Integrity Systems in Construction Organizations in Zambia

International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction Vol 2, No 2, June 2013, 106-119

Integrity Systems in Construction Organizations in Zambia M. Muya, B. Mukumbwa∗ Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Zambia, Lusaka, Zambia Abstract: The construction industry is prone to unethical practices as reported in construction literature world-wide. There is a need for construction organizations to put in place methods for detecting and combating wrongdoings. The purpose of the study was to develop a method for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations. Interviews, a questionnaire survey and three case studies were used to collect data. The study established the need for the development of a method for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations. The framework developed to achieve this is presented. The study established that integrity systems in construction organizations that were sampled in Zambia were moderately developed. The framework to assess the presence of integrity systems reported in this paper could be a useful tool in evaluating ethical compliance in construction organizations. It could be used as a tool for self-assessment by construction organizations. Self-assessment can bring to management’s attention areas that require improvement. Keywords: Construction organizations, integrity systems, unethical practices, Zambia DOI: 10.7492/IJAEC.2013.011

1 INTRODUCTION There is consensus both within and outside the construction industry that corruption and other unethical practices are endemic world-wide. Organizations, including those in construction, need to put in place systems for detecting and minimizing unethical incidences. Failure to detect and address unethical practices could lead to dire consequences for companies. Doran (2004), for example, cited companies that had folded up as a consequence of unethical practices. Not long ago, Enron, WorldCom and Tyco were model companies setting pace for American businesses (Doran 2004). These companies have since become synonymous with greed and corporate malfeasance, leading to tremendous losses in shareholder value, trust and a long list of legal battles. Losses resulting from ethical malpractices have been immense, but chief among them was the eroded trust and reputation, leading to the total collapse of the corporations.

Richter (2009) However, none of the models examined are specific to addressing unethical challenges in construction organizations.

2 UNETHICAL PRACTICES IN THE CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY Being a multi-billion dollar industry, construction is a fertile sector for economic crimes that include fraud, bid-rigging, bribery, collusion, coercion, misrepresentation of facts and extortion (Shakantu and Chiocha 2009). Unethical practices are prevalent in construction industries of both developed and developing countries.

2.1 Unethical Countries

Practices

in

Developed

Doran (2004) stated that 61% of respondents to his study in the construction sector in the USA agreed Several models and frameworks have been suggested that the industry was tainted with unethical practices. over time to address integrity and ethical compli- Eighty-four percent of sampled respondents who inance in organizations. They include those advocated cluded clients, architects, construction managers, conby Kohlberg (1959), Bommer et al. (1987), Stead tractors and sub-contractors agreed that they had exet al. (1990), Jones (1991), Wittmer (2002), Liu et al. perienced, encountered or observed unethical practices (2004), Kaptein and Avelino (2005), Svensson and in the construction sector. Thirty-four percent had exWood (2007), McDevitt et al. (2007), Barnard et al. perienced unethical conduct on many occasions. Doran (2008), Green and Walker (2009) and Dubinsky and (2004) reported that 69% of respondents stated that *Corresponding author. Email: [email protected] 106

Muya and Mukumbwa/International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction 2 (2013) 106-119

the construction industry needed to pay more attention to ethical issues. Vee and Skitmore (2003) also shed light on the problem of unethical practices in the construction industry in Australia. They highlighted conflict of interest, collusion, fraud and corruption as being endemic in the construction industry in that country.

been found to be a central trait of effective leaders and a key determinant of trust in organizations (Barnard et al. 2008). It is considered an essential component of productive work relationships and well-being of organizations. For many years, the construction industry has been criticized for its inability to innovate and adapt to modern management methods (Fewings 2009). Unethical practices in the industry are a calamitous can2.2 Identified Unethical Practices in Asia cer eroding billions of dollars in lost resources that Unethical practices have also been cited in construc- could be utilized for development of national infrastion industries of Asian countries. In Pakistan, Ehsan tructure. To address challenges arising from ethical et al. (2009) reported that 75% of respondents to a malpractices, Transparency International (2006) advoquestionnaire in that country agreed that there were cated for: a Code of Ethics; civil society participation unethical practices in the construction industry. All and oversight; whistleblower protection; conflict of inthe respondents agreed that they had experienced some terest rules; integrity pacts and debarment; rigorous degree of unethical conduct in the form of: individuals prosecution; widely publicized contracting opportunior companies undertaking work beyond their capabil- ties; awards to companies that meet contractual reity; bribery; favoritism; and unfair conduct. Abdul- quirements and make best offers; clear and fair proRahman et al. (2010) also reported that 74% of re- curement rules; transparent, predictable procurement spondents to a questionnaire survey in Malaysia agreed processes and results; and accountable public sectors. that the construction industry was tainted by unethical practices. Under-bidding, bid-shopping and cutting, corruption, negligence, front-end loading, claims 3 INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENTS and payment games were among reported unethical IN INTEGRITY STANDARDS practices prevalent in Malaysia. More than two thirds of respondents in the study of Abdul-Rahman et al. Many countries have legislated against corruption and (2010) were not satisfied with the quality of construc- other unethical practices, not only in construction, but tion industry products. Ninety percent of the respon- other industries as well. Efforts are being taken to dents stated that unethical practices contributed to increase ethical standards and integrity among profespoor quality works. In the study by Zou (2006), it was sionals in many regions of the world. established that in China, corruption existed among all stakeholders and at every phase of project pro- 3.1 Developments in Enhancing Integrity curement from conception, design, tendering and conin South Africa and the USA struction, right through to commissioning and handover. Zou (2006) criticized the effect of corruption in According to Pearl et al. (2005), legislation relating China, where newly constructed bridges and dams col- to the built environment professional sector in South lapsed and just-completed highways showed signs of Africa was overhauled in the 1990s and a new suite of Acts of Parliament were promulgated in 2000 to enfailure soon after completion. hance professionalism in the industry. In the USA, the Construction Management Association of America up2.3 Unethical Practices Cited in Africa dated its Code of Ethics to include a wider range of proIn Africa, Oyewobi et al. (2011), Shakantu fessional services among construction players (CMAA (2006), Shakantu and Chiocha (2009), Osei-Tutu et al. 2006). Izraeli and Schwartz (2000) also stated that in (2009), Bowen et al. (2007b), Bowen et al. (2007a) 1991, the USA Congress enacted the Federal Sentencand Mwiya et al. (2009) reported the prevalence of ing Guidelines. The aim was to create incentives for unethical practices in Nigeria, Malawi, Ghana, South ethics compliance programs. The guidelines also: imAfrica and Zambia respectively. Identified unethical pose sentences on offenders as deterrence; encourage practices included: collusion; price differentiation; bid development of internal mechanisms to identify, report, rigging; tampering with claims and payment certifi- and prevent unethical practices in organizations; and cates; conflict of interest; bribery; embezzlement; ten- to apply punishment justly. der manipulation; negligence; lack of integrity; and fraud. 3.2 Legislation Against Bribery in the

