A MODEL FOR ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF

ELECTRONIC PROCUREMENT FORMS

Luitzen de Boer
Jeroen Harink
Govert Heijboer

Abstract
This paper aims to contribute to the development of a model for assessing the direct and
indirect impact of various forms of electronic procurement (EP) on a firm’s integral
purchasing (-related) costs. The model builds on existing classifications of purchasing costs
and benefits and is illustrated by means of a number of empirical cases.

Keywords: electronic purchasing, purchasing related costs and benefits

Introduction
Fundamentally, Internet technology provides ways of drastically reducing different categories
of transaction- and communication costs. In that respect, the potential merit of various
electronic procurement (EP) forms, such as electronic catalog systems, electronic auctions,
intelligent agent applications, electronic market places seems largely undisputed (Smelzer and
Ruzicka 2000, Croom 2000). However, the wide range of solutions available faces
organisations with the challenge of assessing the suitability of the different solutions for their
specific commodities and portfolio of purchasing requirements. Many organisations seem to
struggle with this. Although a fastgrowing body of literature emerges on various specific EP
forms like electronic ordering systems (Harink, 2000), electronic reverse auctions (Teich et al,
1999), intelligent agents (Liang and Huang 2000) and so on, there still does not seem to be a
clear (theoretical) basis for specifying conditions under which different EP forms appear
appropriate in different purchasing and organisational settings (see e.g. Emiliani, 2000).

This paper aims to contribute to the development of such a basis. More specifically, we
present the first outline of a formal model which gives the impact of EP forms on categories
of purchasing costs and benefits based on company specific criteria and conditions. First we
define six EP forms that actually exist nowadays in practice and their general impact on
organisations. Second, we present the results of a literature study regarding existing
conceptual models of purchasing costs and benefits. Next, we qualitatively assess the impact
of the different EP forms on the different purchasing costs and benefits. The underlying
criteria for this assessment will be indicated. The validity of this model is supported with the
analysis of empirical evidence gathered in the course of several research and consultancy
projects in which the authors were involved. Finally the results are discussed with ideas for
further research.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 119

Electronic procurement encompasses several forms
Electronic procurement (EP) can be defined as using Internet technology in the purchasing
process. It is important to note that this definition is tight in the sense that it excludes old
applications like ordering by telephone or by fax. On the other hand, this definition is
relatively wide, because it not only encompasses the use of Internet applications in the
purchasing process, but it also includes the use of intranet and extranet applications1. For
example, ordering office supplies by using a supplier catalog on a website is a form of EP.

Based on the definition of EP a large number of forms of EP can be distinguished. Some of

these forms have received a lot of attention already, which has led to a situation that these
forms are quite well-defined and relatively well-developed. Other forms of EP are still quite
young and immature. Some of them will mature, others will never reach that state. In this
paper we will focus on the forms of EP that are quite well-defined and relatively well-
developed. Each of these forms has received a name in daily practice, namely:

• e-MRO
• web-based ERP
• e-sourcing
• e-tendering
• e-reverse auctioning
• e-informing

The various forms of EP will be described as processes: a collection of activities that have to
be executed by one or more employees. The Internet technology that is needed in these
processes can be offered to the employees in several ways:

• via market places: market places are specific websites on the Internet (aimed at e.g. an
industry or an commodity) that bring buyers and sellers together to facilitate employees of
organisations in applying forms of EP and more in general e-commerce.
• via intranets: intranets can be seen as a number of websites with information that can only
be accessed by employees of one organisation.
• via extranets: extranets can be seen as a number of websites that can only be accessed by
employees of a number of known organisations. One of these websites may be a market
place.

In the following we shall briefly define these six forms of EP.

e-MRO as well as web-based ERP is the process of creating and approving purchasing
requisitions, placing purchase orders and receiving goods and services ordered, by using a
software system based on Internet technology. In the case of e-MRO the goods and services
ordered are maintenance, repair and operation (MRO) supplies (i.e., non-product related). The
supporting software system (an ordering catalog system) is used by all employees of an
organisation. In the case of web-based ERP the goods and services ordered are product-
related. Usually only the employees of the purchasing department (or the planning

1
One of the most characteristic elements of Internet technology is the TCP/IP-protocol. The Internet
as well as intranets and extranets are based on this protocol.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 120

department) are using the supporting software system (a web-based ERP-system (Enterprise
Resource Planning)).

