See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/328317412

Modelling the adoption of sustainable procurement in construction

organisations

Article  in  Built Environment Project and Asset Management · October 2018

DOI: 10.1108/BEPAM-10-2017-0108

CITATIONS READS

9 665

3 authors:

Kwaku Agbesi Frank D. K. Fugar

The Social Investment Fund Kwame Nkrumah University Of Science and Technology
2 PUBLICATIONS   10 CITATIONS    59 PUBLICATIONS   633 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Theophilus Adjei-Kumi
Kwame Nkrumah University Of Science and Technology
69 PUBLICATIONS   456 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Project Management View project

Construction Economics View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Frank D. K. Fugar on 31 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Built Environment Project and Asset Management
Modelling the adoption of sustainable procurement in construction organisations
Kwaku Agbesi, Frank D. Fugar, Theophilus Adjei-Kumi,
Article information:
To cite this document:
Kwaku Agbesi, Frank D. Fugar, Theophilus Adjei-Kumi, (2018) "Modelling the adoption of sustainable
procurement in construction organisations", Built Environment Project and Asset Management,
https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-10-2017-0108
Permanent link to this document:
https://doi.org/10.1108/BEPAM-10-2017-0108
Downloaded on: 16 October 2018, At: 05:01 (PT)
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

References: this document contains references to 34 other documents.

To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.com
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by
Token:Eprints:85BMMJERPMM5P5QGIHSJ:
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald
for Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission
guidelines are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as
well as providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and
services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the
Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for
digital archive preservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

 The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/2044-124X.htm

Modelling the
Modelling the adoption of adoption of
sustainable procurement in sustainable
procurement
construction organisations
Kwaku Agbesi
Procurement, The Social Investment Fund, Accra, Ghana, and
Received 31 October 2017
Frank D. Fugar and Theophilus Adjei-Kumi Revised 8 February 2018
14 June 2018
Building Technology, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, 6 September 2018
Kumasi, Ghana Accepted 10 September 2018

Abstract
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Purpose – The adoption of sustainable procurement in construction clients’ organisation remains a difficult
concept. Current research of sustainable procurement adoption studies fails to focus on a multi-stage adoption
process. The purpose of this paper is to develop an organisational adoption model in a multi-stage process for
the adoption of sustainable procurement in construction.
Design/methodology/approach – The paper developed an organisational adoption model. The model was
tested against data obtained from survey administered to 193 respondents of central and local government
institutions with a response rate of 63.7 per cent. Structural equation modelling using the partial least squares
was employed to determine and confirm the factor structure of the model, and to measure the relationships
between the model constructs.
Findings – An organisational adoption model is developed, tested and is robust to aid the adoption decision
process of sustainable procurement within construction organisations.
Research limitations/implications – The study is limited in scope affecting generalisation of the results.
Future study should expand the scope to include consultants, contractors and suppliers.
Practical implications – The adoption model will assist policy makers and top managers to understand the
adoption decision process and prioritise on the technological, organisational and environmental factors that
significantly affect sustainable adoption decision process within construction organisations.
Originality/value – This study appears to be among the first to empirically develop an organisational
adoption model to aid the adoption of sustainable procurement in construction.
Keywords Sustainability, Sustainable development, Adoption, Construction organizations,
Conceptual model, Sustainable procurement, Organizational model
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The construction industry has immense impact on the economic and social development of
many countries and causes considerable damage to the environment (Xia et al., 2015).
The industry accounts for one-tenth of the global economy and consumes 30–40 per cent of
global energy requirements (Xia et al., 2015). Sustainable procurement provides the vehicle
for the industry to address economic advancement and social equity in the construction
industry while minimising impact on the environment and contribute to the larger effort of
achieving sustainable development (Meehan and Bryde, 2015). Sustainable procurement is
defined as “[…] a process whereby organisation meet their needs for goods, works and
utilities in a way that achieves value for money on a whole life basis in terms of generating
benefits not only to the organisation, but also to society and the economy, whilst minimising
damage to the environment” (DEFRA, 2006). In the context of construction, sustainable
procurement is a process whereby the client and participating organisation meet design and
development requirements in a way that achieves value for money on a whole life basis
so as to generate benefits not only for project stakeholders but also to society and the Built Environment Project and
Asset Management
economy, while minimising any environmental damage (Alkilani and Jupp, 2013). © Emerald Publishing Limited
2044-124X
Despite the increased trend in sustainable procurement research and practice, most DOI 10.1108/BEPAM-10-2017-0108
 BEPAM construction organisations in the public sector are yet to fully adopt sustainable
procurement (Islam et al., 2017). Public institutions play a critical role in selecting the other
stakeholders along the supply chain including consultants, contractors and determining
construction products (Wilkinson et al., 2015). If they were to demand sustainability in
construction procurement, a considerable amount of progress could be made towards the
attainment of sustainable development (Wong et al., 2016).
The purpose of the paper is to develop an organisational model in a multi-stage process
to improve the adoption of sustainable procurement in construction.

