MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2551329360 · doi:10.1108/jopp-12-02-2012-b003

E-Procurement: Myth or Reality

2012· article· en· W2551329360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Clifford P. McCue, Alexandru V. Roman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Procurement · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicE-Government and Public Services
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProcurementTransformative learningTransparency (behavior)BusinessAccountabilityPoliticsGlobeTransformational leadershipInformation and Communications TechnologyE-procurementPublic relationsProcess managementMarketingPolitical scienceSociologyComputer scienceComputer securityPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Governments across the globe appear to identify and tout technology as a way to transform how they govern. Public procurement is at the forefront of most reform efforts given that it plays a significant role in promoting accountability and transparency. This study relies on survey data of procurement professionals to delineate the current status of eprocurement implementation in United States and Canada. Findings suggest that digitalized public procurement has not yet led to significant transformative changes. Unsuitability of software platforms, organizational resistance, lack of strategic systemsʼ integration and failure to involve public procurement professionals in the design of e-procurement systems were identified as the primary obstacles of effectively implementing digital procurement. These findings suggest that in order to capitalize on the potentially transformative nature of ICT in procurement, policymakers, system designers, and procurement professionals must take an active role in both the design of the software and its adoption across political, institutional and behavioral domains.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.047
Scholarly communication0.0170.034
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0070.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations77
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public ProcurementSame topicE-Government and Public ServicesFrench-language works237,207