Energy Efficient Procurement Methods

Public Procurement and
Energy Efficiency in the
Pacific Northwest
August 1999
WSUEEP99012
FINAL Report to the

Public Procurement and
Energy Efficiency in the
Pacific Northwest
August 1999
WSUEEP99012
FINAL Report to the
Prepared by the Procurement Research Team:
Rick Kunkle, Washington State University
Cooperative Extension Energy Program
Loren Lutzenhiser, Washington State University
Departments of Sociology and Rural Sociology
Jeannine Moga, Washington State University
Linda Dethman, Dethman & Associates
Chad Davis, MACRO International
Jim Perich-Anderson, MACRO International
Robert Paulson, MACRO International
Washington State University
925 Plum Street SE
PO Box 43165
Olympia, WA 98504-3165

Acknowledgements
The Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance supported this research. We would like to
thank John Jennings, the project manager, and all the other Alliance staff who
contributed to this project. We would also like to recognize the Consortium for Energy
Efficiency, which provided support for additional research at the City of Portland. This
work complemented this research project. Linda Witham at the WSU Energy Program
provided project administrative support and research support. Finally, we would like to
thank the many individuals at the public organizations included in this study who spent
time sharing their experiences about procurement with us.

Public Procurement And Energy Efficiency In the Northwest
07/17/00 II
Executive Summary
State and local governments in the United States spend tens of billions of dollars each
year to purchase energy consuming products.1
Where governments do not currently
“buy efficient,” there may be viable opportunities to influence them toward greater
efficiency.
The current research, conducted on behalf of the Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
(Alliance), set out to:
Better understand those who buy or influence the purchase of energy related goods
and services for public agencies in the Northwest.
Identify strategies to encourage public agencies to buy higher efficiency products
and services.
This executive summary focuses upon key findings and our suggested intervention
strategies. To better understand how purchasing occurs, and where energy is
considered, please see the body of the report.
Methods
Staff from the Washington State University Energy Program led a team of researchers
who used qualitative research methods to collect and analyze data on public
purchasing. From December 1998 to April 1999, we conducted 77 in-depth interviews
with buyers, end-users, and policy-makers in 17 federal, state, and local governments in
the Northwest. We asked respondents how their purchasing systems worked; the role
of competitive requirements; how products and services are specified; how they engage
in “green” buying and buy energy consuming products; and what important trends are
likely to affect purchasing.
Key Insights from the Research
These findings underlie the intervention strategies presented in the next section, and
are crucial to understanding the public purchasing arena.
Public sector buying patterns are variable, complex, and somewhat
unpredictable. Many actors are involved in a variety of roles. Although detailed
purchasing rules and competitive requirements existed in most agencies, much
buying is neither rigidly structured nor highly competitive. Thus, just changing the
rules will not necessarily change procurement practices.
Most agencies combine centralized purchasing processes (for higher cost items)
with decentralized purchasing by end-users (for less costly items). These variations
in purchasing approaches are illustrated in Table A.
1
Purchases by local and state governments of durable and non-durable goods and investment in equipment/structures was $262
billion in 1997, according to the U.S. Bureau of the Census, 1998.

07/17/00 III
Table A: General Parameters for Purchasing
Type of
Purchase
Dollar Limit Range
and Exclusions
Procedures/Authorities/
Requirements
Other Purchase
Methods
Petty Cash Generally below $100,
often combined with
Direct Buy level
Employee choice, no competition
required, decentralized in
department
Direct Buy From $0 - $5,000, with
the top limit varying
from $800 to $5,000.
Professional services
and construction might
be excluded. State
universities might have
different limits than
other state agencies.
Employee choice, decentralized in
departments. May require
department approval. Little bidding,
although 3 quotes may be technically
required. Must comply with relevant
policies/laws. Use purchase orders
(LPO), purchasing cards. May
account for bulk of buying. Master
contracts may supercede direct
buying.
Informal
Competition
From $800 - $100,000,
with many variations.
Up to 3 informal written or telephone
bids/quotes. Usually central
purchasing involved, although
department may lead.
Formal
Competition
From $25,000 up. Formal IFB/RFP, sealed bid,
competitive process, often with a
central purchasing authority leading
the process although specifications
usually developed with end-users.
Use of master
contracts
developed by
other jurisdictions,
most often states
Developing in-
house master or
annual supply
contracts, which
may be mandatory
for departments
Use of cooperative
purchasing groups
to increase buying
power
Emergency buying
procedures
Energy costs and efficiency are not widely or consistently considered in
purchasing energy consuming products. Other factors, such as performance,
price, and convenience, drive buying decisions. Energy efficiency information,
without reference to the other buying criteria that are salient to buyers, may receive
limited use.
Energy efficient buying can be leveraged by piggybacking on these three
major purchasing trends:
1. Best value buying – an approach that considers the overall costs and benefits
of products and services rather than just first costs and benefits.
2. Electronic commerce – a mechanism that serves as a source of information, a
tool for improving purchasing processes, and a way to buy.
3. Green purchasing – buying that goes beyond recycled content products and
“safe” products to consider broader environmental concerns.

07/17/00 IV
In the organizations we profiled, we observed nine factors that are related to
higher levels of energy efficient buying. These factors, listed below, are also
entry or leverage points for transforming public purchasing.
1. Political or citizen support for green buying or energy efficiency;
2. Specific budget for energy efficiency or environmentally protective
approaches;
3. Active energy efficiency resources (e.g., energy efficiency staff);
4. Active "green" resources (e.g., agency sponsored recycling);
5. Active Resource Conservation Managers or Resource Efficiency Managers
(RMs);
6. Influential efficiency champions;
7. Vendors promoting use of energy efficient or green products;
8. Strong user/buyer education about buying energy efficient; and
9. Experience with energy efficient buying.
Finally, organization theory suggests that three processes are important for
changing organizational behavior:
1. Regulatory and policy effects – changes in formal rules and requirements
(e.g., to using life cycle costing) can institutionalize efficient buying practices.
2. Normative and professional influences – changes in purchasing standards
within professional organizations can shape purchasing practices.
3. Imitative (mimetic) processes – changes in approach, or successes, at one
agency can influence other agencies to adopt similar practices
Our recommended intervention strategies, which result from our organizational
observations, interviews, and literature review, make use of these three interrelated
processes. Thus our recommendations should be viewed collectively, rather than as
independent, standalone strategies.
Recommendations for Transforming Public Sector Purchasing
Given the variability in government purchasing, the many purchasers, and the many
markets, we are not advocating strategies to transform a specific market for a particular
product. Rather, we are recommending strategies to encourage agencies to change
how they buy – that is, to buy higher efficiency products. Such change likely requires a
long-term commitment, multi-faceted approaches, flexibility, and leveraging of existing
resources. Such change also moves organizational behavior or practices toward being
self-sustaining, so that the commitment to efficiency is institutionalized.

07/17/00 V
Our goal in these recommendations is to help purchasers – designers, project
managers, users, and professional buyers – get the best products and the most energy
efficient ones. We introduce each set of recommendations by describing how they fit
with the factors and trends that encourage energy efficient buying.
Stimulating Regulatory and Policy Effects
Policy level support is essential if public organizations are to institutionalize the buying
of energy efficient products. But our research shows that energy efficiency is not
relevant for political leaders or policy makers. Therefore, energy efficiency needs to be
joined with issues that are more relevant to these leaders and to their constituents, such
as best value buying and green purchasing trends.
The three strategies listed below suggest how energy efficiency can be tied to issues of
interest to policy makers. These actions will help develop political and citizen support
which, in turn, will encourage agencies to devote specific resources to energy efficient
buying (i.e., for staff, training, support materials, or policy changes).
Link energy efficient buying with existing environmental initiatives and
policies in public organizations (e.g., buy recycled).
Connect energy efficient products to political and policy priorities such as
clean air, clean water, sustainability, cost-savings, and good government.
Work with environmentally oriented agencies and with networks targeted to
policy makers to identify existing environmental policies, demonstrate that
energy efficiency policies can be incorporated within those existing
environmental policies, and disseminate these examples through appropriate
networks and media.
Enhancing Normative and Professional Influences
Most government purchasers, whether Resource Managers, end-users, or professional
buyers, belong to and rely upon professional organizations for new ideas and
dependable advice. Often these organizations are looking for meeting and conference
presentations, as well as training opportunities on topics relevant to their members.
While energy efficiency per se may not be perceived as a “hot” topic, it can be linked to
topics that are. For instance, “best value” buying and E-commerce topics are of great
interest within professional purchasing groups – a natural place for energy efficiency to
fit in.
Use mechanisms within existing professional networks – web pages, list
servs, newsletters, training programs, conferences, chapter meetings, users'
groups, and trusted “energy champions” – to inform members about the
relevance of energy efficiency and how to include it in purchasing
specifications, the availability of products, and the presence of existing
energy purchasing initiatives (e.g. Energy Star).
Work with purchasing groups to conduct joint competitive bids for specific
energy efficient products, so that individual organizations can obtain

07/17/00 VI
competitive prices and better access to particular energy efficient products.
Get energy efficient products on master contracts that many organizations
can access.
Leverage the resources of other initiatives that support energy efficient
practices in public organizations, including energy managers, resource
managers, energy efficient new construction programs, and utility, non-profit,
and Federal programs.
Identify and work with major vendors to public agencies to offer energy
efficient products.
Encouraging and Facilitating “Imitation”
The processes of imitation work on two levels. First, the approaches and benefits of
buying efficient can be made visible through successful demonstrations. Second, an
infrastructure of reliable, accessible information about products must be built. This
includes developing awareness among purchasers and policy makers of how to specify,
identify, and buy efficient products. Electronic media (E-commerce) is likely to become
a popular route for conveying information, experience and advice about efficient
purchasing.
Conduct targeted pilot projects at specific high profile organizations to
develop and demonstrate organizational models for purchasing energy
efficient products. Disseminate results.
Help key actors develop networks of energy efficiency champions (such as
RMs) within their organizations.
Support development of organizational models that demonstrate the value of
energy efficient purchasing to public organizations.
Make information on energy efficient products and their performance readily
available from trusted sources
Make buyers and organizations aware of existing suppliers of energy efficient
products so that they can access them through existing purchasing
procedures.
Make energy efficient products easy to identify (i.e. using labeling) and show
how they compare to similar products along a number of key product
characteristics (i.e., not just energy efficiency).
Work with existing groups and, if warranted, support new groups – including
users, manufacturers, and suppliers – to develop comprehensive product
specifications and contract language that include energy efficiency. Make
these available through existing networks and sources.
Conclusions
We believe that public purchasing in the Northwest can incorporate energy efficiency
considerations to a much greater extent. Attention to energy costs and energy related

07/17/00 VII
environmental impacts is already taking place in some government agencies, and there
is considerable potential for greater penetration of high efficiency products. Success will
require that a variety of efforts be coordinated to reach all organizational levels.
The strategies we recommend are intended to encourage long-term organizational
change towards more energy efficient buying. They provide guidance to individuals
and organizations planning and developing programmatic initiatives to encourage
energy efficient buying. We have identified trends, leverage points, and strategies that
should be incorporated into program conceptualization and development efforts. The
process of program development needs to include actors within professional networks
and at leading public organizations. Developing initiatives within this framework will
result in efforts that are well targeted and that best take advantage of existing resources
and leveraging opportunities.
Several trends, such as interest in "good government" (best value purchasing), concern
for the environment, and the development of pro-environmental public policies, offer
important opportunities to associate energy efficiency in purchasing with politically
potent issues. Policies that support these trends, along with professional acceptance of
energy efficiency as an important purchasing criterion, are required for the desired
organizational changes to take place.
However, other trends (e.g., E-commerce) suggest that strategies will also need to be
targeted at end users and mass-market vendors––those actors involved in the bulk of
routine purchases of energy-using goods. Since energy does not concern most end-
users or vendors, strong emphasis on the quality, safety, and reliability attributes of
energy consuming goods will be needed. Manufacturers and vendors must also have
an adequate supply of high efficiency products readily available at comparable prices
and quality.
We believe encouraging energy efficient purchasing will foster efficiency in other parts
of public organizations and outside of them as well. For instance, adherence to energy
efficiency in purchasing could lead to a wider “standard practice” of energy efficiency in
building design. Changes in how public agencies purchase can also help induce
changes in the types of products that manufacturers develop and vendors offer, since
vendors and manufacturers will notice the preferences of these large buyers. In this
way, the impacts of organizational changes in buying habits extend beyond public
purchasing.

