|
KMID : 1134820120410060861
|
|
Journal of the Korean Society of Food Science and Nutrition
2012 Volume.41 No. 6 p.861 ~ p.869
|
|
|
Purchasing Status and Supplier Performance Evaluation of School Foodservice in Chanwon, Korea
|
|
Jung Hoi-Jung
Kim Hyun-Ah
|
|
|
Abstract
|
|
|
|
This study was conducted to investigate the purchasing status and to compare supplier performance evaluations between competitive bidding and negotiated contracts in school foodservice in Changwon, Korea. A total of 190 questionnaires were distributed and 167 (return rate 87.9%) were collected from June 29 to September 28, 2010, and then a total of 151 (analysis rate 79.5%) were used for the final analysis. First, 91.4% of food product purchases for school meals were contracted through competitive bidding, especially limited competitive bidding. It mainly consisted of agricultural products, processed food, and eco-friendly agricultural products (fruit). Second, 78.8% of schools purchased food products by negotiated contracts, while single negotiation accounted for 59.7%. Food products by negotiated contract consisted of meat, kimchi, and fish. Third, the purchase status of competitive bidding and negotiated contracts showed a significant difference in agricultural products (p<0.001), fish (p<0.001), meats (p<0.001), poultry (p<0.001), antibiotic-free poultry (p<0.001), eco-friendly grain (p<0.001), eco-friendly agricultural products (fruit) (p<0.001), eco-friendly processed food (p<0.001), processed products (p<0.001), milk (p<0.001) and general grain (p<0.001) except for kimchi. Fourth, comparative analysis of supplier performance evaluation (on a 5-point Likert scale) of school foodservice showed that price of product of competitive bidding (3.73) was significantly higher than that of negotiated contract (2.95) (p<0.001), and the overall performance level of the negotiated contract (3.85) was significantly higher than that of competitive bidding (3.61) (p<0.01). The supplier performance evaluation levels of product packaging (p<0.01), product quality at the time of delivery (p<0.001), hygiene of products (p<0.001), consistency to specification (p<0.001), swiftness of return and exchange (p<0.001), emergency delivery (p<0.001), service of delivery staff (p<0.05), and handling of complaints (p<0.001) of negotiated contracts were significantly higher than those of competitive bidding of school foodservice. In conclusion, school foodservice selected food suppliers both by adopting competitive bidding and negotiated contracts. And there was a significant difference of school foodservice supplier performance between competitive bidding and negotiated contracts in Changwon, Korea.
|
|
|
KEYWORD
|
|
|
purchasing status, supplier performance evaluation, school foodservice, competitive bidding, negotiated contract
|
|
|
FullTexts / Linksout information
|
|
|
|
|
|
Listed journal information
|
|
|
|