Abstract

Professionalisation is the acquisition of skills appropriate for participants on the professional procurement market. It may involve the acquisition of formal or actual skills. This means that professionalisation will be both the separation of the profession into: the statutory determination of the obligation to hold specific licences in order to perform specific activities, (formal professionalisation); and the acquisition of certain skills (actual professionalisation). The authors of the article are against the formal professionalisation of public procurement, and against limiting the right of contractors to freely decide on how they perform their activities at procurement proceedings and in the course of executing the contract (unless the requirements of the contract, in a certain case, impose on the contractor some obligations assumed as a result of entering into the contract). This would be encumbered with the risk of violating the constitutional principle of economic freedom. At the same time, factual professionalisation is purposeful and beneficial for all participants of the procurement market – creating a system of lifelong learning, and providing the possibility of using state co-financing in the pursuit of knowledge. At the same time, we question the organisation of the system of increasing skills through any one separate public authority, because solutions that meet the needs of the market appear on the private sector faster and in a more comprehensive form. In our opinion, the professionalisation of contractors will also continue as a result of the professionalisation of contracting authorities, from whom (if they behave like professionals) contractors will adopt good practices as a result of participation in tenders.