07/17/00 VIII
Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................................ II
CHAPTER 1 – BACKGROUND AND METHODS.............................................................................................. 10
STUDY CONTEXT AND PURPOSES............................................................................................................................ 10
RESEARCH DESIGN ................................................................................................................................................. 11
RESEARCH METHODS.............................................................................................................................................. 12
Overall Approach.............................................................................................................................................. 12
Constructing the Sample.................................................................................................................................... 13
Establishing Key Contacts................................................................................................................................. 13
Developing the Interview Guide........................................................................................................................ 14
Collecting Field Data........................................................................................................................................ 15
Added Interviews and Secondary Research....................................................................................................... 15
Analyzing and Reporting ................................................................................................................................... 15
CHAPTER 2 - PUBLIC PROCUREMENT IN THE NORTHWEST.................................................................. 16
OVERVIEW OF PATTERNS OF PUBLIC PROCUREMENT.............................................................................................. 16
Formal Purchasing............................................................................................................................................ 16
Informal Purchasing.......................................................................................................................................... 17
New Construction.............................................................................................................................................. 17
Operations and Maintenance Services.............................................................................................................. 18
Other Purchasing Alternatives.......................................................................................................................... 18
KEY VARIABLES IN PURCHASING............................................................................................................................ 19
Laws, Regulations, Rules, Policies, And Authorities......................................................................................... 19
Meeting Competition Requirements .................................................................................................................. 20
Centralization Versus Decentralization ............................................................................................................ 24
Outsourcing Versus Insourcing......................................................................................................................... 25
How Specifications Are Developed ................................................................................................................... 25
Agency Culture and Outside Influences ............................................................................................................ 27
Public Versus Private Procurement .................................................................................................................. 28
CHAPTER 3 – PUBLIC SECTOR PURCHASING OF ENERGY CONSUMING PRODUCTS..................... 30
TWO TRENDS: “GREEN” AND “BEST VALUE” BUYING........................................................................................... 30
PATTERNS OF ENERGY EFFICIENT PURCHASING ..................................................................................................... 31
Buying Office Equipment................................................................................................................................... 31
Buying Equipment for Existing Buildings.......................................................................................................... 32
Buying Equipment for New Buildings ............................................................................................................... 32
SNAPSHOTS OF ENERGY EFFICIENT (EE) BUYING................................................................................................... 33
Success Factors ................................................................................................................................................. 33
Top Tier Agencies (Medium to High Efficiency Buying)................................................................................... 35
Middle Tier Agencies (Low to Medium Efficiency Buying)............................................................................... 36
Bottom Tier Agencies (Low Efficiency Buying)................................................................................................. 38
ADVICE FROM RESPONDENTS ................................................................................................................................. 39
CHAPTER 4 – KEY TRENDS INFLUENCING PUBLIC PURCHASING ....................................................... 42
BEST VALUE BUYING.............................................................................................................................................. 43
ELECTRONIC-COMMERCE AMONG PUBLIC AGENCIES ............................................................................................ 44
ENVIRONMENTAL PURCHASING .............................................................................................................................. 45

07/17/00 IX
CHAPTER 5 – TRANSFORMING PUBLIC SECTOR PURCHASING............................................................ 46
KEY INSIGHTS FROM THE RESEARCH ...................................................................................................................... 46
THIS SECTION CAPTURES THE CENTRAL FINDINGS FROM OUR RESEARCH. THESE FINDINGS ARE CRUCIAL TO
UNDERSTANDING THE PUBLIC PURCHASING ARENA AND UNDERLIE THE INTERVENTION STRATEGIES PRESENTED
LATER IN THIS CHAPTER.......................................................................................................................................... 46
A FRAMEWORK FOR ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE ................................................................................................... 47
Organizational Theory ...................................................................................................................................... 47
MARKET INTERVENTION STRATEGIES..................................................................................................................... 48
Stimulating Regulatory and Policy Effects........................................................................................................ 48
Enhancing Normative and Professional Influences........................................................................................... 49
Encouraging and Facilitating “Imitation” ....................................................................................................... 50
CONCLUSIONS......................................................................................................................................................... 51
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................................................... 53
BIBLIOGRAPHY..................................................................................................................................................... 54

07/17/00 10
Chapter 1 – Background and Methods
Study Context and Purposes
The federal government is the single largest consumer in the United States, spending
over $500 billion per year on products and services, while state and local agencies
spend over $900 billion per year on these purchases (Slater and Strawser 1999). The
Federal Energy Management Program estimates that $10 to $20 billion per year of
federal purchases are for energy related products.2
A similar estimate does not exist for
state and local governments, although data are available on purchases of durable and
non-durable goods and investments in structures and equipment, which total $262
billion per year (U.S. Bureau of the Census 1998). Even if only a small fraction is used
for energy consuming products, public agencies expend tens of billions of dollars each
year on items such as light bulbs, copiers, and HVAC systems. They also hire services
that affect efficiency, including architects and engineers for new buildings and
maintenance contractors for existing facilities. Clearly, in how and what they buy, public
agencies can be more or less energy conscious. And, this consciousness will affect
how markets for energy consuming products develop and how much energy is
ultimately consumed (and saved).
The experience of those who have tried to intervene on behalf of energy efficiency in
the marketplace repeatedly shows that it is essential to be market-sensitive – that is, to
understand the whole context in which the target audience operates. In the case of the
current research, that means understanding the milieu, motivations, and actual
practices of those who buy goods and services – especially energy related goods and
services – for public agencies in the Northwest.
An interdisciplinary team of researchers, in conjunction with and on behalf of the
Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance (Alliance), conducted this research to:
Better understand how public agencies in the Northwest routinely buy products and
services;
Ascertain where, when, and how energy efficiency enters into those buying
decisions; and
Identify workable strategies to encourage public agencies to buy higher efficiency
products and services, including office equipment, building equipment, new building
design and equipment, and operations and maintenance services.

07/17/00 11
Research Design
This research was conducted in two major phases, with the results of the initial phase
being used to guide the subsequent phase. This plan called for a review of existing
research on procurement and interviews with key informants (Phase 1), followed by a
traditional survey of procurement officers representing up to a hundred public agencies
throughout the Northwest in Oregon, Washington, Idaho, and Montana (Phase 2).
However, the results of Phase 1 suggested that:
Public agencies generally do not use energy efficiency as a key criterion in choosing
what goods and services to buy. However, some public agencies have developed
successful green purchasing policies and programs, especially with recycled content
goods.
The standard model used to frame most past research has assumed that
procurement is a rule-based, top-down process carried out by individuals who are
rule-bound and who act fairly independently of other organizational actors and
influences.
Based upon our key informant interviews, many procurement processes may be
more flexible, variable, and complex than the standard model, suggesting that other
approaches to encouraging energy efficient purchases may be possible and useful.
Trends toward decentralized purchasing and electronic commerce may significantly
alter procurement practices.
The standard procurement model has guided efforts to encourage the purchase of
energy efficient products. Relying largely on directives from the top and rewritten
procurement guidelines, these efforts have met with limited success.
These findings suggested it would be useful to develop an in-depth picture of both
procurement processes and potential interventions to encourage greater energy
efficiency in product and service choices. The research team then revised its plan to
focus on these topics:
The existence of, or potential for, more flexible procurement models within target
organizations in the Northwest, including those that have successfully incorporated
green purchasing practices;
The opportunities to encourage energy efficient purchases of office equipment,
building equipment, and O&M services within this wider procurement context; and
New purchasing trends such as decentralization and electronic commerce (E-
commerce).

07/17/00 12
Research Methods
Overall Approach
The methods used in this research depart from methods commonly used in previous
procurement research. This research has traditionally relied on quantitative techniques,
including:
Surveying one person to represent a whole organization, although more than one
person may be involved in purchasing decisions;
Using quantified results to emphasize majority views, even though minority views
may be important to understanding how energy efficient purchasing can be
encouraged; and
Assuming codified procedures accurately represent how purchasing is actually
conducted.
The approach we used for this research was more qualitative and descriptive in nature,
allowing the research team to:
Represent organizations through interviews with a network of contacts within an
organization;
Qualitatively catalogue the diverse purchasing practices regarding green products
and energy consuming products;
Describe how actual practices departed from codified procedures;
Describe where opportunities exist to encourage the purchase of energy efficient
products; and
Use additional interviews (such as with vendors) as well as secondary research to
augment insights about purchasing trends (e.g., decentralization, E-commerce).
Our approach to conducting the organizational analysis included these steps (described
more fully in the sections that follow):
1. Constructing the sample of target organizations;
2. Establishing key contacts within those organizations;
3. Creating an interview guide;
4. Collecting field data from key contacts and their referrals;
5. Conducting additional interviews and researching secondary research sources
on topics related to our primary data collection efforts; and
6. Analyzing and reporting on data within and across organizations.

07/17/00 13
Constructing the Sample
We developed an initial list of organizations using recommendations from key
informants, research team members, and the Alliance. To develop an appropriate mix
of organizations, we considered:
Different types and levels of public agencies;
Public agencies across the four-state region;
Different types of experience with purchasing green products; and
The presence of existing contacts within that organization.
The sample of individuals or groups to contact and interview within each organization
was constructed through an ongoing networking process, beginning with contacting and
interviewing an initial key contact in each agency (see next section) who was then
asked to refer the interviewer to other contacts. This sampling method, also known as
“snowball sampling,” was intended to establish trust and rapport and to provide
interviewers with access to professional networks. This method also helps the
researcher to gain an understanding of the overall market system, which for this
research includes a dense network of suppliers, vendors, colleagues, policy makers,
and advocates.
In all we interviewed, in depth, 77 individuals across 17 public agencies in the
Northwest, as shown in Table 1. The agencies chosen included one federal facility, two
state governments, three counties, one independent municipal corporation, five cities,
four universities, and one school district. Eight agencies were in Washington, four in
Oregon, three in Montana, and two in Idaho. Interviewees included purchasing
managers and staff, chief administrative officers, facilities and construction managers,
equipment managers, and energy and resource managers.
Establishing Key Contacts
As the sample was developed, we set out to identify and establish key contacts within
each agency. Members of the research team called potential organizations to start this
process. These contacts and interviews were especially important, for it is through this
person that the team:
Confirmed the types of insights and experience the organization was likely to offer;
Confirmed if the organization was likely to cooperate in the research;
Established the rapport and trust needed for networking throughout the organization;
and
Gained initial feedback on the types of questions to ask others in the organization.

07/17/00 14
Table 1. Agencies by Name, Type, Location, and Number of Interviews
Agency Name Agency Type Agency Location
Number
Interviewed
1. Boise School District School District Boise, ID 4
2. City of Burien Medium City Burien, WA 1
3. City of Missoula Large City Missoula, MT 1
4. City of Portland Largest OR City Portland, OR 17*
5. City of Seattle Largest WA City Seattle, WA 3
6. City of Tacoma Large WA City Tacoma, WA 3
7. Fort Lewis Federal Military base Tacoma, WA 6
8. King County Largest WA County Seattle, WA 5
9. Missoula County County Missoula, MT 1
10. Multnomah County County Portland, OR 2
11. Seattle Housing Authority Independent Municipal Corporation Seattle, WA 7
12. State of Oregon State Salem, OR 2
13. State of Washington State Olympia, WA 8
14. University of Idaho University Moscow, ID 4
15. University of Montana University Missoula, MT 2
16. University of Oregon University Portland, OR 3
17. Washington State University University Pullman, WA 8
*The Consortium of Energy Efficiency helped support research at the City of Portland, allowing a more in-depth
analysis of this organization.
Summary: Table 1
17 agencies 1 Federal Regional
2 States - WA, OR
1 Independent Municipal Corp.
3 Counties - WA, OR, MT
5 Cities - WA, OR, MT
4 Universities - WA, OR, MT, ID
1 School District ID
8 WA (1 federal)
4 OR
3 MT
2 ID
77 In-depth
interviews
Developing the Interview Guide
In conjunction with the Alliance, the research team prepared an interview guide for use
during the in-depth interviews (see Appendix A). The guide introduces and frames the
topic for respondents, and lists a series of open-ended topics and questions that
interviewers could tailor to the situation of each respondent. These five major topic
areas guided the interviews:
1. Overview. What is your job title and role in your organization? How does your job
relate to purchasing products and services? How centralized/decentralized is
purchasing?
2. Competitive Requirements. As we understand it, most governmental bodies
require that purchasing meet certain competitive requirements. What are these
requirements in your organization? How do these requirements affect purchasing?
3. Specification Development. How are specifications (specs) developed for
products and services?

07/17/00 15
4. Green Purchasing. In your organization, do you know if formal or informal
approaches have been developed to meet environmental requirements, such as
saving energy or water, or buying recycled content products? How are specific
energy consuming products and services bought? What would you suggest for
encouraging more attention to energy efficiency in buying products and services?
5. Trends to Watch. What trends, such as electronic commerce, do you see as being
important for purchasing in your organization over the next few years?
Collecting Field Data
Pairs of researchers conducted interviews with the targeted organizations. Where
possible, interviews were conducted in-person with both researchers present so that the
fullest picture of purchasing could be constructed. To enhance communication among
the researchers, a different pair of researchers was assigned to each organization and
the overall research team regularly spoke with each other to share ideas and directions.
Interviewers worked from the core interview guide with the understanding that they
could pursue other relevant topics and implement alternative data collection
approaches. They were also responsible for gathering relevant documents and
background information (e.g., copies of green ordinances and samples of procurement
master contracts). The goal of this interviewing process was to obtain a complete
picture of procurement processes and possibilities within each organization and, if
possible, also foster interest in energy efficient procurement.
Added Interviews and Secondary Research
We supplemented the primary interviewing within public organizations with four outside
interviews with vendors of energy using equipment and with representatives from the
Federal Energy Management Program. Our secondary research also allowed us to
gain a larger picture of key trends and features of the procurement process. Topics of
particular interest for the secondary research effort included decentralized purchasing;
E-commerce; purchase of recycled products; roles of peer organizations; roles of
manufacturers and vendors; and programs or initiatives to encourage energy efficient
purchasing.
Analyzing and Reporting
Interviewers took detailed notes during their interviews and used these notes to develop
summaries about each organization. These summaries presented key findings and
categorized information into the five major interview topics. The interview notes and
summaries, along with the results of additional interviews and of secondary research,
form the basis of this report. We have tried to accurately portray the rich and insightful
data that that the 17 agencies provided to us. Since this is qualitative data, however,
care should be taken in generalizing these findings to all public agencies in the
Northwest.

