Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Industrial Marketing Management

When purchasing professional services supports innovation

Simona D'Antone a,⁎,1, Juliana Bonomi Santos b,1
a
Kedge Business School, Domaine de Luminy BP 921, 13 288, Marseille cedex 9, France
b
Centro Universitário da FEI, Management Department, Rua Tamandaré, 688, Liberdade, São Paulo 01525-00, Brazil

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper explores the potential contribution that purchasing KIBS may have on innovation at the buying firm. It
Received 26 October 2015 integrates the results of a systematic literature review on purchasing KIBS with literatures respectively on pur-
Received in revised form 19 February 2016 chasing and KIBS contribution to innovation. Based on the outcomes of an extensive study of the literature, a the-
Accepted 21 April 2016
oretical framework is proposed in order to understand what could boost innovation outcomes of purchasing
Available online 27 May 2016
KIBS, especially for the buying firms. The framework suggests observing the KIBS triad configuration, i.e. the re-
Keywords:
lationship between KIBS providers, the purchasing function and the user area within the buying firm, and its con-
KIBS tingencies and characteristics. Overall, the paper suggests that the way KIBS are purchased can influence their
Professional services effect on the innovation they generate, offers insights on aspects that need to be considered to increase potential
Purchasing innovation outcomes, and draws attention to the strategic role that purchasing can play in this context. In this
Integration way, it moves beyond the debate on purchasing involvement in NPD (new product development) and shows an-
Innovation other domain (KIBS services) in which purchasing can contribute to the development of innovation.
© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction involve a design or consulting effort that is followed by a stage in

Over the past decades, various scholars, marketers and policy
makers have contended that two main aspects characterize contempo-
rary economy: knowledge dependence and outsourcing.
In the knowledge-based economy we live in nowadays (Drucker,
1999), value creation, technical and scientific advance (Powell &
Snellman, 2004), and innovation opportunities rely greatly on intellec-
tual capabilities and knowledge. Such capabilities and knowledge
bases are so diverse and fast-changing that firms increasingly opt to ex-
pand the scope of their outsourcing activities and move out of a model
where knowledge, technologies and competencies are developed
based on internal R&D to obtain them from a network of collaborating
partners (Chesbrough, 2003).
Professional services or KIBS (Knowledge Intensive Business Ser-
vices), have a crucial role in this context, as they can be key sources of
intellectual value-added capabilities and innovation for their customers.
KIBS are complex services provided to other firms and public organiza-
tions by firms that employ a highly qualified work force (Muller, 2001;
Muller & Doloreux, 2009). The knowledge and experience embodied in
human capital are the main resources of KIBS firms (Muller & Doloreux,
2009) and are used to provide professional judgement and/or deliver
new knowledge, technologies, products and services to customers (He
& Wong, 2009; Hertog, 2000). In addition, KIBS deliveries necessarily
⁎ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: simona.dantone@kedgebs.com (S. D'Antone).
1
Both authors contributed equally to this article.
which the offering is implemented. Both stages, but especially the earli-
er one, are marked by high levels of creativity and interaction between
buyers and providers (Lehrer, Ordanini, DeFillippi, & Miozzo, 2012).
These conditions create a fruitful environment for the creation and ex-
change of knowledge and ideas (Hertog, 2000; Muller & Zenker, 2001)
that, in its turn, can lead to additional gains and emergent innovation.2
KIBS can take a variety of forms and be classified into 1) advisory ser-
vices, such as legal activities, book-keeping and auditing activities, mar-
ket research, business and management activities; and 2) technical
services, such as computer-related activities, engineering and architec-
tural activities, technical testing and analysis (Koschatzky & Zenker,
1999). Advisory services are also commonly named “professional ser-
vices” or professional KIBS (p-KIBS) and seen as intensive users of tech-
nology, such it is the case for marketing or advertising services (Miles
et al., 1995). Technical services, on the other hand, are also known as
“new technology-based services” or technology-KIBS (t-KIBS) and are
distinguished from professional services because they do not simply
use but also develop and carry technology, such as in the case of soft-
ware design and other computer-related activities (Miles et al., 1995)
(see Appendix A for an example of KIBS classification).
2
Given KIBS characteristics, they can be considered complex purchases (c.f. Dhar,
Menon, & Maach, 2004). However, not all complex purchases are KIBS. KIBS deliveries nec-
essarily involve a design or consulting service (see Santos (2013) for detailed definition of
KIBS). Some purchases are complex, because they require high investments, have several
implementation stages, and involve multiple constituencies, but do not involve design ef-
forts and thus cannot be considered KIBS.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2016.05.024
0019-8501/© 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
The background presented helps to understand why KIBS represent
one of the fastest-growing sectors (7% in value in 2013) of world trade
(WTO, 2014) and are considered as one of the main engines for future
growth within the European Union (European Commission, 2007: 7).
“The four main regulated professions (legal, accounting, architectural
and engineering) represent, on average, 5.3% of EU total value added
and 10% of EU market services value added” (Canton, Ciriaci, & Solera,
2014, p. 13). KIBS services globally generate annual sales in excess of
$3 trillion, they represent 7 to 8% of total service sector revenue in ad-
vanced economies and about 3% of all revenue globally (McKinsey
Global Institute, 2012).
Purchasing KIBS is becoming an activity increasingly common in
companies. This is in line with the general outsourcing trend according
to which the value that stems from the supply chain counts approxi-
mately 80% in many industries with an outsourcing ratio for companies
which often overcomes 90% (Johnsen, Howard, & Miemczyk, 2014). As a
consequence, there is a growing body of literature on purchasing KIBS.
Research in this field has highlighted the peculiarities and specific
challenges characterizing the purchasing of such services. Purchasing
KIBS, it has been argued, involves a variety of risks due to the cre-
dence/experience nature of KIBS (Day & Barksdale, 1994; Geisler &
Hoang, 1992; Wittreich, 1966). Moreover, the relevance of the relational
rather than transactional aspects in purchasing KIBS has been highlight-
ed (Sonmez & Moorhouse, 2010) with a lot of attention devoted to the
controversial role of the purchasing function in processes of purchasing
KIBS (O'Mahoney, Heusinkveld, & Wright, 2013; Sieweke, Birkner, &
Mohe, 2012; Werr & Pemer, 2007).
However, studies on KIBS purchase remain mainly anchored to the
exploration of the characteristics of the purchasing process (i.e. risks, re-
lations and involved actors) with scarce attention to its effects for the
buying firm and the relation between the purchasing processes adopted
and related effects. In this vein, little reference has also been made to the
impacts of purchasing KIBS on the development of innovation for the
buying organization. This seems problematic since buying firms, as
discussed, are increasingly interested in and dependent upon KIBS capa-
bilities and the innovation these capabilities can foster. The lack of focus
on the effects of purchasing KIBS also contrasts with the recognition of
the strategic role of the purchasing function for the company and there-
fore with its contribution to firm's competitiveness and performance
(Johnsen et al., 2014). Therefore, it seems that research on the purchase
of KIBS has been neglecting important trends and missing out on the op-
portunity to guide companies on how they can effectively purchase KIBS
in order to foster their innovation gains.
Two different bodies of literature can be of help in this sense. On the
one hand, literature on innovation purchase, which involves studies on
supplier and customer involvement in new product and service devel-
opment projects (e.g. Stanko & Bonner, 2013; Tsai, Joe, Ding, & Lin,
2013) and the public procurement of innovation (e.g. Hommen &
Rolfstam, 2009; Uyarra & Flanagan, 2010), shows that the way purchas-
ing processes are organized can have different impacts on innovation
generated in the buying firm. These studies, nevertheless, do not focus
on the KIBS purchasing context. On the other hand, the KIBS literature
explores the crucial role of KIBS in fostering innovation. However, this
second stream of literature is usually concerned with economic aspects,
Table 1
The research gap identified.
Streams of literature Object of purchasing examined
New product Public
development procurement of
projects innovation
Literature on purchasing KIBS ✕ ✕
Literature on purchasing innovation ✓ ✓
Literature on KIBS in innovation systems ✕ ✓
173
such as knowledge spillovers across sectors, contributions to local and
national innovation systems or the number and type of KIBS firms
needed in a location to stimulate innovation in the local economies
(He & Wong, 2009; Hertog, 2000; Windrum & Tomlinson, 1999) while
neglecting the innovation generated at the buying firm level.
Both research streams provide valuable insights, but these are not
fully integrated with literature on KIBS purchase and, thus, cannot
completely explain KIBS purchasing effects for buying firms, especially
in terms of innovation. Table 1 highlights this research gap showing
the similarities between these three research streams (KIBS purchase,
innovation purchase and KIBS in innovation systems) and pointing out
unexplored issues.
We therefore decided to explore the missing link between purchas-
ing KIBS and the consequent effects at the buying firm, specifically
focusing on the innovation effects. In other terms, in this work we sug-
gest that knowing how to effectively organize processes of purchasing
KIBS can increase innovation returns for the buying firm. Gaining such
overall understanding is even more relevant if it is considered that pur-
chasing KIBS is central to contemporary economy.
In order to achieve that, we integrate the results of a systematic
literature review on purchasing KIBS with literatures respectively
on purchasing innovation and KIBS roles in innovation systems.
Through the extensive study and integration of the literatures exam-
ined, we aimed to answer two research questions: RQ1: What as-
pects of the KIBS purchasing process can influence the innovation
generated with the acquisition? RQ2: How should buying firms con-
sider these aspects of the KIBS purchasing process to improve their
innovation returns? We conducted our systematic literature review
considering combinations of the three topics, i.e. KIBS, purchasing
and innovation. Knowledge obtained has led to the conceptualiza-
tion of a framework, which shows factors that need to be considered
during the KIBS purchase to generate innovation.
The contribution of this research is fourfold. First, we add to the cur-
rent knowledge on purchasing KIBS by shifting attention also to the ef-
fects of the KIBS purchasing processes and by exploring the relation
between KIBS purchasing processes and related effects on innovation
at the buying firm. Second, we raise evidence on the importance of
the relationship between KIBS providers, KIBS users and the purchasing
function, i.e. the KIBS triad, to favour innovation outputs at the buying
firm when KIBS are purchased. Third, we contribute to the debate on
the integration of the purchasing department into KIBS sourcing and
reconcile extant contrasting positions by providing a set of conditions
that reduce a negative cost-driven purchasing orientation and let a
more strategic and value-adding orientation prevail. Finally, this re-
search provides insights for practitioners to use their purchasing re-
sources to innovate and identifies a series of research opportunities
for developing future works.
This paper is organized as follows: next section explains the research
process and method adopted to achieve our research objectives and to
answer our research questions. Then, the outcomes of the literature
analysis are presented and are followed by the presentation of the the-
oretical framework and a discussion on its main implications for prac-
tice and future research. The final section concludes summing up the
main contributions and limitations of this research.
Focus on characteristics of Analysis of effects Relation between purchasing
the purchasing processes processes and innovation
KIBS On system On innovation at
effects explored
innovation the buying firm
✓ ✓ ✕ ✓ (limited) ✕ (unexplored)
✕ ✓ ✕ ✓ ✓
✓ ✕ ✓ ✕ ✕
174 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
2. Research process and method
2.1. Research process
This research summarizes and integrates extant literatures as a way
to develop a conceptual contribution and provide a comprehensive
framework, which delineates contingencies and characteristics in the
process of purchasing KIBS that can contribute to innovation outcomes
in the buying firm (for a typology of conceptual contributions in mar-
keting studies see MacInnis, 2011). As depicted in Fig. 1, the research
process that we adopted followed three main stages. Stage 1 consisted
in the systematic review of literatures concerning “purchasing contribu-
tion to innovation” and “KIBS contribution to innovation”. This first step
allowed to identify a list of themes, which served as categories to ana-
lyse and interpret literature on “purchasing KIBS” studied in the next
phase. Stage 2, indeed, consisted in the systematic review of literature
specifically focusing on “purchasing KIBS” and the use of qualitative
content analysis to delineate the main issues concerning the purchase
of KIBS and to identify aspects of the KIBS purchasing process that can
have an impact on innovation in the buying firm (RQ1). Finally, Stage
3 consisted in the integration of the main insights obtained from Stage
1 and Stage 2 in order to provide definite answer to our two research
questions.
The literature integration pursued in the third phase, consisted
mainly in “accommodating extant knowledge” (MacInnis, 2011,
p. 138) on how KIBS and purchasing processes, separately, can contrib-
ute to innovation in the specific context of purchasing KIBS and “amal-
gamating” insights emerged from our literatures review that offer an
answer to our research questions. Novel insights were summed up
into a conceptual framework (Fig. 2).
2.2. Research method
The systematic literature review and qualitative content analysis
methods were used in our research process. The former method was
employed to collect texts published on the purchase of KIBS and innova-
tion in an extensive and systematic way (c.f. Tranfield, Denyer, & Smart,
2003; Wolf, 2008). We searched for texts in five widely used databases:
EBSCO, Emerald, JSTOR, Proquest and Science Direct. In order to obtain
texts relevant to this research, we first defined the words related to
Fig. 1. Diagram illustrating the 3 stages of the research process adopted.
the main topics in focus, i.e. KIBS, purchasing and innovation. These
terms were the following: “Innovation”, “KIBS”, “Professional Services”,
“Solution”, “Business Services”, “Purchasing”, “Procurement”, “Sourc-
ing” and “Buying”. Then, we conducted three sets of searches using
combinations of these words, as listed below:
• “KIBS” OR “Professional Services” OR “Solution” OR “Business Ser-
vices” AND “Purchasing” OR “Procurement” OR “Sourcing” OR “Buy-
ing”
• “KIBS” OR “Professional Services” OR “Solution” OR “Business Ser-
vices” AND “Innovation”
• “Purchasing” OR “Procurement” OR “Sourcing” OR “Buying” AND
“Innovation”
The searches were limited to full-texts in English, but no time frame
restrictions were applied. Based on the results of these initial searches,
we decided to do a final search combining the words “Customer”, “Sup-
plier”, “Buyer”, “Seller” with “Innovation”. During the searches, the ab-
stracts of the papers were carefully read and only papers relating to
KIBS and purchasing, KIBS and innovation, and innovation and purchas-
ing were selected. The process described lead to the selection of 228
papers.
Each author then read a sample of 10 papers and used information
on their unit of analysis, objectives and core contribution in order to
classify the papers in three sub-groups. The sub-groups were 1) the
role of KIBS in innovation; 2) the role of purchasing in innovation; and
3) the purchasing of KIBS. When it was not possible to classify the
paper just based on the abstract, the introduction and the methodology
sections were also considered to classify the paper. If the paper did not
fit into one of these three groups it was excluded from the analysis. Pa-
pers with no impact factor and ranked 2 or less in the ABS rank were
also excluded. After this screening process, 86 papers remained in the
sample to be analysed. The first group on the role of KIBS in innovation
included 8 papers, the second group on the role of purchasing in innova-
tion included 24 papers, and the third group included 54 papers.
We then entered in the first stage of our research process and the pa-
pers on the role of KIBS in innovation and on the role of purchasing in
innovation were reviewed with the objective of identifying important
topics related to the relationship between “KIBS and innovation” and
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186 175

