A field in motion Purchasing and supply management research by gto88618


									PAPER ID# 175

   A field in motion: Purchasing and supply management research

Michael J. Mol
London Business School & University of Reading

London Business School
Regent’s Park
NW1 4SA London
United Kingdom
phone ++44 (0)20 7262 5050, ext. 3359

Finn Wynstra
RSM Erasmus University
+31 10 4081990, fwynstra@rsm.nl

   A field in motion: Purchasing and supply management research
The academic field of purchasing and supply management (PSM) is a relative newcomer. Hence
it is still looking to establish its own identity. We study the field’s development during a discrete
time period by analyzing research published in 46 academic journals. We reveal major
differences in journals’ propensity to publish PSM research. We show a negative correlation
between a journal’s SSCI impact score and its propensity to publish PSM research. We analyze
the contents of the PSM articles and show a focus on a relatively small number of topics. We
conclude by discussing future research directions for the field.

Purchasing and supply management, research, meta-analysis

Ever since the inception of the term supply chain management by a group of Booz Allen
Hamilton consultants in 1982 (Oliver and Webber, 1992), there has been growing attention
among practitioners and academics alike for the role that supply chain management plays in the
operations and strategy of firms. Academic interest has led to the establishment of a whole new
research area, purchasing and supply management (PSM), with its own academic associations,
conferences, and journals. The most well-known specialist academic journals, the Journal of
Supply Chain Management (JSCM), associated with the U.S. based Institute for Supply
Management (ISM), and the Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management (JPSM), an offspring
of the International Purchasing and Supply Education and Research Association (IPSERA), have
only been operating under these names since 1999 and 2003 respectively1. Das and Handfield
(1997) documented how the number of doctoral dissertations rapidly increased after the mid-
         But because the PSM field does not study a neatly defined functional area of the firm and
is of relatively recent origin, research in the area tends to be published not just in specialist outlets
but also in various other areas of management. It has often been noted that the PSM field is
reliant upon inputs from various other fields because it deals with issues that cannot be
compartmentalized into the boxes that are required for functional approaches. A more far-
reaching statement still is that PSM does not have clearly defined topics, research methods and
paradigms, like for instance exist in strategic management and organization theory (Das and
Handfield, 1997). Fields in their infancy tend to need time to build up a clear paradigm. Finally,
some observers have raised questions about the academic soundness of the field at present and
call for better theory (e.g. Olsen and Ellram, 1997). Much of the research in PSM seems
practically oriented and devout of much theory and often lacking in sophistication in research
         It is not our objective to provide a critique of PSM. Nor do we necessarily want to defend
the field against outside (and inside) criticism. Rather we believe these criticisms provide
interesting challenges for a meta-analytical study of the field as the time has come to take stock of
our knowledge. How has research in PSM been developing in recent times? With that general
question in mind, we set out to analyze a large number of published research articles in a variety
of academic journals during the period 1999-2003. First we develop a set of more specific
research questions. Then we describe a methodology for analyzing research in the field, followed
by a broad empirical analysis of almost 1,000 articles in the first instance and of over 400 articles
in more detail. Finally we come up with some recommendations for academics working in this

Key questions about the field
The criticisms of PSM provide for some interesting research questions, which we will later tackle
with empirical data. We will now develop these questions in some more detail. First, there is the
notion that PSM relies on inputs from other fields for its own development. That implies other
fields contain some clear set of messages for PSM research. Four specific fields that come to
mind, and of which it is known they investigate PSM related topics, are Marketing (MA),
Operations Management (OM), Operations Research (OR), and Strategy and Organization (SO),

  But note that the JSCM operated under various other names between its founding in 1965 and 1999 while the JPSM
started as the European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management in 1994.

which could also just be called Management2. In MA, scholars have for instance investigated
channel relations (Heide and John, 1988). In OM various aspects of global sourcing have been a
concern, including for instance the ethics of international purchasing (Carter, 2000). One of the
topics of interest in OR is the procurement auction (e.g. Singer, 2002). In SO, there has been
work on the performance implications of cooperative buyer-supplier relations (Kotabe, Martin,
and Domoto, 2003). Specialized journals in these areas ought to therefore contain some
proportion of PSM work but quite how important PSM is in these areas is unclear. Clearly
information on that issue is valuable both from the perspective of the field as a whole, because it
is a key indicator of where contributions are coming from, and from the perspective of individual
researchers, because it will provide them with a guideline for submitting their work.

Research question 1: How prominent is PSM research in Marketing, Operations Management,
Operations Research, and Strategy and Organization journals?

