Xem mẫu
B2B E-Business
Sullivan, L., & Dunn, D. (2004, February 9). The rules of the road still apply to Covisint. Informa-tion Week, p. 92.
Survey: A market too far. (2004). The Economist, 371(8375), 12.
KEY TERMS
Back-End System: The support components of a computer system. It typically refers to the database-management system (DBMS), which is the storehouse for the data.
Business-to-Business (B2B) E-Business: The sale of products or services, or an information exchange, among two or more businesses through electronic technology, usually involving the Inter-net, through a public or private exchange.
Consortium: A group of companies within a particular industry establishing an exchange connecting each of them and their suppliers.
E-Business (Electronic Business): The administration of conducting business via the Internet. This would include the buying and sell-ing of goods and services, along with providing technical or customer support through the Internet. E-business is a term often used in conjunction with e-commerce, but it includes services in addition to the sale of goods.
Enterprise Application Integration (EAI): The process of coordinating the operations of vari-ous applications across an enterprise so they can perform as an integrated, enterprise-wide system. This term also refers to the set of commercial ap-plications designed to facilitate this process.
E-Procurement: E-procurement is the busi-ness-to-business purchase and sale of supplies and services over the Internet. An important part of many B2B sites, e-procurement is also sometimes referred to by other terms, such as supplier exchange. Typically, e-procurement :HEVLWHVDOORZTXDOL¿HGDQGUHJLVWHUHGXVHUVWR look for buyers or sellers of goods and services. Depending on the approach, buyers or sellers may specify prices or invite bids. Transactions can be initiated and completed. Ongoing purchases may qualify customers for volume discounts or special offers. E-procurement software may make it possible to automate some buying and selling. Companies participating expect to be able to control parts inventories more effectively, reduce purchasing agent overhead, and improve manufacturing cycles. E-procurement is expected to be integrated with the trend toward computer-ized supply-chain management.
Independent B2B Marketplace (or E-Mar-ketplace): An Internet destination where busi-nesses from around the world can come together to buy and sell goods and services in an auction format.
Middleware: Software that sits between two or more types of software and translates infor-mation between them. Middleware can cover a broad spectrum of software and generally sits between an application and an operating system, a network operating system, or a database-man-agement system.
Private B2B Exchange: An e-marketplace created by a single company to provide e-business capabilities to its business units and preferred trading partners.
This work was previously published in Encyclopedia of E-Commerce, E-Government, and Mobile Commerce, edited by M. Khosrow-Pour, pp. 26-30, copyright 2006 by Information Science Reference (an imprint of IGI Global).
244
245
Chapter 1.17 Innovation and B2B E-Commerce:
Explaining What Did Not Happen
Steve New University of Oxford, UK
ABSTRACT
The massive wave of enthusiasm for B2B (busi-ness-to-business) e-commerce generated with WKH³GRWFRP´ERRPOHGPDQ\WREHOLHYHWKDWD IXQGDPHQWDOWUDQVIRUPDWLRQRIKRZ¿UPVERXJKW and sold products was just around the corner. The QHZ³ZLUHG´ZRUOGRIFRPPHUFHZRXOGOHDGWR UHDOWLPH,QWHUQHWGULYHQWUDGLQJZLWKVLJQL¿FDQW implications for — amongst other things — the nature of buyer-supplier relationships, pricing, and the management of industrial capacity. De-spite the excitement, such a transformation has largely failed to materialise, and whilst there has been a limited uptake of B2B innovations (for example, the use of online reverse auctions), the fundamental character of B2B trade has remained mostly unchanged. Drawing on a multi-stranded empirical study, this chapter seeks to explain the divergence between the expected and realised degrees of innovation.
INTRODUCTION
The extraordinary rise and fall of the late 1990s technology bubbleZDVQRWWKH¿UVWVSHFXODWLYH boom of its kind — and presumably will not be the last. As with the successive 19th century booms relating to the railways, the frenzy was accompanied by an astonishing explosion of rhetoric, folklore, and intellectual and manage-ULDOIDVKLRQ²FUXGHO\³K\SH´7KLVOHGWRD VLJQL¿FDQWÀXUU\RILQQRYDWLRQSDUWLFXODUO\LQ the founding of large numbers ofInternet-based intermediaries³KXEV´RU³H[FKDQJHV´%DNRV 1991, 1998; Bloch & Catfolis, 2001; Barratt & Rosdahl, 2002; Le, Rao, & Truong, 2004). Inves-tors and organisations poured vast sums into these ventures and, for the most part, lost their money. Consultants and investment banks made shrill claims that interorganisational trade would be transformed, but the predicted revolution failed to materialise.
