The Impact of Electronic Procurement Adoption on Green Procurement towards Sustainable Supply Chain Performance-Evidence from Malaysian ISO Organizations
Abstract
:1. Introduction
- Assessing the level of sustainability after the adoption of E-procurement technology;
- Assessing the factors portraying as a tool for green procurement practices;
- Assessing the effect of E-procurement technology on green procurement practices for the sustainable supply chain.
2. Literature Review
2.1. E-Procurement System in Malaysia
2.2. Green Procurement Practices (GPP)
2.3. Research Hypothesis Development
2.3.1. Green Procurement Practices Influenced by Electronic Reverse Auction
2.3.2. Green Procurement Practices Influenced by Electronic Tendering
2.3.3. Green Procurement Practices Influenced by Electronic Sourcing
2.3.4. Green Procurement Practices Influenced by Electronic Ordering
2.3.5. Green Procurement Practices Influenced by Electronic Informing
3. Research Methodology
Sample and Data Collection
4. Data Analysis
4.1. Descriptive Statistics
4.2. Partial Least Square–Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) Analysis
4.3. Path Diagram Analysis
4.4. Measurement Model Evaluation (Outer Model)
4.5. Structural Model Evaluation (Inner Model)
4.5.1. Coefficient of Determination (R2)
4.5.2. Predictive Relevance (Q2)
4.6. Discussions
4.7. Managerial Implications, Conclusions, and Limitations
Managerial Implications and Its Impact on Society, Economy, and Nation
5. Conclusions, Limitations, and Future Research Directions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Toktaş-Palut, P.; Baylav, E.; Teoman, S.; Altunbey, M. The impact of barriers and benefits of e-procurement on its adoption decision: An empirical analysis. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2014, 158, 77–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ramkumar, M. A modified ANP and fuzzy inference system based approach for risk assessment of in-house and third party e-procurement systems. Strat. Outsourcing Int. J. 2016, 9, 159–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Almajali, D.A.; Masa’Deh, R.; Tarhini, A. Antecedents of ERP systems implementation success: A study on Jordanian healthcare sector. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2016, 29, 549–565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Khan, S.A.; Liang, Y.; Shahzad, S. An Empirical Study of Perceived Factors Affecting Customer Satisfaction to Re-Purchase Intention in Online Stores in China. J. Serv. Sci. Manag. 2015, 8, 291–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tarhini, A.; Masa’Deh, R.; Al-Busaidi, K.A.; Mohammed, A.B.; Maqableh, M.; Sharma, S. Factors influencing students’ adoption of e-learning: A structural equation modeling approach. J. Int. Educ. Bus. 2017, 10, 164–182. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M.; Miller, L. ERP system implementation in large enterprises—A systematic literature review. J. Enterp. Inf. Manag. 2017, 30, 666–692. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Croom, S.; Brandon-Jones, A. Impact of e-procurement: Experiences from implementation in the UK public sector. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2007, 13, 294–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gunasekaran, A.; Ngai, E.W. Adoption of e-procurement in Hong Kong: An empirical research. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2008, 113, 159–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sawik, B. Selected Multiple Criteria Supply Chain Optimization Problems; Lawrence, K.D., Pai, D.R., Eds.; Emerald Publishing Limited: Bingley, UK, 2020; pp. 31–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- De Boer, L.; Harink, J.; Heijboer, G. A conceptual model for assessing the impact of electronic procurement. Eur. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2002, 8, 25–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davila, A.; Gupta, M.; Palmer, R. Moving Procurement Systems to the Internet: The Adoption and Use of E-Procurement Technology Models. Eur. Manag. J. 2003, 21, 11–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ibem, E.O.; Aduwo, E.B.; Afolabi, A.O.; Oluwunmi, A.O.; Tunji-Olayeni, P.F.; Ayo-Vaughan, E.A.; Uwakonye, U.O. Electronic (e-) Procurement Adoption and Users’ Experience in the Nigerian Construction Sector. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2020, 17, 258–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gupta, M.; Narain, R. A survey on adoption of e-procurement in Indian organisations. Int. J. Indian Cult. Bus. Manag. 2012, 5, 76–109. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wu Zsidisin, A.; Ross, D. Antecedents and Outcomes of E-Procurement Adoption: An Integrative Model. IEEE Trans. Eng. Manag. 2007, 54, 576–587. [Google Scholar]
- Ahmad, H.; Hassan, S.H.A.; Ismail, S. Transparency level of the electronic procurement system in Malaysia. J. Financial Rep. Account. 2021. ahead of print. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gunasekaran, A.; McGaughey Ronald, E.; Ngai Eric, W.T.; Rai Bharatendra, K. E-Procurement adoption in the Southcoast SMEs. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2009, 122, 161–175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Presutti, W.D. Supply management and e-procurement: Creating value added in the supply chain. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2003, 32, 219–226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Angeles, R.; Nath, R. Business-to-business e-procurement: Success factors and challenges to implementation. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2007, 12, 104–115. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Min, H.; Galle, W.P. E-purchasing: Profiles of adopters and nonadopters. Ind. Mark. Manag. 2003, 32, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Y.; Chang, C.; Heng, M. The levels of information technology adoption, business network, and strategic position model for evaluating supply chain integration. J. Electron. Commer. Res. 2004, 5, 85–98. [Google Scholar]
- Bakker, E.; Zheng, J.; Knight, L.; Harland, C. Putting e-commerce adoption in a supply chain context. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2008, 28, 313–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Raghavendran, P.S.; Xavier, M.J.; Israel, D. Green Purchasing Practices: A study of E-Procurement in B2B Buying in Indian Small and Medium Enterprises. J. Supply Chain. Oper. Manag. 2012, 10, 13–23. Available online: http://www.procurementobservatoryraj.in/Phase-I/pdf/Green_Purchasing_Practices_A_study_of_e-procurement.pdf (accessed on 12 December 2021).