United Kingdom 2.4 Prevention of Unethical Practices The focus on ethics and integrity systems support organizations and their employees when operating in an environment where the law is not clear. Integrity has

The government in the United Kingdom (UK) passed the Bribery Act of 2010 (Shamdasani 2012). The Act is an anti-corruption law which introduced an offence of failure by an organization to prevent bribery. Sham-

107


dasani (2012) stated that the Bribery Act encourages growth and reward of companies that are ethically managed. The Law is applicable to UK companies that operate within the country and abroad. If a company has procedures to prevent bribery, such structures could be used as defense in courts of law, but not as a mitigation factor. As a result of this piece of legislation, many construction organizations in the UK have sought ways of putting controls in place to detect wrongdoing. Arising from this Act, the British Standards Institute (BSI 2011) developed an Antibribery Management System (ABMS) referred to as BS 10500:2011. BS 10500:2011 aims to put controls in place to identify risks early and take appropriate action. The other objective of BS10500:2011 is to ensure that member organizations, on certification, have robust anti-bribery practices in place.

Penal Code Act, CAP 87 is the principal legislation prescribing penalties for crimes and criminalizing certain practices relating to procurement of infrastructure in Zambia. This Act contains a number of provisions, among them, those dealing with corruption, abuse of office and the exercise of public authority. The Competition and Fair Trading Act, CAP 417 of 1994 of the Laws of Zambia was enacted to encourage competition in the economy by: prohibiting anti-competitive trade practices; regulating monopolies and the concentration of economic power; protecting consumer welfare; strengthening efficiency of production and distribution of goods and services; and expanding the national entrepreneurial base.

5 STUDY METHODOLOGY

3.3 Importance of Certification in Organi- This paper presents the findings of a study into unethical practices in the construction industry in Zamzations Ethics Intelligence (2012) stated that organizations develop anti-corruption compliance programs for various reasons, depending on their business strategy. Others go a step further to seek certification. According to Ethics Intelligence (2012), the advantages of certification include: increasing visibility of commitments; fostering employee support for compliance programs; promoting a clear and identifiable standard for compliance policies and procedures; providing quality assurance of compliance programs and a benchmark against other companies; and gives evidence of a company’s compliance efforts to prosecutors. Certification increases the visibility of management commitments to prevent misconduct. In the current era of increased public hostility towards ethical misconduct, it has become crucial for companies to prove their commitment to honesty and transparency. Compliance certification encourages companies to implement prevention policies and procedures designed not only to reduce legal risk, but also to gain a competitive advantage over others. Whether during an investigation or prosecution, certification provides judicial authorities with externally verifiable evidence of steps taken by a company to prevent misconduct. In terms of ethical compliance, certification is the emerging next frontier for construction organizations to embrace modern management systems.

4 INTEGRITY LEGISLATION IN ZAMBIA In Zambia, various pieces of legislation have been put in place to combat corruption and other illegal activities. These include the Anti-Corruption Act No. 42 of 1996, the Zambia Public Procurement Authority Act No. 12 of 2008, the National Council for Construction Act of 2003, and the Public Interest Disclosure (Protection of Whistleblowers) Act No. 4 of 2010. The

bia. The main objective of the study was to develop a framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations in the country. Structured interviews and a questionnaire survey were used to collect data. The data was collected between August 2011 and June 2012.

5.1 Structured Interviews A purposive, non-probability sampling method was adopted for interviews. Fifteen professionals with 10 to 35 years of experience in the construction sector were identified and interviewed. The interviewees were from the public sector, quasi-government organizations, private companies, co-operating partners and other stakeholders such as Transparency International Zambia, the Anti-Corruption Commission and the Zambia Public Procurement Authority. Interview questions were pilot-tested on an architect, an engineer and a quantity surveyor. These were identified to be from the three main professions in construction in Zambia at the time of the study. The purpose of the pilot was to determine whether the questions and instructions were clear and unambiguous and if respondents found the questions appropriate. All questions that were inappropriate were either reconstructed or removed. It was established that respondents preferred to remain anonymous as most of the questions were sensitive. Information identifying individuals and the organizations they represented was removed to maintain anonymity.

5.2 Questionnaire Survey A stratified random sample was used in the questionnaire survey. Stratified random sampling ensures that a sample adequately represents selected groups in the population. The first step was to classify the population into strata, or groups, on the basis of common

108


characteristics such as profession. The classification was done so that every member of the population was found in one and only one stratum. Separate random samples were then drawn from each stratum. The population was divided into: consulting firms representing engineers, architects and quantity surveyors; contractors; major project sponsors; other groups such as the Anti-Corruption Commission, Transparency International Zambia, National Council for Construction, and Zambia Public Procurement Authority; as well as co-operating partners such as the World Bank, Danish International Development Agency, European Union, Japanese International Co-operation Agency, German Technical Co-operation and the Department for International Development. A stratified group of 361 firms were sampled out of a population of 565 companies as indicated in Table 1. Three hundred and sixty-one copies of the questionnaire were prepared for distribution among the targeted sample. Since 71 of the sampled organizations could not be located, only 290 of the prepared questionnaires were administered either by hand or email. Seventy-four completed questionnaires were received after follow-up telephone calls and reminder emails. Using the formula by Neumann (2000), the active response rate was calculated as 26%. Easterby-Smith et al. (2006) stated that the expected construction industry norm is of the order 25% to 30% if appropriate measures for increasing the response rate are undertaken. Therefore, the response rate of 26% was determined to be acceptable.