07/17/00 16
Chapter 2 - Public Procurement in the Northwest
This chapter tells the story of how public procurement works in the Northwest. An
overview of the general patterns of public procurement in the Northwest begins this
chapter, followed by a more detailed look at the variations within those patterns. The
overview discusses the interweaving of key factors in procurement. More detail about
how these factors vary follow in separate sections, serving to remind us that good
solutions for how to encourage energy efficient purchases will likely need to be tailored
and multi-faceted.
Overview of Patterns of Public Procurement
To capture the story of purchasing, it is important to see both the forest and the trees.
The 17 agencies we studied do have common threads. At the same time, this research
shows that public sector buying patterns are variable, complex, and only somewhat
predictable by type or size of public institution or by the types or dollar amounts of
purchases being made.
Purchasing systems also appear to be subject to many influences and likely to change
over time. Thus, while each agency in this study had purchasing rules, their
procurement systems did not tend to be rigidly rule-based. Indeed, our study shows
that the changing preferences of end-users and policy-makers, changes in product and
service suppliers and how they are accessed, and changes in product choices and
technologies also strongly affect purchasing behavior. Thus, just changing the rules will
not necessarily change procurement practices. (Notably, professional purchasing
officers who enforce the rules do pay more attention to “the rules” than the many people
who informally buy products and services. Since much prior research focused on
professional purchasers, the importance of rules may have been overemphasized.)
Keeping in mind, then, the variability of procurement approaches, here is a picture of
the patterns of purchasing most commonly found in Northwest public agencies.
Formal Purchasing
The perspective that purchasing is driven by rules may be related to the awarding of
large contracts, generally above $25,000. These processes are often more
standardized, specified, and visible due to documented competitive bidding
requirements, written Invitations For Bid (IFB) and Requests For Proposals (RFP) that
include the product and service specifications and criteria for evaluation, and the
involvement of central purchasing authorities. Sometimes this process is directed to a
one-time contract; at other times, the goal is to create a master, long-term contract that
can have multiple vendors. Thus, it may seem that this type of buying encompasses
much of what is being spent. This type of buying offers opportunities to have energy

07/17/00 17
efficiency, life cycle cost analysis, and other green purchasing requirements clearly
specified and standardized.
Informal Purchasing
Individual buyers housed in separate departments regularly make many smaller
purchases that, added together, are substantial. Three types of purchasing are
included in this category:
Petty cash, where very small purchases can be made quickly;
Direct buying, where the dollar limits range up to $5,000 and where little or no
competition and no central purchasing approval is required; and
Informal competition with dollar limits up to $50,000, where up to three informal bids
by telephone or letter are required, and where a central purchasing authority may
have some involvement (largely administrative). Where informal bidding is
conducted, competition is limited and can be managed to favor a preferred vendor or
product.
Replacement products are often bought through informal purchasing avenues, including
many products that consume energy (such as light bulbs, office equipment, and
motors). While this buying approach may be less documented and less consistent, it
also allows the “champions” of innovative, efficient, or “green” products and services to
surface. Although this buying is informal and can end when the buyer leaves the
agency, it is possible that the views of these champions may become adopted and
normalized over time.
New Construction
Purchasing for new construction and large retrofit or remodeling projects (an important
arena for ensuring energy efficient purchasing) is often managed differently and
separately from other types of purchasing. For instance, the State of Washington
centralizes the purchasing authority for these projects under the Department of General
Administration's Division of Engineering and Architectural Services. These projects are
usually high cost, long-term, complex, and unique.
The purchasing process tends to be quite formal and well specified for acquiring the
services of a project design team (e.g., architects and engineers). Once selected, these
external consultants often work in concert with in-house design and engineering staff;
however, the relative influence of each group varies by organization and project. The
project architects and engineers specify much of the material and equipment that is
purchased. These specifications are subject to relevant codes, standards, and standard
practices.
The building design is then packaged into a formal invitation for contractors to bid on the
construction. This formal process is conducted and the winning contractor is selected to
construct the building. This contractor is responsible for purchasing all of the building
components according to the specifications in the building design. The contractor, or
subcontractors hired by the contractor, buys the components of the building and does

07/17/00 18
the construction. (There are variations on this design-bid approach to new construction
projects, but in all cases the purchasing is done through the contractor. In a design-
build approach the designer and contractor are part of the same team (or firm) and are
hired by the purchasing entity at the same time.)
Under the auspices of the general contractor, the purchasing of building components
can be much more informal since it is outside the public organization’s purchasing
processes. The long-term, variable nature of much construction usually includes
substitutions and change orders. During construction, energy efficient products are
sometimes replaced with lower cost, less efficient products due to budget constraints.
Operations and Maintenance Services
Many of the organizations we talked with – which tended to be large – conduct day-to-
day maintenance activities with in-house staff. The few smaller organizations we talked
with in our study have fewer staff and hire more outside services on an as-needed
basis. When agencies need expertise beyond what is available in-house, they hire that
service. Specialized services might include the handling of hazardous wastes, dealing
with emergency situations, and the maintenance of specialized equipment.
Agencies have the latitude to hire special services based on qualifications, not just on
price. The methods used to hire these services include: hiring on a one-time basis;
through a master contract; as part of a service agreement (that is part of the purchase
of the equipment); or through developing a list of qualified providers through a request
for qualifications.
Other Purchasing Alternatives
Four other types of purchasing approaches are commonly used by public agencies:
Using master contracts developed by other agencies. Local governments often
“piggyback” on the contracts of other local governments or make use of state master
contracts. These contracts are developed using formal purchasing guidelines for the
initiating government; these guidelines may or may not match the purchasing
requirements of those who piggyback.
Developing in-house annual supply contracts or master contracts. This mechanism
also creates a master contract, but it is developed using the agency’s rules, and is
often mandatory across all departments within an agency, even for small purchases.
Developing cooperative purchasing arrangements. By banding together, agencies
can leverage their buying power. In cooperative buying arrangements, agencies
agree upon specifications and competition requirements.
Emergency purchase procedures. Emergencies can invoke exceptions to normal
buying procedures. Emergency buying focuses on speed and solving the problem
rather than on formal competition, detailed specification, and extensive
documentation.

07/17/00 19
Key Variables in Purchasing
In all agencies we interviewed, the following factors affected purchasing. Many of these
factors tended to interact with one another in the buying of products and services:
Laws, Regulations, Rules, Policies, And Authorities
This study tried to understand what rules were important – both written and unwritten –
for each purchasing operation. We did not focus upon cataloguing the specifics of the
variety of laws, regulations, rules, policies, and authorities that could affect purchasing
activities in the public agencies we interviewed.
In general, rules are part and parcel of procurement activities because governments
need to be able to document and justify how they spend the public’s money. Public
agencies operate under a variety of formal rules, regulations, and ordinances regarding
purchasing. These rules set both the specifics of purchasing procedures and the
agency’s view toward purchasing activities. Every agency has its own rules, but each
may also be affected by the rules from other agencies – especially from one level of
government to another (e.g., federal to state to local governments).
More specific drivers behind operative rules and regulations include:
Ensuring a consistent, fair and competitive environment for purchasing;
Ensuring access to a variety of vendors;
Complying with specific initiatives such as use of Minority and Women Owned
Businesses or the purchase of recycled content products;
Meeting community values;
Promoting streamlined, efficient, and timely purchasing;
Ensuring efficient tracking of contracts, purchases, and stores;
Meeting the requirements of users;
Getting the best price for the product specified; and
Avoiding fraudulent or wasteful activities.
Rules in one jurisdiction can directly affect purchasing at other jurisdictions, when:
Local agencies use federal or state money;
Local agencies make use of master purchasing contracts or cooperative agreements
established by several jurisdictions; and

07/17/00 20
A law at a higher level applies to purchasing in all local level public agencies. For
instance, in one state, we found that state law requires that all public agencies solicit
formal bids for all purchases over a certain amount.
Despite the web of rules that may surround purchasing, interpretation and application of
those rules may vary greatly. For instance:
Many smaller purchases (such as those below $5,000) do not need to comply with
the same constraints placed upon larger purchases;
Ordinances can be ignored. In several of the agencies interviewed, an ordinance
was passed to give preference to buying recycled content products. However, for a
variety of reasons, this ordinance was not enforced over time;
Buyers may exercise competitive rules in more situations than is actually required;
Individuals (champions) can choose to promote certain types of buying (e.g., green
purchases) independent of organizational rules;
Politicians can intervene in purchasing practices;
Central purchasing authorities may oversee purchases, even those they are not
required to handle, because users request their help; and
Use of master contracts from other jurisdictions might mean different rules are in
place than those of the initiating jurisdiction.
Meeting Competition Requirements
Most public agencies in the Northwest are required by policy, laws, regulations, and
ordinances to purchase competitively under certain conditions. (Greater requirements
for ensuring competition are one of the major differences between public sector and
private sector purchasing.) The goals of these requirements are to ensure a variety of
vendors, no special treatment to specific vendors, and competitive prices for the
products and services desired. However, competitive requirements vary greatly by the
cost of the purchase, the type of product purchased, and the user needs and vendor
relationships that have developed over time.
Ensuring competition was important to the purchasing philosophies of the agencies in
this study, but as this section illustrates, it received more or less emphasis depending
upon the following types of factors:
The value of the purchase;
The type of product being purchased; and
The availability of an existing contract for the desired item.
Even where formal competition is not required, most public agencies say they support a
competitive environment where they encourage a variety of vendors to bid on goods

07/17/00 21
and services. The agency then evaluates the bids and acquires the good or service
from the "lowest responsive and responsible bidder." This commonly used phrase is
interpreted in terms of the specifications in the request for bids and can produce
different results: from acquiring products at the lowest first cost, to including the
maintenance, fuel, and environmental costs of a product, to weighting qualifications
over cost.
Each agency interviewed in this study had specific guidelines for purchasing products
and services at different dollar amounts; at each level, competitive requirements were
different. Agencies had three or four levels of purchases that, in general, corresponded
to low, medium, and high dollar values. Dollar limits might change with the type of
purchase being made – for instance, construction limits might differ from limits on
commodity purchases. (Note: Besides competition, dollar limits also are part of the
overall system of controlling purchases.)
Table 2 outlines four levels of purchasing, the range of dollar limits associated with each
level, how purchasing at each level is typically handled, and alternative purchasing
methods that might be employed unrelated to any specific dollar level. As shown in the
table, the four possible levels of purchasing within the 17 agencies we interviewed
included:
1. Petty cash. Emphasizes buyer autonomy, no competition, and few procedures.
Petty cash is used for small, immediately needed purchases.
2. Direct buy. For less expensive purchases, but with limits ranging up to $2,500
or $5,000. Direct buy procedures are informal and emphasize individual buyer
choice, often with required departmental approval. Although competitive thinking
is assumed, competition is rarely documented. Direct buy also may use easy
purchase methods, such as credit cards and purchase orders. It is an important
category for this study since many energy-consuming products are likely to be
purchased this way.
3. Informal competition. For intermediate dollar purchases, but among the 17
agencies, the range was wide ($1,000 to $100,000). Informal competition usually
requires at least three informal bids and ultimate approval by a central
purchasing authority. As with direct buying, informal requirements can result in
buying patterns that depend on individual or collective past experience that can
limit innovation. On the other hand, a less formal approach can encourage
innovation and flexibility, allowing new types of products and services to be tried
and champions of innovation to surface (e.g., for green purchases or for energy
efficiency).
4. Formal competition. For higher dollar purchases, usually $25,000 and up.
Formal purchasing requires multiple sealed bids and involvement of a central
purchasing authority. It requires a written specification process, usually a
cooperative effort between end-users and the central purchasing authority. This

07/17/00 22
can result in high end-user satisfaction and a thorough exploration of the
marketplace and of innovations. However, the process can be time consuming
and disconnects can occur between the end-user and the central authority.
Notably, as shown in the third column of Table 2, public agencies employ a variety of
alternative purchasing methods, such as piggybacking off of master contracts
developed by other jurisdictions, and using emergency buying procedures. These
mechanisms can change the competitive nature of the purchasing being done. In the
case of using master contracts, the jurisdictions or central purchasing departments
developing the master contracts would set the competition requirements. In the case of
emergency buying, competitive rules are likely to be relaxed.
Table 2. General Competition Parameters for Purchasing
Type of
Purchase
Dollar Limit Range
and Exclusions
Procedures/Authorities/
Requirements
Other Purchase
Methods
Petty Cash Generally below $100,
often combined with
Direct Buy level
Employee choice, no competition
required, decentralized in
department
Direct Buy From $0 - $5,000, with
the top limit varying
from $800 to $5,000.
Professional services
and construction might
be excluded. State
universities might
have different limits
than other state
agencies.
Employee choice, decentralized in
department. May require
department approval. Little
bidding, although 3 quotes may be
technically required. Must comply
with relevant policies /laws. Use
purchase orders (LPO),
purchasing cards. Master
contracts may supercede direct
buying.
Informal
Competition
From $1,000 -
$100,000, with many
variations.
Up to 3 informal written or
telephone bids /quotes. Usually
central purchasing involved,
although department may lead.
Formal
Competition
From $25,000 up. Formal IFB/RFP sealed bid,
competitive process, often with a
central purchasing authority
leading the process although
specifications usually developed
with end-users.
Use of master
contracts developed
by other jurisdictions,
most often states
Developing in-house
master or annual
supply contracts,
which may be
mandatory for
departments
Use of cooperative
purchasing groups to
increase buying
power
Emergency buying
procedures
Table 3 underscores that there is much variation in the specifics of how competition
guidelines are structured. This table shows more specific examples from the 17
agencies covered in this study and highlights the diversity that can occur.

