Research proposal writers

INFLUENCE OF INTERNAL STAKEHOLDERS’ EXPERIENCES IN IMPLEMENTING COMMUNITY PROCUREMENT: A CASE STUDY OF THE DEVELOPMENT RESPONSE TO DISPLACEMENT IMPACTS PROJECT IN RWAMWANJA,

KAMWENGE DISTRICT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION.. i

APPROVAL. ii

TABLE OF CONTENTS. iii

LIST OF TABLES. vi

LIST OF FIGURES. vi

LIST OF ACRONYMS. vii

CHAPTER ONE.. 1

INTRODUCTION.. 1

1.1 Introduction. 1

1.2 Background. 1

1.2.1 Historical Background. 1

1.2.2 Theoretical Background. 1

1.2.3 Conceptual Background. 2

1.2.4 Contextual Background. 3

1.3 Statement of the Problem.. 3

1.4 Purpose of the Study. 4

1.5 Objectives of the Study. 4

1.6 Research Questions. 5

1.7 Research Hypotheses. 5

1.8 Conceptual Framework. 6

1.9 Justification of the Study. 6

1.10        Significance of the Study. 7

1.10.1 Theoretical Significance. 7

1.10.2 Practical Significance. 7

1.11 Scope of the Study. 7

1.11.1 Geographical Scope. 7

1.11.2 Content Scope. 7

1.12 Operational definition of terms. 8

1. CHAPTER TWO.. 9

LITERATURE REVIEW… 9

2.1 Introduction. 9

2.2 Review of Theoretical Literature. 9

2.3 Concept and Actual Literature Review.. 9

2.3.1 Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement and Community Procurement 9

2.3.2 Stakeholders’ attitude & perceptions and Community procurement 10

2.3.3 Stakeholders’ Best Practices and Community Procurement 11

2.4 Summary of the Literature Reviewed. 11

2. CHAPTER THREE.. 13

METHODOLOGY.. 13

3.1      Introduction. 13

3.2      Research Design. 13

3.3      Study Population. 13

3.4      Sample Size. 14

3.5      Sampling Techniques and Procedure. 14

3.6      Data collection methods. 15

3.6.1 Questionnaire survey. 15

3.6.2 Interviewing. 15

3.7      Data Collection Instruments. 15

3.7.2    Interview guide. 16

3.8      Data collection procedure. 16

3.9      Data analysis. 16

3.10     Pre-Testing (Validity and Reliability) 17

3.10.1 Validity test 17

3.10.2 Reliability. 17

3.11     Ethical considerations. 17

CHAPTER FOUR.. 19

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS. 19

4.1 Introduction. 19

4.2 Demographic Information of Respondents. 19

4.2.1 Gender of respondents. 19

Source: Primary Data 2024. 19

4.3.2 Educational level of respondents. 20

4.2.3 Findings on the duration respondents. 20

4.4.1 The level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement 21

4.4.2 Effect of stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. 24

4.4.3 Stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. 27

4.4.1 Community Procurement 29

CHAPTER FIVE.. 32

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF FINDINGS. 32

5.0 Introduction. 32

5.1 Discussion. 32

5.1.1 To examine the effect of the level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. 32

5.1.2 To examine the effect of Stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. 34

5.1.3 Stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. 35

5.2 Conclusion of the study. 36

5.3 Recommendations. 37

REFERENCES. 38

QUESTIONNAIRE.. 40

APPENDICES. 46

Appendix 1: Workplan and Timeframe. 46

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Population, sample size, and sampling methods. 14

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the Conceptual Framework showing the relationship between Stakeholders’ experiences and implementation of community procurement 6

LIST OF ACRONYMS

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the background of the study, the statement of the problem, the study purpose, research objectives, research questions, the conceptual framework, the significance of the study, the scope and justification of the study as well as operational definitions of key terms in the study.

1.2 Background

1.2.1 Historical Background

Globally, the first traces of procurement can be seen throughout ancient history, including the Egyptians in 3,000 BC. Though there was no designated procurement function, materials management aided in the building of the pyramids. Procurement’s organizational role was not truly recognized until the 1800s. One of the earliest acknowledgments of the procurement function can be found in Charles Babbage’s 1832 book, During the Industrial Revolution, procurement solidified its importance. Marshall Kirkman’s 1887 book The Handling of Railway Supplies. In 1886, the Pennsylvania Railroad gave departmental status to the procurement function, referring to it as the ‘Supplying Department.

It was not until the mid-1960s that procurement once again took on a managerial role, on a wide scale. The concept of material management became the focus during this period. Procurement professionals emphasized competitive bidding, with price becoming the determining factor for most contracts. An increase in trained professionals during this period helped procurement on its way to regaining departmental status. it can be expected that the procurement function will only continue to develop and expand its ability to directly impact successful organizations (Rutkowski et al., 2022).

Community procurement involves local communities in the procurement process for goods and services, aiming to ensure that development projects meet local needs and priorities. This approach promotes transparency, accountability, and community ownership, fostering sustainable development.

In Africa, stakeholder engagement is problematic in the public sector including procurement transactions (Buertey et al., 2016). The problem emanates from the cultural settings in the construction industry where few people (stakeholders) take decisions leaving large affected stakeholders out of the process (Dadzie et al., 2012). Other scholars assign the challenge to the nature of the procurement processes in the country (Amoah and Shakantu, 2019, Gidigah et al., 2021). Available institutional reports specify that the problem of single (sole) sourcing of public procurement hinders stakeholder engagement in the procurement process (Aboelazm, 2018). Single sourcing is a problem-ridden procurement process where a project manager secures a contract without passing through a competitive tendering, bypassing the established procurement systems. Such contracts occur under shrewd circumstances devoid of enough stakeholder engagements. Another pressing problem in Nigeria and Ghana’s public procurement within the construction industry is the little integration of sustainability practices (Adjei-Bamfo and Maloreh-Nyamekye, 2019). Adopting sustainable procurement practices in Ghana will provide benefits of preserving the environment and reducing project costs (McMurray et al., 2014) as compared to the current traditional public procurement practices in the country that is stained with corrupt deals (Osei-Tutu et al., 2010).

Sustainable procurement is an emerging field that remains novel in many countries, including east Africa and particularly in east African countries (Bohari et al., 2020; Jeffery, 2009). It acts as a driving force for the industry, promoting economic and social progress while mitigating negative environmental impacts, thus contributing to the goal of sustainable development (Meehan and Bryde, 2015). The European Commission defines Green Public Procurement (GPP) as “a process whereby public authorities seek to procure goods, services, and works with a reduced environmental impact throughout their life cycle when compared to goods, services, and works with the same primary function that would otherwise be procured” (Michelsen and de Boer, 2009). The active involvement of stakeholders in construction projects has become increasingly important, particularly with the growing interest in multicultural project teams (Lehtinen and Aaltonen, 2020). Effective stakeholder engagement can harmonize varying interests, enhancing project outcomes while reducing environmental impacts and boosting economic sustainability (Akomea-Frimpong et al., 2021).

In Uganda, stakeholder engagement in the public sector, particularly in procurement transactions, faces significant challenges (Buertey et al., 2016). These issues stem from the cultural dynamics within the construction industry, where decision-making is often concentrated among a few stakeholders, excluding many others who are affected by the outcomes (Dadzie et al., 2012). Some researchers attribute these challenges to the inherent nature of the country’s procurement processes (Amoah and Shakantu, 2019; Gidigah et al., 2021). Institutional reports indicate that single (sole) sourcing in public procurement further impedes stakeholder engagement (Aboelazm, 2018). Single sourcing, a process where contracts are awarded without competitive tendering and outside the established procurement systems, often occurs under questionable circumstances with insufficient stakeholder involvement. Additionally, the construction industry in Uganda’s public procurement sector struggles with the limited integration of sustainability practices (Adjei-Bamfo and Maloreh-Nyamekye, 2019).

Kamwenge District is located in the Western Region of Uganda. It is characterized by a largely rural population, with agriculture being the predominant economic activity. The district is home to diverse communities, including indigenous residents and refugees from neighboring countries. One of the notable areas within Kamwenge is the Rwamwanja Refugee Settlement, which was re-opened in 2012 to accommodate refugees fleeing conflicts in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), The settlement has grown to host tens of thousands of refugees, which has, in turn, impacted the district’s development planning and resource allocation. The influx of refugees has brought challenges such as increased pressure on land and social services, but it has also presented opportunities for development projects, including those focusing on community procurement.

1.2.2 Theoretical Background

Stakeholder Theory, as proposed by Freeman (1984), emphasizes the importance of identifying and addressing the interests of all stakeholders in an organization. This theory has gained significant traction across various fields, including procurement, where its principles offer valuable insights into the management of relationships with diverse stakeholders, particularly in public sector projects.

