CHAPTER FOUR

DATA ANALYSIS, PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction
This chapter presents the analysis of data collected from the study. The purpose of the
study was to assess the factors influencing efficient selection of suppliers in Flower
farms.
4.2 Presentation of Findings
A total of 15 questionnaires were issued for the research while 12 questionnaires
were filled and returned. From the sampled respondents, 3 Procurement officers, 4
Supervisors and 5 Clerks responded giving which represented 80% response rate.
4.2.1 Response rate
The study sought to determine the response rate at Maridadi Flowers Ltd. The data in
table 4.1 is presented in figure 4.1.
Table 4.1 Response rate
Categories of staff

Sample Size

Response rate

Response rate

Procurement officers

(Percent)
20

Supervisors

27

Clerks

33

Total

15

12

80

Source: Maridadi Flowers Ltd., (2016)

26

Response rate

41%

25%

34%

Procurement officers

Supervisors

Clerks

Figure 4.1 Response rate

According to Table 4.1 and figure 4.1, 20% of the respondents were Procurement
officers, 27% were Supervisors while 33% were clerks.

4.2.2 Gender
The study sought to determine the gender distribution of the respondents at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd. The data in table 4.2 is presented in figure 4.2.
Table 4.2 Gender
Category
Male
Female
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
8
4
12

27

Percentage
67
33
100

Gender

Female

Ge nde r
M ale

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Percentage %

Figure 4.2 Gender

Table 4.2 and figure 4.2 shows the respondents the gender distribution at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd., 67% represented male gender while 33% represented female gender.

4.2.3 Age group of respondents

The study sought to determine the age group of the respondents at Maridadi Flowers Ltd.
The data in table 4.3 is presented in figure 4.3.
Table 4.3 Age group of respondents
Category
Below 20 years
20-30 years
31-40 years
41-50 years
Above 50 years
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
1
5
3
2
1
12

28

Percentage
8
42
25
17
8
100

Age group
Above 50 years

41-50 years

31-40 years

20-30 years

Below 20 years
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.3 Age group

According to Table 4.3 and figure 4.3, 8% of the respondents were below 20 years, 42%
were 20-30 years, 25% were 31-40 years, 17% were 41-50 years while above 50 years
was represented by 8%.
4.2.4 Marital status
The study sought to determine the marital status of the respondents. The data in table 4.4
is presented in figure 4.4.
Table 4.4 Marital status
Category
Single
Married
Separated
Divorced
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
5
4
2
1
12

29

Percentage
42
33
17
8
100

Marital status
Divorced

Separated

Status
M arried

Single

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.4 Marital status

Table 4.4 and figure 4.4 shows that when respondents were asked about their marital
status, 42% said they were single, 33% said they were married, 17% said they were
separated, while 8% said they were divorced.
4.2.5 Level of education
The study sought to determine the level of education of the respondents at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd. The data in table 4.5 is presented in figure 4.5.
Table 4.5 Level of education
Category
O-Level
Cerificate
Diploma
Degree
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
4
2
4
2
12

30

Percentage
33
17
33
17
100

Level of education
Degree

Diploma

Qualification
Cerificate

O-Level

10

15

20

25

30

35

Percentage %

Figure 4.5 Level of education

According to Table 4.5 and figure 4.5, 33% of the respondents had O-Level education,
17% of the respondent were certificate holders, and 33% of the respondent were diploma
holders while 17% were Advanced degree holders.

4.2.6 Length of service

The study sought to determine the length of service of the respondents at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd. The data in table 4.6 is presented in figure 4.6.
Table 4.6 Length of service
Category
Below 2 years
3-5 years
6-9 years
Above 10 years
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
4
5
2
1
12

31

Percentage
33
42
17
8
100

Length of service
Above 10 years

6-9 years

Experience

3-5 years

Below 2 years
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.6 Length of service

Table 4.6 and figure 4.6 when respondents were asked about the duration they have
worked for the organization, 33% of the respondents had below 2 years experience, 42%
had experience between 2-5 years, 17% had experience between 6-9 years while 8% had
experience of above 10 years.

