E-Procurement in International Paper Industry. Adoption and Benefits of e-Procurement and its Models among Paper and Board Producers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The main aim of this research was to analyze the adoption and benefits of e-Procurement and its models among paper and board producers. The study aimed to analyze both the current use of e-Procurement and to review paper and board producers’ intended future actions in utilizing e-Procurement. Additionally, the gained benefits through using e-Procurement were also to be examined. \n\nThe theoretical part of the research was based on earlier researches and literature. Based on the sources, hypotheses related to the adoption and benefits of e-Procurement were drawn and a model of e-Procurement adoption and its benefits among paper and board producers was developed. The model covered also the background factors that were expected to have an effect on the e-Procurement adoption based on earlier researches. In the empirical part of the research, the hypotheses were tested trough quantitative methods, and the model was adjusted based on empirical observations. \n\nThe empirical part of the research analyzed the adoption and benefits of e-Procurement and its models among paper and board producers in Finland, Sweden, Germany, USA and Canada. Over 700 questionnaires were sent to the paper and board production units in the destination countries. The findings of the study pointed out that the majority of paper and board producers were not yet applying e-Procurement. E-Procurement was currently used significantly more in indirect than in direct materials purchasing. The most used e-Procurement model both in direct and indirect materials purchasing was buy-side marketplace. \n\nAccording to the research results, the use of e-Procurement in the future can be expected to increase among paper and board producers, though any extreme growth is not likely to happen. North American paper and board production units were currently using e-Procurement more than their European counterparts, though the difference in the e-Procurement usage between the regions can not be stated as significant. E-Procurement was mostly used in on-going supplier relationships, in where its usage was significantly higher than the usage of e-Procurement in other supplier relationships.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".