- Zaidi, S.A.H.; Mirza, F.M.; Hou, F.; Ashraf, R.U. Addressing the sustainable development through sustainable procurement: What factors resist the implementation of sustainable procurement in Pakistan? Socio-Economic Plan. Sci. 2019, 68, 100671. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Grandia, J.; Groeneveld, S.; Kuipers, B.; Steijn, B. Sustainable procurement in practice: Explaining the degree of sustainable procurement from an organisational perspective. In Public Procurement’s Place in the World; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2014; pp. 37–62. [Google Scholar]
- Ghosh, M. Determinants of green procurement implementation and its impact on firm performance. J. Manuf. Technol. Manag. 2019, 30, 462–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Touboulic, A.; Walker, H. Theories in sustainable supply chain management: A structured literature review. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 2015, 45, 16–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chomchaiya, S.; Esichaikul, V. Consolidated performance measurement framework for government e-procurement focusing on internal stakeholders. Inf. Technol. People 2016, 29, 354–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yevu, S.K.; Ann, T.W.; Adinyira, E.; Darko, A.; Antwi-Afari, M.F. Optimizing the application of strategies promoting electronic procurement systems towards sustainable construction in the building lifecycle: A neuro-fuzzy model approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2022, 336, 130343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Warken, I.; Henn, V.; da Rosa, F. Gestão da sustentabilidade: Um estudo sobre o nível de sustentabilidade socioambiental de uma Instituição Federal de Ensino Superior. Rev. Gestão Finanças Contab. 2014, 4, 147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Couto, H.L.G.D.; Coelho, C. Fatores críticos no comportamento do gestor público responsável por compras sustentáveis: Diferenças entre consumo individual e organizacional. Rev. Adm. Pública-RAP 2015, 49, 519–543. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ramos, P.; Santos, C. Licitações públicas sustentáveis: Um estudo no Instituto Federal de Educação, Ciência e Tecnologia do Rio Grande do Sul. In Encontro Internacional Sobre Gestão Ambiental e Meio Ambiente (ENGEMA), 19; 2017; pp. 1–16. ISSN 2359–1048. Available online: http://engemausp.submissao.com.br/19/anais/arquivos/259.pdf (accessed on 13 December 2021).
- Couto, H.L.G.D.; Ribeiro, F.L. Objetivos e desafios da política de compras públicas sustentáveis no Brasil: A opinião dos especialistas. Rev. Adm. Pública 2016, 50, 331–343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Walker, H.; Brammer, S. The relationship between sustainable procurement and e-procurement in the public sector. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 256–268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sorooshian, S.; Ting, K.C. Reasons for implementing ISO 14001 in Malaysia. Environ. Qual. Manag. 2018, 27, 125–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chidambaram, H.; Evans, K.E. Big data: Is the energy industry starting to see real applications? Supply Chain. Manag. Rev. 2015, 19, 62–64. [Google Scholar]
- Ruehle, K. Procurement: The forgotten element of digital transformation? Manuf. Bus. Technol. 2018. Available online: https://www.mbtmag.com/home/article/13227984/procurement-the-forgotten-element-of-digital-transformation?utm_content=69052551&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter (accessed on 13 December 2021).