A second criticism revolves around a perceived lack of academic quality or status of the PSM
field. The four other areas mentioned before, MA, OM, OR, and SO all have been around for a
longer period of time and have gone through lively discussions around research paradigms and
methodologies. While most business schools have marketing department and many have an OM
group, there are relatively few business schools with a specialist PSM unit or even PSM research
centers. We know there are is an active community of PSM scholars but that community is
relatively small and its members are often tucked away in other areas of business schools such as
MA or OM.
        In addition the interdisciplinary nature of PSM does not lend itself well to high level
methodological or theoretical work. The PSM area appears to be driven by empirical trends
instead. It could be argued that because empirical developments occur so quickly, it is not even
possible to come up with advanced theories and methodologies. What implications could all of
this have for academic journals that publish much PSM research? We would suggest that the
relevance of research in PSM tends to have a relatively short half-life period because of rapid
empirical changes while this at the same time does not allow for the relatively fundamental
debates occurring in other areas. Both of these factors could potentially undermine the frequency
with which PSM research gets cited by other areas or indeed the number of citations within the

Research question 2: Is the propensity of research journals to publish PSM articles related to the
academic standing of these journals?

A third issue is the nature of research itself in the PSM area. It appears to be the case that the
topics of interest to PSM researchers change very often. Although the term Supply Chain
Management may only be twenty-some years old, we have since gone through waves of global
sourcing, leaps in underlying information technology like Enterprise Resource Planning, the rise
of E-Commerce and electronic auctions, and the establishment of the Chief Purchasing Officer.
Perhaps, one could argue, practitioners in PSM are hopping from one management fashion to the
next (Abrahamson and Fairchild, 1999). That raises the question how research in the field is
developing, if indeed it is. If we were to look at PSM research over a number of years, are there

 We verified that these fields are the four most prominent fields to investigate through our Delphi study, which is
described in the methodology section of the paper.

any changes in the content of the work or the research methods employed? And what topics, data
collection techniques and data analysis methods are employed most frequently in research

Research question 3: What is the content of published work on PSM and does that content vary
over time or by subfield?

Research methodology
With these broad research questions in mind, we designed an empirical study to look at the nature
of research in the PSM field. Our meta-analytical study covers published research articles in the
period 1999 to 2003. We went through a number of steps to identify the right set of articles,
designed an appropriate analytical strategy, and then analyzed the set of articles. Although we
had a general idea of the direction in which we wanted to take the study, we did not want to
impinge our own normative selection biases upon the journals and topics we were going to cover.
Therefore we designed a Delphi study, in which we asked a set of well-respected colleagues from
many different countries and experience levels to provide feedback on our initial research design.
We asked them what would be proper search terms for a meta-analytical study of PSM, which
broad areas we ought to include in our search and what journals should be taken into account. Out
of the 26 colleagues we approached, 19 responded to our questions and provided various other
insightful comments.
         Our informants provided a range of possible topics that fall within the scope of PSM but
also suggested we focus our actual search more narrowly to avoid coming up with too many
duplicates and because it is virtually impossible to list all possible search terms and their
synonyms. Initially, we had tried to come up with a much more detailed and more extensive list
of keywords, partly based on Das and Handfield (1997). But given this feedback we eventually
decided to look at only five keywords but to include all variants of these keywords. The five
keywords are purchase, buy, supply, source, and contract. Our keyword search would look not
only at supply but also at supplier, suppliers, and supplies. Admittedly it is unrealistic to expect to
find the universe of PSM articles with these keywords but even 20 or 30 keywords would not
suffice to find all PSM articles. Our simplification allows us to find almost all articles. The only
way one can find all articles would be to manually look at the five volumes of all journals
concerned, which is practically impossible given that over 16,000 articles have appeared in these
journals during the time period under investigation. We did, however, verify that our search came
close to finding all articles by manually examining five volumes of JPSM to see whether there
were many articles that our search method had not recognized yet should be included in our
study. This was not the case. Hence we feel confident that our search method has allowed us to
identify almost all PSM articles that were published in the journals we included during 1999-
2003. We did realize that our search method would require us to sort out articles at a later stage
that did not really deal with purchasing and supply, but this seemed to be a matter of erring on the
right side.
         Based on the outcomes of the Delphi we decided to focus our efforts on the four areas
mentioned before, Marketing, OM, OR, and SO. Using the feedback from our informants and the
initial list we had provided to informants, we then identified a total of 47 academic journals in

these four areas as well as the 2 specialist journals mentioned before, JSCM and JPSM3. During
the search for articles we eventually had to restrict our set to 46 journals because 3 journals did
not generate any useful hits. Table 1 provides the full journal titles as well as the abbreviations
that we will use in the remainder of this paper and indicates in which area the journal has been
placed. In some instances journals belong to more than one area. Management Science, for
instance, actually publishes work from all four areas. Since most of the PSM work it publishes
seems to come from an OR background, however, we chose to place it in that area. We believe
this set of journals includes the well-respected journals in the various areas from both North
America and Europe. It does not include all the journals in these areas because there are no
definitive listings available, some journals cannot even be accessed electronically through the
major databases, and we wanted to maintain a minimum threshold level regarding the academic
quality of the journals.

