ARTICLE IN PRESS
International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440
Case study
Collaborative commerce for non-technical industries:
is it worth the investment?
Christa Centola, Cynthia J. Myer, Mahesh S. Raisinghani*, David Virgil
Graduate School of Management, University of Dallas, 1845 East Northgate Drive, Irving, TX 75062, USA
Abstract
The main focus of this case is to provide insights as to whether it is truly necessary for a seemingly ‘‘non-
technical’’ industry to adopt c-commerce. It is intended for strategic thinkers and corporate managers who
question the impact of, and seek additional information on, collaborative-commerce (c-commerce). The
authors targeted the home building retail industry as it has experienced much growth in the past 10 years
due to home-improvement projects and does not outwardly require a strong technical presence. Although
there are several indicators pointing toward the relevance of relying on technology as a means to do
business, this case looks into the industries that may not have major investments in technology.
Additionally, most of this case presents information derived from the people thinking of and making
decisions about c-commerce. Insights from secondary research and field interviews are also provided.
r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
In today’s digital economy, enterprises of all sizes across many industries face the growing need
to integrate their operational infrastructure with external electronic commerce factions to fully
reap the benefits of c-commerce. C-commerce can help make informed decisions in the following
areas:
Supply chain management and business-to-business (‘‘B2B’’) efficiencies,
*
internal and external communication improvements,
*
24 Â 7 operational capacity,
*
increased touch points with existing clients and potential new prospects,
*
leveraging knowledge management (KM) throughout a company and its partnerships.
*
*Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-972-721-5173.
E-mail address: mraising@gsm.udallas.edu (M.S. Raisinghani).
0268-4012/$ - see front matter r 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2004.06.007

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440
434
However, with the growth of the Internet come many challenges as well, often matching the
opportunities equally. Intuitively, one could argue that c-commerce contributes to the competitive
advantage of an enterprise. While small/medium sized enterprises (SMEs) may be reluctant to
integrate c-commerce because of assumed cost, all enterprises are affected by this factor. The
chasm between enterprises that integrate c-commerce into their operational infrastructure versus
an enterprise that does not portrays a significant impact to the enterprise’s staying power in
today’s digital economy. Throughout this case we will present the major challenges of integrating
c-commerce into an existing business environment, offer strategic and best-practice models for
successful c-commerce integration, and conclude with a summary of our findings.
2. The home building retail industry
Although the tragic events of September 11th followed by the general recession have had a
significant impact on the US economy, the home channel sellers enjoyed a 10% increase in 2001.
Moreover, 2002 saw an even greater increase as the Federal Reserve lowered interest rates in an
effort to stave off the recession (Canlen, 2002). Presently, there are only a few large enterprises
dominating the home channel industry in the USA. Though for much of the 20th century the
home channel industry was dominated by small independents, often members of buying
cooperatives such as ACE or True Value, many small independents have been consolidated into
larger enterprises. Additionally, the ‘‘big box’’ retailers, such as Home Depot and Lowe’s, are
often able to over-power the smaller competitors. Table 1 below presents the industry ranking of
the top home channel enterprises, revenue for 2001 and 2000 and the number of stores for the
respective years.
Still, most home channel retailers have been unsuccessful in adopting c-commerce technologies,
and so we are left asking: how can this industry capitalize on c-commerce and see a return on their
investment? Should they even consider it?
3. C-commerce as a relationship strategy
Most senior managers and business owners understand that sharing information externally and
internally can advance customer relationships, increase process efficiencies, and improve supply
chain management productivity. Equally important is the need to remain current with changing
technology. Can the solution support third-party products and integration with other platforms?
Will this solution remain open and scalable for the future? The decision to collaborate with
trading partners changes the way a company plans, builds, and deploys future business
applications. So, full understanding and support in ‘‘mastering management information’’ is
essential to creating new and sustaining existing customer relationships (Beijerse, 2000; Taylor,
2001).
The common home building retail industry thread, particularly with SMEs, denotes a culture
that looks to customer-driven requests before implementing and adopting new technologies. Quite
plainly, unless the customer is calling and complaining, executives do not feel compelled to
implement new technology. Conversely, larger enterprises in the industry tend to have a strategy

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440 435
Table 1
Industry ranking of the top home channel enterprises
Sales ($M) Stores
Ranking Enterprises 2001 2000 2001 2000
1 Home depot $53,553.0 $45,738.0 1,342 1,134
2 Lowe’s $22,111.1 $18,778.6 752 661
Wal–Marta
3 Not Avail $9,524.0 3,213 2,997
8 Sears $1,613.4 $1,524.6 256 251
Home building retail enterprises interviewed
9 Builder’s First Source $1.561.0 $1,710.0 71 72
10 Lanoga $1,344.0 $1,296.8 188 193
17 Foxworth-Galbraith $501.0 $513.0 72 66
19 McCoy’s $450.0 467.0 91 91
37 Parr Lumber $216.0 227.0 21 20
46 Ply Mart’s $181.0 181.0 12 11
68 Wheeler’s $121.0 110.0 15 15
77 Marvin’s $108.0 120.0 17 18
250 Jerry’s $38.0 $32.0 1 1
Not Ranked Brookharts’
Not Ranked Harvey’s
a
Wal–Mart includes supercenters, discount stores and Sam’s club.
