E-procurement management in state governments: Diffusion of e-procurement practices and its determinants

Abstract

State governments have begun to introduce various eprocurement tools to improve inefficient and ineffective procurement management; however, few empirical studies have documented the diffusion of e-procurement. This study uses data collected from state procurement agencies to examine which e-procurement tools state governments are using as well as to explore what factors affect the adoption of these tools. This study confirms that simple innovations are more rapidly diffused than those that are technically or legally complex. State governments that are more likely to adopt e-procurement tools tend to be larger, managerially innovative, and to have a strong centralized procurement office. Overall, e-procurement is promising technology, but managerial and technical challenges still remain.

Diffusion of e-government: A literature review and directions for future directions

“…Most of the studies have a single source of data. These data sources include the UN's global e-government report (Lee, Chang, & Berry, 2011), National Association of Procurement Officers (Moon, 2005), American state websites (Yun & Opheim, 2010), and the tax e-filing system (Wang & Doong, 2010). In addition, one article used multi-source data (Azad, Faraj, Goh, & Feghali, 2010).…”

“…The manner in which different levels of government are organized plays an important role in accelerating the diffusion of e-government (Azad et al, 2010;Moon & Bretschneider, 1997;Somasundaram, 2004). The magnitude of the effect of e-government diffusion is impacted by the type of government (Moon, 2002;Moon & Norris, 2005), the government agency's size and structure (Moon, 2005;Tony, 2009), and the governments' capacity resources (Moon & Norris, 2005). In addition, inter-municipal collaborations (Ferro & Sorrentino, 2010) and public sector partnerships (Cotterill & King, 2007) can further facilitate the diffusion of e-government.…”

“…These systems include document management (Sorrentino, 2007), e-procurement (e.g. Moon, 2005;Somasundaram, 2004), e-customs (e.g. Reddick, 2009) and bio-terror surveillance (Fedorowicz & Gogan, 2010).…”

Innovation in Public Management: Is Public E-Procurement a Wave of the Future? A Theoretical and Exploratory Analysis

“…It is a future wave in e-governance and democratic public administration. Yet, the diffusion of e-procurement has not been smooth and easy-it has been a slow process, as obstacles abound in its adoption in the public sector, whereas opportunities also are many (McCue & Roman, 2012;Moon, 2005;Somasundaram, 2004;Vaidya, Sajeev, & Callender, 2006).…”

“…Variations are marked by different practices across states within the United States and governments worldwide, from Asia to America, and Europe-the degrees of variations are also immense as institutional capacities of different governments, states, and localities vary widely (Kunstelj & Decman, 2005;Moon, 2005;Orita, 2005;Vaidya, Sajeev, & Callender, 2006). Generally speaking, three structural forms of public e-procurement may be considered in practice: (1) public/government agencies directly adopting the practice with institutionalized IT infrastructures and training programs; (2) semi-public or government corporations, or public enterprises operating like private organizations, adopting public e-procurement systems with invested infrastructures; and (3) government outsourced contractual arrangements with private sector organizations adopting e-procurement systems as part of public sector "strategic sourcing" (Dooley & Purchase, 2006).…”