6 INTEGRITY INDICATORS The development of the framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations was achieved by taking into consideration reviewed literature, interviews and questionnaire survey results. The framework comprises the processes

that influence the integrity capabilities of an organization. It is aimed at providing construction organizations with a tool for assessing the presence of integrity systems and to determine and put in place strategies to bridge identified gaps. The need for an effective and structured instrument for managing systems in construction organizations cannot be over-emphasized. It is important for the purpose of innovation, efficiency and effectiveness (Kululanga 1999). Kanoglu and Gulen (2013) advised that the construction industry need practical models that do not create resistance from professionals and can easily be implemented in practice. Egan (1998) also advocated for the development of management measuring instruments that should help the assessment of construction organizations’ capabilities as one of the means towards modernizing business processes of companies in the sector. Interviewees and questionnaire respondents identified various unethical practices, out of those brought to light from reviewed literature, that were prevalent in the construction industry in Zambia. They included: compromise on quality of goods or works; leaked project base cost; ambiguous variations; collusion; conflict of interest; false representation of facts; corruption and bribery; unfair tendering process; lack of confidentiality; systematic concealment of errors; and fraud. In spite of the various unethical practices identified, it was established that 74% of the respondent firms to the questionnaire did not have systems in place for assessing compliance to integrity. Systems to assess the presence of integrity in construction organizations were lacking. It was therefore determined important that a framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems be developed for construction organizations. From the reviewed literature, results of the interviews and the questionnaire survey, it was determined that the statement indicators identified and discussed below were important in the assessment of the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations.

Table 1. Sampling frame for different strata of surveyed respondents No. 1

Stratum

2 3 4

Consultants Architects Engineers Quantity Surveyors Grades 1-3 Contractors Clients Interest groups

5

Cooperating Partners

Type of organization Zambia Institute of Architects Association of Consulting Engineers Institute of quantity surveyors Association of Building Contractors Major project promoters Anti-corruption Commission, Transparency International Zambia, National Council for Construction, Zambia Public Procurement Authority World Bank, Danish International Development Agency, European Union, Japanese International Cooperation Agency, German Technical Cooperation, Department for International Development

Total

109

Population

Sample size

92 27 39 364 33 4

74 25 35 187 30 4

6

6

565

361


6.1 Organizational Strategy

egy. Dubinsky and Richter (2009) stated that infrastructure covers how the ethics function is structured, Ethics should be embedded in individual practices of staffed, and resourced, as well as its formal and inpersons that conceive the idea of establishing a con- formal reporting relationships. Infrastructure also instruction organization. This is important at conception cludes the roles and responsibilities of those individuals of a construction organization right through its devel- who are assigned to implement the ethics and integrity opment and operation. Clear vision, mission, values, function. Existence of formal structures signifies the strategic objectives and operational plans incorporat- integration of the ethics function into the organizaing ethics are cardinal in ensuring compliance to ethics. tion. Sixty-six percent of the respondents to the quesA definite and clear strategy was identified as a start- tionnaire survey agreed that the existence of corporate ing point in the development of ethical compliance in structures to support ethics can be used to assess the construction organizations. Ethics embedded in an or- presence of integrity systems in an organization. Nine ganization’s strategy form the bedrock for compliance. out of 15 of the interviewees also agreed to this asserIn their study, Zayed et al. (2012) also identified clear tion. In their study, Zayed et al. (2012) also identified vision, mission and goals as critical success factors af- organizational structures as one of the critical success fecting organizational performance. factors affecting organizational performance.

6.2 Leadership Commitment to Ethics

6.4 Existence of an Ethical Culture

Top leadership practices reflect on the whole organization (Doran 2004). Kaptein and Avelino (2005) stated that good leadership serves as a role model, leads an organization by example, and helps to develop strategies in combating unethical practices. Good leadership is also important in the formulation, dissemination and enforcement of Codes of Ethics for organizations. Leadership, according to Dubinsky and Richter (2009) addresses how an organization is accountable for promotion of ethics and integrity. Kaptein and Avelino (2005) stated that two major requirements that have to be met to improve the ethics of business are increasing management awareness of irregularities within the organization; and increasing management sensitivity regarding the extent to which an organizational structure and culture stimulates ethical conduct. Kaptein (2003) observed leadership is not only in the sense of setting a good example, but also stimulating ethical conduct of employees, having a sound understanding of ethics quality and progress of the organization, and taking appropriate measures on the basis of that knowledge. In the study, 14 out of 15 interviewees identified top leadership commitment as one of the factors at organizational level that lead employees to act ethically. In the questionnaire survey, 94% of the respondents also agreed that top leadership commitment to ethical programs can be used to assess the presence of integrity systems in an organization. Results of the questionnaire survey also indicated that the role of leadership was to provide strategic direction on ethics; formulate, disseminate and enforce the Codes of Ethics; and provide the character of the organization. Ninety-six percent of the respondents further stated that having good and committed leadership to ethics was important in combating unethical practices.

6.3 Existence of Formal Structures Formal structures include the way a company organizes its ethics function as part of its overall business strat-

Organizational culture includes both written and unwritten rules that dictate how work is performed. The existence of an ethical culture explores the degree to which an organization focuses on shaping its ethical conduct through mission, vision, strategy and structure. Bommer et al. (1987) stated that an organization’s culture is reflected in the attitudes and values, management styles and problem solving behavior of its employees. In the interviews, 13 out of the 15 interviewees agreed that organizational culture was one of the factors that led employees to act ethically. Eighty-six percent of the respondents to the questionnaire survey also agreed that organizational culture can be used as means to assess the presence of integrity systems in an organization.

6.5 Code of Ethics A Code of Ethics prescribes how employees are expected to conduct themselves when faced with an ethical dilemma (Liu et al. 2004). The results of the interviews indicated that 11 out 15 interviewees agreed that the existence of a Code of Ethics in an organization can be used to assess presence of integrity systems. Interviewees also agreed that lack of effective communication and dissemination of the Codes of Ethics; inconsistencies in its application; and the failure to punish persons who breach it were major obstacles in the implementation of the codes in construction organizations in Zambia. Ninety-three percent of questionnaire respondents agreed that the existence of a Code of Ethics can be used to assess the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations. However, the construction industry is comprised of diverse professional groups, each with its own Code of Ethics. Eight-nine percent of the respondents to the questionnaire agreed that having an industry-wide Code of Ethics was one of the solutions to combating unethical practices in the construction sector.

110


6.6 Compliance Programs

6.9 Reporting Systems of Unethical Conduct

Kaptein and Avelino (2005) stated that a compliance program articulates a company’s business values, principles and standards. Kaplan (2011) identified: effectiveness in helping companies detect wrongdoing early; employees’ likelihood to report wrongdoing within the company; opportunities for whistleblowers to report misdeeds and the company to deal with unethical practices internally; demonstration to stakeholders and clients that the company is responsible and trustworthy; and in some countries, punishment due to unethical misconduct may be less severe for companies as positive aspects of having compliance programs in place. Results also indicated that 11 out of 15 interviewees and 94% of respondents to the questionnaire survey agreed that the existence of compliance programs can be used to assess the presence of integrity systems in organizations.

