Enhancing Purchasing's Strategic Reputation: Evidence and Recommendations for Future Research

Abstract

SUMMARY Past research in the supply chain management literature has rightfully claimed that purchasing is a strategic function of the business. In contrast, other research has found that the level of involvement by members of the supply function in strategic activities is rather low. In particular, the perception of purchasing by members of one particular group within the firm, marketing, often appears to be similar to that of a clerical function performing low‐value‐adding activities. Thus, a dichotomy exists regarding what is often claimed (being a strategic function of the business) and the apparent reality (little participation in strategic corporate activities; conflict with members of other organizational functions). In this article, a model predicting purchasing's strategic reputation within the firm is proposed and tested. The results, which are obtained from a survey of purchasing executives, indicate a role forback‐and‐forth communications and a cooperative relational history to enhance purchasing's reputation within the firm. Implications are discussed for such reputation enhancement of purchasing as a strategic, value‐adding function and recommendations are made for future research.

A strategic skill based model of supplier integration and its effect on supply management performance

“…This scale also includes activities that are noted as areas of concern in the popular press (e.g., Porter, 2000) with respect to the suppliers' level of integration. The supply management function's perceived status is measured with items adapted from Goebel et al (2003) and Giunipero and Flint (2001). Table 3 lists the scales and their pertinent individual items.…”

“…Supply management function perceived status refers to the extent to which supply management is perceived as making strategic, value-added contributions to the firm (Goebel, Marshall, & Locander, 2003). The elevation of the supply management function's status implies increasing the frequency and the intensity of the interactions between the supply management function and the top management team, suppliers, and customers.…”

Understanding the role of marketing–purchasing collaboration in industrial markets: The case of Russia

“…This may hinder key aspects of interfunctional collaboration, for example the sharing and exchange of knowledge and ideas (Day, 1994;Nonaka, 1994;Nonaka, Umemoto, & Senoo, 1996). Marketing-purchasing collaboration can be an area of conflict due to differences in motivation and interests (Humphreys, Williams, & Goebel, 2009), which has been explained via mutual resource dependence (Goebel, Marshall, & Locander, 2003) or overall organizational conflict (Barclay, 1991). For the purpose of our study, we posit the central role of 'market-sensing' in creating interdepartmental alignment of aims and facilitating collaboration between marketing and purchasing.…”

Strategic purchasing participation, supplier selection, supplier evaluation and purchasing performance

“…Consider, for instance, the fact that while members of the purchasing profession have, for some time, considered themselves to be strategic and value-adding players within the organisation (Spekman, Kamauff, and Salmond 1994;Carter and Narasimhan 1996;Narasimhan, Jayaram, and Carter 2001), other members of the organisation have not always shared purchasing's image of itself. There have been questions about whether purchasing indeed has a strategic role in a business (Goebel 2003;Johnson, Klassen, and Leenders 2004;Johnson and Leenders 2012). Prescriptions that include developing dyadic communications and cooperative relationships have been offered for firms aspiring to attain such strategic roles (Goebel 2003).…”