Sustainability 2013, 6, 695-710; doi:10.3390/su5020695
sustainability
ISSN 2071-1050
www.mdpi.com/journal/sustainability
Article
Stakeholder Engagement: Achieving Sustainability in the
Construction Sector
Menoka Bal 1,
*, David Bryde 2
, Damian Fearon 2
and Edward Ochieng 3
1
Built Environment & Sustainable Technologies (BEST) Research Institute, Liverpool John Moores
University, Peter Jost Building, Byrom Street, Liverpool, L3 3AF, UK
2 School of Built Environment, Liverpool John Moores University, Peter Jost Building,
Byrom Street, Liverpool, L3 3AF, UK; E-Mails: D.J.Bryde@ljmu.ac.uk (D.B.);
D.J.Fearon@ljmu.ac.uk (D.F.)
3 School of Built Environment, Liverpool John Moores University, Cherie Booth Building,
Byrom Street, Liverpool L3 3AF, UK; E-Mail: E.G.Ochieng@ljmu.ac.uk
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: M.Bal@2010.ljmu.ac.uk;
Tel.: +44-151-23-14-149.
Received: 20 December 2012; in revised form: 29 January 2013 / Accepted: 6 February 2013 /
Published: 13 February 2013
Abstract: Achieving sustainability-related targets in construction projects is increasingly
becoming a key performance driver. Yet sustainability is a complex concept in projects and
there are many diverse stakeholders. Some stakeholders are generally recognized as
important, i.e., the client and main contractor, yet there are others not always perceived as
such and whose absence from the decision-making processes may result in a failure to
address sustainability issues. Hence there is a need for a systematic approach to engage
with stakeholders with high salience in relation to sustainability. This paper reports the
results of an exploratory study involving interviews with construction project practitioners
that are involved in sustainability in some way. Data were collected from the practitioners
in terms of the processes for engaging with stakeholders to deliver sustainability. The data
suggests six steps to a stakeholder engagement process: (i) identification; (ii) relating
stakeholders to different sustainability-related targets; (iii) prioritization; (iv) managing;
(v) measuring performance; and (vi) putting targets into action. The results suggest that
understanding the different sustainability agendas of stakeholders and measuring their
performance using key performance indicators are important stages to be emphasized in
any stakeholder engagement process to achieve sustainability-related goals.
OPEN ACCESS
Sustainability 2013, 5 696
Keywords: sustainability; stakeholder engagement; stakeholder analysis; project
management; sustainable construction
1. Introduction
The construction industry is one of the most dynamic, risky and challenging business sectors.
There is much waste and it encounters problems caused by myopic control [1,2]. Previous research
carried out in the field recommends that the construction sector must shift from being reactive to being
more proactive and promote sustainable practices. The UK Construction Industry has an annual
turnover of more than £100 billion and accounts for almost 10% of the country’s GDP [3].
Construction Industry forms one of the most diverse and unstable sectors within the UK economy and
it faces wide fluctuating demand cycles, project specific product demand, uncertain productions
conditions and has to combine a diverse range of specialist skills within geographically dispersed short
term project environments [4]. Considering the size and importance of the construction industry to the
world economy and its contribution to environmental damage the suggestion has been made to use the
emerging “sustainability” agenda as a lens through which construction performance can be
measured [5].
In this new global economy, stakeholder engagement is increasingly becoming a part of
construction project practice in order to deliver excellent project outcomes. For example stakeholder
identification is a critical component of the initial scoping phase and should occur before an
engagement plan is formulated and consultations begin. As each stakeholder usually has their own
interest in the project which may cause different priorities, conflicts and dramatically increase the
complexity of the situation [6]. A well-managed stakeholder engagement process helps the project
stakeholder to work together to increase comfort and quality of life, while decreasing negative
environmental impacts and increasing the economic sustainability of the project. Stakeholder
engagement should therefore be taken as a core element of any “sustainable development” plan.
Hence a project is more likely to be successful—especially in the long-term, if it takes into
consideration the expectations of the stakeholders and endeavors to meet their needs.
Considering all these above issues in the construction industry the aim of this paper therefore is to
examine the processes for engaging stakeholders in construction projects. The paper is structured as
follows: after this introduction, the second section briefly reviews the concepts of sustainability in
relation to construction. The next section puts the research into context by considering the theoretical
framework for the research. The fourth section introduces the research method and the fifth presents
and discusses the results. The contribution to knowledge of the paper is highlighted in Section 6 and
conclusions are provided in the seventh, and last, section.
