandatory to obtain a certificate to work for public procurement under certain conditions, while the remaining 4 countries had a different rationale to introduce a certification framework.

Figure 5. Mandatory certification for certain public procurement positions or functions

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

A certification framework of public procurement is used as a mandatory requirement under certain conditions. These include, but are not limited to, working on specific tasks such as (i) access to the e‑procurement system (e.g. Chile), (ii) performing certain procurement procedures (e.g. Hungary, Israel, Croatia, Lithuania, Albania, Serbia), and (iii) requirement for some positions (e.g. United Kingdom). In Chile, it is mandatory to obtain a basic certification to have access to the national e-procurement system. However, two other levels (intermediate and advanced) are used to recognise skills for the purpose of professional development. In Croatia, Lithuania and Serbia, at least one member of the Public Procurement Committee (Croatia), the Evaluation Committee (Lithuania) and the Public Procurement Commission (Serbia) needs to have a certificate for the procurement procedures above a certain threshold. In the United Kingdom, a certificate is mandatory for a senior grade position in the Government Commercial Organisation (GCO).

In the countries where a certificate is not a mandatory requirement, it is used as a tool to certify knowledge and skills. In Norway, a certificate is seen as an advantage and a proof of technical skills, and therefore some contracting authorities choose to require a certificate for recruitment purposes. In France, where purchasing has been recognised as a stand-alone profession since 2017, the certification makes it possible to recognise the skills acquired by trained public buyers and to structure their professional trajectory. The Slovak Republic transferred from a mandatory to an optional model, and now each contracting authority can decide whether to engage certified procurement officials in each procurement process. This change was made in 2024 based on feedback received by the Office for Public Procurement that the mandatory certification framework led to a lack of available certified experts, which could jeopardise the ability of contracting authorities to ensure public procurement processes with their own capacities. In Norway, there was a debate on whether a certificate should be mandatory or not, and eventually an optional mechanism was adopted considering the political signals and the limited tradition in Norway for introducing mandatory schemes.

Classification

A certification framework can define different levels or profiles. It is therefore relevant to define the classification and/or type of a certificate. There are three classifications of a certificate framework that exist in the countries surveyed:

• General certificate by level (e.g. basic, intermediate, advanced, expert);

• Certificate by job profile (e.g. procurement officer for low value procurement, procurement specialist for high-value or complex procurement, contract management, legal officer);

• Specialist certification (e.g. specialist buyer in green public procurement, innovation procurement, specific-sector procurement such as construction and ICT)

• Or a certification of a combination of the above.

The classification of the certification framework varies across countries. Table 2 presents the classifications in the surveyed countries.

Table 2. Classification of a certificate

Classification	Country	Share
1. General certificate by level	69%
1 level	Austria, Lithuania, Norway (general), Brazil, Croatia, Serbia	38%
2 levels	Israel	6%
3 levels	Chile, Peru, Romania	19%
4 levels	Albania	6%
2. By Job profile / role	Hungary (two job profiles), UK (4 job profiles), Slovak Republic (2 roles)	19%
3. Thematic	Norway (sustainable public procurement)	6
4. Combination	France: 3 levels for buyers-procurement manager, 2 levels for contract managers and 2 levels for sustainable procurement	6%

Note: Norway is double counted in both “general certificate by level” and “thematic”

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

The general certificate by level (for example, basic, intermediate, advanced, expert) is the dominant classification with the introduction by 69% of the countries surveyed. Chile has three levels (basic, intermediate, and advanced) and they are linked with the national competency matrix of the public procurement workforce. Hungary, the United Kingdom and the Slovak Republic have a certification framework for job profiles and roles. Norway has a thematic certificate on sustainable public procurement in addition to the basic level general certificate. France has a certificate for job profiles (buyers – procurement manager, contract manager) as well as for a thematic topic (sustainable procurement) with more than one level.

