A mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) on e-procurement

A mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) on e-procurement with exploration on the academic interest and value involved

Joseph Kim-keung Ho

Independent Trainer

Hong Kong, China

Abstract:  Literature review involves heeding the academic interest and value of the academic literature studied. Naturally, paying attention to academic interest and value is also vital for mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR). This article presents an account of MMBLR on e-procurement with reference to the notions of academic interest and value. It illustrates how an MMBLR is conducted. Besides, its literature review findings should be of academic and pedagogical value to those who study the subjects of e-procurement, research methods and managerial intellectual learning (MIL).

Key words: academic interest, academic value, e-procurement, literature review, managerial intellectual learning (MIL), mind map, mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR), thematic analysis

Please cite the article as: Ho, J.K.K. 2016. “A mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) on e-procurement with exploration on the academic interest and value involved” Joseph KK Ho e-resource blog August 28 (url address: http://josephho33.blogspot.hk/2016/08/a-mind-mapping-basedliterature-review.html).

Introduction

Mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) is a recently launched academic topic by the writer (Literature on literature review Facebook page; Literature on mind mapping Facebook page). Via MMBLR on various business and non-business topics, conceptual development can be and has been made on it. This paper is another exercise on MMBLR. The chosen topic for literature review in this paper is e-procurement. One study aim in this case is to produce literature review findings on e-procurement that have academic and pedagogical values. Unique to this study is the discussion on the concepts of academic interest and academic value as related to MMBLR. Since the MMBLR topic is a part of the broader research subject of managerial intellectual learning (MIL) (Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page), this study also contributes to the MIL subject theoretically. The next section examines the notions of academic interest and academic value before proceeding to the MMBLR on e-procurement.

Academic interest and value in the e-procurement field as revealed from the literature review

In literature review, including the mind mapping-based one conducted in this paper, one major review task is the assessment of academic interest and value of the academic literature. Learning academic interest is about finding out (i) the sorts of research questions the academic community is asking, (ii) the main theoretical perspectives, research methods and theories academicians are employing in investigation, (iii) the issues and concepts academicians are debating about, and (iv) the main viewpoints and observations academicians have made and are interested in sharing with others. Knowing the academic interest of the academic community via the literature review informs a researcher to formulate a research topic that academicians are interested in (i.e. existence of academic interest). Of course, it is possible that a researcher could come up with a research topic that has not been thought of by the academic community, thus very novel. Nevertheless, even in this case, a researcher needs to (i) point out how original his/her research topic is by referring to the existing academic interest of the academic community and (ii) convince academicians why they should be interested in his/her novel idea(s). As to academic value, it is about the quality of an academic work, e.g., an academic article. Aspects to consider in academic value assessment of a piece of academic work include: (i) purpose of the article, (ii) type of journal in which it is published, (iii) article organization and content, (iv) publisher bias, (v) article publication date, (vi) bibliography shown in the article, (vii) identity of the article writer, and (viii) appropriateness of the article to its field (University of California Santa Cruz, 2016; Columbia College, 2016). In terms of quality management terms, academic interest is about “design quality” of an academic work which appeals to the academic community. As to academic value, it is derived from the conformance/ implementation quality of an academic work. To achieve high academic value, an academic work needs to show in its content high quality of (i) literature review, (ii) research methods, (iii) academic writing style, and (iv) line of reasoning. Academic value and academic interest are related, as indicated by the following four propositions formulated by the writer with regard to a piece of academic work:

Proposition 1: Higher academic value contributes to higher academic interest: An academic work that has higher academic value, e.g., good academic quality, heightens the interest of the academic community on the topic covered by it and the academic work itself.

Proposition 2: Higher academic interest contributes to higher academic value: An academic work that (i) examines a topic of great interest to the academic community and (ii) is original, also tends to be considered to possess higher academic value.

Proposition 3: Higher practical value[1] contributes to higher academic interest: An academic work that offers innovative, pragmatic and effective solutions to practitioners with clear supportive empirical evidence tends to catch the attention of the academic community more and raises their research interest on it.

