Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Preface
- Part I Preliminary Issues
- Part II General Strategic Principles
- 3 When should procurement be centralized?
- 4 Procurement contracting strategies
- 5 Incentives and award procedures: competitive tendering vs. negotiations in procurement
- Part III Competitive Tendering Strategies
- Part IV Attracting and Screening Participants
- Part V Preventing Collusion and Corruption
- Part VI Dynamic Forces and Innovation
- Glossary
- Index
- References
3 - When should procurement be centralized?
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 November 2009
Book contents
- Frontmatter
- Contents
- List of figures
- List of tables
- List of contributors
- Preface
- Part I Preliminary Issues
- Part II General Strategic Principles
- 3 When should procurement be centralized?
- 4 Procurement contracting strategies
- 5 Incentives and award procedures: competitive tendering vs. negotiations in procurement
- Part III Competitive Tendering Strategies
- Part IV Attracting and Screening Participants
- Part V Preventing Collusion and Corruption
- Part VI Dynamic Forces and Innovation
- Glossary
- Index
- References
Summary
Introduction
Technological and organizational innovations can make it possible to have more cooperation and more initiative simultaneously. Information technology is an obvious source of such movements. By allowing finer performance measurement and better communications, it facilitates getting more initiative (through lowering the cost of providing incentives) and more cooperation (by making coordination easier and increasing contacts among units).
(Roberts 2004, p. 112)Motivated by the need to control costs and streamline processes, the issue of centralization versus decentralization has captured the interest of researchers, practitioners and public administrators from a variety of perspectives and is becoming increasingly important for many organizations. An efficient procurement policy is arguably one of the key activities in private companies, international institutions and governments. In this chapter we discuss purchasing systems from the specific point of view of their degree of centralization.
Given the considerable volume of resources involved, firms and governments always seek to optimize procurement so as to deliver value for money to business units and taxpayers. In pursuing such a goal often the first important choice is to choose between centralized and decentralized purchasing; profitability, performance and budget control within a private company or a public institution can vary considerably according to how purchases are organized and managed.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Handbook of Procurement , pp. 47 - 81Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2006
References
and (1997). Formal and Real Authority in Organizations, Journal of Political Economy, 105, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersen, K. V., N. C. Juul, S. Korzen-Bohr and J. K. Pedersen (2003). Fractional Institutional Endeavors and e-procurement in Local Government. Proceedings of the 16th Bled Electronic Commerce Conference, Bled, Slovenia 961–973.
Bernauer T. and L. Caduff (2004). European Food Safety: Multilevel Governance, Re-Nationalization, or Centralization? Working Paper No 3 CIS ETH Zurich.
and (1990). Multimarket Contact and Collusive Behavior, RAND Journal of Economics, 21 (1), 1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1994). The Firm as a Communication Network, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 4, 809–839.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and . (1990). Decentralization, Duplication and Delay. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 803–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, and (2004). Managerial Economics and Organizational Architecture, McGraw Hill-Irwin.Google Scholar
and (1990). Switching Costs and Bidding Parity in Government Procurement of Computer Systems. Journal of Law, Economics and Organization, 6, 453–469.Google Scholar
and (2002). Organized vs. Competitive Corruption, Annals of Operations Research, 109, 293–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, H. L. and M. J. Shaw (2005). A Roadmap to Adopting Emerging Technology in E–Business An Empirical Study. College Business Working paper, University of Illinois.
Committee on the Economics of Antimalarial Drugs, Board on Global Health (2004). Saving Lives, Buying Time (Economics of Malaria Drugs in an Age of Resistance). , and , Eds., The National Academic Press.Google Scholar
(2002). Authority and Communication in Organizations, Review of Economic Studies, 69, 811–838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts. Official Journal L. 134, 30/04/2004 p. 0114 – 0240.
Fumagalli C. and M. Motta (2001). Buyers Coordination and Entry, CEPR Discussion Paper No. 2908, Mimeo.
and (1991). The Impact of Information Systems on Organizations and Markets. Communications of the ACM, 34 (10), 23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Government Accountability Office, United Nations Preliminary Observations on Internal Oversight and Procurement Practices, Statement of Thomas Melito, Director International Affairs and Trade, Testimony Before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U. S. Senate, United States, GAO-06–226T, 10/31/2005.
and (2005). On the Design of Hierarchies: Coordination versus Specialization, Journal of Political Economy, 113, 675–702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2002). Procurement Practices in the Singapore Civil Service: Balancing Control and Delegation. Journal of Public Procurement, 2 (1): 29–53.Google Scholar
and (2000). Centralized vs. Decentralized Purchasing: Current Trends in Governmental Procurement Practices. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 12 (2), 400–420.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1998). Centralized and Decentralized Contracts in a Moral Hazard Environment, Journal of Industrial Economics, 46 (4), 489–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1987). Centralization versus delegation and the value of communication. Journal of Accounting Research 25, supplement, 1–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
and (1991). Communication in Settings with No Transfers, Rand Journal of Economics, 22, 173–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
, D.Mookherjee and S. Reichelstein (1995). Hierarchical Decentralization of Incentive Contracts, The Rand Journal of Economics, 26, (4), 654–672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2005). E-procurement Management in State Governments: Diffusion of E-procurement Practices and its Determinants, Journal of Public Procurement, 5, (1), 54–72.Google Scholar
Piga, G. and M. Zanza (2004). An Exploratory Analysis of Public Procurement Practices in Europe, ch. 10 in K. V. Thai, A. Aranjo, R. Y. Carter, G. Cullender, D. Prabkin, R. Grimm, K. R. E. Jense, R. E. Lloyd, C. P. Mecue and J. Telgen (Eds.), Challenges in Public Procurement: an International Perspective, PrAcademic Press, 227–247.
Pool, C. and B. Welch (2005). Responding to Katrina: Contracting in an Emergency Situation – Version 2.0. Acquisition Direction Advisory http://summitinsight.com/femakatrina.pdf.
(2004). Diffusion of e-Procurement in the Public Sector: Revisiting Centralized vs. Decentralized Debates As a Twist in the Tale, Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Information Systems.Google Scholar
and (2003). A Study on the Value and Impact of B2B E-commerce: The Case of Web-Based Procurement, International Journal of Commerce, 6 (4), 19.Google Scholar
Subramaniam, C., Qualls W. and M. J. Shaw (2002). Impact of B2B E-Procurement Systems; A Summary Report-College of Business.
and (2000). Government Procurement: Past and Current Developments. Journal of Public Budgeting, Accounting & Financial Management, 12(2): 231–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
(2000). Centralized vs. Decentralized Procurement: Does Dispersed Information Call for Decentralized Decision-Making?International Journal of Industrial Organization, 18, 949–963.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26
- Cited by