Cited by 64Quality and Supply ManagementOutsourcing and Supply Chain ManagementPublic Procurement and Policy

Tools without skills: Exploring the moderating effect of absorptive capacity on the relationship between e‐purchasing tools and category performance

Open access
Kauppi, Katri, Brandon‐Jones, Alistair, Ronchi, Stefano, van Raaij, Erik M.·2013·International Journal of Operations & Production Management

Abstract

Purpose: The paper examines the moderating role of a purchasing function's absorptive capacity (AC) on the relationship between the use of electronic purchasing tools and category level purchasing performance. The authors argue that an e‐purchasing tool may not in itself positively influence performance unless combined with AC as a human interface to maximise its information and transactional improvement potential. Design/methodology/approach: Survey data collected from 297 procurement executives of large companies in ten countries are analysed using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and hierarchical moderated regression. Findings: The results demonstrate few significant direct effects of e‐purchasing tools on category performance. All performance measures studied are enhanced when dimensions of AC and their interactions with the e‐purchasing tools are added. Specifically, buyer competence, manager competence and communications climate have performance‐enhancing effects. In some cases, AC on its own appears to increase performance more than e‐tools. Originality/value: This paper is the first to study the moderating effects of AC on the relationship between e‐purchasing tool usage and category performance. Its findings support the view that simply implementing technology does not lead to performance improvements, but that a human interface is required to maximise the information and transactional improvement potential of e‐purchasing tools.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/ijopm-12-2011-0445

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • This explanatory power compares well with other eSCM studies.

    “This explanatory power compares well with other eSCM studies (See for example, Kauppi et al., 2013; Martínez-Caro and Cegarra-Navarro, 2009; Wiengarten et al., 2013).”

    From Examining the antecedents of the technology acceptance model within e-procurement (2018) · cites this paper as Kauppi et al., 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kauppi, K., Brandon‐Jones, A., Ronchi, S., & van Raaij, E. M.
Affiliations
  • Aalto University (FI)
  • University of Manchester (GB)
  • Politecnico di Milano (IT)
Venue
International Journal of Operations & Production Management
Publisher
Emerald
Published
2013-06-14
Volume
33
Issue
7
Pages
828-857
ISSN
0144-3577 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2009308332
Cited by
64
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2 · 2012: 1
FWCI
7.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Locations
  • International Journal of Operations & Production Management (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
  • Pure (University of Bath) (acceptedVersion, other-oa)
  • The University of Bath Online Publications Store (The University of Bath) (submittedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Quality and Supply Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management Information Systems › Outsourcing and Supply Chain Management
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Strategy and Management › Public Procurement and Policy
Keywords
e-procurement, absorptive capacity, managerial competencies, moderating effect, purchasing function

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review