Factors influencing procurement performance in public institutions in Kenya: a case of Homabay county government

Abstract

Public procurement is the acquisition of any type of works, assets, services and goods by purchase, rental, lease, license, tenancy, franchise or by any other contractual means. Public procurement consumes huge amounts of tax payers’ money. In United Kingdom, the public sector spent £242 billion on procurement of goods, works and services in 2013/2014 which accounted for 33% of the sectors spending. In South Africa, public procurement spending represents 29% of the country’s gross domestic product. Locally, the spending on goods and services accounts for 11% of the country’s GDP. This however can be minimised through an efficient procurement system. Nonetheless, this depends on a number of factors associated with the procurement function. The purpose of this study was to assess the factors influencing procurement performance in public institutions in Kenya: a case of Homa Bay county government. The specific objectives were to; establish the extent to which management competency, information technology and to evaluate the extent to which financial capability: influence procurement performance in the County Government of Homa Bay. The study was anchored on the resource-based view theory (RBV) and adopted descriptive survey design. The target population was 200 staff of Homa Bay County Government with direct and significant influence in public procurement at the county. The sample size was 134 people, obtained through simple random sampling. Primary data used was obtained through structured questionnaires. Reliability test was ascertained through Cronbach’s Alpha. The instrument was reviewed by experts to ascertain validity. Descriptive results showed that there was moderate influence of managerial competency in procurement performance (mean= 3.0476). The responses had lower dispersion as evidenced in smaller standard deviation (SD= 1.00935). Moreover, the distribution was negatively skewed (SK=-0.240) implying that majority of the respondents strongly disagreed. To add, the kurtosis coefficient, K=-0.448 implying that the responses had a leptokurtic distribution; there was moderate influence of Information Technology in the performance of Procurement (mean= 3.000). The responses had lower dispersion as evidenced in smaller standard deviation (SD= 1.07050). Moreover, the distribution was negatively skewed (SK=-0.186) implying that majority of the respondents strongly disagreed. To add, the kurtosis coefficient, K=-0.558 implying that the responses had a leptokurtic distribution and that there was little influence of financial capability in the procurement performance (mean= 2.1905). The responses had lower dispersion as evidenced in smaller standard