2. Literature review
2.1 Sustainable procurement in construction
Traditionally, procurement in the construction industry has largely focused on price, quality
and time and tenders are primarily awarded to the lowest evaluated bidder whereas the
commitment to sustainability has been neglected (Gunatilake, 2013). Masterman (2002)
identified client organisations procurement needs including value for money, lowest
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

possible tender, certainty of final cost, accountability, clients’ active involvement, minimise
risk, minimum design and construction period, certainty of completion date and high
functionality/quality. These needs of client organisations are mainly focused on the
economic dimension. Masterman’s (2002) project procurement needs provide the foundation
to build sustainability in construction procurement.
Adoption of sustainability in construction procurement presents huge social, economic
and environmental benefits to organisations (Opoku and Ahmed, 2014). However,
construction organisations are yet to fully fuse sustainability practices in their procurement
decisions (Islam et al., 2017). Indeed, the industry lags behind other industries with respect to
sustainability adoption and implementation (Brennan and Cotgrave, 2014). Ruparathna and
Hewage (2015) observed that sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction
industry is still at its infancy and not widely adopted. Brennan and Cotgrave (2014)
indicated that despite the sustained interest and reforms undertaken by the UK
Government, the industry lags behind other industries in relation to sustainability adoption
and implementation. Opoku and Ahmed (2014) called for client’s organisations involvement
in the adoption and implementation of sustainable practices in the industry.
Existing research on sustainable procurement adoption has failed to focus on a multi-stage
adoption process. It takes the form of one-shot adoption decision, or combination of adoption
and implementation in a single-stage approach. Meehan and Bryde (2015) examined the
adoption of sustainable procurement in a single-stage approach. Islam et al. (2017) adopted a
similar approach to measure the level of implementation of sustainable procurement in
organisations. A multi-stage adoption process takes a sequence of stages that an organisation
passes through from initiation to adoption and implementation of an innovation.
Zhu et al. (2006) presented a multi-stage process model for the organisational adoption of
e-business from initiation to adoption and implementation. Tornatzky and Klein (1990) pointed
out that adoption needs to focus on both single- and multi-stage assimilation processes.

2.2 Available sustainable procurement models

Attempts have been made to model sustainability practices in construction. Schröpfer
et al. (2017) adopted social network to map the knowledge flow in sustainable project team.
Murtagh et al. (2016) explored the theory of self-determination to model the relationship
between motivations of architectural designers and environmentally sustainable
construction design. Upstill-Goddard et al. (2016) utilised organisational learning and
absorptive capacity perspective to model the role of learning in sustainability standards
implementation. These numerous models provided for modelling sustainability into
construction present little details of how the triple bottom line of sustainability can be
 adopted into organisation’s policy, strategy and general decision making (Meehan and Modelling the
Bryde, 2015). Walker et al. (2012) further argued that the tools do not describe the adoption adoption of
behaviour of organisations in the adoption of sustainable procurement. It has been argued sustainable
that the lack of organisational models and the complexity of existing models are hindering
the adoption of sustainable procurement (Xia et al., 2015). procurement

3. Theoretical foundation, conceptual model and development of hypotheses

3.1 Theoretical foundation
The paper is based on a theoretical combination of diffusion of innovation theory (DIT)
(Rogers, 2003) and technology–organisation–environment (TOE) framework (Tornatzky
and Fleischer 1990). The DIT and TOE framework allows the examination of adoption
process of an innovation within a distinctive set of factors for individual contexts based on
the particular innovation (Hameed et al., 2012). Rogers’s DIT defined an innovation as an
“idea, practice, or object that is perceived as new by an individual or other unit of
adoption”. Relating the definition of innovation to sustainable procurement, it is a
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

relatively new area of research and practice. Sustainable procurement is a new concept
and it could be described as an innovation. For instance, Grob and Benn (2014) viewed
sustainable procurement as an innovation. Therefore, in this study sustainable
procurement is perceived as an innovation. The study argues from the perspective of
adoption process theory that during initiation, adoption decision and implementation,
differential effects at individual stages occur and evolve continuously (Rogers, 2003).
Zhu et al. (2012) posited that to understand the adoption of sustainable procurement, the
factors which promote sustainable practices must first be understood. Consistent with
Rogers’s (2003) DIT and TOE framework, influential factors were categorised into three
contexts of technological, organisational and environmental. Rogers’ (2003) five basic
characteristics of innovation, such as relative advantage, compatibility, complexity,
trialability and observability, were adopted to view sustainable procurement within the
technological context. Through literature review, three organisational (top management
support, organisational readiness and organisational values) and environmental factors
(stakeholder’s pressure, regulatory environment and support and competitive pressure)
that drive sustainable procurement were identified. Integrating TOE framework with the
three-stage adoption process (initiation, adoption decision and implementation) provided
the foundation to identify the factors that influence sustainable procurement adoption and
examine its differing effects on the adoption process.

3.2 Conceptual model and development of hypotheses

Conceptual model. The study developed a conceptual adoption model founded on innovation
adoption process, DIT and TOE as shown in Figure 1. In the conceptual model, the study
proposed how technological, organisational and environmental factors (independent
variables) affect sustainable procurement initiation, adoption and implementation
(dependent variables) in construction organisations.
Development of hypotheses. The paper hypothesised how technological, organisational
and environmental factors have an influence on sustainable procurement adoption in
construction organisations.
Technological contexts. Relative advantage is “the degree to which an innovation is
perceived as being better than the idea it supersedes” (Roger, 2003). Relative to
sustainability studies, relative advantage has been identified as strong predictor and
positively related to adoption (Smerecnik and Andersen, 2011):
H1. Relative advantage is positively related to sustainable procurement initiation,
adoption decision and implementation.
 BEPAM Technological Context
Relative advantage H1
(RA)
H2
Compatibility (COMP)
H3
Complexity (CPLX)

H4
Trialability (TRI)

H5
Observability (OBSV)
Implementation (IMPNT)

Adoption Process of Sustainable Procurement Social

Organisational Context
H6
Top Management (TMS) Initiation (INIT) Adoption Decision (ADOP)

Organisational Values (OCV) H7 Economic

H8
Organisational Readiness (OR)

Environmental Context Environment

Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Regulatory environment and H9

support (RENV)

Competitive Pressure (CP) H10

Figure 1. H11
Conceptual model Stakeholders Pressure (STP)