The origins of procurement can be traced back to ancient civilizations such as Egypt, where materials management played a crucial role in monumental projects like the construction of the pyramids around 3,000 BC. However, procurement as a formal organizational function was not recognized until the 1800s. Charles Babbage’s 1832 book, which acknowledged the importance of procurement during the Industrial Revolution, marked one of the earliest mentions of procurement as a distinct activity. The 1886 Pennsylvania Railroad’s establishment of a ‘Supplying Department’ further solidified procurement’s role within organizations. It was not until the mid-1960s that procurement began to regain a managerial role on a broader scale, focusing on material management and competitive bidding. This period also witnessed the rise of trained professionals within the procurement field, contributing to its re-establishment as a critical organizational function.

Stakeholder Theory is particularly relevant in the context of procurement, where various stakeholders ranging from suppliers and contractors to government entities and local communities have vested interests. In the procurement process, especially in public sector projects, the active involvement of these stakeholders is crucial for ensuring that projects meet local needs and priorities. Community procurement, for instance, seeks to involve local communities in the procurement process, promoting transparency, accountability, and community ownership. This approach aligns with the principles of Stakeholder Theory, which advocates for the inclusion of all relevant parties in decision-making processes.

In Africa, particularly in the public sector, stakeholder engagement faces significant challenges. Cultural settings in the construction industry often lead to decision-making being concentrated among a few individuals, leaving out other affected stakeholders. This exclusion is compounded by the procurement processes in countries like Ghana, where single (sole) sourcing is prevalent. Single sourcing, a procurement method where contracts are awarded without competitive tendering, often occurs under questionable circumstances and lacks sufficient stakeholder engagement. This approach not only undermines the principles of transparency and accountability but also leads to suboptimal project outcomes.

The integration of sustainability practices in procurement is an emerging field, particularly in African countries. Sustainable procurement aims to reduce the environmental impact of goods, services, and works throughout their life cycle, contributing to sustainable development. Stakeholder Theory emphasizes the importance of engaging all relevant parties in this process to harmonize varying interests, enhance project outcomes, and promote economic and environmental sustainability. However, the limited adoption of sustainable procurement practices in countries like Ghana and Uganda poses a challenge to achieving these goals. In Uganda, for example, public procurement in the construction industry struggles with incorporating sustainability practices, leading to missed opportunities for environmental preservation and cost reduction.

Kamwenge District in Uganda, characterized by a predominantly rural population and the presence of the Rwamwanja Refugee Settlement, presents a unique case for the application of Stakeholder Theory in procurement. The influx of refugees has brought both challenges and opportunities for development projects in the district. Community procurement, guided by the principles of Stakeholder Theory, can play a vital role in addressing the needs of both indigenous residents and refugees, ensuring that development projects are inclusive, transparent, and sustainable. However, the district also faces challenges such as single sourcing and limited stakeholder engagement, which need to be addressed to realize the full potential of procurement as a tool for sustainable development. The application of Stakeholder Theory to procurement highlights the importance of involving all relevant stakeholders in the decision-making process to achieve successful project outcomes. Historical developments in procurement, coupled with contemporary challenges in African public sector projects, underscore the need for greater transparency, accountability, and sustainability in procurement practices. By embracing the principles of Stakeholder Theory, procurement processes can be more inclusive, leading to better alignment with the needs and priorities of all stakeholders, particularly in complex environments like Kamwenge District in Uganda.

1.2.3 Conceptual Background

This study will focus on the concept of Stakeholders’ Experiences and their effect on community procurement at DRDIP. Stakeholders’ experiences: involve cognitive, emotional, behavioural, and social responses at touchpoints throughout the project. Stakeholders’ Best Practices: tailoring the information to different stakeholders so that it addresses the issues they’re most concerned about, and provides it in a format that is most accessible to them. In this study, Stakeholders’ Best Practices will be studied from the factors of recognition of stakeholders as partners, monitoring of the stakeholders’ engagement and involvement, and inclusivity of stakeholders

Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement: These are essentially three levels of engagement with stakeholders: informing, consulting and collaborating. In this study, Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement will be studied from the factors of informing, consulting and collaborating perceived to have a relationship with community procurement.

Stakeholders’ Attitude and Perceptions: is the stakeholder’s perception of the project and how its outcomes will affect the stakeholder’s interests. Stakeholders’ Attitude and Perceptions will be studied from the factors of benefits derived from DRDIP, conflicts and social networks perceived to have a relationship with community procurement.

1.2.4 Contextual Background

The Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) is intended to address expanded development needs by the refugee-hosting districts in the country. The project addresses the unmet social, economic and environmental needs identified in the local host communities in Rwamwanja Kamwenge District.

The numerous demands have overwhelmed the Refugee Response partners in Uganda, a country that continues to host refugees on an unprecedented scale, with over 1.4 million refugees, including more than 860,000 children, currently within its borders. Uganda has welcomed over 146,000 new arrivals from South Sudan and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, with more arriving daily. Over 86,000 of these new arrivals have been settled in areas lacking basic infrastructure and receiving only partial support, with insufficient resources such as poles and tools to build shelters, mats to sleep on, and essential items for food storage, cooking, and water collection. In the last quarter of 2022, floods in West-Nile affected over 10,000 people, and damaged latrines remain unrepaired due to insufficient funding. Health risks are also mounting, with ongoing measles outbreaks and a recent Ebola outbreak declared on 20 September, putting refugee settlements at greater risk. Due to underfunding, soap and hygiene kits have not been distributed since 1 July 2022. Recent findings show that 62% and 49% of households in Southwest and West Nile, respectively, are food insecure. Stocks of cereals and pulses are insufficient to meet the planned food distributions for January 2023, and only 42% of households have access to land for food production. Both Ugandans and refugees are facing increasing pressure on land, food, and resources.

DRDIP procurement standards have been deteriorating ever since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic as observed from the procurement indicators of: contribute to the economy, value for money, project sustainability, socio-economic objectives and direct community participation (Rapid Assessment Report, 2021). This phenomenon has resulted into slow response times to incoming requests, poor prioritizing and frustration of stakeholders. These gaps could be perhaps a failure by DRDIP in carefully managing Stakeholders’ Experiences. Under this situation, DRDIP will likely not proficiently meet its procurement mission in the stated districts. Therefore, this study seeks to examine the effect of stakeholders’ experiences in the implementation of community procurement at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project.

1.3 Statement of the Problem

The Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) aims to address the expanded development needs of refugee-hosting districts, specifically targeting the unmet social, economic, and environmental needs of local host communities in Rwamwanja, Kamwenge District. However, since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, DRDIP has faced significant challenges in maintaining its procurement standards, as evidenced by deteriorating procurement indicators such as economic contribution, value for money, project sustainability, socio-economic objectives, and direct community participation (Rapid Assessment Report, 2021).

These procurement issues have led to slow response times, poor prioritization, and stakeholder frustration, suggesting a potential failure in effectively managing stakeholders’ experiences. Consequently, DRDIP risks failing to proficiently meet its procurement mission in the targeted districts. The involvement of stakeholders in procurement processes has remained inadequate, further exacerbating the situation. Reports have highlighted substantial inadequacies in value for money (45% deficiency), project sustainability (30% deficiency), and direct community participation (25% deficiency), leading to a 20% loss of critical donors and widespread stakeholder frustration.

In the public sector of many African countries, including Uganda, stakeholder engagement in procurement processes is often fraught with challenges, especially in the construction industry. These challenges are rooted in cultural practices where decision-making is concentrated among a few individuals, leaving out many affected stakeholders. This exclusion is further exacerbated by prevalent procurement methods like single (sole) sourcing, where contracts are awarded without competitive tendering, leading to minimal stakeholder involvement. The limited integration of sustainability practices in procurement processes, particularly in the construction sector, compounds the issue, resulting in suboptimal project outcomes that fail to address environmental, social, and economic needs effectively. In the specific context of the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP) in Rwamwanja, Kamwenge District, these challenges have manifested in deteriorating procurement standards since the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite strategic efforts to enhance community procurement through stakeholder involvement, procurement indicators such as economic contribution, value for money, project sustainability, socio-economic objectives, and direct community participation have declined. These deficiencies have led to slow response times, poor prioritization, and widespread stakeholder frustration, threatening the project’s ability to meet its intended goals. This study seeks to explore the influence of internal stakeholders’ experiences on the implementation of community procurement within DRDIP. By examining the relationship between stakeholders’ experiences and procurement outcomes, the study aims to provide insights that can help improve the effectiveness of DRDIP’s procurement processes, ultimately enhancing the project’s ability to meet the needs of refugee-hosting communities in Kamwenge District.

1.4 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study was to examine the effect of stakeholders’ experiences in the implementation of community procurement at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP).