Reporting systems include how ethical misconduct and dilemma are reported within the organization and to external parties such as law enforcement agencies. Transparency International (2008) stated that, if put in place, a framework within an organization to deal with self-incrimination and whistle blowing could determine levels of integrity. Kaptein and Avelino (2005) stated that once identified, measures should be undertaken to understand unethical practices, root causes and how to deal with them in future should they recur. Results of the interviews indicated that 14 out of 15 interviewees agreed that reporting systems should be one of the strategies to combat unethical practices. Ninety-four percent of questionnaire respondents agreed that reports of unethical behavior can be used by management in an organization to assess presence of integrity systems.

6.7 Training and Education

6.10 Disciplinary and Reward Procedures

Doran (2004) stated that to help ensure ethical compliance in an organization, there was need for more training and education in ethics. Ninety percent of respondents to the survey by (Doran 2004) agreed to this statement. Kidd (2011) argued that in today’s dynamic environment, with diverse job requirements, training needs to be relevant, frequent and targeted at each particular audience. Ten out of 15 interviewees in the study reported in this paper agreed that provision of training and education in ethics was one of the strategies necessary to prevent unethical practices in organizations. Ninety-seven percent of respondents to the questionnaire survey also agreed that the extent of training and education provided in ethics should be considered in the assessment of the presence of integrity systems in an organization. Ninety-six percent of the respondents stated that training and education in ethics is an important tool in combating unethical practices.

6.8 Communication of Ethical Issues Communication describes how ethics and integrity are articulated and promoted, both internally and externally (Dubinsky and Richter 2009). Results of the interviews indicated that 13 out 15 interviewees agreed that frequent communication of ethical issues to employees should be one of the strategies in the prevention of unethical practices in an organization. Ninety percent of respondents to the questionnaire survey agreed that the frequency of communication of ethical issues to employees in an organization can be used to assess the presence of integrity systems. An organization needs to have a clear communications strategy with regard to ethical matters.

Disciplinary and reward procedures outline how an organization promotes ethical conduct through performance appraisal. Ethical compliance should also be linked to compensation (Dubinsky and Richter 2009). The results of the interviews showed that 12 out of 15 interviewees agreed that the type of internal disciplinary procedures was one of the factors that led employees to act ethically. Eighty-six percent of the questionnaire respondents agreed that the type of punitive and reward system put in place can be used to assess the presence of integrity systems in an organization. Eight-five percent of the respondents stated that punishment and cancellation of practicing licenses of offenders based on Codes of Ethics should be one of the solutions to combating unethical practices in construction organizations. Eighty percent of respondents advocated for indictment and conviction of offenders.

7 FRAMEWORK FOR ASSESSING INTEGRITY SYSTEMS IN CONSTRUCTION ORGANIZATIONS The framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations, shown in Table 2, was constructed by taking into consideration the ten statement indicators discussed above.

7.1 Importance of Elements in the Framework Each element in the framework addresses a certain area in the management process aimed at improving ethical compliance in an organization. All elements contribute to the overall ethical health of an organization. The framework was developed based on statement indicators that were linked to scores. The scores provide an

111


overview of the strengths and weaknesses of integrity capabilities of construction organizations. Each element of the framework was sub-divided into five separate scores. Score 5 was the highest, depicting ethical compliance. Score 1 was the lowest and indicated lower or non-compliance to ethics in a construction organization.

7.2 Importance of Scores of Elements in the Framework The scores facilitate rapid assessment of the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations for each element in the framework. The various elements are aggregated and a mean calculated to determine the overall score for an organization. The overall Score of 1 or 2 meant that the performance of the organization on integrity compliance was below average, suggesting lower or non-ethical compliance in the organization; while Score 3 was average, indicating that ethical systems were fairly developed. Scores 4 or 5 were above average and indicated that the organization had well established ethics programs with respect to all the elements.

7.3 Validation of the Framework

form of expert seal of approval in cases where subjective judgment might have no other alternative.

7.4 Process of Validation Seven questionnaires were prepared and hand-delivered to senior officers of organizations dealing in or having an interest in the integrity of construction organizations. The organizations were: the Anticorruption Commission; Transparent International Zambia; Buildings Department in the Ministry of Transport, Works, Supply and Communications; the Road Development Agency; Lusaka City Council; National Road Fund Agency; and the National Council for Construction. These represented some of the main stakeholders of the construction industry in Zambia. The National Council for Construction is the regulator of all contractors in the country. The Anti-Corruption Commission and Transparency International Zambia are involved in ensuring a corrupt-free construction industry. Lusaka City Council, Road Development Agency, Buildings Department and the National Road Fund Agency are some of the major players and financiers of construction projects in Zambia.

7.5 Validation Results

Having developed the framework, it was next validated. Validation implies that something is verified and that the adjudication is conducted by a person or body competent to judge (Muya 1999). The competence of the adjudicator has to be specific to that which is being judged. The validation process is an important step to guarantee that the developed model best fits the available data (Zayed et al. 2012). Models are tested statistically, logically and practically to determine whether they are efficient in predicting real world results. Macal (2005) stated that verification and validation are essential parts of the model development process for it to be accepted and used to support decision making. Martini and Henaff (2010) also stated that validation of a model focuses on whether it is adequate for the purpose it is to be used for. They further stated that validation includes evaluations of the model’s theoretical soundness and mathematical integrity. Church (1983) argued that the concept of validation, judgment and standards is neither based on empirical nor theoretical evidence. Empirically, anyone conducting the process of validation is unlikely to properly account for the basis of their judgment or define the relevant standards they used. Theoretically, there would be no privileged access to presupposed knowledge and values by which a pure and unchallenged judgment might be made. Muya (1999) stated that although the concept of validation appears to be undermined by these weaknesses, it was an accepted form of critique. The arguments above recognize the philosophical weaknesses which underlie the process of validation. Church (1983) nevertheless stated that validation still remained the accepted

The seven respondents to the validation of the framework for measuring the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations were asked to state the functionality, user-friendliness and usefulness of the framework. They were further asked to state whether they had used or come across a framework for assessing integrity systems in construction organizations. The results of the validation process are presented below.

Experience with Integrity Measuring Frameworks Six of the respondents indicated that they had never come across a framework for assessing integrity systems in construction organizations. Only one suggested they had. The respondent that indicated they had come across such a framework could not, however, provide further evidence where it could be accessed. These results suggested that the majority of the respondents had never seen any framework for assessing the presence integrity systems in construction organizations.