- Khan, M.T.; Idrees, M.D.; Rauf, M.; Sami, A.; Ansari, A.; Jamil, A. Green Supply Chain Management Practices’ Impact on Operational Performance with the Mediation of Technological Innovation. Sustainability 2022, 14, 3362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlNuaimi, B.K.; Khan, M. Public-sector green procurement in the United Arab Emirates: Innovation capability and commitment to change. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 233, 482–489. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nawi, M.N.; Deraman, R.; Bamgbade, J.A.; Zulhumadi, F.; Riazi, S.R. E-Procurement in Malaysian Construction Industry: Benefits and Challenges in Implementation. Int. J. Supply Chain. Manag. 2017, 6, 209–213. [Google Scholar]
- Rosli, S.A.; Songip, A.R. Effectiveness of E-Procurement in Malaysia. Int. J. Acad. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2017, 7, 870–875. [Google Scholar]
- Aman, A.; Kasimin, H. E-procurement implementation: A case of Malaysia government. Transform. Gov. People, Process Policy 2011, 5, 330–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahimbisibwe, A.; Wilson, T.; Ronald, T. Adoption of E-procurement In Uganda: Migration from the Manual Procurement Systems to the Internet. J. Supply Chain. Manag. 2016, 3, 1–14. Available online: http://www.researchjournali.com/pdf/1932.pdf (accessed on 15 June 2019).
- Ramkumar, M.; Jenamani, M. Sustainability in Supply Chain Through E-Procurement—An Assessment Framework Based on DANP and Liberatore Score. IEEE Syst. J. 2015, 9, 1554–1564. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaliannan, M.; Awang, H.; Raman, M. Electronic procurement: A case study of Malaysia’s e-Perolehan (e-procurement) initiative. Int. J. Electron. Gov. 2009, 2, 103–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Osman, I.H.; Anouze, A.L.; Irani, Z.; Lee, H.; Medeni, T.D.; Weerakkody, V. A cognitive analytics management framework for the transformation of electronic government services from users’ perspective to create sustainable shared values. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 2019, 278, 514–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shuib, L.; Yadegaridehkordi, E.; Ainin, S. Malaysian urban poor adoption of e-government applications and their satisfaction. Cogent Soc. Sci. 2019, 5, 1565293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soong, K.-K.; Ahmed, E.M.; Tan, K.S. Factors influencing Malaysian small and medium enterprises adoption of electronic government procurement. J. Public Procure. 2020, 20, 38–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kassim, E.S.; Hussin, H. A success model for the Malaysian government e-procurement system: The buyer perspective. Int. J. Electron. Gov. Res. 2013, 9, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meehan, J.; Bryde, D.J. A field-level examination of the adoption of sustainable procurement in the social housing sector. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2015, 35, 982–1004. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Busu, C.; Busu, M. Research on the Factors of Competition in the Green Procurement Processes: A Case Study for the Conditions of Romania Using PLS-SEM Methodology. Mathematics 2020, 9, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bohari, A.A.M.; Skitmore, M.; Xia, B.; Teo, M.; Khalil, N. Key stakeholder values in encouraging green orientation of construction procurement. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 270, 122246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wimalasena, N.N.; Gunatilake, S. The readiness of construction contractors and consultants to adopt e-tendering: The case of Sri Lanka. Constr. Innov. 2018, 18, 350–370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, Y.; Lee, H.; Irani, Z. Big data-driven fuzzy cognitive map for prioritizing IT service procurement in the public sector. Ann. Oper. Res. 2018, 270, 75–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Manikam, S.; Sahibudin, S.; Selamat, H. Big data analytics initiatives using business intelligence maturity model approach in the public sector. In Advanced Science Letters; American Scientific Publishers: Santa Clarita, CA, USA, 2017; Volume 23, pp. 4097–4100. ISSN 1936-6612. Available online: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/contentone/asp/asl/2017/00000023/00000005/art00061 (accessed on 19 June 2019).
- Chersan, I.C.; Dumitru, V.F.; Gorgan, C.; Gorgan, V. Green public procurement in the academic literature. Amfiteatru Econ. 2020, 22, 82–101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aragão, C.G.; Jabbour, C.J.C. Green training for sustainable procurement? Insights from the Brazilian public sector. Ind. Commer. Train. 2017, 49, 48–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ramkumar, M.; Schoenherr, T.; Wagner, S.M.; Jenamani, M. Q-TAM: A quality technology acceptance model for predicting organizational buyers’ continuance intentions for e-procurement services. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2019, 216, 333–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Davis, F.; Bagozzi, R.; Warshaw. Wikipedia. Wikipedia.org. 1989. Available online: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technology_acceptance_model (accessed on 19 June 2019).