1.5 Objectives of the Study

The study was guided by the following objectives:

• To examine the effect of the level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP
• To examine the effect of Stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP.
• To examine the effect of stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP

1.6 Research Questions

The study was guided by three research questions;

• What is the effect of the level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP?
• What is the effect of stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP?
• What is the effect of stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP?

1.7 Research Hypotheses

The study tested the following hypotheses

• The level of stakeholders’ involvement has a significant effect in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP.
• Stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions have a significant effect in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP.
• Stakeholders’ best practices have a significant effect on the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP.

1.8 Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework presented in Figure 1 captures the relationship among the study Source: “Researcher (2022) variables: Stakeholders’ experiences (independent variable) and Community procurement at DRDIP (dependent variable)”.

From literature reviewed it is evident that implementation of community procurement depends on several factors including those chosen for this study; (level of stakeholders’ involvement, stakeholders’ attitude and perceptions and stakeholders’ best practices). A combination of all these factors results to high implementation of community procurement (Omeke, 2020). Fig.1 depicts the way the variables interact with each other in the current study.

1.9 Justification of the Study

This study appreciates that numerous studies have been done in the areas of Stakeholders’ experiences and community procurement. Such studies have drawn recommendations on different ways that would make Stakeholders’ experiences relevant to the community procurement. However, there seems to be no evidence that a study of this nature focusing on Stakeholders’ experiences and community procurement has been conducted at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP), Uganda, and thus justifiable to undertake within such a framework.

1.10         Significance of the Study

Studies borne out of rigorous empirical study have both theoretical and practical significance and hence the focus o  f this section.

1.10.1 Theoretical Significance

The study findings provided a theoretical contribution to the existing body of knowledge by showing the linkage between Stakeholders’ experiences and the implementation of community procurement at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP). The study will also contribute to the bound to broaden the contextual understanding of Stakeholders’ experiences.

1.10.2 Practical Significance

The study findings are believed crucial in helping the Prime Minister, the Executive officers, and the boards of directors in the Prime Minister’s Office and Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project officers in decision-making with regard to Stakeholders’ experiences as well as non-governmental agencies concerned with policy formulation concerning Development Response to Displacement projects in Uganda.

1.11 Scope of the Study

1.11.1 Geographical Scope

This study was carried out in the Prime Minister’s Office, Uganda with a specific focus on community procurement at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP).

1.11.2 Content Scope

The study was confined to examining the effect of stakeholders’ experiences in the implementation of community procurement at the Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project (DRDIP). The focused on Stakeholders’ Best Practices, Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement and Stakeholders’ Attitudes and Perceptions, and then community procurement.

1.11.3 Time Scope

The scope of this study was the period between 2023 and 2024. This period was chosen because it is the time when there was a noted increase in challenges of procurement in DRDIP.

1.12 Operational definition of terms

Community procurement: Community Procurement is the development of systems to manage program or project funds from local government and/or donors and use them in ways that are determined by the community to acquire products, contractors, and services, generally through locally elected community organizations.

Stakeholders’ experiences: involve cognitive, emotional, behavioral, and social responses at touchpoints through the project.

Stakeholders’ Best Practices: tailoring the information to different stakeholders so that it addresses the issues they’re most concerned about, and provides it in a format that is most accessible to them.

Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement: These are essentially three levels of engagement with stakeholders: informing, consulting, and collaborating.

Stakeholders’ Attitude and Perceptions: is the stakeholder’s perception of the project and how its outcomes will affect the stakeholder’s interests.

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

This chapter presents a review of theoretical and empirical literature relating to study objectives. The chapter discusses the main theory that was used to develop the conceptual framework for the research; followed by a review of specific literature on the main study variables and finally the summary of the research gaps.

2.2 Review of Theoretical Literature

This study will be modeled on the Stakeholders Theory deemed critical to provide the theoretical underpinning of this study. The stakeholder approach has been described as a powerful means of understanding the firm in its environment (Donaldson & Preston, 2021). It is elaborated that the stakeholder model entails that all persons or groups with legitimate interests participating in an enterprise do so to obtain benefits and that there is no pre-set priority of one set of interests and benefits over another. The drawbacks of the stakeholders’ theory are that the theory does not provide a solid normative foundation of identifying who can be ascertained as a stakeholder of an organization.  An additional problem is that the theory fails to guide directors to determine which group of stakeholders is more important than others. Although “there is no easy way to delineate the stakeholder class. Despite the weaknesses pointed out, stakeholders’ theory offers a powerful lens to explore the two study variables in this research.

2.3 Concept and Actual Literature Review

Many empirical studies have linked Stakeholders’ experiences with the implementation of community procurement. A critical review of these studies has been provided in this section objective by objective.

2.3.1 Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement and Community Procurement

There are essentially three levels of involvement with stakeholders: Consultation, Information and Participation.  A study conducted by the Project Management Institute has revealed that ineffective communication is the primary contributor to procurement failure one-third of the time, and has a negative impact on procurement success more than half of the time.

Concerning informing, Musiime and Alinda (2016), observe that communicating regularly with stakeholders and creating a positive understanding can help the organization build effective long-term relationships with key groups.

Concerning participation, Stanley, Lim and Jagjit (2018) opines that “Stakeholders are the representatives of that society. Stakeholder participation is therefore an essential component of community procurement. The role of stakeholders in a business ecosystem becomes clear when we look at the definition of corporate social responsibility. When working with groups, find out what existing networks and structures are already in place to support community participation and reach out to leaders and facilitators within those groups to explain the organization’s intentions and ask for their feedback on the organization’s strategy.

Community procurement is a participatory approach where local stakeholders are actively involved in the procurement process to ensure that goods, services, and works are delivered in a manner that meets the specific needs of the community. This approach is increasingly recognized for its potential to enhance transparency, accountability, and satisfaction among community members. The level of stakeholders’ involvement in this process is crucial for its success. They often play a mediating role, providing technical assistance and advocating for the community’s interests, they are responsible for delivering goods and services and can benefit from local insights to improve project outcomes.

Benefits of Stakeholders’ Involvement, engaging stakeholders in procurement processes can reduce corruption and mismanagement. When community members are involved, they can monitor the use of resources and ensure that procurement practices are transparent (Farrington, 2020).

Monitoring and Evaluation: Establishing mechanisms for ongoing monitoring and evaluation, allowing stakeholders to provide feedback and make necessary adjustments throughout the procurement process. The level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement is a critical factor that influences the success of procurement activities. While there are significant benefits to involving stakeholders, such as increased transparency, accountability, and local capacity, challenges such as resource constraints and power dynamics must be addressed. Best practices, including inclusive planning, capacity building, and collaborative decision-making, can help overcome these challenges and ensure that community procurement processes are effective and sustainable (lysons, 2021).

Top management support is defined as the extent to which senior management recognizes the importance of the procurement function and actively engages in its activities (Merchant & Van Der Steede, 2007). Kandelousi, Ooi & Abdollahi (2011) highlighted that top management support can manifest in various ways, such as assisting teams in overcoming obstacles, demonstrating commitment to the work, and motivating subordinates. Typically, such support results in the timely availability of financial resources, allocation of human and physical resources, and the delegation of necessary authority to procurement officers to ensure the successful completion of the procurement process.

Gikonyo (2008) asserts that a manager must possess vision, effective planning, and consistent follow-through for the successful implementation of the procurement process. Success in implementation requires proper knowledge and skills, clearly defined goals (specific, flexible, realistic), clear priorities, a well-structured plan of action, and a focus on quality control (QC), quality assurance (QA), and quality improvement (QI). A poorly developed implementation plan is a critical factor that can undermine an otherwise successful procurement process. However, the process is governed by procurement legal and official frameworks (procurement rules), which specialists are required to adhere to. These rules are not solely dictated by law but are also influenced by the organization’s objectives (Bashuna, 2013).

A robust procurement system requires a competent professional workforce equipped with specific skills and knowledge for designated procurement roles, as procurement specialists are involved in the process from need assessment to contract close-out. Although they play a direct role in the procurement process, they also provide advice and support throughout its implementation (OECD, 2007). Building a procurement workforce with the right skills and capabilities can be challenging, especially with changes to procurement processes, the introduction or expansion of alternative contracting approaches, and increased reliance on services from the private sector. Procurement officers operate in a complex environment, facing pressure from end-users seeking rapid responses or specific technical solutions, from suppliers vying for contracts, from donor representatives or the public demanding explanations for the use of funds, and from those who perceive a lack of transparency or other weaknesses in the process.

