2019
DOI: 10.1504/ijpm.2019.098553
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Positive and negative impacts of the adoption of e-procurement solutions: the Italian market case

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 36 publications
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An efficient e-procurement system helps a firm organize its interactions with its most crucial suppliers, to reduce problems with suppliers, and improve customer service [21], to shorten the whole purchasing process and improve its quality [22]. E-procurement enhances also the suppliers' side [33]: it allows organizations to eliminate low-rated suppliers [34], for example, through the vendor-rating tools and the better suppliers information [15,35], reducing problems [17] and collusion between them [17,36] by improving the possibility to obtain "longer-term relationships" [34]. However, the impact of e-procurement adoption is not always considered beneficial: this is a quite controversial issue in the literature.…”
Section: Literature Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…An efficient e-procurement system helps a firm organize its interactions with its most crucial suppliers, to reduce problems with suppliers, and improve customer service [21], to shorten the whole purchasing process and improve its quality [22]. E-procurement enhances also the suppliers' side [33]: it allows organizations to eliminate low-rated suppliers [34], for example, through the vendor-rating tools and the better suppliers information [15,35], reducing problems [17] and collusion between them [17,36] by improving the possibility to obtain "longer-term relationships" [34]. However, the impact of e-procurement adoption is not always considered beneficial: this is a quite controversial issue in the literature.…”
Section: Literature Backgroundmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The finding is also consistent with previous studies which proposed that the use of technology in procurement management could contribute to the performance of procurement (Alsetoohy & Ayoun, 2018;Ateto et al, 2013;Gardenal, 2013;Hsiao & Teo, 2005;Karthik & Kumar, 2013;Mäkinen et al, 2011;Mishra et al, 2013;Quesada et al, 2010;Yu et al, 2016). Previous studies also conducted specifically in the public sector also were in support of the hypothesis that technology usage in the public sector procurement had a positive impact on performance (Alsac, 2007;Belisari et al, 2019;Cholette et al, 2019;Dooley & Purchase, 2006;Svidronova & Mikus, 2015). This finding is also consistence with the resource-based view predictions which are based on the argument that technology usage involves some necessary resources and these resources can enhance other resources and capabilities hence leading to performance Additionally, as hypothesized in hypothesis 2 (H2) the result on the relationship of the path from REGPRE*TECUSG to PROPERF was (-0.079) and statistically significant (t = 2.038; p < 0.05).…”
Section: Discussion Of the Findingsmentioning
confidence: 60%
“…Studies on technology usage in procurement, supply chain management, and value chain indicate the existence of a positive relationship between technology usage and public procurement performance (Alsac, 2007;Alsetoohy & Ayoun, 2018;Ateto et al, 2013;Belisari et al, 2019;Cholette et al, 2019;Gardenal, 2013;Hsiao & Teo, 2005;Karthik & Kumar, 2013;Mäkinen et al, 2011;Marinagi, Trivellas, & Sakas, 2014;Quesada et al, 2010;Singer et al, 2009;Svidronova & Mikus, 2015;Yu et al, 2016). Despite significant studies concluding on a positive association between technology usage in procurement and procurement performance yet still some studies provide ambivalent results on the relationship between technology usage in procurement and or supply chain performance.…”
Section: Technology Usage In Procurementmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These include lack of knowledge/ training programs, lack of funds, lack of environmental laws, deficient law enforcement, lack of green products, lack of suppliers for green products, resistance to change and lack of funding for research. These or similar inhibitors have already been highlighted in literature by various scholars in different contexts (Ahsan and Rahman, 2017;Belisari et al, 2019;Delmonico et al, 2018;Leal Filho et al, 2019;Saroha et al, 2019;Zaidi et al, 2019).…”
Section: Conclusion Limitations and Future Research Directionsmentioning
confidence: 66%