This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: White, G. R.T., Parfitt, S., Lee, C. and Mason-Jones, R. (2016), Challenges to the Development of Strategic Procurement: A Meta-Analysis of Organizations in the Public and Private Sectors. Strategic Change, 25: 285–298, which has been published in final form at DOI 10.1002/jsc.2061. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.

Challenges to the Development of Strategic Procurement: a meta-analysis of organisations in the public and private sectors1

Gareth R.T. White, Scott Parfitt, Chris Lee and Rachel Mason-Jones, University of South Wales, UK

Main MessageEnabling the development of strategic procurement has been long recognised as contributing to an effective organisation however companies in both the public and private sector still seem to find it challenging and there appears to be a systemic Cycle of Impotence.

Key PointsThe training and development of Procurement staff in the public and private sector needs careful consideration.

Non-Procurement staff and management need better awareness of the strategic benefits that Procurement is capable of delivering.

The usefulness of the models of strategic procurement is an area that requires further research.

IntroductionProcurement has evolved considerably since its recognition as a primarily

manufacturing sector discipline in the mid twentieth sector (Tassabehji and

Moorhouse, 2008; Reynolds and Thompson, 2008; Porter, 1985; Ammer, 1974).

Originally defined as simply involving the acquisition of goods and services

(Compton and Jessop, 1995) it underwent the greatest change during the 1980’s and

1990’s due to rising cost pressures in an increasingly global market (Rozemeijer,

2008; Ellegaard and Ritter, 2006; Ellram and Carr, 1994; Porter, 1985). It is now

widely recognised as a strategically significant function that is capable of driving and

delivering competitive advantage (Ubeda et al, 2015; O’Brien, 2010; Lysons and

Farrington, 2006; Paulraj et al, 2006; Mol, 2003; Ellram and Liu, 2002; Hendricks

and Singhal, 2002; Humphreys, 2001; Spekman et al, 1999; Tan, Kannan and

Handfield, 1998; Carter and Narasimhan, 1996; Landeros and Monczka, 1989; Syson,

1989).

1 L14

Procurement has clearly demonstrated its rise to strategic importance (Tassabehji and

Moorhouse, 2008; Carr and Smeltzer, 1997; Ellram and Carr, 1994; Burt and Doyle

1993; Novak and Simco, 1991). Yen and Yen (2012) for example highlight the

importance of top management support in driving purchasing initiatives. However it is

extraordinary to discover that many organisations still view it as an administrative,

passive and reactive function (Gonzalez-Benito 2007; Kaufmann and Carter, 2004;

Hirsch and Barbalho 2001). Narasimhan and Das (2001) recognise that in practice

some organisations have struggled to realise the value that procurement can deliver.

Despite the increasing recognition of the need to develop a strategic approach to

procurement academic focus has been largely based on studies of the private sector

(Deasy et al, 2014; Murray, 2001). Public services procurement forms a considerable

proportion of overall government spend, comprising for example 17% of the

European Union’s GDP (€1900 billion) in 2006 (European Commission, 2008) and

public sector procurement has been a subject of debate among European leaders for

many years (Cabras, 2011). The UK government spends around £240 billion per

annum on the procurement of goods and services (Maude, 2012). Consequently,

developing an effective and strategic procurement function is increasingly becoming a

priority for managers who recognise that it has a definitive role in the ultimate success

of the public sector (McClelland, 2012; Green, 2010; Matthews, 2005; Gershon,

2004).

This paper aims to identify the challenges that surround the development of strategic

procurement practices. It undertakes an investigation in both the public and private

sectors thereby contributing to a hitherto under-researched area of supply chain

management in the public sector. Comparisons of public and private sector

procurement practices are made implicitly within the literature, this study provides an

explicit examination. The paper arrives at the realisation that the development of

strategic procurement is ensnared in a Cycle of Impotence (CoI) whereby the

procurement function is neither empowered nor compelled to develop its strategic

capabilities and contributions

The next section of the paper examines the literature around strategic procurement

development, the challenges that it presents and the summary differences between

public and private sectors. Following this, the research methodology is discussed and

then the analyses of the primary data are presented. Finally, the key findings of the

study are discussed before concluding remarks and suggestions for future research are

made.

Developing Strategic ProcurementThe trend to outsource business functions and services is one factor that has

contributed to procurement becoming more important to organisations (Zheng et al,

2007; Guinipero, 2000; Mol, 2003). During the last decade, outsourcing has become

one of the major issues in many sectors of commerce (Cigolini et al, 2011). Many

companies have focussed upon their core capabilities in order to develop their

competitive advantages and have outsourced their extraneous activities. According to

Pouder et al, (2011) 82% of large and medium sized firms now outsource. Over time,

the reasons for outsourcing appear to have shifted, from being predominantly cost-

related, to enabling the organisation to focus upon its core competencies and, lately, to

access complementary specialist expertise (Davis et al, 2015; Dekkers, 2011;

Klingberg and Boksma, 2010; Bengtsson and Dabhilkar, 2009; Lacey and Blumberg,

2005; Elmutti et al, 1998). This trend has led to organisations becoming increasingly

reliant upon their suppliers (Axelsson et al, 2005). It also means that organisations are

dependent upon their purchasing function, not just for sourcing and maintaining

supply, but also for identifying and utilising innovations that arise from within the

upstream and downstream supply chain (Mouzas and Ford, 2012; O’Brien, 2009;

Accenture, 2009).