Public institutions are increasingly encouraged to adopt sustainable purchasing practices as a primary means of managing their social and environmental impacts (Brammer and Walker, 2011). Despite this, there remains a significant gap in understanding and commitment across the public sector, which could be enhanced through greater involvement from stakeholders and managers (Leal Filho et al., 2019). Each sector faces unique challenges, and the public sector is no exception, often encountering distinct obstacles. Ramísio et al. (2019) suggest that the public sector plays a crucial role in driving global change and transformation, positioning it as a key player in addressing sustainability issues. By prioritizing the procurement of environmentally friendly products, the public sector can significantly contribute to the creation of sustainable cities by influencing production, consumption, and supply chain processes (Mendoza et al., 2019). According to Harland et al. (2019), most research on sustainable procurement has focused on the private sector, leaving a gap in studies on sustainable public procurement (SPP), particularly in developing countries (Etse et al., 2021; McMurray et al., 2014). This is particularly notable given the public sector’s substantial purchasing power and its potential impact on sustainability. Only a few studies, such as those by Khan et al. (2018) and Montalbán et al. (2017), have explored the enablers, barriers, and challenges of SPP.

2.3.2 Stakeholders’ attitude & perceptions and Community procurement 

Understanding Stakeholders’ attitudes & perceptions professionally and personally will help lay a foundation of trust and credibility.

An empirical review of the work of Temba (2015) who assessed the role of stakeholder participation in promoting the sustainability of community procurement. A cross-sectional descriptive research design was used with a sample size of 70 stakeholders. Data was analyzed through content analysis and SPSS version 16.0. The study also found that the major role of stakeholder participation in community procurement was mainly in the form of Resource mobilization, Collaboration and partnership, Material contribution and citizen control.

In this study, stakeholder engagement is defined as a mutual or reciprocal action or influence between relevant parties (Wallenborn, 2010). Greenwood (2007) emphasizes that engaging stakeholders involves adopting practices that positively incorporate stakeholders into organizational activities. Various methods for stakeholder engagement include newsletters, employee work councils, customer focus groups, community town meetings, and active public affairs officers. The extent to which companies engage stakeholders can vary widely. Developing a stakeholder consultation plan involves determining the need for consultation and the value it adds to the procurement process, including identifying which groups to consult, how, and when. Engaging clients is essential for building relationships and developing products, services, and offerings that help sustain competitive advantage (Chien & Chen, 2010).

Stakeholders can be affected positively or negatively depending on the stage and nature of the procurement process, from needs identification to contract closure (Olander, 2007). Issues such as disputes, cost overruns, poor communication, and supply chain failures often arise from stakeholder conflicts. These conflicts typically stem from differing goals and priorities among stakeholders. In any organization, stakeholders are crucial to success; without their support, an organization cannot thrive. Consequently, both public and private organizations seek ways to involve stakeholders in their operations (Ondieki, 2011).

Some organizations exclude their internal purchasing departments for several reasons: political considerations of the internal customer unrelated to the purchasing department, the development of purchasing skills within the internal customer’s organization, the belief that the purchasing department does not adequately address required skills, and the conviction that the internal purchasing department lacks the expertise to make effective purchasing decisions.

Ahawo and Simatwa (2015) highlighted the crucial role stakeholders play in providing teaching and learning resources to boost academic achievement in Kenya. These resources, which include textbooks, computers, lab equipment, writing materials, photocopying paper, instructional materials, and exercise books, are vital for delivering quality education at all levels globally. Both teachers and learners need these resources to achieve educational goals, as they enhance the teaching and learning processes.

Ahawo (2010) supports Olendo’s (2008) view that every school should be equipped with relevant textbooks, as they impact academic performance variations. Textbooks serve as valuable teaching aids, offering concrete experiences that promote child-centered learning. Therefore, parents and teachers are expected to purchase instructional materials, reference materials, and science equipment (Olendo, 2008). While Ng’otie (2009) focused on the financial contribution of Parents Associations to secondary education in Baringo District, he did not address the roles of other stakeholders, such as the board of management and sponsors, which this study aims to explore. Ng’otie (2009) was solely concerned with financing.

Concerning conflict management, Stanley, Lim and Jagjit (2018) opines that “understanding the cause of the conflict is critical for gaining support and cooperation amongst the stakeholders. It is through our beliefs that we lay claim to a stake in something. Uncovering the Source through inference and other analysis techniques will help the organisation manage expectations directly linked to the stakeholders and their conflicts.

2.3.3 Stakeholders’ Best Practices and Community Procurement   

Understanding best practices and following them can help the organization build confidence when engaging with stakeholders while ensuring that the organization achieves the best possible outcomes for the community procurement process (Schäfer et al., 2022).

On recognition of stakeholders as partners Temba, (2015) opines that as part of the organization’s stakeholder plan, the organization will need to identify the stakeholders. List out all the different individuals, groups, and organizations who are affected by or may have an influence on the community procurement process. In a large infrastructure project in South Africa, a major focus was placed on community procurement. The project implemented a comprehensive local supplier development program, which included training workshops, financial assistance, and mentorship. As a result, over 50% of the project’s goods and services were sourced from local suppliers, leading to significant economic benefits for the community (Harland et al., 2021).

According to Bal et al. (2013), stakeholders are both institutions and individuals who can positively or negatively influence project outcomes. They are categorized into internal and external parties. Internal stakeholders include clients, consultants, contractors, and subcontractors, while external stakeholders encompass local and national government authorities, social and political organizations, local communities, the general public, environmentalists, trade and industry groups, the media, traditional authorities, and religious groups (El-Gohary et al., 2006; Harris, 2010). This wide range of stakeholders highlights the complexity of engaging them, particularly with the added significance from the sustainable construction movement (Miller et al., 2020).

Stakeholders are crucial to the successful completion of projects; their lack of support can lead to project failure. Zarewa (2019) asserts that stakeholders are the only ones with a genuine interest in a project. The involvement of stakeholders often depends on the project’s characteristics and the organization’s type (Murphy et al., 2021). Successful stakeholder engagement involves collaborating to implement plans and address challenges through mutual support (Persson and Olander, 2004). Waligo et al. (2013) argue that stakeholders should actively participate in the planning process rather than just receiving sustainability planning initiatives. Bahadorestani et al. (2020) conclude that aligning stakeholder interests with project values is crucial for effective engagement (Ogunsanya et al., 2019). Thus, stakeholder engagement is essential for balancing environmental, social, and economic aspects of projects (Rondinel-Oviedo and Schreier-Barreto, 2018).

In a renewable energy project in India, stakeholder engagement was prioritized from the outset. Regular community meetings, transparent communication, and participatory decision-making processes were established. This approach not only mitigated potential conflicts but also led to innovative solutions that enhanced the project’s sustainability and community acceptance (Troje, & Andersson, 2021).

Effective stakeholder engagement and community procurement are essential for the success and sustainability of development projects. Best practices in these areas include inclusive and transparent processes, continuous engagement, capacity building, and the prioritization of local benefits. While challenges exist, they can be addressed through targeted capacity-building initiatives, stakeholder engagement, and policy advocacy. Successful case studies demonstrate the significant positive impact that these practices can have on local communities and project outcomes (Cravero, 2023).

Concerning monitoring of the stakeholders’ engagement, Musiime & Alinda, (2016) opines that “the key benefit of this process is that it maintains or increases the efficiency and effectiveness of stakeholder engagement activities as the procurement process evolves and its environment changes. Procurement Managers do not “control” human behavior – and certainly not that of stakeholders.

The Procurement Manager has several methods at their disposal. Note, there is little process involved (although Procurement Managers do love their processes). However, they must have finely tuned skills to deal with these most senior decision-makers and influencers. Review items from the Stakeholder Engagement Plan, check in with stakeholders regularly, ensure communication is happening, be aware of overwhelm, monitor conflict at the stakeholder level, and Educate and Negotiate (Musiime & Alinda, 2016).

2.4 Summary of the Literature Reviewed

The review of the literature mentioned indicates that the Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement, Stakeholders’ Attitudes and Perceptions, and Stakeholders’ Best Practices have a significant effect on community procurement-related outcomes like contributing to the economy, contributing to value for money, project sustainability, socio-economic objectives, and direct community participation. However, much of the literature reviewed did not address how these Stakeholders’ experiences impact community procurement, hence the need to close this knowledge gap.

Digging a little deeper, despite the concerted efforts of different scholars and researchers to identify the impact of various determinants of Stakeholders’ experiences on community procurement, no study seems to have encompassed all relevant factors such as Level of Stakeholders’ Involvement, Stakeholders’ Attitudes and Perceptions and Stakeholders’ Best Practices in one study with detailed dimensions to impact community procurement, a gap this study seeks to bridge.

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY

3.0 Introduction

This section presents the methodology that will guide the study in order to address the objectives. Specifically, the chapter presents the research design, study population, sample size determination, and sampling methods. Further presented are; the data collection methods and respective instruments, the procedure for data collection, the measurement of variables, the methods for analysis of quantitative and qualitative data, measurement of variables, and ethical considerations.