- Daoud, L.; Ibrahim, M. The Factors Affecting on E-procurement Usage: The Moderating Role of Power. J. Physics: Conf. Ser. 2018, 1019, 012076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iqbal, M.; Zahidie, A. Diffusion of innovations: A guiding framework for public health. Scand. J. Public Health 2021, 5, 14034948211014104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Singh, P.K.; Ismail, F.B.; Wei, C.S.; Imran, M.; Ahmed, S.A. A Framework of E-Procurement Technology for Sustainable Procurement in ISO 14001 Certified Firms in Malaysia. Adv. Sci. Technol. Eng. Syst. J. 2020, 5, 424–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Etse, D.; McMurray, A.; Muenjohn, N. The Effect of Regulation on Sustainable Procurement: Organisational Leadership and Culture as Mediators. J. Bus. Ethic 2021, 5, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hanák, T.; Marović, I.; Jajac, N. Challenges of Electronic Reverse Auctions in Construction Industry—A Review. Economies 2020, 8, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- LaMorte, W.W. Diffusion of innovation theory. Boston University School of Public Health. 2019. Available online: https://sphweb.bumc.bu.edu/otlt/mph-modules/sb/behavioralchangetheories/behavioralchangetheories4.html (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Ndei, F.M.; Mutuku, M. Electronic Procurement and Performance of Non-Governmental Organizations in Kenya. Empirical Evidence from Pathfinder International, Kenya. J. Bus. Manag. Sci. 2021, 9, 71–80. [Google Scholar]
- Blome, C.; Hollos, D.; Paulraj, A. Green procurement and green supplier development: Antecedents and effects on supplier performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2014, 52, 32–49. Available online: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00207543.2013.825748 (accessed on 15 July 2020).
- Harelimana, J.B. The impact of e-procurement on the performance of public institutions in Rwanda. Glob. J. Manag. Bus. Res. 2018, 12. [Google Scholar]
- Siricha, P.S.; Theuri, F.S. The Effects of Electronic Procurement on Organizational Performance in Kenya Ports Authority. Imp. J. Interdiscip. Res. 2016, 19, 5. [Google Scholar]
- Mois, G.; Beer, J.M. Chapter 3—Robotics to support aging in place. In Living with Robots; Pak, R., de Visser, E.J., Ericka, R., Eds.; Academic Press: New York, NY, USA, 2020; pp. 49–74. [Google Scholar]
- Gupta, A.K.; Gupta, N. Effect of corporate environmental sustainability on dimensions of firm performance—Towards sustainable development: Evidence from India. J. Clean. Prod. 2020, 253, 119948. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Quesada, G.; González, M.E.; Mueller, J.; Mueller, R. Impact of e-procurement on procurement practices and performance. Benchmarking Int. J. 2010, 17, 516–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, H.H.; Tsai, Y.C.; Hsu, C.H. E-procurement and supply chain performance. Supply Chain. Manag. Int. J. 2013, 18, 34–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Allal-Chérif, O. Improving Sustainable Procurement: The Role of Information Systems. Int. J. E-Serv. Mob. Appl. 2012, 4, 42–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Teo, T.; Huang, F.; Hoi, C.K.W. Explicating the influences that explain intention to use technology among English teachers in China. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2017, 26, 460–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yusoff, W.S.; Islam, A.; Abas, Z.; Yusuf, D.H. Electronic Government Procurement Adoption Behavior amongst Malaysian SMEs. Int. Bus. Res. 2010, 4, 100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Abu Bakar, N.; Peszynski, K.; Azizan, N.; Sundram, V.P.K. Abridgment of Traditional Procurement and E-Procurement: Definitions, Tools and Benefits. J. Emerg. Econ. Islam. Res. 2016, 4, 74–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- AlNuaimi, B.K.; Khan, M.; Ajmal, M.M. The role of big data analytics capabilities in greening e-procurement: A higher order PLS-SEM analysis. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 169, 120808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Luijken, T.; Martini, M. The Role of Technology in Reducing Corruption in Public Procurement. Anti-Corruption Helpdesk. Transparency International. Disponible à L’adresse. 2014. Available online: http://www.transparency.org/whatwedo/answer/the_role_of_technology_in_reducing_corruption_in_public_procurement (accessed on 9 February 2019).