07/17/00 23
Table 3. Examples of Competitive Structures
Dollar Ranges and Limits Procedures/Authorities Other Purchase Methods
Large City A
 Under $5,000; <$100, petty
cash
 Departments purchase using limited purchase
order (LPO) or City Card, but must meet
overall regulations and policies
 $5,000-$41,000; professional
services up to $19,000
 Department sends purchase requisition to
Purchasing which gets 3 informal quotes,
chooses vendor, and creates purchase order.
 Over $41K; for construction,
begins at $25K; for
professional services begins
at $19,000
 Purchasing oversees formal competitive bid
process, dept. approval and requirements
 About 200 annual supply
contracts for large
quantity purchases
across bureaus
 State purchasing
contracts
 Emergency Purchase
Orders
Large City B
 <$1,000  Employees choose, submit P.O. to Purchasing
 $1,000 - $5,000  Departments solicit 3 bids; forwarded to
Purchasing for approval
 Over $5,000; more formal
when over $25,000
 Purchasing runs process. Ads for bids for
>$25,000; smaller bids listed w/ Purchasing
 Establishes master
contracts or uses
contracts developed by
others
County A
 <$2,500, $1,000 for Solid
Waste
 Anyone can buy anything
 >$2,500 - $25,000  Purchasing requires 3 informal quotes
 >$25,000  Formal sealed bids through Purchasing
 Blanket contracts for
some commodities –
may be mandatory use
County B
 <$2,500  Department discretion
 $2,500 - 50,000  Buy off County/State contracts or may buy
via Purchasing using informal bids
 >$50,000  Purchasing handles competitively bid process
 County and State
master contracts
 Inter-Cooperative
Purchasing Group
Independent Municipal Corp.
 Up to $2,000  One informal phone bid required
 $2,000-$100,000; $0-$40,000
for construction
 More formal RFQs; 3-5 phone or written bids
 Above $100,000; $40,000 for
construction
 Sealed bidding process through purchasing
 Piggybacking on State
and City contracts
State (excludes universities)
 $0-$800  Direct Buy: Obtain desired quality at lowest
price
 $800 - $35,000  Informal Request, for quote to at least 3
bidders
 >$35,000  Formal RFP or IFB
 State master contracts
used by state agencies
and others; use may be
mandatory

07/17/00 24
Centralization Versus Decentralization
In its pure form, decentralized purchasing means a buying structure where individuals,
departments, or bureaus handle the purchasing process and no central purchasing
department exists (although each follows similar regulations and/procedures).
Centralized purchasing, on the other hand, means that buying is accomplished through
a central authority, and follows an established set of steps.
In the 17 organizations we studied, most agencies combined aspects of both
decentralized and centralized purchasing. The two mid-size cities in the sample,
however, had no centralized purchasing authority. Consistent with the criteria described
in the "Competition" section above, the use of a centralized authority generally
depended upon the cost and type of the purchase as well as the philosophy of the
organization. Centralized purchasing authorities are usually used for more expensive
purchases and to develop master contracts, while decentralized methods are used for
less expensive products and services. Decentralized purchasing can be subject to
fewer competitive requirements and puts most responsibility in the hands and
judgement of end-users. It is important to note that tension can exist between
proponents of these two approaches to buying.
When a centralized purchasing department is involved in purchases, its major role
varied considerably among the agencies. These roles including serving as a:
Service bureau with largely administrative responsibilities, with end-users having the
greatest say in what is purchased;
Central player involved in helping end-users develop specifications and accomplish
the bidding/decision process, especially for more costly purchases; or
Support to end-users in terms of education and training.
The degree of centralization/decentralization can change over time within public
agencies (depending on changes in leadership). Many of our respondents mentioned it
as an ongoing issue, since buying through a centralized authority often meant a less
responsive route to buying, involving more time, more steps, and more paperwork.
State universities in particular seemed to mention their push to have a buying authority
separate from state central purchasing authorities. However, there were concerns
about decentralized buying because it was harder to track what was occurring and the
extent to which purchasing was being done in a consistent, fair, and cost-effective
manner.
Perceptions about the level of centralization, and the value of a centralized purchasing
authority also varied. In some cases there appeared to be good cooperation between
the end-users and centralized departments. In other cases, end-users were not aware
of the resources available through the central authority or they saw the central authority
as a bureaucratic structure to work around.

07/17/00 25
Outsourcing Versus Insourcing
Public agencies can either provide services within their own organizations or they can
contract them out to other organizations. Outsourcing involves using private sources to
deliver internal government services as well as citizen services.
Among the organizations we interviewed, the range of service delivery was wide. One
medium-sized city outsourced almost everything, from meeting internal printing needs to
contracting out for utility and fire services. On the other hand, many of the larger
organizations we spoke with kept the majority of these services in-house and
outsourcing was limited to services requiring specialized expertise (such as hazardous
waste handling, specialized equipment maintenance, or unique legal issues).
Outsourcing tends to remove the public agency from specifying the products and
services that the contractor uses, leaving those decisions up to the contractor.
Therefore, even if an organization wanted to use green or energy efficient products and
services, this requirement could get lost when the purchasing is in the hands of an
outside contractor.
How Specifications Are Developed
Product and service specifications are at the heart of any purchase, regardless of its
size or the purchasing procedures followed. However, the type of specification used
(see below), the extent to which specifications are formalized, and the number and type
of people involved in specifying any particular purchase varies widely. Purchasing
specifications can range from being a brand and model specification to a complex set of
written performance standards, i.e., for building a new wastewater treatment plant.
In general, the purpose of specifications is to clearly, concisely, and unambiguously
describe the purchase requirement in terms of the minimum quality level required to
perform the intended function. Three basic types of specifications are generally used by
public agencies, with a fourth type being a combination of the first three. These
approaches include:
1. Brand or trade name specifications. In this approach, the purchaser specifies
a specific brand name and model number to describe the minimum standards of
quality required for the purchase. Competition among brand names is obtained
by adding the phrase “or equal” after the brand name. This type of specification
is the quickest and easiest way to describe the requirement and is often used for
lower dollar purchases.
2. Design specifications. The purchaser describes the item in terms of its
dimensional and physical characteristics. Design specifications focus on how an
item or product is to be manufactured or constructed. Professional design
assistance is frequently required and the specifications often convey the thinking
of the architect or engineer involved. Engineering drawings often accompany
this type of specification.

07/17/00 26
3. Performance/Functional specifications. The purchaser describes in words the
function that the item or product is to perform. This type of specification is more
concerned with what the product does than with its dimensions, materials, and
configurations. Suppliers are encouraged to innovate and use technologically
advanced processes to meet the purchaser’s requirements.
As mentioned above, these specification approaches can be combined; however, the
more detailed and complex the specifications become, the greater the cost of
specification development. During the course of this research we were told about
specification development processes that lasted six months or more.
Within the organizations we studied, the end-user of a product or service is usually
involved, at some point, in developing specifications, whether the process is
decentralized and less formal or centralized and more formal. When an existing piece
of equipment needs to be replaced, and its cost allows informal purchasing, end-users
tend to replace the item with a similar or identical unit. No specifications are written
beyond the purchase order.
Where larger purchases are planned, and a central purchasing authority is involved,
that entity may either lead specification development or it may assist end-users in
developing them. Often a team of end-users is organized to develop specifications so
that all user needs can be identified. Existing specifications for similar products are a
common starting point for specification development. Central purchasing may also
begin the process by gathering sample or model specifications from other jurisdictions,
websites, or professional organizations. For master contracts and annual supply
contracts, central purchasing entities often have more influence and involvement in
specification development, and they tend to push more toward performance
specifications. Where agencies use another organization’s master contracts, they also
use that organization’s specifications; thus, end-users select among existing options.
Standards and standard practices – such as design, engineering or energy efficiency
standards – can also influence specifications. These types of standards can particularly
come into play for new construction projects where design, engineering, and technical
requirements are high. Specifications can be developed by in-house design and
engineering staff, by outside consultants and developers where in-house staff is
minimally involved, or by an integrated collaboration of the two.
In a number of the jurisdictions we studied, individual departments had developed
standards for some energy consuming products such as lighting and motors. These
standards tended to be somewhat loose for replacement projects, and more defined for
new construction or major renovation projects.
In a few of the agencies we interviewed, some progress has been made in moving
toward “best value” bidding. In these cases, a best value product would be specified
and then the lowest bid for that best value product would be chosen. A best value
perspective allows for the consideration of multiple variables such as price,

07/17/00 27
maintenance and energy costs, staff training, and internet ordering capacity within the
specification.
Agency Culture and Outside Influences
All purchases take place within a complex social/professional/market context, where
experience, professional networks and standards, organizational culture and values,
organizational hierarchy and bureaucracy, and the changing marketplace significantly
influence government purchasing. Purchasing systems are dynamic, not static, but
agencies vary quite a bit in their desire and ability to change and innovate.
Some of the agencies in this study thus have an approach and philosophy to purchasing
that still works well for them and they are contemplating few changes. Others are now
in the process of making significant changes to their purchasing approaches. Not
surprisingly, larger agencies such as states and major cities tend to develop more
complicated systems than do smaller ones. Further, these larger agencies appear to be
the ones looking for ways to become more simplified, more responsive, and more
efficient. Notably, they also have the resources to devote to orchestrating change.
Several types of internal actors can influence purchasing activities. These actors bring
varying orientations to purchasing, including:
End users – non-professional buyers who specify what they need and buy what
they need (especially smaller purchases). Their primary job is to use what is bought.
This group is more interested in the result than the process and may be at various
levels in the hierarchy.
Purchasing officials – the professional buyer whose job it is to make sure
administrative procedures are followed and that end users are satisfied. They may
also be responsible for educating end-users about the purchasing process. This
group pays a lot of attention to the process. They are often housed in a central
purchasing entity.
Political leaders and policy makers – a generally non-buying group that
nonetheless sets policies that can significantly affect what is purchased. They are
interested in seeing measurable results or having memorable anecdotes from the
policies they advocate.
Two sets of external actors also influence purchasing:
Professional networks and organizations – serve as a source of information and
example for all the internal actors listed above. For purchasing officials, these
networks appear especially important.
Vendors – serve as the supply side of purchasing. This group provides information
and sells products to buyers. In government agencies, bureaucratic and competitive
requirements often make this relationship weak, although these relationships may be
quite strong for individual end-users.

07/17/00 28
Philosophy and new ideas in purchasing (see Chapter 4 on Trends) can also influence
changes in the purchasing system, including:
the desire to be more efficient;
good government initiatives;
the need to increase convenience – e.g., use of credit cards and electronic payment
and tracking methods;
developing websites to provide vendor and purchasing contract and product
information;
accessing vendor websites;
investigating electronic commerce opportunities;
finding ways to decrease the number of suppliers to be considered;
considering best value instead of just low cost; and
using more cooperative purchasing arrangements.
Public Versus Private Procurement
Although this study did not focus on private sector purchasing systems, several
interviewees with experience in both the public and private sectors, pointed out a variety
of similarities and their differences. What we learned from them, along with information
from our secondary research efforts (notably from studies conducted by the Center for
Advanced Purchasing Studies, or CAPS), is captured in this section.
Our interview findings support Kolchin's (1990) study across sectors (industrial,
institutional, governmental, and retailing) that found public and private purchasing
similar in their:
Overall goals, and the processes to meet those goals (i.e., meeting the needs of
users while doing so at the lowest possible cost);
Combining of centralization and decentralization to organize buying activities;
Use of professional organizations as an important mechanism to train and develop
staff;
Use of multiple strategies to improve purchasing practices; and
View that cost-containment is the bottom line of "good buying."

07/17/00 29
Kolchin also points to some differences, also supported by our interviews. Compared to
the private sector, government agencies:
Make greater use of detailed procedures (i.e. government procurement is more
complex, reflecting a more bureaucratic organizational structure, perhaps resulting in
less innovation, less competition, and a slower pace);
Make greater use of buying cooperatives to leverage purchases, largely because
they often have fewer resources than private sector companies; and
Have a reduced focus on buyer-supplier relationships. Developing strong, long-term
buyer-supplier relationships is common in the private sector, to maximize
cooperation and efficiency. However, due to competitive and other requirements
that assume an arms-length stance, public sector purchasing emphasizes the buyer
viewpoint rather than the relationship of buyer and supplier.