Research question 1
Table 1 also contains the findings of our initial search. For each of the 46 journals we ran all 5
keywords for the 1999-2003 time period in the Business Source Premier (also known as EBSCO)
database. The Business Source Premier database is one of the two big electronic databases
containing the titles, authors, and abstracts of articles as well as other bibliometric information.
While it is not a perfect source, containing some errors of its own, it is highly reliable. In many
cases this database also contains the full text of articles. Since we wanted to look at all 46
journals, however, we could not run full text searches. Hence we restricted ourselves to the titles,
abstracts, and keywords of articles. All the hits that were found this way were exported to a
separate database for analysis after a second person thoroughly checked whether the search had
produced any errors. These were corrected were necessary.
        Table 1 shows that 2,640 articles contained one or more of the keywords used in the
searches. At first sight it may be surprising that the journals that produce the largest number of
hits are EJOR (187), IJPE (165) and IMM (126), and not the specialist journals. But it is
important to keep in mind two things when analyzing this finding. First, these are raw hits,
implying they include articles that contain one or more of the keywords but not necessarily in a
PSM sense of the word. For instance, they might be talking about the sources of problems or of
competitive advantage or about employment contracts. Second, there are large discrepancies
between journals in terms of how many issues they publish, anywhere between three a year and
two a month, and in terms of how many articles are included in an issue (from four to upwards of
20). As we will see when we take the analysis forward momentarily, EJOR for instance publishes
so many articles that it is bound to publish more articles containing the five keywords simply
because there are many more draws that could all produce a hit.
        An obvious problem that arises at this stage is that not all raw hits are actual PSM articles.
Hence a filter had to be constructed to move from raw hits to true hits. This could not be an
automatic filter because of the complex nature of the texts. Manual filtering involved various
steps, all based on reading of abstracts and titles. First, all hits that were not research articles but
instead calls for papers, practitioner case, book reviews and the like were removed. Second, the
authors tried to develop a common understanding of what is and is not PSM that went beyond its

  It can certainly be argued that Supply Chain Management: An International Journal (SCM) is another specialist
journal but we believe it tends to be a bit broader in its choice of topics and more eclectic. The empirical data we will
present shortly seem to prove this point. We therefore classify it as an OM journal.

definition. The list of PSM topics recently published in JPSM (Wynstra and Knight, 2004) proved
helpful in this respect. Both authors and a colleague not involved in the research project then
assessed 100 articles and compared the outcomes. Through these steps a set of decision rules was
identified. For example articles on internal supply chains and on consumer buying were to be
excluded. The authors then read the abstract and titles of all remaining articles to assess whether
or not they were PSM articles. In 86% of cases there was immediate agreement. The remaining
14% were discussed one by one to ensure the right decision was made and in order to find the
source of disagreement. It turned out that divergence in points of view between the two authors
had caused the gap. Much of the difference revolved around the OR articles, of which there were
plenty. One author tended to not rate these as PSM if there were no clear managerial implications
while the other author did rate them as PSM. After all differences had been resolved, 987 clean
hits remained, as show in table 2. While some degree of subjectivity undoubtedly remains in the
selection of articles, the procedure we followed guaranteed a high reliability. In this type of
search that is all one can achieve, as true objectivity is somewhere between a dream and an
        From Table 2 a number of observations can be distilled. First, our initial search obviously
produced a large number of hits that were not relevant at all, or not relevant enough, to PSM.
Less than 40% of the raw hits turned out to be true hits. For this reason alone, it was useful to
apply a manual filter, labor intensive as that filtering process may have been. It also proves the
earlier point that while some journals have a high absolute number of raw hits, that need not
translate into many true hits. Out of EJOR’s initial 187 articles only 41 remain. For JPSM and
JSCM, however, almost all articles remained in the database. A further observation is that the
absolute number of PSM articles has grown somewhat over the years. Of course that need not
imply that the field has become relatively more important in the broader context of business
research because it is feasible the total number of articles has grown more rapidly than the
number of PSM articles.
        To assess whether that is the case, we again move the analysis one step further in table 3.
In table 3 we calculate the ‘PSM intensity’ of specific journals and of the database as a whole.
The PSM intensity of a journal is defined as its propensity to publish PSM research. It is
operationalized as the number of clean PSM hits in that journal divided by the total number of
articles in that journal. The latter we found through separate searches in Business Source Premier.
Looking at the table we find a PSM intensity of ‘0’ for OS in 2001, as it published no PSM
articles that year but one of ‘0.07’ the following year, when three of its 45 published articles were
PSM articles. The PSM intensity of the database is the weighted average of all the journals’ PSM
intensities. In other words, it sums all clean hits and divides them by all published articles in the
        The PSM intensity of the database swings between 4.2% in 1999 and 6.7% in 2002. While
the numbers do not reveal a spectacular trend towards more PSM publications over time, they do
show there was a significant increase during the time period under investigation. Individual
journals vary significantly in their PSM intensity and sometimes also from one year to the next.
Note that a very high PSM intensity is found for the two specialist journals, JSCM and JPSM.
This further strengthens the case that our search method helped us find most of the relevant
articles. Other journals that rate particularly high are found mostly among OM journals, including
SCM, IJPDL, JBL, and JOM. But there are also three MA journals that rank highly, which are the
relatively on-target IMM, JBIM, and JBBM. The OR and SO journals, on the other hand, do not
seem to be as prone to publish PSM articles. This observation of course has to be seen in the light
of the composition of these fields. Perhaps the number of alternative topics that those who