Usefulness and Usability of the Framework The respondents were asked to state whether the framework could be applied in the construction industry and whether it was useful. All the respondents agreed. Kululanga (1999) stated that usability included the degree to which users are able to use the tool without assistance from academics or consultants. Usability also addresses the application to various groups in the same industry.

112


Potential to Improve Ethical Compliance in the there was positive relationship between and among all Construction Industry the variables. Although these results show a linear relaThe seven respondents were also asked to state whether the framework could be used to improve ethical compliance in construction organizations. All of the seven respondents agreed.

8 ASSESSMENT OF INTEGRITY METRICS IN CONSTRUCTION ORGANIZATIONS IN ZAMBIA After its validation, information on integrity metrics based on the framework was elicited from construction organizations. Ninety copies of the questionnaire were distributed to: 30 contractors; 30 client organizations; 10 engineering, 10 architectural, and 10 quantity surveying consulting firms. Forty-eight organizations completed the questionnaires, giving a response rate of 53 percent. This was deemed to be an acceptable response rate. Figure 1 presents the types of firms that responded to the questionnaire.

tionship, Higgins (2005) stated that they do not reveal whether one variable actually causes changes in another. When two variables are correlated, it means that when one of them changes, the other seems to change predictably and correspondingly in the same direction. Positive correlation, therefore, means that an improvement in one variable will more likely have a positive effect on the other variables (Crossman 2011). Kubinger et al. (2007), nevertheless, stated that p < 0.05 could unequivocally be interpreted that variables either had a negative or positive dependency. A correlation exercise was conducted between the type of construction organizations and the ten variables in the framework. The construction organizations were: contactors; consulting firms; and client organizations. It was established that there was no correlation between type of construction organizations and the ten variables in the framework. This meant that the type of organization did not have any influence on the ten variables.

8.1 Results of the Assessment of Integrity 9 CASE STUDIES TO VERIFY AUTHENTICITY OF Systems QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSES An analysis was undertaken to compare and contrast the results of the information gathered from construction organizations based on the framework. This was done among sampled contractors, clients and consultants. The results of the assessment are depicted in Figure 2. The results were compared for all the ten elements. They suggested that integrity systems in construction organizations were moderately developed in: organizational strategies; top leadership commitment; existence of ethical culture; Code of Ethics; compliance programs; and disciplinary and reward procedures. However, established structures to support ethics; provision of training and education in ethics; and communication of ethical issues to stakeholders were determined to be weak in the surveyed organizations.

8.2 Correlation of Factors in the Framework Field (2000) defined correlation as a measure of linear relationships between variables. A correlation coefficient, therefore, measures the strength and direction of a linear association between two variables. Correlation analysis was undertaken between and among all the ten elements in the framework, based on the 48 completed questionnaires in Section 5.2, using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Results of the correlation exercise are shown in Table 3. The purpose for undertaking the correlation exercise was to determine the relationships among the elements. At p < 0.05, correlation was determined to be significant among all the elements. The results suggested that

Three case studies were conducted to verify the authenticity of the results of integrity systems in the surveyed construction organizations. The objective was to triangulate the results, i.e., to verify whether respondents to the questionnaire for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations were truthful by physically getting baseline information on three of the companies surveyed earlier. The sample population of organizations that responded to the questionnaire on industry metrics was clustered into three groups, representing contractors, consulting firms and client organizations. One organization was randomly selected from each cluster. For the purpose of maintaining anonymity, the firms in the case studies were called A, B and C. Baseline information was obtained from the three construction organizations on availability of documentation on the ten variables of the framework.

9.1 Integrity Baseline Information Available at Organization A Firm A was a client organization mandated to construct road infrastructure in Zambia. A physical verification of available documents indicated that 6 out of 10 of the answers by Firm A to the questionnaire on industry metrics were supported by documentation.

9.2 Integrity Baseline Information Available at Organization B Firm B was a contractor involved in the construction of buildings, roads, bridges and other civil engineering

113


infrastructure. A physical verification of available documents at Firm B indicated that 7 out of 10 of the answers to the questionnaire on industry metrics were supported by documentation.

tribution to respondents not to self-incriminate. Mwiya et al. (2009) stated that the subject of ethics was considered sensitive and that information was normally concealed. Organizations were not willing to self-incriminate and subject themselves to scrutiny on 9.3 Integrity Baseline Information Avail- processes and procedures that they had put in place. able at Organization C All surveyed companies wanted to be seen to be ethical, but not all of them practiced ethics. In his Firm C was providing quantity surveying services to study, Doran (2004) stated that only 16% of the rethe construction sector at the time of the case study. spondents would “never” hire or work with a conOnly 4 out of 10 answers to the questions regarding the struction organization they considered to be unethical. presence of integrity systems in Firm C were supported From his results, Doran (2004) concluded that ethical by available documents. considerations were not one of the main criteria for procurement of consultants or contractors. Other results 9.4 Significance of Results of the Case from Doran (2004) indicated that 32% of client organiStudy zations would “rarely” work with unethical contractors The results of the case study suggested that when unless under pressure; 24% stated that they “might” self-administered questionnaires were used, some firms work with unethical contractors if circumstances dicwere not honest in their answers. The sensitive nature tated; and 24% stated they “certainly” could work with of unethical conduct could have had a significant con- an unethical construction organization.

Figure 1. Organizations which respondents belonged to questionnaire

Figure 2. Assessment of integrity systems in construction organizations in Zambia 114

a. Ethics assigned to an officer as part of the many responsibilities. b. Officer assigned to undertake ethics not held accountable for ethics management in the organization

a. Ethics and integrity viewed as compliance with regulations, rules and procedures governing ethical conduct by leaders b. Role models not visible in organization c. Leadership uses some form of procedures available in disciplinary code to deal with ethical dilemmas c. Leadership not up to date with required ethical principles in the organizations a. Leadership not involved in ethics management b. Leadership does not encourage ethics compliance

a. No visible ethical content in mission, values, visions, goals, and objectives. b. Ethics and integrity neither recognized nor discussed or practiced

1

2

a. Ethical structures fairly established in the organization b. An ethics officer at middle or lower management level appointed to manage ethical programs c. Programs on ethics included in the budget

a. Some leaders act as champions and ethical role models in the organization b. Promotion of ethics in organization seen as part of their accountabilities and responsibilities c. Leaders generally view ethics and integrity as management level function

a. Ethics incorporated in some aspects of strategy such as vision and goals b. Ethics discussed openly during meeting by employees as ethical conduct is seen as a requirement for organizational and individual performance c. Organization has identified and defined its core ethical values and communicates them regularly d. Ethical values and conduct is connected to organizational success a. Ethics defined to mean formal procedures, regulations and rules governing ethical conduct b. Ethics is acknowledged openly but not used as a strategic business tool c. No intentions to imbed ethics in organizational practices and strategy