07/17/00 30
Chapter 3 – Public Sector Purchasing of
Energy Consuming Products
This chapter characterizes the patterns and status of energy efficient buying among the
Northwest agencies we studied. In this chapter we:
Explore how two trends may directly encourage the purchase of energy efficient
products;
Discuss the patterns that agencies use to buy the three types of energy consuming
products that are focused upon in this study;
Present a snapshot of the 17 agencies and their current efficient buying activities;
Summarize the advice respondents gave us for increasing energy efficient buying
practices.
Two Trends: “Green” and “Best Value” Buying
Two trends – being “green” and buying for the “best value” instead of lowest price – are
currently attracting government policy-makers, purchasing professionals, and end-
users. (See Chapter 4 for further discussion of these trends.) Despite growing interest
in these trends, attention to buying energy efficient products and services is not typical
among the Northwest agencies we studied. This should not be surprising. Even when
products consume energy, energy is rarely their “reason to be” or their most visible
attribute. Indeed, energy use is hard to make visible and its connection to being green
and to value buying is not straightforward. Agencies buy energy consuming products so
they can make clear copies, get good light, or reliably run pumps. If these products
happen to be green or save money by saving energy, those considerations are usually
secondary or added benefits.
Most Northwest agencies appear to be more green thinking than green acting when it
comes to purchasing, even though they may be quite environmentally proactive on
other fronts (e.g., recycling programs). Except for a few notable cases, agencies do not
routinely buy green, and any green buying largely depends on individual buyers who
champion the cause. In addition, the buying of energy consuming products is largely
decentralized, rests in the hands of many users, is informal, and often is not well
documented, except for the largest purchases.
In the few agencies where being “green” is integrated with the purchasing system, or
where resource efficiency has been mandated, energy efficiency concerns in
purchasing still tend to pale beside more touchable and visible green buying, such as
buying recycled content products. In some agencies, there even appeared to be
competition among green causes for attention and support.

07/17/00 31
In general, purchasers say they want to meet user needs and get the lowest cost or the
best value. Energy efficient products are rarely the lowest cost, but they can be part of
getting the best value. For buyers to pay attention to energy use, it usually has to be
connected with other things they find important such as better performance, less
maintenance, a longer life, or a lower cost to operate. So, considering energy efficiency
is both an extra step in thinking and a step removed from the most important reasons
people have for buying a product in the first place.
Patterns of Energy Efficient Purchasing
Our study considered three categories of energy consuming products: office equipment,
replacement equipment for existing buildings, and equipment for new construction. In
this section, we explore how energy efficiency is considered (or not considered) in
buying these products.
Buying Office Equipment
Energy consumption appears to have little importance for most buyers and users of
energy consuming office equipment (desktop computers, monitors, printers, fax
machines and copiers). Energy use is a hidden feature and other features – such as
speed, friendliness, and reliability – are the attributes users want most. Vendors also do
not tend to promote the energy efficiency of this equipment, but rather focus on
matching user preferences.
In the case of computers, the Energy Star rating resides on many major brands, and
buyers/users often end up with fairly efficient models without a conscious effort.
However, we were told of several instances where energy efficient products have been
purchased (e.g., Energy Star compliant computers and copiers), only to have their
energy saving functions (i.e., powering down or sleep mode) never enabled, or
disabled, because users say it wastes time to wait for machines to wake up.
Several patterns of buying exist for office equipment including:
Buying as needed, or for quick replacement. Energy efficiency is unlikely to be
considered. Products are purchased through direct buy and informal purchasing
methods, where the purchases fall within the specified dollar limits. Departments or
single users identify needs and preferences and specify what they want to vendors
of their choice. In the case of computers, there may be a departmental information
technology group that sets the specifications so that equipment is compatible.
Buying off master contracts. This method has several variations, and may be the
most amenable to including energy efficiency as a criterion. Central purchasing
works with users across departments to define the specifications across a wide
spectrum of users (some of which may champion energy efficiency). Centralized
buyers may be more aware of the value of energy savings than individual
departments or single users, and may pay more attention to trends, to professional

07/17/00 32
networks, and to agency policy. Agencies use master contracts to buy larger
quantities of office equipment, and departments may be required (or may want) to
purchase from a master contract, even for smaller amounts. The reasons for buying
from a master contract include low price, technological consistency, and ease of
buying.
Buying by putting out formal bids. Departments or agencies may also pursue more
formal bid processes for office equipment outside making use of master contracts. A
centralized purchasing authority would likely be involved. If efficiency is raised as a
concern, it could get considered as a specification in the bid.
Buying Equipment for Existing Buildings
Energy consuming equipment for existing buildings includes lights, motors, chillers, and
HVAC equipment. For these products, energy efficiency tends to be secondary to
considerations such as maintainability, lifetime, performance, safety, availability, and
price. In addition, some buyers of energy efficient products have horror stories about
their performance – like the lamps that burned out two weeks after they were installed.
For building equipment, the existing piece of equipment is the starting point for
determining its replacement. If the replacement is urgent (e.g., a motor goes out), the
time to consider alternatives is limited. In this case, direct purchase, or even an
emergency purchase, would be used. With less urgent purchases, equipment for
existing buildings would be obtained through the same methods described for office
equipment.
Energy efficiency may be considered to the extent that the existing equipment is energy
efficient (e.g., an existing motor was energy efficient), and thus similar equipment would
be specified. This type of buying would not be able to take advantage of efficiency
improvements due to technology advances. We found a few cases where energy
efficiency standards (formal or informal) exist for lighting or motors. In a few cases the
development of these standards was influenced by the organizations participation in a
utility sponsored energy efficiency program (such as an energy efficient lighting
program). These standards, however, did not tend to be organization-wide. In one city,
for instance, an energy efficiency champion at the wastewater treatment facilities is in a
position to develop, foster, and ensure standards within his department, but his
expertise is not well known or used outside of his own department.
Buying Equipment for New Buildings
Lighting, chillers, HVAC equipment, pumps, motors and other energy using equipment
for new buildings are included in this category. These products may be the largest and
most long lasting investments that agencies make in efficiency. Fortunately, energy use
may be somewhat more visible with new building equipment decisions because the
whole building is being designed and analyzed at one time, not just its replacement
parts. Some architects, engineers, and clients may consider operations and
maintenance costs in their design due to the size of the project, due to high operation

07/17/00 33
costs of other buildings, or due to good experiences with energy efficiency programs for
new buildings offered in the region for many years.
Other reasons public agencies may look at efficiency in new construction include:
Efficiency analysis requirements. An energy life cycle cost analysis (ELCCA) is
required in one state (Washington) for public buildings over 25,000 square feet,
although it is not consistently applied (making it more of an opportunity than a
requirement). Other agencies use life cycle cost analysis on a limited basis.
Utility incentives. Some organizations have a lot of experience using utility
incentives.
Performance standards for energy efficient products. Standards varied from formal
to informal, to none at all.
Quality needs. Energy efficient products may be easier to maintain, last longer, and
improve performance. These criteria are more likely to be considered if
users/maintenance staff are included in the process of specification.
Sustainable/Green Buildings. There may be an interest on the part of the
organization to produce a showcase, sustainable building. This will usually result in
design criteria that promote the use of resource efficient materials.
Building Commissioning. This activity may indirectly encourage the purchase and
application of efficient equipment.
New construction projects go through a bid process, but it is often handled outside of
the central purchasing authority (for instance, by a department that oversees contracts
for new construction). The contracting agent usually works with a departmental project
manager to construct a bid package; this package includes design and equipment
specifications (that could address energy efficiency). The project is then put out to
formal bid with design/contractor firms, bids are submitted, and the winning team
chosen.
The general contractor on the winning team does the subsequent bidding and buying of
energy consuming equipment. Decisions regarding this equipment may change over
time. Even if energy efficient equipment was originally specified, design changes,
money constraints, delivery times, and other factors could result in change orders that
reduce the level of energy efficiency of the equipment or systems built into the building.
Snapshots of Energy Efficient (EE) Buying
Success Factors
It might be helpful to imagine our 17 agencies as a scatter plot with a gently sloping
upward line representing a continuum from “low” to “high” levels of energy efficient
purchasing. Around this line, a few small agencies would be grouped at the low end,
the bulk of the agencies would be dispersed around a wide middle, and several would

07/17/00 34
be hovering around medium-high. While we can generally group the agencies at these
levels around this continuum, their individual points on the plot remind us that each
agency has individual characteristics when it comes to energy efficient purchasing.
All the agencies we studied have more potential to buy efficiency. Some were strong in
buying efficiency for new construction, but not for replacement or office equipment.
Others stood out because of a strong commitment to the environment that appeared to
be edging them toward energy efficiency. Still others were just getting started (e.g., had
recently hired a Resource Manager), but they were moving in the right direction.
Our research suggests nine “success” factors for energy efficient purchasing within
public agencies. These success factors are also entry or leverage points for market
transformation efforts. In general, the more of these success factors, the more likely the
agency is to take energy efficiency into account – or be poised to take it into account –
when buying energy consuming products and energy related services. Success factors
include:
Top political, policy-maker, and/or citizen support for green buying or energy
efficiency (Top Support);
Active energy efficiency policies and/or resources (includes energy office, utility
or other energy efficiency staff) (EE Policy/Resources);
Active "green" policies or resources (Green Think/Act);
Active Resource Managers (RM);
Specific funding for energy efficiency or environmentally protective approaches
(EE Funding);
Strong user/buyer education about buying energy efficient (EE Education);
Experience with energy efficient buying (EE Buying);
Influential energy efficiency champions (EE Champions); and
Use vendors promoting energy efficient or green products (EE/Green Vendors).
Tables 4, 5, and 6 show the extent of variation among the 17 agencies, to display their
specific energy efficient purchasing attributes, and to connect the data from individual
organizations with the factors listed above. The headings on each table reflect:
Type of agency – i.e., city, county, state, federal;
Level of energy efficient buying : low, low to medium, and medium to high;
Efforts to buy efficient for: office, replacement, and new construction products,
equipment, and services; and
Success factors (see list with abbreviations above).

07/17/00 35
Top Tier Agencies (Medium to High Efficiency Buying)
Table 4 is a snapshot of the four agencies that had progressed the most in pursuing
energy efficient buying. This table shows that a commitment to energy efficient buying
practices can occur at any level of government
Notably, each of these agencies has at least six of the nine success factors, with all
having these four factors: top down support; energy efficient policies and/or resources
(e.g., a federal energy mandate, an energy office); available funding for energy
efficiency efforts; and experience with buying energy efficient products. Three of the
four had a strong overall environmental ethic that they had built or were consciously
trying to build. Three also had an active Resource Manager. More detail about two of
these agencies is given in examples following the table.
Table 4. Snapshots of Four Top Tier Agencies (Medium to High EE Buying)
Type
Level of
EE
Buying
Effort:
EE Office
Equipment
Effort:
EE Existing
Equipment
Effort:
EE New
Buildings
Success Factors
University Medium
to High
Energy Star
computers
EE regularly
considered for
lighting, HVAC
Overall resource
conservation,
including energy
efficiency, routinely
included; LCCA
Top Support
EE Policy/Resources
Green Think/Act
Active RM
EE Funding
EE Education
EE Buying
EE Champions
EE/Green Vendors
County Medium
to High
EE computers
awarded extra
points in bid
process
RM works with
maintenance staff to
optimize efficiency
RM works with
vendors to ensure
high efficiency in
new buildings and
major renovations
Top Support
EE Policy/Resources
Green Think/Act
Active RM
EE Funding
EE Buying
EE/Green Vendors
Federal Medium
to High
Energy Star
computers/
printers;
Bulk purchase of
EE h-axis washers
Large EE project with
ESCO/Utility including
lighting, controls,
motors, drives –
established new
lighting standards;
LCCA for long life
products
Design standards/
mandate for EE;
Some LCCA
Top Support
EE Policy /Resources
Active RM
EE Funding
EE Education
EE Buying
Large City Medium
to High
Digital copiers (not
bought for EE)
Some EE motors,
some use LCCA;
utility lighting retrofits
w/ rebates set
informal EE
standards
Some EE
implemented with
utility rebates.
Some interest in
green buildings
Top Support
EE Policy/Resources
Green Think/Act
EE Funding
EE Buying
EE Champions
Note: While every attempt has been made to make these snapshots accurate, our level of knowledge of each one varies
due to the number and type of people we interviewed and the depth and accuracy of respondent viewpoints.