Proposition 4: Higher practical interest[2] contributes to higher academic interest: An academic work that catches substantial interest of the practitioner community due to its coverage of a hot issue or application area in the world of practice also tends to raise the academic interest of the academic community to research on this work.

The four propositions are suggestive and need further investigation. [This paper’s primary focus is not on practical value and practical interest; thus, these two concepts are not further discussed here.] A prime objective of a literature review is to study academic literature with high academic value and interest to inform formulation of a research topic and, subsequently, writing of a research work that has high academic value and interest (besides, preferably, high practical value and interest). This prime literature review objective applies to the thematic analysis and the complementary mind mapping-based literature review as carried out here. The paper now moves on to the next task of thematic analysis on e-procurement.

A thematic analysis of e-procurement with reference to the academic interest and value in the e-procurement field

By studying the academic literature on e-procurement (see also the Literature on procurement Facebook page), the writer comes up with seven main themes; these themes are associated with clusters of e-procurement ideas (labelled as points). The exercise is by nature a thematic analysis on the e-procurement academic literature. The findings are as follows:

Theme 1: Definitions of e-procurement

Point 1.1.                “…E-procurement is any technology designated to facilitate the acquisition of goods by a commercial or government organization over the Internet…” (Redick, 2004);

Point 1.2.                 “…. In its most basic definition, e-procurement is the streamlining of corporate purchasing processes by eliminating traditional paper-based documents such as purchase orders and requisitions forms….” (Teo, Lin and Lai, 2009);

Point 1.3.                “…electronic procurement (e-procurement) is the application of electronic commerce in procurement. It involves the use of various forms of information technology (IT), such as e-mail (electronic mail), EDI (Electronic Data Interchange), and e-marketplace (electronic marketplace), to automate and streamline the procurement process in business organizations…., improving efficiency and transparency and thereby reducing the costs of operation within and between businesses….” (Chan and Lee, 2002);

Theme 2: Before-internet procurement technologies

Point 2.1.                “….traditional procurement is a paper-based process that often is characterized by fragmented purchasing, off-contract buying, and lack of control over expenditures…” (Redick, 2004);

Point 2.2.                 “….The concept is not new. In the 1980s and early 1990s, many companies used electronic data interchange technology to transmit information such as purchase orders, invoices, material releases, and shipping notices electronically. EDI involves the direct transfer of information using special, predetermined formats. To use this technology you have to be tied to traditional client/server technology….” (Attaran and Attaran, 2002);

Point 2.3.                “….Traditional EDI is expensive, because of the proprietary networks required. In addition, EDI has stringent syntax requirements that necessitate a custom integration between each pair of trading partners. The Internet has made the difference in that there is a standard, reliable, and secure universal communication system that companies can use to transact business, instead of a set of expensive, complicated links and proprietary networks….” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Point 2.4.                 “…Proprietary platform procurement systems tend to be customized to the needs of individual firms. These buyers and suppliers have incentives to specify the software and hardware infrastructure requirements to best match their own procurement or supply services infrastructure capabilities. Prior to the Internet, such systems were offered via secure dedicated lines and private networks, and tended to connect a buyer to a preferred group of suppliers. Traditional EDI systems are the most recognizable example…” (Kauffman and Mohtadi, 2004);

Theme 3: E-procurement tools

Point 3.1.                “….E-procurement is not one single application but consists of many different tools; ……. The list is as follows: e-sourcing, e-tendering, e-informing, e-reverse auctions, e-MRO, Web-based enterprise resource planning (ERP) and e-collaboration….” (Knudsen, 2003);

Point 3.2.                 “…..E-procurement technologies are focused on automating workflows, consolidating and leveraging organizational spending power, and identifying new sourcing opportunities through the Internet….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 3.3.                “…Technologies such as digital signatures are becoming well established making it safer to procure over the Internet….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 3.4.                 “…There are various purchasing software technologies. The following are the most important: E-procurement (buyer software), E-catalog, auctions, and marketplaces — also known as net markets/exchanges software. However, companies’ solutions many times straddle more than one of these options…” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Point 3.5.                 “….….. A systematic study of the subject "procurement of cloud solutions in value networks" is intended to identify potentials and issues for designing effective value networks to support the acquisition of cloud solutions…” (Schrödl and Bensch, 2013);

