10 1002@csr 92

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management
Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Mgmt. 13, 61–77 (2006)

Published online 14 March 2006 in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com) DOI: 10.1002/csr.092
The Hurdle Analysis. A Self-evaluation Tool

for Municipalities to Identify, Analyse and
Overcome Hurdles to Green Procurement
Edeltraud Günther and Lilly Scheibe*
Technische Universität Dresden (TUD), Department of Business Management
and Economics, Professorship of Business Administration esp.
Environmental Management, Germany
ABSTRACT
It has been known for years that green public procurement can stimulate innovation.
Even so, all initiatives to promote it have not sufficiently changed the procurement
process in municipalities so far. What are the reasons for this? This article presents
on the one hand the search for possible reasons – so-called hurdles – with the help
of hurdle analysis, and on the other hand a self-evaluation tool for municipalities to
identify, analyse and overcome hurdles to green procurement.
Hence the hurdle analysis offers a questionnaire to identify hurdles, three assess-
ment methods and a workshop to generate strategies to deal with the most relevant
hurdles. With the self-evaluation tool every municipality will be enabled to accomplish
such an analysis and to identify key persons and decision elements within its pro-
curement process, as well as fixing responsibilities and generating solutions on their
own. Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.
Received 29 October 2004; revised 5 March 2005; accepted 21 March 2005

Keywords: hurdle analysis; public procurement; municipalities; decision-making; identification of actors (stakeholder manage-
ment); self-evaluation tool; questioning; assessment of hurdles
The Aim – What Leads to the Necessity for Analysing Hurdles Within
the Procurement Process?
The Potential of Green Procurement in Municipalities

UE TO THE RELATIVELY HIGH DEMAND VOLUME (ABOUT 12% OF TOTAL GNP), THE POTENTIAL
D of green procurement in municipalities has been well known for many years. It offers a good
opportunity for encouraging sustainable production, closing material cycles and avoiding waste.
Environmentally oriented material management for example has been an important field of
* Correspondence to: Lilly Scheibe, Technische Universität Dresden (TUD), Department of Business Management and Economics, Professorship
of Business Administration esp. Environmental Management, 01062 Dresden, Germany. E-mail: lilly.scheibe@mailbox.tu-dresden.de
Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment
62 E. Günther and L. Scheibe
work for a long time by now. Already in the 1980s handbooks for practicing environmentally oriented
management had been published on this topic. Alongside this institutions, governments, companies and
municipalities, too, have been starting a number of initiatives to encourage green procurement over these
last 20 years. The following may stand as examples.
• For more than 15 years the German Umweltbundesamt has been working on the topic of greening
procurement. As a result of this work several guidelines concerning green procurement have been
published (Umweltbundesamt, 1987; 1999).
• Guidelines for implementing an Environmental Management System have been developed (ISO,
1996; European Parliament and the Council, 2001), so companies aiming at a validation within EMAS
or on the certification DIN EN ISO 14001 have already had to consider environmental aspects in pro-
curement decisions to influence and continuously advance their relevant environmental aspects. As
these aspects in a municipality result mainly from used products and services green public procure-
ment can influence them positively by e.g. avoiding purchasing those that cause the relevant envi-
ronmental aspects. Consequently implementing EMAS or DIN EN ISO 14001 can be seen as an
encouragement for green procurement.
• Already in 1996 the international city network ICLEI started the Eco-Procurement Initiative. This ini-
tiative today is based on four columns: the EcoProcura conference series, the EcoProcura magazine,
the ‘Buy it green’-network for green procurers all over Europe (BIG-Net) and a number of projects
with practical background.
• Alongside these efforts governmental and non-governmental initiatives for green and sustainable
development established themselves to promote and foster green procurement.1 Furthermore, in many
countries continuously revised web pages, providing information about green procurement, procure-
ment checklists, eco labelling etc., are available.2
• Environmentally oriented trade associations working on the topic of green procurement established
themselves. E.g., in Germany the Bundesdeutsche Arbeitskreis für umweltbewusstes Management
(BAUM) as well as internationally the International Network for Environmental Management (INEM)
exist.
• In recent years first initiatives and platforms in the new field of eCommerce have also been developed
to support and encourage green procurement (green eBusiness).
• Last but not least EU legislation will be mentioned. For example, the new EU chemical law will influ-
ence procurement decisions, too, as it requests the storage of data in a central database when a
company manufactures or imports more than a tonne of a chemical substance per year (Commission
of the European Community, 2003). The German ‘Kreislaufwirtschafts- und Abfallgesetz’, too, influ-
ences procurement decisions, because it obligates companies to take responsibility for their products
beyond the usage phase. To be able to fulfil this obligation it is strategically necessary to include
environmental aspects of the product’s disposal already in the procurement decision (Section 4 (2)
KrW-/AbfG).
Concluding, it can be observed that many different initiatives have sprung up all over the world, but e.g.
in Germany green procurement in general as well as green procurement in municipalities in particu-
lar has a lower relevance than in other European countries such as the Scandinavian countries or Austria.
However, even in these countries the mentioned existing potentials for green purchasing are insufficiently
1
www.grip.no/Felles/english.htm; miljo.regeringen.se/hut/index.htm
2
E.g. in the UK www.environment-agency.gov.uk/business/444217/444285/317943/514774/; in Germany www.beschaffung-info.de; in Austria
www.oekoeinkauf.at/; in Switzerland www.umwelt-schweiz.ch/buwal/eng/fachgebiete/fg_produkte/umsetzung/oeffentliche_beschaffung/; in
Luxembourg http://www.uneptie.org/pc/sustain/procurement/green.asp; in Canada www.ec.gc.ca/eog-oeg/greener_procurement/Greener_
Procurement.htm; in the USA www.epa.gov/oppt/epp; in Australia www.smarterbuying.nsw.gov.au/sustainable_proc.shtm
Copyright © 2006 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Mgmt. 13, 61–77 (2006)
DOI: 10.1002/csr
The Hurdle Analysis 63
Demand Market Award Procurement