3.3. Governance considerations  

Duration and costs of developing a certification framework

A certification framework is expected to bring various benefits, but it also requires human and financial resources and time to administer it. This section presents the survey results on the experiences of countries that introduced a certification framework in terms of costs.

Preparing and launching a certification framework can be time consuming, because it might require approval within the government. Table 3 lists the duration taken for selected countries to launch a certification framework. In general, the experiences of the surveyed countries show that introducing a certification framework takes years, as in most cases it requires amendments to the legal framework regulating public procurement and the preparation of the certification framework itself, including the training programme and the examination.

Table 3. Duration taken to launch a certification framework

Country	Duration (years)	Requirement of government approval	Remarks
Austria (BBG)	1	No	The government approval was not necessary because this was an organisational certificate. The process involved aligning with standard ISO certification rules.
Lithuania	4	Yes	Started in 2019 by drafting the amendments to the legal framework. Certification process started in July 2022.
Norway	3	Yes	Certification framework is based on the previous scheme provided by a private test provider. Started the process in 2016 and the basic level (SOA) was launched in November 2019
Slovak Republic	1.5	Yes	In 2021, the concept of public procurement education was developed and completed as part of the Recovery and Resilience Plan. It entered into force on 31 March 2022
United Kingdom	2	Yes	This involved preparing the commercial standards for the roles, designing a full robust capability assessment method using scenario-based assessment, standing up the assessment process, training assessors, and recruiting moderators and administrators
Albania	5	Yes	Started the process in 2020 and the first exam took place on 8 February 2025
Serbia	3	Yes	2008 – requirement established by Public Procurement Law (PPL), 2009 - started its application, 2010 - first exam (December 2010)

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

Figure 6 shows the respondents’ estimation of the share of the workload for the tasks related to administering a certification framework. On average more than a third of the workload in the surveyed countries fell into the “administrative tasks” category, which includes tasks such as registration of applicants, issuance of certificates, and answering questions. Providing training, preparing the certification exams and administering digital platforms related to the certification framework accounted for on average 20%, 17% and 14% of the workload, while evaluating the exam only accounted for on average 6%, due to the fact that most countries evaluate candidates through multiple choice written exams (c.f. the section on Building Competence Step by Step: Choosing the Right Exam Structure). Variation in the distribution of the workload was wide, due to the differences in how the certification framework is set up in each country.

Figure 6. The approximate distribution of the workload for tasks related to the certification framework across surveyed countries

Note: (*) registration, issuance of a certificate, answering questions etc. (**) It was about 7 in 2021 when establishing a certification framework

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

As Table 4 shows, the range of resources and manpower used to establish a certification framework showed great variation in general. For example, the human resources needed to administer a certification framework in terms of number of staff ranges from 0.7 of Lithuania to 16 of the United Kingdom. This variation in the number of staff needed to administer the certification framework can be explained by factors such as but not limited to the pre-existing public procurement professionalisation framework, the type of training and exams that are introduced, and the existing digital infrastructure.

Table 4. Human resources (number of staff) for administering the certification framework

	AUT	CHL	FRA	HUN	ISR	LTU	NOR	SVK	GBR	HRV	PER	ROU	ALB	SRB
Number of staff	1.1	2.5	3	4	6	0.7	1	2 (*)	16.4	5	12	4	10	2.2

Note: (*) It was around 7 in 2021 when establishing a certification framework

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

It should also be noted that this data is to be interpreted as an approximate reference, because the necessary workload might vary, and the number of stakeholders involved in the administration of the certification framework often fluctuated at different stages, which was not consistently reflected in the survey responses. In addition, the overall workload and its share for each task are directly affected by the institutional framework and other characteristics of the certification framework of each country (e.g. mandatory training, examination types, digitisation of the processes). For example, Lithuania might require relatively less manpower because the country invested heavily in professionalisation initiatives before launching a certification framework by digitalising the processes and preparing thousands of exam questions for online examinations. On the other hand, the United Kingdom might require more human resources because the country administers 100% of the examination in the form of oral exams and carries out many follow-up activities for candidates. This additional information paints a more detailed picture and helps contextualise the wide variation in resources needed to establish a certification framework based on the existing context and the characteristics of the certification framework to be implemented.