Point 3.6.                “….Current E-procurement products have less functionality than traditional purchasing products or purchasing modules of ERP systems.…… E-procurement products are still in the early stage of their evolution and the functionality will continue to improve. Current E-procurement products mainly support noncoded/nonstock MRO materials only…” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Point 3.7.                 “…..There has been a significant growth in e-procurement products recently. Vendors are responding to the market, and the demand for robust e-procurement apps is heating up…” (Attaran and Attaran, 2002);

Point 3.8.                “….Buyer software enables users to automate transactions and focus on the buying organization’s activities, such as order placement, catalog management, payment, reporting, and so on. Most of these systems currently handle MRO products….” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Theme 4: Underlying business trends and management thinking on procurement

Point 4.1.                “….very few procurement strategies, if any, can be said to have their roots in entrepreneurial discoveries. However, in recent years the inherent nature of competition has changed, relying more now on constant technological innovation and rapid entrance into new markets ….. Thus, the need for procurement strategies to involve these qualities becomes urgent….” (Knudsen, 2003);

Point 4.2.                “….…..Procurement, a primary determinant for the organization’s relationship with suppliers…., corresponds to one of the three key generic business competencies, which are: 1) the demand management competence…. 2) the transformation competence or the ability of turning supply inputs into more valuable outputs through a value adding process; and 3) the procurement and supply management….” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 4.3.                “….In a global enterprise environment, companies have to utilize the various B2B information technologies/systems such as EDI, Internet, WWW, ERP and E-procurement to standardize and automate business processes…” (Gunasekaran, McGaughey, Ngai and Rai, 2009);

Point 4.4.                “….The move to e-procurement provides a unique opportunity for supply managers for two reasons. First, the application of technology to boost competitiveness and profitability is on the agenda of any forward-thinking CEO. Second, the application of technology to supply management, where firms spend most operating dollars, is focusing more top-management attention on that issue….” (Presutti Jr., 2003);

Point 4.5.                “…..In the process of industrial purchasing, a series of sequential and differentiated phases may be identified in which participants (in terms of size and composition) may vary depending on the nature and needs of each phase…” (Garrido-Samaniego, Gutièrrez-Arranz and José-Cabezudo, 2010);

Point 4.6.                “….E-procurement is more than putting purchasing decisions online, its functions also include linking suppliers and buyers into the purchasing network and rethinking of business processes such as transactions…” (Yen and Ng, 2003);

Point 4.7.                “…Being a broader scope than “purchasing,” procurement involves strategic activities such as sourcing, negotiating with suppliers, and coordination with R&D….” (Yen and Ng, 2003);

Point 4.8.                 “….the use of open information systems can provide greater levels of information to buyers, thereby opening up greater competitiveness between providers.…” (Redick, 2004);

Point 4.9.                “….Within the topic of technology adoption, there is a model available to predict firms’ intention to adopt financial electronic data interchange (FEDI) systems using institutional theory as a lens to understand the factors that explain their adoption…” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 4.10.             “…This increasing emphasis on supply management, rather than on the more traditional ‘‘purchasing,’’ requires that the professional supply manager move beyond the typical transaction focus of purchasing …” (Presutti Jr., 2003);

Point 4.11.            “….the diffusion of e-procurement at the state and local levels has been slow and incremental, and argues that many traditional procurement principles should be reconsidered….” (Moon, 2005);

Point 4.12.            “….In an ISM/Forrester Research Report (2001–2003), seven out of ten firms in the US market were reported to have engaged in online procurement of strategic items and critical services (namely those products and services that are closely linked to the firm's production or service delivery)…” (Teo, Lin and Lai, 2009);

Theme 5: E-procurement project justifications and impacts

Theme 5.1: Project justifications

Point 5.1.                In the context of e-government, “….….The costs for e-procurement can be ….: (1) technical complexity – privacy, security, standardization and so forth; (2) legal issues such as Web information as a public notice, digital signatures for procurement documents; (3) method of payment for potential initial developmental costs and operating costs; (4) maintaining relationships with online vendors and application service providers; and (5) the digital divide for small and minority owned businesses…..” (Redick, 2004);