Copyright © 2009, IGI Global, distributing in print or electronic forms without written permission of IGI Global is prohibited.
Innovation and B2B E-Commerce
I address two central questions in this chapter. 7KH¿UVWLVWKHVLPSOHTXHVWLRQ:K\GLGWKHUHYR-lution not happen? The second is: What substan-tive ideas for business practice can be salvaged from the wreckage? This is an important task; to adapt George Santayana’s famous quip, those who do not understand the past are condemned to repeat it.
2QHIHDWXUHRISXEOLVKHGZRUNLQWKLV¿HOGLV that there has been relatively little solid empirical material; on the other hand, there has been a great deal of generalised comment and unsupported speculation regarding the causes and consequenc-es of the bursting of the B2B bubble. Day, Fein, and Ruppersberger (2003) present an analysis that HPSKDVLVHVWKHVLPLODULWLHVZLWKRWKHU³VKDNHRXWV´ associated with disruptive technologies.
This chapter reports the results of a multi-stranded investigation into the extent to which organisations are prepared to make use of the Internet in buying and selling, and into the patterns of life and death ofB2B exchanges. Unlike much of the literature in this area, which has largely focused on leading companies or the few success-ful hubs, this chapter concentrates more on the RSSRUWXQLWLHVDQGREVWDFOHVWKDWIDFH³RUGLQDU\´ organisations, and the innovations which failed. The logic behind this is that there is often much to be learnt about the process of innovation from the mundane and the typical. The purpose of this study was not to recount the organisational suc-FHVVVWRULHVRIOHDGLQJ¿UPV²RWKHUVKDYHGRQH that before, and the potentialEHQH¿WVRI%% e-commerce are well documented (e.g., Sculley & Woods, 1999; Timmers, 2000; DeMaio, 2001; Raisch, 2001). For this study, the challenge was to understand the reality of organisations’ experi-ences, and to gauge the key issues and obstacles that they face.
BACKGROUND: THE B2B PHENOMENON
A simple starting point to the complex origins of the B2B e-commerce phenomenon lies in the well-established technologies ofelectronic data interchange(EDI). At the beginning of the 1990s, for many industries, the direct system-to-system transfer of data over proprietary networks follow-ing industry standard protocols had become a routine element of doing business. The technology DOORZHGVLJQL¿FDQWVDYLQJVIURPERWKLQFUHDVLQJ the speed and accuracy of data transmission, and in some cases was progressing to more advanced uses whereby buyers and suppliers could not only PDQDJHURXWLQHWUDQVDFWLRQVEXWDOVR³VHH´LQWR each others’ systems, facilitating such operational innovations ascollaborative planning forecasting and replenishment, and vendor managed inven-tory. In addition, electronic linkages also were developing for the easier sharing of technical and GHVLJQGDWDHQFRXUDJLQJLQWHU¿UPFROODERUD-tion in technical design. The downside of these ³inter-organisational information systems” ZHUHWKHFRQVLGHUDEOH³KRRNXS´FRVWVLQFXUUHG by the parties involved, a fact which limited the adoption of the technologies by smaller suppliers, often faced with meeting the costs of linking their own systems with the non-matching requirements of several customers. In parallel, in the academic literature, there was a limited debate as to the ORQJWHUPHIIHFWVRIWKHVHWHFKQRORJLHVRQ¿UPV¶ switching costs, and good arguments could made for expecting both a reduction and increases in PDUNHW³VWLFNLQHVV´DQGWKHFRQVHTXHQWLDOVKLIW WR SXUHU ³PDUNHWV´ RU JURZLQJ ´KLHUDUFKLHV´ respectively (Malone, Yates, & Benjamin, 1987; Bakos, 1991). The debate was rather theoretical, and was rather neglected outside of a handful of learned journals.
