The Impact of Smart Digitalization Technologies on Mitigating Incremental Risks in Sustainable Sourcing Practices

Tom Okot; Marco Jarquin

doi:10.4067/S0718-27242025000100086

Authors

Tom Okot Latin American University of Science and Technology (ULACIT) https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4402-2127
Marco Jarquin Emirates Steel Arkan https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1898-5870

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242025000100086

Keywords:

Smart Digitalization Technologies, Sustainable Procurement, Risk Mitigation, Supply Chain Resilience, Operational Efficiency, Procurement Risks

Abstract

This study explores the intersection between incremental risks introduced by sustainable sourcing practices in procurement and the role of Smart Digitalization Technologies (SDT) in mitigating these risks while enhancing operational efficiency, organizational effectiveness, and resilience. A mixed-methods approach was employed, combining a structured survey of procurement professionals with in-depth interviews with SDT providers. This methodology allowed for both quantitative validation of SDT's perceived effectiveness and qualitative insights into their strategic applications. Findings reveal that while SDT significantly contribute to risk identification and mitigation particularly through supply chain visibility, automation, and data-driven decision-making challenges remain. Poor data quality, unrealistic leadership expectations, and ineffective change management limit their full potential. Additionally, SDTs have yet to prove effective in managing crises, particularly unpredictable disruptions. This research highlights SDT as a catalyst for sustainable procurement maturity, reinforcing the relationship between sustainability and operational efficiency. However, successful implementation depends on organizational readiness and strategic alignment. A practical evaluation tool is provided to assess known risks and mitigation mechanisms.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biography

Marco Jarquin, Emirates Steel Arkan

Marco Jarquin holds a Master of Business Administration (MBA) from the Faculty of Graduate Business at the Universidad Latinoamericana de Ciencia y Tecnología, Costa Rica. He is passionate about research and aims to contribute valuable insights for informed decision-making in both society and businesses. Her research interests span across business and humanities.

References

Aghajanian, S. (2018). An Empirical procurement Risk Management Framework in Supply Chain Networks: A Hybrid Approach. Industrial Engineering y Management Systems, 17(4), 730-744. https://doi.org/10.7232/iems.2018.17.4.730

Al-Kaabi, H. (2023). A Comprehensive Analysis of Public E-Procurement System: The Case of Bahrain. International Journal of Green Management and Business Studies, 3(2), 138-161. https://doi.org/10.56830/IJGMBS12202305

Almeida, R. & Ramos, P. (2023). Indirect procurement management: Maturity model development and validation. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 39(2), 120-138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jscm.2023.06.005

Aulia, D. & Isvara, W. (2021). Strategies to increase procurement maturity level using procurement maturity model to improve procurement performance. International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, 11(6), 489-501. https://doi.org/10.29322/IJSRP.11.06.2021.p11465

Barimah, A. F. (2024). Determinants of supplier risk mitigation and control in the procurement of goods and services: A review of literature. Preprints, 202409.1072.v1. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202409.1072.v1

Bednarski, L., Roscoe, S., Blome, C. & Schleper, M. C. (2023). Geopolitical disruptions in global supply chains: A state-of-the-art literature review. Production Planning y Control. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537287.2023.2286283

Changalima, I. A. & Mdee, A. E. (2023). Procurement skills and procurement performance in public organizations: The mediating role of procurement planning. Cogent Business y Management, 10(1), 2163562. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2022.2163562

Chartered Institute of procurement & Supply. (2020). procurement process. CIPS https://www.cips.org/intelligence-hub/procurement/procurement-process.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications.

Drentin, R., Khushalani, S., Kloos, C. & Misra, P. (2024). Where procurement is going next. McKinsey & Company. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/operations/our-insights/where-procurement-is-going-next

EcoVadis. (2024). Sustainable procurement is the Cornerstone for Business Resilience and Growth. Business Wire. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240222948868/en/

Escobar, F., Almeida, W. H. C. & Varajão, J. (2023). Digital transformation success in the public sector: A systematic literature review of cases, processes, and success factors. Information Polity, 28, 61-81. doi:10.3233/IP-211518

Gao, B. & Xu, Z. (2024). Adjustment of supply chain investment by transnational corporations in the Ukrainian crisis and geopolitical risks: Taking the three levels as the analytical framework. Transnational Corporations Review, 16, 200076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tncr.2024.200076

Garcia Rodríguez, M. J., Rodriguez-Montequín, V., Ballesteros-Pérez, P., Love, P. E. D. & Signor, R. (2022). Collusion detection in public procurement auctions with machine learning algorithms. Automation in Construction, 133, 104047. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2021.104047

Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (2017). Discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203793206

Gong, C. & Ribiere, V. (2021). Developing a unified definition of digital transformation. Technovation, 102, 102217. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2020.102217

Guida, M., Caniato, F., Moretto, A. & Ronchi, S. (2023). The role of artificial intelligence in the procurement process: State of the art and research agenda. Journal of Purchasing y Supply Management, 29, 100823. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2023.100823

Hald, K. S., Wiik, S. & Larssen, A. (2021). Sustainable procurement Initiatives and Their Risk-related Costs: A Framework and a Case Study Application. Measuring Business Excellence, 25(2), 230-243. https://doi.org/10.1108/MBE-04-2020-0052.