07/17/00 36
Example 1 – A "Green" University: This university has built a pervasive green buying
ethic and while energy efficient buying is somewhat less strong than other green buying,
it is present and growing. The university employs a comprehensive environmental
policy and a formalized recycling policy, both of which grew out of student activism
almost twenty years ago. They focus on “changing the culture” toward greenness over
the long term.
Green thinking has been mandated through policy and supported through ongoing
educational efforts. A central purchasing support service has major responsibilities for
continuously educating and assisting the many end-users who purchase products within
this largely decentralized purchasing system. Green goals are specified along with the
ways those goals can be achieved through purchasing environmentally safe and
resource efficient products. Life cycle cost analysis is regularly used as part of
purchasing. Vendors have become more attentive to these environmental goals and in
identifying products that respond to the University's needs. A new energy manager has
just been added with the mandate to increase campus attention to energy efficiency,
including purchasing.
Example 2 – A City with Potential: A major city is environmentally aware with a variety
of environmental initiatives underway. This city has an energy office that helps the city
pursue efficiency projects and that has tracked energy use to show that, despite growth,
consumption has remained stable. The office fostered lighting retrofits using utility
incentives and this appears to have promoted higher efficiency levels for lighting
throughout the city.
A citizen-based sustainability committee and an employee-based Green Team also
attend to environmental issues. While ordinances exist that favor recycled content
products and life cycle cost analysis, they tend not to be widely applied. Using energy
efficiency as a criterion for purchasing products is currently limited to special projects or
a few efficiency champions, such as a manager of the waste water treatment facilities
who has developed a set of guidelines for ensuring premium equipment is bought,
where “premium” includes efficient.
Middle Tier Agencies (Low to Medium Efficiency Buying)
Great variation exists among these eleven agencies as shown in Table 5. Two success
factors which were strongly in place in the top tier agencies are rare among these
agencies: top down support and specific energy efficiency policy (although several have
good efficiency resources, such as a conservation-minded utility or an energy office or
department). In addition, Resource Managers, strong educational activities, and
relationships with green vendors are not present in most.

07/17/00 37
Table 5. Snapshots of Eleven Middle-Tier Agencies (Low to Medium EE Buying)
Type
Level
of EE
Buying
Effort:
EE Office
Equipment
Effort:
EE Existing
Equipment
Effort:
EE New Buildings
Success Factors
State Low to
Medium
Little apparent
– not important
to end users
Work with ESCO to
do EE retrofits
Energy LCCA required for
buildings >25,000 sq. ft.;
LED exit signs standard;
higher EE lighting standards
followed
EE Policy/Funding for GA
RM for GA
EE Funding
EE Buying
EE/Green Vendors
University Low to
Medium
Little apparent Major lighting
retrofits with EE
bond, utility
incentives
Commissioning; EE
considered in design;
innovative EE approaches
EE Policy/Resources
RM
Green Think/Act
EE Funding
EE Buying
State Low to
Medium
Energy Star
computers
Limited LCCA for
large equipment
Little apparent EE Resources (Energy
Office)
EE Education (from State
Energy Office)
Green Think/Act
County Low to
Medium
Little apparent Insulation, lighting
retrofits; uses
LCCA
LCCA (5 year payback “the
key”)
Intermittent EE Funding
EE Buying
EE/Green Vendors
Energy Champion
Large City Low to
Medium
Energy star
computers,
copiers (sleep
mode may not
be enabled)
Little apparent Commissioning for new
public buildings; some green
building activities
Top Support
EE Resources (utility)
EE Funding
Green Think/Act
University Low to
Medium
Little apparent Little apparent Stringent EE standards;
commitment to high quality
buildings; some LCCA;
some green orientation
EE Policy/Resources
Green Think/Act
EE Funding
EE Buying
University Low to
Medium
Little apparent;
perhaps in
future for
computers and
copiers (digital)
Looks at energy
costs/savings vs.
equipment costs
Commissioning; EE in
design review, incorporation
of measures such as
variable freq. drives;
innovative EE (e.g., heating
kettles with central steam)
RM
EE Education
EE Buying
Independent
Municipal
Corporation
Low to
Medium
Consider
Energy Star
appliances;
little apparent
otherwise
Little apparent For large new development,
conducted LCCA and
implemented heating,
lighting, and windows
measures; do look at "price
point” for EE
EE Funding
EE Buying
EE Champions
County Low to
Medium
Energy Star
Computers
Lighting retrofits
only possible w/
utility rebates;
some LCCA
Limited use of LCCA; first
costs driver; some green
building activities
Top Support (green only)
Green Think/Act
Green Vendors (not EE)
School
District
Low to
Medium
E Star
Computers
LCCA for air
conditioning; ballast
replacements
Little apparent Active RM (new)
EE Buying
Large City Low to
Medium
E Star
Computers
Some LCCA,
especially for
electric T&D
equipment
Little apparent
EE Resources (utility)
EE Buying
Note: While every attempt has been made to make these snapshots accurate, our level of knowledge of each one varies due to
the number and type of people we interviewed and the depth and accuracy of respondent viewpoints.

07/17/00 38
Other findings of note include:
Being “green” may be important in other areas such as recycling or buying recycled
content products, but green doesn’t necessarily include energy efficiency.
Energy efficient equipment might be bought (e.g., computers and copiers), but the
energy saving features may not be enabled.
Energy champions may exist for individual departments, but do not influence the
whole organization very much.
Some energy efficiency “buys” tend to be invisible, such as Energy Star computers,
which tend to be industry standard, or consideration of digital copiers, where the
reasons to buy have little to do with efficiency.
Resource Managers appear to be strongly connected to new construction and major
renovation activities, but less so to office equipment and smaller replacement
projects.
Experience with utility incentive programs had mixed results for influencing future
energy efficiency activities.
Example 1 – A Strong Resource Manager. This university has an Energy Manager,
housed in Facilities Management, who has been instrumental in fostering efficiency in
new buildings, some with innovative approaches and some that have been
commissioned. In the past, the university also obtained energy efficiency bonds
allowing lighting retrofits in many buildings. These bonds are now spent and funding is
limited for any further upgrading. Still, energy efficiency is strongly on the table with the
presence of the Resource Manager. No general energy efficiency policy exists at the
university, there is no green ethic, and the work by this Resource Manager does not
appear to extend to other University functions outside of campus facilities.
Example 2 – A "Green" County. A large county has steadfastly pursued green
purchasing, which grew out of recycling initiatives. An Environmental Purchasing
Coordinator is very active, sponsoring educational efforts for green activities and use of
innovative green materials. But there appears to be an efficiency “gap” in crucial areas.
The county only uses life cycle cost analysis on a limited basis, and first costs are the
driver on new construction. Lighting rebates from electric utilities helped achieve more
efficient lighting, but staff report it would not be done otherwise. Energy Star computers
are specified, however.
Bottom Tier Agencies (Low Efficiency Buying)
Two medium sized cities are included in this tier, as depicted in Table 6. These are the
smallest of the agencies included in our study. This may suggest that small agencies
are less likely to have the resources needed to buy efficiency without a great deal of
support from other, larger entities. Clearly, they had few of the success factors present
in the other two tiers. One city, however, has a history of grass roots green behavior

07/17/00 39
(recycling program) and oversees a good deal of building activity; the other city has a
lapsed “buy recycled” policy and does little direct buying of energy consuming products.
Table 6. Snapshots of Two Bottom Tier Agencies (Very Low EE Buying)
Level of
EE
Buying
Effort:
EE Office
Equipment
Effort:
EE Existing
Equipment
Effort:
EE New
Buildings
Success Factors Present
Medium
City
Very Low
(little to
buy)
Little
apparent
Little apparent Little apparent None apparent (lapsed recycled content
buying policy)
Medium
City
Very Low Little
apparent
Little apparent Little apparent Green Think/Act
Note: While every attempt has been made to make these snapshots accurate, our level of knowledge of each one varies due to
the number and type of people we interviewed and the depth and accuracy of respondent viewpoints.
Example – An Outsourcing City. This new city appears to have little current potential
to buy energy efficient products. The city only owns three buildings, four cars, and three
copy machines. Purchasing is not centralized and most city services are outsourced
(e.g., water, energy, fire protection) to other entities that do their own purchasing. To
influence these purchases would mean developing and imposing different specifications
in the buying habits of these service providers. Although this city does have a recycled
content ordinance on the books, the city council member who championed it is no
longer in office and the ordinance is not active. The level of influence on energy related
purchasing could change if the city took on the delivery of more of its services.
Advice From Respondents
Respondents were asked to suggest ways to make energy efficient purchasing more
viable. Their advice is captured in the bullets below.
Connect Energy Efficient Products to Important Benefits. Our respondents provided
a list of benefits that they feel should be strongly connected to buying energy
efficient products. (It’s important, of course, that the products live up to these
claims.) These benefits are much more likely to be of interest to buyers and end-
users than energy efficiency alone. They advised us to emphasize that high
efficiency products:
 are premium products that last longer;
 have lower maintenance and operation costs;
 are safer;
 are more reliable;
 offer improved comfort;
 are innovative (can be perceived as negative, however);
 are good government;
 are the “best overall value”; and
 have everything to gain and nothing to lose.

07/17/00 40
Connect efficiency to other green topics and to good environment. Attach efficiency
to recycling and reuse and make it clear how energy efficiency can benefit the
environment (e.g., decreased pollution).
Devise methods to make energy efficiency visible and noteworthy. How many low-
income homes can be heated if an efficient government building is constructed?
How can money saved on energy efficient purchases be used elsewhere in
government? Efficiency can also be personalized by identifying actions staff can do
at home.
Make energy efficiency easier. Purchasers are busy and have no time to pay
attention to anything extra. Information about efficiency needs to be readily
available through their normal information channels and connected to attributes of
importance to buyers (see above). Purchasers are interested in education on how to
easily identify and purchase energy efficient products.
Use multiple approaches. Single pronged approaches to higher efficiency are
probably not enough. For instance, mandating efficiency, while important, can be
ignored unless support exists through:
 ongoing education;
 easily available and easy to use information;
 a good supply of high efficiency products from reliable vendors;
 establishing goals that are achievable and measurable; and
 collecting and disseminating success stories.
Influence and infiltrate professional networks. Professional associations are often
looking for topic ideas and speakers for conferences and meetings. Materials (in the
form of meeting or conference handouts and presentations) and speakers on energy
efficiency could be developed and offered to these organizations.
Foster imitation of successful energy efficiency efforts. Public organizations watch
one another’s activities. Governments would be interested in seeing examples of
how other governments successfully purchase energy efficient products and pursue
other avenues to sustainability and efficiency.
Motivate energy efficient supporters to spread the word. For instance, allow staff to
use the money saved from high efficiency choices on something politicians and /or
citizens will notice. Staff also appreciate opportunities to exchange information and
experience within the organization.
Correct misperceptions about who is responsible for energy efficiency. Buyers may
feel that enough energy efficiency is already built into codes and utility activities or
that “someone else” is doing it. Energy efficiency has to be made everyone’s
responsibility.
Connect energy bills to the sites where the energy is being used. This allows energy
benefits to be more easily seen and high use facilities with energy efficiency
opportunities to be identified
Make energy efficiency tools such as life cycle cost analysis more streamlined or
reframe these tools for purchasers as part of “best value” buying guidelines. These

07/17/00 41
tools will help demonstrate how high efficiency is not more costly overall and not
always more costly up front.
Increase awareness of tools, resources, and information sources that are already
available (e.g. MotorMaster). These tools could be more widely marketed and
distributed.

07/17/00 42
Chapter 4 – Key Trends Influencing Public Purchasing
As discussed in Chapter 2, public procurement systems tend to be dynamic (despite a
reputation of bureaucratic inertia) and subject to a variety of influences. Some
organizations we spoke to were in the process of changing their purchasing processes,
always with the hope of improving efficiency and effectiveness. Some spoke of making
significant changes while others indicated much more minor modifications. Barriers to
making changes included bureaucracy/organizational inertia, security issues, loss of
control, competitive requirements and technology limitations.
Two agencies in our study – a major city and a federal agency – illustrate the types of
motivations for changes in purchasing. The goals of re-engineering the city's
purchasing processes are to:
reduce procurement spending citywide, including transaction costs;
be more strategic in acquiring goods and services;
be more proactive in implementing social policies through contracting;
decrease the number of suppliers; and
use an automated system for purchasing transactions.
At the federal agency, the goals are to:
get away from the traditional transaction type processes; and
steer purchasing toward best business judgement rather than low price.
The respondents in our study described several trends they thought would influence
purchasing within their organizations over the next several years. Most organizations
are aware of these trends and are actively discussing them and following their progress.
Some are already responding to these trends, but others don’t expect to in the near
future. Key trends noted by respondents included:
Making awards based on best value (including factors such as service, delivery time,
quality, performance) rather than lowest first cost;
An increased use of electronic information and communication technologies;
Use of a smaller number of suppliers;
Development of partnerships with suppliers and vendors; and
Using cooperative purchasing to reduce procurement costs and to obtain more
competitive prices.