E-sourcing is the process that identifies new suppliers for a specific purchasing category,
using Internet technology (usually the Internet itself). By identifying new suppliers a
purchaser can increase the competitiveness during the tendering process for this purchasing
category. E-sourcing is also a way of decreasing the supply risk associated with this
purchasing category (Kraljic, 1983).

E-tendering is the process of sending RFI’s and RFP’s to suppliers and receiving the
responses of suppliers, using Internet technology. Sometimes within e-tendering the analysis
and comparison of responses is also supported. E-tendering does not include closing the deal
with a supplier. As a matter of fact, e-tendering smoothens a large part of the tactical
purchasing process (according to (van Weele, 1988)), without focusing on the content of that
process.

In daily practice an auction enables a supplier to sell (surplus) goods and services to a number
of (known or unknown) buying organisations. During a relatively short time frame the buying
organisations involved generate bids for the goods and services that are auctioned. The
auction has an increasing (an English auction with several bids) or decreasing price
mechanism (a Dutch auction with one bid only). A reversed (English) auction is the opposite:
it enables purchasers to buy goods and services needed from a number of (known of
unknown) suppliers. E-reverse auctioning is the Internet technology based equivalent of
reverse auction. Usually e-reverse auctioning focuses on the price of the goods and services
auctioned. Other criteria are in most cases neglected during the reverse auction. Of course,
other criteria can be used in a previous phase in order to determine which suppliers are invited
to join the e-reverse auction. E-reverse auctioning does really close a deal between a buying
organisation and a supplier, if parties agree on the price.

E-informing is a form of EP that is not directly associated with a contract or a transaction,

whereas the others are. E-informing is the process of gathering and distributing purchasing
information both from and to internal and external parties, using Internet technology. For
example, publishing purchasing management information on an extranet that can be accessed
by internal clients and suppliers is a way of e-informing.

Impact of forms of EP on organisations

Organisations are confronted with EP and all the forms it encompasses. The question arises
whether an organisation should do something with EP and if so, which form(s) of EP should
be chosen. In order to answer these two questions it is necessary to know what the impact of
each form of EP is, when it is implemented. In general the impact of implementing a form of
EP in a company may relate to four areas:

1. organisation;
2. IT;
3. cultural;
4. financial.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 121

The organisational impact has to do with changes in functions. By implementing a form of
EP, processes change. As a consequence, activities that need to be executed change. Some
activities may diminish, other activities may need more or less time and new activities may
emerge. Because functions are based on activities that have to be executed, this will cause
functions to change.

The IT impact has to do with changes in the collection of networks and systems an
organisation uses. By implementing a form of EP, (a specific tool based on) Internet
technology usually has to be introduced in the organisation and has to fit in with all other
networks and systems. For example, an ordering catalog system has to be bought and
installed. This ordering catalog system must probably interface with the financial system and
the HR system that are already in use.
The cultural impact has a direct relation with the organisational impact and deals with the
norms and values of an organisation. If there are no significant changes in functions,
everything will more or less remain the same and there is no real cultural impact. If functions
significantly change (e.g. within every function it is now allowed to order non-product related
goods and services), employees may have to execute some new activities or may have to let
go of some old activities. Norms and values may change drastically.
In general the organisational, IT and cultural impact of an EP form can not be neglected.
However within the scope of this article we restricted ourselves only looking to the financial
impact.

The financial impact deals with the costs and savings associated with the implementation of a
form of EP. Based on the current, ‘stable’ integral purchasing costs, the organisation has to
create a clear picture with respect to:

• the integral purchasing costs that will be realized after the implementation of a specific
form of EP (the new, stable situation);
• the costs that have to be made in order to reach that new, stable situation.

