Public
vs.
Private

–Julie Peterson

We all recognize that KSU is a public institution, but some implications of this status can come as a surprise.  Well-run institutions—whether they are public or private—are likely to have policies requiring the review of contracts as a means of protecting the interests of the institution. But there can really be no dispute that the paperwork, the reviews, the delays—the bureaucratic red tape is generally more burdensome in the public sector than is the case in the private sector.

More than a few KSU employees have been unpleasantly surprised at learning that the freedoms and liberties they associate with an academic environment have concealed from them the University’s governmental underpinnings. Spending taxpayer dollars requires a different kind of accountability, compared with organizations in the private sector.

Business Services has to be able to demonstrate to auditors (who are the eyes of taxpayers) where the money is at every single moment it is in our hands; it is demonstrated with very complete paperwork. When the money leaves our possession, Business Services has to be able to demonstrate—again, with very complete paperwork—how the money was spent.

In particular, Business Services must demonstrate that taxpayer money is only spent in compliance with laws, rules and regulations established for the expenditure of such money. Many of these laws, rules and regulations have to do with fairness and a level playing field for companies wishing to do business with government agencies such as KSU. In this context, it is interesting to consider that companies wishing to do business with the government generally seek to tilt the playing field in their favor through advantages over their competitors. Occasionally, a company will seek an unfair advantage over their competitors, and accountants as well as others involved in the purchasing process must remain on guard against such activities.

There are plenty of auditors (taxpayer eyes) keeping tabs on KSU. We are, at any time, liable to be audited by the Georgia Department of Administrative Services, the Georgia Department of Audits, the Board of Regents and also our own internal auditors. Looking good in the eyes of taxpayers is clearly an important activity, as taxpayers do not care to read in the newspaper that their hard-earned money is being mismanaged. (For more on the auditing function in state government, see the July, 2010, newsletter article, So, are audits a good thing? by Susan Dalton.)

We in Procurement certainly understand how KSU employees can become fed up with government red tape, but taxpayers want to know a lot about how the government spends their money. KSU is very good at showing how the money is spent and how these expenditures comply with laws, rules and regulations.