The arrival of the Internet, and its adoption by businesses as a serious tool for business, however,
246
Innovation and B2B E-Commerce
radically changed the character of the debate. Three key features of the Internet and two innova-tions transformed the horizons of possibility. The Internet was ubiquitous, cheap, and — being built around the idea of a standard and simple set of WHFKQLFDOSURWRFROV²UHODWLYHO\HDV\IRU¿UPVWR adopt. The two innovations — the search engine and the online auction — opened up a range of new possibilities for online B2B trading. Over time, two basic connected perceptions emerged regarding the potential for a new approach.
7KH¿UVWRIWKHSHUFHSWLRQVZDVWKDWWKH,QWHUQHW could radically transform procurement and sales processes, collapsing the costs and timescales of trading. Prospective buyers could seek out pro-spective suppliers very rapidly, and suppliers could present vast quantities of searchable information on their products and capabilities. Furthermore, buyers could use Internet mechanisms to identify the cheapest supplier in real time using multilateral reverse auctions. Correspondingly, suppliers could be more responsive in their pricing. The scope for WKHVHQHZDSSURDFKHVWR\LHOGVXEVWDQWLYHEHQH¿WV was widely acknowledged.
The second perspective, however, took these new potentials as heralding something far more VLJQL¿FDQWWKDQVRPHGROODUVVKDYHGRIIDGPLQ-istrative transaction costs. As Bill Gates (1995) VWDWHGWKH,QWHUQHWZLOO³FDUU\XVLQWRDQHZ world of low-friction, low-overhead capitalism, in which market information will be plentiful and transaction costs low.” This vision of the future initially fuelled enthusiasm for online business-to-consumer (B2C) retailing, but after a while many observers realised that the B2B market was of a vastly larger scale. B2B e-commerce was KHOGWRVLJQLI\D³IXQGDPHQWDOFKDQJHLQWKHZD\ capitalism works” (Prigg, 2000; Tapscott et al., 2000). A report by AT Kearney (2001) suggested WKHHPHUJHQFHRI³GLIIHUHQWLDWHGYDOXHQHWZRUNV´ WKDWZRXOG³UHGH¿QHHQWLUHLQGXVWULHVDQGYDOXH FKDLQV´DQGWKDWWKDWHPDUNHWV³FDQGUDPDWLFDOOaffect the power balance in today’s value chain.” Partly driven by an almost ideological faith in the QDWXUHRI³PDUNHWV´WKLVSRVLWLRQDVVXPHGWKDW supply markets for corporate purchasers would be transformed: The features which stopped industrial markets behaving like the theoretical, HTXLOLEULXP¿QGLQJ PDUNHWV RI WKH QHRFODVVL-FDOPRGHOVPDOOQXPEHUVFRQVWUDLQHGÀRZVRI information, high switching costs, high barriers to entry) could be removed by the new technol-RJ\ UHDSLQJ VXEVWDQWLDO HI¿FLHQF\ JDLQV )RU these gains to be realised, however, new market LQVWLWXWLRQVZRXOGEHQHHGHGWRDFWDV³KXEV´ between buyers and sellers, and these — even if charging just a tiny fraction of the throughput — stood to reap phenomenal economic rewards. 7KHVHKXEVZHUHWREHWKH³NLOOHUDSSOLFDWLRQRI the B2B Internet revolution” (Sculley & Woods, $VDUHVXOWDQ,QWHUQHW³ODQGJUDE´HPHUJHG as entrepreneurs and existing market participants sought to establish themselves in the controlling positions in their chosen market or industry.
As time has passed, many of these new inter-mediaries have fallen by the wayside — and their fate is examined later in the chapter. However, it is important to note that there is far more to B2B e-commerce than online exchanges and marketplaces, and some organisations have DFKLHYHGVLJQL¿FDQWDGYDQWDJHWKURXJKWKHXVH RIHSURFXUHPHQWDQGWKHXVHRIVRFDOOHG³SUL-vate exchanges.” However, many organisations have struggled to develop their e-procurement or e-marketing activities, and it is interesting to explore why this might be so.