4.2.7 Respondents Designation

The study sought to determine respondents designation. The data in table 4.7 is presented
in figure 4.7.
Table 4.7 Respondents Designation
Category
Administrator
Officer
Supervisor
Clerk
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
1
3
3
5
12

32

Percentage
8
25
25
42
100

Respondents Designation
Clerk

Supervisor

Officer

Administrator

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.7 Respondents Designation

Table 4.7 and figure 4.7 shows that when respondents were asked about their designation,
71% of the respondents were Administrators, 25% were Officers , 25% were Supervisors
while 42% of the respondents were Clerks.
4.2.8 Cost related factors affect efficient supplier selection?
The study sought to determine whether cost related factors affect efficient supplier
selection. The data in table 4.8 is presented in figure 4.8.
Table 4.8 Cost related factors affect efficient supplier selection?
Category
Yes
No
I dont know
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
8
3
1
12

33

Percentage
67
25
8
100

Cost related factors affect efficient supplier selection?

I dont know

Response

No

Yes

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Percentage %

Figure 4.2.8 Cost related factors affect efficient supplier selection?

Table 4.8 and figure 4.8 when respondents were whether cost related factors affect
efficient supplier selection, 67% of the respondents said Yes, 25% said No while 8% said
they dont know.
4.2.9 What is the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection?
The study sought to determine the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection. The data
in table 4.9 is presented in figure 4.9.
Table 4.9 What is the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection?
Category
Distribution process
Product price
Quality of product
Technical Capability
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
5
3
3
1
12

34

Percentage
42
25
25
8
100

What is the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection?

Technical Capability

Quality of product

Response

Product price

Distribution process
0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.9 What is the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection?

Table 4.9 and figure 4.9 shows that when respondents were asked the effect of cost on
efficient supplier selection, 42% of the respondents said distribution process, 25% of
the respondents said determine the product price, 25% said determine the quality of
product while 8% said cot influence the technical capability. From the findings the
company should consider cost related factors before engaging suppliers as they directly
affect the profit margins.
4.2.10 Extent to which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers?
The study sought to determine the extent to which flexibility of supply contract terms
influence selection of suppliers. The data in table 4.10 is presented in figure 4.10.
Table 4.10 Extent to which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers?
Category
Very great extent
Great extent
Low extent
Not so sure
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
5
4
2
1
12

35

Percentage
42
33
17
8
100

Extent to which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers

45
40
35
30
25
Percentage %

20
15
10
5
0

Very great extent

Great extent

Low extent

Not so sure

Figure 4.10 Extent to which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers
Table 4.10 and figure 4.10 indicates that when respondents were asked about the extent to
which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers, 42% of the
respondents said to a very great extent, 33% said to a great extent , 17% said to a low
extent while 8% said they are not so sure. Majority of the respondent agreed that
flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers to a very great extent.
4.2.11 How does flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers?
The study sought to determine how flexibility of supply contract terms influence
selection of suppliers. The data in table 4.11 is presented in figure 4.11.

36

Table 4.11 How does flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers?
Category

Frequency

Percentage

Uncertainties in supply sources

42

Process life cycles

17

Operation disruptions
Consumption patterns
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

4
1
12

33
8
100

How doe s fle xibility of contract te rms influe nce s e le ction of s upplie rs ?

Not so sure

Low extent

Re sponse
Great extent

Very great extent

10

20

30

40

50

60

Pe rce ntage %

Figure 4.11 How does flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers?
Table 4.11 and figure 4.11 shows that when respondents were asked how flexibility of
supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers, 42% of the respondents said
manage uncertainties in supply sources, 17% said manage process life cycles, 33% said
operation disruptions while 8% said manage consumption patterns.

37

4.2.12 The organization has factored in flexibility of supply contract terms in its
operations?
The study sought to determine whether the organization has factored in flexibility of
supply contract terms in its operations. The data in table 4.12 is presented in figure 4.12.

Table 4.12 The organization has factored in flexibility of supply contract terms in its
operations
Category

Frequency

Percentage

Strongly agree

42

Agree

25

Strongly disagree

25

Disagree

Total

12

100

Source: Author, (2016)

The organization has factored in flexibility of supply contract terms in its operations
Disagree

Strongly disagree

Response

Agree

Strongly agree
0

10

15

20

Percentage %

38

25

30

35

40

45

Figure 4.12 The organization has factored in flexibility of supply contract terms in
its operations
Table 4.12 and figure 4.12 shows that when respondents asked whether the organization
has factored in flexibility of supply contract terms in its operations, 42% of the
respondents said they strongly agree, 25% said they agree, 25% said they strongly
disagree while 8% said they disagree. From the findings company consideration on the
ability of the suppliers to offer different varieties of goods due to fluctuations in demand
and supply.
4.2.13 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier selection?
The study sought to determine whether the organization have any strategy in enhancing
supplier selection. The data in table 4.13 is presented in figure 4.13.
Table 4.13 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier
selection?
Category
Yes
No
I dont know
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
5
3
4
12

Percentage
42
25
33
100

Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier selection?