The degree of compatibility between the innovation’s characteristics and the current practices
of the organisation impacts new technology adoption (Rogers, 2003). Sustainability is
compatible with procurement criteria of time, quality or price. Grob and Crawford (2008)
found compatibility to be positively related to the adoption of sustainable procurement:
H2. Compatibility is positively related to sustainable procurement initiation, adoption
decision and implementation.
Complexity is defined as the degree to which innovation is perceived as relatively difficult to
understand and use (Rogers, 2003). The adoption of new technology or idea can bring in
significant changes to the work practices of organisations. According to Smerecnik and
Andersen (2011), the complexity of changing values to adopt sustainability innovations may
be inherent in the paradigm shift that takes place:
H3. Complexity is negatively related to sustainable procurement initiation, adoption
decision and implementation.
Trialability is defined as the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with limited
basis (Rogers, 2003). Trialability is positively related to adoption (Hameed et al., 2012):
H4. Trialability is positively related to sustainable procurement initiation, adoption
decision and implementation.
Observability is defined as the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to
others (Rogers, 2003). According to Hameed et al. (2012), organisations that have
the opportunity to observe others using an innovation have a more positive view of the
innovation and are more likely to adopt the innovation:
H5. The greater observability of sustainable procurement in the construction industry, the
more likely organisations will initiate, adopt and implement sustainable procurement.
Organisational context. Top management support is one of the best predictors of
sustainability adoption by organisations. Gunatilake (2013) stated that top management is a
 key driver for sustainable practices, because they are responsible for the organisation’s Modelling the
activities and influence the culture of organisations: adoption of
H6. Top management support is positively related to sustainable procurement initiation, sustainable
adoption decision and implementation. procurement
Organisational value has been identified by researchers to be one of the determinants of
sustainable practices. In the view of Gunatilake (2013), a great level of attention of
sustainable practices issues is required within organisation’s culture to shape and motivate
employees of construction organisations. Organisations with high level of innovativeness
are more likely to initiate and adopt sustainable procurement (Bamgbade et al., 2017):
H7. Organisational values are positively related to initiation, adoption decision and
implementation of sustainable procurement.
Organisational readiness refers to the availability of the needed organisation resources for
adoption. Availability of financial and technological resources of a firm has been found to be
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

a key driver of sustainable procurement adoption (Gunatilake, 2013). Previous innovation

adoption studies (e.g. Hameed et al., 2012; Zhu et al., 2006) found organisational readiness to
be positively related to innovation initiation, adoption and implementation:
H8. Organisational readiness is positively related to initiation, adoption decision and
implementation of sustainable procurement.
Environmental context. Regulatory environment and support affect adoption and
implementation of sustainable procurement (Banihashemi et al., 2017; Wong et al., 2016).
Wong et al. (2016) found regulations as the most significant factor facilitating the effective
green procurement in construction projects. Contrarily, Bamgbade et al. (2017) found
government support significant but negatively associated with the adoption of sustainable
practices by large construction companies:
H9. A supportive regulatory environment is positively related to sustainable
procurement initiation, adoption and implementation.
Competitive pressure is supported in sustainability adoption literature as one of the major
factors in the environmental context (Zhu et al., 2006). Sustainable procurement is often
adopted in situations of competitive pressure because it better positions organisations to
respond to emerging competitive threats (Zhu et al., 2006):
H10. Competitive pressure is positively associated with the initiation, adoption and
implementation of sustainable procurement in construction organisations.
Stakeholder pressure and a desire to reduce the risk of negative publicity have been
described as a key external driver influencing sustainability adoption. Akadiri and Fadiya
(2013) noted that government, stakeholders and customers give rise to pressures towards
adoption of sustainable practices:
H11. Stakeholder pressure is positively related to sustainable procurement initiation,
adoption decision and implementation.

4. Research design and analytical approach

4.1 Survey instrument design and operationalization of measures
The paper is quantitative in nature using a questionnaire. The questionnaire was evaluated
by a group made up of two experts and ten public sector procurement officers to guarantee
the validity and effectiveness of the questions in a construction organisation context and
 BEPAM pre-tested in a pilot survey. The study had three dependent variables (initiation, adoption
decision and implementation). The measurement items were derived from previous studies,
but specific items were added to fit into the context of sustainable procurement.
Thus, “initiation” of sustainable procurement was measured by the degree of potential
benefits when the organisation is or was considering using sustainable procurement based
on a five-point Likert scale from not significant to very significant. “Adoption decision” was
measured by the extent to which sustainable procurement initiatives have been adopted in
the organisation’s mission, strategy and procurement policy using a five-point Likert
measure scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). Finally,
“implementation” was operationalised by 21 sustainable procurement practices that cover
economic, environment and social sustainable practices utilising a five-point Likert
measurement scale. The independent variables were measured on a five-point Likert
measure scale ranging from strongly disagree (1) to strongly agree (5). All the variables were
reflectively measured except implementation that was formatively measured.
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

4.2 Analytical approach

The paper adopted the smart partial least square (PLS) of the structural equation modelling
(SEM) software to model the organisational adoption of sustainable procurement. PLS
allows simultaneously testing of models of both reflective and formative constructs,
analysing and testing data of complex theoretical models and testing of measurement and
structural path models (Sarstedt et al., 2014). The measurement model stipulates the
associations between a construct and its observed indicators, whereas the structural model
identifies the relationships between the constructs (Sarstedt et al., 2014). It is used in many
fields including construction (Bamgbade et al., 2017). This paper adopts PLS because the
research is explanatory and also comprises both reflective and formative variables.

