Purchasing supply management 13th edition pdf

Purchasing and supply management : p. Leenders, P. Fearon and a great selection of similar Used, New and Collectible Books. Purchasing and supply management - van stockum Purchasing And Supply Management. Fearon, Harold E. Fraser; Leenders, Michiel R. Formats and editions of purchasing and supply Purchasing and supply management: 1. Fearon, Anna Flynn, P. Fraser Johnson] on Amazon. This text. Author: Johnson, P. Fraser Author: Flynn, Anna E. Author: Cram Textbook Reviews Subject:.

Purchasing supply management - michiel leenders - Purchasing Supply Management a comprehensive introduction to the purchasing and supply chain management P.

Purchasing and supply management, 14th edition - Save more on Purchasing and Supply Management, 14th Edition, Rental Options Expiration Date.

Flynn, Michiel Leenders, Harold E. Harold e fearon books - list of books by harold e Discount prices on books by Harold E Fearon, including titles like Purchasing Supply Management. Purchasing and supply management: michiel r. Purchasing and Supply Management [Michiel R. Fearon, Anna Compare Prices. The Leenders text provides a comprehensive introduction to the purchasing and supply chain management. Harold e fearon - abebooks Purchasing Supply Management.

Reverse marketing - wikipedia, the free This is important in the emerging strategic orientation of supply chain management, "Reverse Marketing: Synergy of Purchasing The Netherlands. Leenders is. Flynn, Harold E. Cultural and social customs are also a very obvious potential problem in cases when the buyer and supplier company are located far from each others. Leenders et al state that business customs vary even in different areas of the U. The same is true also in EU, which is a very multi-cultural area.

However, the problem is obviously most apparent when a buyer in EU or in the U. Partnership relationship in these situations is certainly different than partnership with local suppliers. Comparison to firm-specific evolutionary models Different from our historical evolution of the purchasing and supply management phenomenon as a whole, some other researchers have presented models of the evolution of purchasing and supply management in individual firms.

In these models, evolution of purchasing and supply management in individual firms is described to develop from passive, clerical function towards strategic, proactive function e. These frameworks cover in some form both the globalizing sourcing perspective and the more holistic view over the supply chain. Tim Laseter studies co-operative practices compared with competitive purchasing processes, but gives only limited attention to the global sourcing perspective.

For example Monczka and Trent have developed a model, which focuses on the globalizing sourcing function only. Cammish and Keough and van Weele describe a longer stepwise model, where co-operation among the supply chain partners can be seen on the last steps. We will also use this framework later on in this paper to illustrate our research agenda and to highlight our research perspectives, research questions and the research approaches we are planning to take.

The framework combines the two main variables in the global purchasing and supply management area: sourcing Y axis and supply chain management X-axis. The main focus of sourcing is on searching and selecting suppliers, while supply chain management focuses on developing joint processes in collaboration with supply chain partners. Our research agenda focuses particularly on the challenges in combining sourcing and supply chain development perspectives in the global purchasing and supply management context.

Our research problem is as follows: How do companies effectively combine continuous search of new suppliers in the globalizing business environment and consistent supply chain development.

All companies in the international market are acknowledged to cover all of the four areas; local purchasing, local partnering, international purchasing and global supply network management. However, we assume that the emphasis between the four areas in an individual company depend on several factors, including e.

The challenge rises from complexity of global sourcing and potential contradiction between supply chain development and low cost sourcing as the example from Christoph et al and experiences of roundtable discussants shows. As Trent And Monzcka contend that majority of firms focus mainly on international purchasing activities without consideration of strategic orientation.

Most companies do not have in place well developed global sourcing strategies, and, therefore, improvement potential is attractive and largely unrealized, according to Trent and Monczka b. Figure 1. The framework of global purchasing and supply management. Focus on supply chain development Global Local supply partnering network management Continuous search Favouring old, of new, global local suppliers suppliers Local International purchasing purchasing Focus on making deals In order to focus our efforts, we have selected four perspectives to research the above mentioned question.

These research perspectives are the following, reflecting our observations of the present challenges as discussed, for example, in the context of our roundtable. Separate research questions will be formulated to study each of these perspectives, according to the forthcoming organization of our research work.

Management system perspective and evolution perspective The management system and evolution perspectives cover all the four areas of the framework. The management system perspective searches for understanding of how do globally operating companies manage their supply category planning, supplier selection, relationship management, capability development, processes and systems and performance measurement across the purchasing and supply management organisational boundaries, and what might be some of the contingencies influencing different choices in different companies.