I dont know

Response

No

Yes

10

15

20

Percentage %

39

25

30

35

40

45

Figure 4.13 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier
selection?
Table 4.13 and figure 4.13 when respondents asked whether the organization have any
strategy in enhancing supplier selection, 42% of the respondents said Yes while 25% said
No while 33% said they dont know. From the findings majority of the respondents
disagreed that the company has in place strategies in enhancing supplier selection. There
is need to create awareness on the strategies in place.
4.2.14 The organization do face any challenge(s) when executing supplier selection?
The study sought to determine whether the organization do face any challenge(s) when
executing supplier selection. The data in table 4.14 is presented in figure 4.14.
Table 4.14 The organization do face any challenge(s) when executing supplier
selection?
Category
Yes
No
I dont know
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
6
4
2
12

Percentage
50
33
17
100

The organization do face any challenge(s) when executing supplier selection?

I dont know

Response

No

Yes

10

20

30

Percentage %

40

40

50

60

Figure 4.14 The organization do face any challenge(s) when executing supplier
selection?
Table 4.14 and figure 4.14 when respondents were asked whether the organization do
face any challenge(s) when executing supplier selection, 65% of the respondents said
Yes, 33% said No while 17% said they dont know.
4.2.15 Extent to which competition affect efficient supplier selection
The study sought to determine the extent to which competition affect efficient supplier
selection. The data in table 4.15 is presented in figure 4.15.
Table 4.15 Extent to which competition affect efficient supplier selection
Category

Frequency

Percentage

Very great extent

50

Great extent

25

Low extent

17

Not so sure

Total

12

100

Source: Author, (2016)

41

Extent to which competition affect efficient supplier selection

Not so sure

Low extent

Response

Great extent

Very great extent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Percentage %

Figure 4.15 Extent to which competition affect efficient supplier selection

Table 4.15 and figure 4.15 shows that when respondents were asked the extent to which
competition affect efficient supplier selection, 50% of the respondents said to a very great
extent, 25% said to a great extent , 17% said to a low extent while 8% said they are not so
sure. Majority of the respondents were in agreement that when the process is competitive
the company is likely to attract efficient suppliers who have the ability to meet the needs
of the company.
4.2.16 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier selection?
The study sought to determine whether the organization have any strategy in enhancing
supplier selection. The data in table 4.16 is presented in figure 4.16.
Table 4.16 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier
selection?
Category
Yes
No
I dont know
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency
5
3
4
12

42

Percentage
42
25
33
100

Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier selection?

I dont know

No

Response

Yes

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.16 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier
selection?
Table 4.16 and figure 4.16 when respondents asked whether the organization have any
strategy in enhancing supplier selection , 42% of the respondents said Yes 25% said No
while 33% said they dont know.
4.2.16 Does your organization have any strategy in enhancing supplier selection?
The study sought to determine whether the organization have any strategy in enhancing
supplier selection. The data in table 4.16 is presented in figure 4.16.
4.2.17 Technological challenges the organization face in supplier selection
The study sought to determine some of the technological challenges the organization face
in supplier selection. The data in table 4.17 is presented in figure 4.17.
Table 4.17 Technological challenges the organization face in supplier selection
Category
Resistance

to

implement

technology
Limited Resources
Too expensive to implement
Skills shortage
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

Frequency

Percentage

42

3
3
1
12

25
25
8
100

43

Technological challe nge s the organization face in s upplie r s e le ction

45
40
35
30
25

Pe rce ntage %

20
15
10
5
0
Resistance to implement technology

Too expensive to implement

Re sponse

Figure 4.17 Technological challenges the organization face in supplier selection

Table 4.17 and figure 4.17 shows that when respondents were asked about some of the
technological challenges the organization face in supplier selection, 48% of the
respondents said resistance to implement technology, 24% said limited resources, 19%
said too expensive to implement while 9% said skills shortage.

