IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rbs/ijbrss/v9y2020i7p233-238.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Strategic negotiation on the performance of government’s devolved systems in Kenya

Author

Listed:
  • Carren Chepng’etich

    (Procurement & Logistics Department, Jomo Kenyatta University of Agriculture And Technology P.O Box 62000-00200 Nairobi, Kenya)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of strategic negotiation on the performance of Devolved systems of governments in Kenya, the study adopted a cross-sectional survey design using both quantitative and qualitative approaches. The target population for this study consisted of the 47 county governments in Kenya, the sample size comprised of 10 counties namely; Garissa, Kisii, Nyamira, Narok, Marsabit, Murang’a, Bomet, Nairobi, Kiambu, and Homa Bay, and the respondents ware specifically employees working under finance and procurement department. The study utilized stratified random sampling to pick 186 respondents from the finance and procurement departments. Descriptive and inferential statistics were aided by Statistical Packages for Social Sciences version 24. Hypothesis testing was carried out using multiple regression analysis and standard F tests. The study concluded that strategic negotiation practice has a moderate positive correlation with the performance of devolved systems of government in Kenya using the Pearson correlation coefficient. The study found out that if the management could adopt strategic negotiation, it could increase the performance of devolved systems of government. The study further, therefore, concluded that devolved systems of government strategically have adopted the use of negotiations for various reasons such as to obtain fair prices for the specified quality of the item, agree on delivery period, decide on the packaging, packing, and method of transportation, agree on the payment terms and many other reasons. Key Words:Strategic negotiation, performance, Devolved systems of government

Suggested Citation

  • Carren Chepng’etich, 2020. "Strategic negotiation on the performance of government’s devolved systems in Kenya," International Journal of Research in Business and Social Science (2147-4478), Center for the Strategic Studies in Business and Finance, vol. 9(7), pages 233-238, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:rbs:ijbrss:v:9:y:2020:i:7:p:233-238
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs/article/view/935/739
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.ssbfnet.com/ojs/index.php/ijrbs/article/view/935
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Theresa Metty & Rob Harlan & Quentin Samelson & Tom Moore & Thomas Morris & Ron Sorensen & Avner Schneur & Olga Raskina & Rina Schneur & Joshua Kanner & Kevin Potts & Jeffrey Robbins, 2005. "Reinventing the Supplier Negotiation Process at Motorola," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 35(1), pages 7-23, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kursad Derinkuyu & Fehmi Tanrisever & Nermin Kurt & Gokhan Ceyhan, 2020. "Optimizing Day-Ahead Electricity Market Prices: Increasing the Total Surplus for Energy Exchange Istanbul," Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, INFORMS, vol. 22(4), pages 700-716, July.
    2. Ronald M. Harstad & Aleksandar Saša Pekeč, 2008. "Relevance to Practice and Auction Theory: A Memorial Essay for Michael Rothkopf," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 38(5), pages 367-380, October.
    3. Marcelo Olivares & Gabriel Y. Weintraub & Rafael Epstein & Daniel Yung, 2012. "Combinatorial Auctions for Procurement: An Empirical Study of the Chilean School Meals Auction," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(8), pages 1458-1481, August.
    4. Hur, Daesik & Mabert, Vincent A. & Hartley, Janet L., 2007. "Getting the most out of reverse e-auction investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 403-416, August.
    5. Pham, Long & Teich, Jeffrey & Wallenius, Hannele & Wallenius, Jyrki, 2015. "Multi-attribute online reverse auctions: Recent research trends," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(1), pages 1-9.
    6. Tuomas Sandholm & David Levine & Michael Concordia & Paul Martyn & Rick Hughes & Jim Jacobs & Dennis Begg, 2006. "Changing the Game in Strategic Sourcing at Procter & Gamble: Expressive Competition Enabled by Optimization," Interfaces, INFORMS, vol. 36(1), pages 55-68, February.
    7. Thevenin, Simon & Ben-Ammar, Oussama & Brahimi, Nadjib, 2022. "Robust optimization approaches for purchase planning with supplier selection under lead time uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 303(3), pages 1199-1215.
    8. Burke, Gerard J. & Carrillo, Janice E. & Vakharia, Asoo J., 2007. "Single versus multiple supplier sourcing strategies," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 182(1), pages 95-112, October.
    9. Raventós, Pedro & Zolezzi, Sandro, 2015. "Electronic tendering of pharmaceuticals and medical devices in Chile," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2569-2578.
    10. Muñoz, Juan Carlos & Molina, Diego, 2009. "A multi-unit tender award process: The case of Transantiago," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 197(1), pages 307-311, August.
    11. Gülşah Karakaya & Murat Köksalan, 2016. "An interactive approach for Bi-attribute multi-item auctions," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 97-119, October.
    12. Sandy D. Jap & Prasad A. Naik, 2008. "BidAnalyzer: A Method for Estimation and Selection of Dynamic Bidding Models," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(6), pages 949-960, 11-12.
    13. Michael H. Rothkopf, 2007. "Decision Analysis: The Right Tool for Auctions," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 4(3), pages 167-172, September.
    14. Tung Bui & Alexandre Gachet & Hans-Juergen Sebastian, 2006. "Web Services for Negotiation and Bargaining in Electronic Markets: Design Requirements, Proof-of-Concepts, and Potential Applications to e-Procurement," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 15(5), pages 469-490, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:rbs:ijbrss:v:9:y:2020:i:7:p:233-238. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Umit Hacioglu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ssbffea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.