between “purchasing and innovation”. This analysis and a brainstorm-
ing between the researchers led to the selection of 13 themes consid-
ered important to answer the research questions. Table 2 presents
these themes; the first nine themes listed in the table came from the
two streams of research reviewed and later four were added by the re-
searchers based on classifications of innovation in management studies.
Then, in the second stage of the research process, we used these
themes as categories of a qualitative content analysis used to systemat-
ically analyse the 54 papers included in the third group, which covered
at least some aspect of the KIBS purchase. Qualitative content analy-
sis involves the codification of textual material and the qualitative
interpretation of the categories created (Abbasi & Nilsson, 2012)
and was used to identify whether this literature could reveal how
the purchase of KIBS can support innovation. Each author analysed
half of the papers in the sample. However, throughout the classifica-
tion and analysis process, the two authors exchanged their classifica-
tions in order to compare their results and solve eventual doubts.
Finally, we used the analysis grid to compare the papers across the
different categories of analysis and make sense of content of the 54
papers.
During the second stage, we identified that only eight papers out of
54 covered aspects related to how the purchase of KIBS can lead to inno-
vation. Most of the papers were mainly concerned with the purchase of
KIBS. Furthermore, few themes covered in the literature on KIBS in inno-
vation and on the role of purchasing in innovation were explored in the
KIBS purchasing literature. They were the involvement of the purchas-
ing function in the KIBS purchase and the orientation and maturity of
the purchasing department. Other topics on the purchase of KIBS - like
the selection of KIBS, factors that affect the involvement of purchasing,
and the need for integration between the parties involved in the KIBS
purchase - however emerged from the analysis of the paper and were
further explored.
Given this context, in the third stage, we used logical reasoning and
the knowledge acquired in the previous phases of the research to devise
a framework on how KIBS purchase can lead to innovation at the buying
firm. The topics listed in the framework came from the integration of
themes identified in first and second research phases.
3. Stage 1: purchasing and KIBS contribution to innovation
In this section, we provide an overview of the role that purchasing
and KIBS, separately, play in innovation.
3.1. Purchasing and its role in innovation
Purchasing has evolved from a clerical and cost-oriented function
into a critical and strategic priority for companies (Ellram & Carr,
1994). The potential contribution of purchasing to innovation has
been identified since the earliest acknowledgments of its strategic
role: occupying a boundary-spanning position, purchasing gains visibil-
ity over the business environment, acquires knowledge about cost,
availability and reliability of new potential technologies and suppliers
in the market, and redistributes these information across different func-
tions in the buying company (Burt & Soukup, 1985; Mogee & Bean,
1976; Williams & Smith, 1990).
The shift towards the open innovation paradigm has drawn further
attention to the role of purchasing in innovation (Chesbrough, 2003).
Indeed, within an environment characterised by open innovation, com-
panies move out of a model where technologies and competencies are
developed internally in protected laboratories, and decide to obtain
them from a network of collaborating partners. Since suppliers are re-
framed as critical sources for innovation, the role of purchasers changed
to one in which selecting and managing the relations with suppliers is
crucial.
The involvement in new product development (NPD) project is the
only context in which literature considers purchasers' contributions to
innovation (to our knowledge the only exception is the work of
Wynstra, Weggeman, & Van Weele, 2003 – see Table 3). In this context,
the integration of purchasing in the NPD team has proved to have pos-
itive effects on the success of the innovation (Luzzini, Amann, Caniato,
Essig, & Ronchi, 2015; McGinnis & Vallopra, 1999, 2001; Mendez &
Pearson, 1994; Nijssen, Biemans, & De Kort, 2002; Tracey, 2004). More-
over, when suppliers need to be involved at an early stage in NPD pro-
jects, an early purchasing involvement (EPI) is also needed (Dröge,
Jayaram, & Vickery, 2004; Lakemond, van Echtelt, & Wynstra, 2001;
McGinnis & Vallopra, 1999; Wynstra, Van Weele, & Axelsson, 2000).
Areas of purchasing contribution to NPD have been distinguished
into operational and strategic aspects. This distinction reflects the way
the purchasing function itself is organized in most innovative firms
where a ‘life-cycle sourcing’ team exists along with an ‘advanced sourc-
ing’ team (Schiele, 2010). The ‘life-cycle sourcing’ team usually consists
of purchasers with a strong commercial focus and specialists in a partic-
ular commodity; integrated into all NPD projects, this team intervenes
in the production phase managing relations with suppliers. On the
other hand, the ‘advanced sourcing’ team is a distinct organizational
unit composed of engineers or purchasers who have developed a strong

Table 2
Analysis grid: categories used to analyse the sample of 54 papers on KIBS purchase.

Themes Definition

Role of purchasing function Main activities executed by the purchasing function

Orientation of purchasing function
Maturity of purchasing function
Processes of purchasing
Type of KIBS
Type of KIBS contribution to innovation
Interaction
Extent of use
Geographical proximity
Main purchasing contribution identified
Performance of innovation
Innovation generated
Innovation maturity
Evaluating costs/benefits of suppliers
Identifying the problem to be solved
Evaluating method proposed
Evaluating suppliers reputation
Evaluate the capabilities of the service firm via success story
Evaluate knowledge and skill of sellers
Type of activity the purchasing function is involved, i.e. project management, product management, supplier interface management,
development management (based on Wynstra et al., 2003)
What aspect of purchasing was considered, e.g. life-cycle sourcing, advanced sourcing, purchasing department, and buying centres.
Type of process purchasing is involved, i.e. Prioritizing, Mobilizing, Coordinating, Informing, Timing (based on Wynstra et al., 2003)
p-KIBS/t-KIBS
Description of how suppliers contributed to innovation process, i.e. by bringing innovation, by helping in the development of
innovation, by sharing knowledge
Description of how buyers and customers interacted during the service provision
New supplier to customer or extant supplier to customer
Importance of the co-location of buyers and supplier
Description of the outcomes generated due to the involvement of the purchasing function
Type of innovation outcome generated, e.g. lower development costs or time-to-market
Product innovation/process innovation
Radical/incremental
176 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186

technical background over time; this team then focuses on developing
relationships with new rather than extant suppliers.
Among the purchasing contribution to operational aspects of NPD,
the interfacing role has been particularly spotlighted, since this facili-
tates the buyer-supplier relationship that is of pivotal importance for
the exchange of knowledge and the development of innovation
(Luzzini et al., 2015; Nijssen et al., 2002). Also, overall operation project
assistance has been cited among other purchasing contributions
(Nijssen et al., 2002).
The effectiveness of purchasing across these contributions depends
on aspects of the purchasing function maturity, such as its knowledge
(i.e. knowledge of the external supplier environment, of the internal
customer's environment, and of the firm's strategic goals) and skills
(i.e. analytical, communication, and general management skills), the re-
sources available to purchasing, and the integration of purchasing with
other functions inside the firm (Castaldi, Ten Kate, & Den Braber, 2011;
Luzzini et al., 2015). Moreover, it has been pinpointed that in contexts of
technological uncertainty and immaturity of the industry, suppliers' in-
volvement in NPD is less appropriate and the relevance of extant long-
term suppliers' relationships decreases (Johnsen, 2009; Johnsen,
Phillips, Caldwell, & Lewis, 2006), therefore, in these situations also
the relevance of the purchasing role in NPD diminishes.
Wynstra et al. (2003), provide a comprehensive classification of the
purchasing's roles in NPD identified in literature. The rationalization
role allows the firm to get competitive advantage minimizing total
costs of production; the structuring role concerns purchasing influence
over the structure of the supplier network, for instance balancing in
terms of dependence on suppliers and inclusion of newly established
suppliers along with old ones; the development role relates to the tech-
nological alignment between the firm and the supplier network, so to
favour exploitation of suppliers' technical competencies and generate
suppliers' interest in developing products corresponding to firm's inter-
nal needs.
Moreover, Wynstra et al. (2003) have the merit of proposing to shift
from a short-term NPD project perspective to a long-term and strategic
NPD process view, elaborating a framework that broadens the palette of
purchasing contributions in product development. Far from being limit-
ed to managing supplier involvement in single development projects,
the model encompasses various purchasing key processes, activities
and areas of integration. The framework moves from ex-post project-
based measures of purchasing integration value (e.g. reducing product
and development costs, reducing development time, and increasing
product quality) to a tool that allows identifying ex-ante the required
level of purchasing integration according to its potential contribution
to the process.
Public procurement represents another stream of research where in-
creased interest on the purchasing contribution to innovation has re-
cently developed (see Table 4). “Public procurement of innovation” is
the term currently used in this stream of literature to identify “purchas-
ing activities carried out by public agencies that lead to innovation”
(Rolfstam, 2012, p. 303).
While in business purchasing literature the focus is mainly on the ef-
fects that purchasing involvement generates on innovation and
especially NPD for buyers, in the public procurement literature the
focus is on the purchasing of innovations from the market and its effects
on innovation for the industry and networks. Based on earlier studies il-
lustrating that the state often acts as a lead user in stimulating innova-
tion (Dalpé, DeBresson, & Xiaoping, 1992), the central idea is that
demand from public organizations can be used as an engine for the de-
velopment and diffusion of innovations, even if the primary objective is
not to enhance the development of new products, but to target func-
tions that satisfy human needs or solve societal problems (Edquist &
Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, 2012). Drawing on previous relevant literature
on the theme (Edler, 2009; Hommen & Rolfstam, 2009; Uyarra &
Flanagan, 2010), Edquist and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia (2012) propose a
taxonomy to classify innovation procurement based on two dimen-
sions: (1) the user of the resulting product and (2) the character of
the innovation. According to the first dimension innovation procure-
ment is direct when the procuring organization is also the end user
or catalytic when the procuring agency acts as a “buyer” for the ben-
efit of a third end-user. According to the second dimension, three
types of innovation procurement are identified: pre-commercial,
when (expected) research results are procured and no product is in-
volved in the purchasing (it may however involve the development
of a product prototype); adaptive, when the product or system pro-
cured is new only to the geographical area of procurement, so that
innovation concerns incremental adaptation to the specific local
conditions; developmental, when completely new to the world
products or systems are created as a result of the procurement
process.