4.2.18 Effect of technology on efficient supplier selection

The study sought to determine the effect of technology on efficient supplier selection.
The data in table 4.18 is presented in figure 4.18.
Table 4.18 Effect of technology on efficient supplier selection
Category

Frequency

Percentage

Sharing of information and knowledge

42

Transparency

33

Informed and better decisions

Efficiency
Total
Source: Author, (2016)

2
1
12

17
8
100

44

Effect of technology on efficient supplier selection

Efficiency

Informed and better decisions

Response

Transparency

Sharing of information and knowledge

0

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Percentage %

Figure 4.18 Effect of technology on efficient supplier selection

Table 4.18 and figure 4.18 indicates that when respondents were asked effect of
technology on efficient supplier selection, 48% of the respondents sharing of information
and knowledge, 24% said transparency, 19% said informed and better decisions while 9%
said efficiency. Majority of the respondents agreed that technology enhances the sharing
of information in the selection process by creating an efficient process.
4.3 Summary of data analysis
Supplier selection will benefit greatly from a more structured and effective approach,
which can help identify what are the most important criteria and how to make the right
choice. Even when information technology provides the capability to cheaply connect to
more potential suppliers, managers cannot ignore the incentive effects such a move will
have. In particular, when providing incentives is important, working closely with a small
number of supplier "partners" may be optimal, regardless of how low coordination costs
become. If a firm wants its suppliers to invest, it must guarantee them a fair share of the
benefits, and sometimes this can only be done by limiting the number of alternative
suppliers.
Regarding flexibility of the supply contract terms, the respondents further said that the
company considers the ability of the suppliers to offer different varieties of raw materials
45

required for specified products. The supplier should be able to provide different volumes
of goods as required by the company. Fluctuations in demand and supply which dictates
the amount of raw materials required for production. The supplier should also be able to
supply raw materials within short notice if there is urgency in the use of such raw
materials. This will be highly convenient in ensuring that there are no delays in the
production process. Flexibility therefore plays a major role in selection of a suitable
supplier for raw materials in manufacturing industry.
To leverage its competitive advantages, the company should hire suppliers that have more
focus on all fields in which it decides to compete. Both external uncertainties and internal
resources drive the adoption of supplier selection strategies. The influence of a marketfocused selection on supplier performance is positive and significant, while that of
relationship-focused strategy is negative. Interaction between two types of supplier
selection strategies will improve supplier performance.

46

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Introduction
This chapter outlines summary of findings answers to research questions, conclusion and
recommendations.

5.2 Summary of Major Findings

The purpose of this study was to assess the factors influencing efficient selection of
suppliers in Flower farms. The study was guided by the following objectives; determine
the effect of cost on quality supplier selection, flexibility of supply contract terms
influence selection of suppliers, the effect of competition on supplier selection and the
effect of technology on supplier selection.
2.5.1 What is the effect of cost on efficient supplier selection at Maridadi Flowers
Ltd?
From the findings when respondents were asked the effect of cost on efficient supplier
selection, 42% of the respondents said distribution process, 25% of the respondents said
determine the product price, 25% said determine the quality of product while 8% said cot
influence the technical capability. From the findings the company should consider cost
related factors before engaging suppliers as they directly affect the profit margins.
2.5.2 To what extent does flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of
suppliers at Maridadi Flowers Ltd?
According to Table 4.10 and figure 4.10 when respondents were asked about the extent to
which flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers, 42% of the
respondents said to a very great extent, 33% said to a great extent , 17% said to a low
extent while 8% said they are not so sure. Majority of the respondent agreed that
flexibility of supply contract terms influence selection of suppliers to a very great extent.
This is because in times of uncertainties they have an impact on the procurement process.

47

2.5.3 To what extent does competition affect efficient supplier selection at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd?
The study established that according to majority of respondent that competition affect
efficient supplier selection to a very great extent. 50% of the respondents said to a very
great extent, 25% said to a great extent , 17% said to a low extent while 8% said they are
not so sure. Majority of the respondents were in agreement that when the process is
competitive the company is likely to attract efficient suppliers who have the ability to
meet the needs of the company.
2.5.4 What is the effect of technology on efficient supplier selection at Maridadi
Flowers Ltd?
The study established that technology enhance efficient supplier selection. 48% of the
respondents said technology enables sharing of information and knowledge, 24% said for
transparency, 19% said it encourages informed and better decisions while 9% said it
brings about efficiency. Majority of the respondents agreed that technology enhances the
sharing of information in the selection process by creating an efficient process.
5.3 Conclusions
The study concludes that the cost is a major factor in selection of suppliers. Companies
opt for suppliers who offer the required goods at reasonable price. The transaction cost,
the expenses incurred in transporting and goods should be minimized to reduce the
overall cost of goods. Costs such as transportation cost, production cost, operating cost
and profit are considered during selection of suppliers.
With respect to flexibility of supply contract terms, the study concludes that companies
consider flexibility during selection of suppliers. Flexibility affects output quality in
selection of suppliers. Introduction of new products and product modification influences
selection of suppliers. Companies consider the ability of the suppliers to offer different
varieties of raw materials required for specified products. The supplier should be able to
provide different volumes of raw materials as required by the company and supply them
within a short notice if there is urgency in the use of such goods.