management Research processing
• Demand • Market analysis and • Chosing the • Conclusion of a
emergence market observation procedure for the contract
• Demand research • Prediction of the award • Logistics
• Demand analysis development • Formulation of • Goods and
and fixing the • Communication specifications accounting control
demand with the • Assessment and • Invoice processing
procurement selection of tender
markets and supplie
Figure 1. Procurement process as a special decision process
used in spite of all the initiatives and efforts made. So the question remains: what hinders green pro-
curement in municipalities?
Hurdles Hampering Green Procurement Do Exist

The Public Procurement Process
Public procurement decisions are the result of a special decision process that consists of a number of
different elements (FIG 1).
In every element of this procurement decision process different external stakeholders and decision-
makers within the administration of a municipality are acting. Each decision-maker might belong to a
different functional area of the municipality which consists of an operational level (specialists = ‘pro-
moters by know-how’, which means persons who actively and intensely encourage an innovation process
by means of object specific know-how; Gemünden, 1988) and a strategic level (executives/politicians =
‘promoters by power’, which means persons who promote innovation processes by means of their hier-
archic power potential actively and intensively; Gemünden, 1988) respectively. From the outside there
are also stakeholders acting in a public procurement decision. These are in particular
• the state by composing laws, directives and regulations, and
• the market by providing suitable products and services as well as
• the citizens by taking influence on the decision-makers through their voting (FIG 2).
Hurdles as Conquerable Disturbances in the Procurement Process

Every actor (Figure 2) within every element (step) of the decision process (Figure 1) can be a potential
source for ‘disturbing factors’ (Janis and Mann, 1979), that may decelerate, slow down or even block
green procurement. In the following these factors are called hurdles.
The aim of the hurdle analysis has to be seen in identifying reasons (hurdles) for the insufficient use
of the existing potentials of green procurement as shown above as well as in developing strategies to
handle and/or remove them.
To reach this aim the definition of hurdles and hurdle groups – subsumption of hurdles with the
same intention – seemed sensible. As such groups of hurdles were defined (French and Raven, 1959,
Figure 3):
DOI: 10.1002/csr
MARKET
products
PROCUREMENT FINANCE
O S
DEPARTMENT P
DEPARTMENT T
PROCUREMENT FINANCE E R
DEPARTMENT DEPARTMENT R A
A T C
S T E I
I G
T O I T
A law N C vote I
A
T L L Z
E ENVIRONMENT E E
DEPARTMENT L V
ENVIRONMENT USERSE E N
USERS V L
DEPARTMENT E
L
Figure 2. Actors in a procurement decision
Regulated
Information available
Sufficient knowledge Not regulated
Incentives existent
(reward/punishment) Information not available
Lack of knowledge
Set as aim
Incentives not existent

Green
procurement
Not set as aim
Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5
Figure 3. Potential hurdles to green procurement
DOI: 10.1002/csr
• no aims
• no regulations
• no information
• no knowledge
• no incentive and sanction system.
The existence of hurdles in decision processes has been known for a long time and therefore became
an important field of scientific research. This led to a multitude of approaches on this behalf 3 dealing
with the description and explanation of different types of hurdles.4 Most of these approaches only cover
one of the hurdle groups. For example, the principal agent theory only considers information hurdles
between the principal and the agent (Laffont and Martimort, 2002).
However, as we wanted to base the hurdle analysis on a broad foundation to generate as many poten-
tial hurdles as possible the approach of the bases of power (French and Raven, 1959) was chosen as the
basis for this because in the authors’ opinion it allows the derivation of the broadest range of potential
hurdles. Additionally, the studies on promoters presented by Hauschildt and Gemünden (1999), which
have been analysing reasons for ‘disturbing factors’ (hurdles) in decision processes since the 1970s,
were of interest. They identified barriers (hurdles) as hampering but conquerable hindrances. Further-
more they found a ‘barrier of will’ and a ‘barrier of capability’ as possible causes that lead to the block-
ing of innovation.5 These barriers identified by Hauschildt and Gemünden (1999) correspond to
legitimate power and expert power in the approach of French and Raven (1959). Beyond this Hauschildt
and Gemünden could identify different key persons with certain characteristics who are capable of
setting hurdles but also of removing them. These are as has already been mentioned the ‘promoters by
know-how’ and the ‘promoters by power’. The influence of both groups of key persons can be explained
with the help of the bases of power, too. So a combination of the two approaches seemed sensible. The
hurdle analysis within the procurement process will therefore make a contribution to the identification
of such key persons in municipalities to systematically work towards the improvement of green pro-
curement and consequently overcoming hurdles.
Summarizing, it can be stated that the hurdles set by different key persons within a procurement
process are the reason for not using the existing potential of green public procurement. The aim there-
fore has to be to identify, assess and handle them proactively. The following part therefore focuses on
the hurdle analysis method itself to describe its development and to explain how it is working and which
targets could be reached by using the method and their assessment methods.
The Method of the Hurdle Analysis and its First Implementations
Developing the Method