A plethora of frameworks and models exist that outline the steps toward developing

procurement as a strategic function (outlined in Figure 1) (Beukers et al, 2006;

Cousins et al, 2006; Van Weele, 2005; Jones, 1997; Barry et al, 1996; Stannack and

Jones, 1996; Burt and Doyle, 1993; Cammish and Keough, 1991; Freeman and

Cavinato, 1990; Bhote, 1989; Syson, 1989; Reck and Long, 1988). Part of the reason

for the existence of so many models is due to the constantly changing nature of

procurement activities and responsibilities within organisations (Van Weele et al,

1998). As the function develops and its roles and responsibilities change and expand

so the models are enhanced.

Mol (2003) offers words of caution in reference to the relevance and over-use of

procurement models and frameworks and explains that they are easy for managers to

apply but they need to be applied appropriately. Ubeda et al (2015) point out that the

models do not specify the techniques that organisations could, or should, use in order

to develop their maturity level. Rozemeijer (2008) claims that many of the

procurement development models are unhelpful or are used inappropriately because

they do not consider operational factors. Furthermore, the models infer that the

ultimate goal for an organisation is the development of fully strategic procurement

practices. In practice however, asymmetric procurement practices have been found to

be not only effective, but also appropriate, depending upon the nature of the materials

being procured (Deasy et al, 2014).

Figure 1, Overview of Models of Strategic Procurement

Challenges to Strategic Procurement

The development of procurement as a strategic enabler is a significant undertaking for

any organisation (Greve and Mitsuhashi; 2007; Cox and Lamming, 1997; Cammish

and Keough, 1991). It is more complicated than merely following the path identified

by one of the models: these should perhaps be viewed as descriptions of strategic

procurement practice rather than prescriptions for its attainment.

Mintzberg et al (1998) emphasise a critical issue in the development of organisational

strategy: if the business and functional strategies are not in alignment then the

organisation is at risk of failing to achieve its long-term goals (Freeman and Cavinato,

1990). Strategic misalignment eventually results in lower profit margins (Saunders,

1997), reduction in market share (Johnson and Scholes, 2002) and missed

opportunities that are often seized by competitors (Baily et al, 2008). The

development of Category Management (CM) as a strategic method of procurement for

example, presents significant challenges to organisations and their personnel.

CM is a radical transformation of the established view of procurement, expanding its

responsibilities from demand-side cost control, to include responsibility for supply-

side cost control (O’Brien, 2009; Heikkila and Kaipia, 2009). Consequently CM

challenges the established structure of an organisation and requires procurement staff

to expand their skills to include activities such as market research and analysis,

managing projects and change, as well as being able to recognise and foster

innovative practice. The difficulties that CM presents are considered by many to be

worth enduring as CM has been shown to be capable of delivering tens of millions of

pounds worth of savings within two to three years of implementation (CIPS, 2012).

One of the biggest challenges that the procurement function continues to face, despite

its widely reported benefits, is the general lack of awareness of the advantages that it

can provide to an organisation (Tassabehji and Moorhouse, 2008; Van Weele and

Rietveld, 1996; Reck and Long, 1998). The efficacy of strategic procurement is

heavily reliant upon its formal position within the organisation (Cannon, 2005),

particularly at Board level (Cousins et al, 2006), and has also been battling for

acceptance and recognition among functional peers (Cox, 1996). This appears to be a

particularly problematic issue for smaller, resource-scarce organisations (Quayle,

1998; Spekman, 1994). Procurement professionals can also be hindered by a lack of

appropriate skills and knowledge to enable them to address the problems and

opportunities that arise in a strategically important business function (Tassebehji and

Moorhouse, 2008).

Public and Private Sector Procurement

Both the public and private sectors have an important role in supporting the economic

environment in which they operate (Hoctor and Keating, 2009). Procurement in both

public and private sectors is concerned with the purchase of materials to enable them

to undertake their primary functions (Cabras, 2011; Uyarra and Flanagan, 2010).

Some perceive that procurement has a much more strategic role within public sector

organisations since there are increasingly complex product choices, increased use of

technology, increased consideration of environmental issues and a switch of focus

from cost to Value for Money (VFM) (McCue and Gianakis 2001; Zheng et al, 2007;

Beukers et al, 2006; Paulraj et al, 2006; Gelderman and van Weele 2005).

Procurement in the public sector differs somewhat to private sector procurement, most

noticeably through the potential for government influence and the highly regulated

nature of the sector (Schapper et al, 2006). The regulations that govern public sector

procurement define performance requirements together with the delivery of

efficiencies and this can be interpreted to show that the sector is just as concerned

with productivity and performance improvement as the private sector (Linna et al,

2010). It has, however, been stated that regulation cannot deliver the same

competition levels as afforded to the private sector, but it does provide a pressure on

the public service to perform (Cousins et al, 2008). It has also been said that the drive

in the public sector to operate in a commercial sense undermines the forms of

regulation within which it operates (Prowse and Prowse, 2007).

Summary and PurposeEven a cursory review of the literature would suggest that the development of

strategic procurement practices is a panacea for corporate success. However, as one

could expect from an initiative that aims to radically change the way in which a key

business function operates, the challenges are significant. These range from poor

perceptions of its potential value, functional recognition, resource availability, and

staff skills and capabilities.