The evolution perspective looks at the evolution of individual companies between the four areas of purchasing and supply This paper was presented in the IPSERA German Node conference, Wiesbaden, Germany, 7 5 September Why and how has a company developed this kind of approach, processes, and organisations?

When and how do companies move across the borderlines in the framework; from local purchasing to local partnering or to international purchasing, and particularly, from local partnering and international purchasing to global network management?

Capability perspective Purchasing and supply management has developed from an operational function towards a strategic profession. With this development, purchasing decision making has become more and more knowledge and capability driven. Knowledge and capabilities are important sources of strategic change.

Axelsson et al define capabilities as the abilities of a firm to fulfil its assignments. Capabilities are the combination of human resources, technologies, production equipment and organization as well as processes and procedures applied. The organizational unit could improve or worsen its capabilities through a variety of measures and combinations of efforts.

As argued by several authors Ford et al. The possibilities of acquiring knowledge from other firms are limited by its endowment in direct and indirect capabilities. In this context, inter-firm relations embody structures of complementary knowledge that may result in competitive advantages for the companies that are able to develop effective combinations of direct and indirect capabilities Foss and Loasby The main aspects of capability development are organizational and individual levels.

The individual learning has many similarities with that of the organization. Organizations as such do not learn; organizational learning always needs to be performed by individuals. Capabilities can be dealt with short-term and long term. The long-term capability means ability to take on the challenges of tomorrow. Teece et al have called this long-term aspect a dynamic capability. In the context of our research framework, we hypothesize that a firm needs different types of purchasing and supply management capabilities in the different areas of the framework.

Our interest is to understand, what kind of capabilities a modern globally-operating company needs in managing its suppliers and supply markets in this frame of reference. Attractivity perspective One aspect of global purchasing and supply management is the phenomenon of the attractivity of the company as a customer, as supply management is becoming increasingly pro-active in nature.

The suppliers are getting stronger and more and more innovations are coming from suppliers. Given the fact that companies are outsourcing, gaining most out of suppliers in terms of reduction of total cost, joint improvement initiatives and innovations are becoming critical for survival.

Following a rational economical model, best practice suppliers assess the expected value they are going to devote from customers if they devote the resources to them. Making the company attractive to the customers is the new theme both to practitioners like the purchasing managers and to researches.

The attractivity phenomenon is closely related to the so called reverse marketing. The concept of reverse marketing was originally developed by Leenders and Blenkhorn , and was based on some earlier work by Leenders and Henderson a and b. Leenders and Blenkhorn defined reverse marketing as an aggressive and imaginative approach to achieving supply objectives. The purchaser takes the initiative in making the proposal. The traditional relationship, where the seller takes the initiative by offering a product, is increasingly being replaced by one where the buyer actively searches for a supplier who is able to fulfil its exact needs.

Reverse marketing describes how purchasing actively identifies potential suppliers and offers suitable partners a proposal for long term collaboration. Burt noted a similar phenomenon, that he called proactive procurement, while Oumlil and Williams used the term market-driven procurement. Blenkhorn and Banting consider the industrial marketers' inadequate performance to be the major cause for this changed attitude: 'If those business-to-business marketers really were paying attention to customer's needs, procurement people would not have to develop aggressive materials acquirement strategies.

In effect, the buyer becomes the salesperson, pushing that vendor or potential vendor toward some mutually acceptable solution. This is the opposite of the somewhat traditional role that suggests a buyer to play a more passive role and wait for the seller to make overtures and engage in extensive information solicitation.

There has been some discussion of the concept, but no attempts at examining if, in fact, buyers are becoming more attractivity oriented.

To date, there is not many published measure of reverse marketing orientation Plank and Francis Attractiveness as a concept has its background in marketing literature. Suppliers have been urged to seek out the most attractive customer accounts with the purpose of the allocation of scarce resources. Fiocca introduces a number of measures of customer business attractiveness, including financial, market and technological factors.

The relationship strength dimension is measured by relationship duration, power balance and development cooperation etc. The accounts that rate highest on these measures are deemed most important and receive most attention. In our research, we divide attractivity in two types: first type is the threshold level of attractivity, a firm needs to be attractive enough to be considered an interesting business partner to receive requests for quotation from global, important customers.

Second type is the collaboration winner level of attractivity, a firm needs to be attractive from the perspective of the most innovative and high performing suppliers to collaborate in joint development.