Table 3
Main themes discussed in literature on the role of purchasing in innovation (business companies).

Aspect analysed Main themes Description Authors

Context of analysis of purchasing
contribution to Innovation
Effects
Types of contribution
Moderators of contribution
Purchasing involvement in
new product development
(NPD) projects.
Positive effects on the success
of the buyers' innovation.
Role of the purchasing
function
Orientation of the purchasing
function
Maturity of purchasing
function
Maturity of the industry and
technological uncertainty
Papers focus on different aspects related to the involvement All studies analysed, the only exception is
of purchasing in NPD projects the work of Wynstra et al. (2003).
Positive effect associated with the involvement of the Luzzini et al. (2015), McGinnis and
purchasing function in NPD projects Vallopra (1999, 2001), Mendez and
Pearson (1994), Nijssen et al. (2002),
Tracey (2004).
Contribution to operational aspects of NPD, e.g. the Luzzini et al. (2015), Nijssen et al. (2002),
interfacing role; the overall operation project assistance. Wynstra et al. (2003).
Short-term orientation to contribute to the NPD project with Schiele (2010), Wynstra et al. (2003).
a more commercial focus vs. long-term orientation aimed at
developing relationships and purchasing strategies to support
innovation
Knowledge of the external supplier environment, of the Castaldi et al. (2011), Johnsen et al.
internal customer's environment, and of the firm's strategic (2006), Johnsen (2009), Luzzini et al.
goals; analytical, communication, and general management (2015).
skills; the resources available to purchasing; the integration
of purchasing with other functions inside the firm.
Suppliers' involvement in NPD is less appropriate and the
relevance of extant long-term suppliers' relationships
decreases therefore also the relevance of the purchasing role
in NPD diminishes.
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186 177

3.2. Knowledge intensive business services and their role in innovation
(systems)
Knowledge-intensive business services (KIBS), it has been argued,
play a vital role in regional and national innovation systems (Hertog,
2000; Miles et al., 1995 – see Table 5), due to their intrinsic characteris-
tics. KIBS are offerings that have knowledge as the main input and are
supplied to business markets (Muller & Doloreux, 2009). In these ser-
vices, customers come to KIBS providers because they have a specific
need for which there is no available offering in the market. KIBS em-
ployees then use their knowledge to diagnose customers' problems
and needs, design solutions (Mills & Moshavi, 1999) and, if the case, im-
plement them (Bettencourt, Ostrom, Brown, & Roundtree, 2002). In this
sense, KIBS customers do not buy products or services, but solutions
composed of a plan of how to address customers´ needs (Hertog,
2000) and of the customized products and services needed to imple-
ment it.
As such, KIBS can be sources of innovation for their customers, as
they can support them in their innovation efforts, by helping out with
the introduction of new products, services and technologies or with
the implementation of new organizational models. KIBS firms can also
use their knowledge and experience to co-create an original solution to-
gether with the customer (Gadrey & Gallouj, 1998). For example, a pro-
vider of solutions for call centres designs and implements a bespoke call
centre operation for the customer (Hertog, 2000) or a consulting com-
pany develops and implements, together with a food retailer, the e-
commerce side of the business.
KIBS can also have a more indirect role in promoting innovation in
their customers, acting as facilitators of innovation efforts. For instance,
KIBS can help customers get access to new sources of information and
develop capabilities that are relevant for the development of new prod-
ucts, services and organizational processes. Lau and Lo (2015) identified
that business units buying KIBS have more interaction with other
branches, their headquarters and third parties (e.g. customers) to ac-
quire new knowledge. Yam, Lo, Tang, and Lau (2011) also showed
that the use of KIBS stimulates buying companies to use technical re-
ports, patent databases, and scientific publications as additional sources
of information and knowledge. Still according to these authors, KIBS
firms help their customers develop the capability to allocate human re-
sources and money efficiently to innovation activities, which in turn im-
proves the sales performance of technological innovations.
Furthermore, KIBS can be sources of key innovation inputs for cus-
tomers, i.e. new knowledge and ideas (He & Wong, 2009; Hertog,
2000; Muller & Zenker, 2001). This happens because of the nature of
the delivery process of KIBS firms. In order to define and implement so-
lutions, KIBS providers use their existing knowledge bases. However, in
many cases, they have to acquire new knowledge that is not owned by
the firm or its employees (Muller & Zenker, 2001). Providers may learn
new methods and processes (Nachum, 1999) and/or hire individuals
with knowledge on a new area. During the service delivery, KIBS pro-
viders use their “new” and existent knowledge bases to solve the prob-
lem of the customer and, though the interaction between customers
and providers, knowledge is partially transferred to customers (Muller
& Zenker, 2001). Such knowledge can then lead to future innovation ef-
forts within the customer business.
Given KIBS firms abilities to combine and adapt knowledge bases to
produce solutions to customers´ problems, these service providers reuse
ideas, skills and tools developed in one sector or company to serve other
sectors and/or companies. The transference of knowledge between cus-
tomers and KIBS providers then enables knowledge to spill over across
firms, economic sectors and even countries (Windrum & Tomlinson,
1999). For this reason, KIBS are considered carriers of innovation across
companies, sectors and countries (Hertog, 2000; Miles et al., 1995).
The ability of KIBS providers to foster innovation in regional and na-
tional innovation systems, however, seems to depend on certain condi-
tions. KIBS firms differ in relation to how they use and develop
knowledge and technologies. Professional KIBS, or professional services,
are KIBS delivered by professionals (Miles et al., 1995). These services
are provided by individuals that own very specific knowledge bases,
e.g. legal doctrines and principles follow specific codes of conduct and
ethics and are accredited and regulated by the relevant authorities
(Løwendahl, Revang, & Fosstenløkken, 2001). These KIBS providers
are considered users of existing knowledge, as they rely on existing
systems and technologies to deliver their solutions or propose
diagnosis (Miles et al., 1995). Technology-based KIBS (t-KIBS), like
engineering, R&D and bespoke software development, on the other
hand, use their knowledge to create new ideas and develop technol-
ogy of various kinds (Miles et al., 1995). As such, t-KIBS provider can,
or should, play a more active role in developing and carrying
innovation.
In addition, Doloreux and Shearmur (2013) show that, although the
use of KIBS can lead to more fruitful innovation outcomes, the type of
KIBS and the extent to which customers use KIBS plays an important
role in determining these outcomes. Furthermore, KIBS firms depend
considerably on their geographical proximity with customers to deliver
good quality services and to get established in the market (Koch &

Table 4
Main themes discussed in literature on the role of purchasing in innovation (public procurement).

Aspect analysed Main themes Description Authors

Effects Positive effects on the innovation Positive effect associated with public demand for new Dalpé et al. (1992), Edler (2009), Edquist and
for the industry and networks. products, services and technologies Zabala-Iturriagagoitia (2012), Hommen and
Rolfstam (2009), Uyarra and Flanagan (2010)
Types of contribution Public procurement as a source of The state demand stimulates the development and Edler (2009), Edquist and
innovation diffusion of innovation even when the primary objective is Zabala-Iturriagagoitia (2012), Hommen and
not to develop innovation rather to satisfy human needs Rolfstam (2009), Uyarra and Flanagan (2010)
and solve social problems.
Classification of procurement Depending on the user of the Direct when the procuring organization is also the end user Edquist and Zabala-Iturriagagoitia (2012)
innovation resulting product Catalytic when the procuring agency acts as a “buyer” for
the benefit of a third end-user.
Depending on the character of the Pre-commercial, when (expected) research results are
innovation procured and no product is involved in the purchasing (it
may however involve the development of a product
prototype);
Adaptive, when the product or system procured is new
only to the geographical area of procurement, so that
innovation concerns incremental adaptation to the specific
local conditions;
Developmental, when completely new to the world
products or systems are created as a result of the
procurement process.
178 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186

Table 5
Main themes discussed in literature on the role of KIBS in innovation (systems).

Aspect analysed Main themes Description Authors

Effects
Types of contribution
Moderators of contribution
Positive in regional and
national innovation systems
KIBS as sources of innovation
KIBS as facilitators of
innovation
KIBS as carriers of innovation
Type of KIBS
Interaction
Extent of use
Geographical proximity
Positive effect associated with the types of contribution Hertog (2000), Miles et al. (1995)
When KIBS support customers in their innovation efforts, Gadrey and Gallouj (1998), He and Wong
customers and providers combine their knowledge and (2009), Hertog (2000), Muller and Zenker
experience to create an original solution. (2001)
KIBS stimulate access to new sources of information (e.g. new He and Wong (2009), Hertog (2000), Lau and Lo
branches or documents) (2015), Muller and Zenker (2001), Yam et al.
KIBS as sources of new knowledge and ideas for customers (in (2011)
relation to the nature of the delivery process).
KIBS develop capabilities (e.g. develop the capability to allocate
resources efficiently to innovation activities, which in turn
improves the sales performance of technological innovations).
Knowledge and solutions are adapted from one Hertog (2000), Miles et al. (1995), Windrum
sector/company to another, generating new ideas and Tomlinson (1999)
t-KIBS (technology-based KIBS): KIBS that create technical Miles et al. (1995)
knowledge of various
p-KIBS (professional KIBS): KIBS delivered by professionals.
Though the interaction between customers and providers, Huggins (2011), Muller and Zenker (2001)
knowledge, ideas, skills are partially transferred between the
parties, so interaction is vital
The extent to which customers hire KIBS to support their Doloreux and Shearmur (2013)
operational activities
co-location with customers enables face-to-face interaction Huggins (2011), Koch and Stahlecker (2006)
and facilitates knowledge transfer