A multitude of frameworks exist that provide taxonomies of the stages of strategic

procurement development. While they are useful descriptors and comparators they are

of questionable value to those practitioners that aim to use them as guides for the

development of their own organisations. In fact, the use of strategic procurement

practices should be confined to only those areas where it is appropriate and will reap

reward.

Public sector procurement has received comparatively little academic attention

despite being a significant proportion of national spend. The private sector has been

hailed as the vanguard of organisational efficiency (MacDonald, 2002; Bailey and

Pack, 1995) much to the chagrin of their public sector counterparts. In order to

examine the challenges to strategic procurement this study explores organisations in

both the public and private sectors. In doing so it also provides illumination of the

interesting question, “which is more strategic, Public or Private Sector procurement?”

MethodologyThis research presents a meta-analysis of ten case studies conducted within a range of

public and private sector organisations. The technique of meta-analysis is widely used

and may be applied to data sources from any epistemological or ontological domain.

It has been applied in studies ranging from human mortality (O’Sullivan et al, 2013),

learning (Yorio and Ye, 2012), motivation to use information systems (Wu and Lu,

2013), effectiveness of advertising (Assmus et al, 1984), to strategic alignment (Cao

et al, 2012), and, in support of this study’s approach, researchers have been called

upon to utilise meta-analyses to improve supply chain management theory and

understanding (Goldsby and Autry, 2011).

This study draws upon prior fieldwork that comprised ten case study examinations of

public and private sector organisation. The work is exploratory in nature and so case

study approaches are appropriate (Yin, 2003). Descriptions of the organisation types

and the data capture methods that were employed in the ten individual case studies are

presented in Table 1. Five of the case organisations operate in the public sector, one

is a public/private partnership and the remaining four are private sector organisations.

The cases were selected in order to provide a representative sample of organisation

types in each sector. Multi-method and multi-site analyses triangulate the findings and

contribute to this study’s validity (Bryman and Bell, 2011; Eden and Huxham, 1996;

Jick, 1979; Miles, 1979).

There appears to be no prescribed way to perform a meta-analysis, partly due to the

wide range of philosophical paradigms and data sources that may be employed. The

meta analysis employed in this study consisted of a thematic analysis of the findings

of the individual case studies to identify common themes and observations (Guest et

al, 2012). Thematic analysis of the public sector case studies was undertaken by one

of the investigators and the analysis of the private sector case studies by another

investigator. Collectively they then compared their individual findings in order to

identify the common themes and issues between public and private sector

organisations. The common themes were then independently verified by the third

investigator through comparison with the original case study data findings.

Organisation Description Data Capture Method(s)

UK Local authority. Focus Groups with senior managers.

UK Emergency Service. Focus Groups with senior managers and staff survey.

A consortium that undertakes procurement for a

group of UK educational establishments.

Survey of suppliers.

Local Authorities in England and Wales. Semi-structured interviews with senior procurement managers and a

survey of 101 local authorities.

UK Borough Council. Semi-structured interviews with senior procurement professionals and

key suppliers.

Part Public/Part Private Airline company employing

5,000 people worldwide, with an annual turnover in

excess of £700 million.

Focus Groups, semi-structured interviews and survey with senior

managers.

Pharmaceutical company, employing over 65,000

people worldwide with a turnover in excess of £25

billion.

Focus Groups with senior procurement managers.

FMCG company, employing over 185,000 people

worldwide with a turnover in excess of £20 billion.

Focus Groups with senior procurement professionals.

Construction company, employing over 50,000

people worldwide with a turnover in excess of £800

Semi-structured interviews with senior management.

million.

Aerospace company, employing over 10,000

employees with a turnover in excess of £900

million.

Action Research observations and semi-structured interviews with

Procurement staff.

Table 1, Overview of Prior Fieldwork

Thematic Meta-Analysis

This section presents the meta analysis of the ten case study organisations. The

discussions are arranged according to the key themes of ‘acting tactically, ‘perception

of the value of the procurement function’, ‘lack of recognition of the function’,

‘training and development of staff ‘and confusion over the meaning of ‘centralization

of procurement’, that emerged from the analyses.

Acting Tactically

Across both public and private sectors the study finds that many organisations do not

enact strategic procurement practices. Procurement was stated to be ‘reactive’, ‘short-

termist’ and concerned with delivering price reductions (Gonzalez-Benito 2007;

Kaufmann and Carter, 2004; Hirsch and Barbalho 2001). It is perhaps significant that

both the procurement function staff and other people, predominantly senior managers,

within each organisation, proffered this view.

Procurement staff indicated that acting tactically was not their preferred methodology

and that they recognised the limitations of such an approach. However, circumstances

within the organisations, including a lack of functional recognition and directives to

generate cost reductions had meant that the development of strategic procurement

practices was neither wanted nor possible. In these situations the staff reported

increased frustrations at being constrained from fulfilling their potential, both as a

department and as individuals.

Perception of Value

Despite the relative maturity of the Procurement function since its emergence as a

professional discipline, and contrary to much of the contemporary literature (such as

Ubeda et al, 2015; O’Brien, 2010), organisations still perceive that it is not a value-

adding function and that it undertakes merely administrative tasks. This view was

expressed by procurement staff and senior managers in the organisations in both

sectors.