to embrace technology for the purpose of enhancing business; in looking more toward value to the
customer or trading partner, they have been willing to implement c-commerce initiatives. C-
commerce allows for fluid communications across an entire supply chain as well as an efficient
share in data and knowledge across several partnered enterprises. It provides a cost-effective
means of establishing partnerships across the supply chain, helping to reduce inventory costs and
tighten efficiencies.
However, if a company is willing to take on a c-commerce strategy, there must be significant
investment in understanding the full process of how the enterprise relates to other enterprises
either in business-to-business (B2B) relationships or business-to-consumer (B2C) relationships for
an enterprise to truly reap the benefits of establishing technology to support c-commerce (and
KM as a function of c-commerce) (Matlay, 2000; Duffy, 2001). Likewise, there must be full
understanding that alongside the return on investment comes the initial cost of the investment as
well as production costs for sustaining the product (McAdam & Reid, 2001; Bajwa & Lewis,
2003). With the expense of taking on a new technology comes the question of utilization—so what
could a company in a non-technical industry expect in terms of its adoption rates?
Our research points toward a number of mergers and acquisitions in this highly competitive
industry. The activity challenges the larger enterprises with adopting any new form of technology
due to the enormous consolidation effort in the information technology (IT) infrastructures and
significant upset in the overall enterprise culture. Our research also reveals that enterprise culture,
as well as the general cultural aspects reflected in an industry, is a primary driver when
determining successful c-commerce adoption (see Fig. 1). Additionally, data presented in Fig. 2

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440
436
Drivers of c-Commerce Adoption
9%
Budget
27%
Culture
27%
Budget & Culture
Other
37%
Fig. 1. Drivers of c-commerce adoption.
Technology Adoption
9% Early
27%
Middle
Late
64%
Fig. 2. Technology adoption rate.
suggests a prevalent ‘‘late technology adoption’’ within the home building retail industry, possibly
denoting that this industry is not eager to embrace or adopt strategies to aid in the
implementation of c-commerce.
4. Challenges of integrating c-commerce into an existing business environment
When we consider the major challenges, culture is a strong contender. Culture often proves to
be the stated reason for failure when adopting new technology. The culture not only reflects the
ability to adopt and sustain change management, but also reflects a current state of utilizing a
collaborative structure internally. How does an enterprise share its internal information? What
does an enterprise consider its best practices for deriving and sharing customer metrics, internal
improvement metrics, and competitive metrics?
The lack of a strong change management strategy and sponsorship by senior management
could be a major obstacle when implementing a c-commerce strategy. Moreover, although an
enterprise may have independent c-commerce initiatives, it may lack a centralized strategy and
hence may be unable to capitalize on its efforts. Other enterprises might understand that
c-commerce is important to their long-term success, but they still fail to make it a strategic focus

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440 437
even if they have the budget and infrastructure to support it. For example, Builder’s First Source
(BFS) have the technical capability to implement extensive c-commerce solutions, but they have
not yet employed a robust strategy to support c-commerce. While BFS has implemented
electronic data interchange (EDI) and collaborates effectively within the enterprise, they have not
implemented significant c-commerce applications with their customers. This appears to be caused
by inconsistent demand from customers and the large-scale infrastructure challenges at BFS.
5. Analysis: how are these challenges identical and how do they differ from each other?
Most important is that small enterprises have a significant challenge with funding due to the
basic revenue requirements needed to support a comprehensive c-commerce initiative. There
seems to be a critical mass that must be achieved before a business reaches the right combination
of financial resources, technical prowess, and strategic direction to implement significant c-
commerce initiatives. Often the smaller enterprises lack the internal collaborative model
associated with supporting an external collaborative model. The investment required to
implement changes is too high to validate the need of change.
Conversely, large enterprises tend to have advanced global processes and mature infrastructures
to support more robust collaborations. The benefit of c-commerce is in being able to reach
customers and partners in a timely and flexible manner. Our research reveals that the medium
sized enterprises that have incorporated c-commerce as a strategic initiative are enjoying success.