publish in OR and SO journals avail of is simply higher than that available to MA and OM
researchers. In any case it seems fair to conclude that PSM research does indeed to an
overwhelming extent take place outside of the truly specialist journals.

Research question 2
The second research question focuses on the relation, or lack thereof, between the PSM intensity
of a journal and its academic status. There are many possible indicators of a journal’s academic
status but we have chosen one that is established through a fixed set of procedures, relatively
stable over time, available to most researchers, and quantitative. We used the Web of Knowledge
database to retrieve a journal’s Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) impact score where it was
available. For a majority of journals, 28, the SSCI score is available for all five years. For another
7 journals the score is available for at least some years.
         In order to assess whether there is some systematic relation between the PSM intensity of
a journal and its SSCI score, we correlated these two measures. There are of course various ways
to execute this correlation analysis and we tried four of those. At the most aggregate level, we
correlated the average citation score of a journal over the entire period with its average PSM
intensity, leaving out IIET since it has an SSCI score for the year 2000 only. We found a
correlation of -.276 (N = 34, significance level .114). A second variant takes into account every
individual year. This obviously produces a substantial increase in the number of observations as it
involves five different scores for most journals. On the other hand it includes internally related
observations, because SSCI scores are correlated from one year to the next because of the very
measurement method of the ISI, and therefore perhaps produces a biased result. Here we found a
correlation of -.193 (N = 163, significance level .014).
         Yet a third variant is to also include the journals without a citation score, with the premise
that their citation score is ‘0’, which clearly introduces biased observations, as no journal will
have zero impact although most journals without an SSCI score are bound not too rank highly,
but does allow us to increase the number of observations and to present a finding that holds
across our entire sample of journals, not just those that happen to have a score in place. We also
included IIET in this analysis (based on its 1-year score). The correlation this produced was -.397
(N =46, significance level .006). Finally, it may be argued that the findings are influenced by the
inclusion of various OM and OR journals, which generally seem to have a lower citation score
than their counterparts in MA and SO but at the same time may treat PSM topics as more central
to their area. As a robustness check, we therefore ran an analysis confined to just the MA and SO
journals but for all five years of observations (to include enough observations for a meaningful
statistical test). The outcome was a correlation of -.253 (N = 116, significance level .007).
         We understand that a limitation of the use of simple correlations is that it does not allow
us to rule out that this is a spurious finding and that it may in fact be that other factors, such as
journal age, authors’ reputations, and composition of editorial boards, provide a stronger
correlation for a journal’s impact factor. But in the absence of reliable data on these factors and in
the presence of an insufficient number of observations, it is not possible to run any multivariate
analysis to check this and we cautiously conclude there is a negative correlation between a
journal’s PSM intensity and its academic status.

Research question 3
The third research question revolves around the contents of published work. Here we follow a
two-step analytical strategy. First we look at the number of keywords contained in the database of
clean articles. Then we try to classify articles around topics, data collection techniques, and data