2. What Makes Construction Sustainable?
Construction is said to be sustainable when it meets environmental challenges, responds to social
and cultural demands and delivers economic improvement. For example, a building could be
considered environmentally sustainable if the energy usage throughout the building’s life cycle is low
Sustainability 2013, 5 697
and it considers reusing of materials at the end of the building’s life [7]. The fundamental concept of
sustainable construction is to deliver long term affordability, quality and efficiency, value to clients
and users, whilst decreasing negative environmental impacts and increasing the economic
sustainability. It requires the development of enlightened institutions and infrastructures, appropriate
management of risks and uncertainties and information and knowledge to assure intergenerational
equity and conservation of the ability of earth's natural systems to serve humankind [8]. ISO TS 21929
defines a framework for sustainability indicators of buildings which is based on the premise that
sustainable construction brings about the required performance with the least unfavorable
environmental impact, while encouraging economic, social and cultural improvement at a local,
regional and global level [9]. Sustainability is presented as an agenda that extends beyond economic
viability and environmental regeneration, reaching deep into the structure of social organizations, by
insisting on social equity and justice [10]. The social aspect is seen in reforms of housing and
planning—a new approach to how to build, to achieve development that meets the economic, social
and environmental needs of future generations. Sustainable construction supply chain delivers tangible
benefits to the triple bottom line (TBL) that is (1) Economic Growth (2) Environmental Sustainability
and (3) Ethical/Social Performance [10]. According to UNEP [11] sustainable building and
construction should have the following characteristics
- Routinely designed and maintained to optimize the entire life span,
- Sustainability considerations and requirements should take in building legislation
and standards,
- Environmental aspects should be considered in the project and should include short-term as
well as long-term aspects,
- Policies and incentives provided by the government to support sustainable building and
construction practices,
- Investors, insurance companies, property developers and buyer of buildings are aware of
sustainability considerations and should take an active role to encourage sustainable building
and construction practice.
3. Theoretical Framework
According to Freeman [12] “A stakeholder is any group or individual who can be affected or is
affected by the achievement of the organization’s objectives”. According to the Project Management
Institute (PMI) Standards Committee, project stakeholders are individuals and organizations who are
actively involved in the project or whose interests may be affected by the execution of the project or by
successful project completion [13]. Chinyio and Olomolaiye [14] stated that stakeholders can affect an
organization’s functioning, goals, development and even survival. They also mentioned that
stakeholders are beneficial when they help to achieve its goals and they are antagonistic when they
oppose to the mission. Stakeholders are vital to the successful completion of a project because their
unwillingness to continuously support the vision or objectives of the project leads many projects
to fail.
Successful engagement of stakeholders involves actively giving and getting their support and
working together to devise, plan and develop new business solutions [15]. Ayuso et al. [16] combined
Sustainability 2013, 5 698
stakeholder engagement and knowledge management (KM) which are elements of organizational
capability that deals with stakeholder-related innovation, in the context of sustainable development.
They found that knowledge sourced from engagement with stakeholders affects firm’s sustainable
innovation orientation. Glass [10] proposed a mechanism of sustainability reporting (SR) to make a
construction company’s strategies, actions and achievements more transparent, to increase
communication performance, develop a reputation for responsible behavior and gain competitive
advantage. SR in construction contributes by identifying challenges around durability, stakeholder
engagement and reputation management. Senior leaders in organizations can adopt stakeholder
engagement as an opportunity to influence other organizations and create alignment to structures and
processes to support the vision and mission of sustainability [17]. Jeffry [18] proposed a model of a
“meaningful” stakeholder engagement process that builds a proactive two-way process between the
organization and the stakeholder. Here communication, opinions and proposals flow in both directions
and the organization can change its behavior as a result of engagement. This process is not actually
linear; rather it is an iterative process in which an organization learns and improves its ability to
perform meaningful stakeholder engagement through developing relationships of mutual respect, in
place of one-off consultations. Holmes and Moir [19] developed a preliminary conceptual framework
to explore the drivers of a firm’s engagement with a nonprofit stakeholder and also to identify factors
that impact on generating innovation through stakeholder engagement. Engaging stakeholders in
construction is a formal process of relationship management through which clients, contractors and
sub-contractors engage with a set of primary and secondary stakeholders, in an effort to align their
mutual interest to reduce risk in projects [19, 20].
The example of Heathrow Terminal 5 (T5) illustrates the importance of proactive development of
long-term contractual relationships with stakeholders and stakeholder engagement [21]. In the T5
project the stakeholder engagement and commitment process is supported by the project executives, to
engage with project leadership and suppliers in order to introduce a right first time quality concept and
to get their buy-in and commitment [22]. On the downside, British Airways’ management failed to
properly engage with its important stakeholders prior to going operational—staff and paid the price of
a tarnished reputation [21]. Whether the focus was on the successful construction of T5 or the
“unsuccessful” opening, the reason of both the success (of construction) and the failure (of going
“live”) was the “soft skills” of project management—stakeholder engagement and effective
communication. Another example of problems caused by a lack of engagement is the Denver
International Airport (DIA) project, when Boeing Airport Equipment and the airport project
management made a major mistake of excluding key stakeholders (airlines) from key discussions [23].