3

115 a. Company structures do not incorporate ethics b. No officer appointed to deal with ethics

a. Ethics structures well established and headed by an officer at senior level b. Ethics function supported by adequate budget c. Ethics management recognized as unique and specialized and officers appointed according to qualification

a. Demonstration of leadership in integration of ethics and strategy in all business units b. Integration of ethical conduct into organizational culture c. Training and education in ethics part of leadership responsibility

a. Employees provided with clear mission, vision, values, and objectives that integrate ethics b. Integrity policies, regulations and rules articulated in strategic plans c. Business recognizes ethical compliance as being good practice and upholding ethical-principles over seeking profit as the guiding rule

4

Existence of formal structures a. Ethics structures well developed and integrated across all business units and is headed by senior manager or director. b. Ethics recognized as a strategic tool for organizational performance c. Ethics form as integral part of annual work plans and reports d. Adequate ethics budget across all business units and head office provided

Top leadership commitment a. Leadership provide strategic direction on ethical matters b. Leadership seen as role models and manage ethics across the entire organization c. Competency in ethics seen as essential for supervisors’ and managers’ appointment d. Leaders include ethics in Annual work plans and reports e. Leaders involved in risk assessment and management

Organizational strategy a. Ethics integrated in mission, values, vision, goals, strategic objectives of the organization b. Clearly articulate commitment for integrity c. Organization is benchmarked by other construction organizations e. Leaders involved in risk assessment and management

Score 5

a. Ethics not integrated as part of organizational culture b. Employees rarely or not encouraged to discuss ethical issues

a. Employees not safe to freely talk about ethical misconduct in the organization b. Culture remains one of compliance to rules and regulations c. Organization uses the term ’ethical culture’ symbolically without attachment of meaning

a. Culture of organization relatively open to allow free discussions of ethical matters b. History and mission with respect to ethics of organization are well known

a. Organization allows employees to freely discuss ethics b. Good ethical conduct visible in organization c. History and mission with respect to ethics of organization are well known and documented d. Role models visible in organization

Existence of ethical culture a. Organization allows employees to freely discuss ethics b. Ethics integrated as part of culture of organization c. There is mutual trust and fairness practiced by all employees and management d. Integrity role models easily identified e. Annual reports indicate commitment to ethical behavior.

Table 2. Framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations

a. No Code of Ethics in place b. Employees in the organization do not talk about ethics

a. Individual moral codes or different professional Codes of Ethics used by Officers in organization b. Organization view compliance to contract and other regulations as being ethical c. Code of Ethics not freely discussed by employees

Code of Ethics a. Code of Ethics in place and distributed to all employees and signed-for b. Organization has champion of Code of Ethics at high level c. Code of Ethics part of overall strategy and reviewed regularly d. Codes of Ethics provides concrete actionable guidance to real situations and methods of resolution to ethical dilemma, which include punishment for non- compliance a. Organization has Code of Ethics and has been disseminated to all employees at Business Units b. Visible champions of Code of Ethics in organization c. Code of Ethics regularly discussed as part of work d. Codes of Ethics provides concrete actionable guidance to real situations and methods of resolution to ethical dilemmas a. Organization has formal Code of Ethics which is available at head office b. Champion of Code of Ethics visible in organization c. Employees freely discuss the contents of the Code of Ethics


a. Training and education in ethics a strategic objective in the organization b. Organization exposes employees to all levels training and education with challenging ethical dilemmas c. Role based training in ethics d. New employees provided with induction course

a. Ethics training provided as stand-alone course rather than integrated with overall training curriculum b. Training focus on rules and organizational expectations rather than on ethical analysis c. Training provided is not role based d. New employees provided with induction course

a. Training on ethics is brief and focus on informing employees about policies and meeting legal requirements b. Persons designing and delivering training do not have specific expertise in ethics

a. There is no formal ethics training and education provided to employees

a. Compliance programs disseminated to all employees at business units and head office b. Employees are knowledgeable of ethical compliance programs c. Organization has methods of resolving ethical conflicts d. Monitoring, control and evaluation of ethical practices in place e. Organization has policy on hospitality and gifts f. Conflict of interest policy in place

a. Policies, guidelines and rules on ethical conduct disseminated to all employees b. Policies, guidelines and rules on ethical conduct updated periodically c. Compliance programs discussed periodically among employees d. Some form of monitoring and control for ethical conduct exist

a. Employees mistakenly refer to organization rules and regulations as compliance compliance programs

a. No compliance programs in place

4

3

2

1

Training and education programs in ethics a. Training and education in ethics included as part of strategy and employees’ development b. Ethics training focused on enhancing ethical awareness, decision making and leadership c. Training on ethics evaluated and reviewed periodically d. Role based training in ethics e. new employees inducted in ethics

a. Leaders uphold the Code of Ethics and Conduct and regularly refer to it in speeches b. Organization demonstrates transparency and accountability in decision making c. Organization benchmarks best practice d. Monitoring , control and evaluation of ethical practices are in place and compared with best practice e. Organization has policy on hospitality and gifts f. Conflict of interest policy in place

Compliance programs

5

Score

a. Communications is part of organization strategy b. The function of ethics included in annual plans and reports c. Leaders and managers promote ethics internally and externally d. Organization policy on dealing with media on ethical matters in place e. Organizational has live website that has active ethical content f. Organization communicates its policy on hospitality and gifts to media and stakeholders a. Organization has communications policy of ethical matters b. Organization communicates ethics initiatives to employees and external stakeholders c. Website in place but content on ethics not updated regularly d. Media dealt with on ad-hoc basis e. No policy on hospitality and gifts communicated to media or stakeholders a. Some managers talk about ethics informally or on ad hoc basis b. Someone in management or human resources occasionally reminds employees about policies and compliance requirements c. Static website available with no content on d. No policy on hospitality and gifts a. There is no formal communications or discussions about ethics and integrity b. No website in ethics is available

a. Ethics and its communications used as strategy in trust and reputational building b. Organization discusses ethics in meetings and is included in negotiation of contracts and annual reports c. Organization has policy to deal with media and other stakeholders d. Communication to employees and outsiders highlights ethics and values e. Organizational has live website that has active ethical content