- Panayiotou, N.A.; Gayialis, S.P.; Tatsiopoulos, I.P. An e-procurement system for governmental purchasing. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2004, 90, 79–102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ho, L.W.; Dickinson, N.M.; Chan, G.Y. Green procurement in the Asian public sector and the Hong Kong private sector. In Natural Resources Forum; Blackwell Publishing Ltd.: Oxford, UK, 2010; Volume 34, pp. 24–38. [Google Scholar]
- Vaidyanathan, G.; Devaraj, S. The role of quality in e-procurement performance: An empirical analysis. J. Oper. Manag. 2008, 26, 407–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Konradt, U.; Lückel, L.; Ellwart, T. The role of usability in business-to-business e-commerce systems: Predictors and its impact on user’s strain and commercial transactions. Adv. Hum.-Comput. Interact. 2012, 2012, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Devaraj, S.; Vaidyanathan, G.; Mishra, A.N. Effect of purchase volume flexibility and purchase mix flexibility on e-procurement performance: An analysis of two perspectives. J. Oper. Manag. 2012, 30, 509–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Marshall, D.; McCarthy, L.; Claudy, M.C.; McGrath, P. Piggy in the Middle: How Direct Customer Power Affects First-Tier Suppliers’ Adoption of Socially Responsible Procurement Practices and Performance. J. Bus. Ethic 2016, 154, 1081–1102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leal Filho, W.; Shiel, C.; Paço, A.; Mifsud, M.; Ávila, L.V.; Brandli, L.L.; Molthan-Hill, P.; Pace, P.; Azeiteiro, U.M.; Vargas, V.R.; et al. Sustainable development goals and sustainability teaching at universities: Falling behind or getting ahead of the pack? J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 232, 285–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sarkis, J.; Zhu, Q. Environmental sustainability and production: Taking the road less travelled. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2017, 56, 743–759. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Galeazzo, A.; Ortiz-de-Mandojana, N.; Delgado-Ceballos, J. Green procurement and financial performance in the tourism industry: The moderating role of tourists’ green purchasing behavior. Curr. Issues Tour. 2021, 24, 700–716. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahsan, K.; Rahman, S. Green public procurement implementation challenges in Australian public healthcare sector. J. Clean. Prod. 2017, 152, 181–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nijaki, L.K.; Worrel, G. Procurement for sustainable local economic development. Int. J. Public Sect. Manag. 2012, 25, 133–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hollos, D.; Blome, C.; Foerstl, K. Does sustainable supplier co-operation affect performance? Examining implications for the triple bottom line. Int. J. Prod. Res. 2012, 50, 2968–2986. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rajesh, R.; Rajendran, C. Relating Environmental, Social, and Governance scores and sustainability performances of firms: An empirical analysis. Bus. Strat. Environ. 2019, 29, 1247–1267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Testa, F.; Grappio, P.; Gusmerotti, N.M.; Iraldo, F.; Frey, M. Examining green public procurement using content analysis: Existing difficulties for procurers and useful recommendations. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2015, 18, 197–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tokbolat, S.; Karaca, F.; Durdyev, S.; Calay, R.K. Construction professionals’ perspectives on drivers and barriers of sustainable construction. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2020, 22, 4361–4378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Capello, M.; Oro, L.G.G. Gasto público eficiente: Propuestas para un mejoramiento en los sistemas de compras y contrataciones gubernamentales. Actual. Econ. 2015, 25, 5–20. [Google Scholar]
- Huq, F.A.; Stevenson, M. Implementing Socially Sustainable Practices in Challenging Institutional Contexts: Building Theory from Seven Developing Country Supplier Cases. J. Bus. Ethic 2018, 161, 415–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Matos, S.V.; Schleper, M.C.; Gold, S.; Hall, J.K. The hidden side of sustainable operations and supply chain management: Unanticipated outcomes, trade-offs and tensions. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 2020, 40, 1749–1770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McMurray, A.; Islam, M.; Siwar, C.; Fien, J. Sustainable procurement in Malaysian organizations: Practices, barriers and opportunities. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2014, 20, 195–207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mani, V.; Gunasekaran, A.; Delgado, C. Enhancing supply chain performance through supplier social sustainability: An emerging economy perspective. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2018, 195, 259–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Murcia, M.J.; Panwar, R.; Tarzijan, J. Socially Responsible Firms Outsource Less. Bus. Soc. 2020, 60, 1507–1545. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crespin-Mazet, F.; Dontenwill, E. Sustainable procurement: Building legitimacy in the supply network. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2012, 18, 207–217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Waris, M.; Panigrahi, S.; Mengal, A.; Soomro, M.I.; Mirjat, N.H.; Ullah, M.; Azlan, Z.S.; Khan, A. An Application of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) for Sustainable Procurement of Construction Equipment: Multicriteria-Based Decision Framework for Malaysia. Math. Probl. Eng. 2019, 2019, 6391431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gounden, K. Factors Influencing Sustainable Procurement within the Private and Public Sector in South Africa. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, South Africa, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Ciliberti, F.; Pontrandolfo, P.; Scozzi, B. Investigating corporate social responsibility in supply chains: A SME perspective. J. Clean. Prod. 2008, 16, 1579–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Carter, C.R.; Jennings, M.M. The role of purchasing in corporate social responsibility: A structural equation analysis. J. Bus. Logist. 2004, 25, 145–186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ntayi, J.M.; Mugume, E. A taxonomy of strategic sourcing for defense forces in sub-Saharan Africa. World J. Entrep. Manag. Sustain. Dev. 2014, 10, 13–32. [Google Scholar]
- Zailani, S.; Jeyaraman, K.; Vengadasan, G.; Premkumar, R. Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) in Malaysia: A survey. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 2012, 140, 330–340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kahlenborn, W.; Mansor, N.; Adham, K. Government green procurement (GGP) Short-term action plan 2013–2014. Sustain. Consum. Prod. (SCP) Policy Support Malays. 2013, 6, 1–25. [Google Scholar]
- Sheik, I.; Singh, P.K. Industry 4.0 managerial roles and challenges. Int. J. Innov. Eng. Res. Technol. 2020, 5, 378–381. [Google Scholar]
- Obradović, T.; Vlačić, B.; Dabić, M. Open innovation in the manufacturing industry: A review and research agenda. Technovation 2021, 102, 102221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rahmanzadeh, S.; Pishvaee, M.S.; Govindan, K. Emergence of open supply chain management: The role of open innovation in the future smart industry using digital twin network. Ann. Oper. Res. 2022, 4, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nee, G.Y.; Wahid, N.A. The effect of ISO 14001 environmental management system implementation on SMEs performance: An empirical study in Malaysia. J. Sustain. Dev. 2010, 3, 215. [Google Scholar]
- Mansi, M. Sustainable procurement disclosure practices in central public sector enterprises: Evidence from India. J. Purch. Supply Manag. 2015, 21, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Aibinu, A.A.; Al-Lawati, A.M. Using PLS-SEM technique to model construction organizations’ willingness to participate in e-bidding. Autom. Constr. 2010, 19, 714–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Vaidyanathan, G.; Devaraj, S.; D’Arcy, J. Does Security Impact E-procurement Performance? Testing a Model of Direct and Moderated Effects. Decis. Sci. 2012, 43, 437–458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iles, J. How is E-Procurement Related to the Success of US Cities’ Sustainable Purchasing Policies? ASU School of Sustainability, Arizona State University: Tempe, AZ, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Yevu, S.K.; Yu, A.T.; Nani, G.; Darko, A.; Tetteh, M.O. Electronic Procurement Systems Adoption in Construction Procurement: A Global Survey on the Barriers and Strategies from the Developed and Developing Economies. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2022, 148, 04021186. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Altounjy, R.; Alaeddin, O.; Hussain, H.I.; Kot, S. Moving from Bricks to Clicks: Merchants’ Acceptance of the Mobile Payment in Malaysia. Int. J. eBusiness eGovernment Stud. 2020, 12, 136–150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tayaran, H.; Ghazanfari, M. A Framework for Online Reverse Auction Based on Market Maker Learning with a Risk-Averse Buyer. Math. Probl. Eng. 2020, 2020, 5604246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Candela, A.; Ulises, F. E-Procurement and Performance of Manufacturing Firms in Buenos Aires, Argentina. J. Procure. Supply Chain. 2022, 6, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Manthou, V.; Bialas, C.; Stefanou, C.J. Benefits and barriers of e-sourcing and e-purchasing in the healthcare sector: A case study. In Automated Enterprise Systems for Maximizing Business Performance; IGI Global: Thessaloniki, Greece, 2016; pp. 71–87. [Google Scholar]
- Kimutai, B.; Ismael, N.S. Role of strategic e-sourcing practices on supply chain performance in state corporations in Kenya: A case of Kenya Electricity Generating Company Ltd. Int. Acad. J. Procure. Supply Chain. Manag. 2016, 2, 113–133. [Google Scholar]
- Schoenherr, T. Becoming Mainstream: Electronic Sourcing Suites. In The Evolution of Electronic Procurement; Palgrave Pivot: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 87–100. [Google Scholar]
- Mwangi, P.N. Application of E-Sourcing And E-Informing in Procurement Practices on Procurement Performance in Independent Electoral And Boundaries Commission In Kenya. Int. J. Bus. Manag. Financ. 2020, 3. [Google Scholar]