Excluding important stakeholders from participating in key project decisions is always a losing
strategy. In August 2010, the UK Fire control project suffered a series of delays and increased costs by
reducing the number of dispatches available to handle emergencies and the slow pace of work resulted
in IT systems being not fit for purpose. These problems happened, in part, due to mismanaged
relationships with major stakeholders and contractors and an “adversarial” relationship between the
government and the main IT contractor [24].
Figure 1 [25] shows five stages stakeholder engagement model which are: Identify key stakeholders
and significant issues; Analyze and plans; Strengthen engagement capacities; Design the process and
engage; Act, review and report. There are three broad accompanying processes, being “thinking and
Sustainability 2013, 5 699
planning”, “preparing and engaging” and “responding and measuring”. Through effective
management, such involvement creates a positive relationship amongst them. Some of the following
benefits result from general stakeholder engagement for sustainability: better understanding of the
market condition, as stakeholders often possess a wealth of information; promoting of reputation;
building relationships; better understanding of the priorities and needs of stakeholders; building trust
and long-term collaborative relationships; sharing experience and skills; and understanding and
mitigating the threats and uncertainties.
Figure 1. Five-stages stakeholder engagement model (adapted from the Stakeholder
Engagement Practitioner Handbook, 2008) [25].
Table 1 (next page) provides a summary of the extant literatures on stakeholder engagement and its
relationship with sustainability. As shown in the table, researchers have considered the importance of
Strengthen engagement
capacities
 Strengthen the ability to respond to
an issue
 Developing internal skills
 Building stakeholders capacity to
engage
Design the process
and engage
 Identify the most effective
engagement approach
 Design the process
Identify key stakeholders and
significant issues
 Mapping stakeholders identifying
issues
 Setting strategic objectives
 Prioritizing
Act, review and report
 Planning and follow-up
activities
 Ensuring learning
 Reviewing the engagement
 Assuring your stakeholders
Analyze and plans
 Reviewing progress
 Learning from others and
identifying partners
 Learning about stakeholders
 Setting stakeholder objectives
Significance
Responsivenes
Completeness
Stakeholder
Engagement
Thinking
and
planning
Responding
and
measuring
Preparing
and
engaging
Sustainability 2013, 5 700
both stakeholder engagement and sustainability and provided some suggestions and guidelines as to
how the construction sector can achieve a strategic aim in respect of sustainability, with the aid of
stakeholder’s contributions. The literature is presented in chronological order.
Table 1. Extant literature on stakeholder engagement and its relationship
with sustainability.
Study Year
Data Collection
Place
Main Findings Methodology
Persson and
Olander [15]
2004 Sweden
A Stakeholder-Urban Evaluation (STURE)
model is proposed to systematize the input of
sustainability factors, depended on the
stakeholder’s views and demands.
Conceptual paper:
estimating methods
and evaluating tools.
Clulow [26] 2005 Australia
Four themes emerged from the analysis, indicating
stakeholders and their responsibility to achieve
sustainability.
A systematic discourse
analysis of the text
Bourne and
Walker [19]
2006 Australia
One needs to adopt different strategies to achieve
stakeholder engagement, leading to a stakeholder
satisfaction and a successful project.
Case Study and action
learning approach:
Emerging project
management and
decision-making
literature.
Gao and
Zhang [27]
2006 UK
This paper identifies a “match” between corporate
sustainability and social auditing, aiming to
improve the social, environmental and economic
performance of an organization; whilst considering
the well-being of a wider range of stakeholders
and requiring the engagement of stakeholders in
the process.
Research Paper
Holmes and
Moir [19]
2007 UK
The literature identifies firm motivations,
engagement conditions and intra-firm factors
that would appear to influence innovation.
Conceptual Paper,
literature review
Mathur
et al. [28]
2007 UK
The study reveals the value of identifying and
mapping the stakeholders for stakeholder
engagement to attain sustainability.
Conceptual Paper,
literature review
Boesso and
Kumar [29]
2008 Italy and USA
This paper prioritizes the stakeholders according to
their power and legitimacy and through this
prioritization focuses the effort to engage the
stakeholders.
Conceptual Paper
Johansson
[30]
2008 Sweden
A stakeholder system model is introduced by
Simmons and Lovegrove (S&L model) to
demonstrate how organizations can be managed in
order to achieve organizational sustainability.
Case Study: A
Swedish clothing
design enterprise
Sustainability 2013, 5 701
Table 1. Cont.
Study Year
Data Collection
Place
Main Findings Methodology
Lim and
Yang [31]
2008 Australia
This research identified the different perceptions
and priority needs of the stakeholders and issues
that impact on achieving sustainability objectives.
Interviews: n = 20
senior and highranking
infrastructure
project stakeholders
Romenti
[32]
2010 Italy
Corporate communication has been built on a
network of stakeholder partnerships through which
company continuously improves and develops new
business solutions.
Case Study: Leading
dairy company
Spitzeck and
Hansen [33]
2010 UK
Stakeholders are granted a voice regarding
operational, managerial as well as strategic issues.