Even though both groups of stakeholders make similar comments their motivations

are rather different. In accordance with Cox’s (1996) observations, non-procurement

managers stated that procurement, as a function within the organisation, was of little

value, but some did concede that it was a potentially value-adding discipline in

general. Contrastingly, while the procurement staff agreed that the procurement

function was a potentially value-adding discipline, they felt as though it was not

perceived as being value-adding within the organisation because it was constrained

from acting in such a manner by the organisation strategy and management itself.

Lack of Recognition

Similar to the analysis of the perceptions of procurement’s value-adding capability,

both public and private sector organisations indicated that the function lacked

recognition. In this instance though, the lack of recognition was not due to a

perception of value-adding capability, but was a statement of the function’s

representation within the organisation, reflecting the observations of Cousins et al

(2006) and Cannon (2005). In both cases the organisations employed senior

Procurement staff, responsible for managing specific aspects of the department and

company spend. However, it was reported that the function did not possess

representation at the highest level within the organisation.

Training & Development

Staff capabilities and ongoing development is a perennial issue for procurement

professionals (Tassebehji and Moorhouse, 2008) and was an issue that was found to

span both the public and private sectors. This was observed to be particularly

problematic in long-established organisations where procurement staff had been

employed for a number of years. Some of these staff had been unable to pursue the

development of their skills and capabilities, due to personal commitments, company

constraints and often a lack of recognition of the importance of continuing their

professional development.

The lack of ongoing training and development is an obvious concern for all staff in all

disciplines. It is of particular concern in a function that is developing its strategic

capabilities especially when those developments have significant effects upon the rest

of the organisation and the supply base, such as CM that was discussed in the

literature review.

Centralisation

According to the frameworks that were used to conduct the initial case-based

analyses, one of the most common areas where organisations in both public and

private sectors appeared to be operating in non-strategic manners was around the

centralisation of responsibility for purchasing materials. The analyses also suggested

that in some instances the notion of centralised procurement had been misinterpreted:

organisations expected centralised purchasing to mean that all procurement functions

should be carried out by the procurement department and staff. This would appear to

concur Rozemeijer’s (2008) observations.

This had lead to the introduction of significant lead-time into the process for

purchasing low-value and consumable items. In reality, the notion of centralisation

refers to the centralisation of responsibility for sourcing and managing procurement

contracts while the act of procuring some items may remain the responsibility of the

function or person that requires them. An example of this may be the procurement of

stationery for a large, geographically dispersed organisation. In this instance one

would expect the procurement function to establish Vendor Managed Inventories

(VMI) or contract call-off arrangements whereby control of the spend and

management of the supplier relationship remained centralised but the act of managing

and ordering stock remained the responsibility of the item’s end users.

Overall there did not appear to be a difference between the degree of strategic

procurement development in one sector over the other. There would therefore appear

to be little ‘best practice’ knowledge that could be garnered from any specific sector,

although individual organisations in either sector may exhibit functional excellence.

Discussion

The observations that the procurement functions that were studied in both the public

and private sectors are acting tactically and are often perceived to be of questionable

value, raises an interesting point. It was found that Senior Management teams

appeared to be “waiting” for procurement to emerge as being value-adding, while

procurement were “waiting” for the organisation to enable the function to develop its

strategic direction and thereby deliver the greater benefits that it is capable of. This

may be an issue that begins to explain why some organisations still view procurement

as an administrative, passive and reactive function (Gonzalez-Benito 2007; Kaufmann

and Carter, 2004; Hirsch and Barbalho 2001).

The lack of recognition and representation of Procurement at the highest level in

organisations may well also be partly due to its perceived, and its historical, relatively

poor track record in delivering bottom-line benefits (Cousins et al, 2006; Cannon

(2005). This is an issue that has also been identified in the lack of strategic

recognition of the Marketing function (Merlo et al, 2012). This may be exacerbated

by less than adequate training provision, both for the Procurement staff, and for other

senior managers in the organisations. It is likely that non-Procurement staff would

have received little or no exposure to cutting edge Procurement methodologies and

would therefore be unaware of its potential contribution (Tassabehji and Moorhouse,

2008; Cox, 1996).

Collectively this can be seen to initiate and perpetuate a Cycle of Impotence (CoI)

whereby the procurement function is neither empowered nor compelled to develop its

strategic capabilities and contributions (Figure 2). The lack of understanding of, and

confidence in, the long-term value of procurement constrains the rational

development of a strategic approach to take advantage of the function’s capabilities

(Porter, 1985). Meanwhile, poor execution of procurement strategies has limited the

contributions that the function has delivered and thereby constrained its emergence as

a strategically valuable function (Mintzberg, 2013). This results in strategic

misalignment between the organisation and the function (Freeman and Cavinato,

1990).

Figure 2, Cycle of Impotence in Strategic Procurement Development

Strategic Misalignment

Lack of representation at senior level

No evidence of improved

competitive advantage

Lack of training and

development.

No directive to develop

strategically

Perceived lack of Procurement value

Lack of strategic Procurement practices

Senior Management

Procurement

The meta-analysis identified a range of problems that have been identified in previous

studies, including the perception of procurement’s value, its recognition as an

important function, and staff skills and capabilities. The only issue that was not

highlighted within this analysis was that of resource availability, however, this might

have been a more prominent issue if the meta-analysis had been performed upon

studies of SMEs for example. Overall, the problems appear to plague both public and

private sector organisations. There did not appear to be any particular problem that

was prevalent in one sector to a greater degree than another. What this suggests is that

both sectors are still in need of assistance in making the best use of their procurement

functions and professionals, and, that procurement staff in both sectors need to both

develop and demonstrate their capabilities in order to gain opportunity to make further

contributions to organisations’ successes (Narasimhan and Das, 2001).