Of course, from a financial perspective solely, there is no need to implement a specific form
of EP if the integral purchasing costs that will be realized in the new, stable situation are
higher than in the current, stable situation. Only if the integral purchasing costs in the new,
stable situation are less than in the current, stable situation, it may be sensible to implement
that specific form of EP, see figure 1.

insert figure 1 here

Based on the costs that have to be made in order to reach that new, stable situation compared
with the difference in integral purchasing costs (i.e., the structural savings), the pay back time
can be estimated and a (preliminary) decision can be made. In this article we will only focus
on the impact of the forms of EP on the integral purchasing costs and benefits. Therefore we
need a structure by which these integral purchasing costs and benefits can be described well.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 122

Purchasing costs and benefits
In this section, we present the results of a literature study regarding existing conceptual
models of purchasing costs and benefits. Traditional purchasing and supply literature defines
purchasing costs as the equivalent of the actual spending. In other words: the price paid to the
supplier. Writers on TCO (Ellram 1994) have indicated the importance of also including (a)
the actual costs of carrying out a particular purchasing transaction and (b) the longer term
consequences of owning or using the product or service purchased (e.g. the cost of actually
installing, maintaining and salvaging a machine). Following the TCO approach, formal
economic models of supply strategies have been developed, see e.g. Homburg (1995). An
interesting feature of Homburg’s model is his modelling of supply risk, where the risk refers
to the (opportunity) cost of currently not paying the (theoretically) lowest price and suffering
interrupts in supply from the supplier. Taking a higher level of analysis, writers on buyer-
supplier relationships and business networks (see e.g. Gadde Snehota 1998) primarily
consider the costs and benefits of doing business with a supplier beyond the level of
individual transactions. More specifically, they distinguish the categories of economic
consequences of supplier relationships as can be seen in Table 1.

insert table 1 here

Obviously, the classification by Gadde and Snehota seems to incorporate all of the cost
categories identified in the traditional and TCO literature. Taking their level of analysis will
enable us to consider all possible consequences of implementing and using one or more EP
forms, whether it concerns the use of such forms within the same relationship or using it to
change or break-off the relationship. However, while we still take into account the different
categories of supply costs and benefits we suggest a slightly more compact – and disjunct –
grouping of the purchasing costs. In the following analysis we will use the following
categories:

- The expenditures on purchased items and services directly related to a firm’s primary
operations. We will refer to these expenditures as DIR – as in direct – . Note that DIR also
includes the costs of investing in the supplier’s primary operations, e.g. investments in
machinery or the costs of training the supplier’s workforce;
- The expenditures on purchased items and services which are not directly used in the
firm’s primary operations. We will refer to these expenditures as NPR – as in non-product
related - . Note that NPR may also include expenditures intended for and/or used by the
supplier.
- The costs of executing operational purchasing activities, i.e. ordering and expediting. We
will refer to these costs as OPC;
- The costs of executing tactical purchasing activities, i.e. setting specifications, selecting
suppliers, negotiating and contracting etc. We will refer to these costs as TPC;
- The costs of executing strategic purchasing activities, e.g. conducting spend analysis,
managing suppliers etc. We will refer to these costs as SPC;

Note that DIR and NPR comprise actual expenditures while OPC, TPC and SPC are the costs
accruing from time spent by the firm’s employees and management. The relevant purchasing
benefits are categorized as follows: CB for cost-benefits and RB for revenue-benefits. In the

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 123

following sections we will attempt to formulate hypotheses about how implementation of
various EP-forms may impact on DIR, NPR, OPC, TPC, SPC, CB and RB.

Direct implications of EP forms on the purchasing costs

Having defined the various EP forms and the categorization of relevant purchasing costs and
benefits, hypotheses can be formulated about the implications of implementing an EP form on
each category. In this section we first specifically consider the immediate impact of
implementing different EP-forms on DIR, NPR, OPC, TPC and SPC. These implications can
be seen in Table 2. Indirect impact of implementing EP on these costs as well as impact on
CB and RB will be discussed in section 5.

insert table 2 here

The arrows in table 2 represent the impact on the respective cost categories. They either go up
or down (indicating an increase or a decrease). In addition, a distinction is made by double
arrows implying a strong impact and an arrow between brackets for a slight impact. As
several effects might occur with each EP form in each cell more than one arrow (and in
different directions) may appear. The overall effect will be a "summation" of several effects.
For determining the actual size of each arrow for a specific company we need to take a closer
look at the underlying conditions and criteria. When for a company most of these criteria do
not apply the size of an arrow may decrease that much that no effect may be expected. Below
we will indicate which criteria are important for each cell in Table 2, where an impact is
expected.

