ABSTRACT
From mid 1996 on, the idea of the catalogue had been promoted to suppliers, retailers and various institutional players who might have some influence. There was also the need to motivate the “knowledge partners” when they became uneasy about increasing costs and lengthening time frames, due to unplanned events and inability to match optimistic expectations. Meetings were held to calm the partners when their expectations of a fast return were not met. The catalogue was presented as a win-win game in which no one would be “hurt”. Suppliers would not have to develop “point to point” proprietary solutions with major customers and retailers would not have to develop their own catalogues. There were also national political implications. Both the government and the small traders’ associations were concerned with the erosion of small business due to the growing power of the major retailers. They welcomed the catalogue and there was talk of financial support for small local businesses to use it. The catalogue came to be understood as a transparent and democratic “equalizer” of information access, yet another example of the transformation of meaning.