4.3 Data collection and sample size

The survey questionnaire was administered through personal delivery and e-mails to 193
respondents. The eligible respondents were involved in sustainable procurement practices
and best qualified to talk about their organisations. The respondents were represented by
chief directors, project managers, engineers, procurement officers, quantity surveyors and
planning officers. The rule of thumb for the determination of PLS–SEM minimum sample
size as suggested by Hair et al. (2014) is ten times the largest number of formative
indicators used to measure a construct or ten times the number of structural paths
directed to a particular construct in the structural model. Adopting the rule of thumb, the
ten times the number of structural paths directed to the formatively measured construct
“implementation” is 12. A minimum sample size of 120 units was required for the study.
A total of 193 respondents of 10 ministries and departments, 6 metropolitan, 49 municipal
and 76 district assemblies were sampled. The sample was stratified by scope and
purposively selected to achieve representations. The diverse government bodies provided
a better sample and diversity of opinions into public procurement practices in the
institutions. A total of 123 valid responses were offered, resulting in a response rate
of 63.70 per cent. The response rate is adequate comparable to similar studies
(e.g. Bamgbade et al., 2017). The respondents were made up of 0.80 per cent chief directors,
4.88 per cent project managers, 3.26 per cent district coordinating directors, 60.98 per cent
engineers, 13.83 per cent procurement officers, 13.01 per cent quantity surveyors and
3.25 per cent planning officers. A total of 66.70 per cent of the respondents had PhD and
master degrees, and the remaining respondents had bachelor degrees and higher national
diploma. A greater majority of the respondents of about 83.74 per cent had over five years’
working experiences in procurement. Considering the varied profile and experiences of the
respondents the data are acceptable.
 5. Data analysis and results Modelling the
5.1 Measurement model results adoption of
The reflective constructs’ item validity, convergent validity and discriminant validity were sustainable
assessed. The measurement of the formative model was assessed differently via variance
inflation factor (VIF), and indicator weights relevance (Hair et al., 2014). Hair et al. (2014) procurement
recommend a minimum threshold of 0.70 for item reliability, 0.70 for composite reliability,
0.70 for composite reliability and 0.60 for average variance extracted (AVE). Moreover, the
required VIF for each indicator must be less than 5.
Individual item reliability. The result showed that 18 items of the reflective constructs
(INIT1 ADOP5, REAV2, REAV5, REAV6, REAV10, COMP5, CPX4, TRI3 OBSV1, OBSV3,
TMS2, OCV2, OCV5, OCV6, OR1, CP4 and RENV4) loaded below the threshold of 0.7 and
were removed from the initial model because they could have an adverse effect on the
constructs’ convergent validity (Sarstedt et al., 2014). However, the indicators TRI1 and
OBSV4 with loadings of 0.563 and 0.602, respectively, were retained despite its loadings
being below 0.70. This was to avoid the construct being measured with a single item
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

(Sarstedt et al., 2014). The results indicate that all the other outer loading values exceeded
the standardised loading threshold of 0.7.
Convergent validity. Convergent validity is the measure of the internal consistency of items
and assessed by Cronbach’s α, construct reliability and AVE. The composite reliability of the
13 reflectively measured construct ranged from 0.746 to 0.984. All the AVE values recorded
values above 0.6. The adequate item reliability, Cronbach’s α, composite reliability and AVE
suggest attainment of convergent validity of the measurement model (see Table I).
Discriminant validity. Discriminant validity defines the degree to which a construct is
empirically separated from other constructs in the path model, both in terms of how much it
correlates with other constructs and in terms of how distinctly the indicators represent only
this single construct (Sarstedt et al., 2014). Fornell and Larcker (1981) was applied to test
discriminant validity, where the square roots of each construct’s AVE were compared to its
interconstruct correlations with all opposing reflective constructs. As shown on the diagonal
of the correlation matrix in Table II, the square roots of AVE were greater than the variance
shared between them and it suggests establishment of discriminant validity of the model.
Multicollinearity of the formative indicators. High multicollinearity among formative
indicators results in an indicator having a low or non-significant paths weight (Hair et al.,
2014). The VIF of the construct “implementation” indicates values below the threshold of ⩽ 5
as shown in Table III. This indicates no issue with multicollinearity in the measurement model.
Formative indicators’ weights and loadings. A PLS bootstrapping was run to compute the
t-values for each indicator weight (Sarstedt et al., 2014). The determination of the t-values
allows the following decisions to be made on the significance of the indicator weights.
The items Impss1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 15 and 17 were determined to be statistically significant.
The remaining indicators had statistically non-significant weights but higher loadings
within the range of 0.522–0.844. These indicators were retained regardless of their
statistically insignificant weights because their outer loadings as presented in Table III were
higher than the least threshold of 0.50 and experts supported the presence of these
sustainable procurement practices.

5.2 Structural model and hypotheses testing

Structural model testing. A standard bootstrapping procedure was employed with 5,000
bootstrap samples to determine the structural model’s coefficient of determination (R2), and
cross-validated redundancy (Q2) (Sarstedt et al., 2014). Figure 2 shows the significant paths
and t-values for the structural model. The minimum threshold recommended by Sarstedt
et al. (2014) for Q2 is zero.
 Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Table I.

AVE and
BEPAM

Cronbach’s α
Factor loading,
composite reliability,
Items Outer Composite Cronbach’s
Constructs code Items description loadings reliability AVE α