Multiple comparative
case analysis: 46
companies
Lam
et al. [34]
2010 Hong Kong
Using sustainable materials on projects is achieved
by drawing up suitable clauses and collaborating
with the stakeholders to get up-to-date feedback.
Interview: n = 16
Ayuso
et al. [16]
2011 World wide
Engaging with key stakeholders of the firm, both
internal and external has a positive impact on a
company’s sustainable innovation orientation.
Questionnaire: n = 656
Typical stakeholders in construction projects are Sustainability Consultant, Contractor, Employee,
Client, Engineers, Trade Subcontractor, Archaeologist, Development Manager, Local Government,
Design Coordinator, Regulatory Agency, Managing Director, Technical Director, Conservationist,
Environmentalist, Project Manager, Area Manager, Material Supplier, Subcontractor, Architect and
Quantity Surveyor and other specialist consultants. Therefore, the potential stakeholders to a
construction project are numerous and disparate, which introduces a level of complexity to the issue of
stakeholder engagement. The sustainability agenda has introduced other stakeholders with high
salience to the construction environment. For example, the need to meet the social aspects of
sustainability that affect the local communities in which construction is undertaken, such as noise,
traffic, dust and security of sites, has led to the prominence of schemes like “Considerate
Constructors” [35]. In order to successfully engage these stakeholders in the construction project life
cycle, general stakeholder engagement theory would suggest that it is vital to initially analyze their
characteristics, that is, they need to be classified according to their level of interest, power and attitude
towards the project. In other words, those with high interest, high power and a positive attitude are
most useful and those with high interest, high power and a negative attitude are the most dangerous to
the achievement of the project objectives—both of these groups are said to have high salience.
Stakeholder analysis is a practice that can be used to identify and assess the salience of key people,
groups of people, or institutions that may significantly influence the success of an activity or project.
Identifying stakeholders relative to their interest, power and attitude helps to bring the most salient
stakeholders into the decision-making process. Those with high salience will have interest and
authority to deliver sustainability related performance and might have an interest in and knowledge of
Sustainability 2013, 5 702
different sustainability related issues and solutions as well. Those with a high salience but a negative
attitude may need to be brought on board in some way through actions that lead to a change in attitude
from negative to positive.
4. Method
What is not clear though and is worthy of further investigation is how can an effective stakeholder
engagement process can be established to achieve sustainability is construction. To investigate this
issue an exploratory study involving in-depth structured interviews with UK-based practitioners
representing some of the key stakeholders to a construction project were undertaken. It has been
highlighted in the previous section that there are a multiplicity of stakeholders interested in
sustainability in construction environments, however for the purpose of this study it was decided to
focus on a closely bounded group of stakeholders that were all representatives of the project team,
where the term “team” reflects the view that it is made up of a temporary project coalition of
organizations [36]. Whilst they all had different specific roles on projects, they all worked in some
capacity on delivering sustainability on buildings. As this was an exploratory study a small-scale and
purposive sampling frame was constructed and from this 10 people involved in construction projects
were selected to be interviewed (as shown in Table 2). Initial discussions prior to the formal interview
ensured that those selected had knowledge and experience in both the UK construction industry and of
sustainability, to provide meaningful information. The most experienced had 40 years’ experience in
the industry and the least experienced 3 years (again, see Table 2).
Table 2. Profile of interviewees.
Organization (UK) Role of interviewee
Experience in construction
and interview duration
Construction Company Contractor A 40 years; 1 h 30 min
Water and waste water services Project Manager 30 years; 1 h 20 min
Social Housing Company Client Project Manager 30 years; 1 h 8 min
House builder Contractor B 38 years; 1 h
Engineering, construction and
technical services organization
Sustainability Consultant 7 years 6 months; 1 h
Water and waste water services Environmentalist 8 years; 1 h
Water and waste water services Contractor C 3 years; 45 min
Construction Company Civil Engineer 8 years; 55 min
House builders Developer 15 years; 1 h
Engineering, construction and
technical services organization
Design Engineer 37 years; 1 h 10 min
A pre-produced list of questions was used as a tool for face-to-face discussion. Participants were
asked to express both their experiences and their attitudes relating to the importance and feasibility of
stakeholder engagement to achieve sustainability on construction projects. Interviews typically lasted
1 hour; with the shortest interview lasting 45 minutes and the longest 1 hour 30 minutes (see Table 2).
Interviews were recorded and then transcribed. The data analysis procedure involved converting raw
Sustainability 2013, 5 703
narrative data (interview notes, audiotapes) into partially processed data (transcripts) which were then
coded (with the aid of NVIVO software). Key steps in the stakeholder engagement process were then
developed from the coding process. The results are presented in the next section. As the purpose was to
derive a stakeholder engagement process the focus of the analysis was on identifying the
commonalities in the data between respondents, rather than on the differences.
5. Findings and Discussion
This section presents a summary of the interview findings, with brief discussion, in relation to the
interviewees’ attitudes and experiences related to the processes for engaging with stakeholders.