3.1 Research Design

According to Creswell, (2018). a research design refers to an orderly plan of how research would be conducted in a given study. A descriptive survey design will be adopted for the proposed study as it is intended to permit the in-depth study of fundamental themes. The design will be relevant to the study because it is suitable for analyzing facts and helps a researcher to develop a detailed understanding of the research problem (Siedlecki, 2020). Hence, the approach will be adopted to create an in-depth understanding of the Stakeholders’ experiences and community procurement at DRDIP.

3.2 Study Population

The study targets a population of Development Response to Displacement Impacts Project and managers of the same. For the qualitative component of the study, the study targets 8 key informants categorically including; the Prime Minister overseeing the functioning of the mentioned project. Others will include; the Human Resource Manager (1) and Procurement managers (4) and Project Accountants (2). The study will use a population of 57 respondents including; mainly the DRDIP junior staff. The target of these categories of respondents leverages the fact that by virtue of their role in the implementation of community procurement, they have vast knowledge and experience on the effect of Stakeholders’ experiences on the implementation of community procurement.

3.3 Population, sample size, and sampling methods

Table 1: Population, sample size, and sampling methods

Source: Field data (2022)

3.4 Sample Size

The sample size (Table 3.1) for the 65 main respondents including; top management and DRDIP junior staff will be obtained using the 1970 Krejcie & Morgan sample size determination table. According to the table, the population of 65 respondents can be adequately be represented by a sample size of 56 respondents. Malunda and Atwebembeire, (2021) observe that the sample size table readily provides a sample that can adequately represent a specific population size that can generate findings that are generalizable to the population.

3.5 Sampling Techniques and Procedure

The study will make use of two sampling methods in line with the quantitative and qualitative approaches to the study., Saunders, et al (2020) assert that simple random sampling techniques make it possible to carry out a study that would otherwise be impossible to conduct because it is simple and easy to be used. It permits the selection of a representative unit(s) from the population so that results can be used to draw interpretations about the total population. This study adopted a simple random sampling and selected respondents from the following groups; Heads of department, Senior administrative staff, and Support staff respectively. According to Croswell, (2018), purposive sampling is when the researcher precisely targets certain people due to their familiarity with the research subject. Purposive sampling purposes to ensure that the researcher discovers and involves resourceful respondents to augment the study. Therefore, the study used purposive sampling to target members of the top management of DRDIP.

3.6 Data collection methods

3.6.1 Questionnaire survey

This method will be used to gather quantitative data from the main respondents of the study specifically DRDIP junior staff. The reason for using a questionnaire survey is to allow the collection of quantitative data which can be analysed using quantitative techniques to test the study hypotheses. The data collection tools (questionnaires) will be administered to respondents with the aid of a team of trained Research Assistants to ensure data quality.

3.6.2 Interviewing

For the qualitative approach, the study will make use of interviews which will be conducted with the help of Research Assistants. Interviews are chosen because they allow collection of in-depth information to provide a comprehensive understanding of the study phenomena (Malunda & Atwebembeire, 2021). The interviews will allow probing of respondents to obtain in-depth understanding of the Stakeholders’ experiences and its effect on community procurement.

3.7 Data Collection Instruments

• Questionnaire

The questionnaire survey will be used to generate responses from senior management staff, and middle and lower management staff. According to Cohen, Manion & Morrison (2018), this methodology is preferred because it is quite easy to administer, reduces biases, is cost-effective, allows many questions to be asked about the subject, and permits the use of statistical techniques to analyze survey data. It can neither be used for illiterate nor for semi-literate persons. A sample is attached in Appendix 2

3.6.2 Interview guide

The researcher will develop a semi-structured interview guide which will be used to collect data from respondents. Croswell, (2018) Asserts that the general interview guide is a structured schedule of questions that allows for flexibility in its composition. The drawback of the general interview guide is that questions may not be consistently posed by the interviewer (Shanti, 2020). The interview guide will be structured based on the objectives of the study.

3.7 Data collection procedure

A letter for fieldwork will be obtained from UTAMU following a successful proposal Defence. The letter will be introduced to the Head Human Resources Manager of DRDIP and authorization to conduct the study at DRDIP. After authorization, a list of respondents from the target population will be compiled with guidance from officials in the stores who are familiar with the categories of the targeted respondents. The research assistants will be recruited and trained to distribute the questionnaires. Before administering the questionnaire, a respondent will be introduced to the study and consent sought. The Research Assistants shall make arrangements with the respondent on when to collect the filled questionnaire or when to conduct the interview.

 3.8 Data analysis

As regards to the gathering of both quantitative and qualitative data, and in accordance with the mixed methods approach, The analysis will start with descriptive statistics to describe the variables. The second stage will entail multiple regression analysis to test the hypothesis and effects of Stakeholders’ experiences on community procurement. The choice for regression analysis leverages on its ability to estimate the significance of the effect as well as the magnitude of effect of the independent on the dependent variable as observed (Creswell, 2018).

For qualitative data, interview notes will be typed entered in Nvivo qualitative data. Thematic analysis will be applied to analyse the transcribed notes using Nvivo software. The data will be coded for both the themes and the categories. Verbatim patterns will be generated in line with the study objectives based on the major themes and expressions in the contents and will be sufficiently used to develop arguments. Notably, this process will be iterative and reflective as the emerging issues may pave the way for further collection and analysis of data. This procedure derives from the works of Creswell, (2019).

3.8 Pre-Testing (Validity and Reliability)

3.8.1 Validity test

Validity is the ability of the research tool/instrument to measure what it is supposed to measure (Croswell, 2018). The validity of the instrument quantitatively will be established using the Content Validity Index (CVI). This will involve the expert scoring of the relevant items in the instrument. The instruments that will yield a CVI above 0.7 will be within the accepted ranges. Index (CVI) will be computed to establish validity qualitatively, the instruments will be given to the experts (supervisor) to evaluate the relevance of each item in the instrument to the objectives and rate each item on the scale of very relevant (4), quite relevant (3), somewhat relevant (2) and not relevant (1).

3.8.2 Reliability

Reliability refers to the dependability of the items in the instrument or the extent to which an instrument gives the same results at given intervals using the same test (Croswell, 2018), Trustworthiness: credibility, transferability, dependability, and confirmed ability, of the qualitative data collection instruments will be ensured through cross-checking. Reliability quantitatively will be obtained by using Cronbach’s

3.9 Ethical considerations

Ethical issues will be put into consideration since the study involves human participants and the protection of participants. The issues include; potential invasion of privacy and potential harm from disclosure of individual respondents’ specific information which more so, could be critical and judgmental. These issues are supported by the literature on research ethics such as Fouka and Marianna, (2011).

First, the research proposal has been tested for plagiarism to ensure it does not exceed the maximum 15% acceptable level of plagiarism. This means the content presented in the proposal is researchers’ and any information obtained from other authors has been acknowledged and properly cited.

During data collection, the respondents will be oriented to the rationale, objectives, and potential use of the evidence which will arise from the study. This is important to create their appreciation of the study and therefore pick interest to participate in the study voluntarily.

In addition, the study will strive to ensure confidentiality during data collection and reporting of findings. To achieve this, the names of respondents will not be identified on the data collection tools and interview notes but rather unique identification numbers will be used for each respondent.

CHAPTER FOUR

DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents, analyses and interprets findings according to the study objectives. It contains the response rate, demographic information of respondents, findings according to objectives of the study and research hypotheses. Results on objectives and hypotheses are presented using descriptive and inferential statistics.

4.2 Demographic Information of Respondents

The researcher sought out to collect demographic information about the respondents. This information was about gender, age, department of employee, education level and duration one worked.

4.2.1 Gender of respondents

The researcher requested the respondents to indicate their gender, and this was intended to find out whether the sample size was a fair representation of the population. The response was presented in Table 4.3

Table 3: Gender of respondents

Source: Primary Data 2024

Table 4.4 above indicates that the majority of respondents in the study were females constituting 36(65.8%), males on the other hand, were constituted 20 (34.2%) of the respondents. The implication of this finding was that no matter the disparity in percentage of males and females who attended the study, at least views of both males and females were captured which was too vital in making a critical analysis. This made the study findings representative and therefore, enabled generalizations.

4.3.2 Educational level of respondents

This section presents the findings on the educational level of respondents, this was done in order to understand the educational level of respondents to determine the response from respondents.

Table 4: Table showing Educational level of respondents

Source: Primary Data

According to the findings in the study majority 42 (75.3%) of the respondents had a certificate, 10(17.8%) of the respondents had a Bachelor’s degree while 4.1% had a diploma, and 2.7% had postgraduate degree qualification, this finding further indicates that all the respondents were well educated and therefore they could answer the question with good understanding of the subject topic.

