The Role of Cognitive Bias and Digital Trust in Bidding Systems on Fair Vendor Selection in Logistics Equitable Procurement in PT.  Pos Indonesia

Jo Pical; Melia  Eka Lestiani; Erna  Mulyati

Authors

Jo Pical Universitas Logistics Business International
Melia Eka Lestiani Universitas Logistik dan Bisnis Internasional, Bandung
Erna Mulyati Universitas Logistik dan Bisnis Internasional, Bandung, Indonesia

Keywords:

Logistic Equitable Procurement, Fair Vendor Selection, Digital Trust, Cognitive Bias, Bidding System

Abstract

This study analyze how cognitive biases and digital trust affect fair vendor selection and equitable procurement in electronic bidding systems at PT Pos Indonesia. Using survey data from 255 employees and decision makers, we found that cognitive biases (anchoring, confirmation, overconfidence, availability, and status quo) negatively impact procurement outcomes, while digital trust dimensions (security, integrity, reliability, transparency, and confidence) have positive effects. Fair vendor selection serves as a critical mediator between these factors and ethical procurement practices. The model explains 50.6% of variance in fair vendor selection and 35.4% in equitable procurement. These findings emphasize the need for both bias mitigation strategies and trust-enhancing digital platforms to achieve transparent and sustainable procurement decisions in logistics organizations.

References

Al Hazza, M.H., Abdelwahed, A., Ali, M.Y., Sidek, A.B.A. (2022). An Integrated Approach for Supplier Evaluation and Selection using the Delphi Method and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP): A New Framework. International Journal of Technology. Volume 13(1), pp. 16-25. https://doi.org/10.14716/ijtech.v13i1.4700.

Booth, G. G., & Theodossiou, P. (2024). Cognitive biases and their impact on the supply chain inventory decisions: Theory and example. SSRN Electronic Journal.https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4739306.

Chen, X., Liang, Z., & Yao, D. (2024). Strategic logistics service procurement in shipping supply chains. Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, 183, 103429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tre.2023.103429.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203771587.

Fasolo, B., Heard, C., & Scopelliti, I. (2024). Mitigating cognitive bias to improve organizational decisions: An integrative review, framework, and research agenda. Journal of Management, 51(6), 2182-2211. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241287188.

Földesi, P., & Sós, E. (2024). Developing sustainable logistic strategies in the context of cognitive biases. Infocommunications Journal, 110-118. https://doi.org/10.36244/ICJ.2024.5.13.

Hair, J. F., & Alamer, A. (2022). Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM) in second language and education research: Guidelines using an applied example. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 1(3), 1-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100027.

Guo, Y. (2022). Digital trust and the reconstruction of trust in the digital society: An integrated model based on trust theory and expectation confirmation theory. Digital Government: Research and Practice, 3(4), Article 26. https://doi.org/10.1145/3543860.

Haron, N. R. H. M., & Mahzan, I. H. Q. D. M. (2019). Ethics in procurement: A case study in a logistic company. In FGIC 2nd Conference on Governance and Integrity 2019 (pp. 930-942). KnE Social Sciences. https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v3i22.5104.

Kamara, T., & Dunbar, S. E. (2025). Personality Traits as Predictors of Loss Aversion and Status Quo Bias in Public Procurement Professionals. International Journal of Public Policy and Administration, 7(1), 42–67. https://doi.org/10.47941/ijppa.2616

Ketchen, D. J., & Craighead, C. W. (2022). Cognitive biases as impediments to enhancing supply chain entrepreneurial embeddedness. Journal of Business Logistics, 43(4), 542-568. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12307

Kwon, I. G., Shin, N., Kim, S. H., & Usman, H. (2021). Trust and commitment in supply chain during digital transformation: A case in Korea. AIMS Environmental Science, 8(6), 641-655. https://doi.org/10.3934/environsci.2021040.

Liu, L., Zhou, Y., Zhu, H. (2011). A conceptual framework for vendor selection based on supply chain risk management from a literature review. Journal of System and Management Sciences. https://www.aasmr.org/jsms/Vol1/No%203/JSMS_Vol1_No3_1.pdf.

Magableh, G. M., Mistarihi, M. Z., & Alfaouri, R. T. (2024). An integrated model for rice supplier selection strategies and supply chain optimization. PLOS ONE, 19(4), e0301930. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0301930.

Mukti, A. R. (2025). Sample size determination: Principles and applications for health science research. Health Sciences International Journal, 3(1), 127-143. https://doi.org/10.71357/hsij.v3i1.63.

Nourbakhsh, V., Ahmadi, A., & Mahootchi, M. (2013). Considering supply risk for supplier selection using an integrated framework of data envelopment analysis and neural networks. International Journal of Industrial Engineering Computations, 4(2), 273-284. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.ijiec.2013.01.001.

Nowicka, K. (2018). Trust in digital supply chain management. Logistics and Transport, 39(3), 59-64. https://doi.org/10.26411/83-1734-2015-3-39-3-18.

Pamucar, D., Yazdani, M., Obradovic, R., Kumar, A., & Torres-Jiménez, M. (2022). A novel fuzzy rough decision-making approach for sustainable supplier selection. Journal of Cleaner Production, 365, 132638. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2022.132638

Park, Y. S., Konge, L., & Artino Jr, A. R. (2020). The positivism paradigm of research. Academic Medicine, 95(5), 690-694. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003093.

Perks, M. (2023). Developing a new procurement model, using behavioural economics, to enable continuous improvement of productivity and better value in large UK infrastructure projects. Revista de la Construcción, 22(3), 30-47. https://doi.org/10.7764/RIC.00089.21.

Prashar, A. (2025). Exploring Framing and Spillover effects in Sustainable Logistics Provider selection: Role of Attentional Biases. International Journal of Production Economics, p. 109755. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijpe.2025.109755.

Supriadi, Y.N. and Pramudito, F. (2025). Optimizing purchasing decisions through digital marketing and online reviews: consumer trust as a key mediator. Jambura Economic Education Journal, 7(1), pp. 127–139. https://doi.org/10.37479/jeej.v7i1.25499.

Strazzullo, S., Cricelli, L., & Grimaldi, M. (2024). Fostering digital trust in manufacturing companies through stakeholder-oriented digital innovation. Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, 9(3), 100604. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100604.

Wang, Q., Jiang, S., Ngai, E. W. T., & Huo, B. (2024). Vendor selection in the wake of data breaches: A longitudinal study. Journal of Operations Management, 70(2), 234-251. https://doi.org/10.1002/joom.1294.

Wong, R. S. (2024). The power of past performance in multidimensional supplier evaluation and supplier selection: Debiasing anchoring bias and its knock-on effects. PLOS ONE, 19(5), e0303700. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0303700.

Zulfikri, A. (2024). Integrating green procurement and logistics: Overcoming barriers for sustainable supply chains. Sinergi International Journal of Logistics, 2(4), 264-276. https://doi.org/10.61194/sijl.v2i4.739.