In our research framework, our first hypothesis is that the first type of attractivity needs to grow when the firm moves its emphasis from the left side of the framework to the right side of the framework.

The second hypothesis is that the collaboration level of attractivity needs to grow when the firm moves its emphasis upwards towards more focus on the supplier development. Summary In this paper we have addressed the problem of total effectiveness in global purchasing and supply management, and how we are planning to start a research agenda for several years research program with multiple doctoral thesis researchers.

We described the challenges for global purchasing and supply management research and practice. We stated our main research problem which is how globally operating companies effectively combine continuous search of new suppliers in the globalizing business environment and consistent supply chain development.

We presented a framework that combines global sourcing and buyer- supplier collaboration area into four distinct areas defined by two factors: 1 the trade-off between established local supply relationships and the search for new suppliers, and 2 development of existing suppliers as opposed to focusing on making new deals.

The role of the framework was to illustrate our research agenda and it is used to highlight our research perspectives, research questions and the research approaches we are planning to take. Our four main research perspectives are the following: 1 management system for global purchasing and supply management, 2 evolution of purchasing and supply management, 3 purchasing and supply management capabilities in a globally operating firm, and 4 attractivity of the buying firm towards desired suppliers.

Our next steps are, first, to sharpen our research questions based on the feedback we will get, and, second, to define what would be the right research approaches to increase knowledge in this field with high importance for industrial firms in the global business markets.

References 1. Ammer, D. Dubois, and L. Axelsson, B. Bouwmans, F. However, the arguments for constantly reassessing past buy-or-make decisions are particularly strong. Perceived risks may have been minimized or eliminated. New technology may permit processes previously considered impossible. New suppliers may have entered the market or old suppliers may have left. It is this constant change in volumes, prices, capabilities, specifications, suppliers, capacities, regulations, competitors, technology, and managers that requires companies to review their current make-and-buy profile continuously in identifying new strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats SWOT.

The two questions that need to be addressed on an ongoing basis by a cross-functional team including purchasing, operations, accounting, and marketing are 1 which products or services are we currently buying that we should be doing in-house? Continuing to buy what was pur- chased before is likely to be standard practice. From a supply perspective there are, how- ever, several reasons why supply might have to trigger an insourcing initiative.

The most obvious reason is when an existing source of supply goes out of business or drops a prod- uct or service line and no other supplier is available. Assuming the requirement for the product or service continues, the purchaser needs to find an alternate source. Supplier development or the creation of a new supplier who was previously not selling the product or service is one option.

The other is to insource. Similarly, a sudden massive increase in price, the purchase of a sole source by a competitor, political events and regulatory changes, or a lack of supply of a key raw material or component required for the manu- facture of the purchased product might force supply to consider insourcing. Thus, anything that threatens assurance of supply may provide supply a reason for insourcing.

The reasons would be simi- lar to the make arguments provided earlier in this chapter in the make-or-buy discussion. We may have developed a unique process for this product or service. Our quality, delivery, total cost of ownership, or flexibility would be vastly improved. We could provide superior customer service and satisfaction.

Insourcing would greatly enhance our competitive abil- ity. In the first place, how do we discontinue our dealings with our existing supplier s? Can the changeover occur simultaneously with current contract expiries or may penalties have to be paid to terminate existing commitments? With any insourcing initiatives, there is also a new supply issue in terms of raw materi- als, components, equipment, energy, and services required to produce the particular requirement just insourced.

For example, a company whose employees clean the buildings may decide to hire an outside janitorial firm to provide this service. That a huge wave of out- sourcing and privatization in the public sector has hit almost all organizations during the last decade is evident.

Some activities, such as janitorial, food, and security services, have been outsourced for many years. Information systems IS is one activity that has received much attention recently as a target for outsourcing. Other popular outsourcing targets are mail rooms, copy centers, and corporate travel departments. Almost no function is immune to outsourcing. An entire function may be outsourced, or some elements of an activity may be outsourced and some kept in-house.

For example, some of the elements of information technology may be strate- gic, some may be critical, and some may lend themselves to lower-cost purchase and man- agement by a third party. The growth in outsourcing in the logistics area is attributed to transportation deregula- tion, the focus on core competencies, reductions in inventories, and enhanced logistics management computer programs.

Lean inventories mean there is less room for error in deliveries, especially if the organization is operating in a just-in-time mode. Logistics companies now have computer-tracking technology that reduces the risk in transportation and allows the logistics company to add more value to the firm than it could if the function were performed in-house.