The first questionnaire for assessing hurdles in the procurement process was developed in the context
of the RELIEF project.6 It was tested in the municipalities participating in this project. Based on theo-
3
The following may stand as representatives: for the principal agent theory Laffont and Martimort (2002); for approaches to transaction cost
Williamson (1985); for the stakeholder theory Freeman (1984); for the theory of promoters Hauschildt and Gemünden (1999) and for the
theory of the bases of power French and Raven (1959).
4
Types of hurdle investigated are information, communication, power etc.
5
Green procurement can be seen as an organizational innovation with subjective novelty. Subjective novelty means that it is an innovation for
a company if a technical innovation is used for the first time in the organization even if it is not new to other companies anymore (Hübner,
2002; Hockerts, 2003). So this approach, too, can be applied.
6
For further information about the project please visit the project homepage www.iclei.org/ecoprocura/relief/ or have a look at the latest pub-
lication of results from within the project (Erdmenger, 2003).
DOI: 10.1002/csr
interface
politician / politicians / Procurement environment finance information
market state executives user
executives department department department flow
and specialists
• no outcome of
individual • no outcome of • no outcome of • no outcome of • no outcome of
efforts
targets efforts efforts efforts efforts
• user prejudice
• information
about target
organizational • different • lack of support
• lack of target • information
targets perspectives by guidelines
about
possibilities
• identification
Search for of products • lack of • information
alternatives • availability of possibilities about alternatives
products • identification
• price of • price of
products • additional products • information
decision • functionality
work about
criteria • functionality • calculation of products
relevance
of products method
• uncertainty of
• demand legislation • demand • uncertainty of
scenarios
volume • complexity volume legislation
• restriction
• possibilities • possibilities • possibilities • possibilities

• administration
decision not widely not widely not widely not widely
process
used used used used
Figure 4. Prototype I of the hurdle matrix
retical studies done beforehand and the results of this survey in the municipalities a first hurdle cata-
logue (see Figure 9 below for the latest version) and resulting from that a first hurdle matrix (see Figure
4) were derived.7 The catalogue included all so far identified relevant hurdles in the form of questions,
whereas with the hurdle matrix possible hurdles were matched to the procurement process as well as
to the actors within this process, to make it easier to pinpoint key persons and generate strategies when
assessing perceived hurdles in a municipality.
Already the first analyses made clear that the development of a universally valid strategy for
overcoming existing hurdles might be difficult because of widely different perceived hurdles in the
municipalities.
The accomplishment of another case study like hurdle analysis in the context of the NaBesI project8
confirmed this perception of the possible non-existence of a universally valid strategy. It furthermore
led to an improvement of the questionnaire.
In 2002, after analysing the answers of an interview of the employees of three English municipali-
ties, prototype II of the hurdle matrix was developed in cooperation with Global to Local Ltd.9 Hereby
the results were compared with the hitherto obtained findings and the questionnaire as well as the hurdle
matrix were improved once again.
7
For continuative information about the general concept of the hurdle analysis see Günther (2003) and Günther and Scheibe (2004). Figure
9 represents the recent hurdle catalogue. The up to date hurdle matrix (prototype III) is shown in Figure 8.
8
NaBesI stands for ‘potentials of sustainable procurement and instruments for the implementation’. For further information see www.tu-
dresden.de/wwbwlbu/forschung/laufende_projekte/nachhaltig_beschaffen/en/
9
Further information at www.globaltolocal.com/indexuk.htm. The consultancy member Helmut Lusser was assessor from the EU in the
RELIEF project.
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Based on the experiences with the hurdle analysis a thesis for assessing and overcoming hurdles to
green procurement in municipalities was generated:
Because of the strongly different perception of relevant hurdles within the municipalities one uni-
versally valid strategy for overcoming hurdles does not exist. The development of individual strate-
gies going along with accompanying counselling is therefore recommended.
This cognition follows the contingency theory, which states that successful decision-making differs from
organization to organization because of its situation, strategies, size, employees etc. so only the fact that
hurdles hamper the implementation of green procurement is proven. But which hurdles these might
be and how they could successfully be handled depends on the organization and its individual situation
(source?).
To enable municipalities to develop strategies, an assessment of the perceived hurdles and a visual-
ization of the results are essential requirements. Therefore the following chapter presents the assess-
ment methods chosen within the hurdle analysis.
Identifying and Assessing the Hurdles