Stahlecker, 2006), as co-location with customers enables face-to-face
interaction and facilitates knowledge transfer (Huggins, 2011).
4. Stage 2: aspects and contribution of purchasing KIBS to innovation
In the two streams of literature analysed there is evidence that both,
purchasing and KIBS can contribute to innovation. Both streams of re-
search, however, do not consider how the buying organization should
behave during the KIBS purchase or the extent to which the purchasing
function should get involved in the KIBS purchase in order to increase
innovation outcomes. We therefore explored the specific literature on
purchasing KIBS expecting to find more detailed insights on this matter.
The results of the qualitative content analysis, however, showed that
most of the papers limit their focus to the KIBS purchasing process,
more specifically the KIBS selection and the involvement of the purchas-
ing function in the KIBS purchase, and dedicates little attention to inno-
vation. Next, we describe the main aspects covered in the KIBS purchase
literature.
4.1. KIBS selection
Due to the credence/experience nature of KIBS services, most of the
literature mainly focuses on the risks and transactional costs linked to
their purchasing and, therefore, identifies in the establishment of formal
and simple purchasing selection procedures a way for reducing uncer-
tainties and limiting these risks and costs (Day & Barksdale, 1994;
Geisler & Hoang, 1992; Wittreich, 1966). The decision making process
identified in literature, which has been mainly studied in the context
of t-KIBS, is concerned with the definition of the needs of internal cli-
ents, the decisions concerning the selection of technology, and the deci-
sions concerning the selection of suppliers (Geisler & Hoang, 1992).
However, most of the literature has specifically focused on this latter
point.
Wide attention to the reduction of risks in the selection phase has
been devoted by Mitchell (1995) who specifically studies public pro-
curement of planning consulting services and identifies three main
types of risks associated to the purchasing of these services, namely,
time, financial, and psycho-social. The author also reveals that risk per-
ception is higher in pre-purchase phase/new supplier condition and
that, therefore, information provided by suppliers, checklists to help
evaluations and also suppliers' physical proximity might represent
valuable strategies to reduce risk perceptions (Mitchell, 1998b). Great
attention has been also given to the criteria used to select KIBS pro-
viders, in order to ensure an effective purchasing. The relevant criteria
identified are related to price/competitive fees, project management
competence/quality of service provided, suppliers' industry knowledge
and variety of services offered, prior experience with the supplier, and
reputation/image of the supplier (Scott & Van der Walt, 1995;
Supphellen & Gronhaug, 2003). Many contingency factors influence
the employment of the one or the other criterion in the selection
phase: buyers' risk propensity (Mitchell, 1998a), the strategic relevance
and complexity of the service bought (Devlin, 1998; Fitzsimmons, Noh,
& Thies, 1998), the frequency of the purchasing (Dawes, Dowling, &
Patterson, 1992; Sharma, 1994).
In these studies, clear selection criteria not only have the role of
guiding buyers in decision making, but they also have the function of
informing suppliers in order to get commercial efficiency, that is
stabilising requirements to avoid inaccuracies in specifications and
communication problems (Peña-Siles, del Mar González-Zamora, &
Machuca, 2012). Overall, formalising the purchasing processes is
highlighted as crucial and can be executed by either the establishment
of purchasing policies or agreements with preferred suppliers. The oppor-
tunity of employing the first or the latter depends on the company size,
repetition of the purchasing in time, as well as on cultural dimensions
such as uncertainty avoidance and masculinity–femininity (Pemer,
Sieweke, Werr, Birkner, & Mohe, 2014; Pemer, Werr, & Bianchi, 2014).
Despite the formalising efforts which attempt to include objective
criteria, soft, affective, and relational criteria also emerge as highly dis-
criminant as in the case of “personal chemistry”, trust, and commitment
with the supplier (Day & Barksdale, 2003; Fitzsimmons et al., 1998;
Garry, 2008; Lian & Laing, 2007). These soft aspects seem to be more rel-
evant especially when an innovation goal is involved. However, given
the limited focus on the KIBS selection phase, little is said in this litera-
ture about the subsequent phases of relationship development and,
therefore, few implications for innovation are provided.
4.2. Purchasing function involvement and its role
First, purchasing in itself is identified as one of the many possible
strategies to access external knowledge, alternative to cooperation or
external information acquisition (Kang & Kang, 2014; Vega-Jurado,
Gutiérrez-Gracia, & Fernández-de-Lucio, 2009; Viljamaa, 2011). The
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
literature strongly pinpoints that when companies buy KIBS, this often
excludes any involvement of the purchasing department or of purchas-
ing professionals inside the buying firm (Sonmez & Moorhouse, 2010).
In the case of KIBS purchasing, indeed, the final users, who are managers
from other departments than the purchasing one, directly establish a re-
lationship with external professionals and engage in the purchasing
process (Fitzsimmons et al., 1998; O'Mahoney et al., 2013; Sieweke
et al., 2012; Werr & Pemer, 2007). Despite the attention given to the in-
volvement of the purchasing department in buying KIBS (Bäcklund &
Werr, 2005; Freedman & Stinson, 2004; Mohe, 2005; Werr & Pemer,
2007), still conflicting positions exist concerning the benefits of this
inclusion.
On one hand, some authors stress that, due to different works of for-
malization, the involvement of purchasing professionals commodifies
management knowledge and limits the exchange value of that knowl-
edge, interfering with the external professional-manager relation
(O'Mahoney et al., 2013). It is noticed, for instance, that the maturity
of the consulting service makes the service itself more easily understood
by purchasers and managers: this facilitates the cooperation between
them, but can increase the political usage of management consulting
by managers, who resist to formalized purchasing procedures. These
tensions would not depend on the type of consulting service rather on
the client-consultant relation (Werr & Pemer, 2007).
On the other hand, other authors (Sieweke et al., 2012) have found
that the centralisation of the purchasing process reduces transaction
costs without affecting, contrary to the critics, the selection criteria,
which still are based also on relational aspects. The role that the purchas-
ing department should assume in this context (Sieweke et al., 2012; West,
1997) only resides in facilitating the selection phase and reducing trans-
action costs, with effects on efficiency rather than effectiveness of the ser-
vice bought (i.e. respectively advertising and management consulting).
Managers still have to keep the control over the purchasing process
(Sieweke et al., 2012) and purchasing intervenes only when the external
professional-internal manager relation is not too strong (West, 1997).
Werr and Pemer (2007), who have studied barriers and enablers of
purchasing involvement in purchasing of consultancy services, have
identified three possible levels of involvement: decentralised, coordi-
nated decentralisation, and purchasing coordination. Decentralisation
is the lowest level of involvement and consists of an occasional and
transactional oriented intervention on the management initiative. Coordi-
nated decentralisation corresponds to the role assigned to purchasing by
the other authors cited earlier (Sieweke et al., 2012; West, 1997), and
consists in achieving convenient commercial agreements and facilitating
the purchasing process offering procedures and templates to support
managers. Finally, purchasing coordination implies a centralisation of
the purchasing process with purchasers highly expert in the domain, in-
ternally integrated and with high managerial capabilities. Actively in-
volved in all the purchasing steps, they do not establish a lot of
procedures and templates and do not focus on the commercial aspect;
rather their aim is to identify potential value creation. The authors identify
several factors influencing the purchasing involvement such as top man-
agement commitment, status of the purchasing function, managerial use
of and attitude towards consultants, framing of management consulting
and of purchasing situation (e.g. as a regular purchase or a competence
acquisition requiring HR involvement), implementation strategy (e.g. in-
ternal rules for compliance; control and follow-up systems), and persis-
tence by the purchasing function. Similar procurement involvement
models are also depicted in the context of public procurement of profes-
sional services (Schiele, 2005; Schiele & McCue, 2006).
In line with the necessity of a progressive inclusion of purchasing in
buying KIBS, some scholars (Sieweke et al., 2012) propose that future
studies should look at the service triad, involving purchasing profes-
sionals, managers, and consultants (see e.g., Choi & Wu, 2009; Van der
Valk & van Iwaarden, 2011). This can explain the purchasers' lack of
control over the service delivery and service quality (mainly in the
hands of managers), due to their detachment from the service; at the
179
same time this can explain the complexity of the service delivery due
to the fact that the service provider has two “principals” who generally
pursue different goals.
Adopting the same interaction-based perspective, a limited group of
studies have shifted focus from the sole initial selection phase to the
production/consumption of business services, which also include KIBS
(Van der Valk, Wynstra, & Axelsson, 2008; Van der Valk, Wynstra, &
Axelsson, 2009; Wynstra, Axelsson, & Van der Valk, 2006). These studies
propose that buyer-supplier interaction patterns are different depend-
ing on the type of usage that it is made of the business service. These
studies propose that interaction patterns can be described in terms of
key objectives, buyer and supplier capabilities, buyer and supplier rep-
resentatives involved, and communication (Van der Valk et al., 2009).
According to these models, purchasers should be involved in buyer-
supplier interaction patterns involving component and consumption
services, the first being services that are transferred to customers of
the customer without any intervention and the latter consisting of a
large variety of items including less expensive and more routine-like
services. This would imply that if KIBS purchasing correspond to one
of these two usages, the inclusion of professional purchasers also into
the buyer-seller relationship should be considered.
4.3. Effects on innovation
Only a small share of the papers reviewed explores the relationship
between KIBS purchase and innovation. Among the 54 papers analysed,
only eight cover some aspect related to how purchasing can contribute
to the generation of innovation. Five papers contend that, in general, the
purchase of KIBS can lead to product innovation for the buying organi-
zation (Kadefors, Björlingson, & Karlsson, 2007; Linder, Jarvenpaa, &
Davenport, 2003; Love, Gunasekaran, & Li, 1998; Töllner, Blut, &
Holzmüller, 2011; West, 1997). Kadefors et al. (2007) also propose
that the purchase of KIBS can increase the buying firm's overall willing-
ness to change and implement new organizational routines. Concerning
the purchasing process, the main insight provided is that collaborative
attitudes and purchasing practices between customers and KIBS firms
are required to stimulate innovation; such collaborative practices
enable the parties to establish a clearer focus during the development
effort, create means for both parties to share their competences, and
promote the selection of providers based on their attitudes and team-
work potential rather than on past performance and reputation
(Eriksson & Westerberg, 2011; Kadefors et al., 2007).
None of the papers explores or observes that the purchase of KIBS
can benefit KIBS providers too or other partners in the network. All
these papers consider customers purchasing technology based KIBS (t-
KIBS), corroborating the proposition of Miles et al. (1995) that t-KIBS
have the potential to generate innovation, while p-KIBS tend to support
the adoption of innovation. In addition, even when considering how to
boost innovation, the literature limits the role of the purchasing func-
tion to the management of activities related to the project, i.e. selecting
KIBS suppliers, negotiating with them, evaluating their performance
and supervising the project (Kadefors et al., 2007; Love et al., 1998;
West, 1997). West (1997) and Töllner et al. (2011) complement, re-
spectively, that having purchasing top managers and buying centres in-
volved in certain projects can be fruitful, as they will have more
autonomy to make decision when it comes to more complex purchases.
The work of Linder et al. (2003) is the only one to propose that purchas-
ing could have a more strategic role. Although not specifically attribut-
ing this activity to the purchasing function, these authors claim that
companies should have a function dedicated to establishing processes
and templates to buy innovation, to define and create a fruitful cultural
environment to source innovation, and to ensure that information and
knowledge flows between the parties involved. This resonates with
Werr and Pemer (2007) who, even not referring directly to innovation
effects, identify the possibility of a more strategic-coordinating role of
purchasing professionals in buying KIBS. Here is important to consider
180 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186

Table 6
Main themes discussed in literature on purchasing KIBS.

