Theory in public procurement research
| Published date | 01 March 2014 |
| Pages | 139-180 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JOPP-14-02-2014-B001 |
| Date | 01 March 2014 |
| Author | Anthony Flynn,Paul Davis |
| Subject Matter | Public policy & environmental management,Politics,Public adminstration & management,Government,Economics,Public Finance/economics,Texation/public revenue |
JOURNAL OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT, VOLUME 14, ISSUE 2, 139-180 SUMMER 2014
THEORY IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT RESEARCH
Anthony Flynn and Paul Davis*
ABSTRACT. This paper examines the role of theory in public procurement
research. Theoretical rigour is integral to management science, yet little is
known on the extent and form of theory in public procurement. With the field
starting to mature, addressing this issue is timely. From conducting a
systematic literature review we find that 29 percent of articles are
theoretically grounded, with the incidence of theory having increased in
recent years. Economic, sociological, psychological, and management
theories are all in evidence, but micro-economic theories predominate. Our
findings also show that survey reporting and case studies account for almost
half of all studies; procurement research is focused on organizational-level
aspects more than regulatory-policy issues or public buyers; and studies to
date have largely emanated from the North American and European regions.
The contribution of this paper lies in clarifying the theoretical underpinnings
of public procurement. Out of this we highlight the need for greater
theoretical rigour, point to the under-use and even absence of theories that
could have high validity and utility, and suggest a narrowing of research foci.
INTRODUCTION
Writing over a decade ago Thai (2001) drew attention to the
academic neglect of public procurement. In spite of its centrality to
public service delivery and its long history in public administration,
public procurement resided on the periphery of management science.
In the years since much has happened to redress this imbalance so
------------------------
* Anthony Flynn is a doctoral candidate, Business School, Dublin City
University, Ireland. His research interests include public procurement, SMEs
and enterprise policy. Paul Davis, Ph.D., is an Associate Professor, Business
School, Dublin City University, Ireland. His research interests include public
procurement, supply chain management, and information technology.
Copyright © 2014 by PrAcademics Press
140 FLYNN & DAVIS
that public procurement has moved closer to the mainstream. Its
research remit continues to expand as scholars of management,
public administration, finance, law, supply chain and logistics
management, mathematics, and information technology apply
themselves to the study of public procurement. In turn, this has
opened up promising lines of inquiry on topics as diverse as e-
procurement (Lee, 2010; McCue & Roman, 2012; Schapper, Veiga,
Malta, & Gilbert, 2006), small suppliers (Flynn, McKevitt, & Davis,
2013; Qiao, Thai, & Cummings, 2009; Withey, 2011), and buyer
professionalization (McCue & Gianakis, 2001; McKevitt et al., 2012;
Prier, McCue, & Behara, 2010). The progression of the public
procurement field is just as evident outside academia. In political and
policy arenas public procurement is now linked to concerns over
economic growth, social inclusion, and environmental sustainability
(Arrowsmith, 2010; McCrudden, 2007). In particular, pressures on
public finances since the 2007 global financial crisis have forced a
reappraisal of the role of public procurement, with some arguing that
it should be leveraged for domestic economic growth and job creation
(Murray, 2009). Whatever perspective one takes, it is clear that the
profile of public procurement is greater than at any time previously.
Central to the upward trajectory of public procurement has been
two-way communication between research and practice. While there
has been a regrettable trend in many disciplines to divorce
themselves from the everyday concerns of business practitioners and
privilege theoretical and methodological rigour over all else
(Hambrick, 2007; Gunther McGrath, 2007), public procurement has
made a virtue out of constructively engaging with practitioners and
addressing their interests. Contemporary studies attest to an
emergent nexus between academic research and issues of direct
organizational and professional concern. Among recent examples of
such practitioner-focused inquiry include a framework to support
buyers in managing the challenges associated with e-procurement
adoption and implementation (Roman, 2013), a model for quantifying
the organizational benefits of migrating to e-procurement (Gardenal,
2013), and a tool for assessing the contribution that buyers make
during the procurement of consultancy services (Schiele, 2005).
Procurement professionals are also making an impact. Their insights
on topics ranging from environmental impact assessments (Van
Valkneburg & Nagelkerke, 2006) to procurement strategies in post-
disaster situations (Atkinson & Sapat, 2012) are helping to
THEORY IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT RESEARCH 141
disseminate best practice, stimulate debate, and inform scholarship.
This intersection of research and practice is creating a solid platform
on which public procurement can develop into the future.
Notwithstanding the undoubted progress that has been made in
fostering a community of interest in public procurement research
(Grimm & Thai, 2011), there are still areas that have yet to be fully
addressed. In particular, the role of theory in public procurement
research is deserving of greater attention. While it is clear that
practitioner concerns have featured prominently, it is less clear as to
what role theory has played in advancing our knowledge of
purchasing in public sector contexts. This raises important questions
over just how rigorous is public procurement research. Having
answers to these questions is necessary if we are to make informed
assessments of how far we have come and how far we still have to go
to establish public procurement as a credible management sub-field.
Where scholars have engaged with the question of theory, the
recommendation is that we need more of it. In their discussion of
public procurement policy Snider and Rendon (2008, p. 311) were
minded to say that “…. scholars have yet to give sufficient efforts to
the sort of conceptual theorising about policy that will lead to ordering
devices and approaches that can help researchers and students
make sense of its complexity, uses and limitations.” Previous to this,
Snider (2006) hinted at a tendency towards introspection in
contemporary public procurement research and a failure to relate it to
more overarching theoretical perspectives. Other contributors have
also averred to the desirability of using theoretical lenses, as when
McCue and Prier (2008, p. 2) called for more theory if “one wants to
explain, predict, and understand behavior concerning the intent,
purpose, and actual use of cooperatives in procurement.” Thus, while
the role of theory has not been interrogated in any systematic fashion
up to this point, there is reason to believe that practitioner relevance
has taken precedence over theoretical rigour.
When deliberating on the role of theory in public procurement
research, there are a number of factors worth bearing in mind. Firstly,
the entry of public procurement into the academic ranks is a relatively
recent occurrence (Matthews, 2005). The fact that public
procurement was still spoken of by Prier, McCue, and Behara (2010)
in terms of the “birth of profession” as recently as 2010 is further
indication of its newness. Secondly, public procurement is said to
To continue reading
Request your trial