Procurement Rules Were AI Governance Before AI

Grants had strict procurement rules: define what you need, get competing quotes, document why you chose the winner. It slowed down purchases just enough to stop the two classic mistakes — buying from a friend, and buying the shiniest thing.

Watch how teams buy AI tools today: someone tries a demo, gets excited, and the company is suddenly running on it. No comparison, no criteria, no record of why this tool won.

Procurement rules were AI governance before AI existed. Borrow them:

1. Write down what you need the tool to do, in plain language, before you look at any product.
2. Compare at least two or three options against those needs — not against each other's marketing.
3. Document the decision: what you chose, why, and who approved it.

This isn't red tape. It's the difference between choosing a tool and falling for one. Grants programs that skipped procurement steps paid for it in audit findings. AI buyers who skip them pay in lock-in, surprise costs, and tools that never quite fit.

Define, compare, document. It worked for everything else. It works here.

I explain frameworks; I don't give legal counsel.