Public procurement is seen as an important component of fulfilling government policy objectives and its primary purpose of providing goods and services in a timely, cost-effective, and efficient manner. Public procurement can play a pivotal role in raising the productivity level of the economy, increasing the efficiency of public sectors, and increasing public confidence in public institutions. This study aims at exploring the actions taken by companies when they decide to offer products on the public procurement market in Romania. A quantitative marketing research was conducted using an opinion poll survey, with the database being created through a questionnaire completed by representatives of companies active on this market. The results reveal that the most successful actions are performing a thorough analysis of the requests published on the public electronic procurement system in Romania, the appropriate completion of the documentation, as well as ensuring a full compliance with the conditions specified by the contracting authority. These findings have provided us with guidance in establishing the hypotheses and objectives of a future quantitative research on the analysed topic.

1. ANAP (2025), https://anap.gov.ro/web/prezentare-valori-obiective-misiune/, page accessed on 29.09.2025
2. ANAP, statistic rapport, (2025), Available https://anap.gov.ro/web/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/Raport-statistic-An-2024.pdf
3. Andersen P.H., Rask M. (2003) Supply chain management: new Organisational practices for changing procurement realities, pp. 83-95
4. Bleda M., Chicot J., (2020) The role of public procurement in the formation of markets for innovation, pp. 186-196
5. Cheung S., T. Ng, Wong S.-P., Suen H., (2003) Behavioral aspects in construction partnering -International Journal of Project Management, pp. 333-343
6. Chugunov I., Makogon V. "Budget policy under economic transformation", Ekonomicnij Casopis-XXI (Economic Annals-XXI), 158(3-4(2)), pp. 66-69, 2016.
7. Cox A., Thompson I., (1997) Fit for purpose contractual relations: determining a theoretical framework for construction projects, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, pp. 127-135
8. Darvas Z. Zsolt, Wolf B., Guntram An anatomy of inclusive growth in Europe, Bruegel, 2016
9. Eriksson P.E., Laan A., (2007), Procurement effects on trust and control in client–contractor relationships Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, pp. 387-399
10. Falagario M., Sciancalepore F., Costantino N., Pietroforte R. (2012) Using a DEA-cross efficiency approach in public procurement tenders, pp. 523-529
11. Gootjes B. and Haan J (2022), Do fiscal rules need budget transparency to be effective?, European Journal of Political Economy, Volume 75, December 2022, 102210, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejpoleco.2022.102210.
12. Law No. 98 of 19 May 2016 regarding public procurement, art. 3, aligned 1 (b)
13. Lisy, J., Caplánová, A., Gonda, V., Hontyová, K., a kol. 2011. Ekonómia. Bratislava: IURA EDITION, 2011, pp. 714
14. Love P., Skitmore M., Earl G., (1998) Selecting a suitable procurement method for a building project, Construction Management and Economics, pp. 221-233
15. Mankiw, N.G., Weinzierl, M., Yagan, D., 2009. Optimal Taxation in Theory and Practice, Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 23(4), pp. 147-74
16. OECD (2023), “Lessons learned from the implementation of the European Competency Framework for Public Procurement Professionals: Towards an international competency framework”, OECD Public Governance Policy Papers, No. 32, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a0b8c9b7-en.
17. Osei‐Kojo A. (2017) E‐government and public service quality in Ghana
18. Park J., Ojiako U., Williams T, Chipulu M., Marshall A., Manag. Eng. J. (2015) Practical tool for assessing best value at the procurement stage of public building projects in Korea 
19. Preuss L. (2009) Addressing sustainable development through public procurement: the case of local government Supply Chain, pp. 213-223
20. Preuss L., (2011) Walker H., Psychological barriers in the road to sustainable development: evidence from public sector procurement, pp. 493-521
21. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg (2018), Public Procurement Guidance for Practitioners
22. Raudla, R. (2021). Politicians’ use of performance information in the budget process. Public Money & Management, 42(3),144–151, https://doi.org/10.1080/09540962.2021.1989779
23. Satanova, A., Potkány, M. 2004. Controlling - Modern tool of company control. Ekonomický časopis, Bratislava: Slovak Academic Press s.r.o., Vol. 52. No. 2. 2004, pp. 148 –165.
24. Schöttle A., Arroyo P. (2017) Comparison of weighting-rating-calculating, best value, and choosing by advantages for bidder selection
25. Scott S., Molenaar K.R., Gransberg D., Smith N. (2006) Best-value procurement methods for highway construction projects NCHRP Report 561, NCHRP Report 561. Best-Value Procurement Methods for Highway Construction Projects, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Washington DC, USA 
26. Spekman R.E., W.J. Johnston W.J. (1986) Relationship management: managing the selling and the buying interface, pp. 519-531
27. Rolfstam M.E.E., Northampton (2013) Public procurement and innovation: The role of institutions
28. Tsipouri L. European Commission (2015) Public procurement of innovation (policy brief no. 2), Innovation for Growth
29. Tysseland B., (2008) Life cycle cost-based procurement decisions: a case study of Norwegian defence procurement projects, International Journal of Project Management, pp. 366-375

• Uyarra E.andFlanagan K., (2010) Understanding the innovation impacts of public procurement. European Planning Studies, 18, pp. 123-143
• Wardani M., Messner J., Horman M., (2006) Comparing procurement methods for design-build projects, Journal of Construction Engineering and Management, pp. 230-238

32. World Bank (2012), Why Reform Public Procurement? World Bank, Washington DC 

none