Initiation INIT1 Ensures compliance with policies/regulations 0.658 0.984 0.952 0.975
INIT2 Indicates our organisations’ practical expression of commitment to sustainable development 0.975
INIT3 Ensures value for money 0.973
INIT4 Enhancing reputation 0.979
Adoption decision ADOP1 Action taken to design procurement policies that take into consideration sustainability 0.852 0.923 0.668 0.900
ADOP2 My organisation favours contractors/consultants/suppliers that rate highly on sustainability at
the tender process 0.798
ADOP3 We have a documented procurement policy which states our commitment to procuring
sustainable works, goods and services 0.865
ADOP4 My organisation has incorporated sustainability into its procurement process 0.820
ADOP5 My organisation specifies sustainability criteria in its contract 0.680
ADOP6 We have made our contractors/consultants/suppliers aware of our sustainable procurement
policy and practices 0.810
ADOP7 We currently have ISO14001 certification 0.755
Relative advantage RA1 Offers organisational reputation and pride 0.866 0.903 0.650 0.865
RA2 Improves health, safety and security for workforce and local community/residents 0.575
RA3 Improves the local economy and create wealth 0.828
RA4 Creates employment opportunities 0.837
RA5 Reduces cost 0.044
RA6 Minimises harmful impact of pollution and waste −0.019
RA7 Sustainable construction procurement ensures value for money 0.716
RA8 Sustainable construction procurement ensures efficient and effective use of natural resources 0.787
RA9 Sustainable construction procurement reduces the harmful impact of pollution and waste 0.856
RA10 Offers organisational reputation and pride 0.202
Compatibility COMP1 Sustainable procurement adoption fits our organisation’s preferred way of conducting our
procurement activities 0.829 0.893 0.627 0.851
COMP2 Sustainable procurement adoption is compatible with our organisation’s current procurement
process 0.77
COMP3 Adoption of sustainable procurement is consistent with our organisation’s values and beliefs 0.807
COMP4 Sustainable procurement adoption is consistent with our organisational strategy and policy 0.764
COMP5 Sustainable procurement adoption is with the way our procurement activities should be
achieved 0.088
COMP6 Sustainable procurement adoption will disrupt the procurement process 0.786

(continued )
 Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Items Outer Composite Cronbach’s

Constructs code Items description loadings reliability AVE α

Complexity CPX1 Sustainable procurement is hard to learn 0.858 0.892 0.733 0.823
CPX2 Sustainable construction procurement use is a complex process 0.842
CPX3 Integrating sustainable procurement into our current work practices will be very difficult 0.869
CPX4 It is not easy to become skilful in using sustainability criteria in construction procurement 0.040
Trialability TRI1 Prior to adopting sustainability in procurement, it would be necessary to adopt it on an elective
basis for a trial period 0.563 0.748 0.605 0.745
TRI2 Sustainable procurement could be tried without fully committing to it 0.953
TRI3 Sustainable procurement training was a way of learning more prior to committing to it 0.556
Observability OBSV1 The observation of other organisations that have adopted sustainability in construction
procurement influence or will influences our decision to adopt it 0.223 0.746 0.612 0.789
OBSV2 It is easy for my organisation to observe other organisations using sustainability in
construction procurement 0.920
OBSV3 Using sustainability in construction procurement is/will not be visible in my organisation −0.217
OBSV4 Using sustainability in construction procurement will show improved procurement
performance/results 0.602
Top management TMS1 Top management articulate a vision for organisational adoption of sustainable construction
support procurement 0.727 0.907 0.620 0.878
TMS2 Top management is likely to consider the adoption of sustainable construction procurement as
strategically important 0.656
TMS3 Top management formulated a strategy for the organisational adoption of sustainable
construction procurement 0.823
TMS4 Top management has effectively communicated its support for sustainable construction
procurement adoption to employees 0.833
TMS5 Top management is committed to the use of sustainable construction procurement 0.768
TMS6 Top management is likely to invest funds in sustainable construction procurement 0.809
TMS7 Top management is willing to take risks involved in the adoption of sustainable construction
procurement 0.761
Organisational OCV1 Our organisation is highly committed to sustainability (social, environmental and economic)
values goals 0.817 0.890 0.620 0.846
OCV2 The history, value, culture, norms support adoption of innovative idea such as sustainable
construction procurement adoptions in the organisations 0.551

(continued )
procurement
Modelling the
adoption of
sustainable

Table I.
 Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Table I.
BEPAM

Items Outer Composite Cronbach’s

Constructs code Items description loadings reliability AVE α

OCV3 Our organisation has provided experienced and capable people to manage sustainability
(social, environmental and economic) issues in our procurement activities 0.827
OCV4 Our organisation adopts sustainability criteria (social, environmental and economic) in
selecting contractors and suppliers 0.813
OCV5 The willingness of the organisation to tolerate risk and failure 0.584
OCV6 Our organisation values emphasised collaboration and support 0.664
OCV7 In our institution, we believe that new innovations in procurement strategies achieve efficiency
in managerial process 0.795
OCV8 Our vision of sustainability is extensively communicated and comprehended throughout the
institution 0.701
Organisational OR1 We have sufficient human resources necessary to use/adopt sustainability in construction
readiness procurement 0.679 0.825 0.619 0.616
OR2 We have the knowledge necessary to adopt/use sustainability in construction procurement 0.829
OR3 We have sufficient financial support to adopt/use sustainability in construction procurement 0.862
Regulatory RENV1 The government procurement laws and regulations support adoption of sustainable
environment and construction procurement initiatives and implementation
support RENV2 The adoption of sustainable construction procurement is/was driven by incentives provided by 0.859 0.858 0.608 0.777
government 0.774
RENV3 The adoption of the sustainable construction procurement is/was required by government 0.891
RENV4 The positive attitudes of government towards adoption of sustainable procurement 0.389
RENV5 Adequate trainings programs offered by government to the area of sustainable procurement 0.748
Competitive CP1 Competition in our industry/environment is very intense 0.858 0.950 0.905 0.895
pressure CP2 Our organisation does experience competitive pressure forcing us to adopt/implement
sustainable construction procurement 0.842
CP3 Organisations that readily implement new ideas/innovation will be competitive 0.869
CP4 Competition in our industry/environment is very intense 0.080
Stakeholders STP1 The degree of adoption among other public organisations is pressuring our organisation to
pressure adopt sustainable construction procurement 0.924 0.831 0.625 0.736
STP2 The regulatory body (Public Procurement Authority) exerts pressure on our organisation to
adopt sustainability in construction procurement 0.717
STP3 Our major stakeholders/stockholders (e.g. contractors, suppliers, consultants, professional
bodies, etc.) pressurise us to adopt sustainable construction procurement 0.712
 ADOP CMPLX COMP CP INIT OBSV OCV OR RA RENV ST TMS TRI
Modelling the
adoption of
ADOP
CMPLX
0.817
0.375 0.856
sustainable
COMP 0.283 0.276 0.792 procurement
CP 0.257 0.360 0.250 0.951
INIT 0.356 0.259 0.337 0.485 0.976
OBSV 0.228 0.436 0.384 0.264 0.160 0.778
OCV 0.180 0.390 0.407 0.131 0.297 0.274 0.787
OR 0.360 0.387 0.252 0.330 0.160 0.317 0.359 0.840
RA 0.399 0.381 0.325 0.239 0.238 0.250 0.341 0.337 0.806
RENV 0.374 0.362 0.319 0.279 0.079 0.228 0.224 0.304 0.357 0.780 Table II.
ST 0.091 0.369 0.252 0.077 0.061 0.234 0.168 0.399 0.067 0.063 0.790 Correlations between
TMS 0.507 0.458 0.542 0.522 0.523 0.329 0.625 0.290 0.571 0.571 0.282 0.788 constructs
TRI 0.019 0.014 −0.252 0.036 0.029 0.190 0.008 0.191 0.021 0.019 0.091 −0.168 0.783 (Fornell–Larcker)
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