- Kasemsap, K. Mastering electronic procurement, green public procurement, and public procurement for innovation. In Digital Governance and E-Government Principles Applied to Public Procurement; IGI Global: Bangkok, Thailand, 2017; pp. 29–55. [Google Scholar]
- Afande, F.O. Adoption of E-Procurement Strategy and Procurement Performance in State Corporations in Kenya (A Case of KRA). Ind. Eng. Lett. 2015, 5, 1–24. [Google Scholar]
- Gunaratne, H.; Pappel, I. Enhancement of the e-Invoicing Systems by Increasing the Efficiency of Workflows via Disruptive Technologies. In International Conference on Electronic Governance and Open Society: Challenges in Eurasia; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2020; pp. 60–74. [Google Scholar]
- Chepkwony, J.K.; Lagat, C. E-Ordering and E-Informing on Supply Chain Performance in Retail Marketing Outlets in Kenya. J. Mark. Consum. Res. 2016, 1, 3. [Google Scholar]
- Kiroski, K.; Gusev, M.; Ristov, S. IaaS Cloud Model for e-Ordering and e-Invoicing. In FedCSIS (Position Papers); Cyril and Methodius University: Skopje, Macedonia, 2013; pp. 105–110. [Google Scholar]
- Mutangili, S.K. Influence of E-Procurement Practices on Supply Chain Performance: A Case Study of Kenya Airways. J. Procure. Supply Chain. 2019, 3, 1–16. [Google Scholar]
- Hair, J.F.; Risher, J.J.; Sarstedt, M.; Ringle, C.M. When to use and how to report the results of PLS-SEM. Eur. Bus. Rev. 2019, 31, 2–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Henseler, J.; Ringle, C.M.; Sarstedt, M. A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2015, 43, 115–135. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Sarkar, B.; Ullah, M.; Kim, N. Environmental and economic assessment of closed-loop supply chain with remanufacturing and returnable transport items. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2017, 111, 148–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ahmad, T.; Aljafari, R.; Venkatesh, V. The Government of Jamaica’s electronic procurement system: Experiences and lessons learned. Internet Res. 2019, 29, 1571–1588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Al-Dalou, R.; Abu-shanab, E. E-participation levels and technologies. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Information Technology, (ICIT 2013), Amman, Jordan, 8 May 2013; pp. 8–10. [Google Scholar]
- Bataineh, L.; Abu-Shanab, E. How perceptions of E-participation levels influence the intention to use E-government websites. Transform. Gov. People Process Policy 2016, 10, 315–334. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Masudin, I.; Aprilia, G.; Nugraha, A.; Restuputri, D. Impact of E-Procurement Adoption on Company Performance: Evidence from Indonesian Manufacturing Industry. Logistics 2021, 5, 16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boateng, E.; Simons, B. Barriers to the Adoption of Electronic Tendering in Construction Procurement in Ghana. Ph.D. Thesis, Sunyani Technical University, Sunyani, Ghana, 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Raventós, P.; Zolezzi, S. Electronic tendering of pharmaceuticals and medical devices in Chile. J. Bus. Res. 2015, 68, 2569–2578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- O’Connell, L. Electronic Tendering: Recognising a More Effective Use of Information Communications Technology in the Irish Construction Industry. Master’s Thesis, Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin, Ireland. [CrossRef]
- Langat, B.K. Electronic Sourcing and Procurement Cost of Commercial State Corporations in Kenya. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Nairobi, Nairobi, Kenya, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- Sunmola, F.T.; Shehu, Y.U. A Case Study on Performance Features of Electronic Tendering Systems. Procedia Manuf. 2020, 51, 1586–1591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dey, K.; Bhattacharya, J. Reverse Auction Administration in Indian Public Sector Coal Mining, its Effect on the Engineering and Unsustainable Outcomes. J. Inst. Eng. (India) Ser. D 2021, 102, 103–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kandpal, D.; Dhingra, T. Migrating to reverse Auction mechanisms in wind energy sector: Status and challenges. Energy Policy 2021, 156, 112352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cabral, Ó.; Ferreira, L.; Dias, G.P. Adoption of reverse auctions in public e-procurement: The case of Portugal. In Proceedings of the 2016 11th Iberian Conference on Information Systems and Technologies (CISTI), Gran Canaria, Spain, 15–18 June 2016; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar]
- Hanák, T. Electronic reverse auctions in public sector construction procurement: Case study of Czech buyers and suppliers. TEM J. 2018, 7, 41–52. [Google Scholar]
- Pawar, P.V.; Behl, A.; Aital, P. Systematic literature review on electronic reverse auction: Issues and research discussion. Int. J. Procure. Manag. 2017, 10, 290–310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, X.; Zhao, L.; Lee, S.H. Measuring user experiences with e-sourcing platforms: The development of the e-sourcing experience index. J. Fash. Mark. Manag. Int. J. 2020, 25, 430–447. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ruparathna, R.; Hewage, K. Sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction industry: Current practices, drivers and opportunities. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 109, 305–314. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Author (Year) | Scope of EPT and SPP | Theory/Country/Industry |