Point 5.2.                “….The problem with assessing the value associated with e-procurement has been addressed by researchers and practitioners, but a clear methodology to determine the benefits related to e-procurement adoption is still missing, especially for IT…” (Ronchi, Brun, Golini and Fan, 2010);

Point 5.3.                “….…larger firms may be more willing to invest in proprietary systems solutions, while smaller firms with less capital may be reluctant to adopt proprietary e-procurement technology…” (Kauffman and Mohtadi, 2004);

Point 5.4.                “….value of e-procurement adoption is defined …. as benefits from its implementation over costs. E-procurement adoption is justified only when the former are large enough to cover the latter. Benefits from using e-procurement include enhancing effectiveness and improving efficiency …. whereas costs comprises of initial investment and ongoing expenses of e-procurement implementation…” (Chan and Lee, 2002);

Point 5.5.                 “….Making a business case for e-procurement requires that the supply manager understand the concept of economic value added (EVA), considered a comprehensive financial measure of value creation…” (Presutti Jr., 2003);

Point 5.6.                “….in this period of worldwide economic crisis, to base the decision of an important investment simply on gut feelings. Now even the smallest investment (e.g., an e-procurement connection with a supplier) should be based on a sound business plan…” (Ronchi, Brun, Golini and Fan, 2010);

Point 5.7.                “……. For a firm to realize the maximum value-creating benefits from an e-procurement strategy, the purchasing process must be evaluated to determine if it needs to be reengineered….” (Presutti Jr., 2003);

Point 5.8.                “…Proponents of e-procurement argue that it helps governments save money and provides a more accountable, more effective, and faster way to manage procurement…” (Moon, 2005);

Point 5.9.                In the context of e-government, “….… The positive aspects of e-procurement generally cited in the literature include the following: (1) lowered transaction costs; (2) faster ordering; (3) greater vendor choice; (4) more efficient and standardized procurement processes; (5) more control over procurement spending (e.g., less maverick buying) and employee compliance; (6) more accessible Internet alternatives for buyers; and (7) less paperwork from fewer repetitive administrative procedures….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 5.10.            “….To SME, a small percentage saving in procurement expenses can impact the profit margin considerably….” (Chan and Lee, 2002);

Point 5.11.            “…managers should think about the following issues before investing in online procurement software: In-house experts…..Employee education ….. Content management….Integration….  Content rationalization…. Downsizing….. Better communication ….” (Attaran and Attaran, 2002);

Theme 5.2: Impacts

Point 5.12.             “….EPSs [electronic procurement systems] lead to changes at different levels: at the organizational level, in the information systems department, on the organizational culture, and at the financial level…” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 5.13.             “….…The impact of EC in the procurement process is classified into buyer and seller, which is further divided into individual and inter-organizational categories…” (Yen and Ng, 2003);

Point 5.14.             “…The availability and generally low cost of information and technology provided by Internet-based purchasing create absolutely different economics characterized by the following: • Low barriers for market entrance…• Price transparency…. • Better opportunities to avoid “maverick buying” and to use preferred supplier networks…• Better balance of power between sellers and buyers” (Ageshin, 2001);

Point 5.15.             “…The use of the Internet to deliver all government services is a significant barrier because of the digital divide …. Small business owners …. feel that they are disadvantaged in the e-procurement process because of their lack of technical expertise and education on the government’s multiple procurement Websites….” (Redick, 2004);

Theme 6: E-procurement implementation considerations and process

Theme 6.1: Implementation considerations

Point 6.1.                In the context of e-government, “…Implementing e-procurement requires strong policy leadership and a managerial willingness to innovate, both of which are continuing challenges for many states….” (Moon, 2005);

Point 6.2.                “…..Unknown vendors make procurement officers hesitant to give up their cumbersome paper-based process conducted with longtime and trusted suppliers….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 6.3.                “….One of the greatest impediments to e-procurement’s fast adoption is a gap between the expectations of the two sides of the transaction - suppliers and buyers - about the way B2B marketplaces should affect them….” (Ageshin, 2001);