07/17/00 43
Many of these trends are in line with eighteen trends recently highlighted in the Future
of Purchasing research from the Center for Advanced Purchasing Studies (Carter
1998). While this research emphasizes private sector firms, trends equally relevant to
the public sector include:
Electronic commerce technologies will support efforts to improve purchasing
efficiency.
Supply-side strategies – i.e., relationships with suppliers – will be strengthened.
Strategies such as taking advantage of increased competition, development of
partnerships, linkages and alliances, and use of supplier performance
measurements.
Demand-pull purchasing will link suppliers and buyers and their information systems
more closely to produce the products needed.
Third-party purchasing will be increased. Consortium and third-parties will use
leveraging and buying expertise to purchase and make products available through
master contracts.
Competitive bidding and negotiations will continue to be used to ascertain market
prices and award business. Competitive bidding will become more intensive
because of greater price transparency and cost visibility.
In addition, we have noted a growing interest in environmental issues among some of
the organizations in this study. We believe this trend and related initiatives will support
the continued expansion of environmental purchasing efforts.
A number of the trends noted above could potentially support the purchase of more
energy efficient products. This chapter describes three trends likely to change
purchasing in general and energy efficient purchasing in particular. These trends are:
1. Best value buying;
2. Electronic commerce; and
3. Green or environmental purchasing.
Best Value Buying
"Good government" initiatives and the desire to move toward more sound business
practices often motivate change in government procurement. Best value buying, or
buying that looks beyond first costs to overall costs of products and services fits both of
these motivations.
The pitfalls of traditional transaction focused purchasing, rather than value focused
purchasing, were described in a recent report on purchasing trends. (Carter 1998)

07/17/00 44
Traditionally, purchasing has been transaction focused — getting the right quantity and
quality of goods of all kinds to the right place at the right time at the lowest price
possible. Traditional purchasing is insufficient in today’s competitive environment.
Buying goods at the cheapest price absent an overall strategy that takes into account
competition, total cost of ownership, and a host of other factors is a recipe for disaster.
Traditional thinking centered on cost-control. Now “a procurement chief may be told that
merely buying from the lowest bidder isn’t always best, and he may not like it” (Brown
1997). According to the Harvard Business Review, strategic needs are more likely to
influence procurement, with items to be purchased assessed according to their impact
on company performance.
Best value buying can positively influence the purchase of higher efficiency products,
since factors such as lower maintenance and operating costs, longer lifetime, or
improved performance can be factored into product purchases. While energy efficiency
products may have higher first costs than standard products, they often can be justified
by their lower costs over time. Still, best value buying, while sensible, is not familiar or
easy for most buyers. Buyers can feel that determining “value” instead of comparing
“sticker prices” requires considerably more work. Institutional mechanisms for
considering value are not often in place.
Electronic-Commerce Among Public Agencies
Many of the improvements and innovations identified by the organizations we talked to
involved the increased use of the internet or electronic information and communication
technologies. These include:
Use of websites to obtain vendor and purchasing contract and product information
(for both internal organization purchasers and external users of an organization's
purchasing contracts);
Use of purchasing cards and electronic payment and accounting methods;
Links with suppliers websites containing product and purchasing information; and
Paperless purchasing systems that allow for electronic purchase orders and more
efficient tracking and accounting.
E-commerce deserves special attention because it is fast becoming part of the way
governments do business. At this point, E-commerce is largely used as an information
source (information available electronically on the intranet or internet). Examples
respondents mentioned include state purchasing contracts on the web, internal
purchasing catalogs, vendor catalogs, and product information on vendor/manufacturer
web sites. The use of the internet by professional organizations as a tool for sharing
information among peers appears promising (purchasing officials mostly mentioned
this). However, actual use of the internet as an information source varied widely. Some
were overwhelmed by all the information while others could not live without it.
E-commerce is also beginning to be used to provide basic purchasing process
improvements, such things as paperless purchasing processes, electronic purchase

07/17/00 45
orders, invoicing, and tracking systems. Some organizations are using purchasing
cards (like credit cards) to link into these process improvements, although some
organizations are quite resistant to using these cards.
Actual electronic or on-line purchasing is not yet occurring among the organizations we
talked to. Some see this as the future, but several mentioned security concerns.
Environmental Purchasing
Early environmental purchasing initiatives were in part a response to successful
community-based recycling programs. The development of these recycling programs
was due to increasing costs for waste disposal and difficulties developing new waste
disposal sites. Strong political and community support emerged to implement waste
reduction programs.
The success of recycling programs created a glut of recycled materials, greatly
diminishing the demand for these materials. Recycling programs faced the problem of
having no ready market for the products they were collecting. In response to this
problem, many government organizations implemented policies and initiatives to
encourage the purchase of recycled content products. Most environmental purchasing
programs in public organizations focus on recycled content purchasing.
Another aspect of environmental purchasing is reducing the purchase of toxic,
hazardous materials. The trends driving this interest are health and safety, the high
cost of handling and disposing of these products, and environmental concerns (these
materials kill wildlife, foul water resources, etc). Many public organizations are seeking
alternatives for such things as pesticides and cleaning chemicals and are seeking out
low emissivity products (furnishings, carpet, paint, and sealants).
There is a broader set of environmental concerns that we believe will continue to spur
interest in environmental purchasing and broaden the scope of these initiatives. Some
of the issues that will drive this expanded interest include global climate change, the
endangered species act (e.g. salmon), water supply constraints, and quality of life
issues. Some public organizations (including some in our sample) are showing interest
in sustainability issues such as sustainable development and citizen health and well
being. Initiatives and policies to address these issues are in place and in a few cases
are having some effect on the purchasing of products.
Currently, energy efficiency is not generally associated with environmental purchasing.
It does not fit well into environmental purchasing initiatives that focus on the purchase of
recycled content or low toxicity products. However, energy efficiency fits quite well with
broader environmental concerns. Issues such as global climate change, the listing of
salmon as endangered species, and water supply shortages all have strong links to
energy use in the Northwest. Growing interest in these issues (including the emergence
of organizations such as the Natural Step) supports policies that could encourage the
purchase of energy efficient products.

07/17/00 46
Chapter 5 – Transforming Public Sector Purchasing
In this chapter we summarize the key insights from our research, present a general
framework for enhancing public sector purchases of efficient products and services, and
outline intervention strategies for transforming public sector purchasing.
Key Insights from the Research
This section captures the central findings from our research. These findings are crucial
to understanding the public purchasing arena and underlie the intervention strategies
presented later in this chapter.
Public sector buying patterns are variable, complex, and somewhat
unpredictable. Many actors are involved in a variety of roles, often for a single
purchase. Although detailed purchasing rules and competitive requirements existed
in most agencies, much buying is neither rigidly structured nor highly competitive.
Thus, just changing the rules will not necessarily change procurement practices.
Most agencies combine centralized purchasing processes (for higher cost items)
with decentralized purchasing by end-users (for less costly items).
Agencies do not widely or consistently consider energy costs and efficiency
in purchasing energy consuming products. Other factors, such as performance,
price, and convenience, are more salient to purchasers and drive buying decisions.
Energy efficiency information, without reference to the other buying criteria that
buyers find important, may receive limited use.
In the organizations we profiled, we observed nine factors that are related to
higher levels of energy efficient buying. These factors, listed below, are also
entry or leverage points for transforming public purchasing.
 Political or citizen support for green buying or energy efficiency;
 Active energy efficiency resources (e.g., energy specialists);
 Active "green" resources (e.g., agency sponsored recycling);
 Active Resource Managers (RMs);
 Specific budget for energy efficiency or environmentally protective
approaches;
 Strong user/buyer education about buying energy efficient;
 Experience with energy efficient buying;
 Influential efficiency champions; and
 Vendors promoting energy efficient or green products.

07/17/00 47
Energy efficient buying can be leveraged further by piggybacking on three
major purchasing trends:
 Best value buying – an approach that considers the overall costs and benefits
of products and services rather than just first costs and benefits.
 Electronic commerce – a mechanism that serves as a source of information, a
tool for improving purchasing processes, and a way to buy.
 Green purchasing – buying that goes beyond recycled content products and
“safe” products to consider broader environmental concerns.
A Framework for Organizational Change
Given the variability in government purchasing, the many purchasers, and the many
markets, we will not, in this report, advocate intervention strategies to transform a
specific market for a particular product. Rather, we will recommend strategies to
encourage agencies to change how they buy – that is, to buy more and higher efficiency
products.
As with most market transformation efforts, such changes will likely require:
 a long-term commitment
 multi-faceted approaches
 a broader context than just energy efficiency or purchasing alone
 flexibility
 leveraging of other resources and networks
This type of change also works toward organizations being self-sustaining, so that the
commitment to efficiency is institutionalized. In the next section we present theoretical
underpinnings for organizational change.
Organizational Theory
We looked to organizational change literature to ask a key question: “What do we know
about how and when organizations change their practices?” Powell and DiMaggio
(1991) describe three primary processes of organizational change that encourage
organizations to change:
1. Regulatory or policy processes – For example, changes in formal rules such as
green purchasing or life cycle cost analysis requirements have led some public
agencies to institutionalize energy efficiency considerations in their specification and
procurement practices.
2. Normative or professional processes – For instance, the changing standards of
the numerous professional groups to which public sector employees belong have
shaped purchasing practices.
3. Mimetic processes – Learning from and emulating the successes of other
organizations occurs in government as well as in competitive business contexts.

07/17/00 48
These three processes of change (and the inertia they also can produce) must be taken
into account and used strategically to influence government purchasing patterns. Since
they suggest changes in organizations can be due to outside influences, they offer
cause for optimism about the prospects of successful intervention in this market.
However, they also point to the need for coordinated action, since change in one arena
(e.g., regulatory requirements or professional orientation) is often blunted by other
internal and external influences. Our recommended intervention strategies, which result
from our organizational observations, interviews, and literature review, make use of
these three processes.
Market Intervention Strategies
Our goal in these recommendations is to help purchasers – designers, project
managers, users, and professional buyers – get the best products and the most energy
efficient ones. We have organized the recommendations using Powell and DiMaggio’s
three change processes; however, it’s important to keep in mind that there is interaction
among these areas of change.
Stimulating Regulatory and Policy Effects
Policy level support is essential if public organizations are to institutionalize the buying
of energy efficient products. But our research shows that energy efficiency is not
relevant for political leaders or policy makers. Therefore, energy efficiency needs to be
joined with issues that are more relevant to these leaders and to their constituents, such
as best value buying and green purchasing trends.
The three strategies listed below suggest how energy efficiency can be tied to issues of
interest to policy makers. These actions will help develop political and citizen support
which, in turn, will encourage agencies to devote specific resources to energy efficient
buying (i.e., for staff, training, support materials, or policy changes).
Link energy efficient buying with existing environmental initiatives and
policies in public organizations (e.g., buy recycled). Energy efficiency is not
currently relevant at a policy level in public organizations; thus more policy support is
needed for energy efficient purchasing to occur with any degree of consistency.
Where public organizations have existing environmental policy and initiatives, efforts
need to be made to get energy efficient purchasing on the policy agenda as an
element of these environmental initiatives. Energy efficiency needs to be identified
as an effective way to meet environmental policy goals.
Connect energy efficient products to political and policy priorities such as
clean air, clean water, sustainability, cost-savings, and good government.
Energy efficiency is generally not relevant to most policy-makers or individual
purchasers and the connections are not obvious (e.g., how does efficiency make
the environment better?). The way to sell energy efficiency is to identify policy and

07/17/00 49
product benefits (e.g., quality, convenience, availability) for policy makers and
purchasers.
Work with environmentally oriented agencies and with networks targeted to
policy makers to identify existing environmental policies; demonstrate that
energy efficiency policies can be incorporated within those existing
environmental policies, and disseminate these examples through appropriate
networks and media.
Enhancing Normative and Professional Influences
Most government purchasers, whether Resource Managers, end-users, or professional
buyers, belong to and rely upon professional organizations for new ideas and
dependable advice. Often these organizations are looking for meeting and conference
presentations, as well as training opportunities on topics relevant to their members.
While energy efficiency per se may not be perceived as a “hot” topic, it can be linked to
topics that are. For instance, “best value” buying and E-commerce topics of great
interest within professional purchasing groups – a natural place for energy efficiency to
fit in.
Use mechanisms within existing professional networks -- web pages, list
servers, newsletters, training programs, conferences, chapter meetings, and
trusted “energy champions” – to inform members about the relevance of
energy efficiency and how to include it in purchasing specifications; the
availability of products; and the presence of existing energy purchasing
initiatives (e.g. Energy Star). Through these mechanisms, standing committees,
users’ groups and advisory groups on the special topic of energy efficient or
environmental purchasing could be formed. Professional networks also provide an
important forum for the exchange of information and experience, and will help define
good practice and professional identity. For instance, organizations could be
encouraged to include energy efficiency in definitions of "best value." Advances in
telecommunications technologies make it easier to form and link these networks with
existing energy purchasing initiatives (Energy Star) and with end-users.
Work with purchasing groups to conduct joint competitive bids for specific
energy efficient products, so that individual organizations can obtain
competitive prices and better access to particular energy efficient products.
Get energy efficient products on master contracts that many organizations
can access. This step calls for working within existing purchasing peer
organizations (professional purchasing associations, intergovernmental purchasing
cooperatives) to develop cooperative purchases and other active forms of
environmental purchasing.
Leverage the resources of other initiatives that support energy efficient
practices in public organizations, including energy managers, resource
managers and energy efficient new construction programs. Initiatives that
support organization-level Energy Managers or Resource Managers can be
supported. Building operator certification, which develops the professional capability