Aspect analysed Main themes Description Authors

KIBS purchase KIBS selection Great attention given to the criteria used to select KIBS providers in Day and Barksdale (2003), Fitzsimmons et al. (1998),
order to ensure an effective purchasing Garry (2008), Lian and Laing (2007), Mitchell (1995,
Soft affective and relational criteria such as “personal chemistry”, 1998b)
trust and commitment with the KIBS providers is considered highly
discriminant
Involvement of purchasing KIBS purchases often exclude the purchasing Fitzsimmons et al. (1998), O'Mahoney et al. (2013),
function department/professionals Sieweke et al. (2012), Van der Valk and van Iwaarden
Formalization introduced by purchasing may commodify (2011), Werr and Pemer (2007)
knowledge, limit its exchange, and interfere with the
provider-manager relation.
Purchasing involvement can reduce transaction costs. This is leading
scholars to defend purchasing involvement
When purchasing is involved, its participation levels can vary.
Service usage Buyer-supplier interactions patterns are different depending on the Van der Valk et al. (2008), Van der Valk et al. (2009),
type of usage of the business service Wynstra et al. (2006)
Purchasers should be involved depending on buyer-supplier
interaction patterns (e.g. in component and consumption services)
Cultural factors The establishment of KIBS purchasing policies or agreements with Pemer, Werr, and Bianchi (2014a), Pemer, Sieweke,
preferred supplier can depend on the company size, repetition of Werr, Birkner, and Mohe (2014b)
the purchase in time, as well as on culture dimensions such as
uncertainty avoidance and masculinity–femininity
Effects on Product/process innovation KIBS purchase can lead to product and process innovation Kadefors et al. (2007), Linder et al. (2003), Love et al.
innovation Little attention dedicated to process innovation (1998), Töllner et al. (2011), West (1997)
Integration Collaborative attitudes and purchasing practices between customers
and KIBS firms are required to stimulate innovation
This enables parties to share their competences and select providers
based on their attitudes and teamwork
Orientation to innovation One paper suggests companies should have a function oriented to
buy innovation

the opposite argument made by O'Mahoney et al. (2013) that purchas-
ing involvement could interfere with the professional-manager relation
and, consequently, hamper the ability to generate innovation.
Given the limited knowledge on purchasing KIBS for innovation that
we could obtain from Stage 2, we decided to interpret and integrate
these insights with those obtained from Stage 1 which had a specific
focus on the contribution of purchasing and KIBS, respectively, to inno-
vation. Based on this conceptual integration, we elaborated the frame-
work presented in the next section.
5. Stage 3: how to purchase KIBS for innovation
This section initially presents the framework developed as an out-
come of our research process and then discusses the implications of
the framework for research and practice. The framework, inspired by
the one proposed by Webster and Wind (1972), aims to represent orga-
nizational buying behaviour and explores characteristics of the buying
group and determinants of their interactions. It is, however, focused
on the way companies should buy KIBS to increase their innovation
returns and considers only issues relevant to this context.
5.1. KIBS purchase and innovation: theoretical framework
The framework proposed in Fig. 2 represents the relevant aspects
that buying firms need to consider in the purchase of KIBS to boost inno-
vation. This framework should be interpreted in the following ways.
First, the framework focuses mainly on aspects involved in the KIBS
purchase. The KIBS purchase starts with the activities that take place
once the buying firm gets in contact with KIBS providers and the parties
begin to interact. The process involves activities related to the purchase
stage, like solution specification, selection of preferred supplier and
contracting as well as the ones involved in the delivery of the solution.
The decisions made during the purchase stage define the actions needed
to deliver the solution. However, the KIBS purchase process is iterative
and changes and discoveries made in the delivery can require changes
in initial specifications (Santos & Spring, 2015), a feature represented
by two circular arrows in Fig. 2. Before the initial interaction between pro-
viders and the buying firm, there is a pre-purchase stage in which the
buying firm – represented either by the buying function or by the buying
function and the purchasing team – decides the scope and cost of what is
needed and shortlists suppliers that might be worth contacting.
Second, given our research outcomes, we propose that ideally the
KIBS service triad, i.e. the KIBS provider, the purchasing function and
the function buying the KIBS, should be involved in the entire purchase
process and that these parties should interact intensively to boost inno-
vation outcomes. There are moments of the process marked by higher
levels of interaction between the parties, such as when providers and
customers work together to design the solution in the purchasing
stage or when clients engage more actively in testing the solution pro-
vided in the delivery phase; other moments are characterised by
lower levels of interaction, like when KIBS employees work more inde-
pendently to create a solution that addresses customers' needs (Lehrer
et al., 2012). However, a more intensive involvement of the customer
in the KIBS purchase and interaction between the parties guarantee
the delivery of an effective solution (Santos & Spring, 2015) and it is pre-
cisely this interaction that creates a fruitful environment for the ex-
change of knowledge and ideas for innovation (Hertog, 2000; Muller
& Zenker, 2001). It is also important to mention that, in the KIBS
purchase, even before the preferred supplier is selected, buyers can
learn from the interaction with the different KIBS providers that
are presenting their solution proposals and even share knowledge
gained from the interaction with one supplier with other providers.
As such, before the contracting stage, different service triads might
be in place.
Finally, we suggest aspects important to facilitate the interaction and
relationships between the members of the KIBS triad and identify con-
tingencies that influence the relationships between the members of
the triad, such as the maturity of the purchasing function, buyers' levels
of intra-organizational integration, KIBS usage, maturity of the KIBS sec-
tor and cultural factors.
Next we explore the different aspects of the framework in more
detail.
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
Fig. 2. Purchasing KIBS effects on innovation: a conceptual framework.
5.1.1. KIBS service triad configuration
One main aspect emerging from Stage 1 of our analysis is that the in-
teractions taking place during the purchasing process have a significant
impact on the innovation generated in the buying firm. This is corrobo-
rated by literature on KIBS (Huggins, 2011; Muller & Zenker, 2001) as
well as by the different works on purchasing from Wynstra and col-
leagues (Van der Valk et al., 2008; Van der Valk et al., 2009; Wynstra
et al., 2006) who include the interactions taking place during the overall
purchasing process among those which are likely to develop innovation
at the buying firm. The literature on the involvement and role of the
purchasing function analysed in Stage 2 specifies the boundary of the
relevant interactions and suggests to analyse the KIBS service triad
which includes the KIBS provider, the purchasing function and the
user function inside the buying firm (Sieweke et al., 2012).
Our framework, therefore, highlights the relevance of putting the
service triad at the core of any KIBS purchasing aiming to generate inno-
vation outputs at the buying firm. The service triad approach is relevant
at least for three main reasons.
First, the studies analysed (Bäcklund & Werr, 2005; Freedman &
Stinson, 2004; Mohe, 2005; Werr & Pemer, 2007) demonstrate that
KIBS purchasing increasingly involves the three parts above mentioned.
Indeed, emulating public sector procurement policy and aiming to con-
trol the costs of consultancy and similar services, large companies more
and more involve purchasing professionals in buying KIBS (Werr &
Pemer, 2007).
Second, while the KIBS provider-user relation has been traditionally
acknowledged as being critical in the effectiveness of the service deliv-
ery (Santos & Spring, 2015), studies on the involvement of the purchas-
ing department (Werr & Pemer, 2007) suggest that also this latter can
benefit on the service delivery, from simply favouring the effectiveness
of the interactions involved up to playing a strategic role in identifying
internal needs and selecting suitable suppliers. It is precisely this
181
strategic role that has been identified as relevant in increasing the con-
tribution of purchasing to long-term processes of innovation inside the
firm while activities of support and formalization, more commercial-
oriented, can contribute to short term innovation within the perimeter
of a specific project (Wynstra et al., 2003).
Third, the service triad perspective, which is based on the interaction
approach proposed by the IMP group, is a valuable framework to exam-
ine issues of innovation (Freytag & Young, 2014) and allows to take a
wider perspective on the innovation process, which goes beyond the
simple transaction (i.e. selection) phase so far favoured in studies on
KIBS purchasing.
Developing on these considerations we have specifically looked,
among the studies analysed, at those which draw more specifically on
the interaction perspective such as Wynstra et al. (2006); Van der Valk
et al. (2008) and Van der Valk et al. (2009) who propose different interac-
tion configurations in the service delivery. Integrating these insights with
models proposing different levels of purchasing integration in NPD
(Wynstra et al., 2003) and in KIBS purchasing (Werr & Pemer, 2007), it
is possible to say that three main aspects define the triad configuration:
(1) the involvement of different actors in the interaction; (2) the role of
actors in the interaction; and (3) the content exchanged in the interaction.
The first aspect is consistent with what is identified in the model of
Van der Valk et al. (2009) and previous versions as “supplier represen-
tatives” and “customer representatives”. In the KIBS service triad config-
uration, these “representatives” may belong to the KIBS supplier, the
function making use of the service bought, and the purchasing function
that may have different degrees of involvement in the interaction (c.f.
Werr & Pemer, 2007).
The second aspect relates to the role these actors take in the service
triad and is consistent with what is identified in the model of Van der
Valk et al. (2009) and previous versions as “critical customer capabili-
ties” and “critical supplier capabilities”. For instance, when the
182 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
purchasing function only plays an ancillary role, it will engage with
works based on its contractual, administrative and legal capabilities.
Differently, when the purchasing function plays a commercial facilitator
role, it will rely on mobilizing and prioritizing capabilities to facilitate the
selection and reduce transaction costs. Finally, when the purchasing func-
tion plays a more strategic role, it may mobilise its informing, formalising,
coordinating and timing capabilities to participate in the project and ser-
vice management. These different roles will highlight different contribu-
tions of the activities involved in purchasing KIBS to the innovation.
The third aspect, finally, relates to what is named as “communica-
tion” in the model of Van der Valk et al. (2009) and concerns the content
exchanged in the interaction, which can involve simple information,
knowledge or the development of capabilities with different impacts
on innovation. Both the literature on KIBS contribution to innovation
(Hertog, 2000; Muller & Zenker, 2001) and the one on public procure-
ment contribution to innovation (Edquist & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia,
2012) corroborate the idea that the interaction between the parties
can generate flows of information, knowledge and competences.
5.1.2. Factors influencing KIBS service triad configuration and its impacts on
innovation
Once established that the service triad configuration can have an im-
pact on the innovation generated, it is crucial to identify which aspects
can influence the way the interactions in the KIBS service triad develop
and affect innovation outcomes. From our study of the literature nine
aspects emerge that influence the relationship between the KIBS service
triad configuration and the innovation outcomes. Four of these aspects
are actual characteristics of the KIBS service triad (i.e. its integration,
the orientation to innovation of the purchasing function, the geograph-
ical proximity between parts, the type of KIBS purchased), while the
other five aspects are organizational or contextual factors which can af-
fect the configuration of the KIBS service triad (i.e. maturity of the pur-
chasing function, buyer's organizational integration, KIBS service usage,
maturity of KIBS's service sector, cultural factors).
The first aspect related to the features of the KIBS triad is the level of
integration in the triad between the KIBS provider, the purchasing func-
tion and the user of the KIBS, a topic explored in the studies on the pur-
chase of KIBS (Table 6). Integration relates to how parties coordinate
their processes as well as the extent to which they cooperate to achieve
common objectives (Santos & D'Antone, 2014), and such collaborative
practices between KIBS providers and customers enable the parties to
establish a clearer focus during the development effort and create
means for both parties to share their competences (Eriksson &
Westerberg, 2011; Kadefors et al., 2007). They also enable knowledge
to be transferred between the parties (Huggins, 2011) and increase
the trustworthiness, commitment, and openness of the parties. These
features are vital to guarantee the successful implementation of the
KIBS and the expected innovation outcomes (Eriksson & Vaghult,