4.2.3 Findings on the duration respondents

Figure 2: The figure showing the Duration respondents have worked

Source: Primary Data

According to the figure above 56 (76.7%) of the respondents indicated that they have worked at for 3-4 years, this finding shows that majority of respondents had worked for some time and therefore they were able to answer the questionnaires from an informed perspective and therefore the information from the field can be relied upon. The figure further indicates that only 8 (11% ) of the respondents have worked for less than one year, 5 (6.8%) of the respondents have worked for 2-3 years and 4 (5.5%) have worked for 1-2 years.

4.4.1 The level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement

The first objective of the study was to assess the level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. The findings of this objective were gathered from questionnaires administered to the respondents. The variables were measured using 10 items scored on a five-point Likert scale of 1=strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3=Uncertain, 4=Agree, 5= strongly agree.

Source:  Primary Data

The study results further show that Identification of Stakeholders, 80.5% strongly agree, 15.9% agree, 1.2% not sure, 2.4% disagree, Mean: 4.74, Std. Deviation: 0.602, the high mean score and the low standard deviation indicate a strong consensus that stakeholders are effectively identified at the beginning of the procurement process. This suggests a well-structured approach to stakeholder identification, ensuring that relevant parties are involved from the onset.

The study results further show that Engagement in Discussions includes 72% agree, 24.4% not sure, 3.7% disagree, Mean: 4.64 and Std. Deviation: 0.562, this shows that the majority of respondents agree that relevant stakeholders are engaged in discussions regarding procurement plans. However, a significant portion (24.4%) is unsure, indicating that there may be a need for more transparent or inclusive engagement processes.

The findings in the study further reveals that Opportunities to Voice Concerns, 72% agree, 25.6% not sure, 2.4% disagree, Mean: 4.70 and Std. Deviation: 0.519. Stakeholders generally feel that they have opportunities to voice their concerns and suggestions, as reflected by the high mean score. The lower standard deviation suggests consistency in responses, reinforcing the perceived openness in communication.

The study results further show that, regular Updates, 74.4% agree, 22% not sure, 3.7% disagree, Mean: 4.70 and Std. Deviation: 0.545, Providing regular updates to stakeholders is seen as a strength in the procurement process. The high mean score and relatively low standard deviation reflect a positive consensus, though the 22% uncertainty suggests room for improvement in update frequency or clarity.

The study results further show that timely and Relevant Information, 46.3% strongly agree, 32.9% agree, 15.9% not sure, 4.9% disagree, Mean: 4.23 Std. Deviation: 0.842, there is a noticeable drop in the mean score for timely and relevant information. The higher standard deviation indicates more variability in responses, suggesting that while many stakeholders are satisfied, there are issues in consistency or timing of information dissemination.

In the findings of effective Communication Channels, 52.4% strongly agree, 32.9% agree, 9.8% not sure, 4.9% disagree, Mean: 4.37 and Std. Deviation: 0.791, the establishment of effective communication channels is generally viewed positively, as reflected by the mean score. However, the variability in responses indicates that there may be occasional lapses in communication effectiveness.

The findings in the study also reveals that active Involvement in Decision-Making, 51.2% agree, 43.9% not sure, 4.9% disagree, mean: 4.47 and Std. Deviation: 0.579. Stakeholders’ active involvement in decision-making processes has a relatively high mean score, yet nearly half of the respondents are unsure. This uncertainty could stem from a lack of clarity about how stakeholder input is utilized or communicated.

In the findings of consideration of Stakeholders’ Inputs, the 51.2% agree, 39% not sure, 6.1% disagree, 3.7% strongly disagree, while the mean values indicate that Mean: 4.34 and the Std. Deviation: 0.786, the consideration of stakeholders’ inputs in procurement-related decisions is viewed positively but with significant variability. The substantial percentage of unsure responses suggests that while inputs may be solicited, their impact on decisions may not be clearly communicated back to stakeholders. The findings indicate a generally positive perception of stakeholder involvement in the community procurement process, with high mean scores across most areas. However, the variability in responses, especially regarding the timeliness and relevance of information and the active involvement in decision-making, highlights areas for potential improvement. Enhancing transparency, consistency, and feedback mechanisms could further strengthen stakeholder engagement and satisfaction.

4.4.2 Effect of stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP

The first objective of the study was to the effect of stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP. The findings of this objective were gathered from questionnaires administered to the respondents. The variables were measured using 10 items scored on a five-point Likert scale of 1=strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3=Uncertain, 4=Agree, 5= strongly agree.

Source: Primary Data

Community procurement is perceived to increase accountability, as reflected in the mean score of 3.59 and a standard deviation of 1.065. A combined 43.9% of respondents either agree or strongly agree with this statement. Nonetheless, a significant portion of stakeholders remain unsure (40.2%), indicating that while many see potential accountability improvements, there may be hesitations regarding the actual implementation and monitoring of these procurement processes.

The enhancement of trust within the community through community procurement has a mean score of 3.38 and a standard deviation of 1.113. A notable 39% of respondents agree with this statement, and 14.6% strongly agree. However, 28% disagree, and 17.1% are not sure, showing a divided opinion. The relatively high standard deviation suggests varied experiences or expectations regarding trust-building through these processes, highlighting the need for more consistent communication and trust-building measures.

The efficiency of community procurement processes compared to traditional methods received a mean score of 3.30 with a standard deviation of 1.163. Only 34.1% of respondents agree, and 14.6% strongly agree, while 28% disagree and 19.5% are unsure. This spread indicates a significant amount of skepticism or variability in experiences regarding the efficiency of community procurement, suggesting that improvements in process efficiency are necessary to gain broader acceptance.

Community procurement is seen to result in better project outcomes, with a mean score of 3.95 and a standard deviation of .911. A significant majority (51.2%) agree, and 26.8% strongly agree. This high level of agreement, coupled with the relatively low standard deviation, indicates strong confidence among stakeholders in the positive impact of community procurement on project outcomes. This perception aligns with the principles of increased stakeholder engagement and localized decision-making leading to more suitable and successful projects.

Achieving project timelines through community procurement has a mean score of 3.75 and a standard deviation of 1.128. A substantial proportion (48.8%) agree, and 25.6% strongly agree with this statement. However, 13.4% disagree, and 8.5% are unsure, indicating that while many stakeholders believe community procurement aids in adhering to project timelines, there are still notable concerns about its reliability and consistency.

The recognition of significant challenges in implementing community procurement is reflected in a high mean score of 4.03 and a standard deviation of .881. Nearly half (47.6%) agree, and 32.9% strongly agree with this statement, indicating a clear consensus on the presence of challenges. This overwhelming acknowledgment points to the need for addressing barriers such as resistance from traditional procurement bodies, lack of capacity or resources, and complexities in aligning community objectives with broader project goals.

Resistance from traditional procurement bodies is strongly perceived, with a mean score of 4.18 and a standard deviation of .788. A significant majority (56.1%) agree, and 17.1% strongly agree with this statement. The relatively low standard deviation suggests a consistent view among stakeholders about this resistance. This finding underscores the necessity for change management strategies, stakeholder engagement, and education to facilitate a smoother transition to community procurement methods. The findings reveal a general positive perception of community procurement among stakeholders, particularly in terms of improving project outcomes, accountability, and transparency. However, there are notable concerns regarding its efficiency and significant implementation challenges, primarily due to resistance from traditional procurement bodies. Addressing these challenges through targeted strategies and consistent stakeholder engagement will be crucial for the broader acceptance and successful integration of community procurement practices.

4.4.3 Stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP

Source: Primary Data

In finding out if the stakeholders Are Involved Early in the Procurement Process, the results indicated that the mean score of 3.49 (Std. Deviation 1.082) indicates a moderate agreement with the statement that stakeholders are involved early in the procurement process, Early involvement of stakeholders is essential for capturing their needs, concerns, and inputs from the outset. The moderate agreement suggests that while some efforts are made to involve stakeholders early, there is room for improvement. Stakeholders might not be consistently engaged early in every procurement activity, which could lead to a lack of alignment and potential conflicts later in the process.

In the findings Regular Meetings with Stakeholders had results of with a mean score of 4.04 (Std. Deviation .889), there is a high level of agreement that regular meetings are held to gather input and feedback from stakeholders, Regular meetings are a cornerstone of effective stakeholder engagement. The high level of agreement suggests that stakeholders are frequently consulted, which helps in addressing their concerns promptly and incorporating their feedback into the procurement process. This practice likely enhances the transparency and accountability of procurement activities.

Findings revealed that encouragement of Stakeholder Participation in Decision-Making had a mean score of 4.14 (Std. Deviation .787) shows a strong agreement that stakeholders are encouraged to participate in decision-making, Encouraging stakeholder participation in decision-making ensures that their voices are heard and considered. This practice not only builds trust but also empowers stakeholders, leading to more sustainable and accepted procurement outcomes. The strong agreement indicates that stakeholders feel valued and are actively contributing to decisions.