The observation item of the hurdle analysis is perceptions. Hence only perceived hurdles can and will
be analysed with the hurdle analysis within municipalities.
The answers gained from the part of the questionnaire concerning hurdles will be used to
• classify the identified hurdles on the basis of the averages and
• analyse the spreads and the deviations from the average to derive strategies.
There are several methods available to analyse these parts of the questionnaire and therewith to iden-
tify and assess those hurdles for a municipality.
Because of the hurdle analysis to give municipalities a feasible tool to support the identification of
their hurdles as well as to give them a first impression of the hurdles, a first clue to where they stand
and some strategic suggestions, three simple assessment methods were chosen. Municipalities should
be able to repeat by themselves the self-evaluation of their hurdles and based on that compare the results
on their own successfully after a period of time. The chosen methods serve as assessment but most of
all as visualization instruments for the results of each municipality. They provide a discussion base and
initiate the acquisition of comparing abilities for repeated appliance. They should give the municipali-
ties first thought-provoking impulses and possibly stimulate further analyses of the hurdles as well as
generating strategies to handle those. In the authors’ opinion this objective can be reached with the
chosen methods.
The view of the hurdle analysis’s assessment methods is a bird’s eye view on the overall strength of
hurdles within a municipality. Therefore, all perceived hurdles strengths of all participants are combined
by statistical methods (averages, spreads, deviations) to generate one ‘hurdle picture’ of the organiza-
tion. With this a first assessment and interpretation of a municipality’s hurdles seen as such by the
majority of the participants will be sketched. Within the assessment the hurdles with a high priority for
the whole organization are identified (hurdle profile), depending on their relevance the hurdles are
roughly sorted into action options (hurdle portfolio) for reconnecting them with the identified key
persons in the municipality to locate possible starting points (hurdle matrix). Therefore, the aim of this
step of the method is to acquire a picture of the hurdles to green procurement within the organization
and a short interpretation for which hurdles are to be considered further.
Because of the different structures of municipalities and, connected with this, differing procurement
processes and numbers of participants in the hurdle analysis, the representativeness between the results
DOI: 10.1002/csr
I agree
I rather agree
I rather
do not agree
I do not agree
rts
rt
ed
on
ex
ab t re nts
rn e
pr lt to ves
av ify
ex ble
re y
ce
na le
an t inc k
eq d
te
rit
ew
ie
ie
lit
or
c
fu nsiv
de
po
d
ai
si
t
pl
t a van
di
fo
us
iti
a
ilit
ilit
en
ho
la
ur
w
i
ui
lu
up
vi
at
us tion
os
ju
he
ev
ef
ai
ib
ib
ad s h
e
d
l
ut
co
le
nt
ts
lp
p
el
pr
i
tt
ss
ss
of
la
nc
er
lte
rp
s
re
id
co itio
ou
no
ga
po
po
ry
ce
ed ork
e
ts
no
ca
pr
ffe
tw
e
om
o
ve
u
ab
uc
d
le
no icu
o
do
to
lo
he
of
o
ew
d
er
di
ou
pr
s
no
ab
od
tc
in
st
ed
ff
y
ts
w
tt
ck
es
n
la
ou
rta
di
m
lo
m
uc
ou
tio
m
la
ra
ie
in
de
of
ce
ed
no
or
od
up
ab
ilit
tra
lf
el
m
un
m
nf
ga
id
m
or
ib
pr
er
is
w
ed
ai
ti
gu
or
ss
nf
gh
in
le
llo
no
nf
no
ti
m
po
fo
hi
or
no
ti
ad
no
nf
ti
no
Figure 5. Hurdle profile of a municipality
of varying municipalities is not given. Nevertheless, the usability of the assessment methods (within one
municipality) based on averages, spreads and deviations is scientifically proven, because Rohrmann
worked out that assessment methods are reliable for cardinal data, too, under the assumption that the
data is equidistant (Rohrmann, 1978). This requirement is fulfilled by the conception of the question-
naire although a scale with four answering options is chosen. Mostly a scale of three and five answer-
ing options respectively is suggested for such purposes (Likert scale; Likert, 1932), but as the hurdle
analysis focuses on finding tendencies a neutral category was not considered sensible to offer in this
context. The reason for this consideration is that the method is based on the assumption, that a hurdle
is either seen as existing or not but that there is no neutral view on it, so to avoid respondents answer-
ing ‘I don’t know’ because they don’t want to think about the topic it was decided against a neutral
answering category so that the respondents have to decide for one side (Wittmann, 1994). Nonetheless,
equidistance of the answering options is given if the neutral position is assumed to be in the middle of
‘I tend to agree’ and ‘I tend to disagree’.
To visualize the hurdles and their relevance for municipalities the following three different methods
were chosen. These will assist in getting a first clue where to start and afterwards possibly to decide
whether to have a deeper analysis of the identified hurdles and to generate strategies for overcoming
them.
Assessment Method 1 – the Hurdle Profile

This assessment method uses the averages and spreads to point out tendencies for probably existing
hurdles of a municipality and to evaluate their relevance (Figure 5).
Cognitions that can be achieved by using this assessment method are
DOI: 10.1002/csr
• knowledge of whether potential hurdles are perceived as hurdles – the higher the average is the bigger
is the perceived hurdle,
• knowledge of whether and different views do exist about hurdles – the bigger the spread is the more
different is the perception of a hurdle within a company.
Results aimed at with this analysis are to point out first trends (e.g. all interviewees perceive one hurdle
almost identically) and to identify starting points for the assessment of causes for hurdles (e.g. strongly
differing views on hurdles indicate we have to look for the reasons).
In the example shown in Figure 5 the results can be interpreted as follows.
‘No outcome of efforts’ is seen by most of the participants as non-relevant. This means that almost
everyone finds green procurement sensible. However, in contrast to this the hurdle ‘higher demand pre-
requisite’ is seen as a relevant hurdle within the municipality. For both hurdles the views between the
participants do not vary much and so the next step for the municipality is to find a strategy to handle
the relevant hurdle and answer the question of whether the non-relevant never existed or how it was
overcome in the past to use this knowledge for further hurdles. Furthermore, it can be learned from the
hurdle profile that there are very different views on guidelines within the municipality. It, therefore, has
to be found out in the next step why people see this so differently and whether they can learn from each
other.
But for further strategy suggestions assessment method 2 can be of use.
Assessment Method 2 – the Hurdle Portfolio