Third-party logistics providers track freight using electronic data interchange technology and a satellite system to tell customers exactly where its drivers are and when the delivery will be made.

In a just-in-time envi- ronment, where the delivery window may be only 30 minutes, such technology is critical. For example, Hewlett-Packard turned over its inbound, raw materials warehousing in Vancouver, Washington, to Roadway Logistics. Hewlett-Packard reports savings of 10 percent in warehousing operating costs. Lacity, Leslie P. Willcocks, and David F. There is a key difference, however.

Outsourcing is perceived by many unions as efforts to circumvent union contracts. The United Auto Workers union has been particularly active in trying to prevent auto manufacturers from outsourcing parts of their operations.

As organizations have gained more experience in making outsourcing decisions and craft- ing outsourcing contracts, they have become better at applying sourcing and contracting expertise to these decisions. From writing the statement of work or request for proposal to defining the terms and conditions, the success of an outsourcing agreement lies in the details. For example, when Saturn Corporation streamlined its supply management operations, it determined that supply could add the most value in the management of pro- duction materials, and that a distributor could add the most value in the area of nonproduction-related materials.

CAMBAR is also responsible for quality control, material warranty, and assistance in supplier selection. In a CAPS study on outsourcing, it was found that there was little outsourcing of typical supply management activities. The activities most likely to be outsourced were inventory monitoring, order placement, and order receiving, with more than 40 percent of respondents expecting increased outsourcing in inventory monitoring and order placement.

The tasks typically outsourced include freight auditing, leas- ing, maintenance and repair, freight brokering, and consulting and training. Deciding what represents a core competency to an organization is not always an easy task, nor is the decision always the same for a specific function. For example, ownership and management of an in-house fleet of vehicles may be subject to the decision to out- source or maintain in-house. Many of the func- tions of fleet management may be outsourced—leasing rather than owning vehicles, main- tenance, resale of vehicles—but the contact with the drivers may be retained as an in-house function because keeping the drivers sales force happy is critical to the success of the organization.

The outsourcing decision is a function of many factors, and each organization must assess these factors based on the goals and objectives and long-term strategy of the organization.

However, given the nature of the decision, purchasing should be heavily involved in outsourcing. Fearon and Michiel R. The strategic importance of make-or-buy, insourcing, and outsourcing decisions is so high that great care needs to be exercised to make sure these decisions are right. Obviously, appropriate supply input is critical for these decisions as well as supply management sub- sequently to assure the success of whichever option has been chosen.

Conclusion Make or buy, insourcing, and outsourcing are key strategic decisions for any organization. That each of these decisions can be reviewed and reversed at a later date, as conditions warrant, adds to the challenge of maintaining an appropriate mix of in-house activities and purchased goods and services.

Obviously, effective supply management requires an ongo- ing active contribution from supply into this continuing assessment process. The more skilled the supply group at exploiting market opportunities and developing competitive sources, the more ready the organization should be to buy outside and outsource. Questions 1. Why should an organization switch from making to buying? What is outsourcing? How might one make the decision to outsource an activity or not?

Why is the make-or-buy decision considered strategic? Review 4. What is the gray zone in make or buy? What are its implications? Why might an organization decide to insource? Can you give an example? Discussion 6. What is subcontracting? Why would an organization outsource its logistics? In the public sector, what name is frequently used for outsourcing? What are some major impediments to outsourcing in the public sector?

What role is expected of supply once an insourcing decision has been made? If you were the sole owner of your own company, would you favor the make side or the buy side of the make-or-buy decision? References Ellram, Lisa M. Outsourcing: Implications for Supply Management. Gilley, K. Lacity, Mary; Leslie P. Willcocks; and David F. Mol, Michael J. Quinn, J. Takeishi, A. Although his purchasing agent to outsource manufacturing for an the burn table could work with eight stations, this outrigger bracket.

It was the end of April and Mr. Wilson machine had only been operating with one station. The had to evaluate the proposal and make a decision final assembly operation, T, was performed at a regarding whether to proceed.

Manufacturing lead time for the outrigger bracket was two weeks. Consequently, finished inventory trucks. The company comprised three divisions: the levels of the outrigger bracket were kept to a minimum.

Each division operated as a separate profit center, but manufacturing operations between each were highly integrated. November to April. Brian met with the controller, Mike Carr, who provided a breakdown of the manufacturing costs for the outrigger bracket. Looking at the material, labor, accessory that could be used to secure oversized and overhead costs, I would estimate that the fixed containers.