It is observed a diverse approach in the meaning of purchasing amongst the literature background. Van Weele (2010) defines purchasing as the typical term which is related to the acquisition process of raw materials but it can also be known as procurement or even supply management.
Bowersox (2010), states that purchasing has been traditionally adversarial and transaction focused, thus primarily interested in the product price. Nowadays, on the contrary, a shift towards the lowest cost of ownership occurs. This implies that purchasing will have to consider all the costs that will be charged during the lifetime of the products purchased.
In addition, Monczka, et al. (2011) made a distinctive difference approach between purchasing and supply …show more content…
A purchasing contract is more than just a price for a specified product. Purchasing team strongly believe in good alignment to improve the total supply chain for all parties involved. Close collaboration does not only work with people who are eager and open to work closely together, although it is an indispensable and essential action. Responsibilities and objectives must be set clearly. Purchasing team makes a clear distinction between direct spend, raw materials and packaging material, for which the Central Purchasing Managers are ultimately responsible and indirect spend for which the individual BU’s are responsible. This does not mean that Central Purchasing Managers conclude all direct spend contracts and BU-colleagues all indirect spend contracts. As long as there is close alignment it is not important who eventually concludes the contract. The one responsible for the spend is not necessarily always the most logic choice to do this. There are also examples where it made sense to benefit from purchasing team critical mass it has as a group on product groups for which every BU is individually responsible. As long as there is full alignment in place, it can make sense to conclude a contract centrally (Refresco,
Bowersox (2010), states that purchasing has been traditionally adversarial and transaction focused, thus primarily interested in the product price. Nowadays, on the contrary, a shift towards the lowest cost of ownership occurs. This implies that purchasing will have to consider all the costs that will be charged during the lifetime of the products purchased.
In addition, Monczka, et al. (2011) made a distinctive difference approach between purchasing and supply …show more content…
A purchasing contract is more than just a price for a specified product. Purchasing team strongly believe in good alignment to improve the total supply chain for all parties involved. Close collaboration does not only work with people who are eager and open to work closely together, although it is an indispensable and essential action. Responsibilities and objectives must be set clearly. Purchasing team makes a clear distinction between direct spend, raw materials and packaging material, for which the Central Purchasing Managers are ultimately responsible and indirect spend for which the individual BU’s are responsible. This does not mean that Central Purchasing Managers conclude all direct spend contracts and BU-colleagues all indirect spend contracts. As long as there is close alignment it is not important who eventually concludes the contract. The one responsible for the spend is not necessarily always the most logic choice to do this. There are also examples where it made sense to benefit from purchasing team critical mass it has as a group on product groups for which every BU is individually responsible. As long as there is full alignment in place, it can make sense to conclude a contract centrally (Refresco,