This second method is based on the averages and spreads of the collected data. It classifies the hurdles
to derive first strategies for overcoming (Figure 6).
The result of this method is a description of existing, non-existing and no longer existing
hurdles respectively. They will show in the fields of ‘decision analysis’ and ‘best practice sharing’. An
illustration of the differences in the perception of hurdles is possible as well in the field of the ‘problem
analysis’.
By using the portfolio a catalogue with first proposals for potential actions can be derived. It can be
used to decide what to do first – overcoming the hurdles, knowledge transfer or in-depth analysis.
The example of a municipality in FIG 6 gives first suggestions to the participating municipality. In
this case the hurdles, e.g. ‘higher demand prerequisite’ and ‘uncertain legal position’, appear in the field
of ‘decision analysis’. This means they are seen as relevant hurdles by the majority of the participants.
For those hurdles situated in the ‘decision analysis’ field strategies for overcoming have to be generated.
Hurdles in the field of ‘best practice sharing’ such as ‘no outcome of efforts’, ‘not informed about pos-
sibilities’ or ‘no products available’ indicate that either the municipality had already handled these
hurdles successfully and might be able to generate a procedure for handling further hurdles or that the
hurdle never occurred within the municipality due perhaps to a special structure or strategy. To hurdles
situated in the field of ‘problem analysis’ such as in this case ‘guidelines do not support’ an in-depth
analysis has to be applied to find out reasons for the high deviation from the average and therewith iden-
tify possible knowledge or information gaps between the employees, which can easily be removed. The
selection field contains all those hurdles that only tend to belong to one group or another (e.g. ‘user prej-
udice’, ‘follow up costs not included’ etc.). For these hurdles the municipality has to decide which strat-
egy it wants to accomplish.
Assessment Method 3 – the Hurdle Matrix

This method is based on the hurdle catalogue that includes all so far detected possible hurdles. It con-
nects the procurement process with the actors. The positioning dots which characterize the hurdles visu-
DOI: 10.1002/csr
no outcome of efforts
Hurdles Matrix no aim of my local authority
different views
high not informed about the aim
Problem Analysis not informed about the possibilities
lack of possibilities
Decision Analysis guidelines do not support
possibilities not widely used
uncertain legal position
law very complex
Average
legal framework prevents

not informed about relevance
Selection
not informed about alternatives
difficult to identify
no products available
products too expensive
lower functionality
Best Practice Sharing
user prejudice
administration process hurdle
low additional work
low high follow up costs not included
Deviation higher demand prerequisite
Figure 6. Hurdle portfolio of a municipality. This figure is available in colour online at www.interscience.wiley.com/journal/csr
alize for once the location of these hurdles within a municipality and through the averages also their
relevance (Figure 7).
With this assessment method the following questions can be answered.
• Which hurdles are relevant for which actor?
• In which element of the decision process do hurdles exist?
The results can be seen as a visualization of the relevant hurdles and a help to fix responsibilities and
generate strategies.
The hurdle matrix of the municipality shows the relevance of the hurdles and where they are located.
It can be seen in the example that ‘no outcome of efforts’ really is no hurdle for the municipality, whereas
‘higher demand prerequisite’ and ‘uncertain legal position’ are shown as relevant hurdles. What this
assessment method now provides is starting points, on which the removal of a hurdle should begin. For
example the fact that a higher demand would foster green procurement is linked to the users and there-
with the strategy for the municipality has to be to convince the users to request more green products
and services. This might be accomplished by providing more and better information on such products
and services or by initiating product tests to reduce prejudices etc.
Conclusions
Because of the experiences collected while developing the hurdle analysis method together with the
deduced theses that resulted from the surveys done within this developing process and to give the munic-
ipalities a feasible instrument for the analysis of their hurdles respectively it was decided to generate a
self-evaluation tool. Therefore prototype II of the hurdle matrix and the questionnaire connected there-
DOI: 10.1002/csr
no outcome
individual target no outcome no outcome no outcome no outcome of efforts
of efforts of efforts of efforts of efforts users prejudice
not informed
about aim
no aim of local different guidelines do not
organizational target authority views support
not informed
about possibilities
decision process
no products not informed about

available lack of alternatives
options possibilities
availability of difficult to identify
products
too expensive
lack of too expensive lower not informed
decision criteria lower
influence follow-up costs functionality about
functionality
not included relevance
uncertainty
higher demand higher demand uncertain legal
scenarios complexity
prerequisite prerequisite position
restriction
administration possibilities not possibilities not possibilities not possibilities not

decision
process widely used widely used widely used widely used
market politicians / procurement finance information