In terms of how the challenges are similar across all sized-enterprises, our research indicates that
the enterprises lack a clear and fundamental understanding of their customer needs. Throughout
c-commerce research, one thing holds true: an enterprise must have a significant investment in
recognizing the full end-to-end process of how the enterprise relates to other enterprises when
collaborating in B2B or B2C processes. When asked how firms would determine if their strategy
was sound, most enterprises replied that they were looking for a quantitative return on investment
(ROI). Only a few recognized the value of differentiation and customer loyalty as reasons to
develop c-commerce initiatives.
A simple review of our research enterprises’ web sites shows that most do not have an
aggressive collaborative initiative evident on their web site. While some of the enterprises are
collaborating with their trading partners, many acknowledged they had some form of c-commerce
implemented; however, in reviewing each enterprise’s web site, only three of the eleven yielded
information about their c-commerce initiatives.
6. Models for successful c-commerce integration
Looking at the models of success, at the forefront is the fundamental need to understand your
customer and model a culture that supports the strategies associated to bringing in new business
and retaining you clients. Our research shows three major components to successful adoption of
c-commerce if it is to truly enable a competitive advantage:
(1) Robust sponsorship from senior management to provide the means for change management to
aid in adopting and sustaining a long-term c-commerce strategy. As with any tool that can

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440
438
enable a shared thread for relationship and knowledge management (B2B and B2C alike),
c-commerce is more than just an electronic tool.
(2) Appropriate allocation of resources and budget to prepare the internal infrastructure (people,
process and systems) for a collaborative culture in support of the c-commerce strategy.
(3) Proper allocation of resources and budget toward implementing the external c-commerce
infrastructure in support of the c-commerce strategy. To minimize risk, the enterprise must look
for specific opportunities to develop the required external infrastructure.
Therefore, the opportunity to differentiate often resides in price or service; because of small
margins, service differentiation seems the most likely opportunity for businesses in the industry.
All of the primary research participants acknowledged that they wanted future c-commerce
initiatives to provide significant service differentiation through a number of improvements. Some
of the common ones were improved communications, customer and vendor access, increased
sales, increased customer loyalty, reduced costs of doing business, and improved margins.
7. Putting it all together: what did our interviewees say about c-commerce?
Whether an enterprise adopts an early, middle, or late strategy, building the c-commerce
strategy requires that enterprises embrace a strategy for c-commerce adoption. Our secondary
research indicates that c-commerce, as a strategy, must focus on the end result of a more fluid
communication across the supply chain as well as an effective data share with partners and
customers. So, in order for c-commerce to be successful, an enterprise must commit to its success
in adoption. Fig. 3 below presents the responses of the 11 enterprises interviewed (including large
enterprises and SMEs) when asked the question, ‘‘Is c-commerce critical to your future success?’’
In fact, although 60% of respondents considers c-commerce as critical or important to future
success, the remaining percent, 30% do not consider c-commerce to be critical to future success,
and the remainder do not have a general sense that c-commerce will be important to their near
future success.
It appears that the larger the enterprise, the greater the strategic advantage enjoyed over the
smaller competitors. Successful collaboration in commerce indicates the ability to share data
(through the proper organizational infrastructure as well as the hardware/software configura-
tions). In this way, larger enterprises show more promise in adopting a successful c-commerce
strategy because the typical global presence that is prevalent among large enterprises provides an
Is C-commerce criticalto your future success?
10% 10% Not in Near Future
No
30%
Yes
50% Important
Fig. 3. Is collaborative commerce critical to your future success.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440 439
infrastructure that often naturally supports a culture of collaboration among partners and
customers. Large enterprises usually have an end-to-end process of collaboration as a function of
size and competitiveness in any industry. Yet, our research does not bear this out. Some of the
large competitors, because of their consolidation efforts, struggle with a disparate technology
environment as they spend time and resources toward conversion and migration strategies in
order to sustain tactical and day-to-day activities internal to the enterprise.
8. Conclusion
A trusted and respected relationship with partners coupled with appropriate technology could
be key to a successful enterprise. Electronic chat rooms, video/audio conferencing, automated
virtual supply chains, and online customer ordering/tracking capabilities to forge, enforce, and
even terminate relationships can achieve collaboration within an enterprise (Ulrich, 2001; Wickert
& Herschel, 2001; Sgarioto, 2001). Today’s digital economy necessitates an adoption of
c-commerce so that enterprises of all sizes can leverage core competencies of strategic
partnerships. In the home building retail industry, the growth and volatility aspects of mergers
and acquisitions make for a difficult transition to a c-commerce strategy if there is little to no
incentive for profit or full utilization with partners. Ultimately, users looking to engage in
c-commerce projects should be prepared to make value their primary measurement of success.
