Maverick Spend

Maverick spend, sometimes called rogue spend or off-contract spend, is any purchase made outside the rules the organization has set for buying. It includes buying from a supplier that has not been approved, buying from an approved supplier without using the negotiated contract, splitting purchases to avoid approval limits, and paying invoices that were never backed by a purchase order. Most maverick spend is not deliberate misconduct; it usually happens because the approved route is slow, unclear or unknown.

Maverick spend matters because it undermines the benefits of managed purchasing. Negotiated discounts are lost, supplier risks go unchecked and spending becomes harder to track and forecast. For IT financial management, maverick spend is common in technology, where SaaS tools, cloud services and contractors can be bought quickly by any team, and it often hides costs that only surface when renewals arrive or security issues appear.

Definition of Maverick Spend

Maverick spend is spending that does not comply with an organization's procurement policies or contracts. It is the opposite of compliant, managed spending, and reducing it increases spend under management.

The term covers both purchases from unapproved suppliers and purchases from approved suppliers made outside the agreed terms, for example at list price rather than the negotiated rate.

Common Forms

Off-contract buying occurs when a contract exists with a preferred supplier but a team buys a similar product or service elsewhere, or buys from the preferred supplier without using the contract.

Unapproved supplier buying occurs when a team purchases from a supplier that has not been through the organization's onboarding, security and risk checks. In technology, this often means SaaS tools bought on corporate cards.

Process bypassing includes purchases made without required approvals, invoices received without purchase orders and large purchases split into smaller ones to stay under approval thresholds.

Why It Happens

The most common reason is that the approved process is slower or harder than going around it. If getting a new tool approved takes weeks, a team with an urgent need may simply buy it on a card.

Other reasons include lack of awareness of existing contracts, a belief that a different supplier offers something better, and approval thresholds or policies that do not fit how the business works.

Understanding these causes is more useful than enforcing rules alone, since many can be fixed by improving the process.

Importance of Maverick Spend in IT Financial Management

Maverick spend reduces the value of procurement work. When teams buy outside contracts, the organization pays more, takes on more risk and loses visibility of what it is spending.

In technology, these effects are amplified by the number of tools and services that can be bought without IT's involvement. SaaS, cloud and contractor spending are the most common sources, and all three can grow quickly once a team starts using them. Good IT procurement practices aim to make the approved route the easiest one.

Tracking maverick spend also helps identify where purchasing processes need to change, since high rates in a category often point to a process that is not working.

Higher Costs

Purchases made outside negotiated contracts usually cost more. Teams pay list prices, miss volume discounts and accept standard terms that may include automatic renewals and price increases.

Maverick spend also creates duplication. Several teams may buy similar tools from different suppliers, each paying full price, when one shared tool would serve them all. This contributes to SaaS sprawl.

Over time, these small differences add up. Maverick spend in technology is often a significant source of avoidable cost.

Hidden Risks

Suppliers that have not been through security and privacy reviews may store company or customer data without adequate safeguards. Contracts signed by individual teams may lack data protection terms, service levels or exit rights.

Maverick spend also makes forecasting harder, since costs appear in expense reports and departmental budgets rather than in planned technology spending. Renewals arrive without warning, and the organization may not know who owns them.

These risks are often discovered only when something goes wrong, such as a security incident or an unexpected renewal invoice.