Processes for engaging with stakeholders
In terms of engaging with stakeholders the interview findings suggests a systematic process
involving six key steps—as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. Project Stakeholder Engagement Process for Sustainability.
The next section discusses each of the 6 steps in turn.
Identifying all
Key
Stakeholders
Relating the
stakeholders
with
Sustainbility
Related target
Prioritizing the
Stakeholders
Managing
Stakeholders
Measuring their
Performance
Putting Targets
into Action
Sustainability 2013, 5 704
5.1 Identifying all Key Stakeholders
Interviewees suggested that depending on the size of the construction project there could be many
stakeholders associated with it but there are typically only a small number of key stakeholders with
high salience in relation to sustainability. According to the Design Engineer “(…) stakeholders are
sometimes entitled as recognizing all persons, organizations or community involved in a project,
besides the target group and the implementing society and anticipates their responses to the target and
gains and maintains their support or opponent to the project plan if it’s controversial”. If the overall
planning process and the purpose of the project are clear then it will be easier to find out who these
stakeholders are. In such circumstances it is possible to identify those key people. It is worth noting
that on a construction project, different kinds of stakeholders are involved in different steps such
as pre-design, design, bidding and construction. A formal identification process can be considered
as a key step in drawing a line between the parties to be involved and the parties not to be
involved [27,37]. In terms of the sustainability mission of a project, as with other success criteria,
stakeholders can be identified by their interest, power and attitude—which all relate to their potential
impact on achieving the mission.
5.2 Relating the Stakeholders to Different Sustainability-Related Targets
Interviewees further suggested that after the stakeholder identification step it is important to relate
the stakeholders to different sustainability-related targets. According to the Sustainability Consultant,
“(...) different stakeholders possess different working skills and different knowledge. Therefore their
contribution to delivering sustainability related outcomes is also different. These different skills and
knowledge means people’s relationships with the project are also different”. It must be ensured that
key stakeholders of the project understand the commitment to sustainable development and the
objectives of the project. It is important that the project’s objectives mesh with its “stakeholders”
responsibility and skills and that they continue to fit stakeholders’ interests as the project evolves,
conditions change and the interdependencies of key systems, stakeholders and their objectives
change [32,38]. Taking into account all the sustainability-related criteria, stakeholders have a role in
developing a sustainability strategy that delivers the best project benefits.
5.3 Prioritizing the Stakeholders
The next step is to rank their importance based on the stakeholder's potential impact on project
success—in terms of achieving sustainability-related targets. Contractor A articulated the importance
of stakeholder prioritization as follows: “After identifying the stakeholders sometimes there is struggle
to pay attention to all of them and sometimes one needs to sacrifice the needs of one stakeholder for
the needs of another. To stop these conflicts arising we prioritize each stakeholder according to the
situation. And this prioritization can be done according to stakeholder’s intensity of interest, power
and impact”. Indeed all stakeholders are important, but they should be prioritized depending on the
sustainability-related issues and their relevant characteristics, such as their ability to influence, impart
knowledge, bring integrity and legitimacy. Stakeholders are prioritized through their power and
legitimacy and the greater the priority accorded to a stakeholder group, the greater the efforts aimed at
Sustainability 2013, 5 705
engaging the stakeholder groups [31]. Stakeholders can be prioritized based on the following: those
who have the highest decision-making power; those who contribute economically, socially and
environmentally in terms of impact or are dependent on the organization; and those who are not linked
directly to the project, but interested in seeing the project deliver a sustainable solution.
5.4 Managing Stakeholders
Interviewees highlighted that after prioritizing the stakeholder the next requisite step is to manage
them; i.e. to manage their relationship. Contractor B stated that “(...) we provide regular training and
workshops for our clients, suppliers and customers to get the benefit from education and to raise the
values, improve their behaviors and habits needed to assure a sustainable future and also [we hope] to
transform society through superior structures without compromising the resources to which the future
generations are entitled”. Managing the construction stakeholders is the practice of meeting the
expectation of anyone that has an interest, impact or power on the project and will be affected by its
deliverables or outputs. The Environmentalist described how “(...) sometimes stakeholders may be
satisfied for now or they may have more clarifications for us [to respond to]. We do listen to them and
include [the messages] in our action plan”. Successful completion of construction projects is
dependent on meeting the expectation of stakeholders [39]. Managing relationships with stakeholders
helps raise the consciousness of the project and make it better prepared to deal with changing
stakeholder needs; it also makes it more able to respond efficiently and effectively to the difficulties
that may arise or issues that need to be resolved. In this sense, stakeholders are a major source of
uncertainty; a generic project risk management process framework provides a structure for a review of
approaches to analyzing stakeholders and risk management issues [40] and such a framework could be
adapted to the sustainability context.
5.5 Measuring their Performance
Most of the interviewees agreed that performance targets that encourage continual improvement in
terms of sustainability need to be set up and stakeholders need to be engaged with the measures.