48

5.4 Recommendations
From the conclusions arrived at, the following recommendations were made:
The study recommends that company should prioritize all critical success factors that
influence the choice of suppliers because acquisition of the right goods and cost incurred
affect overall financial performance of the company.
The study recommends that the management keeps on adopting new supplier selection
approaches since they are particularly critical for the company because of the role they
play in relation to well performance of the whole procurement process.
The process of selecting suppliers should be open and transparent, thorough and detailed
to identify the salient and most important aspects of suppliers. Due to its nature, supplier
selection should be done by experts who are knowledgeable and have expertise to
conduct the exercise professionally. All key departments in the organization should the
best and qualified suppliers are identified and engaged.
The study further recommends that employees and heads of purchasing department in
should undergo continuous training and have access to updated market conditions. This is
in line with the dynamism of the business environment and the need to have appropriate
information for effective and efficient supplier selection decision making.

5.5 Suggestions for future studies

This research had intended to assess the factors influencing efficient selection of
suppliers in Flower farms with reference to Maridadi Flowers Ltd. Other researchers may
focus on the relationship between selection of suppliers and performance of flower farms
in Kenya.

49

References
Amin, M., E. (2005). Social Science. Sampling Methodology. Pp 235-257. Makerere
University.
Benson, K. (2011). Effectiveness of VMI in retail outlets. International Journal of
Business and Public Management (ISSN: 2223-6244) Vol. 1(1): 85-89.
Bowersox, D. J., Closs, D. J., & Cooper, M. B. (2007). Supply Chain Logistics
Management, (2nd ed.). Michigan, USA: McGraw Hill.
Brunelli, N. System providers prepare for the future of e-procurement, Purchasing
online, http://www.manufacturing.net/magazine/purchasing, March 23, 2000.
Bryman, A. and Bell, E., (2003), Business Research Methods. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Cheraghi, S. H., Dadashzadeh, M., & Subramaniam, M. (2004). Critical success factors
for supplier selection: An update. Journal of Applied Business Research, 20 (2),
91-108.
Choy KL, Lee WB, (2002). The development of a case based supplier management tool
for multinational manufacturers. Measuring Business Excellence 2002;
6(1):pp.1522, 2002.
Chris Morgan, Adam Dewhurst, (2007),"Using SPC to measure a national supermarket
chain's suppliers' performance", International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, Vol. 27 Iss: 8 pp. 874 900.
Creswell, John W (2003), Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed
Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.
De Boer, L., Labro, E. & Morlacchi, P., 2001. A review of methods supporting supplier
selection. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 7(2), pp.75
89.
Degreave, Z., Labro, E., & Roodhoft, F. (2000). An evaluation of vendor selection
models from a total cost of ownership perspective. European Journal of
Operational Research, 125 (1), 34-58.
Drury, C. (2000). Management & Cost Accounting, (5th ed.). London, UK: Thomson
Learning.