METHODOLOGY
The investigation described here used multiple research methods. First, an e-mail questionnaire ZDVVHQWWRRYHU¿UPVZKRVXSSO\WKHPDMRU UK utilities, generating 240 usable replies that
247
Innovation and B2B E-Commerce
provided information on these companies as both buyers and sellers. Second, follow-up telephone in-WHUYLHZVZLWKDGR]HQRIWKHVH¿UPVKHOSHGSURYLGH greater insight into their experiences. Third, this was complemented by nine case studies (involv-ing site visits, multi-informant interviews, and documentary analysis) involving a range of both public and private sector organisations. Fourth, the work used a database of 663 e-marketplaces and B2B hubs constructed by Meakin (2002). This ODUJHGDWDEDVHUHSUHVHQWVDVLJQL¿FDQWVOLFHRIWKH SRSXODWLRQDOWKRXJKWKHUHLVQRZD\RIGH¿QLWLYHO\ establishing what percentage it represents. Grubb (2000) estimated 1,400 B2B exchanges had been ODXQFKHG/HYDX[³HVWLPDWHGDWKRXVDQG or so.” Caspar (2000) cited an Andersen Consult-ing study that claimed there were 7,500 by late 2000. Day et al. (2003) claim a peak of 1,520. (For UHDVRQVGLVFXVVHGQH[WDOOWKHVH¿JXUHVPXVWEH taken with considerable caution).
7KHVDPSOHIRUWKHHPDLOVXUYH\ZDV¿UPV in the Utilities Vendor Database of the Achil-les Group — a B2B company whose activities concentrate on public and regulated procurement (see www.achilles.com). The pool of companies UHSUHVHQWHGDEURDGUDQJHRI¿UPVVXSSO\LQJWKH UK utilities sector. Our approach was to initially use a very brief questionnaire and to use the im-PHGLDF\RIHPDLOIHHGEDFNWRUH¿QHWKHVWUXFWXUH and examine the effect on response rates by adapt-ing the number and sequence of questions asked. The survey was administered in the autumn of 2001, and we e-mailed just over 4,000 organisa-tions, reaping over 240 usable replies (we asked ¿UPVDERXWHLWKHUWKHLUSXUFKDVLQJRUVHOOLQJRU both). However, due to our adaptive design, we did not collect data on all questions from every respondent. Participants were entered into a draw-ing to win a £50 gift voucher.
The mechanism of the questionnaire was to send a plain text e-mail, for which the answers could be simply overtyped on the reply and returned. We did this to avoid using e-mail at-WDFKPHQWVZKLFKPLJKWEHEORFNHGE\¿UPV¶
¿UHZDOOVDQGWRDYRLGWKHQHHGIRUUHVSRQGHQWV to access a Web page (we knew that for at least VRPHRIWKHVPDOOHU¿UPVLQYROYHGZKRVHDF-cess to the Internet was by standard telephone line, this requirement would be a disincentive). We also offered each participant access to the ¿QGLQJVRIWKHUHSRUWDQGDEULHIEHQFKPDUN-ing report comparing their response with other DQRQ\PRXV¿UPV`XHWRWKHH[SORUDWRU\QDWXUH of the research, we have not employed formal scaling or rigorous hypothesis testing in the in-terpretation of the data; the full analysis is still in progress. Here, we present an overview of the descriptive data, which in this case we believe is more instructive than looking for intricate correlations of scores. As we were dealing with non-anonymous returned questionnaires, we were able to additionally incorporate further public domain information about the organisations into RXUDQDO\VLVLQFOXGLQJ¿QDQFLDOLQIRUPDWLRQDQG (subject to data protection constraints) data from the original database. The median turnover of the respondents was £11m, with the median number of employees being 124.
The qualitative aspects of the research entailed a series of visits to nine organisations with a view WR¿QGLQJRXWZKLFKLVVXHVDQGDVSHFWVRI%% e-commerce at the top of their agendas; we sought (within the time and budget available) as wide a selection of organisations as possible (large, small, public, and private sector), and sought to let managers and staff in these organisations largely steer the direction of the discussions. This rather unstructured approach meant that we did not (nor did we expect) to collect commensurate or matching data from these organisations; however, it helped us engage with some of the underlying issues regarding B2B and e-procurement, which we suspect would have been rather lost if we had framed the meetings too strictly in our own terms. We believe this trade-off to be particularly important given managers’ propensity to discuss aspiration in these areas as if it were current fact, and the way in which interviewees’ responses may
248
...
- tailieumienphi.vn
nguon tai.lieu . vn