t-statistics (of
Items loadings
Constructs code Item description VIF Weights weights) p-values Loadings

Social Imp1 Health and safety for workforce 1.347 0.375 17.846 0.000 0.844
and local community/residents
Imp2 Preventing nuisance noise 1.458 0.437 14.225 0.000 0.780
from construction operations
Imp3 Minimising disruption to 1.796 0.316 17.339 0.000 0.834
traffic of local community
Imp4 Community security/well-being 2.068 0.071 10.723 0.000 0.703
Imp5 Provide employment to the 2.265 −0.026 0.491 0.623 0.745
community
Imp6 Improving working 1.646 −0.001 0.476 0.634 0.747
environment and conditions
Imp7 Promoting ethical practices 1.965 −0.037 11.087 0.000 0.536
Economic Imp8 Clear establishment of need 3.444 0.198 0.549 0.583 0.560
and evaluation of alternative
options
Imp9 Value for money 3.021 0.227 0.742 0.458 0.685
Imp10 Local/area economic growth 2.792 −0.514 1.272 0.203 0.715
Imp11 Consideration of whole life 3.488 −0.036 0.074 0.941 0.522
costing
Imp12 Use of local material 1.351 0.603 1.095 0.274 0.528
Imp13 Improving the efficiency of 1.600 0.555 1.454 0.146 0.571
the supply side
Imp14 Maximum use of limited 4.692 −0.037 0.141 0.888 0.636
resources
Environmental Imp15 Reducing energy consumption 1.350 0.486 2.378 0.018 0.529
Imp16 Reducing water consumption 1.398 −0.229 1.172 0.242 0.664
Imp17 The use of recycled and 1.305 0.737 3.426 0.001 0.696
sustainable materials
Imp18 Reusing existing built assets 1.276 −0.084 0.370 0.711 0.510
Imp19 Minimising water, land and 2.400 −0.036 0.111 0.912 0.611
air pollution Table III.
Imp20 Preserving and enhancing 2.225 0.422 1.124 0.261 0.511 VIF, weights, t-values
biodiversity of the indicators
Imp21 Environmental management 1.328 0.098 0.351 0.726 0.796 of the construct
system “implementation”
 BEPAM
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

Figure 2.
Organisational
adoption model

The coefficient of determination (R2) assesses the structural path representing the amount of
explained variance of each endogenous latent variable by the exogenous latent variable
(Sarstedt et al., 2014). The dependent variables, initiation and adoption decisions had
R2 values 89.9 and 81.0 per cent, respectively. The R2 values of implementation measured
with regard to environmental, economic and social sustainability were 40.9, 29.7 and
95.5 per cent, respectively. These suggest that the model explained 89.9 per cent variance of
initiation and 81.9 per cent variance of adoption decision of sustainable procurement. In
addition, it explained 40.9, 29.7 and 95.5 per cent variance of environmental, economic and
social aspects of sustainable procurement implementation, respectively.
The model’s predictive relevance (Q2) was examined through blindfolding procedure using
the cross-validated redundancy. The result indicates Q2 values of 0.815, 0.493, 0.267, 0.233 and
0.366 for the constructs initiation, adoption, environmental, economic and social, respectively,
that were above zero. This provides support for the model’s predictive relevance.
Hypotheses testing. Within the technological context, relative advantage had significant
positive paths leading to initiation and implementation of social sustainable procurement.
 Its path to initiation had a higher effect than implementation with path values of 0.953 and Modelling the
0.356, respectively. Hence, H1a and H1c3 were supported. Compatibility had a moderate adoption of
positive path effect of 0.288 to implementation of environmentally sustainable procurement sustainable
and thus only H2c3 was supported. On the other hand, complexity had a small significant
path effect of −0.046 to initiation; however, adoption and implementation of the three sides procurement
of sustainable procurement practices were insignificant. Trialability had a small effect of
0.08 on initiation of sustainable procurement but no effects on adoption decision and
implementation. As a result, only H5a was supported. Observability had a significant
( p o0.10) and medium positive path effect of 0.28 to implementation of environmental
aspect of sustainable procurement practices. Hence, demonstrating only H4c3 was
supported. Within the organisational context, top management support had only significant
positive path of 0.114 to initiation but had an insignificant path to adoption and
implementation of sustainable procurement practices. This indicated that only H6a was
supported. Organisational values had a significant and positive path to initiation and
adoption decision but insignificant path to all the aspects of implementation. Similarly, its
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