Conditions for obtaining a certificate

There can be various conditions for obtaining a certificate, which can be summarised into three categories: (i) completion of the training programme, (ii) passing the exam, and (iii) other requirements, such as a minimum academic background (e.g. bachelor’s or master’s degree) or years of professional experience in a specific field. This section focuses on the first two elements (training and exam), as these are the common conditions for obtaining a certificate.

Developing a training programme and exam are the most time-consuming tasks related to the certification framework not only for the certifying party (who needs to organise training and exam) but also for the candidates or party to be certified (who need to complete training and pass the exam). The number of expected candidates to be certified affects the administration of training and the exam.

Training

In the context of a certification framework, it is important to determine whether completing the training to obtain a certificate should be mandatory. 53%, or 8 out of 15 countries that responded to the survey, make it mandatory to complete training before taking the exam to obtain a certificate. Training duration varies widely across countries.

On the other hand, candidates are allowed to take an exam without completing training in 47% of the countries surveyed. These countries still provide free materials to help candidates prepare for the exam. Candidates can also decide to participate in training offered by private or public training institutes.

Making training completion mandatory to obtain the certificate ensures that all the candidates will increase their capabilities in the process of certification. However, this requirement can be burdensome for candidates who already have sufficient knowledge and skills to obtain a certificate. These considerations need to be weighed up against one another when introducing a mandatory requirement for completing training.

Figure 7. Training as a mandatory requirement to obtain a certificate

Source: Prepared by the author based on the Survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

Building Competence Step by Step: Choosing the Right Exam Structure

It is common practice to require an exam in a specific format as a condition for obtaining a certificate. Indeed, this applies to all the countries surveyed except Hungary, where a certificate can be obtained by completing training without taking the exam. There are a number of considerations to take into account when designing the exams, which are explained in the following subsections.

One unified exam or exams for each level

When the certification framework has more than one level, one consideration will be whether one unified exam is prepared, or an exam is prepared for each level. In Chile, the exam is prepared for each level (Basic, Intermediate and Advanced). On the other hand, Peru prepares one unified exam that applicants of all the three levels (Basic, Intermediate and Advanced) shall take, but the level is certified depending on the score obtained by each candidate: Basic level certification for 30 – 42 points (out of 72 points), Intermediate level for 43 – 57 points and Advanced level for 58 – 72 points. In Albania, where a certification framework was launched only recently in 2025, currently one unified exam is taken by the candidates for the four different levels (like in the case of Peru), but different exams will be introduced for each level from September 2026. When introducing one unified exam common for multiple levels, it is important to refine the difficulty of each question, because the final score determines the certified levels. Preparing different exams for each level can help refine the accuracy of certification and tailor it to target specific skills related to the tested level. While creating separate exams will most likely be more expensive than a single exam for all levels, the benefit of a more accurate examination system can outweigh this cost.

Types of exams

There are several different types of exams that can be designed to verify the level of knowledge of the candidates. These include, but are not limited to, the following:

• Written exam, consisting of:

  • Single/ multiple choice questions (e.g. Choose the correct option on the explanation of A);

  • Open questions (e.g. Please describe and explain A with a few sentences; Please calculate the value of A; What procedure would you choose under this scenario and why?)

• Essay or work-based assignment (WBA) (e.g. please choose one country, and prepare the summary analysis of MAPS / PEFA within 5000 words)

• Oral examination (case studies, discussion, presentation etc).