Hallikas, J., Immonen, M. & Brax, S. (2021). Digitalizing procurement: the impact of data analytics on supply chain performance. Supply Chain Management. https://doi.org/10.1108/SCM-05-2020-0201

Hillcox, A. & Sawchuk, C. (2024). The CPO Agenda: 2024 Procurement Key Issues. The Hackett Group. https://tinyurl.com/ynhxjpuu

Jama, L. A. & Mohamud, I. H. (2024). The impact of procurement practices on organizational performance: A literature review. Journal of Logistics, Informatics and Service Science, 11(1), 119-135. https://doi.org/10.33168/JLISS.2024.0108

Johnson, P. & Brown, T. (2020). Sustainable Public procurement Practices: Challenges and Opportunities in Implementation. Journal of Environmental Management, 256, 109941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.109941

Kabra, G., Srivastava, S. K. & Ghosh, V. (2023). Mapping the field of sustainable procurement: A bibliometric analysis. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 30(10), 4370-4396. https://doi.org/10.1108/BIJ-06-2022-0418

Kakwezi, P. & Nyeko, S. (2019). procurement processes and performance: Efficiency and effectiveness of the procurement function. International Journal of Social Sciences Management and Entrepreneurship, 3(1), 172-182.

Liberale, T. (2023). Digital procurement in buyer-supplier relationships: the impact on operative excellence and supplier satisfaction (Master's thesis, University of Twente). https://purl.utwente.nl/essays/97362

Liinaharja, K. (2023). Indirect procurement management: Maturity model development and validation. Turku: University of Turku. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe20231129150040

Lin, C.-C., Chang, Y.-F., Chang, C.-C. & Zheng, Y.-Z. (2020). A fair and secure reverse auction for government procurement. Sustainability, 12(20), 8567. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208567

Mensah, S. & Ameyaw, C. (2021). Sustainable procurement Practice: The Effect of procurement Officers Perceptions. International Journal of procurement Management, 14(3), 312-327. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJPM.2021.10036114

Milosavljevic, M., Radovanovic, S. & Delibasic, B. (2021). Evaluation of public procurement efficiency of the EU countries using preference learning TOPSIS method. Economic Computation and Economic Cybernetics Studies and Research, 55(3), 187-201. http://dx.doi.org/10.24818/18423264/55.3.21.12

Moura, G. L. S., Guzzo, F., Cecon, P. R., Martins Filho, S., Carneiro, A. P. S. & Nascimento, M. (2024). Comparison of Normal, Logistic, Laplace, and Student's t distributions for experimental error in the Bayesian description of dry matter accumulation in Allium sativum. Ciência Rural, 54(7), e20230056. https://doi.org/10.1590/0103-8478cr20230056

Okonta, D. E. (2023). The scientometric analysis and visualization of sustainable procurement. Heliyon, 9(10). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20985

Okot, T. (2025). Integrating Artificial Intelligence and Public Educational Reforms: Advancing Education 4.0 in Costa Rica. In M. Sposato & E. Carlos Dittmar (Eds.), Transforming Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics With AI (pp. 393-432). IGI Global Scientific Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9894

Okot, T., Madrigal-Mendez, P., & Solorzano-Arias, D. (2023). The Internet of Things (IoT) for Sustainability: A Framework for Costa Rica. Journal of technology management & innovation, 18(4), 3-17. https://dx.doi.org/10.4067/S0718-27242023000400003

Othman, R. & Zakaria, H. (2024). Employees' perceived risk management in public procurement and finance: Evidence in Malaysia. Journal of Public procurement and Finance, 15(2), 205-223. https://doi.org/10.1080/xxxxxx

Schuh, C., Raudabaugh, J. L., Kromoser, R., Strohmer, M. F., Triplat, A., Pearce, J., & Pearce, J. (2017). The Purchasing Chessboard (pp. 49-206). Springer New York.

Seppäläinen, K. (2024). Sustainability Risk Management in Public Procurement: A Pathway to Responsible Governance, Lappeenranta-La University of Technology LUT. LUT Business School. https://urn.fi/URN:NBN:fi-fe202402289042

Srai, J. S. & Lorentz, H. (2019). Developing design principles for the digitalisation of purchasing and supply management. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 25(1), 78-98. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pursup.2018.07.001

Sundarasen, S., Zyznarska-Dworczak, B. & Goel, S. (2024). Sustainability reporting and greenwashing: A bibliometrics assessment in G7 and non-G7 nations. Cogent Business y Management, 11(1), 2320812. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311975.2024.2320812

United Nations Global Compact. (2023). Unlocking the Global Pathways to Resilience, Growth, and Sustainability for 2030: The 12th United Nations Global Compact-Accenture CEO Study. UN Global Compact. https://unglobalcompact.org/library/6103

Virkkala, P., Saarela, M., Hänninen, K., Kujala, J. & Simunaniemi, A.-M. (2020). Business maturity models for small and medium-sized enterprises: A systematic literature review. Management, 15(2), 137-155. https://doi.org/10.26493/1854-4231.15.137-155

Vladislavovna, B. I. (2021). Applying an Integrated methodology of Supplier Selection with a Kraljic Matrix-based Strategic Decision-Making Tool. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 12(6).

Yang, Z., Wang, X. & Su, C. (2006). A review of research methodologies in international business. International Business Review, 15(5), 601-617. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2006.08.003

Yevu, S. K., Yu, A. T. W. & Darko, A. (2021). Digitalization of construction supply chain and procurement in the built environment: Emerging technologies and opportunities for sustainable processes. Journal of Cleaner Production, 329, 129093. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2021.129093