The main purpose of performance measurement is to measure and improve the efficiency and the
quality of the performance, and identify opportunities for progressive improvements in
performance [41]. All key stakeholders’ individual performance needs to be measured to decide how
well they are meeting their responsibilities to produce a better outcome for the project.
Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) are used to measure the individual performance. The Developer
described it as follows: “We have KPIs, we practice KPIs from our parent company to measure the
social impact we make in areas. After identifying all of our stakeholders we set up their goals and also
use KPIs to measure progress toward those goals”. According to Contractor B that (...) we also
measure performance indicators in terms of things like tenancy’s satisfaction [which relates to aspects
of the TBL]—again we have that as a key driver”. For each measure, performance needs to be defined
to identify the data to measure and to understand the important aspects that will effectively make up
the action plan to ensure the right thing is measured in an appropriate way. One of the Project
Managers described how they undertake “Customer Satisfaction Surveys” to measure their
performance against their customers’ demands. A study of relationships between the stakeholders’
Sustainability 2013, 5 706
performance and project success proved that the owner, supervisor and contractor’s performances are
significantly related to the criteria of project success [42,43]. Sometimes some stakeholder’s
expectations and perceptions may seem difficult to measure on a quantifiable basis. Performance
measurement, though, needs to be two-way, providing stakeholders with the opportunity to provide
their own feedback, express concerns, help to identify problems early, such two ways communication
will keep motivation levels at a high level.
5.6 Putting Targets into Actions
Participants confirmed that after measuring performance, which will quantify the stakeholder’s
contribution in an individual area related to sustainability, plans can be developed and in some cases
modified to ensure that sustainability-related targets continue to be met. A systematic plan of
stakeholder engagement is a valid mechanism that focus’s to the firms’ innovation orientation within
the context of sustainable development [16]. According to Contractors A “(…) after effectively
measuring the contribution of each member it will support us to identify the individual performance
issues (...) and I have no doubt that we will also be able to continually monitor the progress of each
stage of our sustainability plan against the target”. Evaluating that performance among all the project
stakeholders provides the basis for judgments about how well the company is performing in meeting
sustainability related targets. Adapting the above mentioned performance measurement
plan assists the project in setting targets and adapt to changing needs, requirements and the
external environment.
6. Contribution to Knowledge
Interest in the topic of sustainability in the construction industry has increased rapidly in recent
years. Despite this interest, the concept of stakeholder engagement, including its practical
implementation, in terms of delivering sustainability is still relatively unexplored [44]. Research has
been carried out on broad aspects of construction stakeholder management i.e., considering the
management of risk, conflict, quality, value, communication, culture and leadership, change of
stakeholder management [14,45–47], but few authors have focused their research on the stakeholder
engagement process in construction project environments. Furthermore, there has been very little
research that has focused on how stakeholder engagement processes are integrated together in a
construction context [16,18,19]. Hence this paper makes a contribution to theoretical knowledge by
deriving an iterative process for the engagement of stakeholders in construction, through an empirical
study, in order to meet sustainability-related targets (Figure 2).
As is shown in Figure 2, which is introduced in Section 5 above, the importance of performance
measurement in respect of delivering sustainability is integral to the process, yet it is an activity that
has not received much prominence in existing models for stakeholder engagement in the literature.
The pivotal role of performance measurement in the whole process is best articulated by the Design
Engineer of an Engineering, Construction and Technical Services organization, who described how—
“(...) after finding out our key partners with their key responsibilities we always work closely with
them and support them to help them deliver on those [sustainability] targets and all the way along of
our project we put in place different measurement tools that will actually help us to monitor progress”.
Sustainability 2013, 5 707
Further, in comparison to the general project stakeholder management process introduced by
Cleland [48] and the Construction Stakeholder Management by Chinyio and Olomolaiye [14], the
Project Stakeholder Engagement Plan for Sustainability, represented in Figure 2, emphasises the
importance of aligning the management of the relationship of stakeholders with the sustainability
related targets—which is another activity that has not been stressed in prior theoretical work.
7. Conclusions
This paper has highlighted some of the processes which are being used by diverse project
participants to ensure sustainability-relate issues are properly considered in construction projects. It is
important to understand such processes as they show how stakeholders are engaged with in
construction projects to integrate sustainability considerations into design and construction-related
activities. Data collected from interviews with practitioners a systematic and cyclic stakeholder
engagement process is proposed. This process suggests that participants are motivated by a mixture of
control, management and organizing activities, in order to engage with their internal and external
stakeholders in order to meet sustainability related target.
In terms of the individual steps to successful stakeholder engagement that could be adopted by a
project team the process suggests 6 key steps. These steps are: identifying all key stakeholders, relating
the stakeholders to different sustainability-related targets, prioritizing the stakeholders, managing
stakeholders, measuring their performance and putting targets into actions. By undertaking this process
a fully integrated stakeholder team can be engaged with throughout a project life cycle.
