Why talk about compliance in the public sector?
Whenever a citizen waits weeks to obtain a simple certificate, or reads headlines about misappropriation of funds, the image of the Administration deteriorates and collective trust shrinks. It was to counteract this cycle that the concept of compliance – already mature in companies – gained momentum among public organisations. In practice, compliance in the public sector means aligning processes, people and technologies to guarantee compliance with laws, regulations and ethical standards, reducing corruption and inefficiencies.
This article explains how well-designed programmes generate public value, describes essential elements and presents good practices adopted by European municipalities that are already reaping the rewards of greater transparency and accountability.
1. Why is compliance different (and more demanding) in the public sector?
-
Regulatory complexity– Public organisations comply with national legislation, European directives and internal rules. Managing multiple levels of regulation requires robust legal update controls.
-
Pressure for integrity– When managing everyone’s resources, any failure has a direct impact on political legitimacy.
-
Exposure to scrutiny– Courts of Auditors, parliaments, the media and citizens constantly monitor public actions.
-
Risk of political capture– Changes of government can alter priorities and weaken accountability mechanisms.
Consequently, a compliance programme in the public sector must go beyond mere legal compliance; it needs to create a culture of institutional integrity, resistant to electoral cycles and external pressures.
2. Architecture of a public compliance programme
| Pillar | Description | Particularities of the Administration |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership commitment | Formal declaration by senior management and provision of resources. | May require approval by the municipal assembly or publication in the Official Gazette. |
| Risk assessment | Identifies critical processes (public procurement, subsidies, licences) and probabilities of fraud. | Risks should be reviewed at least annually and published for consultation. |
| Codes and policies | Codes of Ethics, anti-corruption policies, conflict of interest, whistleblowing channels. | They should cover employees, managers and suppliers. |
| Internal control | Segregation of duties, double validation, rotation of critical positions. | Compatibility with spending limits and public tenders. |
| Training and communication | Regular sessions, e-learning and awareness campaigns aimed at civil servants and partners. | Often financed by European funds or public administration schools. |
| Protected whistleblowing channel | Anonymous mechanisms, whistleblower protection, follow-up reports. | Adhere to Directive (EU) 2019/1937 on whistleblowing. |
| Monitoring and auditing | Transparency KPIs, internal and external audits, public reports. | Involve independent bodies such as inspectorates general or anti-fraud bodies. |
| Corrective action | Agile disciplinary process, recovery of assets, review of processes. | Subject to civil service disciplinary statute. |
3. Proven impact: what do citizens and managers gain?
-
Reduction in deviations – OECD studies show a drop of up to 40 per cent in contracting irregularities when there is a systematic risk assessment.
-
Administrative efficiency – Standardised processes reduce rework and lower average service times.
-
Trust and investment – Transparent municipalities attract additional European funds because they demonstrate management capacity and fraud mitigation.
-
Culture of service – When rules are clear and applied to everyone, the professional pride of public service providers increases and, consequently, the quality of public service.
4. Good practices in Europe: three municipalities that inspire
4.1 Cascais (Portugal) – Anti-Corruption Management System
In 2024, Cascais adopted an Anti-Corruption Management System in line with the ISO 37001 standard. The municipality mapped risk areas – public space concessions, sponsorships and town planning – integrated an independent whistleblowing channel and began publishing half-yearly compliance reports. The project involved consulting Columbia University in a comparative analysis with Barcelona and Madrid, reinforcing transparency indicators. See more at Cascais.pt and at sipa.columbia.edu
Results in 12 months: a 28 per cent decrease in the average time taken to award minor contracts and a 35 per cent increase in relevant complaints (a sign of confidence in the system).
4.2 Barcelona (Spain) – Sistema d’Integritat Institucional
The Diputació de Barcelona unanimously approved its Institutional Integrity System and Anti-Fraud Measures Plan in February 2022, responding to the requirements of the EU’s Recovery and Resilience Facility. The strategy includes segregation of duties, payment traceability and an annual declaration of conflicts of interest for all managers. See more at transparencia.diba.cat
Strength: integration of existing instruments (transparency portal, code of conduct, open data observatory) into a single ecosystem, avoiding redundancies.
4.3 Milan (Italy) – PIAO 2025-2027
In March 2025, the Metropolitan City of Milan approved the Piano Integrato di Attività e Organizzazione (PIAO) 2025-2027, chapter 2.3 of which deals with corruption risks and transparency. To strengthen compliance in the public sector, the plan introduces quantifiable targets (e.g. 100 per cent of contract publications in open data format within 24 hours) and articles to hold managers accountable if they fail to meet deadlines. See more at cittametropolitana.mi.it
Innovation: prior public consultation to gather suggestions from citizens before formal approval, increasing legitimacy and participation.
5. Key lessons learnt from European experiences
| Lesson | How to apply to other organisations |
|---|---|
| Top-down bottom-up | Political leadership is essential, but involving civil servants and civil society ensures continuity. |
| Digitalise to control | Open data platforms and risk dashboards facilitate audits and early warnings. |
| SMART indicators | Measurable targets (e.g. “publish 95 per cent of contracts ≤ 10 days after award”) allow for objective auditing. |
| Ongoing training | Quarterly micro-learning keeps the subject alive and reduces knowledge turnover with staff changes. |
| Independent assessment | ISO 37001 certifications or external audits increase credibility and signal international commitment. |
6. Common challenges and how to overcome them
-
Internal resistance– Mitigated with clear communication about benefits and incentives to join (career progression linked to ethical performance).
-
Limited resources– Inter-municipal partnerships and European funds (e.g. URBACT) can finance training, consultancy and technological solutions. See more at forumdascidades.pt
-
Political changes– Shielding key policies in local regulations and involving external bodies (Court of Auditors, civil society) ensures continuity.
-
Bureaucratic overload– Automating data collection and reporting reduces the burden and increases reliability.
7. Conclusion and next step
Compliance programmes in the public sector are proving to be the most effective tool for curbing corruption and improving the management of public resources. By adopting principles of transparency, risk assessment and accountability, public organisations gain efficiency, regain trust and deliver more value to citizens.
CTA – Explore examples of success in European municipalities.
Consult the integrity portals of Cascais, Barcelona and Milan, visit the URBACT platform of good practices and assess how to adapt the initiatives to the reality of your organisation.
The journey requires commitment, but the results – greater ethics, faster services and more confident citizens – are well worth the investment.
👉 Be part of the conversation that’s shaping the future of work! Book a meeting!
See other articles that may be of interest to you.
We hope you enjoyed this article.
Thank you!
Constantino Ferreira
iBlow.eu
