less visible in implementation terms, and which carry higher transaction costs are not being complied with. The division of contracts into lots, for example, requires knowledge of contract design as well as the ability to analyse the costs and benefits of using several small suppliers in preference to one large supplier. Findings: predictors of compliance The second phase of the analysis involves testing predictors of compliance. Twelve variables are included as part of a predictive model. There is no evidence of multi-collinearity among the variables, as indicated by the high tolerance and low VIF values (table 3). The model is significant: F (19, 325) = 4.556, p <.001 and explains 16.4% of the variance in compliance (Adjusted R Square = 16.4 R Square = .210). Four of the twelve variables are statistically significant. Three of these relate to individual characteristics of the public buyer: involvement in procurement, policy familiarity, and perceived importance of SME access. Each has a positive impact on compliance. The fourth significant variable is organisation type. It is negatively related to policy compliance. None of the other eight variables are statistically significant. The standardised coefficients and significance levels for all twelve variables are listed in table 3. Indicated by effect size, involvement in procurement has the greatest positive impact on policy compliance. This is consistent with the prediction that increased involvement makes adherence to the institutional norms of public procurement more salient and career-relevant to public buyers. The assumption that compliance with policy presupposes a degree of familiarity is also supported. Likewise, public buyers that perceive public procurement as having a key role to play in supporting SMEs are more likely to comply with SME-friendly policy. Contrary to hypothesised predictions, neither experience, qualifications nor training are found to be significant in predicting compliance. The relevance of these attributes in contributing to effective
less visible in implementation terms, and which carry higher transaction costs are not being complied with. The division of contracts into lots, for example, requires knowledge of contract design as well as the ability to analyse the costs and benefits of using several small suppliers in preference to one large supplier. Findings: predictors of compliance The second phase of the analysis involves testing predictors of compliance. Twelve variables are included as part of a predictive model. There is no evidence of multi-collinearity among the variables, as indicated by the high tolerance and low VIF values (table 3). The model is significant: F (19, 325) = 4.556, p <.001 and explains 16.4% of the variance in compliance (Adjusted R Square = 16.4 R Square = .210). Four of the twelve variables are statistically significant. Three of these relate to individual characteristics of the public buyer: involvement in procurement, policy familiarity, and perceived importance of SME access. Each has a positive impact on compliance. The fourth significant variable is organisation type. It is negatively related to policy compliance. None of the other eight variables are statistically significant. The standardised coefficients and significance levels for all twelve variables are listed in table 3. Indicated by effect size, involvement in procurement has the greatest positive impact on policy compliance. This is consistent with the prediction that increased involvement makes adherence to the institutional norms of public procurement more salient and career-relevant to public buyers. The assumption that compliance with policy presupposes a degree of familiarity is also supported. Likewise, public buyers that perceive public procurement as having a key role to play in supporting SMEs are more likely to comply with SME-friendly policy. Contrary to hypothesised predictions, neither experience, qualifications nor training are found to be significant in predicting compliance. The relevance of these attributes in contributing to effective
EPC_Nov2014_Accepted_Version.docx