executives department department flow
state politicians / environment users
specialists Actors department
Figure 7. Hurdle matrix of a municipality
with were revised once again. Prototype III of the hurdle matrix (Figure 8) as well as a slightly changed
version of the questionnaire and hurdle catalogue respectively (Figure 9) happened to be the result of
this revision. These latest improvements and the experiences gained therewith build up the basis for
the tool described in the following.
The Self-Evaluation Tool for Municipalities
The self-evaluation tool is based on the method of hurdle analysis. It represents an approach with which
municipalities should be enabled to identify hurdles, key persons and decision elements as well as fixing
responsibilities and trying to generate solutions on their own.
The concept consists of three steps.
Step 1. Choosing the participants for the self-evaluation and completing the questionnaires on the hurdles to
green procurement.
Step 2. Identification and assessment of the hurdles to green procurement.
Step 3. Interpretation of the results and development of strategies for handling hurdles proactively.
Concept
Step 1: Choosing the Participants for the Self-Evaluation and Completing the Questionnaires on the
Hurdles to Green Procurement
For this step the public authority has first to decide which people can influence the procurement process
(so-called key persons). Based on this, a decision on which people will take part in the survey is to be
DOI: 10.1002/csr
interface
politicians / politicians / procurement environment finance information
market state users
executives executives and department department department flow
specialists
• no outcome of
individual • no outcome of • no outcome of • no outcome of • no outcome of
target efforts efforts
efforts efforts efforts
• prejudice
• information
• lack of target about target
organizational • different • lack of support • lack of • no primary • no primary
• extend scope by guidelines • information
target perspectives influence target target
about
possibilities
• identification • lack of • lack of • lack of • lack of • information

• lack of
search for of products • lack of commitment commitment commitment commitment about
commitment
alternatives • availability of possibilities • use scope • use scope • use scope • use scope alternatives
• use scope better
products better better better better • identification
• price of
• price of
• no subsidies products • information
products • lack of • lack of • additional • functionality
decision criteria • no tax • calculation about
• functionality commitment influence work method of products
reduction relevance
of products
• costs(up/down)
• uncertainty
• demand • demand • uncertainty of
scenarios • complexity
volume volume legislation
• restriction
• possibilities • possibilities • possibilities • possibilities

• lack of • administra-
decision not widely not widely not widely not widely
commitment tion process
used used used used
Figure 8. Prototype III of the hurdle matrix
made. This could be only those involved directly in the act of purchasing, or it could be all those who
can influence the result of a procurement decision in the organization. For a meaningful assessment of
hurdles, however, the number of participants should be no less than five.
The choosing process will provide the public authority with a clear picture of their procurement
process and therewith will sensitize it for the process as a whole. Another advantage could simply be a
clearer understanding of who the key persons in the organization are with respect to the procurement
process. This will help in adapting the organizational structure and increasing the identification of the
employees with their organization by making it clear for them which important role they play within
the procurement process.
After the selection process the participants fill in the online questionnaire. To do this the question-
naire can be answers either in paper form or with the help of an online version provided by Technis-
che Universität Dresden (TUD). For the online version a login is provided, which all participants can
use to answer the questionnaire online (even at the same time). So the tool/questionnaire is very prac-
tical and easy to use for all participants.
Step 2: Identification and Assessment of the Hurdles to Green Procurement

When analysing hurdles it is important not only to consider the relevance attached to them by a single
person but also to look at the spread of the answers given by all participants in the questioning. For this
reason the three simple methods (explained earlier) for assessment of the perceived hurdles are used.
These methods allow the authority to identify trends and sort hurdles according to their relevance for
the participants. This will help the public authority to decide on which hurdles to concentrate their
efforts.
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Efforts for green procurement are not seen as useful.

Employees are not sufficiently informed about the aim of green procurement.
Green procurement is not one of the aims of the municipality.
The aim is not fixed in guidelines for green procurement.
The procurement guidelines of the municipality do not support green procurement.
Given possibilities to include environmental criteria are not widely used in the municipality.
There are different views at several decision levels of the municipality concerning green procurement.
There are uncertainties concerning the legal position of green procurement.
The applicable law concerning green procurement is very complex.
The existing legal framework prevents green procurement.
Employees are not informed about the environmental relevance of products and services.
Employees are not informed about the possibilities of green procurement.
Employees are not informed about green product and service alternatives.
It is difficult to identify green products and services within the procurement market.
Many users have prejudices concerning green product and service alternatives.
Green procurement is obstructed by the administration processes (e.g. due to spread competences).
Follow-up costs (e.g. energy or disposal costs) are not included in procurement decisions.
Green products have a lower functionality compared to conventional products.
Low demand for green product and service alternatives by users within the municipality prevents more green
procurement.
Green products and services are too expensive.
Green procurement causes additional work.
Green procurement causes cost increases.
There are no sufficient possibilities for green procurement in the municipality.
There are no sufficient green product and service alternatives available within the procurement market.
The given scope for green procurement is too small.
The given scope for green procurement is not used effectively.
Figure 9. Hurdle catalogue (Günther and Scheibe, 2004)
Step 3: Interpretation of the Results and Development of Strategies for Handling Hurdles Proactively
For the interpretation of the results, workshops are recommended which that bring together all the key
persons in the procurement process within the public authority. At these workshops the results of the
survey, and possible reasons for the hurdles identified will be discussed, and strategies for tackling them
in future will be developed. This process will again contribute to possible organizational improvement,
and strategic actions in tackling hurdles.
The Online Questionnaire as a Tool to Accomplish a Hurdle Analysis