It needs to be noted that this paper reports the findings of an exploratory study and the next step will
be to collect data from a larger sample of practitioners. This will allow for future research focused on
developing further and validating the process for project stakeholder engagement in construction,
which can include a more finally grained analysis of the potential influence of stakeholder types on the
specific activities undertaken within the overall holistic process. It would also be useful to explore the
relationships between adherence to the stakeholder engagement process presented in this paper and the
achievement of sustainability goals to projects.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Mills., A. A systematic approach to risk management for construction. Struct. Surv. 2001, 19,
245–252.
2. Vrijhoef, R.; Koskela, L. Roles of Supply Chain Management in Construction. In Proceedings
IGLC-7, University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA, 26–28 July 1999; pp. 133–146.
3. Strategic Forum for Construction. Strategic Forum: Targets to 2012, 2010. Available online:
http://www.cic.org.uk/strategicforum/pdf/targets.pdf (accessed on 14 November 2012).
4. Dainty, A.R.J.; Briscoe, G.H.; Millett, S.J. New perspectives on construction supply chain
integration. Supply Chain. Manag. 2001, 6, 163–173.
Sustainability 2013, 5 708
5. Murray, P.E.; Cotgrave, A.J. Sustainability literacy: The future paradigm for construction
education. Struct. Surv. 2007, 25, 7–23.
6. Karlsen, J.T.; Græe, K.; Massaoud, M.J. Building trust in project-stakeholder Relationships. Balt
J. Manag. 2008, 3, 7–22.
7. Blauert, J.; Zadek, S. Mediating Sustainability: Growing Policy from the Grassroots, 1st ed.;
Kumarian Press: West Hartford, CT, USA, 1998; pp. 57–58.
8. Majdalani, Z.; Ajam, M.; Mezher, T. Sustainability in the construction industry: A Lebanese case
study. Construct. Innovat. 2006, 6, 33–46.
9. Häkkinen, T.M. Sustainable building related new demands for Product information and product
model based design. ITCon 2007, 12, 19–37. Available online: http://www.itcon.org/data/
works/att/2007_2.content.06036.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2012).
10. Glass, J. The state of sustainability reporting in the construction sector. SASBE 2012, 1, 87–104.
11. UNEP. Sustainable Building and construction Initiative. 2006 Information Note. Available online:
http://www.uneptie.org/pc/pc/SBCI/SBCI_2006_InformationNote.pdf (accessed 10 January 2013).
12. Freeman, R.E. Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, 1st ed.; Pitman Publishing:
Boston, MA, USA, 1984; pp. 24–25.
13. PMI Standards Committee. A Guide to the Project Management Body of Knowledge. 3rd ed.;
Project Management Institute (PMI): Pennsylvania, PA, USA, 2004; pp. 81–86.
14. Chinyio, E.; Olomolaiye, P. Construction Stakeholder Management, 1st ed.; Wiley-Blackwell:
London, UK, 2010; pp. 1–349.
15. Persson, U.; Olander, S. Methods to Estimate Stakeholder Views of Sustainability for
Construction Projects. In Proceedings of the 21th Conference on Passive and Low Energy
Architecture, Eindhoven, The Netherlands, 19–22 September 2004.
16. Ayuso, S.; Rodríguez, M.A.; Castro, R.G.; Ariño, M.A. Does stakeholder engagement promote
sustainable innovation orientation? Ind. Manag. Data. Syst. 2011, 111, 1399–1417.
17. Quinn, L.; Dalton, M. Leading for sustainability: Implementing the tasks of leadership. Corp.
Govern. 2009, 9, 21–38.
18. Jeffery, N. Stakeholder Engagement: A Road Map to Meaningful Engagement. The Doughty
Centre for Corporate Responsibility, Cranfield School of Management, 2009. Available online:
http://www.som.cranfield.ac.uk/som/dinamic-content/media/CR%20Stakeholder.pdf (accessed on
14 April 2012).
19. Holmes, S.; Moir, L. Developing a conceptual framework to identify corporate innovations
through engagement with non-profit stakeholders. Corp. Govern. 2007, 7, 414–422.
20. Bourne, L.; Walker, D.H.T. Using visualizing tool to study stakeholder influence—Two
Australian Example. Proj. Manag. J. 2006, 37, 5–21.
21. Bourne. L. Why is Stakeholder Management so Difficult. Stakeholder Management Pty Ltd.,
2010. Available online: http://www.mosaicprojects.com.au/PDF_Papers/P123_Why_is_
Stakeholder_Management_so_difficult.pdf (accessed 14 April 2012).
22. Basu, R.; Little, C.; Millard, C. Case study: A fresh approach of the balanced scorecard in the
Heathrow Terminal 5 project. Measuring Business Excellence 2009, 13, 22–33.