Table 5. Types of the exam to obtain a certificate

Country	Written exam		WBA	Oral (case studies, presentation)
	Single/multiple choice	Open questions
Austria	✓			✓
Chile	✓	✓
France	✓		✓
Hungary	N/A	N/A	N/A	N/A
Israel	✓		✓
Lithuania	✓
Norway	✓
Slovak Republic	✓
United Kingdom				✓
Brazil	✓
Croatia	✓
Peru	✓
Romania	✓
Albania
Serbia	✓	✓	✓
Total of Yes (✓)	12	2	3	2
Share (%)	86%	14%	14%	14%

Note: In Hungary, a certificate can be obtained by completing training without taking the exam. In Romania, the format of the exam is not standardised, and it depends on each training provider. However, the most common exam is the written exam with a set of 10-20 multiple-choice questions.

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

How to ensure the quality of the exam?

The quality of the exam questions and the evaluation of candidates is an important consideration. The quality of the exam questions matters for all formats of the exam (written exam, WBA and oral exam), while the quality of evaluation and the skills of assessors are especially relevant for exam formats where there is no single correct answer, and the evaluation is more nuanced.

Countries that have a certification framework have been taking measures to ensure the quality of the exam. In some countries, the exam questions are reviewed by third parties. For example, in Israel, the exam questions are reviewed by the central purchasing body and the legal bureau at the Ministry of Finance before they can be included in the exam. In the United Kingdom, the assessment centre has been designed by commercial subject matter experts and occupational psychologists to ensure that they evaluate candidates in a logical and fair way. In Peru, the preparation of the exam questions involves experts specialised in the preparation of tests, psychometric analysis as well as subject matter experts in public procurement.

Lithuania and Norway adopted data analytics approaches ensure that the evaluation conforms to high standards. In Lithuania, the questions with the highest error rates are identified, reviewed, and, if necessary, revised for future exams. In Norway, the provider of the certification exams analyses the quality of exam questions at least once a year. The test provider analyses the difficulty level and correlation of the answers. Based on the analysis results, the DFØ (Public Procurement Authority of Norway) adjusts the wording of questions and answers in the certification tests. Some countries, including Austria and Peru follow international quality management standards such as the ISO 17024 (standard for the Certification of persons).

Unlike with single or multiple choice questions, open questions, essays, and WBAs as well as oral examination require capability of staff who evaluate and certify the candidates. The United Kingdom, which has a 100% oral examination-based certification framework has a group of 60 to 80 trained assessors who are either senior active internal commercial managers, or external senior commercial professionals that are paid a daily rate. Each candidate is assessed by several assessors to remove bias and provide an accurate view of the candidate.

The verification of exam questions in terms of both content and format is a clear best practice. The regular monitoring and updates to the exam to ensure that they remain relevant and in line with the evolving practices of public procurement is another key consideration.

When can it be taken?

The timing of the exams can be an important factor in ensuring that the introduction of the certification framework does not become a burden for procurement professionals. To ensure maximum flexibility, in some countries, candidates can take the exam any time (Lithuania) or any time within the specified period (Chile and Brazil) from their laptop. For example, to enable a flexible “any-time exam”, Lithuania digitalised the exam and prepared thousands of questions which appear randomly in the display. This minimises inconvenience from the viewpoint of the applicants but implies an increased workload for the administrator of the certification framework, in particular before launching a certification framework. In addition, this kind of flexibility is only possible for a written exam.

Due to factors such as the requirement to conduct the examination in a specific venue (not online), the exam date and time is fixed in most of the countries surveyed. Additionally, in the case of oral exams the availability of the assessors also limits the flexibility of the certifying authority to schedule exams. For example, the oral examination in the UK’s certification framework has to be taken via an online platform and be evaluated by assessors in real time, thus the exam takes place at a fixed date.

Validity of the certificate

The validity of a certificate and the conditions for renewal are other elements to be considered when developing a certification framework. The need for renewal arises from the assumption that the world of public procurement changes and evolves dynamically, and that some of the knowledge and skills acquired might get outdated as time passes.