ConclusionThe aim of this paper was to identify the challenges that surround the development of

strategic procurement practices within both private and public organisations. It found

that many organisations, in both the public and private sectors experience the same

difficulties when developing strategic procurement. Most significantly, these include

a general lack of cohesive strategic practices: some organisations remain focussed on

making tactical, cost-based improvements. This was in part due to a general lack of

recognition of the potential value of strategic procurement and a lack of representation

of the procurement function at a senior level in the organisation.

The primary contribution of this paper is to identify that recognition of procurement

as a strategically valuable function is constrained by internal and external factors in

both the public and private sectors. Procurement is often neither recognised within a

rational strategic approach nor capable of emerging as a valuable function.

Consequently, a Cycle of Impotence (CoI) transpires that serves to maintain the

function as a merely necessary activity. Business managers should be aware of the

possibility of such as cycle occurring and take action to stimulate the development of

what has become, in many situations, an increasingly important and valuable

discipline.

The training and development of staff was found to be a common problem across both

sectors. Procurement professionals often lacked coherent personal development plans,

partly due to operational constraints and lack of support, but also due to personal lack

of recognition of the importance of continuing professional development. Other

organisational staff, especially senior management, also appeared to lack an

understanding of the potential benefits that strategic procurement practices may bring,

along with the scale of change that they impart, and the level of commitment and

support that they require. This contributes to the difficulty that the procurement

function faces in gaining recognition and support at a senior level.

These findings suggest that procurement professionals should be more concerned for

their own professional development and that organisations should support their

Procurement staff in order to gain maximum benefits from a strategically significant

function. Furthermore, training and education in other disciplines should incorporate

exposure to Supply Chain Management and Procurement theory and practice in order

to become more aware of the benefits that this discipline can deliver, and more

attuned to the support that it requires in order to be a value-adding business function.

The literature pointed to the issues that surround the use of strategic procurement

development models. The models appear to suggest that ‘more strategic’ procurement

practices are somehow always more desirable. Research has suggested that this is not

necessarily the case and that strategic procurement practices should be developed

where they are only capable of delivering bottom line benefit. Future research should

explore the use of development models, in particular the way that different models

may impart different emphases upon the resultant procurement function and systems.

ReferencesAccenture (2009). “Business Process Outsourcing Sourcing and Procurement’s

Untapped Potential Leveraging Category Management to Achieve High

Performance.” Available at: http://www.accenture.com/us-en/pages/insight-bpo-

procurement-category-management-performance-summary.aspx (Accessed 2/9/2013).

Ammer, D., S. (1974). ‘Is Your Purchasing Department a Good Buy?’, Harvard

Business Review, March-April.

Axelsson, B., Rozeimejer, F. and Wynstra, F, (2005). Developing Sourcing

Capabilities; creating strategic change in purchasing and supply management, 1st

Edition, West Sussex, John Wiley and Sons Ltd.

Assmus, G., Farley, J. U. and Lehmann, D. R., (1984), ‘How Advertising Affects

Sales: Meta-Analysis of Econometric Results’, Journal of Marketing Research, 21,

65-74.

Bailey, E.E. and Pack, J.R. (1995) The Political Economy of Privatization and

Deregulation. Edward Elgar, Aldershot: UK.

Baily P., Farmer D., Crocker B., Jessop D. and Jones, D., (2008). Procurement

principles and management, 10th Edition, Essex, Pearson Education.

Barry, J., Cavinato, J. L., Green, A. and Young, R. R., (1996). ‘A development model

for effective MRO procurement’, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials

Management, Summer, 35-44.

Bengtsson, L. and Dabhilkar, M., (2009). ‘Manufacturing outsourcing and its effect

on plant performance-lessons for KIBS outsourcing’, Journal of Evolutionary

Economics, 19(2), 231-257.

Beukers, M., Versendaal, J., Batenburg, R. and Brinkkemper, S., (2006). ‘The

Procurement Alignment Framework Construction and Application’,

Wirtschaftsinformatik, 48(5), 323-330.

Bhote, K. R., (1989). ‘Strategic Supply Management’, AMACOM, New York.

Burt, D. N. and Doyle, M. F., (1993). The American Keiretsu: A Strategic Weapon

for Global Competitiveness, Business One, Irwin

Bryman, A. and Bell, E., (2011). Business Research Methods, OUP, Oxford.

Cabras, I., (2011). ‘Mapping the spatial patterns of public procurement: A case study

from a peripheral local authority in England’, International Journal of Public Sector

Management, 24(3), 187-205.

Cammish, R. and Keough, M. (1991). ‘A Strategic Role for Purchasing, The

McKinsey Quarterly, 3, 22-39.

Cannon, S., (2005). Procurement Policy, Strategy & Procedures A Practical Guide

London, Spiro Press.

Cao Q., Baker, J. and Hoffman, J., J. (2012). ‘The Role of Competitive Environment

in Studies of Strategic Alignment: a meat-analysis’, International Journal of

Production Research, 50(2), 567-580.