The results show that Clear and Open Communication, with a mean score of 4.21 (Std. Deviation .786), there is strong agreement that clear and open communication is maintained with all stakeholders and Clear and open communication is fundamental for effective stakeholder engagement. The high level of agreement suggests that stakeholders are well-informed about procurement activities, which reduces misunderstandings and fosters a collaborative environment. This practice is crucial for building and maintaining trust among stakeholders.

The study results also indicate that availability of Information on Procurement Processes, the mean score of 4.14 (Std. Deviation .887) indicates strong agreement that information about procurement processes is readily available to stakeholders and transparency in procurement processes is vital for stakeholder confidence. The strong agreement suggests that stakeholders have access to necessary information, enabling them to understand, monitor, and contribute to the procurement activities. This practice enhances transparency and accountability, key elements for successful community procurement.

The study results further show that adequate Training on Procurement Procedures, with a mean score of 4.08 (Std. Deviation .939), there is strong agreement that stakeholders receive adequate training on procurement procedures and also adequate training ensures that stakeholders are knowledgeable about procurement procedures, which enables them to participate effectively. The strong agreement indicates that stakeholders are well-prepared to engage in procurement activities, which can improve the overall quality and effectiveness of the procurement process. The analysis of the data reveals that stakeholders generally perceive the practices for their involvement in community procurement positively, with strong agreement on several key aspects such as regular meetings, encouragement of participation, clear communication, availability of information, and training. However, the moderate agreement on early involvement suggests that there may be opportunities to enhance stakeholder engagement at the initial stages of the procurement process. Overall, the findings highlight the importance of maintaining and further improving these best practices to ensure effective and inclusive community procurement.

4.4.1 Community Procurement

The variables were measured using 10 items scored on a five-point Likert scale of 1=strongly disagree, 2= Disagree, 3=Uncertain, 4=Agree, 5= strongly agree.

Source:  Primary Data

The survey results indicate a high level of awareness among respondents regarding the community procurement process. With 80.5% of respondents strongly agreeing and 15.9% agreeing that they are aware of the process, the mean response is 4.74, and the standard deviation is 0.602. This high mean and low standard deviation suggest that the majority of the community is well-informed about the procurement process. The small percentage of disagreement (2.4%) and uncertainty (1.2%) highlights a minor gap in awareness that could be addressed through targeted outreach efforts.

Understanding the benefits of community procurement is crucial for effective participation. According to the survey, 72% of respondents agree, and 24.4% strongly agree that they understand the benefits, resulting in a mean response of 4.64 and a standard deviation of 0.562. This positive response indicates that most community members are well-informed about the advantages of community procurement, such as increased transparency and enhanced community engagement. However, the 3.7% who disagreed may need additional education or resources to fully grasp these benefits.

Receiving adequate information is essential for effective participation in community procurement. The survey results show that 72% of respondents agree, and 25.6% strongly agree that they have received sufficient information, leading to a mean response of 4.70 and a standard deviation of 0.519. This suggests that most community members feel well-informed, though a small percentage (2.4%) may require further communication and information dissemination to bridge any gaps.

The feeling of encouragement to participate is vital for active engagement. The survey indicates that 74.4% of respondents agree, and 22% strongly agree that they feel encouraged to participate, resulting in a mean response of 4.70 and a standard deviation of 0.545. These results demonstrate a generally high level of encouragement among community members, although 3.7% of respondents do not feel encouraged, highlighting a potential area for improvement in community outreach and motivational strategies.

Effective community procurement relies on clear channels for community members to provide input. The survey results show a more varied response in this area, with 46.3% of respondents strongly agreeing, 32.9% agreeing, 15.9% unsure, and 4.9% disagreeing, resulting in a mean response of 4.23 and a standard deviation of 0.842. This indicates that while a majority of respondents feel there are clear channels for input, a significant portion remains unsure or disagrees. This suggests a need for improved communication and clarity regarding the mechanisms for community input in the procurement process. The survey results provide a comprehensive overview of community members’ perspectives on community procurement. The high levels of awareness, understanding, information sufficiency, and encouragement to participate are promising indicators of a well-informed and engaged community. However, the responses also highlight areas for improvement, particularly in ensuring clear channels for community input and addressing the needs of the minority who feel less informed or encouraged. By addressing these gaps, community procurement processes can be further enhanced to foster greater transparency, accountability, and community satisfaction.

CHAPTER FIVE

DISCUSSION, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF FINDINGS

5.0 Introduction

This section presents discussion on conclusion and recommendations of study findings

5.1 Discussion

This section presents the discussion of the study in line with study objectives.

5.1.1 To examine the effect of the level of stakeholders’ involvement in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP

The study results further show that Identification of Stakeholders, the high mean score and the low standard deviation indicate a strong consensus that stakeholders are effectively identified at the beginning of the procurement process, this suggests a well-structured approach to stakeholder identification, ensuring that relevant parties are involved from the onset, this view was also in line with Musiime and Alinda (2016) who indicated that Concerning informing, observe that communicating regularly with stakeholders and creating a positive understanding can help the organization build effective long-term relationships with key groups.

The study results further show that Engagement in Discussions had majority of the respondents agreeing this shows that the majority of respondents agree that relevant stakeholders are engaged in discussions regarding procurement plans. The study further indicates that Opportunities to Voice Concerns, Stakeholders generally feel that they have opportunities to voice their concerns and suggestions, as reflected by the high mean score. The lower standard deviation suggests consistency in responses, reinforcing the perceived openness in communication, this view was also in line with Lim and Jagjit (2018) who opines that “Stakeholders are the representatives of that society. Stakeholder participation is therefore an essential component of community procurement.

The study results further show that, providing regular updates to stakeholders is seen as a strength in the procurement process. The high mean score and relatively low standard deviation reflect a positive consensus, the study results further show that timely and Relevant Information, there is a noticeable drop in the mean score for timely and relevant information. The higher standard deviation indicates more variability in responses, suggesting that while many stakeholders are satisfied, there are issues in consistency or timing of information dissemination.

The role of stakeholders in a business ecosystem becomes clear when we look at the definition of corporate social responsibility. When working with groups, find out what existing networks and structures are already in place to support community participation and reach out to leaders and facilitators within those groups to explain the organization’s intentions and ask for their feedback on the organization’s strategy. The findings indicate a generally positive perception of stakeholder involvement in the community procurement process, with high mean scores across most areas. However, the variability in responses, especially regarding the timeliness and relevance of information and the active involvement in decision-making, highlights areas for potential improvement. Enhancing transparency, consistency, and feedback mechanisms could further strengthen stakeholder engagement and satisfaction.

5.1.2 To examine the effect of Stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP.

Community procurement is perceived to increase accountability, as reflected in the high mean score and the findings further shows that the enhancement of trust within the community through community procurement has a mean score, the relatively high standard deviation suggests varied experiences or expectations regarding trust-building through these processes, highlighting the need for more consistent communication and trust-building measures, this view was also inline with Temba, (2015) who  opines that as part of the organization’s stakeholder plan, the organization will need to identify the stakeholders. List out all the different individuals, groups, and organizations who are affected by or may have an influence on the community procurement process.

The efficiency of community procurement processes compared to traditional methods received a high mean score this spread indicates a significant amount of skepticism or variability in experiences regarding the efficiency of community procurement, suggesting that improvements in process efficiency are necessary to gain broader acceptance. Community procurement is seen to result in better project outcomes, with a high mean score of. A significant majority of respondents agree, this high level of agreement, coupled with the relatively low standard deviation, indicates strong confidence among stakeholders in the positive impact of community procurement on project outcomes. This perception aligns with the principles of increased stakeholder engagement and localized decision-making leading to more suitable and successful projects. An empirical review of the work of Temba (2015) who assessed the role of stakeholder participation in promoting the sustainability of community procurement. A cross-sectional descriptive research design was used with a sample size of 70 stakeholders. Data was analyzed through content analysis and SPSS version 16.0. The study also found that the major role of stakeholder participation in community procurement was mainly in the form of Resource mobilization, Collaboration and partnership, Material contribution and citizen control.

Concerning conflict management, Stanley, Lim and Jagjit (2018) opines that “understanding the cause of the conflict is critical for gaining support and cooperation amongst the stakeholders. It is through our beliefs that we lay claim to a stake in something. Uncovering the Source through inference and other analysis techniques will help the organisation manage expectations directly linked to the stakeholders and their conflicts. Understanding best practices and following them can help the organization build confidence when engaging with stakeholders while ensuring that the organization achieves the best possible outcomes for the community procurement process.

5.1.3 Stakeholders’ best practices in the implementation of community procurement at DRDIP

The survey results indicate a high level of awareness among respondents regarding the community procurement process. This high mean and low standard deviation suggest that the majority of the community is well-informed about the procurement process. The small percentage of disagreement highlights a minor gap in awareness that could be addressed through targeted outreach efforts. The study further indicates that understanding the benefits of community procurement is crucial for effective participation, this positive response indicates that most community members are well-informed about the advantages of community procurement, such as increased transparency and enhanced community engagement.