Communication of ethical issues

116

a. Employees do not speak freely about ethics b. Employees not free to report unethical practices c. Organization discourages anonymous complaints of unethical practices

a. Employees able to report unethical practices to manager b. Manager or supervisor decides how to deal with reported unethical practices

a. Organization provides employees and external stakeholders with confidential channels to report unethical practices b. Secure hot-line facility in place to receive reports of unethical practices c. Management decides on what is to be reported

Reporting systems of unethical conduct a. Employees openly speak about unethical practices b. Channels of reporting unethical practices are confidential and anonymous c. Whistleblower policy is in place d. Procedures for selfincrimination are available e. Reports on unethical practices part of annual reporting f. Policy of dealing with external law enforcement agencies is in place g. Ethics officer responsible for management of reports of unethical practices is available a. Protection provided to whistleblowers against retaliation b. Instructions about the hot-line provided internally and externally c. Reports received from hot-line and action taken are quantified d. Guidelines for internal investigations and fact finding available e. Secure hot-line in place f. Senior management decide on which cases to be forwarded to law enforcement agencies

a. No policy or procedures exist for addressing breaches of ethics b. No explicit reward system available for ethical conduct

a. Consequences of ethical misconduct only addressed if failure has adverse effect on organization b. Concerns on ethical misconduct not directly addressed by management

a. Disciplinary and reward procedures sometimes used to punish breaches and reward good conduct b. Procedure for reporting and investigating ethical misconduct are fair and not selective c. Formal performance appraisal available but may not specifically include ethics

a. Disciplinary and grievance policy in place to deal with ethical dilemmas b. Organization recognizes and rewards ethical conduct c. Ethics embedded in performance appraisal and employees rewarded accordingly

a. Disciplinary and grievance policy in place for resolving ethical dilemmas b. Best practice in disciplinary and reward procedures benchmarked c. Promotion linked to ethical conduct d. Leaders motivate employees to act ethically through rewards e. Discipline and rewards imbedded in organization strategy

Disciplinary and reward policy

Table 2. Framework for assessing the presence of integrity systems in construction organizations (continued) Muya and Mukumbwa/International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction 2 (2013) 106-119


Table 3. Sampling frame for different strata of surveyed respondents N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N6

N7

N8

N9

N10

Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N

N1

N2

N3

N4

N5

N6

N7

N9

N10

1

.553** 0 48 1

.525** 0 48 .597** 0 48 1

.383** 0.007 48 .493** 0 48 .552** 0 48 1

.631** 0 48 .595** 0 48 .576** 0 48 .514** 0 48 1

.646** 0 48 .547** 0 48 .573** 0 48 .455** 0.001 48 .767** 0 48 1

.545** 0 48 .465** 0.001 48 .562** 0 48 .420** 0.003 48 .589** 0 48 .656** 0 48 1

.608** 0 48 .654** 0 48 .774** 0 48 .530** 0 48 .706** 0 48 .750** 0 48 .563** 0 48 .821** 0 48 1

.354** 0.015 48 .488** 0.001 48 .331** 0.023 48 .444** 0.002 48 .549** 0 48 .404** 0.005 48 .565** 0 48 .487** 0.001 48 .561** 0 48 1

48 .553** 0 48 .525** 0 48 .383** 0.007 48 .631** 0 48 .646** 0 48 .545** 0 48 .563** 0 48 .608** 0 48 .354** 0.015 48

48 .597** 0 48 .493** 0 48 .595** 0 48 .547** 0 48 .465** 0.001 48 .546** 0 48 .654** 0 48 .488** 0.001 48

48 .552** 0 48 .576** 0 48 .573** 0 48 .562** 0 48 .707** 0 48 .774** 0 48 .331** 0.023 48

48 .514** 0 48 .455** 0.001 48 .420** 0.003 48 .526** 0 48 .530** 0 48 .444** 0.002 48

48 .767** 0 48 .589** 0 48 .599** 0 48 .706** 0 48 .549** 0 48

48 .656** 0 48 .591** 0 48 .750** 0 48 .404** 0.005 48

48 .540** 0 48 .563** 0 48 .565** 0 48

48 .561** 0 48

48

Note: ** Correlation is significant at the p < 0.05 level; N: Number of observations; N1 - Organizational strategy; N2: Top leadership commitment; N3: Formal structures; N4: Culture; N5: Code of ethics; N6: Compliance programs; N7: Training and Education; N8: Communications; N9: Reporting systems; N10: Disciplinary and reward procedures

10 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS

regarding the results presented in this paper. The proposed framework was only tested in Zambia. To determine its usefulness, suitability and acceptability, the From the results presented in this paper, there was an framework needs to be tested in other countries as well. acknowledged need for the strengthening of integrity Additionally, ethics is a sensitive subject. As estabsystems in construction organizations in Zambia. The lished in the three case studies reported in this paper, majority of the interviewed construction organizations firms tend not to answer questions regarding integrity in the country acknowledged the need to operate eth- and ethics honestly. It seems that to obtain reliable ically. All companies surveyed portrayed an ethical results, the case study approach, in which documenimage, even though none knew of any best practice tary evidence is elicited, provides a more appropriate integrity system. All respondents to the question- method for investigating ethical issues compared to einaire survey in the study acknowledged that uneth- ther interviews or questionnaires which were used in ical practices were prevalent in the construction in- this study. dustry in Zambia. The framework to assess the presence of integrity systems that was developed and reREFERENCES ported in this paper could, therefore, be a useful tool in evaluating ethical compliance in construction orAbdul-Rahman, H., Wang, C., and Yap, X. W. (2010). ganizations. The framework could be used as a tool “How professional ethics impact construction quality: for self-assessment by construction organizations. SelfPerception and evidence in the fast developing econassessment can bring to management’s attention areas omy.” Scientific and Research Essays, 5(23), 3742– that require improvement. 3749. There were limitations that need to be acknowledged Barnard, A., Schurink, W., and de Beer, M. (2008). 117