Carr, A. S. and Smeltzer, L. R., (1997). ‘An empirically based operational definition

of strategic procurement’, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Chain

Management, 3(4), 199-207.

Carter, J. and Narasimhan, R., (1996). ‘Is purchasing really strategic?’, International

Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 32(1), 20-28.

Cigolini, R., Miragliotta, G. and Pero, M., (2011). ‘A road-map for outsourcing

facilities-related services in SME’s’, Facilities, 29(11/12), 445-458.

CIPS, (2012). Category Management. CIPS Local Committee Meeting, South Wales,

November 2012.

Compton, H. K. and Jessop, D. A., (1995). Dictionary of purchasing and supply:

Terminology for buying and selling, Tudor, Eastham.

Cousins, P. D., Lawson, B. and Squire, B., (2006). ‘An empirical taxonomy of

purchasing functions’, Industrial Journal of Operations and Production Management,

26(7), 775-798.

Cousins, P., Lamming, R., Lawson, B. and Squire, B., (2008). ‘Strategic Supply

Management, Principles, Theories and Practise, Prentice Hall.

Cox, A., (1996). ‘Relational competence and strategic procurement management’,

European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 2(1), 57-70.

Cox, A. and Lamming, R., (1997). Managing supply in the firm of the future, in Cox,

A. and Hines, P., (Ed) (1997). Advanced Supply Management. Earlsgate Press.

Davies, L., White, G. R. T., Plant, E. and Lee, C. (2015). Measuring Outsourcing

Efficacy: a quantitative examination of on-site outsourcing performance in the

aerospace manufacturing sector. Strategic Change, Special Issue ‘High Technology

Ventures’, In-Press.

Deasy, M., White, G. R. T., Parfitt, S. and Ringwald, K., (2014). Asymmetric

Procurement in the Public Sector. Strategic Change: briefings in entrepreneurial

finance, 23(1/2), 21-29.

Dekkers, R., (2011). ‘Impact of strategic decision making for outsourcing on

managing manufacturing’, International Journal of Operations and Production

Management, 31(9), 935-965.

Eden C. and Huxham, C., (1996). ‘Action Research for Management Research’,

British Journal of Management, 7, 75-86.

Ellegaard, C. and Ritter T., (2006). ‘The concept of attraction – its purchasing

potential’, in Proceedings fourth Annual Supply Chain Management Research

Symposium. University of San Diego, 1-10.

Ellram, L. M. and Carr, A., (1994). ‘Strategic purchasing: a history and review of the

literature’, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 30(2), 10-

22.

Ellram, L. M. and Liu, B., (2002). ‘The financial impact of supply management’,

Supply Chain Management Review, 6(6), 30-37.

Elmuti, D., Kathawala, Y., and Monippallil, M., (1998). ‘Outsourcing to gain

competitive advantage’, Industrial Management, 20(3).

European Commission, (2008). ‘Public procurement: updated lists of contracting

authority give better access to public contracts for businesses’, press release, Brussels,

15 December, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-08-1971_en.htm

(Accessed 3/7/2013).

Freeman, V. T. and Cavinato, J. L., (1990). ‘Fitting purchasing to the strategic firm:

frameworks, processes and values’, Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,

26(1), 15-20.

Gelderman, C. J. and van Weele, A. J., (2005). ‘Purchasing portfolio models: a

critique and update’, The Journal of Supply Chain Management, 41(3), 19–28.

Gershon, P., (2004). ‘Releasing resources for the frontline: Independent Review of

Public Sector Efficiency- Independent Review of Public Sector Efficiency’, HM

Treasury, available sat:

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/efficiency_review120704.pdf (Accessed

16/6/2013).

Goldsby, T. J. and Autry C., (2011). ‘Toward Greater Validation of Supply Chain

Management Theory and Concepts: the roles of research replication and meta-

analysis’, Journal of Business Logistics, 32(4), 324-331.

Gonzalez-Benito, J., (2007). ‘A theory of purchasing’s contribution to business

performance’, Journal of Operations Management, 25(4), 901-917.

Gordon, M. J., (2001). ‘Improving purchasing's contribution - The purchasing strategy

of buying council’, International Journal of Public Sector Management 14(5), 391-

410.

Green, P., (2010). ‘Efficiency Review - Key Findings and Recommendation”’,

[online] Available at: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/resource-library/efficiency-

review-sir-philip-green-key-findings-and-recommendations (Accessed 14/11/2013).

Greve, H. R. and Mitsuhashi, H., (2007). ‘Power and Glory: Concentrated Power in

Top Management Teams’, Organisation Studies, 28(8), 1197-1221.

Guest, G. S., MacQueen, K. M. and Namey, E. E., (2012). Applied Thematic

Analysis, Sage Publications, UK.

Guinipero, L., (2000). A Skilled-Based Analysis of the World Class Purchaser. Centre

for Advanced Purchasing Studies, US.

Heikkilä, J. and Kaipia, R., (2009). ‘Purchasing Category Management—From

Analyzing Costs to a Proactive Management Practice’, Available at: http://legacy-

tuta.hut.fi/logistics/publications/IPSERA_2009_CategoryManagement.pdf (Accessed

21/5/2013).

Hendricks, K. B. and Singhal, V. R., (2002). ‘How supply chain glitches torpedo

shareholder value?’, Supply Chain Management Review, 6, 18-24.