60%, or 9 out of the 15 countries surveyed, introduced an expiration date on the validity of the certificate. The duration of the validity varies across countries: 2 years (Hungary and Peru), 3 years (Austria, Chile and Croatia), 5 years (Lithuania, UK, Brazil and Albania). On the other hand, a certificate is valid for lifetime in 40% of the countries surveyed.

Figure 8. Validity of certificate

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

There are two types of renewal conditions in the surveyed countries: passing the examination again and the completion of additional training. Both renewal options allow the candidates to continue to update and improve their skills and knowledge. In Chile, Lithuania, Peru and Albania, candidates need to pass the exam again. In Croatia, candidates need to complete an additional 32-hour training programme within the validity of the certificate. In the United Kingdom, candidates are required to spend 30 hours on continuing professional development (CPD) per year. CPD needs to have a clear purpose, but the format is quite flexible: it does not need to be a formal course, and can be replaced by a mixture of formal training, peer to peer learning, and in-role tasks. In Austria, BBG provides flexibility on renewal conditions by allowing each candidate to choose between passing the exam again or completing training.

Table 6. Key renewal conditions of certificate

Renewal conditions	County	Share (%)
Passing the exam again	Chile, Lithuania, Peru, Albania	50%
Completing training	United Kingdom, Croatia	25%
Completing training or passing the exam again	Austria (BBG)	12.5%
Renewable upon request	Hungary	12.5%

Source: Prepared by the author based on the survey on good practices of certification framework for public procurement (2025)

To set up the validity and renewal conditions, it is relevant to consider the potential burdens that recertification poses to both the certifying party and the candidates. Shorter validity of a certificate implies more time commitment for both parties. On the other hand, limiting the validity of the certificate ensures that public procurement professionals refine their knowledge and stay aware of legal updates. With the help of the OECD, Lithuania set up the validity of the certificate for 5 years, taking into account these parameters of advantages and burdens for both parties.

Monitoring and evaluation mechanisms

To ensure that the certification framework is fit for purpose, namely that it helps meet the professionalisation goals set out for the public procurement workforce without creating an unjustified burden for either officials or the certifying authority, monitoring and evaluation mechanisms are necessary Different elements of the certification framework could be monitored, such as the quality of the training programmes, the quality of the exams, as well as the impact of the existence of the certification framework and its usefulness for reaching the goals of professionalisation.

When it comes to monitoring and evaluating the training and the exam, mechanisms are already in place in several countries. As cited in the section on exams, some countries use data analytics tools to assess whether the exam is appropriate for evaluating candidates, while others designed the exam in conformity with international quality management standards.

As for monitoring and evaluating the impact of the certification framework overall, in most surveyed countries there are other initiatives supporting capability building, which makes measuring the impact specifically of the certification framework difficult. Some countries launched a survey among public procurement officials to understand their views on the certification framework with the purpose of improving the system. For example, in Chile there is a satisfaction survey to understand officials’ views on the certification process, through which relevant improvements are implemented as necessary. Similarly, in Lithuania the Ministry of Economy and Innovation carries out a biennial evaluation of the public procurement system through a survey. In the first survey after the implementation of the certification framework, it was rated positively overall, although some noted that obtaining a certificate posed some difficulties. In reaction to the feedback, the Public Procurement Office is constantly reviewing the exam questions to reduce uncertainties and ambiguities. Furthermore, the Public Procurement Office publishes a Procurement Scoreboard, which classifies the performance of contracting authorities according to 17 key performance indicators. Since the introduction of the certification framework in 2022, the performance of contracting authorities across the indicators has been improving, which the Public Procurement Office at least partly attributes to the certification framework.

In the Slovak Republic, the Public Procurement Office published a survey to gather feedback on the certification framework. As a result of the survey, which indicated that the mandatory requirement for a certified guarantor for all procurement processes was unrealistic and contracting authorities could not always meet this requirement, the Public Procurement Act was amended in 2024 to change the mandatory use of the certification framework in certain cases.