2000; Kadefors et al., 2007; Love et al., 1998).
Another aspect summed up in the framework is the orientation to
innovation of the purchasing function. It has been argued that, if pur-
chasing is involved in the KIBS purchase, an efficiency-oriented behav-
iour could affect negatively the extent to which the parties tend to be
creative and innovative (O'Mahoney et al., 2013). Some authors also
claim that purchasing should be oriented to obtain innovation out-
comes. Wynstra et al. (2003), for instance, contend that purchasing
should act in the sense of mobilizing and coordinating resources that
will enable more innovation. Similarly, Linder et al. (2003) suggest
that purchasing should establish processes and templates to buy inno-
vation and ensure information and knowledge exchange between the
parties involved. If the purchasing function has a greater orientation to-
wards innovation, a more fruitful environment would exist to source in-
novation and firms would be able to innovate more. This could also be
the case if KIBS providers and the function buying the KIBS were also
more oriented towards innovation, but the literature reviewed does
not focus on it.
A third relevant aspect, according to the studies on the role of KIBS in
innovation systems, is the geographical proximity between the mem-
bers of the KIBS services triad. Koch and Stahlecker (2006) argue that
KIBS firms depend considerably on their geographical proximity with
customers to deliver good quality services because the proximity en-
ables face-to-face interaction (Huggins, 2011) and the establishment
of social bonds. This then would further enhance the integration be-
tween the KIBS triad members. Therefore, we could expect that, under
greater levels of integration and co-location in the service triad, parties
can expect to obtain better innovation returns.
Finally, the seminal work of Miles et al. (1995) on KIBS proposes that
professional services or p-KIBS are users of technology, while t-KIBS
focus on the development and implementation of new technologies.
As such, t-KIBS would be more likely to promote innovation outcomes,
because the development of technology usually is more customized
and requires interaction between the parties in order to create and de-
sign the technology anew. However, if we consider that all KIBS can de-
velop customized solutions anew or modify organizational processes
and routines within customers business, e.g. an accountancy firm (p-
KIBS) can create a customized tax reporting method for a customer
due to a change in the country's tax system, the type of the KIBS pur-
chased seems to matter more than the fact that it is a professional ser-
vice or not. As such, we adopt the idea that the type of KIBS, that is,
the extent to which KIBS involve the development of solutions anew,
may influence the level of innovation created and propose in the frame-
work that the type of KIBS purchased may influence the extent to which
buyers can benefit from the innovation.
The other aspects that are listed in the framework as determinants of
the KIBS triad relate to organizational and contextual characteristics that
may facilitate the adoption of a triadic approach for the purchase of KIBS.
One of the factors listed relates to the overall maturity of the pur-
chasing function, which can change its role in the service triad and the
content of the exchanges it is involved in. In a mature purchasing func-
tion the higher professionalization of its representatives (Schiele, 2005)
can ensure a more strategic contribution to the KIBS purchasing process
(Luzzini et al., 2015; McGinnis & Vallopra, 1999, 2001; Mendez &
Pearson, 1994; Nijssen et al., 2002; Tracey, 2004). Moreover, a mature
purchasing function can have a deeper involvement in the KIBS pur-
chasing due to its status and integration within the firm will be higher.
The overall integration between departments in the buyer organiza-
tion, i.e. the extent to which different departments are used to coordi-
nate and cooperate within the company (Santos & D'Antone, 2014)
will therefore also favour the involvement of the purchasing depart-
ment in the KIBS purchasing, even on the initiative of the internal ser-
vice user. Higher integration also implies an easier understanding and
communication between the two “principals” of the triad, and favour
the alignment of their goals facilitating the identification of the need,
the specification phase, the selection of the more adapted supplier and
the interaction throughout the whole service delivery (Werr & Pemer,
2007; West, 1997).
Another aspect that might determine the use of the KIBS triad is the
KIBS usage. This aspect is proposed based on the work of Wynstra et al.
(2006) and Koch and Stahlecker (2006), which argue that the usage
made of the service delivered, and the interaction patterns needed to
buy/sell the services ultimately define if purchasing department should
be involved or not. As such, in the framework we propose that, depend-
ing on the KIBS usage, buying firms will be more inclined to adopt the
triadic approach. Not all KIBS modify organizational processes and rou-
tines within customers business (Maister, 2004). Companies can hire
KIBS providers to support their operating activities and, in such cases,
solutions have lower levels of customization, limited effort maybe be re-
quired in terms of designing the solution, since the customer already
knows what is needed, and little change in customers' processes is ex-
pected. In such cases, following the logic of Wynstra et al. (2006), the
buying firm would be more inclined to involve the purchasing function,
as a more cost-oriented approach might be beneficial.
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
The maturity of the industry has been identified as another factor
that can impact the involvement of external suppliers in knowledge ac-
quisition (Johnsen, 2009; Johnsen et al., 2006). It is argued that when
the technology or the industry are unstable and less mature, then the
company would perceive as more risky to share ideas with the external
context. Still, in these situations new suppliers might be contacted to ex-
plore new potential ideas. Similarly, also in studies on purchasing KIBS
the maturity of the KIBS sector has been mentioned as a potential factor
influencing the involvement of different actors. In this context, it is ar-
gued that when the service sector is more developed it is also more un-
derstood by the purchasers and the users. However, it is not clear
whether this might facilitate the inclusion or the exclusion of the pur-
chasing function and the relation between the parties in the KIBS triad
(Werr & Pemer, 2007).
Finally, as from Pemer, Sieweke, et al. (2014) cultural dimensions
such as uncertainty avoidance and masculinity–femininity may influ-
ence the adoption of formalized purchasing policies and, therefore, im-
pact on the role this function may play in the KIBS service triad.
5.1.3. KIBS triad effects on innovation
Building on the literature on the role of KIBS in innovation systems
and on KIBS purchase, it is possible to pose that the purchase of KIBS
can generate innovation for the buying firm (c.f. Eriksson & Vaghult,
2000; Gadrey & Gallouj, 1998; He & Wong, 2009; Hertog, 2000; Kang
& Kang, 2014; Linder et al., 2003; Muller & Zenker, 2001; Töllner et al.,
2011).
The literature reviewed on KIBS purchase (Table 6) suggests that
KIBS purchase can lead to product and process innovation. Product in-
novation tends to result from the acquisition of solutions because in
such cases, KIBS providers sell a combination of customized products
and services that meet specific needs of customers (Töllner et al.,
2011). Customers can also incur in product innovation when they
source R&D services that develop products anew to them or increment
existing products (Huang, Chung, & Lin, 2009). Although the literature
on KIBS purchase dedicates much more attention to how KIBS purchase
can lead to product innovation (Huang et al., 2009; Kadefors et al., 2007;
Töllner et al., 2011; West, 1997), Eriksson and Vaghult (2000) claim that
KIBS are agents of change and can, thus, modify organizational processes
and routines. In a similar vein, Kadefors et al. (2007) and Yam et al. (2011)
argue that KIBS providers also help their customers improve their work
environment and develop capabilities to allocate human resources and
money efficiently to innovation activities. As such, the purchase of KIBS
can also lead to process innovation within buying organizations.
Furthermore, the literature on the role of KIBS in innovation systems
claims that KIBS are facilitators and sources of innovation (Hertog,
2000; Miles et al., 1995 – Table 5). As such, in the framework, we sug-
gest that there is the need to consider whether the purchase of KIBS is
generating innovation or simply leading to the adoption of innovation
(Johnsen, 2009). In the literature, we observed that customers can ac-
quire an innovative offering and, therefore, adopt an innovation created
by the KIBS firm (Eriksson & Vaghult, 2000; Huang et al., 2009; Töllner
et al., 2011), hire KIBS firms to support their innovation initiatives
(Kadefors et al., 2007), or both (Kang & Kang, 2014; Linder et al.,
2003; West, 1997). When firms hire KIBS providers to support their in-
novative efforts, KIBS play a more active role in designing the solution
and helping customers implement them, like when a consultancy com-
pany helps the customer implement a new call centre unit (Hertog,
2000) or supports customers' new product and service development ef-
forts. Together customers and KIBS firms can generate products, ser-
vices and processes anew. Customers, on the other hand, can adopt
innovation by purchasing a new technology or product developed by a
KIBS firm, like when buyers acquired integrated solutions – i.e. combi-
nations of customized products and services designed to meet specific
requirements of customers (Töllner et al., 2011). KIBS firms may also
be hired to support the implementation of a new technology within
the buying firm. In adopting an innovation, the buying firm may have
183
to change internal processes or/and adapt business models (Muller &
Doloreux, 2009). In such cases, it is then possible to see firms generating
and adapting processes.
Finally, although we could expect that firms would have higher mo-
tivation to look for innovation inputs outside the boundaries of the firms
to support more strategic and complex product and service develop-
ments, like complex product systems (CoPS) such as flight simulators,
air traffic control systems, and weapon systems (Davies & Brady,
2000), the work of Huang et al. (2009) shows that companies can rely
on KIBS even for more incremental/marginal innovation initiatives. As
such, the purchase of KIBS, depending what is being acquired, may gen-
erate radical or incremental innovation.
5.2. KIBS purchase and innovation: implications for practice and future
research
Although the framework and the relationships proposed need to be
validated by further research, they draw attention to some important
implications.
First, a key aspect of the KIBS purchase is that it involves different ac-
tors, i.e. KIBS providers, purchasers and user functions, all of which have
their own roles, expertise and vested interests. As such, it is important
that all parties are aligned in terms of what they should do to achieve
more significant innovation returns and work towards this common
goal. Intensive interaction and information sharing within the triad fa-
vour the alignment of these goals (Werr & Pemer, 2007; West, 1997)
and enable knowledge to flow between the parties (Huggins, 2011),
creating a more fruitful environment for innovation for all the parties in-
volved. The actors of the KIBS triad should therefore invest on actions to
stimulate integration between them during the KIBS purchase and deliv-
ery process. In line with this, geographical and cultural proximity be-
tween the members of the triad seems important and should be pursued.
Questions however still remain in relation to how parties of the ser-
vice triad should organize themselves and behave during the KIBS pur-
chase. It would be interesting to research more on these aspects and on
their impact on innovation outcomes. There is an increasing body of re-
search concerned with service triads (see Wynstra, Spring, &
Schoenherr, 2014), their configurations and dynamics. Future research
could build on this literature to further understand the issues raised here.
Another point to consider is that not all KIBS purchases have the
same potential to generate innovation. The interaction and knowledge
exchange that takes place during KIBS delivery is central to increase
the flow of knowledge and ideas between the parties that can be used
to foster innovation. In this line, the acquisition of KIBS that involve
more design effort and the development of solutions anew seem to
have a higher potential for innovation. The involvement of the purchas-
ing function in the KIBS purchase, depending on the use the KIBS will
have, also seems beneficial, as long as purchases do not adopt an ex-
tremely efficiency-oriented perspective that may hinder creativity and
knowledge exchange. Furthermore, throughout the different phases of
the KIBS purchasing process, activities of support and formalization to
increase interaction can contribute to short-term innovation within
the perimeter of a specific project. On the other hand, more strategic
purchasing activities and relationship-oriented interactions, such as
the identification of internal needs or the definition and management
of suppliers' network, can contribute to long-term innovation, beyond
the perimeter of the specific project.
On the counter-side of this argument is the fact that, in KIBS pur-
chases, interaction may not necessarily mean that parties are exchang-
ing knowledge and learning. As presented, KIBS purchasing processes
are iterative and changes and discoveries made in the delivery phase
can require changes in initial specifications and in already imple-
mented actions. Such iterations do not always result in positive out-
comes and parties may need to interact to solve problems and reduce
conflict (Santos & Spring, 2015). In our review, we found little evi-
dence on the potential impact of such iterations on the interaction
184 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186