analysis methods in a much more detailed manner. Table 4 contains data on the occurrence of the
five keywords in our database. In all the five keywords occurred 1,451 times in the 987 articles.
While the median number of keywords per article is obviously just one, some articles contained
as many as four keywords. Note that the number of keywords per year tends to fluctuate more or
less with the number of clean articles in that year. That is not a particularly surprising observation
but what is perhaps more interesting is the huge differences in the occurrence of various
keywords. Supply, with all its variants, accounts for almost half of all hits. Given the year-to-year
fluctuations there may even be something of a trend for supply to become more prominent still.
Source and contract on the other hand, do not seem to occur very frequently. Research in PSM
seems to be concentrated around supply processes and less around contracting and sourcing
issues. Purchase and buy are important too but not as important as supply.
        The second step of the content analysis of articles again draws on the list published in
JPSM (Wynstra and Knight, 2004). For this step we restricted our analysis to a more manageable
number of 448 articles, which were those articles appearing in journals for which a SSCI score
was available for all five years. That choice was made not just to limit the number of articles
somewhat but also because it will allow the database to be used for citation analyses in the future.
The JPSM list contains 24 research topics, 7 data collection methods, and 8 data analysis
techniques. We again read all abstracts of articles and classified them into whatever category or
categories they best fitted in. Table 5 contains these results.
        Table 5 shows that the most frequently recurring topics are supplier relationships, supply
chain management (including multi-tier coordination), information management and ICT, make-
or-buy/outsourcing strategy, tendering and contracting, and managing innovation through
suppliers. To what extent is that surprising? Given the attention that has been paid in recent years
to using suppliers to gain competitive advantage (e.g Dyer and Singh, 1998), one would expect
supplier relationships and managing innovation through suppliers to be prominent themes. Make-
or-buy decisions are a continuous theme in PSM and in the theory of the firm. Tendering and
contracting is the process through which contracts take shape and therefore also highly relevant.
And information management and ICT was very prominent in managerial agendas during the
time period under investigation, which includes the Internet boom and given the length of writing
and review processes did not yet allow for the skepticism which has since set in over the use of
ICT. In that sense these findings are unsurprising. Yet they do confirm that one would reasonably
expect to be core themes in PSM, are indeed among the most important themes.
        The numbers of observations we have on data collection and data analysis are
substantially lower. Hence it is hard to draw conclusions with any certainty. Yet it appears that
survey data and formal modeling are the major collection technique and analysis method
respectively. Survey data are widely used in MA and also in SO. Formal modeling is of course
the method on which OR studies rely. We also find some case studies in use and a relatively
small number of conceptual studies. The latter could perhaps point to a lack of theory
development in the PSM area. We will return to this topic when discussing future directions and

Limitations and extensions
Our study is characterized by various limitations. We do not think that the limitations around the
data collection are particularly severe. We used keywords that seemed to capture the large
majority of PSM articles. Then a filtering process was used that consisted of multiple steps and
appears quite reliable. Thus the selected set of articles can at the very least be said to form a
highly representative set for the PSM field and we would argue that it contains almost all of the

studies with substantial academic impact that have appeared during the 1999-2003 time frame.
Beyond that though, there are some more serious limitations, particularly around the use of
abstracts to assess articles. We were unable to assign values to data collection techniques and data
analysis methods for the majority of articles on the basis of the abstract only. Many authors
simply do not mention whether they have collected data and how they have done that or how they
have analyzed these data. We have to recognize this as a natural limit to our search method,
which trades off some depth for breadth. Another limitation is the time frame of our study. For
practical reasons we were not able to look at all the work that has appeared since the inception of
the term supply chain management in 1982. Instead we focused on five recent years of
publications. A final limitation is in the choice to use academic research articles only. That rules
out books, book chapters and practitioner articles, which presumably contain some additional
information that could help us document the discourse on PSM better.
        These limitations also raise the question how the work presented here could be extended
in future efforts to document research in PSM. One natural extension would be to look at citation
patterns for the set of articles that have appeared in SSCI ranked journals. Such an approach
could answer various questions. For instance, are there cross-citations between the four areas of
study investigated here? Do citation patterns seem to center around journals or rather around
topics? What are the characteristics of the most well-cited articles? Do these appear in the very
top journals only or rather are they characterized by certain topics, like supplier relationships?
Another possible extension would be to look at the individuals who produce PSM research and
assess to what extent their contributions center around one topic or are published in one area.
Perhaps some individuals are particularly prone to fulfill the role of closing structural holes (Burt,
1990) by bridging various areas. This extension could teach us more about whether and how
knowledge from various functional disciplines is brought into PSM research. A third extension
could be to take a much more qualitative approach and look at the research process behind a more
limited number of PSM publications. What thought processes generate the conceptual and
methodological angles that we observe in PSM research?

Future research directions and conclusions
What is the state of research in PSM and how is that likely to change in the future? On the basis
of our research findings we can firmly conclude that there is a vibrant community of scholars
who do research in PSM. That community uses a variety of outlets, both specialist PSM journals
and journals in other areas. What is less clear is what the sense of togetherness of the community
is. Perhaps it in fact consists of various sub communities that more or less lead their own lives.
PSM research analyzes a range of topics, although some are more prominent than others. The
four key areas of research that we identified are supplier relations, supply chain management,
information management and ICT, and outsourcing strategy. While the first, second, and fourth
area have long been of interest to PSM researchers, the third area is relatively new. It is unclear
whether the amount of published research we identified in our study reflects a fundamental
change in what PSM stands for or is simply an artifact of the time period under study.
        While any statements on the future of PSM research are bound to be highly speculative,
we see several trends emerging. First, there will be a tendency among researchers, as well as a
practical need, to gain ever more detailed insights of the nature of relations between buyers and
suppliers. Because suppliers are increasingly seen to be contributors to the competitive advantage
of buying firms (Dyer and Singh, 1998), there is much merit in studying how it is they interact
with their customers and what their contributions to their customers’ innovative capabilities and
product and service offerings is. Second, we foresee the introduction of more and more varied