The findings indicates that there is need for improved communication and clarity regarding the mechanisms for community input in the procurement process. The survey results provide a comprehensive overview of community members’ perspectives on community procurement. The high levels of awareness, understanding, information sufficiency, and encouragement to participate are promising indicators of a well-informed and engaged community. However, the responses also highlight areas for improvement, particularly in ensuring clear channels for community input and addressing the needs of the minority who feel less informed or encouraged. By addressing these gaps, community procurement processes can be further enhanced to foster greater transparency, accountability, and community satisfaction.

5.2 Conclusion of the study

The findings indicate a generally positive perception of stakeholder involvement in the procurement process, with high mean scores across most areas. However, the variability in responses, especially regarding the timeliness and relevance of information and active involvement in decision-making, highlights areas for potential improvement. Enhancing transparency, consistency, and feedback mechanisms could further strengthen stakeholder engagement and satisfaction.

There is a generally positive perception of community procurement, especially regarding improved project outcomes, accountability, and transparency, concerns about efficiency and significant implementation challenges remain. Addressing these challenges through targeted strategies and consistent stakeholder engagement will be crucial for the broader acceptance and successful integration of community procurement practices.

The analysis reveals that stakeholders generally perceive the practices for their involvement in community procurement positively, with strong agreement on several key aspects such as regular meetings, encouragement of participation, clear communication, availability of information, and training. However, the moderate agreement on early involvement suggests opportunities for enhancing stakeholder engagement at the initial stages of the procurement process. Maintaining and further improving these best practices is crucial for effective and inclusive community procurement.

Clear channels for providing input are essential for effective community procurement. The survey reveals a more varied response, with 46.3% strongly agreeing, 32.9% agreeing, 15.9% unsure, and 4.9% disagreeing, resulting in a mean response of 4.23 and a standard deviation of 0.842. This indicates that while a majority perceive clear channels for input, a significant portion remains unsure or disagrees, highlighting a need for improved communication and clarity regarding the mechanisms for community input, o verall, the survey results indicate a well-informed and engaged community, with high levels of awareness, understanding, information sufficiency, and encouragement to participate in the procurement process. However, addressing the areas of uncertainty and disagreement, particularly in ensuring clear channels for community input, will further enhance the community procurement process, fostering greater transparency, accountability, and satisfaction among community members.

5.3 Recommendations

The moderate agreement regarding early stakeholder involvement suggests that this area needs improvement. Early engagement can help capture stakeholder needs and concerns from the outset, leading to better alignment and reduced conflicts later in the process. Initiatives such as pre-procurement workshops or consultations could be introduced to engage stakeholders at the initial stages, While information availability was positively perceived, variability in responses indicates room for improvement. Establishing clear guidelines for information dissemination and ensuring that stakeholders receive timely and relevant updates can enhance their understanding and involvement. Developing a standardized communication plan could help in maintaining consistency, variability in responses about clear channels for providing input highlights a need for improved feedback mechanisms. Creating dedicated platforms or feedback systems where stakeholders can voice their concerns and receive responses can strengthen engagement and satisfaction. Regularly reviewing and acting on stakeholder feedback will foster trust and collaboration. The regular meetings and encouragement of participation were positively rated, there is a need to ensure consistency in stakeholder involvement throughout the procurement process. Establishing standardized procedures for stakeholder engagement, including clear roles and responsibilities, can help in maintaining consistent and effective participation.

The survey revealed a significant portion of respondents were unsure or disagreed on clear channels for input. Enhancing the visibility and clarity of these channels, perhaps through community meetings or information campaigns, can help ensure that all community members are aware of how they can contribute and provide feedback. Regular monitoring and evaluation can help in assessing the effectiveness of stakeholder engagement strategies and identifying areas for improvement. This approach can ensure that best practices are maintained and adapted as needed to enhance stakeholder involvement and satisfaction. Overall, while the study reveals a generally positive perception of stakeholder involvement in community procurement, addressing the areas of early involvement, information dissemination, feedback mechanisms, and clarity in input channels will further strengthen the engagement process. By implementing these recommendations, the project can enhance transparency, accountability, and stakeholder satisfaction, ultimately leading to more successful and inclusive community procurement practices.

REFERENCES

Adan I. H., (2012). Influence of stakeholder’s role on the performance of constituency’s development fund projects a case of Isiolo North Constituency, University of Nairobi, Kenya

Ahmad E., (2015). Infrastructure finance in the developing world: Public finance underpinnings for infrastructure finance in developing countries, Intergovernmental Group of Twenty-Four and Global Green Growth Institute, Washington, DC.

Albert, H., (2014). Handbook of project management procedures, TTL Publishing Ltd, England

Anderson, C. Narus, J and Van, W., (2016). Customer value propositions in business markets. Harvard Business Review, 84(3), 90-9.

Ategeka, S. (2018). The causes of post-harvest losses in maize and their effects on profitability of agribusiness enterprises in Masindi district. 12-45.

Cravero, C. (2023). PARTICIPATION AND SUSTAINABILITY IN COMMUNITY-BASED PROCUREMENT BETWEEN LAW, PRACTICE AND STORYTELLING. African Public Procurement Law Journal, 10(2), 42-82.

Avis W., (2015). Engaging stakeholders in areas of cross-border infrastructure investment, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK.

Buertey, J. Amofa, D and Atsrim F., (2016). Stakeholder Management on Construction Projects: A Key Indicator for Project Success, American Journal of Civil Engineering, 1(3) 9-12

Cohen, J. Cohen, P. West, G. & Aiken, S., (2013). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences, Routledge.

Troje, D., & Andersson, T. (2021). As above, not so below: Developing social procurement practices on strategic and operative levels. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 40(3), 242-258.

Creswell, J. W., (2013). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approach, Sage publications, United Kingdom.

Lindgaard, P., & Zoran, P. (2022). Outsourcing Process and Theories. Journal in Business Outsourcing: Technical University of Denmark, Building 421.

Musiime, F., & Alinda, D. (2016). Drivers of customer’s choice of mobile money agent for mobile MONEY SERVICE IN KAMPALA, UGANDA. DBA Africa Management Revie, June Vol 6 No.4, 2016 pp 1-10: Retrieved from: http://journals.uonbi.ac.ke/damr.

Opuene, K., & Ejo-Orusa, H. (2020). Business Process Outsourcing and Organizational Performance of Money Deposit Banks in Port Harcourt, Rivers State. International Journal of Management Sciences, ISSN: 2360-9944 | Volume 8, Issue 1 | February 2020 | Pages 33 – 49.

Harland, C. M., Eßig, M., Lynch, J., & Patrucco, A. (2021). Policy-led public procurement: does strategic procurement deliver?. Journal of Public Procurement, 21(3), 221-228.

QUESTIONNAIRE

Dear Respondent,

You have been selected to participate in this study, I kindly request for 10 mins of your time to fill in this questionnaire. The aim of this study is to examine “Influence of stakeholders’ experiences in implementing community procurement”.

The information provided shall be used for academic purposes only, thus total confidentiality is guaranteed for all information provided.

Please indicate by ticking in the boxes provided what best represents the category in which you lie.

Section A:      Respondent Details:

Gender:    Male                                      Female

Level of Education:

Postgraduate             Bachelor Degree Diploma               Certificate           None of These

Department

Clinical               Administration                             Other

Cadre

Medical Officer     Administration    Nurse/Midwife    Clinical Officer    Other

How many years have you worked with?

Less than 1 year    1-2 years  2-3 years   3-4 years               4 & above

Section B:  level of stakeholders’ involvement.  Here you are requested to indicate the level at which you agree with the statement by circling a number on a scale of 1-5. The keys have been displayed below where; SA=Strongly Agree,  A=Agree,  NS=Not Sure,   D=Disagree,   SD=Strongly Disagree

Section C: Stakeholders’ attitudes and perceptions in the implementation of community procurement : Here you are requested to indicate the level at which you agree with the statement by circling a number on a scale of 1-5. The keys have been displayed below where; SA=Strongly Agree,  A=Agree,  NS=Not Sure,   D=Disagree,   SD=Strongly Disagree

Section D:  Stakeholders’ best practices. Here you are requested to indicate the level at which you agree with the statement by circling a number on a scale of 1-5. The keys have been displayed below where; SA=Strongly Agree,  A=Agree,  NS=Not Sure,   D=Disagree,   SD=Strongly Disagree

Section E:  Community Procurement.  Here you are requested to indicate the level at which you agree with the statement by circling a number on a scale of 1-5. The keys have been displayed below where; SA=Strongly Agree,  A=Agree,  NS=Not Sure,   D=Disagree,   SD=Strongly Disagree

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: Workplan and Timeframe