and integration between the KIBS triad members. Future research
could explore this aspect further. It would be interesting to understand
if conflict is necessarily bad and, if not, when conflict levels become so
high that it starts damaging the potential innovation outcomes of the
KIBS purchase. Researchers could also explore how the KIBS triad can or-
ganize to minimize problems associated with such issues.
Last, our research suggests that projects can have different innova-
tion results depending on the attention dedicated to innovation during
the KIBS purchase. Customer firms will more likely innovate if they ac-
tively participate during the KIBS delivery to learn from KIBS providers,
dedicate resources to co-produce with KIBS providers (Bettencourt
et al., 2002), and invest resources in the co-developed products and ser-
vices and in by-products. Not all customers however enter the KIBS pur-
chasing process aware of this. KIBS customers, especially user functions,
may just want an answer to their problem (c.f. Maister, 2004) and, in
such cases, may not behave in a way that would promote innovation.
It becomes therefore important for buying firms to have a greater orien-
tation towards innovation, if it wants to benefit the most of the innova-
tion returns associated with the KIBS purchase. It seems, in line with
this, that purchasing should assume a more strategic role and focus
on mobilizing resources to KIBS delivery processes (c.f. Wynstra
et al., 2003), establishing processes and procedures to create a fruit-
ful cultural environment to source innovation (Linder et al., 2003)
and, perhaps, even include innovation targets in KIBS initial specifi-
cations for suppliers. So far, mainly theoretical papers have dedicated at-
tention to this issue. More research is thus needed concerning the
orientation of the purchasing function and the associated outcomes so
that we can offer more practical advice on what purchasers should do.
In a similar line, if the orientation of the purchasing function can matter,
then the orientation of the other members of the KIBS triad can also
play a role and this could also be investigated in the future.
6. Contributions and concluding remarks
providing a set of conditions that contribute to reduce negative cost
driven purchasing orientation and let a more strategic and value-
adding orientation prevail.
Finally, purchasing managers could also use the insights of this paper
to better understand the impacts of their action on innovation and to
guide their strategies to foster innovation.
In conclusion, our work integrates important streams of the litera-
ture that talk about correlated matters but ignore how they can benefit
from each other. In doing so, it offers more specific insights on how
firms can buy KIBS more effectively to boost innovation and on the con-
tingencies involved in it. We also propose some practical guidelines that
should help managers identify gaps in their day-to-day operations and
devise action plans.
This research however does not come without limitations. Struc-
tured literature reviews adopt a set of criteria to select relevant papers
on the subject in question (Tranfield et al., 2003); nevertheless the sam-
ple of texts collected is always selected based on their availability
(Abbasi & Nilsson, 2012). In our case it was not different and texts
that are relevant to the purchase of KIBS may not have been selected.
To minimize this effect, we did consider a wide array of key words
and did our searchers in 5 different databases. In addition, the frame-
work results from our analysis of the texts selected with the structured
literature review process and is, thus, influenced by our interpretation
of the texts and personal backgrounds (Abbasi & Nilsson, 2012). We
however followed the procedures proposed by Wolf (2008) to increase
the validity and reliability of our classification process, namely: we ex-
tracted our categories of analysis from two different literature streams
that were related to our research questions; analysed a sample of papers
to check if both researchers were classifying the papers in the same way,
and discussed the classification of papers that were difficult to analyse
to reduce misinterpretations. Strengthen by our efforts with the meth-
odology, we hope that the insights raised in the paper can fuel future
research.