---|---|---|
Walker and Brammer (2012) | Relationship, sustainable supply chain | Information system/Multiple |
Ramkumar and Jenamani (2015) | Adoption, sustainable supply chain, framework | TAM/Multiple |
Yu et al. (2020) | Relationship, integrated framework | RBV, TOE/Construction |
Yevu et al. (2022) | EPT implementation for sustainability | TAM, RBV |
Ruparathna and Hewage (2015) | Sustainability | Canada |
Chen et al. (2021) | Adoption, sustainable strategies | TAM/Multiple |
Brandon-Jones and Kauppi (2018) | Adoption, sustainability | TAM/Netherlands |
Ramkumar et al. (2019) | Usage, implementation | TAM, DCB, RBV/Multiple |
AlNuaimi et al. (2021) | Implementation, environmental performance | ROT/UAE |
Toktaş-Palut et al. (2014) | Benefits, usage | Turkey |
Belisari et al. (2020) | Adoption, implementation, sustainability | Italy |
Khan et al. (2022) | Technology innovation, operational performance, green supply chain management | Pakistan |
Masudin et al. (2021) | Adoption, performance | Indonesia |
Variables | Classification of Variables | Frequency | Total | Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gender | Male | 108 | 152 | 70 |
Female | 44 | 30 | ||
Age | Between 20 and 29 years | 42 | 152 | 27 |
Between 30 and 39 years | 86 | 55 | ||
Between 40 and 49 years | 21 | 14 | ||
Between 50 and 59 years | 3 | 4 | ||
Education | SPM | 0 | 152 | 0 |
SPTM | 28 | 18 | ||
Diploma | 76 | 50 | ||
Degree | 42 | 29 | ||
Masters | 5 | 3 | ||
Ph.D. | 0 | 0 |
Variables | N | Mean Value | Standard Deviation | Minimum | Maximum |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-Tendering | 152 | 4.306 | 0.725 | 3 | 5 |
E-Reverse auctioning | 152 | 3.307 | 1.014 | 2 | 5 |
E-Informing | 152 | 4.443 | 0.729 | 3 | 5 |
E-Sourcing | 152 | 4.096 | 0.877 | 4 | 5 |
E-Ordering | 152 | 3.874 | 0.864 | 3 | 5 |
Green Procurement Practices | 152 | 4.324 | 0.580 | 2 | 5 |
Constructs | Average Variance Extracted (AVE > 0.5) | Composite Reliability (CR > 0.7) | Cronbach’s Alpha | Evidence |
---|---|---|---|---|
E-Informing (E-INF) | 0.698 | 0.902 | 0.856 | Valid |
E-Ordering (E-ORD) | 0.705 | 0.905 | 0.863 | Valid |
E-Reverse auctioning (E-RA) | 0.801 | 0.941 | 0.918 | Valid |
E-Sourcing (E-SOU) | 0.780 | 0.934 | 0.906 | Valid |
E-Tendering (E-TEN) | 0.783 | 0.935 | 0.908 | Valid |
Green Procurement Practices (GPP) | 0.505 | 0.917 | 0.903 | Valid |
Constructs | E-Informing | E-Ordering | E-Reverse Auctioning | E-Sourcing | E-Tendering | Green Procurement Practices |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-Informing | 0.835 | |||||
E-Ordering | 0.154 | 0.839 | ||||
E-Reverse auctioning | 0.228 | 0.144 | 0.895 | |||
E-Sourcing | 0.398 | 0.191 | 0.239 | 0.883 | ||
E-Tendering | 0.524 | 0.111 | 0.193 | 0.490 | 0.885 | |
Green Procurement Practices | 0.417 | 0.202 | 0.250 | 0.929 | 0.509 | 0.709 |
Constructs | E-Informing | E-Ordering | E-Reverse Auctioning | E-Sourcing | E-Tendering | Green Procurement Practices |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-Informing | ||||||
E-Ordering | 0.201 | |||||
E-Reverse Auctioning | 0.268 | 0.163 | ||||
E-Sourcing | 0.451 | 0.197 | 0.257 | |||
E-Tendering | 0.588 | 0.133 | 0.212 | 0.535 | ||
Green Procurement Practices | 0.462 | 0.267 | 0.401 | 0.691 | 0.540 |
Latent Construct | R Square (R2) | Result |
---|---|---|
Green Procurement Practices (GPP) | 0.868 | High |
Construct | SSO/SSE | Q2 = (1 − SSE/SSO) |
---|---|---|
Green Procurement Practices (GPP) | 1672/ 1009.934 | 0.396 |
Path | Original Sample (O)-Beta | Standard Deviation (STDEV) | T Statistics | p Values | Decisions |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
E-INF → GPP | 0.029 | 0.048 | 2.604 | 0.044 | Supported |
E-ORD → GPP | 0.021 | 0.034 | 6.607 | 0.000 | Supported |
E-RA → GPP | 0.019 | 0.030 | 0.619 | 0.536 | Unsupported |
E-SOU → GPP | 0.881 | 0.030 | 2.931 | 0.000 | Supported |
E-TEN → GPP | 0.056 | 0.045 | 1.247 | 0.213 | Unsupported |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Singh, P.K.; Chan, S.W. The Impact of Electronic Procurement Adoption on Green Procurement towards Sustainable Supply Chain Performance-Evidence from Malaysian ISO Organizations. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2022, 8, 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020061
Singh PK, Chan SW. The Impact of Electronic Procurement Adoption on Green Procurement towards Sustainable Supply Chain Performance-Evidence from Malaysian ISO Organizations. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity. 2022; 8(2):61. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020061
Chicago/Turabian StyleSingh, Pratik Kumar, and Shiau Wei Chan. 2022. "The Impact of Electronic Procurement Adoption on Green Procurement towards Sustainable Supply Chain Performance-Evidence from Malaysian ISO Organizations" Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity 8, no. 2: 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020061
APA StyleSingh, P. K., & Chan, S. W. (2022). The Impact of Electronic Procurement Adoption on Green Procurement towards Sustainable Supply Chain Performance-Evidence from Malaysian ISO Organizations. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 8(2), 61. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc8020061