For e-MRO the NPR purchasing volume can be considerably lowered. This savings will
intuitively be larger if the total NPR volume (or as a percentage of total spend) is high,
especially when the situation with respect to contracts in NPR is not optimal at the moment.
This means that, when contract coverage and/or concern leverage is low and/or maverick
buying is high there is a lot of room for improvement. Furthermore the 'clickability' of the
NPR volume has to be taken into account. Here 'clickability' of a purchase is defined as
whether the purchase can be done with a few simple mouseclicks or not. As an example office
supplies are in general clickable, whereas ordering a company for moving office equipment
(when an employee gets another room) is not. For e-MRO only savings can be made on
clickable purchases. Thus the higher the clickability the better. Although there are a lot of
factors that will give rise to a huge decrease in the NPR spend, there is also an increase: when
using a third party for implementing an e-MRO system, service contracts (updates) will be
necessary. Reducing the OPC with e-MRO is most effective when the number of purchase
orders is high as well as the number of the internal customers (employees). Also when the
convenience of ordering is low for the internal customer substantial improvements can be
made. The TPC will increase as more time as the conditions with respect to e-MRO need to
be discussed with the MRO suppliers (a discussion that was not necessary in the old
situation). When the experience with Internet technology of suppliers and purchasers is high
these costs may not increase that much. If the availability of purchasing management
information is low at the moment, e-MRO gives the possibility to obtain this information
more efficiently and more reliably and therefore lowering the SPC.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 124

For web-based ERP solutions only the OPC can be lowered assuming an ERP system is
already available. As the ERP system should already have made the ordering process of direct
purchases very efficient, a web application can only give added value being a better user
interface. Therefore when the number of internal customers, that order direct goods is high
and the convenience of making these orders is not so high in the current situation, the most
cost savings can be made. Note that the NPR costs may increase because of possible
maintenance contracts for this web application.

For e-sourcing only a direct impact is expected on the TPC. E-sourcing can be a very useful
tool for locating possible new suppliers, getting information and contacting them. This will be
most useful for the commodities in the leverage and bottleneck kwadrant of the Kraljic matrix
(these can be both direct and indirect commodities). As e-sourcing facilitates tactical
purchasing the TPC will decrease.

Introducing e-tendering is done to lower the TPC. Especially when in the current situation the
so-called tendering bureaucracy is high, meaning the amount of paperwork involved with the
whole tendering process and also the way the process is organised itself. Having a far from
optimal situation with respect to contracts may also give a larger impact. Having a low
concern leverage and/or a low contract coverage (like with e-MRO, see above) in the old
situation leaves a lot of room for improvement on tactical purchasing. As with the web-based
ERP system and e-MRO here also the NPR costs may increase because of possible service
contracts.

For e-reversed auctioning a company needs to have a high number of possible suppliers as the
idea of an auction is to obtain lower prices by using the market mechanism. Therefore the
impact of introducing this process will be higher when the leverage (or even routine)
purchasing volume is high (the volume can consist of direct and indirect purchases). Another
condition to be able to hold a reversed auction is to have the commodity well specified. The
larger the number of commodities that can be well specified, the more an e-reversed auction
can be applicable, thus the larger the possible effect. Having a third party actually execute the
e-reversed auction or having third party software increases the NPR spend. On one hand, if
often time consuming and unclear (price) negotiations occur currently, e-reversed auctions
can replace that, lowering the TPC substantially. On the other hand the preparation of an e-
rversed auction takes considerable time making a good specification of the commodity and
setting up the whole process with all suppliers involved, giving rise to an increase of the TPC.