For a wider multiplication of the hurdle analysis in municipalities and for giving as many municipali-
ties as possible the chance of carrying out such a self-evaluation of hurdles an online tool was devel-
oped. The conception of the online tool follows the conceptual steps explained above.
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Step 2:
Step 1: Choosing the participants and Identification Step 3: Inter-
completing the questionnaires and pretation
assessment
first prepare data data

data recording evaluation
contact recording processing
TU Dresden municipality municipality TU Dresden municipality

municipality TU Dresden TU Dresden
internet e-mail e-questionnaire HTML workshop

data base EXCEL
automatically automatically automatically manually manually
Figure 10. Modus operandi of the self-evaluation tool
Step 1: Choosing the Participants for the Self-Evaluation and Completing the Questionnaires on the
Hurdles to Green Procurement
The first step towards the self-evaluation consists of the decision of a local authority to actually accom-
plish such an analysis.
When interested, different ways to enter the self-evaluation tool and obtain more information are
possible.
1. Technische Universität Dresden (TUD) provides the access to the internet-based tool using the
web pages of the professorship (www.tu-dresden.de/wwbwlbu/forschung/laufende_projekte/
hemmnisse/).
2. The following link leads directly to the internet-based tool: http://www.wwil.wiwi.tu-dresden.de/
hurdles/
In the next step potential participants get more information about the hurdle analysis method and the
self-evaluation. Based on this the decision of whether to take part or not has to be made.
The second step comprises the data recording. It is divided into two parts.
1. The local authority declares its willingness to take part in the self-evaluation. Contact persons are
named, the number of participants defined and the time span for the questioning worked out.
2. TUD installs the access to the online questionnaire and gives the login information to the contact
person.
The next phase is the data recording phase. Therefore the participants within the local authority have to
fill in the questionnaire.
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Two weeks before the end of the time span set for the questioning TUD will check the percentage of
answers so far gathered.
If necessary the contact person will be informed to initiate further answering.
Step 2: Identification and Assessment of the Hurdles to Green Procurement

The collected data is stored in a database. In the step of data processing those data of one local author-
ity is subsumed and prepared for the assessment.
In the following the data is analysed and interpreted with the presented assessment methods (‘hurdle
profile’, ‘hurdle portfolio’, ‘hurdle matrix’).
Eventually the hurdles are allocated to the five groups of hurdles (no aims, no regulations, no infor-
mation, no knowledge, no incentive and sanction system).
Step 3: Interpretation of the Results and Development of Strategies for Handling Hurdles Proactively
The last step to accomplish is to discuss the results of the analysis within the local authority (probably
by carrying out workshops with the involved persons and departments). Therewith acceptance will be
achieved, discussion and strategy-finding induced and a more open handling started.
To achieve this aim, detailed information about ‘normal’ and ‘critical’ incidents concerning a hurdle
that was identified as relevant should be collected. With this information conclusions about the fre-
quency, gravity and direction of these hurdles can be deduced.
Based on this information and the other results of the hurdle analysis, detailed plans for handling
and overcoming the identified hurdles can be developed.
Conclusions
For interested municipalities the tool is available under www.wwil.wiwi.tu-dresden.de/hurdles/ To
accomplish such a hurdle analysis municipalities can apply for the online self-evaluation, fill in the ques-
tionnaire and get a first assessment of their hurdles by using the described methods. This will help them
identify hurdles and generate strategies on their own in future. As TU Dresden will further develop the
tool, comments are cordially welcome (mailto bu@mailbox.tu-dresden.de).
Perspectives
One future objective of the hurdle analysis is to access the online self-evaluation tool to as many as pos-
sible municipalities to enable them to assess their hurdles. This might be promoted (besides imple-
menting the tool on the homepage of the Professorship of Environmental Management of TU Dresden)
by linking the tool to the ICLEI Eco Procura Campaign10 and therewith make it known all over Europe.
Furthermore, based on experiences and further theoretical studies the hurdle analysis method and its
assessment methods will be improved. One step will be to develop another assessment method that
combines the different hurdles within the hurdle groups. The method will be based on the so-called
cobweb diagram (see Figure 11).
Another future objective might be seen in the research project ‘Green eBusiness – Assessment of the
market penetration of green products based on a hurdle analysis (GeB)’. The aim of this project is on
10
This Campaign was initiated within the RELIEF-project and will be continued by ICLEI in the following.
11
For further information about the project see www.tu-dresden.de/wwbwlbu/forschung/laufende_projekte/green_ebusiness/en/
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Hurdles Web
no aim
no incentives/sanctions no regulation
no knowledge no information
Figure 11. Hurdle web
the one hand to identify existing hurdles for green procurement in the 500 largest companies
in Germany as well as in the medium sized companies participating in the Bundesverband
Materialwirtschaft, Einkauf und Logistik e.V. (BME, 2000) by using the described hurdle analysis
method. And on the other hand based on the results of that survey requirements for eBusiness designs
will be derived to be able to support the overcoming of those hurdles.11
References
Bundesverband für Materialwirtschaft, Einkauf und Logistik e.V. (BME). 2000. Chancen und Entwicklungen im Public Procure-
ment [Chances and Developments in Public Procurement], Booz-Allen, Hamilton (eds). Wegweiser Verlag: Berlin (in German).
Commission of the European Communities. 2003. Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council Con-
cerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH), Establishing a European Chemicals
Agency and Amending Directive 1999/45/EC and Regulation (EC) (on Persistent Organic Pollutants), 2003/0256(COD),
2003/0257(COD), version 29 October 2003, Brussels.
Erdmenger C (ed.). 2003. Buying Into the Environment. Experiences, Opportunities and Potentials for Eco-Procurement in Europe.
Greenleaf: Sheffield.
European Parliament and the Council. 2001. Regulation (EC) No 761/2001 Allowing Voluntary Participation by Organisations in
a Community Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS), version of 19 March 2001, Brussels.
Freeman RE. 1984. Strategic Management. A Stakeholder Approach. Pitman: Boston, MA.
French JRP Jr., Raven B. 1959. The bases of social power. In Studies in Social Power, Cartwright D (ed.). Ann Arbor: Michigan;
150–167.
Gemünden HG. 1988. ‘Promoters’ key persons for the development and marketing of innovative industrial products. In Inno-
vations: a Cross-Disciplinary Perspective, Gronhaug K, Kaufmann G (eds). Norwegian University Press: London u.a.; 347–374.
Günther E. 2003. Hurdles in green purchasing: method, findings and discussion of the hurdles analysis. In Buying Into the
Environment. Experiences, Opportunities and Potentials for Eco-Procurement in Europe, Erdmenger C (ed.). Greenleaf:
Sheffield; 30–50.
Günther E, Scheibe L. 2004. The Hurdles Analysis. A Method to Identify and Analyse Hurdles for Green Procurement in Munici-
palities, Dresdner Beiträge zur Betriebswirtschaftslehre 80/04, Dresden.
Hauschildt J, Gemünden HG. 1999. Promotoren. Champions der Innovation [Promoters. Champions for Innovation]. Gabler:
Wiesbaden (in German).
DOI: 10.1002/csr
Hockerts KN. 2003. Sustainability Innovations. Ecological and Social Entrepreneurship and the Management of Antagonistic Assets,
Dissertation No. 2750, Bamberg.
Hübner H. 2002. Integratives Innovationsmanagement. Nachhaltigkeit als Herausforderung für ganzheitliche Erneuerungsprozesse
[Integrated Innovation Management. Sustainability as Challenge for Holistic Renewal Processes]. Erich Schmidt Verlag: Berlin
(in German).
International Standardization Organisation (ISO). 1996. Environmental Management Systems – Specification with Guidance for
Use.
Janis IL, Mann L. 1979. Decision Making. A Psychological Analysis of Conflict, Choice and Commitment. Free Press: New York.
Laffont J-J, Martimort D. 2002. The Theory of Incentives – the Principal-Agent Model. University Press: Princeton, NJ.
Likert R. 1932. A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology: New York.
Rohrmann B. 1978. Empirische Studien zur Entwicklung von Antwortskalen für die sozialwissenschaftliche Forschung [Empir-
ical Studies toward the developement of answering scales for research in social sciences]. Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie
9: 222–245 (in German).
Umweltbundesamt (ed.). 1987. Umweltfreundliche Beschaffung. Handbuch zur Berücksichtigung des Umweltschutzes in der
öffentlichen Verwaltung und im Einkauf [Environmentally Friendly Procurement]. Wiesbaden (in German).
Umweltbundesamt (ed.). 1999. Handbuch umweltfreundliche Beschaffung. Empfehlungen zur Berücksichtigung des Umweltschutzes
in der öffentlichen Verwaltung und im Einkauf [Handbook of Environmentally Friendly Procurement]. Munich (in German).
Williamson OE. 1985. Transaction Cost Economics. Elgar: Aldershot, UK.
Wittmann R-G. 1994. Rückstandsmanagement: eine theoretische und empirische Untersuchung [Waste Management. A Theoretical
and Empirical Study]. M&P, Verlag für Wissenschaft und Forschung: Stuttgart (in German).
DOI: 10.1002/csr