Sustainability 2013, 5 709
23. Robert. Case Study—Denver Airport Baggage Handling System—An Illustration of Ineffectual
Decision Making. Denver Airport Baggage Handling System Case Study—Calleam Consulting,
(2010). Available online: http://undergraduate.csse.uwa.edu.au/units/CITS2220/readings
/DIABaggage.pdf (accessed on 14 April 2012).
24. Calleam Consulting Ltd. Why Technology Projects Fail. A resource centre for advanced learning.
2012. Available online: http://calleam.com/WTPF/?p=3273 (accessed 14 April 2012).
25. Department of Immigration and Citizenship. Stakeholder Engagement Practitioner Handbook.
2008. Available online: http://www.immi.gov.au/about/stakeholder-engagement/_pdf/stakeholderengagement-practitioner-handbook.pdf
(accessed 14 April 2012).
26. Clulow, V. Futures dilemmas for marketers: can stakeholder analysis add value? Eur. J. Market.
2005, 39, 978 – 997.
27. Gao, S.S.; Jane, J.; Zhang, J.J. Stakeholder engagement, social auditing and corporate
sustainability. Bus. Process. Manag. J. 2006, 12, 722–740.
28. Mathur, V.N.; Price, A.D.F.; Austin, S.; Moobela, C. Defining, identifying and mapping
stakeholders in the assessment of urban sustainability. In Proceedings of the SUE-MoT
Conference 2007, International Conference on Whole Life Urban Sustainability and its
Assessment, Glasgow, Scotland, 27–29 June 2007.
29. Boesso, G.; Kumar, K. An investigation of stakeholder prioritization and engagement: Who or
what really counts. J. Account Organ. Change. 2009, 5, 62–80.
30. Johansson, P. Implementing stakeholder management: A case study at a micro—Enterprise.
Measuring Business Excellence 2008, 12, 33–43.
31. Lim, S.K.; Yang, J. Understanding the Need of Project Stakeholders for Improving Sustainability
Outcomes in Infrastructure Projects. In Proceedings of the Performance and Knowledge
Management Joint CIB Conference, Finland, Helsinki, 3–4 June 2008; In-house Publishing:
Rotterdam, the Netherlands; pp. 332–343.
32. Romenti, S. Reputation and stakeholder engagement: An Italian case study. J. Comm. Manag.
2010, 14, 306–318.
33. Spitzeck, H.; Hansen, E.G. Stakeholder governance: How stakeholders influence corporate
decision making. Corp. Govern. 2010, 10, 378–391.
34. Lam, P.T.I.; Chan, E.H.W.; Chau, C.K.; Poon, C.S. A sustainable framework of “green”
specification for construction in Hong Kong. J. Facil. Manag. 2011, 9, 16–33.
35. Glass, J.; Simmonds, M. Considerate construction: Case studies of current practice. Eng.
Construct. Architect. Manag. 2007, 14, 131 – 149.
36. Winch, G. The construction firm and the construction project: a transaction cost approach.
Construct. Manag. Econ. 1989, 7, 331–345.
37. Vos, J.F.J. Corporate Social Responsibility and the Identification of Stakeholders. Corporate
Social Responsibility and Environmental Management 2003, 10, 141–152.
38. Morris, P.G.W. The Management of Projects; Thomas Telford: Heron Quay, London, UK, 1996;
pp. 25–30.
39. Cleland, D. Project Management Strategic Design and Implementation, 5th ed.; McGraw Hill:
Singapore, 1995; pp. 43–45.
Sustainability 2013, 5 710
40. Ward, S.; Chapman, C. Stakeholders and uncertainty management in projects. Construct. Manag.
Econ. 2008, 26, 563–577.
41. Wegelius-Lehtonen, T. Performance measurement in construction logistics. Int. J. Prod. Econ.
2001, 69, 107–16.
42. Wang, X.; Huang, J. The relationships between key stakeholders’ project performance and project
success: Performance of Chinese construction supervising engineers. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2006,
24, 253–60.
43. Yang, H.; Yeung, J.F.Y.; Chan, A.P.C.; Chiang, Y.H.; Chan, D.W.M. A critical review of
performance measurement in construction. J. Facil. Manag. 2010, 8, 269–284.
44. Sachs, S.; Rühli, E. Changing managers’ values towards a broader stakeholder orientation. Corp.
Govern. 2005, 5, 89–98.
45. Garvare, R.; Johansson, P. Management for Sustainability — A Stakeholder Theory. Total Qual.
Manag. 2010, 21, 737–744.
46. Yang, J; Shen, Q; Ho, M. An overview of previous studies in stakeholder management and its
implications for the construction industry. J. Facil. Manag. 2009, 7, 159–175.
47. Bryson J.M. What to do when stakeholder’s matters: A Guide to Stakeholder identification and
analysis techniques. 2003. Available online: http://www.governat.eu/files/files/pb_bryson_
stakeholder_identification.pdf (Accessed on 14 November 2011).
48. Cleland, D.I. Project stakeholder management. Proj. Manag. J. 1986, 17, 36–44.
© 2013 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/).