Point 6.4.                “….some of the main impediments [on e-procurement adoption]…   Technology uncertainty…. Process change … Cultural change… Logistical infrastructure not in place….. Value…” (Tatsis, Mena, Van Wassenhove and Whicker, 2006);

Point 6.5.                “….The management issue here is how to train personnel to use online procurement tools and to retrain those workers displaced because of e-procurement…” (Redick, 2004);

Point 6.6.                “…part of the problem is that in most organizations the procurement process is still seen as tactical rather than strategic, as a cost rather than a benefit to the organization. …” (Redick, 2004);

Point 6.7.                “…It is not clear which e-procurement solution providers (and whose standards) will survive, and which will not. Multiple standards in the industry are already causing confusion and increasing purchasing cost, which undermines the cost savings…” (Ageshin, 2001);

Point 6.8.                 “…Perhaps some organizations do not have the capacity to implement EPSs [electronic procurement systems] and perhaps others simply do not know that competitors are extracting value from the EPSs…” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 6.9.                 “….….By making e-procurement part of the ERP package, purchasing departments have found that funding technology is no longer something they have to shoulder on their own …… Instead, it’s an enterprise issue ….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 6.10.            “….a firm with greater power could influence its trading partners to adopt EDI, where power is determined by its dependence on the other party. On the other hand, trust encourages a firm to expand the amount of information sharing through EDI….” (Chan and Lee, 2002);

Point 6.11.            “….moving toward e-procurement from traditional paper-based processes also brings great challenges to procurement officers. They need new technical and managerial skills…….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 6.12.            “….Significant planning is needed to achieve the savings promised by E-procurement. Enterprises must focus on certain key critical success factors….  Define an E-Procurement Strategy….. Reengineer the Procurement Processes….. Involve Key Stakeholders…. Focus on Segments …. Identify Useful Measures ….. Manage Expectations ….” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Point 6.13.            “…The extent to which SME owners and managers actually believe E-procurement can positively impact future performance will influence their predisposition toward adoption….” (Gunasekaran, McGaughey, Ngai and Rai, 2009);

Point 6.14.            “…E-procurement adoption poses a great many challenges for small to medium sized companies. One serious impediment to adoption is the lack of awareness of E-procurement and its implications for organizational performance….” (Gunasekaran, McGaughey, Ngai and Rai, 2009);

Point 6.15.            “…... less than 20% of tender documentation is sent out and received through e-tendering, suggesting that implementation of e-procurement targets set by the government is proving unpopular in UK construction ….” (Eadie, Perera and Heaney, 2010);

Theme 6.2: Process of implementation

Point 6.16.            On the stage of growth e-procurement for e-government, Redick (2004) proposes: “….The first stage is information dissemination.… The second stage is two-way communication.……. The third stage is the transactional stage.…… The fourth stage is where all procurement services and functions are integrated….”;

Theme 7: E-procurement practices and models

Point 7.1.                “….e-procurement continues to enhance the breakdown of traditional silos and to shift management’s focus toward horizontal processes and the empowerment of individual employees, a movement into stage four of the e-procurement growth model…” (Redick, 2004);

Point 7.2.                “….Most E-procurement activities of companies are currently centered on nonproduction - mostly maintenance, repair, and operating supplies (MRO) goods. MRO goods spending accounts for as much as 60 percent of total expenditures for some companies….” (Rajkumar, 2001);

Point 7.3.                 “…..……Online procurement is best suited for commodity type products ….. Online buying is not well suited for more costly and complex items …. since the various alternatives and multiple configurations of those items often require personal contact with vendors….” (Redick, 2004);

Point 7.4.                “….…At a higher level of maturity, the firm can also use the EPS [electronic procurement systems] to electronically conduct auctions or to run a B2B exchange in which its internal users and suppliers can bid and trade goods….” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 7.5.                “….Horizontally, EPSs [electronic procurement systems] may support three procurement areas: procurement transaction support, procurement management, and market making. Vertically, EPSs may support the demand side, the supply side, and interorganizational modules….” (Soares-Aguiar and Palma-dos-Reis, 2008);