Hirsch, C. and Barbalho, M., (2001). ‘Towards World-Class Procurement’, Supply

Chain Management Review, Nov/Dec, 74-80

Hoctor K. and Keating, I., (2009). ‘Back to Business Local Solutions’, [online]

Available at: http://www.lga.gov.uk (Accessed 14/11/2013).

Humphreys, P., (2001). ‘Designing a management development programme for

Procurement executives’, The Journal of Management Development, 20 (7), 604–626.

Jick, T. D., (1979). ‘Mixing Qualitative and Quantitative Methods: Triangulation in

Action’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 602-611.

Johnson, G. and Scholes, K., (2002). Exploring Corporate Strategy. 6th edition,

Harlow, Pearson Education Limited.

Jones, D. M., (1997) cited in Baily et al (2008). Procurement Principles and

Management, 10th Edition, Prentice Hall.

Kaufmann, L. and Carter, C., (2004). ‘Deciding on the mode of negotiation: to

auction or not to auction electronically’, Journal of Supply Chain Management 40(2),

15–26.

Klingenberg, W. and Boksma , J. D., (2010). ‘A conceptual framework for

outsourcing of materials handling activities in automotive: differentiation and

implementation’, International Journal of Production Research, 48(16), 4877-4899.

Lacey, K. and Blumberg, D., (2005). ‘Improving business performance with

outsourcing’, Journal of Medical Marketing, 5(1), 15-18.

Landeros, R. and Monczka, R. M., (1989). ‘Cooperative buyer-seller relationships and

a firm’s competitive posture’, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials

Management, 25, 9-18.

Linna, P., Pekkola, S., Ukko, J. and Melkas, H. (2010). ‘Defining and measuring

productivity in the public sector: managerial perceptions’, International Journal of

Public Sector Management, 23(3), 300-320.

Lysons, K, and Farrington, B., (2006). Purchasing and Supply Chain Management,

London, Prentice Hall.

MacDonald, M. (2002). Review of Large Public Procurement in the UK. HM

Treasury, London:UK.

Matthews, D., (2005). ‘Strategic procurement in the public sector: A mask for

financial and administrative policy’, Journal of Public Procurement, 5(3), 388-389.

Maude, F., (2012). Keynote Speech, Procurex Conference, March.

McClelland, J., (2012). ‘Maximising The Impact of Welsh Procurement Policy’,

available at:

http://wales.gov.uk/docs/caecd/publications/120719johnmcclellanreview.pdf

(Accessed 17/08/2013).

McCue, P. and Gianakis, G. A., (2001). ‘Public Purchasing: Who’s minding the

store?’, Journal of Public Procurement, 1(1), 71-95.

Merlo, O., Lukas, B., A. and Whitwell, G., J., (2012) Marketing’s reputation and

influence in the firm. Journal of Business Research, 65, 446-452.

Miles, M. B., (1979). ‘Qualitative Data as an Attractive Nuisance: The Problem of

Analysis’, Administrative Science Quarterly, 24(4), 590-601.

Mintzberg, H. (2013). The Rise and Fall of Strategic Planning. Free Press: USA.

Mintzberg, H. and Ahlstrand, B., (1998). Strategic Safari, Harlow, FT Prentice Hall.

Mol, M. J., (2003). ‘Purchasing’s strategic relevance’, Journal of Purchasing &

Supply Management, 9, 43–50.

Morris, T. and Wood, S., (1991). ‘Testing the survey method: continuity and change

in British industrial relations’, Work, Employment and Society, 5(2), 259-82.

Mouzas, S. and Ford, D., (2012). Leveraging knowledge-based resources: the role of

contracts. Journal of Business Research, 65, 153-161.

Narasimhan, R. and Das, A., (2001). ‘The Impact of Purchasing Integration and

Practices on Manufacturing Performance’, Journal of Operations Management, 19(5),

593–609.

Novack, R. A. and Simco, S. W., (1991). ‘The industrial procurement process: a

supply chain perspective’, Journal of Business Logistics, 12(1), 145-167.

O’Brien, J., (2009). Category Management in Purchasing: A Strategic Approach to

Maximise Business Profitability, Kogan Page, London.

O’Brien, M., (2010). ‘The Procurement Evolution: It Is All About Category

Management’, available at: http://www.release-news.com/index.php/business/34990-

introducing-category-management.html (Accessed: 2/1/2013).

O’Sullivan, T. A., Hafekost, K., Mitrou, F. and Lawrence, D., (2013). ‘Food Sources

of Saturated Fat and the Association with Mortality: a meta-analysis’, American

Journal of Public Health, 103(9), 31-42.

Paulraj, A., Chen, I.J. and Flynn, J., (2006). ‘Levels of strategic purchasing: impact on

supply integration and performance’, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,

12, 107-122.

Porter, M. E., (1985). ‘Competitive Advantage: Creating and sustaining superior

performance’, The Free Press.

Pouder, R. W., R. S. and Daly, J. P., (2011). ‘The impact of outsourcing on firm

value: New insights’, SAM Advanced Management Journal, 76(2), 4-13 .

Prowse, P. and Prowse, J., (2007). ‘Is there still a public sector model of employment

relations in the United Kingdom?’, International Journal of Public Sector

Management ,20(1), 48-62.