E-informing can be implemented to have better and more efficient access to strategic
purchasing information (that is more reliable also) and in that way lowering the SPC. The
effect of introducing this will be larger if the experience with Internet technology of both
suppliers and purchasers is higher, like with e-MRO. Similar to e-MRO as well, the impact
will be bigger when at the moment the availability of purchasing management information is
low. Also a high strategic (and to a lesser extent bottleneck) purchasing volume makes this
tool more useful. For the usage of e-informing IT support will be needed though, as the actual
implementation involves coupling different information systems together, giving rise to
higher OPC. The actual amount of that will depend on whether a company already has a good
IT-support infrastructure or not.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 125

Indirect purchasing costs and benefits of implementing an EP form
In the previous section, we considered the expected immediate impact of various EP-forms on
OPC, TPC, SPC, DIR and NPR. The underlying assumption in that exercise was that the
frequency and depth of the different steps in the purchasing process remained unchanged. In
terms of a firm’s Loss and Profit statement, the expected net reduction in the sum of OPC,
TPC, SPC, DIR and NPR directly contributes to a higher profit, see figure 2.

insert figure 2 here

Naturally, it may be expected that as a result of the direct impact of EP, certain changes in the
frequency and/or depth of one or more steps in the purchasing process will be considered. In
that respect it is particularly interesting to consider changes in the frequency and/or depth in
the tactical purchasing steps: specification, selection and contracting. Let us for example
consider the possible consequences of ET on the frequency of supplier selection. As the direct
costs of selecting suppliers drops (TPC fall), it seems to make sense to consider a higher
frequency of tendering. The general rationale behind this would be that in this way, the firm
would benefit from better deals, resulting in a lower DIR (or NPR) and or more benefits (CB
and RB). However, changing suppliers more often will create additional costs in terms of (re-
) investing in more suppliers, managing more suppliers and possibly losing certain cost-
and/or revenue benefits. Table 3 aims to capture some of the possible consequences.

insert table 3 here

Therefore, when the implementation of EP leads to changes in the frequency and/or depth of
the tactical purchasing steps, these indirect effects on purchasing costs and benefits must be
taken into account as well. The possible indirect effects of EP implementation in terms of the
firm’s Loss and Profit statement are shown in figure 3.

Some empirical illustrations

In order to roughly evaluate our theoretical model, we briefly consider two empirical cases.

A large Dutch transportation company decided in 2000 to implement e-MRO. Based on a

clickable NPR purchasing spend of about Euro 50,000, a thorough and detailed business case
was developed. Savings are mentioned for three areas: the biggest saving will be realized by
reducing maverick buying (about Euro 5 million per year). Other savings will be realized by
increasing process efficiency (Euro 2 million once only) and improving purchasing control
(Euro 4 million per year, once enough data is captured in the system). The organisation has
chosen not to cash the savings based on increased process efficiency (no jobs will be lost).
This means that NPR will reduce dramatically, OPC will remain the same as a consequence of
the organisational choice mentioned and SPC will decrease (on the longer term). At this
moment a part of the organisation works with e-MRO, but realised savings are not yet
available. However, the feeling is that the savings mentioned in the business case will be
realized easily. This organisation had chosen to buy a software solution (initial license fee of
about Euro 1.5 million). As a consequence, this organisation will pay about 20% of the initial
license fee per year (so, NPR slightly increases).

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 126

A European vendor of e-reverse auctioning services, that has already served several clients,
provided the following data (based on about 200 auctions). The preparation of an e-reverse
auction takes about 4 to 6 weeks for several people (from the buying organisation). This
means that TPC increases. The actual auction will reduce prices significantly by 10 to 15%
(so, NPR or DIR decreases). The volume of the purchasing category auctioned varies from
Euro 50,000 to Euro 2.5 million. The buying organisation using an e-reverse auction service
has to pay Euro 2500 - 8000 plus a part of the savings accomplished (so, in that way NPR
increases slightly).

Conclusions
Developing a simple qualitative model of the possible impact of various forms of EP
underlines the danger of treating EP as one ‘solution’. Trying to assess the direct impact of the
various forms is hardly straightforward, let alone the possible indirect impact. Opposing
effects may occur within one and the same category of purchasing costs. In addition, the
dramatic reduction in search and communication costs makes it worthwhile to consider
drastically different frequencies and/or choice-sets in the purchasing process, e.g. supplier
selection. Doing so may have a range of indirect effects, not only on the purchasing costs but
also on costs of internal processes other than purchasing. Still, the basic structure of our
model seems to offer a useful starting point for better understanding the complexity and
challenges of EP.