Point 7.6.                 “….The extant literature on e-procurement has focused mainly on large economies and technology oriented industries…” (Tatsis, Mena, Van Wassenhove and Whicker, 2006);

Point 7.7.                “…different marketplace forms coexist although they represent different stages of e-procurement evolution. ….” (Ageshin, 2001);

Point 7.8.                 “….…We distinguish among three kinds of B2B e-procurement systems platforms. Proprietary platform procurement systems involve traditional electronic data interchange (EDI) technologies. Open platform procurement systems are associated with e-market Web technologies. Hybrid platforms involve elements of both….” (Kauffman and Mohtadi, 2004);

Point 7.9.                “….There are significant differences in the involvement of the functional areas at each phase of the e-procurement process…” (Garrido-Samaniego, Gutièrrez-Arranz and José-Cabezudo, 2010);

The seven main themes and associated points indicate the prevailing academic interest on e-procurement; the quality of the academic references used in the thematic analysis, e.g., the content and dates of publication, go some way to establish the academic value of this anaylysis exercise. With the thematic analysis findings now obtained, the paper is in a position to conduct a mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) on e-procurement as the next step of analysis.

A mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) on e-procurement

By assimilating the seven main themes and associated ideas (called points) from the thematic analysis on the e-procurement literature into a mind map, the writer is going to render an image on the knowledge structure on e-procurement. This is shown in Figure 1.

The mind map (re: Figure 1) posits the core topic of study, namely e-procurement at the centre as a blob; seven main branches are attached to it, corresponding to the seven main themes as identified in the previous section. Two main branches fork into sub-branches. They are (i) E-procurement project justifications and impacts and (ii) E-procurement implementation considerations and process. The nodes at the end of the smallest branches are labelled with key phrases taken from the points from the thematic analysis.  For examples, the “cultural change” node on the “implementation considerations” sub-branch is associated with point 6.4, and the “EVA” node on the “project justifications” sub-branch is based on point 5.5. The mind mapping exercise works as a complementary diagramming-based literature review with the thematic approach on literature review. The mapping exercise fosters concept exploration and memorization in an engaging and entertaining way to study e-procurement (see also the Literature on literature review Facebook page and the Literature on mind mapping Facebook page).

Concluding remarks

The MMBLR on e-procurement reveals a rather rich image on the existing knowledge structure on e-procurement in the academic literature. There are guidelines to gauge the academic value of academic works covered in an MMBLR. The references utilized and the organized literature review findings attest to the academic value of this article on MMBLR on e-procurement itself. At the same time, the main academic interest of the academic community on e-procurement can also be made explicit via the thematic analysis, which has identified the main themes and associated points on it. The academic interest of this article itself is relatively low as it does not offer much original thinking on both e-procurement and mind mapping.

The bibliography provides a useful reading list of academic journal articles on e-procurement. Overall, this study on MMBLR and e-procurement should have some academic and pedagogical values to those who are interested in the subjects of Research Methods, e-procurement, mind mapping and managerial intellectual learning (MIL).

Bibliography

1.      Ageshin, E.A. 2001. “E-procurement at work: a case study” Production and Inventory Management Journal First quarter: 48-53.

2.      Attaran, M. and S. Attaran. 2002. “Catch the Wave of e-procurement” Industrial Management 44(3) May/June: 16+.

3.      Chan, J.K.Y. and M.K.O. Lee. 2002. “SME E-Procurement Adoption in Hong Kong – The Role of Power, Trust and Value” Proceedings of the 36th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’03), IEEE.

4.      Columbia College. 2016. “Evaluating the Credibility of Your Sources” Columbia College Academics (url address: https://www.college.columbia.edu/academics/integrity-sourcecredibility) [visited at August 26, 2016].

5.      Eadie, R., S. Perera and G. Heaney. 2010. “Identification of E-Procurement Drivers and Barriers for UK Construction Organisations and Ranking of these from the Perspective of Quantity Surveyors” Journal of Information Technology in Construction 15. ISSN 1874-4753: 23-43.