Quayle, M., (1998) ‘The impact of strategic procurement in the UK government

sector’, International Journal of Public Sector Management, 11(5), 397–413.

Reck, R. and Long, B., (1998). ‘Purchasing: A Competitive Weapon’, Journal of

Purchasing and Material Management, 24(3), 2-8.

Reynolds, A. and Thompson, I., (2008). Purchasing Models Handbook, Stamford,

Lincs, Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply.

Robson, C., (2002). Real World Research a Resource for Social Scientists and

Practitioner-researchers, 2nd Ed. Blackwell.

Rozemeijer, F.A., (2008), Purchasing myopia revisited again?, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 14(3), 205–207

Saunders, M. (1997) ‘Strategic Purchasing & Supply Chain Management’ 2 Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A., (2007). Research Methods for Business

Students, UK, Pearson Education.

Schapper, P., Matla, J. N. and Gilbert, D., (2006). ‘An analytical framework for the

management and reform of public procurement’, Journal of Public Procurement, 6(1),

1-26.

Spekman, R. E., (1994). ‘At Last Purchasing is Becoming Strategic’, Long Range

Planning, 27(2), 76-84.

Spekman, R., Kamauff, L. and Spear, J., (1999). ‘Towards more effective sourcing

and supplier management’, European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,

5(2), 103-116.

Stannack, P. and Jones, M., (1996). ‘The Death of Purchasing Procedures’ , PSERA.

Syson, R., (1989). ‘The Revolution in Purchase. Purchasing and Supply

Management’, September, 16-21.

Tan, K., Kannan, V. and Handfield, R., (1998). ‘Supply Chain Management: Supplier

Performance and Firm Performance’, International Journal of Purchasing and

Materials Management, 34(3), 2-9.

Tassabehji, R. and Moorhouse, A., (2008). ‘The changing role of procurement:

Developing professional effectiveness’, Journal of Purchasing and Supply

Management, 14(1), 55-68.

Ubeda, R., Alsua, C. and Carrasco, N., (2015). Purchasing models and organizational

performance: a study of key strategic tools. Journal of Business Research, 68, 177-

188.

Uyarra, E., Flanagan, K., (2010). ‘Understanding the Innovation Impacts of Public

Procurement, European Planning Studies, 18(1), 123-43..

Van Weele A. J., Rozemeijer, F. A. and Rietveld G., (1998). ‘Professionalizing

Purchasing’, 7th International Annual IPSERA Conference Proceeding, London.

Van Weele, A. J. and Rozemeijer, F. A., (1996). ‘Revolution in Purchasing: building

competitive power through proactive purchasing’, European Journal of Purchasing &

Supply Management, 2(4), 523-539.

Van Weele, A. J. and Rozemeijer, F. A., (2005). ‘Changing course in corporate

procurement’, CPO Agenda, Summer, 46-51 .

Wu, J. and Lu, X., (2013). ‘Effects of Extrinsic and Intrinsic Motivators on Using

Utilitarian, Hedonic, and Dual-Purposed Information Systems: a meta-analysis’,

Journal of the Association for Information Systems, 14(3), 153-191.

Yen, Y., and Yen, S., (2012). Top-management’s role in adopting green purchasing

standards in high-tech industrial firms. Journal of Business Research, 65, 951-959.

Yin, R. K., (2003). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 3rd Ed. Sage

Publications Inc., UK.

Yorio, P. I. and Ye, F., (2012). ‘A Meta-Analysis on the Effects of Service-Learning

on the Social, Personal, and Cognitive Outcomes of Learning’, Academy of

Management Learning & Education. 11(1), 9-27.

Zheng, J., Knight, L., Harland, C., Humby, S. and James, K., (2007). ‘An analysis of

research into the future of purchasing and supply management’, Journal of Purchasing

& Supply Management, 13(1), 69-83.

Author Biographies

(Corresponding Author)

Dr Gareth RT White is Reader in Operations and Information Management at the

University of South Wales, Director of the Connections Research Group (CRG) and

Co-Director of the Centre for Supply Chain, Operations and Procurement Excellence

(CSCOPE). His research interests encompass a broad range of operational subjects

and disciplines including information systems and development, lean production and

environmental management.

Telephone: (+44)1443 482958

Email: gareth.white@southwales.ac.uk

Scott Parfitt is a Senior Lecturer at the University of South Wales and a member the

Centre for Supply Chain, Operations and Procurement Excellence (CSCOPE). He is a

member of Welsh Governments Creative Procurement Forum. He has undertaken

research for Value Wales and Cardiff Council and is a member of the Source Regional

Group. He was actively involved in the Category Management KTP at Cardiff Council

and continues to act as a ‘critical friend’ on matters of Category Management policy

and implementation.

Chris Lee is a Senior Lecturer at the University of South Wales and a member the

Centre for Supply Chain, Operations and Procurement Excellence (CSCOPE). His

teaching and research interests encompass strategic supply chain management,

operations management, purchasing, logistics, retail and supply chain management,

organisational behaviour and management theory.

Dr Rachel Mason-Jones is a Senior Lecturer at the University of South Wales has

worked in both industry and academia within the field of supply chain management.

The main focus of her previous research has been supply chain management

resilience with particular interest in the area’s of uncertainty and risk management.

The resilience work has led to a current interest in sustainable supply chain

management and the renewable technology sector.