It has been a year since the Procurement Act came into force. The date, 24 February 2025, marked the start of a new regime to create a faster, more flexible and transparent public procurement process, with a focus on supporting small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs).

It also provided the ideal moment for ACE’s Procurement and Pipeline Group to meet and reflect. We set out to understand what the past year has meant for the people who work with the Act every day. What emerged was a balanced but hopeful picture. There is real progress, even if it remains uneven and sometimes slower than we would like.

No one expected change to happen instantly. Construction is a large and complex sector shaped by culture, habit and long-standing processes. Yet it was encouraging to hear that the Act is reshaping how procurement is viewed. Instead of being treated as a procedural obstacle, procurement is increasingly recognised as a strategic tool that can unlock innovation, guide markets and deliver better outcomes.

This growing respect for procurement as a professional discipline, supported by clearer expectations and improved capability building, is one of the most important achievements of the past year.

Pipeline visibility and pre-market engagement stood out as areas where the Act has already had a positive effect. These early conversations are helping suppliers prepare and helping clients understand market conditions before they publish competitions. Procurement and Pipeline Group participants agreed this is improving the quality of bids and increasing participation from smaller suppliers.

The main barrier is the digital platform that supports this work, which continues to feel slow, restrictive and administratively demanding. The intention behind greater transparency is strong, but the supporting technology needs to improve before its benefits can be fully realised.

Much of the meeting’s discussion focused on the Flexible Procedure, which is perhaps the most forward-looking part of the Act. When used well, it allows organisations to design competitions around outcomes rather than rigid templates. We heard examples of genuinely fresh approaches, including outcome focused specifications that attracted a wide range of solutions, live demonstrations instead of lengthy written submissions, and evaluation processes that involved people who actually use the services being procured.

These examples show what is possible. However, they remain rare. Many organisations continue to re-use the old-restricted procedure because it feels safer and easier, especially when internal governance and legal caution encourage risk avoidance. What the public sector needs now is reassurance that using the new freedoms is not only allowed but actively supported.

Contract management was another important theme. For the first time, the Act extends its expectations beyond the point of award and into the delivery phase, requiring clearer and more consistent use of performance measures. This is a significant shift in principle, but many organisations are still adjusting in practice. Key performance indicators may be loosely defined, overly generous or unfamiliar.

Contract managers may not yet feel they have the tools or training they need. Even so, the direction is correct. By creating visibility around performance, the Act is encouraging organisations to build capability and take contract management more seriously.

We also explored the rapid growth of frameworks and the wide range of buying organisations that operate them. This has created concerns about consistency, transparency and value for money. Attendees noted the risk of what is often called framework shopping, where the route chosen reflects convenience rather than best fit.

While the Act cannot solve this challenge on its own, the sector clearly wants better guidance, greater quality assurance and a more consistent understanding of what good looks like.

Another important area of discussion was the experience of small and medium sized enterprises. While the Act is helping bring them into early conversations, many still find procurement too time consuming and too costly, especially for lower value work. If the UK wants to support innovation and diversify its supplier base, improving accessibility for smaller firms must remain a priority.

Finally, the group discussed the difficulty of moving innovation from pilot stage to real contracts. Many organisations run successful accelerators or trials but struggle to integrate new solutions into formal procurement routes. The Act offers tools that can help, including outcome focused specifications and staged development contracts, but wider confidence and familiarity are needed before innovation becomes a routine part of procurement.

As we look ahead to the second year of the Procurement Act, ACE will continue to support members as they navigate this transition. Our priorities include advocating for better digital systems, encouraging confident and sensible use of the Flexible Procedure, strengthening contract management capability and improving access for smaller suppliers. The Act has created a strong foundation, and now the task is to build on it with clarity, consistency and collaboration.

The Procurement and Pipeline Group champions practical improvements to procurement, shaping ACE’s interactions with policymakers, supporting evidence-based thought-leadership, and ensuring our industry is at the forefront of government discussions of an area which cuts across all member activity. The chair is Conor McCarthy from WSP. Find out more here.