In a world marked by strong outsourcing (MacCarthy, Lewis, Voss, & Acknowledgments

Narasimhan, 2013), in which firms are increasingly dependent on
knowledge and innovation to gain and sustain competitive advantage, We gratefully acknowledge the reviewers for helpful comments on
the new trend consists in relying on knowledge, competences and tech- earlier versions of this paper. All remaining errors are our responsibility.
nologies available in the network to boost innovation (Chesbrough, Juliana Bonomi Santos gratefully acknowledges financial support in the
2003). KIBS are an important source of innovation for buying firms form of a CNPq Research Fellowship, Grant number 471637-2014-9. The
(Eriksson & Vaghult, 2000; Huang et al., 2009; Kang & Kang, 2014; organization that provided financial support had no involvement in the
Linder et al., 2003; Töllner et al., 2011) and potentially also to second- execution of this study.
tier suppliers and other companies of the buyers´ network. However,
firms need to know not only where innovation can come from, but Appendix A. KIBS sectors and sub-sectors as from the European clas-
also how to buy it effectively. As academics, we need to provide compa- sification of economic activities (adapted from Muller & Doloreux,
nies with tools and frameworks that can help in that sense. This paper is 2009)
an attempt in this direction.
First, it contributes by emphasizing the value-adding effects of KIBS
purchasing and specifically the innovation effects that can be favoured European KIBS sectors KIBS sub-sectors description
through certain KIBS purchasing processes. In doing so, we move beyond NACE code description
the debate on the involvement of the purchasing in new product and ser- 72 Computer and
vice development and explore a new situation in which purchasing can related activities
contribute to the development of innovation in the buying organization. 721 Hardware consultancy
Since much knowledge exists scattered across different fields, a merit of 722 Software consultancy and supply
723 Data processing
this research is that it does not limit its perimeter to the literature on pur- 724 Database activities
chasing KIBS, but expands to close research streams and integrates in its 725 Maintenance and repair of office, accounting
theoretical development crucial knowledge on the effects that KIBS and and computing machinery
purchasing, respectively, can have on innovation at the buying firm. 726 Other computer-related activities
73 Research and
Second, this research highlights the importance of the KIBS triad
development
in the generation of innovation when a firm purchases KIBS. The 7310 Research and experimental development in
co-constructive nature of the service design in both the purchasing natural sciences and engineering
and delivery phases increases the degree of interactions between 7320 Research and experimental development in
parts in the KIBS triad with higher levels of interactions and knowl- social sciences and humanities
74 Other business
edge exchanges which are at the base of innovation development. activities
Third, we reconcile extant contrasting positions on the opportunity
of involving the purchasing department into the KIBS sourcing by
 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
Appendix A (continued)
(continued)
European KIBS sectors KIBS sub-sectors description
NACE code description
741 Legal, accounting, book-keeping and auditing
activities, tax consultancy; market research and
public opinion polling; business and management
consultancy; holdings
7411 Legal activities
7412 Accounting, book-keeping and auditing activities;
tax consultancy
7413 Market research and public opinion polling
7414 Business and management consultancy
activities
742 Architectural and engineering activities and
related technical consultancy
743 Technical testing and analysis
744 Advertising
7484 Other business activities n.e.c.
References
Abbasi, M., & Nilsson, F. (2012). Themes and challenges in making supply chains environ-
mentally sustainable. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5),
517–530.
Bäcklund, W., & Werr, A. (2005). Breaking the personal tie: On the formalization of the
procurement of management consulting services. In S. Furusten, & A. Werr (Eds.),
Dealing with confidence: The construction of need and trust in management advisory ser-
vices (pp. 184–200). Køge: Copenhagen Business School Press.
Bettencourt, L., Ostrom, A., Brown, S., & Roundtree, R. (2002). Client co-production in
knowledge-intensive business services. California Management Review, 44(4),
100–128.
Burt, D. N., & Soukup, W. R. (1985). Purchasing's role in new product development.
Harvard Business Review, 63(5), 90–97.
Canton, E., Ciriaci, D., & Solera, I. (2014). The economic impact of professional services
liberalisation. Brussels (European economy. Economic papers, 533) (Accessed on line
in October 2015 at: http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_
paper/2014/pdf/ecp533_en.pdf).
Castaldi, C., Ten Kate, C., & Den Braber, R. (2011). Strategic purchasing and innovation: A
relational view. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 23(9), 983–1000.
Chesbrough, H. W. (2003). Open innovation: The new imperative for creating and profiting
from technology. Harvard Business Press.
Choi, T. Y., & Wu, Z. (2009). Go ahead, leap: Triads and their practical and theoretical im-
port: In response to “to leap or not to leap: Triads as arbitrary subsets of networks of
connected dyads” by Anna Dubois. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,
15(4), 269–270.
Dalpé, R., DeBresson, C., & Xiaoping, H. (1992). The public sector as first user of innova-
tions. Research Policy, 21(3), 251–263.
Davies, A., & Brady, T. (2000). Organisational capabilities and learning in complex product
systems: Towards repeatable solutions. Research Policy, 29(7), 931–953.
Dawes, P. L., Dowling, G. R., & Patterson, P. G. (1992). Factors affecting the structure of
buying centers for the purchase of professional business advisory services.
International Journal of Research in Marketing, 9(3), 269–279.
Day, E., & Barksdale, H. C., Jr. (1994). Organizational purchasing of professional services.
Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 9(3), 44.
Day, E., & Barksdale, H. C., Jr. (2003). Selecting a professional service provider from the
short list. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 18(6/7), 564–579.
Devlin, J. F. (1998). Adding value to service offerings: The case of UK retail financial ser-
vices. European Journal of Marketing, 32(11/12), 1091–1109.
Dhar, R., Menon, A., & Maach, B. (2004). Toward extending the compromise effect to com-
plex buying contexts. Journal of Marketing Research, 41(3), 258–261.
Doloreux, D., & Shearmur, R. (2013). Innovation strategies: Are knowledge-intensive
business services just another source of information? Industry and Innovation,
20(8), 719–738.
Dröge, C., Jayaram, J., & Vickery, S. K. (2004). The effects of internal versus external inte-
gration practices on time-based performance and overall firm performance. Journal of
Product Innovation Management, 22, 557–573.
Drucker, P. (1999). Knowledge-worker productivity: The biggest challenge. California
Management Review, 41(2), 78–94.
Edler, J. (2009). Demand policies for innovation in EU CEE countries. Manchester Business
School working paper no 579. Manchester: The University of.
Edquist, C., & Zabala-Iturriagagoitia, J. M. (2012). Public procurement for innovation as
mission-oriented innovation policy. Research Policy, 41(10), 1757–1769.
Ellram, L. M., & Carr, A. (1994). Strategic purchasing: A history and review of the litera-
ture. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 30(1), 9–19.
Eriksson, K., & Vaghult, A. L. (2000). Customer retention, purchasing behavior and rela-
tionship substance in professional services. Industrial Marketing Management, 29(4),
363–372.
Eriksson, P. E., & Westerberg, M. (2011). Effects of cooperative procurement procedures
on construction project performance: A conceptual framework. International Journal
of Project Management, 29(2), 197–208.
European Commission (2007). Towards a European strategy in support of innovation in ser-
vices: Challenges and key issues for future actions, Commission Staff Working Document,
185
SEC (2007) 1059. Brussels: Commission of the European Communities (Accessed on
line in October 2015 at: http://ref.sabanciuniv.edu/sites/ref.sabanciuniv.edu/files/
innovation_in_services.pdf).
Fitzsimmons, J. A., Noh, J., & Thies, E. (1998). Purchasing business services. Journal of
Business & Industrial Marketing, 13(4/5), 370–380.
Freedman, A. M., & Stinson, G. H. (2004). Herding cats: Lessons learned from managing
and coordinating organization development consultants. Consulting Psychology
Journal: Practice and Research, 56(1), 44.
Freytag, P., & Young, L. (2014). Introduction to special issue on innovations and networks:
Innovation of, within, through and by networks. Industrial Marketing Management,
43(3), 361–364.
Gadrey, J., & Gallouj, F. (1998). The provider-customer interface in business and profes-
sional services. Service Industries Journal, 18(2), 01–15.
Garry, T. (2008). Affect and the role of corporate customer expertise within legal services.
Journal of Services Marketing, 22(4), 292–302.
Geisler, E., & Hoang, W. (1992). Purchasing information technologies: Behavior patterns
in service companies. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management,
28(3), 38–42.
He, Z. L., & Wong, P. K. (2009). Knowledge interaction with manufacturing clients and in-
novation of knowledge-intensive business services firms. Innovations, 11(3),
264–278.
Hertog, P. D. (2000). Knowledge-intensive business services as co-producers of innova-
tion. International Journal of Innovation Management, 4(4), 491–528.
Hommen, L., & Rolfstam, M. (2009). Public procurement and innovation: Towards a tax-
onomy. Journal of Public Procurement, 9(1), 17–56.
Huang, Y. A., Chung, H. J., & Lin, C. (2009). R&D sourcing strategies: Determinants and
consequences. Technovation, 29(3), 155–169.
Huggins, R. (2011). The growth of knowledge-intensive business services: Innovation,
markets and networks. European Planning Studies, 19(8), 1459–1480.
Johnsen, T. E. (2009). Supplier involvement in new product development and innovation:
Taking stock and looking to the future. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management,
15(3), 187–197.
Johnsen, T., Howard, M., & Miemczyk, J. (2014). Purchasing & supply chain management: A
sustainability perspective. Routledge.
Johnsen, T., Phillips, W., Caldwell, N., & Lewis, M. (2006). Centrality of customer and sup-
plier interaction in innovation. Journal of Business Research, 59(6), 671–678.
Kadefors, A., Björlingson, E., & Karlsson, A. (2007). Procuring service innovations: Contrac-
tor selection for partnering projects. International Journal of Project Management,
25(4), 375–385.
Kang, K. H., & Kang, J. (2014). Do external knowledge sourcing modes matter for service
innovation? Empirical evidence from South Korean service firms. Journal of Product
Innovation Management, 31(1), 176–191.
Koch, A., & Stahlecker, T. (2006). Regional innovation systems and the foundation of
knowledge intensive business services. A comparative study in Bremen, Munich,
and Stuttgart, Germany. European Planning Studies, 14(2), 123–146.
Koschatzky, K., & Zenker, A. (1999). The regional embeddedness of small manufacturing
and service firms: Regional networking as knowledge source for innovation? Working
papers firms and region no. R2/1999. Karlsruhe: ISI.
Lakemond, N., van Echtelt, F., & Wynstra, F. (2001). A configuration typology for involving
purchasing specialists in product development. Journal of Supply Chain Management,
37(4), 11–20.
Lau, A. K., & Lo, W. (2015). Regional innovation system, absorptive capacity and innova-
tion performance: An empirical study. Technological Forecasting and Social Change,
92, 99–114.
Lehrer, M., Ordanini, A., DeFillippi, R., & Miozzo, M. (2012). Challenging the orthodoxy of
value co-creation theory: A contingent view of co-production in design-intensive
business services. European Management Journal, 30(6), 499–509.
Lian, P. C., & Laing, A. W. (2007). Relationships in the purchasing of business to business
professional services: The role of personal relationships. Industrial Marketing
Management, 36(6), 709–718.
Linder, J. C., Jarvenpaa, S. L., & Davenport, T. H. (2003). Toward an innovation sourcing
strategy. MIT Sloan Management Review, 44(4), 43–49.
Love, P. E. D., Gunasekaran, A., & Li, H. (1998). Concurrent engineering: A strategy for pro-
curing construction projects. International Journal of Project Management, 16(6),
375–383.
Løwendahl, B. R., Revang, Ø., & Fosstenløkken, S. M. (2001). Knowledge and value creation
in professional service firms: A framework for analysis. Human Relations, 54(7),
911–931.
Luzzini, D., Amann, M., Caniato, F., Essig, M., & Ronchi, S. (2015). The path of innovation:
Purchasing and supplier involvement into new product development. Industrial
Marketing Management, 47, 109–120.
MacCarthy, B. L., Lewis, M., Voss, C., & Narasimhan, R. (2013). The same old methodolo-
gies? Perspectives on OM research in the post-lean age. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 33(7), 934–956.
MacInnis, D. J. (2011). A framework for conceptual contributions in marketing. Journal of
Marketing, 75(4), 136–154.
Maister, D. H. (2004). The anatomy of a consulting firm. In C. J. Fombrun, & M. D. Nevis
(Eds.), The advice business: Essential tools and models for managing consulting. New
York: Prentice Hall.
McGinnis, M. A., & Vallopra, R. M. (1999). Purchasing and supplier involvement: Issues
and insights regarding new product success. Journal of Supply Chain Management,
35(2), 4–15.
McGinnis, M. A., & Vallopra, R. M. (2001). Managing supplier involvement in process im-
provement in manufacturing. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 37(2), 48–53.
McKinsey Global Institute (2012). The social economy: Unlocking value and productivity
through social technologies: Professional services. Accessed on line in October 2015
186 S. D'Antone, J.B. Santos / Industrial Marketing Management 58 (2016) 172–186
at http://www.mckinsey.com/insights/high_tech_telecoms_internet/the_social_
economy
Mendez, E. G., & Pearson, J. N. (1994). Purchasing's role in product development: The case
for time-based strategies. International Journal of Purchasing and Materials
Management, 30(4), 2–12.
Miles, I., Kastrinos, N., Flanagan, K., Bilderbeek, R., Den Hertog, P., Huntink, W., & Bouman,
M. (1995). Knowledge-intensive business services. EIMS publication.
Mills, P. K., & Moshavi, D. S. (1999). Professional concern: Managing knowledge-based
service relationships. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 10(1),
48–67.
Mitchell, V. -W. (1995). Assessing the perceived risks associated with appointing plan-
ning consultants. Journal of Marketing Management, 11(1–3), 165–186.
Mitchell, V. -W. (1998a). Segmenting purchasers of organisational professional services:
A risk-based approach. Journal of Services Marketing, 12(2), 83–97.
Mitchell, V. W. (1998b). Buy-phase and buy-class effects on organisational risk perception
and reduction in purchasing. Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 13(6),
461–478.
Mogee, M. E., & Bean, A. S. (1976). The role of the purchasing agent in industrial innova-
tion. Industrial Marketing Management, 5(4), 221–229.
Mohe, M. (2005). Generic strategies for managing consultants – Insights from clients'
companies in Germany. Journal of Change Management, 5(3), 357–365.
Muller, E. (2001). Innovation interactions between knowledge-intensive business services
and small and medium-sized enterprises: An analysis in terms of evolution, knowledge
and territories. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag.
Muller, E., & Doloreux, D. (2009). What we should know about knowledge-intensive busi-
ness services. Technology in Society, 31(1), 64–72.
Muller, E., & Zenker, A. (2001). Business services as actors of knowledge transformation:
The role of KIBS in regional and national innovation systems. Research Policy, 30(9),
1501–1516.
Nachum, L. (1999). Measurement of productivity of professional services: Anillustration
on Swedish management consulting firms. International Journal of Operations &
Production Management, 19(9), 922–950.
Nijssen, E. J., Biemans, W. G., & De Kort, J. F. (2002). Involving purchasing in new product
development. R&D Management, 32(4), 281–289.
O'Mahoney, J., Heusinkveld, S., & Wright, C. (2013). Commodifying the commodifiers: The
impact of procurement on management knowledge. Journal of Management Studies,
50(2), 204–235.
Pemer, F., Sieweke, J., Werr, A., Birkner, S., & Mohe, M. (2014). The cultural embeddedness
of professional service purchasing—A comparative study of German and Swedish
companies. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 20(4), 273–285.
Pemer, F., Werr, A., & Bianchi, M. (2014). Purchasing professional services: A transaction
cost view of the antecedents and consequences of purchasing formalization.
Industrial Marketing Management, 43(5), 840–849.
Peña-Siles, J., del Mar González-Zamora, M., & Machuca, J. A. (2012). Specifying business
services: Learning from software engineering. Journal of Service Management, 23(1),
97–119.
Powell, W. W., & Snellman, K. (2004). The knowledge economy. Annual Review of
Sociology, 30, 199–220.
Rolfstam, M. (2012). An institutional approach to research on public procurement of in-
novation. Innovation: The European Journal of Social Science Research, 25(3), 303–321.
Santos, J. B. (2013). Operations management perspectives on expert services. (Doctoral dis-
sertation) Lancaster University.
Santos, J. B., & D'Antone, S. (2014). Reinventing the wheel? A critical view of demand-
chain management. Industrial Marketing Management, 43(6), 1012–1025.
Santos, J. B., & Spring, M. (2015). Are knowledge intensive business services really co-
produced? Overcoming lack of customer participation in KIBS. Industrial Marketing
Management, 50, 85–96.
Schiele, J. J. (2005). Meaningful involvement of municipal purchasing departments in the
procurement of consulting services: Case studies from Ontario, Canada. Journal of
Purchasing and Supply Management, 11(1), 14–27.
Schiele, H. (2010). Early supplier integration: The dual role of purchasing in new product
development. R&D Management, 40(2), 138–153.
Schiele, J. J., & McCue, C. P. (2006). Professional service acquisition in public sector pro-
curement: A conceptual model of meaningful involvement. International Journal of
Operations & Production Management, 26(3), 300–325.
Scott, D. R., & Van der Walt, N. T. (1995). Choice criteria in the selection of international
accounting firms. European Journal of Marketing, 29(1), 27–39.
Sharma, D. D. (1994). Classifying buyers to gain marketing insight: A relationships ap-
proach to professional services. International Business Review, 3(1), 15–30.
Sieweke, J., Birkner, S., & Mohe, M. (2012). Preferred supplier programs for consulting ser-
vices: An exploratory study of German client companies. Journal of Purchasing and
Supply Management, 18(3), 123–136.
Sonmez, M., & Moorhouse, A. (2010). Purchasing professional services: Which decision
criteria? Management Decision, 48(2), 189–206.
Stanko, M. A., & Bonner, J. M. (2013). Projective customer competence: Projecting future
customer needs that drive innovation performance. Industrial Marketing
Management, 42, 1255–1265.
Supphellen, M., & Gronhaug, K. (2003). The role of formal authority in buyer evaluation of
business research suppliers: A Scandinavian case. Journal of Business to Business
Marketing, 10(2), 53–78.
Töllner, A., Blut, M., & Holzmüller, H. H. (2011). Customer solutions in the capital goods
industry: Examining the impact of the buying center. Industrial Marketing
Management, 40(5), 712–722.
Tracey, M. (2004). A holistic approach to new product development: New insights.
Journal of Supply Chain Management, 40(3), 37–55.
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003). Towards a methodology for developing
evidence-informed management knowledge by means of systematic analysis.
British Journal of Management, 14(3), 207–222.
Tsai, Y., Joe, S., Ding, C. G., & Lin, C. (2013). Modeling technological innovation perfor-
mance and its determinants: An aspect of buyer–seller social capital. Technological
Forecasting and Social Change, 80, 1211–1221.
Uyarra, E., & Flanagan, K. (2010). Understanding the innovation impacts of public pro-
curement. European Planning Studies, 18(1), 123–143.
Van der Valk, W., & van Iwaarden, J. (2011). Monitoring in service triads consisting of
buyers, subcontractors and end customers. Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Management, 17(3), 198–206.
Van der Valk, W., Wynstra, F., & Axelsson, B. (2008). An empirical investigation of inter-
action processes between buyers and sellers of business services. IMP Journal,
2(22), 3–24.
Van der Valk, W., Wynstra, F., & Axelsson, B. (2009). Effective buyer-supplier interaction
patterns in ongoing service exchange. International Journal of Operations & Production
Management, 29(8), 807–833.
Vega-Jurado, J., Gutiérrez-Gracia, A., & Fernández-de-Lucio, I. (2009). Does external
knowledge sourcing matter for innovation? Evidence from the Spanish manufactur-
ing industry. Industrial and Corporate Change, 18(4), 637–670.
Viljamaa, A. (2011). Exploring small manufacturing firms' process of accessing external
expertise. International Small Business Journal, 29(5), 472–488.
Webster, F. E., Jr., & Wind, Y. (1972). A general model for understanding organizational
buying behavior. The Journal of Marketing, 36, 12–19.
Werr, A., & Pemer, F. (2007). Purchasing management consulting services: From manage-
ment autonomy to purchasing involvement. Journal of Purchasing and Supply
Management, 13(2), 98–112.
West, D. C. (1997). Purchasing professional services: The case of advertising agencies.
International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, 33(2), 2–9.
Williams, A. J., & Smith, W. C. (1990). Involving purchasing in product development.
Industrial Marketing Management, 19(4), 315–319.
Windrum, P., & Tomlinson, M. (1999). Knowledge-intensive services and international
competitiveness: A four country comparison. Technology Analysis & Strategic
Management, 11(3), 391–408.
Wittreich, W. J. (1966). Tips on buying professional services. Harvard Business Review,
55(5), 56–59.
Wolf, J. (2008). The nature of supply chain management research: Insights from a content
analysis of international supply chain management literature from 1990 to 2006. Frank-
furt: Die Deustche Nationalbibliotek.
WTO (2014). Press release PRESS/721, 14 April 2014. Accessed on line in October 2015 at
https://www.wto.org/english/news_e/pres14_e/pr721_e.htm
Wynstra, F., Axelsson, B., & van der Valk, W. (2006). An application-based classification to
understand buyer-supplier interaction in business services. International Journal of
Service Industry Management, 17(5), 474–496.
Wynstra, F., Spring, M., & Schoenherr, T. (2014). Service triads: A research agenda for
buyer–supplier–customer triads in business services. Journal of Operations
Management, 35, 1–20.
Wynstra, F., Van Weele, A., & Axelsson, B. (2000). Purchasing involvement in product de-
velopment: A framework. European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, 5(3),
129–141.
Wynstra, F., Weggeman, M., & Van Weele, A. (2003). Exploring purchasing integration in
product development. Industrial Marketing Management, 32(1), 69–83.
Yam, R. C., Lo, W., Tang, E. P., & Lau, A. K. (2011). Analysis of sources of innovation, tech-
nological innovation capabilities, and performance: An empirical study of Hong Kong
manufacturing industries. Research Policy, 40(3), 391–402.
Simona D'Antone is an Assistant Professor of Marketing at KEDGE Business School in Mar-
seille, France. Her main research interests are in cultural and social aspects of markets and
consumption with a specific focus on market shaping and market innovation in relation to
society/morality, supply-demand interfaces, sustainable organizational purchasing, sus-
tainable consumption.
Juliana Bonomi Santos is a Lecturer in Marketing Management and Competitiveness at
Centro Universitário da FEI, Brazil. Her main research interests lie in the area of the oper-
ations of knowledge intensive business services and professional services, business rela-
tionships and collaborative innovation, and service management.