6.      Garrido-Samaniego, M.J., A.M. Gutièrrez-Arranz and R.S. José-Cabezudo. 2010. “Assessing the impact of e-procurement on the structure of the buying centre” International Journal of Information Management 30: 135-143.

7.      Gunasekaran, A., R.E. McGaughey, E.W.T. Ngai and B.K. Rai. 2009. “E-Procurement adoption in the Southcoast SMEs” International Journal of Production Economics 122, Elsevier: 161-175.

8.      Kauffman, R.J. and H. Mohtadi. 2004. “Proprietary and Open Systems Adoption in E-Procurement: A Risk-Augmented Transaction Cost Perspective” Journal of Management Information Systems 21(1) Summer: 137-166.

9.      Knudsen, D. 2003. “Aligning corporate strategy, procurement strategy and e-procurement tools” International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management 33(8), Emerald: 720-734.

10.  Literature on literature review Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.literaturereview/).

11.  Literature on mind mapping Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/literature.mind.mapping/).

12.  Literature on procurement Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-procurement-1183861155006531/).

13.  Managerial intellectual learning Facebook page, maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/managerial.intellectual.learning/).

14.  Moon, M.J. 2005. “E-procurement management in state governments: diffusion of e-procurement practices and its determinants” Journal of Public Procurement 5(1): 54-72.

15.  Presutti Jr., W.D. 2003. “Supply management and e-procurement: creating value added in the supply chain” Industrial Marketing Management 32, North-Holland: 219-226.

16.  Rajkumar, T.M. 2001. “E-procurement: business and technical issues” Information Systems Management 18(4), Fall: 1-9.

17.  Redick, C.G. 2004. “The growth of e-procurement in American state governments: a model and empirical evidence” Journal of Public Procurement 4(2): 151-176 (url address: http://ippa.org/jopp/download/vol4/issue-2/GrowthofE_Procurement_Reddick.pdf) [visited  at August 25, 2016].

18.  Ronchi, S., A. Brun, R. Golini and X. Fan. 2010. “What is the value of an IT e-procurement system?” Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management 16, Elsevier 16: 131-140.

19.  Schrödl, H. and S. Bensch. 2013. “E-Procurement of Cloud-based Information Systems – a Product-Service System Approach” Thirty Fourth International Conference on Information Systems, Milan (url address: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/E-Procurement-of-Cloud-based-Information-Systems-a-Schr%C3%B6dl-Bensch/634f0c7f45fd565c9d4f9d7b257862898d8dd1f6/pdf) [visited at August 25, 2016].

20.  Soares-Aguiar, A. and A. Palma-dos-Reis. 2008. “Why do Firms Adopt E-Procurement Systems? Using Logistic Regression to Empirically Test a Conceptual Model” IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management 55(1) February: 120-133.

21.  Tatsis, V., C. Mena, L.N. Van Wassenhove and L. Whicker. 2006. “E-procurement in the Greek food and drink industry: Drivers and impediments” Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 12, Elsevier: 63-74.

22.  Teo, T.S.H., S. Lin and K.H. Lai. 2009. “Adopters and non-adopters of e-procurement in Singapore: An empirical study” Omega 37: 972-987.

23.  University of California Santa Cruz. 2016. “Evaluate the quality and credibility of your sources” University Library, University of California Santa Cruz (url address: http://library.ucsc.edu/help/research/evaluate-the-quality-and-credibility-of-your-sources) [visited at August 26, 2016].

24.  Yen, B.P.C. and E.O.S. Ng. 2003. “The Impact of Electronic Commerce on Procurement” Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce 133(3 & 4): 167-189.

---

[1] Practical value is created when a piece of academic work offers concrete, comprehensible and pragmatic recommendations and solutions to the practitioner community. The work, in this case, offers knowledge of high actionable value to practitioners. In this case, the practitioner community values the conformance/implementation quality of an academic work from the practitioner community’s standpoint.

[2] Practical interest is generated when an academic work addresses a topic of great interest to the practitioner community. The topic could be related to certain hot issues and applications in the world of certain practices, e.g., production management or marketing management for a particular industry.