theories to describe PSM phenomena, especially in the specialist journals. Because of the
interdisciplinary nature of these phenomena, it would make sense to see competing theories from
various other disciplines being tested (Mol and Wynstra, 2003). Buyer-supplier relationships are
for instance open to MA theories including those around channel conflict and industrial networks
and SO theories, like perspectives from new institutional economics, economic sociology or
organizational politicking. Third, although our data do not shed much light on this, the PSM field
will probably go through a phase of increasing methodological sophistication. There already has
been a tendency to use more sophisticated techniques and methods in recent years. In order to
publish case studies on PSM for instance, it is becoming increasingly important to lay out the
methodology of the study. For those who use statistical techniques, it no longer suffices to use
simple correlations and multivariate analysis techniques have become the standard. We therefore
believe that PSM is very much a field in motion and that it is an exciting time for us as
researchers to operate in that field.

Abrahamson, E. & Fairchild, G., 1999. Management fashion: Lifecycles, triggers, and collective
learning processes. Administrative Science Quarterly 44(4), 708-740.
Carter, C.R., 2000. Ethical Issues in International Buyer-Supplier Relationships:
a Dyadic Examination. Journal of Operations Management 18(2), 191-208.
Das, A. & Handfield, R.B., 1997. A meta-analysis of doctoral dissertations in purchasing. Journal
of Operations Management 15, 101-121.
Dyer, J. H. & Singh, H., 1998. The relational view: Cooperative strategy and sources of
interorganizational competitive advantage. Academy of Management Review 23, 660-679.
Heide, J. & John, G., 1988. The Role of Dependence Balancing in Safeguarding Transaction-
Specific Assets in Conventional Channels. Journal of Marketing 52(1), 20-35.
Kotabe, M., Martin, X. & Domoto, H., 2003. Gaining from Vertical Relationships: Knowledge
Transfer, Relationship Duration, and Supplier Performance Improvement in the U.S. and
Japanese Automobile Industries. Strategic Management Journal 24, 293-316.
Mol, M.J., & Wynstra, F. (2003). Theoretical foundations for research in purchasing
and supply management. In: Chikan, A. (Ed.), Where theory meets practice. Proceedings 12th
International Annual IPSERA Conference, 14-15 April 2003, Budapest, Hungary, 893-904.
Oliver, R.K. & Webber, M.D., 1992. SCM: Logistics catches up with strategy.
In: Christopher, M. (Ed.) Logistics: The strategic issues, London: Chapman Hall, 63-75.
Olsen, R.F. & Ellram, L.M., 1997. Buyer-supplier relationships: Alternative research approaches.
European Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 3(4), 221-231.
Singer, J.I., 2002. Double auctions across a constrained transmission line. Operations Research
50 (3), 449-461.
Wynstra, F. & Knight, L., 2004. JPSM – Foundations and future development, 2004-2007.
Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management 10(6), 227-231.

                                                                                   Area   1999   2000   2001    2002   2003   Total
Academy of Management Journal (AMJ)                                                 SO      1      8      6      10     6      31
Academy of Management Review (AMR)                                                  SO      2      3      1      8      3      17
Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science (AMSJ)                                 MA       7     10      5      11     3      36
Annals of OR (AOR)                                                                  OR      6     11     8       10     4      39
Administrative Science Quarterly (ASQ)                                              SO      1      1      5      2      2      11
Computers & Industrial Engineering (CIE)                                            OR      9     2      4       26     5      46
California Management Review (CMR)                                                  SO      3      3      4      3      5      18
Computers & Operations Research (COR)                                               OR      2     4      4       5      16     31
Decision Sciences (DS)                                                              OR      6     4      4       10     1      25
European Journal of Operational Research (EJOR)                                     OR     30     27     38      39     53     187
Harvard Business Review (HBR)                                                       SO     14     14      7      13     17     65
IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management (IEEE)                                  OR      3     3      9       14     7      36
Interfaces (IF)                                                                     OR      1     6      5       8      19     39
IIE Transactions (IIET)                                                             OR      9     9      8       10     0      36
International Journal of Logistics Management (IJLM)                               OM      11      7     13      11     6      48
International Journal of Operations & Production Management (IJOPM)                OM      23     20     24      14     17     98
International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management (IJPDLM)   OM      12     37     21      31     29     130
Int. Journal of Production Economics (IJPE)                                        OM      36     16     43      35     35     165
Int. Journal of Production Research (IJPR)                                         OM      21     25     24      35     26     131
Int. Journal of Research in Marketing (IJRM)                                       MA       3      1      2      1      9      16
Industrial Marketing Management (IMM)                                              MA      23     19     30      22     32     126
Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing (JBBM)                                   MA       6      4      4      3      4      21
Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing (JBIM)                                MA      17     11     13      12     13     66
Journal of Business Logistics (JBL)                                                OM       9      8      7      3      4      31
Journal of Business Research (JBR)                                                 MA      16     17     17      25     29     104
Journal of Management (JMAN)                                                        SO      3      7      4      6      4      24
Journal of Marketing (JMAR)                                                        MA       8      5      8      3      8      32
Journal of Marketing Research (JMR)                                                MA       7     10     11      6      14     48
Journal of Management Studies (JMS)                                                 SO      2      6      5      5      11     29
Journal of Operations Management (JOM)                                             OM      12      7     12      16     9      56
Journal of the Operational Research Society (JORS)                                  OR      8      9     16      14     19     66
Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management (JPSM)                                 PSM     19     22     23      21     24     109
Journal of Supply Chain Management (JSCM)                                          PSM     25     22     23      21     11     102
Long Range Planning (LRP)                                                           SO      9      6      3      2      5      25
Marketing Science (MARS)                                                           MA       6      1      6      7      9      29
Management Science (MS)                                                             OR     25     11     34      26     24     120
Manufacturing & Service Operations Management (MSOM)                               OM       6      8     10      7      6      37