path from initiation stage ( β ¼ 0.247) increased to the path of adoption ( β ¼ 0.363).
Therefore, H7a and H7b were supported. Organisational readiness had a significant and a
negative path of −0.122 to initiation. Hence, this demonstrated that H8a was partially
supported because the study had proposed a positive relationship between organisational
readiness and each of the three stages of adoption. In the last factors of the environmental
context, the results indicated that regulatory environment had significant positive paths to
initiation ( β ¼ 0.373) and adoption ( β ¼ 0.176). However, its path to implementation was not
significant. Consequently, only H9a and H9b were supported. Competitive pressure had
a significant and a negative path to initiation. Therefore, H10a was partially supported.
Finally, stakeholder’s pressure was established not to be significant in any of the adoption
process and as a result, H11a, H11b and H11c1–3 were not supported.

6. Discussions
The model explained 90 per cent variance in initiation, 89.9 per cent variance in adoption
decision of sustainable procurement and 96 per cent variance in social aspect of sustainable
procurement implementation suggesting a robust model. The perceived relative advantage,
complexity, compatibility, trialability, observability, top management support,
organisational values, organisational readiness, competitive pressure and the regulatory
environment were found to have an effect on organisational adoption of sustainable
procurement. The results further revealed differing effects of the contextual factors on the
sustainable procurement adoption processes.
Relative advantage was the strongest factor that positively influenced initiation and
implementation of the social aspect of sustainable procurement but did not have a
significant effect on adoption decision or implementation of the economic and
environmental stages of sustainable procurement adoption. Previous studies have not
distinguished among stages of adoption of sustainable procurement but have generally
found that relative advantage positively affects sustainable procurement adoption (Meehan
and Bryde, 2015). It confirmed other previous studies on innovation which indicated that
benefits affected adoption and implementation of an innovation ( for instance, Hameed et al.,
2012). The result suggests that public sector client organisations must be certain and
persuaded of the possible benefits of sustainable procurement at both the initiation and
implementation stages.
Organisational values were found to be a predictor of initiation and adoption decision
stages in this study but did not affect the implementation stage of sustainable procurement
in the organisations studied. This reinforced the findings of earlier studies (Roman, 2017;
 BEPAM Gunatilake, 2013), which discovered that organisational values affect the adoption of
sustainable practices. In the view of Gunatilake (2013), a great level of attention to
sustainable practices issues is required within an organisation’s culture to shape and
motivate employees of construction organisations.
Regulatory environment and government support within the environmental context had
significant and large positive effects on the initiation and implementation of the environmental
aspect of sustainable procurement but had an insignificant path to the adoption and
implementation stages of economic and social aspects of sustainable procurement. The effects
in the adoption stage were higher than the initiation stage. Previous studies of sustainable
procurement found it to affect sustainable procurement positively both at the adoption
and implementation stages (Gunatilake, 2013; Akadiri and Fadiya, 2013). However, these
studies did not group adoption into all its three stages but rather combined adoption and
implementation as one stage. The finding of the study suggests that the presence of
government procurement laws, policies and regulations motivates public sector client
organisations to initiate sustainable practices in construction procurement and finally aid
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

adoption and implementation.

7. Conclusions
This study has both theoretical and practical implications. Researchers have extensively
used DIT and TOE framework in several research contexts, but its application in
sustainable procurement research is limited. Relying on DIT and TOE, the study developed
a conceptual model for researchers to assess the technological, organisational and
environmental factors in which sustainable procurement will be initiated, adopted and
implemented. Previous research studies linked to sustainable procurement adoption in
construction had not concentrated on the differential effects of the influential factors on the
adoption stages. This study appears to be among the first to empirically study and test the
differential effects of technological, organisational and environmental factors on sustainable
procurement adoption in a multi-stage process within a single model. This result also
supports the theoretical view that the same variables could produce diverse roles at each
stage of the adoption process. Furthermore, the findings indicate that regulatory
environment and support is an important factor that influences the tendency of public sector
organisations to initiate and implement sustainable procurement. The implication is that
sustainable procurement adoption requires the existence of appropriate government
policies, procurement laws and regulations. Such policies should include promotion of use of
efficient energy materials, endorsement of low taxes and tariffs on sustainable goods and
provision of financial incentives. One of the major contributions of the study is the
development of an organisational model for the adoption of sustainable procurement in
construction. The developed organisational adoption model will assist policy makers and
top managers to understand the adoption process and to prioritise on the factors that
significantly affect the adoption of sustainable procurement. The study is limited in scope
and sample size affecting generalisation of the results. Future study should expand the
sample size and scope to include consultants, contractors and suppliers.

References
Akadiri, P.O. and Fadiya, O. (2013), “Empirical analysis of the determinants of environmentally
sustainable practices in the UK construction industry”, Construction Innovation, Vol. 13 No. 4,
pp. 352-373.
Alkilani, S. and Jupp, J. (2013), “Paving the road for sustainable construction in developing countries:
a study of the Jordanian construction industry”, Australasian Journal of Construction Economics
and Building – Conference Series, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 84-93.
 Bamgbade, J.A., Kamaruddeen, A.M., Nawi, M.N.M., Yusoff, R.Z. and Bin, R.A. (2017), “Does Modelling the
government support matter? Influence of organizational culture on sustainable construction adoption of
among Malaysian contractors”, International Journal of Construction Management, Vol. 18 No. 2,
pp. 1-15. sustainable
Banihashemi, S., Hosseini, M.R., Golizadeh, H. and Sankaran, S. (2017), “Critical success factors (CSFs) procurement
for integration of sustainability into construction project management practices in developing
countries”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 35 No. 6, pp. 1103-1119.
Brennan, C.M. and Cotgrave, A.J. (2014), “Sustainable development: a qualitative inquiry into the
current state of the UK construction industry”, Structural Survey, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 315-330.
DEFRA (2006), Procuring the Future Sustainable Procurement National Action Plan: Recommendations
from the Sustainable Procurement Task Force, Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs, London.
Fornell, C. and Larcker, D.F. (1981), “Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable
variables and measurement error”, Journal of Marketing Research, pp. 39-50.
Grob, S.M. and Benn, S. (2014), “Conceptualising the adoption of sustainable procurement: an institutional
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