“A conceptual framework of integrity.” SA Journal of Industrial Psychology, 34(2), 40–49. Bommer, M., Gratto, C., Gravander, J., and Tuttle, M. (1987). “A behavioral model of ethical and unethical decision making.” Journal of Business Ethics, 6(4), 265–280. Bowen, P., Akintoye, A., Pearl, R., and Edwards, P. J. (2007a). “Ethical behavior in South African construction industry.” Construction Management and Economics, 25(6), 631–648. Bowen, P., Pearl, R., and Akintoye, A. (2007b). “Professional ethics in the South African construction industry.” Building Research and Information, 35(2), 189–205. BSI (2011). An International Anti-bribery Framework. British Standards Institution Group, London, United Kingdom. Church, C. H. (1983). Practice and Perspective in Validation: Research into Higher Education Proceedings. Society of Research into Higher Education, Guildford, United Kingdom. CMAA (2006). “Updates codes.” Construction Bulletin Norcross, 28, 291. Crossman, A. (2011). Correlation Analysis, a Common Statistical Technique Used In Sociological Analyses. Available at http://www.statsoft.com/textbook/basic-statistics (accessed 07/20/2012). Doran, D. (2004). Survey of construction Industry Ethical Practices. FMI/Construction Management Association of America, Denver, United States. Dubinsky, J. and Richter, A. (2009). Ethics and Integrity Best Practices Tool: Global Ethics and Integrity Benchmarks. QED Consulting, New York, United States. Easterby-Smith, M., Thorpe, R., and Lowe, A. (2006). Management Research, an Introduction. SAGE Publications, London, United Kingdom. Egan, J. (1998). Rethinking construction. British Government, London, United Kingdom. Ehsan, N., Anwar, S., and Talha, M. (2009). “Professional ethics in construction industry of Pakistan.” Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering, Vol. 1, 1–5. Ethics Intelligence (2012). Anti-corruption Certification. Ethics Intelligence, London, United Kingdom. Fewings, P. (2009). Ethics in the Built Environment. Taylor and Francis Group, London, United Kingdom. Field, A. (2000). Discovering Statistics using SPSS. SAGE Publications, London, United Kingdom. Green, J. and Walker, K. (2009). “A contingency model for ethical decision making by educational leaders.” International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 4(4), 1–10. Higgins, J. (2005). The Radical Statistician. Duxbury Advanced series, Duxbury, Massachusetts, United States.

Jones, T. M. (1991). “Ethical decision making by individuals in organizations: An issue-contingent model.” Academy of Management Review, 16(2), 366–395. Kanoglu, A. and Gulen, S. (2013). “Model for managing the contractual risks of construction firms imposed by procurement system.” International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 2(1), 43–54. Kaplan, J. (2011). A Compliance and Ethics thought Experiment for General Counsel. Available at http://www.corporatecomplianceinsights.com (accessed 12/26/2011). Kaptein, M. (2003). “The diamond of managerial integrity.” European Management Journal, 21(1), 99– 108. Kaptein, M. and Avelino, S. (2005). “Measuring corporate integrity: A survey-based approach.” Corporate Governance, 5(1), 45–54. Kidd, B. (2011). Right-sizing Ethics and Compliance Training for Today’s Evolving Workforce. Available at http://www.corporatecomplianceinsights. com/right-sizing-ethics (accessed 12/26/2011). Kohlberg, L. (1959). Stages in the Development of Moral Thought. Holt Rinehart, New York, United States. Kubinger, K. D., Rasch, D., and Simeckva, M. (2007). “Testing a correlation coefficient’s significance.” Psychology Science, 49(49), 74–87. Kululanga, G. K. (1999). A Framework to Facilitate Construction Contractors’ Learning. Unpublishedthesis, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, United Kingdom. Liu, A. M. M., Fellows, R., and Jess, N. (2004). “Surveyors perspectives on ethics in organizational culture.” Engineering, Construction and Architectural Management, 11(6), 438–449. Macal, C. M. (2005). Model Verification and Validation. University of Chicago, Chicago, United States. Martini, C. and Henaff, P. (2010). “Model validation: Theory, practice and perspectives.” Journal of Risk Model Validation, 4(5), 3–5. McDevitt, R., Giapponi, C., and Tromley, C. (2007). “A model of ethical decision making: The integration of process and content.” Journal of Business Ethics, 73(2), 219–229. Muya, M. (1999). A Systematic Approach for Improving Construction Materials Logistics. Unpublished thesis, Loughborough University, Leicestershire, United Kingdom. Mwiya, B., Muya, M., Shakantu, W., and Kaliba, C. (2009). “The need for the technical auditing in the Zambian construction industry.” International Journal of Project Management, 27(8), 821–832. Neumann, W. L. (2000). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Allyn & Bacon, New York, United States. Osei-Tutu, E., Badu, E., and Owusu-Manu, D. (2009).

118


“Exploring corruption practices in public procurement of infrastructural projects in Ghana.” International Journal of Managing Projects in Business, 3(2), 236–256. Oyewobi, L. O., Ganiyu, B. O., Oke, A. A., OLAAWO, A. W., and Shittu, A. A. (2011). “Determinants of unethical performance in the Nigerian construction industry.” Journal of Sustainable Development, 4(4), 175–182. Pearl, R., Bowen, P., Makanjee, N., Akintoye, A., and Evans, K. (2005). “Professional ethics in the South African construction industry - A pilot study.” The Queensland University of Technology Research Week International Conference, Brisbane, Australia. Shakantu, W. (2006). Corruption in the Construction Industry, Forms, Susceptibility and Possible Solutions. University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa. Shakantu, W. and Chiocha, C. (2009). “Corruption in the construction industry: The case of Malawi.” RICS COBRA Research Conference, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa, 1568–1576. Shamdasani, A. (2012). UK Bribery Act Helps Develop Global Anti-corruption Culture. Available at http://www.trust.orgnews/uk-bribery-act-helpsdevelop-global-anti-corruption-culture (accessed 06/30/2012). Stead, W. E., Worrell, D. L., and Stead, J. G. (1990). “An integrative model for understanding and manag-

ing ethical behavior in business organizations.” Journal of Business Ethics, 9(3), 233–242. Svensson, G. and Wood, G. (2007). “A model of business ethics.” Journal of Business Ethics, 7(3), 303– 322. Transparency International (2006). The Global Corruption Report 2005. Pluto Press, London, United Kingdom. Transparency International (2008). Project AntiCorruption System, Construction Projects. Transparency International, London, United Kingdom. Vee, C. and Skitmore, R. M. (2003). “Professional ethics in the construction industry.” Engineering Construction and Architectural Management, 10(2), 117–127. Wittmer, D. (2002). “Developing a behavioral model for ethical decision making in organizations: Conceptual and empirical research.” Handbook of Administrative Ethics, 481–507. Zayed, T., Elwakil, E., and Ammar, M. (2012). “A framework for performance assessment of organisations in construction industry.” International Journal of Architecture, Engineering and Construction, 1(4), 199–212. Zou, P. X. W. (2006). “Strategies for minimizing corruption in the construction industry in china.” Journal of construction in Developing Countries, 11(2), 15–29.

119