50

DSouza, D.E and Willims, F.P (2000). Toward a taxonomy of manufacturing flexibility
dimensions. Journal of operations management, Vol. 18(5) 577-593.
Gerwin D. (2009). Manufacturing Flexibility. A Strategic Perspective. Management
Science Journal Vol. 39 pp 395-410.
Gurnani, H., & Gerchak, Y. (2007). Coordination in decentralized assembly systems with
uncertain component yields. European Journal of Operational Research, 176,
15591576.
Gunasekaran, A., Patel, C., Tirtiroglu, E., 2001. Performance measure and metrics in a
supply chain environment. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management 21 (1/2), 7187.
Guneri, A. & Kuzu, A., 2009. Supplier selection by using a fuzzy approach in just-intime: A case study. International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing,
22(8), pp.774783.
Harps L. H. (2000). The Haves and the Have Nots: Supply Chain Practices for the New
Millenium: Inbound Logistics Journal. 75-114
Handfield, R, and McCormack, K. P., (2007). Supply chain risk management: minimizing
disruptions in global sourcing, New York: CRC press.
Harwood, S.A., 2009. Conceptualizing supply chain management: the sourcing triangle.
Koste, L., and Malhotra, M. (2004). A theoretical framework for analyzing the
dimensions of manufacturing flexibility. Journal of Operations Management,
18(1), 75-94.
Kothari, C. R. (2004), Research Methodology: Methods and Techniques. New Delhi:
Wiley.
Kumar, S., Parashar, N. and Haleem, A. (2009). Analytical hierarchy process applied to
vendor selection problem: small scale, medium scale and large scale industries,
Business Intelligence Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.355362.
Lummus, R.R., and Vokurka, R.J. (2004). Defining supply chain management: A
historical perspective and practical guidelines. Industrial Management and Data
Systems, 99(1 and 2), 11-17.
Lysons, K. and Farrington, B. (2006) Purchasing and Supply Chain Management. 7th ed.
U.K., Prentice Hall.
51

Monczka, R. M. & Trent, R. J. (2003). Understanding Integrated Global Sourcing,

International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 33,
607-29.
Mugenda, M. O. & Mugenda, A. G. (2003). Research methods: quantitative and
qualitative approaches. Nairobi: Acts press.
Nahavandi N, Yousefian MH, Bayat A. (2008). IT outsourcing strategy selection: The
case of Iranian Banking Industry. Q J New Econ.; 13:89110.
Ngechu. M. (2004), Understanding the research process and methods. An introduction to
research methods. Acts Press, Nairobi.
Njoroge, S., Okech, T. (2011). An Assessment of the Factors Influencing Foreign Direct
Investment Inflows in Kenyas Horticultural Industry. International Journal of
Business and Social Science. Vol. 2 No. 5; March 2011.
Nollet, J., Calvi, R., Audet, E., & Ct, M. (2008). When excessive cost savings
measurement drowns the objectives. Journal of Purchasing & Supply
Management, 14(2), 125-135.
Oberoi, J. and Khamba, J. (2005). Strategically managed buyer-supplier relationship
across supply chain: An exploratory study. Journal of Human Systems
Management, 24(6), p.275-283.
Oke, A., 20 05. A framework for analyzing manufacturing flexibility. International
Journal of Operations & Production Management 25, 973996.
Paul D. Cousins, Benn Lawson, Brian Squire, (2008),"Performance measurement in
strategic buyer supplier relationships: The mediating role of socialization
mechanisms", International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 28 Iss: 3 pp. 238 258.
Ramsey, J., & Croom, S. (2008). The impact of evolutionary and developmental
metaphors on purchasing and supply chain management: A critique. Journal of
Purchasing & Supply Management, 14, 192-204.
Shin, H., Collier, D.A. & Wilson, D.D. (2000), Supply management orientation and
supplier/buyer performance, Journal of Operation Management, Vol. 18, pp.
317-33.

52

Simchi-Levi, D. et al. (2009), Designing and Managing the Supply Chain, Tata McGrawHill Publishing Company Ltd, New Delhi.
Somekh, B. and Cathy, L. (2005), Research Methods in the Social Sciences. London:
Sage publications Inc.
Stanley E. G. and Gregory M. M. (2001). Achieving World Class Supply Chain
Alignment: Benefits, Barriers and Bridges A Compiled Research Report.
Szwejczewski, M., Lemke, F. and Goffin, K. (2005). Manufacturer-supplier
relationships: an empirical study of German Manufacturing companies,
International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 9,
pp. 875-897.
Tohidi, H. (2011). The Role of Risk Management in IT systems of organizations.
Procedia Comput Sci. 2011; 3:8817
Van Weele, A. J. (2005). Purchasing & Supply Chain Management (4th ed.). Eindhoven,
Netherlands: Thomson.
Walliman, Nicholas. (2001), Your Research Project: A Step-by-Step Guide for the Firsttime Researcher. London: Sage Publications Inc.
Wan and Beil (2008). Wan, Z. and D. R. Beil. 2008. RFQ auctions with supplier
qualification screening. To appear in Operations Research.
Wouters, M., Anderson, J. C., & Wynstra, F. (2005). The adoption of total cost of
ownership for sourcing decisionsa structural equations analysis. Accounting,
Organizations and Society, 30 (2), 167-191.

53