Omega (OMEGA)                                                                 OR      5       6       3       4     15     33
Operations Research (OR)                                                      OR      3       13      14      9     19     58
Organization Science (OS)                                                     SO      6       2       1       8     4      21
Organization Studies (OST)                                                    SO      3       3       5       2     4      17
Production and Inventory Management Journal (PIMJ)                            OM      11      9       10       9   n/a     39
Production and Operations Management (POM)                                    OM      5       12      9       12    3      41
Supply Chain Management: An International Journal (SCM)                       OM      12      14      20      24    38    108
Strategic Management Journal (SMJ)                                            SO      5       8       4       17    13     47
Sloan Management Review (SMR)                                                 SO      8       10      7       10    11     46
Total                                                                                459     461     534     590   596   2,640
Table 1: Raw number of articles by year (columns) and journal (rows). Note that PIMJ was discontinued in 2003.

           1999    2000   2001   2002   2003    Total              1999     2000   2001    2002    2003    Total
 AMJ        0       1      4      1      2        8       JBR       3        4      5       6        6      24
 AMR        1       0      0      0      0        1       JMAN      0        1      0       0        1       2
 AMSJ       4       4      4      3      1       16       JMAR      0        1      3       1        3       8
 AOR        1       0      3      1      0        5       JMR       3        2      0       0        4       9
 ASQ        0       0      2      0      0        2       JMS       0        1      1       0        0       2
 CIE        2       0      1      12     2       17       JOM       4        3      7       6        4      24
 CMR        1       3      1      3      2       10       JORS      2        3      6       4        3      18
 COR        0       2      1      0      6        9       JPSM      18       21     21      18      22      100
 DS         4       4      3      8      1       20       JSCM      21       20     22      19      11      93
 EJOR       4       7      10     9      11      41       LRP       1        3      3       0        0       7
 HBR        0       2      0      1      0        3       MARS      0        0      0       1        0       1
 IEEE       1       1      5      7      0       14       MS        4        3      13      10       8      38
 IF         1       1      1      3      4       10       MSOM      2        3      2       3        3      13
 IIET       2       2      2      6      0       12       OMEGA     0        4      2       2        5      13
 IJLM       3       3      6      2      1       15       OR        0        1      2       2        4       9
 IJOPM      3       13     11     11     9       47       OS        2        0      0       3        3       8
 IJPDLM     4       11     7      9      14      45       OST       1        0      3       1        2       7
 IJPE       7       7      10     13     15      52       PIMJ      6        4      5       2       n/a     17
 IJPR       5       3      4      8      6       26       POM       1        1      4       8        2      16
 IJRM       1       1      2      0      2        6       SCM       5        6      9       15      27      62
 IMM        15      9      17     13     19      73       SMJ       1        2      2       3        2      10
 JBBM       3       2      4      2      2       13       SMR       2        4      0       2        0       8
 JBIM       9       7      6      8      8       38       Total    136      160    207     220     207      987
 JBL        4       5      2      1      3       15
Table 2: Cleaned number of articles by year (columns) and journal (rows).

