Competition is often seen as a simple way to improve public services, but my findings show it can change how contracts are managed in ways that are not always helpful. The key question is not just how to get more bidders, but how to manage complex contracts well. If competition leads to overly rigid contracts and too much monitoring, it can cancel out the benefits.
Dr Alice Moore, Lecturer in Management & Organisation at King’s Business School
20 April 2026
More competition is not always better for complex public contracts
New study finds that highly competitive markets can lead to tighter controls and higher costs in public services.
New research from King’s Business School suggests that increasing competition for public contracts does not always improve outcomes, especially when services are complex.
The study, published in Public Administration Review, finds that when many suppliers compete for a contract, public sector managers tend to place tighter controls on how work is delivered and check performance more closely.
The findings come as local authorities prepare for elections across England, with public services and value for money high on the agenda.
Dr Alice Moore’s research examines how competition shapes day-to-day contract management. It focuses on two key questions: how much freedom suppliers are given, and how closely their work is checked.
Based on responses from nearly 600 public managers, the study finds that higher competition is associated with stricter requirements and closer monitoring. In complex services such as outsourced technology development or support, this can limit how far suppliers can adapt their work, while increasing the time and cost involved in managing contracts.
The study also finds risks where competition is low. In those cases, managers may check performance less closely, which can weaken oversight.
Together, the findings point to a trade-off. While competition can strengthen accountability, it can also lead to tighter controls that reduce flexibility and increase costs.
Dr Moore said the findings are relevant for local authorities, which manage a wide range of complex contracts. As councils face pressure to deliver better services with limited resources, the research highlights the need to focus not just on how many suppliers bid for a contract, but how those contracts are managed.
This is particularly relevant for digital and technology contracts, which are the focus of the study and where services are harder to define and often change over time. With local elections bringing renewed focus to public service delivery, the findings draw attention to the trade-offs between competition and the day-to-day management of these contracts.
Read the full paper: Do Markets Shape Management? Experimental Evidence for the Effects of Competition on Contract Management, published in Public Administration Review.
In this story
Lecturer in Management & Organisation