Current Science Research Bulletin

Procurement of office stationery is part of the routine operational expenditure of local governments that plays an important role in supporting the smooth implementation of organizational tasks. Although the value of each procurement package is relatively small, the high frequency of procurement causes the accumulation of Office stationery expenditure to be significant and needs to be evaluated from the perspective of effectiveness and efficiency of regional spending. This study aims to analyze the effectiveness and efficiency of direct procurement of Office stationery at the Regional Inspectorate of Klaten Regency in the 2025 Fiscal Year using a value for money approach. This study uses a quantitative descriptive evaluative method with data sourced from procurement documents, budget data and realization of Office stationery expenditure, Office stationery user questionnaires, and limited interviews with procurement officials as supporting data. The results show that direct procurement of Office stationery is in the fairly effective category with an effectiveness index of 79.95 percent, and efficient with an efficiency ratio of 96.14 percent. However, there are still opportunities to improve procurement performance, especially in aspects of timeliness, consistency of needs fulfillment, and price control. Therefore, this study recommends prioritizing e-purchasing mechanisms through e-catalogs for routine and recurring stationery procurement to improve efficiency, transparency, and achieve value for money in regional spending.

Direct procurement; office stationery; value for money; e-purchasing.

1. Creswell, J. W.,& Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage.
2. Darmawan, F., & Sari, M. (2021).User Satisfaction in E-procurementSystems: LPSE vs. E- Katalog. Technology in Government, 8(4), 210-225.
3. Croom, S., & Brandon-Jones, A. (2007). Impact of e-procurement: Experiences from implementation in the UK public sector. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 27(3), 294–317.https://doi.org/10.1108/01443570710725551
4. Erpidawati, E., Usdarisman, U., & Dodi, A. (2022). Contribution To Work Motivation And Incentives On The Performance Of Pamong City Of Padang.
5. Febrin, M. (2022). Gambaran Pelaksanaan Fungsi Manajemen Logistik NonMedis Jurnal Logistik Non Medis. Vol 2(No 4). Juli 2022.
6. Fakhri, M., Rachmawati, D., & Kurniawan, A. (2020). Sistem informasi pendukung pengadaan barang/jasa pada Inspektorat Provinsi DKI Jakarta. Jurnal Sistem Informasi, 18(2), 123–134.
7. Flynn, A., McKevitt, D., & Davis, P. (2021). The impact of corruption on public procurement. Journal of Business Ethics, 172(3), 495-517.
8. Flynn, B. B., Schroeder, R. G., & Sakakibara, S. (2019). The impact of quality management practices on performance. Journal of Operations Management, 17(1), 85-102.
9. Flyvbjerg, B. (2017). The Oxford handbook of megaproject management. Oxford University Press.
10. Green, T., & Brown, M. (2023). E-procurementand Environmental Sustainability in Public Procurement. Sustainability Journal, 15(1), 45–60.
11. Gupta, P., & Kumar, V. (2021). Barriers to E-procurementImplementation in Developing Countries. Journal of Development Economics, 15(2), 77–92.
12. Hartono, B., & Pratiwi,D. (2019). E-procurementAdoption in Local Government: A Comparison Between LPSE and E-Katalog Systems. International Journal of Digital Governance, 11(2), 78- 95.
13. Heeks, R. (2018). Reinventing government in the information age. Routledge.
14. Hood, C. (1991). A public management for all seasons? Public Administration, 69(1), 3-19
15. Julnes, P. L., & Holzer, M. (2020). Performance measurement: Challenges and strategies. Routledge. In Imam Bonjol International Conference on Islamic Education (pp. 85-91).
16. Halachmi, A., & Bouckaert, G. (1995). Organizational performance and measurement in the public sector: Toward service, effort, and accomplishment reporting. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
17. Jordan. (2019).Barang Logistik. Journalof Chemical Information and Modeling, 2(No 1), 1–32.
18. Kurniawan, E., & Setiawan, R. (2021).Evaluating Efficiency Gains from E-procurementin Indonesian Public Sector. Asian Journal of Public Administration, 43(1), 112-130.
19. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2019). Public procurement and value for money: Policy brief. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://www.oecd.org/gov/public- procurement/
20. Thai, K. (2001). Publicprocurement re-examined. Journalof Public Procurement, 1(1), 9–50.
21. Vaidya, K., Sajeev, A. S. M., & Callender, G. (2006). Critical factors that influence e- procurement implementation success in the public sector.Journal of PublicProcurement, 6(1–3), 70–99.
22. World Bank. (2020). Benchmarking public procurement 2020: Assessing publicprocurement systems in 180 economies. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. https://openknowledge.worldbank.org/
23. Mentzer, J. T., DeWitt,W., Keebler, J. S., Min, S., Nix, N. W., Smith, C. D., & Zacharia, Z. G. (2001). Defining supply chain management. Journal of Business Logistics, 22(2), 1–25.
24. Mohite, R. A., Chourasiya, R. H., Sharma, S., & Akre, S. (2025). Enhancing the competitiveness of msmesthrough industrial engineering innovations in supply chain management. International Journal of EngineeringManagement, 9(1), 30-38. Retrieved from https://www.sciencepublishinggroup.com/article/10.11648/j.ijem.20250901.14
25. Prakash, A. (Ed.). (2023). Regional integration in indo-pacific: connectivity, cooperation, and new supply-chain Linkages. Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia.
26. Punnakitikashem, P., Laosirihongthong, T., Adebanjo, D., & McLean,M. W. (2010). A study of quality management practices in TQM and non-TQM firms: findings from the ASEAN automotive industry. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, 27(9), 1021-1035. https://doi.org/10.1108/02656711011084819
27. Van der Vorst, J. G. A. J. (2004).Supply chain management: Theory and practices. In Bridging theory and practice. Springer.