           1999    2000   2001   2002    2003     Average                 1999    2000    2001    2002    2003    Average
 AMJ         0     0.01   0.05   0.01    0.04      0.02         JBR       0.04    0.04    0.06    0.06    0.05      0.05
 AMR       0.02      0      0      0       0       0.00         JMAN        0     0.02      0       0     0.02      0.01
 AMSJ      0.14    0.10   0.15   0.08    0.02      0.09         JMAR        0     0.04    0.10    0.03    0.10      0.05
 AOR       0.01      0    0.02   0.01      0       0.01         JMR       0.08    0.05      0       0     0.11      0.05
 ASQ         0       0    0.09     0       0       0.02         JMS         0     0.02    0.02      0       0       0.01
 CIE       0.01      0    0.01   0.11    0.02      0.03         JOM       0.12    0.10    0.20    0.14    0.10      0.13
 CMR       0.03    0.11   0.03   0.10    0.07      0.07         JORS      0.01    0.02    0.04    0.03    0.02      0.02
 COR         0     0.03   0.01     0     0.04      0.02         JPSM      0.95    0.95    0.91    0.86    0.92      0.91
 DS        0.09    0.11   0.11   0.30    0.04      0.12         JSCM      0.81    0.91    0.81    0.83    0.73      0.82
 EJOR      0.01    0.02   0.03   0.02    0.03      0.02         LRP       0.02    0.08    0.08      0       0       0.03
 HBR         0     0.02     0    0.01      0       0.00         MARS        0       0       0     0.04      0       0.01
 IEEE      0.02    0.02   0.11   0.17      0       0.06         MS        0.03    0.03    0.11    0.09    0.07      0.07
 IF        0.01    0.01   0.01   0.05    0.05      0.03         MSOM      0.20    0.12    0.06    0.14    0.13      0.11
 IIET      0.02    0.02   0.02   0.06      0       0.02         OMEGA       0     0.07    0.04    0.05    0.11      0.05
 IJLM      0.18    0.19   0.46   0.13    0.06      0.19         OR          0     0.01    0.03    0.02    0.05      0.02
 IJOPM     0.04    0.17   0.13   0.12    0.12      0.12         OS        0.04      0       0     0.07    0.07      0.03
 IJPDLM    0.11    0.23   0.18   0.20    0.31      0.21         OST       0.02      0     0.07    0.02    0.04      0.03
 IJPE      0.04    0.04   0.05   0.08    0.08      0.06         PIMJ      0.14    0.10    0.17    0.08     n/a      0.12
 IJPR      0.02    0.01   0.02   0.03    0.03      0.02         POM       0.04    0.03    0.11    0.23    0.06      0.10
 IJRM      0.06    0.04   0.11     0     0.07      0.05         SCM       0.19    0.26    0.35    0.50    0.63      0.42
 IMM       0.27    0.18   0.29   0.18    0.26      0.24         SMJ       0.02    0.03    0.03    0.04    0.03      0.03
 JBBM      0.27    0.17    0.4   0.14    0.12      0.20         SMR       0.06    0.14      0     0.03      0       0.03
 JBIM      0.33    0.21   0.16   0.22    0.19      0.22         Average   0.042   0.051   0.065   0.067   0.061    0.057
 JBL       0.19    0.24   0.11   0.08    0.16      0.16
Table 3: PSM intensity (number of clean articles relative to total number of articles – total number of articles not displayed separately but available upon request)
by year (columns) and journal (rows).

           Purchase    Buy        Supply        Source      Contract   Total (100%)
Total      296         274        681           106         95         1451
1999       22.6%       19.2%      45.1%         6.7%        6.3%       208
2000       21.5%       20.8%      42.6%         8.3%        6.8%       265
2001       19.4%       19.7%      47.0%         6.7%        7.3%       330
2002       19.5%       15.1%      50.6%         7.5%        7.2%       318
2003       20%         20%        47.9%         7.3         5.2%       330
Average    20.4%       18.9%      47.0%         7.3%        6.5%
Table 4: Number of keyword hits over 5-year period and percentage all keyword hits in various years.

Topics                                                                           Managing innovation through suppliers   37
Purchasing and supply in a strategic context                                29   Public procurement                      3
Organizational buying behavior                                              20   Not-product related (NPR) purchasing    0
Make-or-buy/outsourcing strategy                                            51   Service purchasing                      10
Specifying requirements                                                     7    Data collection
Sourcing strategy                                                           12   Conceptual study                        12
Global/international sourcing                                               30   (Systematic) literature review          7
Supply markets and networks                                                 17   Case study                              19
Supplier selection                                                          18   Survey                                  53
Supplier relationships                                                      90   Experiments                             5
Supplier development                                                        14   Action research                         3
Supplier quality assurance                                                  16   Secondary data                          2
Tendering and contracting                                                   37   Data analysis
Costing and pricing                                                         32   Qualitative data analysis               1
Performance measurement                                                     26   Modeling/simulation                     42
Negotiation                                                                 6    Means/difference testing                2
Purchasing and supply organisation                                          25   ANOVA/MANOVA                            2
Purchasing and supply people                                                4    Regression                              8
Information management and information and communication technology (ICT)   58   Factor/cluster analysis                 6
Social, ethical and environmental supply issues                             10   Structural equation modelling           5
Supply chain management                                                     78   Other                                   0
Table 5: Topics, data collection methods, and data analysis techniques.


To top