theory perspective”, Australasian Journal of Environmental Management, Vol. 21 No. 1, pp. 11-21.
Grob, S.M. and Crawford, J.D. (2008), “Diffusing sustainability: towards a framework for adopting
sustainable procurement”, Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management Conference,
Auckland.
Gunatilake, S. (2013), “The uptake and implementation of sustainable construction: transforming
policy into practice”, doctoral dissertation, University of Central Lancashire.
Hair, F.J. Jr, Sarstedt, M., Hopkins, L. and Kuppelwieser, V.G. (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS–SEM) an emerging tool in business research”, European Business
Review, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 106-121.
Hameed, M.A., Counsell, S. and Swift, S. (2012), “A conceptual model for the process of IT innovation
adoption in organizations”, Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 29 No. 3,
pp. 358-390.
Islam, M.M., Murad, M.W., McMurray, A.J. and Abalala, T.S. (2017), “Aspects of sustainable
procurement practices by public and private organisations in Saudi Arabia: an empirical study”,
International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, Vol. 24 No. 4, pp. 289-303.
Masterman, J.W.E. (2002), An Introduction to Building Procurement Systems, 2nd ed., E & FN Spon,
London.
Meehan, J. and Bryde, D.J. (2015), “A field-level examination of the adoption of sustainable procurement
in the social housing sector”, International Journal of Operations & Production Management,
Vol. 35 No. 7, pp. 982-1004.
Murtagh, N., Roberts, A. and Hind, R. (2016), “The relationship between motivations of architectural
designers and environmentally sustainable construction design”, Construction Management and
Economics, Vol. 34 No. 1, pp. 61-75.
Opoku, A. and Ahmed, V. (2014), “Embracing sustainability practices in UK construction
organisations: challenges facing intra-organisational leadership”, Built Environment Project
and Asset Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 90-107.
Rogers, E.M. (2003), Diffusion of Innovations, 5th ed., Free Press, New York, NY.
Roman, A.V. (2017), “Institutionalizing sustainability: a structural equation model of sustainable
procurement in US public agencies”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 143 No. 1, pp. 1048-1059.
Ruparathna, R. and Hewage, K. (2015), “Sustainable procurement in the Canadian construction
industry: current practices drivers and opportunities”, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 109,
pp. 305-314.
Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C.M., Smith, D., Reams, R. and Hair, J.F. (2014), “Partial least squares structural
equation modeling (PLS–SEM): a useful tool for family business researchers”, Journal of Family
Business Strategy, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 105-115.
 BEPAM Schröpfer, V.L.M., Tah, J. and Kurul, E. (2017), “Mapping the knowledge flow in sustainable
construction project teams using social network analysis”, Engineering, Construction and
Architectural Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 229-259.
Smerecnik, K.R. and Andersen, P.A. (2011), “The diffusion of environmental sustainability innovations in
North American hotels and ski resorts”, Journal of Sustainable Tourism, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 171-196.
Tornatzky, L.G. and Fleischer, M. (1990), The Processes of Technological Innovation, Lexington Books,
Lexington, MA.
Upstill-Goddard, J., Glass, J., Dainty, A. and Nicholson, I. (2016), “Implementing sustainability in small
and medium-sized construction firms: the role of absorptive capacity”, Engineering,
Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 23 No. 4, pp. 407-427.
Walker, H., Miemczyk, J., Johnsen, T. and Spencer, R. (2012), “Sustainable procurement: past, present
and future”, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 18 No. 4, pp. 201-206.
Wilkinson, S.J., Sayce, S.L. and Christensen, P.H. (2015), Developing Property Sustainably, Routledge,
London and New York, NY.
Wong, J.K.W., San Chan, J.K. and Wadu, M.J. (2016), “Facilitating effective green procurement in
Downloaded by 154.160.21.128 At 05:01 16 October 2018 (PT)

construction projects: an empirical study of the enablers”, Journal of Cleaner Production,

Vol. 135, pp. 859-871.
Xia, B., Zuo, J., Wu, P. and Ke, Y. (2015), “Sustainable construction trends in journal papers”,
Proceedings of the 19th International Symposium on Advancement of Construction Management
and Real Estate, pp. 69-179.
Zhu, K., Kraemer, K.L. and Xu, S. (2006), “The process of innovation assimilation by firms in different
countries: a technology diffusion perspective on e-business”, Management Science, Vol. 52
No. 10, pp. 1557-1576.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K.H. (2012), “Green supply chain management innovation diffusion and its
relationship to organizational improvement: an ecological modernization perspective”, Journal of
Engineering and Technology Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 168-185.

Further reading
Edum-Fotwe, F.T. and Price, A.D. (2009), “A social ontology for appraising sustainability of
construction projects and developments”, International Journal of Project Management, Vol. 27
No. 4, pp. 313-322.
Essa, R. and Fortune, C. (2008), “Pre-construction evaluation practices of sustainable housing projects
in the UK”, Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 514-526.
Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q. and Lai, K.H. (2011), “An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain
management literature”, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 130 No. 1, pp. 1-15.

Corresponding author
Kwaku Agbesi can be contacted at: gbesie@yahoo.co.uk

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

View publication stats