References
Croom, S.R., 2000. The impact of web-based procurement on the management of operating
resources supply. The Journal of Supply Chain Management, Winter 2000.
Ellram, L.M., 1994. Total cost modelling in purchasing. Center for Advanced Purchasing
Studies.
Emiliani, M.L., 2000. Business-to-business online auctions: key issues for purchasing process
improvement, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 5(4), 176-186.
Harink, J.H.A., 1999. Excelleren met elektronisch inkopen (Excelling with electronic
purchasing). Samsom, Alphen aan den Rijn.
Homburg, C., 1995. Single Sourcing, Double Sourcing, Multiple Sourcing...?: Ein
ökonomischer Erklärungsansatz (Single Sourcing, Double Sourcing, Multiple Sourcing?
Towards an economical foundation). Zeitschrift für Betriebswirtschaft, 65(8), 813-834.
Gadde, L.E. and Haakansson, H., 1993. Professional purchasing, Routledge, London.
Kraljic, P., 1983. Purchasing must become supply management. Harvard Business Review,
September-October, 109-117.
Liang, T.P. and Huang, J.S., 2000. A framework for applying intelligent agents to support
electronic trading. Decision Support Systems 28, 305-317.
Smeltzer, L. and Ruzicka, M., 2000. Electronic Reverse Auctions: Integrating the Tool with
the Strategic-Sourcing Process. Practix, June 2000.
Teich, J., Wallenius, H. and Wallenius, J., 1999. Multiple-issue auction and market
algorithms for the world wide web. Decision Support Systems, 26, 49-66.
Weele, A. van, 1988, Inkoop in strategisch perspectief. Samsom, Alphen ad Rijn

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 127

 Table 1: categories of supply costs and benefits (based on Gadde and Snehota 1998)

Costs of supplier relationships Benefits of supplier relationships

- Direct procurement costs (purchasing spend) - Cost-benefits (possibility to keep costs of

- Direct transaction costs (costs of specifying, internal processes at a low level, e.g. inventory)
selecting, negotiating, contracting, ordering etc)
- Relationship handling costs (investments at
supplier, transaction independent - Revenue-benefits (improving product quality,
communication) innovation etc)
- Supply handling costs (supply risk
investigations)

Table 2: Direct impact of EP forms on the purchasing costs

DIR NPR OPC TPC SPC

e-MRO - ↑↓↓↓ ↓↓ ↑ (↓)

web based ERP1 - (↑) ↓ - -
e-sourcing - - - ↓ -
e-tendering - (↑) - ↓ -
e-reversed auctions ↓ ↓( ↑ ) - ↑↓ -
e-informing - - (↑) - ↓
1
assuming in the starting situation an ERP system is present

Table 3: Possible indirect impact of some EP forms

Effect on DIR / Effect on TPC Effect on SPC Effect on CB / RB

NPR

Likely to fall as Assumed constant Can go either way: a

more alternatives (more selections but new supplier may
can be considered costs per selections lead to a significant
Changing are lower) fall in DIR but
supplier (s) replacing the old
more often May rise as May rise as more supplier may result
investments are suppliers must be losing valuable CB
necessary in managed (over time) or RB. It may also
(more) suppliers lead to a drop in
over time DIR and improved
CB and RB

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 128

 Figure 1: structural savings through implementing EP

Structural savings

Integral
purchasing
costs
Integral
purchasing
costs
One-time
implementation costs

Old 'stable' New 'stable'

situation situation

Figure 2: direct impact of EP assuming no change in purchasing strategy

Profit and loss statement

Non-purchasing
related costs

SPC

TPC Turnover
∆ OPC
DIR
NPR

∆ Profit

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 129

 Figure 3: possible indirect impact of EP forms

Profit and loss statement

Non-purchasing
∆’ related costs
(cost benefits)

SPC

TPC Turnover
(revenue benefits)
OPC
∆’’
DIR
NPR

Profit
∆’ + ∆’’+ ∆’’’ ∆’’’

About the authors

Luitzen de Boer, tel. + 31 53 4894090, email l.deboer@sms.utwente.nl,
Jeroen Harink, tel. + 31 53 4894443, email jeroen.harink@nl.pwcglobal.com,
Govert Heijboer, tel. + 31 53 4894443, email g.j.heijboer@sms.utwente.nl,

University of Twente, Faculty of Technology & Management, P.O. box 217, 7500 AE
Enschede, Netherlands; fax + 31 53 4892159.

The 10th International Annual IPSERA Conference 2001 130