10 1002@csr 92

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

10 1002@csr 92

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management

Corp. Soc. Responsib. Environ. Mgmt. 13, 61–77 (2006)

The Hurdle Analysis. A Self-evaluation Tool

Received 29 October 2004; revised 5 March 2005; accepted 21 March 2005

The Potential of Green Procurement in Municipalities

Demand Market Award Procurement

Hurdles Hampering Green Procurement Do Exist

Hurdles as Conquerable Disturbances in the Procurement Process

Figure 2. Actors in a procurement decision

Sufficient knowledge Not regulated

Incentives not existent

Step 1 Step 2 Step 3 Step 4 Step 5

Figure 3. Potential hurdles to green procurement

The Method of the Hurdle Analysis and its First Implementations

Developing the Method

• possibilities • possibilities • possibilities • possibilities

Figure 4. Prototype I of the hurdle matrix

Identifying and Assessing the Hurdles

Figure 5. Hurdle profile of a municipality

Assessment Method 1 – the Hurdle Profile

Assessment Method 2 – the Hurdle Portfolio

Assessment Method 3 – the Hurdle Matrix

legal framework prevents

no products not informed about

administration possibilities not possibilities not possibilities not possibilities not

market politicians / procurement finance information

Figure 7. Hurdle matrix of a municipality

The Self-Evaluation Tool for Municipalities

• identification • lack of • lack of • lack of • lack of • information

• possibilities • possibilities • possibilities • possibilities

Figure 8. Prototype III of the hurdle matrix

Step 2: Identification and Assessment of the Hurdles to Green Procurement

Efforts for green procurement are not seen as useful.

Figure 9. Hurdle catalogue (Günther and Scheibe, 2004)

The Online Questionnaire as a Tool to Accomplish a Hurdle Analysis

first prepare data data

TU Dresden municipality municipality TU Dresden municipality

internet e-mail e-questionnaire HTML workshop

automatically automatically automatically manually manually

Figure 10. Modus operandi of the self-evaluation tool

Step 2: Identification and Assessment of the Hurdles to Green Procurement

You might also like