Keyword

Capability Maturity, Centralized Procurement, Decentralized Procurement, e-Procurement, Digital Context, Supply Chain

Abstract

This study refers to the research model of Batenburg (2008) which defined procurement functions to six maturity dimensions; strategy, processes, control, organization, information, e-Technology as the starting point and indicates twenty-two items to support capability maturity measurement which is called Procurement Competitive Capability Maturity (PCCM). This model is used for a company to assess current practices of procurement function and perceives the level of its capabilities. The data collection is from a survey of fifty-two selected procurement organizations in Southeast Asia (SEA) countries; from Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. The objective of this study is to demonstrate the significant value of industry type, size of spending and centralized/decentralized procurement that affect procurement capability maturity. The results show that the industry has no relation to the capability maturity; the size of procurement spend has a positive relation to the capability maturity, and the centralized procurement has higher capability maturity than the decentralized. Moreover, this study extends the knowledge of e-Procurement and digital context to leverage procurement processes and visible procurement integration in an organization and across the supply chain.


Full Text : PDF
References
  • Batenburg, R. &Versendaal J., 2008. Maturity Matters: Performance Determinants of the
  • Procurement Business Function, 16th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), Galway, Ireland.
  • Van Weele, A., 2004.Purchasing and Supply Chain Management Analysis, Strategy,
  • Planning,and Practice, 4th Edition, London: Thomson, pp. 16.
  • Robinson, P. & Wale, D. & Dickson, G., 2010.Events Management. Cambridge, MA: CABI.
  • Rolstadas, A., Hetland, P.W., Jergeas, G. F. &Westney, R. E., 2011.Risk Navigation Strategies for Major Capital Projects: Beyond the Myth of Predictability, London NY: Springer.
  • Segev, A., Beam, C. &Gebauer, J.,1998. Procurement in the Internet Age–Current Practices and Emerging Trends (Results From a Field Study). Working Paper 98-WP-1033, Fisher Center, University of California, Berkeley.
  • Kraljic, P., 1983. Purchasing must become supply management. Harvard Business Review,
  • September–October, pp. 109–117.
  • Thomson, D. and Singh, M., 2001.A Macro Level Business Model For E-Enabled Procurement,CollEcTeR Conference, Coffs Harbour, December 3-4.
  • http://aseanup.com/benefits-asean-economic-community-aec[Access June 2016]
  • Croom, S. & Johnson, R., 2003. E-service: Enhancing Internal Customer Service through
  • E-procurement. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 14(5).
  • Rozemeijer, F.A., van Weele, A., Weggeman, M., 2003. Creating Corporate Advantage through Purchasing: toward a contingency model. The Journal of Supply Chain Management: a global review of purchasing and supply 39, 4-13.
  • Rosemann, M. and de Bruin, T., 2005.Towards a Business Process Management Maturity Model. In proceedings of the European Conference on Information System (ECIS), Regensburg, Germany.
  • Iversen, J.,Nielsen, P.A. and Norbjerg, J. , 1999. Situated assessment of problems in software
  • development. Database for Advances in Information Systems, 30 (2), pp.66-81.
  • Schiele, J. J., & McCue, C., 2006. Professional Service Acquisition in Public Sector Procurement: A Conceptual Model of Meaningful Involvement. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 26 (3): 300-325.
  • De Boer, L., Harick, J., Heijboer, G., 2002. A conceptual model for assessing the impact of electronic procurement, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Chain Management, 8, 25-33
  • Gunasekaran, A., &Ngai, E.W.T., 2008. Adoption of e-procurement in Hong Kong: An empirical research. International Journal of Production Economics, 113, 159-175.
  • Lefebvre, L., Lefebvre, E., Elia, E, &Boeck, H., 2005. Exploring B-to-B e-commerce adoption
  • trajectories in manufacturing SMEs. Technovation, 25, 1443-1456.
  • Teo, T.S.H., Lin, S., & Lai, K. (2009). Adopters and non-adopters of e-procurement in Singapore: An empirical study. The International Journal of Management Science, 37, 972-987.
  • Presutti, W.D., 2003. Supply Management and E-procurement: Creating Value Added in the Supply Chain. Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 2, pp. 219-26.
  • Giner, A. H., Alberto, A. A., Guillermo, C.R., &Cuauhtemoc, S. R. , 2011. Improving E-Procurement in Supply Chain Through Web Technologies: The HYDRA Approach, Supply Chain Management - New Perspectives, Prof. Sanda Renko (Ed.), ISBN: 978-953-307- 633
  • Lancioni, R.A. Smith, M.F. Oliva, T.A. , 2000. The role of internet in supply chain management logistics catches up with strategy. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(1), 45-56.
  • Aberdeen Group, Spend Analysis, pp. 16, August 2007.
  • Vision 2020: The future of procurement, Ideas for Procurement in 2020 by Industry Leading Procurement Executives, Published on 30 Oct 2013.
  • Nunnally, J. C., 1978. Psychometric Theory, 2ndEdition). New York: McGraw-Hill.