As this industry does not see a pressing need for c-commerce utilization, planning for
organizational changes and addressing issues and standards that will support the adoption of new
technologies are hardly a priority. In order to successfully implement and adopt c-commerce,
robust project management strategies (often the obvious internal collaborative efforts) would
need to evolve. Business partner management and full B2B and B2C relationships would not only
require fostering, but ongoing care as well.
References
Bajwa, D. S., & Lewis, L. F. (2003). Does size matter? An investigation of collaborative information technology
adoption by US firms. The Journal of Information Technology Theory and Application (JITTA), 5(1), 29–46.
Beijerse, R. P. (2000). Knowledge management in small and medium-sized companies: Knowledge management for
entrepreneurs. Journal of Knowledge Management, 4(2), 162.
Canlen, B. (2002). Downturn deals some a blow, while overall industry remains strong. Home Channel News, 30–32.
Duffy, J. (2001). Knowledge management finally becomes mainstream. Information Management Journal, 35(4), 62–65.
Matlay, H. (2000). The future of workplace learning and knowledge management: A small business perspective.
Management Research News, 23(9–11), 110–111.
McAdam, R., & Reid, R. (2001). SME and large organisation perceptions of knowledge management: Comparisons
and contrasts. Journal of Knowledge Management, 5(3), 231–241.
Sgarioto, M. S. (2001). Trust drives c-commerce. MSI, 19(6), 14–18.
Taylor, P. (2001). Creating customers from knowledge management. The British Journal of Administrative
Management., 28, 14–15.
Ulrich, W. M. (2001). Collaboration counts in c-commerce. Computerworld, 35(8), 32.
Wickert, A., & Herschel, R. (2001). Knowledge-management issues for smaller businesses. Journal of Knowledge
Management, 5(4), 329–337.

ARTICLE IN PRESS
C. Centola et al. / International Journal of Information Management 24 (2004) 433–440
440
Christa Centola brings over 11 years experience in improving and implementing organizational infrastructures, usually
by way of setting up and managing formal Project Management Offices as well as managing large, complex programs
within complex global organizations. She earned her Bachelor of Arts degree in English with a concentration in Writing
from the University of Massachusetts, a Master of Business Administration degree from Northeastern University in
Boston, and a Master of Management concentrating in Information Technology from the University of Dallas.
Additionally, she is a certified PMP from the Project Management Institute and also has a Project Management
Certificate from Boston University Management Development Programs. She has completed post-graduate studies
in Business Writing and Rhetoric, Change Management, and various technologies in an effort to implement
organizational efficiencies through the use of company resources and technology. She currently resides near Boston,
MA, where she works as a Senior Project Manager.
C.J. Myer has spent most of her career in various facets of the travel industry. The last ten years C.J. has been a Senior
Analyst specializing in Marketing Planning and competitive analysis for the airline industry. She earned her Bachelor of
Arts and Sciences degree in Accounting with a minor in Marketing from Dallas Baptist University. She also holds a
Certified Travel Counselor designation from the Institute of Certified Travel Agents headquartered in Wellesley, MA.
C.J. is a member of the Sigma Iota Epsilon Honor Society at the University of Dallas where she earned her Master of
Business Administration degree with a concentration in eBusiness. She is continuing her education by working on a
Masters in Marketing Management.
Dr. Mahesh S. Raisinghani is a faculty member at the Graduate School of Management, University of Dallas, where he
teaches MBA courses in Information Systems and E-Business. Dr. Raisinghani was the recipient of the 1999 UD
Presidential Award, 2001 King/Haggar Award for excellence in teaching, research and service; 2002 research award,
2002 Organizational Service Award for being the Best Track Chair at Information Resources Management Association
and a finalist at the 2003 Asian Chamber of Commerce awards. His previous publications have appeared in Information
and Management, Journal of Global IT Management, Journal of E-Commerce Research, Information Strategy: An
Executive’s Journal, Journal of IT Theory and Applications, Journal of IT Cases and Applications, International
Journal of E-Business Research, Journal of Computer Information Systems, Journal of Digital Information and
Information Resources Management Journal among others.
David Virgil is currently the Director of Applications Development for Foxworth-Galbraith Lumber Company, a
regional supplier of building material products in the southwest, David has over 18 years of applications development
management experience in the retail industry, the last 13 at Foxworth-Galbraith. He earned his Bachelor of Business
Administration degree in Information Resource Management from Texas Wesleyan University in Fort Worth,
Texas and a Master of Business Administration degree from the University of Dallas, with a concentration in
E-Commerce.