07/17/00 50
of facility operations staff, can also be offered. Leverage opportunities also include
initiatives to promote energy efficient new construction projects, since new
construction purchases are often large and take place outside of the standard
purchasing process. Initiatives aimed at improving the energy efficiency of new
buildings are important for addressing the energy efficiency of these product
purchases.
Identify and work with major vendors to offer energy efficient products.
Helping organizations identify and easily access energy efficient products through
trusted vendors will also be important. Interest in efficient products will wane quickly
if supply of those products isn’t readily available.
Encouraging and Facilitating “Imitation”
The processes of imitation we imagine work on two levels. First, an infrastructure of
reliable, accessible information about products must be built; followed by developing
awareness among all purchasers and policy makers about how to specify, identify, and
buy efficient products. Second, the approaches and benefits of buying efficient can be
made visible through successful demonstrations. E-commerce is likely to become a
popular route for conveying experience and advice about efficient purchasing.
Conduct targeted pilot projects at specific high profile organizations to
develop and demonstrate organizational models for purchasing energy
efficient products. Disseminate results. Demonstrations need to develop
policies, standards, education, and an energy function in the organization (such as a
resource manager, energy manager, or energy office). These models produce
success at the local organization, can be used by other organizations, and perhaps
most importantly build the critical mass for energy efficient purchasing. Information
about these models and associated best practices need to be disseminated through
trusted networks (associations of public officials, purchasing professionals’
associations, facilities managers' and resource managers' associations).
Information about problems and how they’ve been resolved also needs to be
communicated so those lessons can be shared across governments.
Help key actors develop networks of energy efficiency champions (such as
RMs) within their organizations. Education and technical support efforts need to
be targeted to developing a critical mass of energy efficiency champions within
organizations in the region.
Make information on energy efficient products and their performance readily
available from trusted sources. This information needs to allow energy
efficient products to be easily identified and compared to other products,
along a variety of product characteristics (not just energy efficiency). Product
information must be specific and readily accessible by many means, from energy-
related media such as the Energy Ideas Clearinghouse, the Lighting Design Lab,
and EPA or DOE web pages, to professional publications, vendor product
catalogues, and web pages. Links (electronic and otherwise) need to be made
between more conventional purchasing information sources and ones that are more

07/17/00 51
directly geared to buyers already interested in efficiency (i.e., energy champions).
Perhaps a new electronic information source could be developed to provide a
spectrum of information (i.e., one-stop shopping), including energy efficiency, to help
buyers decide on the best product.
Make buyers and organizations aware of existing suppliers of energy efficient
products so that they can access them through existing purchasing
procedures.
Work with existing groups and, if warranted, support new groups -- including
users, manufacturers, and suppliers – to develop comprehensive product
specifications and contract language that include energy efficiency. Make
these available through existing networks and sources and encourage their use for
developing organization-level standards. Identify sources used by designers to
develop specifications (such as MasterSpec).
Support development of organizational models that demonstrate the value of
energy efficient purchasing to public organizations.
Conclusions
We believe that public purchasing in the Northwest can incorporate energy efficiency
considerations to a much greater extent. Attention to energy costs and energy related
environmental impacts is already taking place in some government agencies, and there
is considerable potential for greater penetration of high efficiency products. Success will
require that a variety of efforts be coordinated to reach all organizational levels.
The strategies we recommend are intended to encourage long-term organizational
change towards more energy efficient buying. They provide guidance to individuals
and organizations planning and developing programmatic initiatives to encourage
energy efficient buying. We have identified trends, leverage points, and strategies that
should be incorporated into program conceptualization and development efforts. The
process of program development needs to include actors within professional networks
and at leading public organizations. Developing initiatives within this framework will
result in efforts that are well targeted and that best take advantage of existing resources
and leveraging opportunities.
Several trends, particularly concern for the environment and the development of pro-
environmental public policies, offer important opportunities to associate energy
efficiency in purchasing with politically potent issues. Policies that support these trends,
along with professional acceptance of energy efficiency as an important purchasing
criterion, are required for the desired organizational changes to take place.
However, other trends (e.g., E-commerce) suggest that strategies will also need to be
targeted at end users and mass-market vendors––those actors involved in the bulk of
routine purchases of energy-using goods. Since energy does not concern most end-
users or vendors, strong emphasis on the quality, safety, and reliability attributes of

07/17/00 52
energy consuming goods will be needed. And, manufacturers and vendors must be
able to supply high efficiency products readily at comparable prices and quality.
We believe encouraging energy efficient purchasing will foster efficiency in other parts
of public organizations and outside of them as well. For instance, adherence to energy
efficiency in purchasing could lead to a wider “standard practice” of energy efficiency in
building design. Changes in how public agencies purchase also can help induce
changes in the types of products that manufacturers develop and vendors offer, since
vendors and manufacturers will notice the preferences of these large buyers.

07/17/00 53
References
Carter, Phillip, Joseph Carter, Robert Monczka, Thomas Slaight, Andrew Swan, 1998.
The Future Of Purchasing And Supply: A Five- And Ten-Year Forecast, A Joint
Research Initiative of Center for Advanced Purchasing Studies, National Association
of Purchasing Management, A.T. Kearney, Inc., Copyright A.T. Kearney, Inc.
Kolchin, Michael. 1990. Purchasing in the Industrial, Institutional, Governmental, and
Retail Sectors: A Comparative Study. Executive Summary. Center For Advanced
Purchasing Studies.
Powell, Walter and Paul DiMaggio, eds. 1991. The New Institutionalism in
Organizational Analysis. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Slater, Courtnay and Cornelia Strawser ed. 1999. Business Statistics of the United
States, 1998 Edition. Washington DC: Bernan Press.
U.S. Bureau of the Census 1998. Statistical Abstract of the United States: 1998.
Springfield, Virginia: National Technical Information Service.

07/17/00 54
Bibliography
This is a sample of many of the products and materials collected in the course of this study
A City’s Procurement Meltdown, The Public Purchaser, Lemov, Penelope, March/April
1998, pp. 10-23.
A Reward/Measurement Model of Organizational Buying Behavior, Anderson, Paul F.
and Terry Chambers, Journal of Marketing, 1985, 49 (Spring), pp. 7-23.
Best Value, Price Seeking and Price Aversion: The Impact of Information and Learning
on Consumer Choices, Tellis, Gerard and Gary J. Gaeth, Journal of Marketing,
1990, 54 (April), pp. 34-45.
Buying Smart: State Procurement Reform Saves Millions, NASPO/NASIRE, Report in
1996. Follow-up report: Blueprint for Action in 1997. Available at:
http://www.state.ky.us/nasireNASIREmain.html.
"Changing Government Purchasing Practices: Promoting Energy Efficiency on a
Budget", McKane, Aimee. and Jeff. Harris, Lawrence Berkeley National
Laboratory, 1996 ACEEE Proceedings, pp. 5.159-5.168.
City Energy Challenge, Portland's Energy Savings Program for Greater Efficiency in
City Government, ICLEI Conference, June 1998.
Conditions that Create Influence for Purchasing in Corporate Strategic Planning,
Smeltzer, Larry R., 1997, 88 p.
The Connected Corporation: How Leading Companies Win Through Customer-Supplier
Alliances, Lewis, Jordan D., 1995, 343 p.
Current Contract Information, Dept. of General Administration, State of Washington,
12/1/98.
Data Sources Directory for Purchasing Officials, New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority.
Elected Officials' Guide to Procurement, Watt, Patricia, Government Finance Officers
Association, 1995, #3035, 72 p. Order: http://www.nigp.org.
Electronic Commerce for the Networked Age,” Texas General Services Commission,
Conference Proceedings, Sun Microsystems.
"Electronic Purchasing Slashes Cycle Time and Inventory Costs," Purchasing
Management Bulletin, 25-Jul-98, 4-Jan.

07/17/00 55
Energy Efficient Procurement Collaborative Phase1 - Working Group Meeting Final
Report, New York State Energy Office, New York State Energy Office, August
1994, 28p.
"Energy-Saving Strategies for Federal Procurement," Report, US General Accounting
Office, 1979, 11 leaves.
Energy Star Purchasing for State and Local Government: A Strategic Initiative for
Increasing the Market Transformation Power of Energy Star's Program,
Reynolds, Ned, US Environmental Protection Agency Energy Star
Program/Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory.
Energy Star Purchasing Tool Kit, US Environmental Protection Agency, US Department
of Energy, 1998.
Engineer’s Procurement Manual for Major Plant Equipment: A Guide to Principles and
Procedures–Planning, Specifications, Bidding, Evaluation, Contract Award,
Leeser, Robert C., 1996.
Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) (62 Fed. Reg. 44809, August 22, 1997), 23.704
Policy. Changes can be viewed at: http://thorplus.lib.purdue.edu:8100/gpo/
Financial Services Center of North American Counties reports on the Cooperative
Purchasing Alliance, Supply Contract with Office Depot: Saved Ten Million.
http://www.naco.org/fsc/index.htm.
Furnishing Annual Supply of Office Supplies, ICLEI Conference, City of Portland Bureau
of Purchases, 1999.
Furnishing Refuse Hauling & Recycling Services for Various City of Portland Locations,
ICLEI Conference, City of Portland Bureau of Purchasing, 1999.
"Getting Past the Hype: Internet Opportunities for b-to-b Marketers," Barnes, Hank,
Marketing News, Vol. 33, No. 3, p. 11, February 1, 1999.
Government Purchasing and Market Transformation–Revisited, Harris, Jeffrey, E&E
Division, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Washington Office, 2 p. 1/29/98,
http://eande.lbl.gov/CBS/ NEWSLETTER/NL11/Dcoffice.html.
GSAdvantage, US General Services Administration, US Department of Energy, Federal
Energy Management Program.
Handbook of Buying and Purchasing Management, Hough, Harry, 1992, 453 p.

07/17/00 56
Handbook of Purchasing and Materials Management: An In-Depth Hands-On
Reference, Kalman I. Perlman, 1990, 462 p.
"How Do You Turn a Prime Supplier Into a Partner?", The Public Purchaser,
July/August 1998.
How to Buy Energy Efficient Fluorescent Tube Lamps, US Department of Energy,
Federal Energy Management Program, September 1997.
"Influence Strategies in Buying Centers", Venkatesh, R., Ajay K. Kohli, and Gerald
Zaltman, Journal of Marketing, 1995, 59 (October), pp. 71-82.
"Information Control and Influence in Emergent Buying Centers," Dawes, Philip L., Don
Y. Lee, and Grahame R. Dowling, Journal of Marketing, 62 (July), pp. 55-68,
1998.
Integrating Energy Efficiency into Municipal Purchasing Decisions: Defining the
Framework, Scharer, Marya, Manager and David Pratt, Economist, Seattle City
Light, Urban Consortium Energy Task Force, 1990, ix, 105 p.
Introduction to Burlington's Climate Protection Task Force, ICLEI Conference, June
1998.
Invitation for Bid, Washington Department of General Administration.
Issues in Public Purchasing: A Guidebook for Policymakers, Short, John, National
Association of State Purchasing Officials, 1992, 117p.
Making Buying Decisions: Using the Computer as a Tool, Clodfelter, Richard, 1996, xiii,
217 p.
Measures of Purchasing Effectiveness, Fearon, Harold E., 1997, 97 p.
National Assn. of Purchasing Management Certification Program Study Guide, 1976, ix,
310 p.
"Newly Emerging Resource Efficiency Manager Programs," Wolf, Scott and Charles
Howell, Energy Engineering, Vol. 94, No. 6, November 1, 1997.
NYSERDA Second Interim Report, Data Source Evaluation, Quimby, Howard, Natural
Intelligence, Inc. for NYSERDA, 1997, 28 p.
"Organizational Buying Behavior: Toward an Integrative Framework," Johnston, Wesley
J. and Jeffrey E. Lewin, Journal of Business Research, 1996, 35, pp. 1-15.

07/17/00 57
"Organizational Buying: Environmental Concern as a Non-economic Buying Criterion,"
Drumwright, Minette E., Journal of Marketing, 48 (July), pp. 1-19, 1994.
“Partnerships Deliver Efficiency, Savings,” Avery, Susan, Purchasing, 120 (10) 56-61,
1996.
Principles & Practices, National Association of State Purchasing Officials. Survey of
State & Local Government Purchasing Practices, 1997.
Procurement Works Hand in Hand with Energy Efficiency, USDOE Tomorrow’s Energy
Today, July 1994, 6 p. http://www.eren.doe.gov/cities_counties/elecpro.html.
Profitable Purchasing Strategies: A Manager’s Guide for Improving Organizational
Competitiveness Through the Skills of Purchasing, Steele, Paul, 1996, xii, 235 p.
“Pro-social Consumer Influence Strategies: When and How do they Work?”, Osterhus,
Thomas L., Journal of Marketing, 1997, 61 (October), pp. 16-29
Purchasing Organizational Relationships, Fearon, Harold E., 1988, 58 p.
Purchasing’s Organizational Roles and Responsibilities, Fearon, Harold E., 1995, 70 p.
Purchasing Sites on the Internet, Resource List, WSU Energy Program, 1998.
Socially Responsible Purchasing Practices, National Association of State Purchasing
Officials, Survey of State & Local Government Purchasing Practices, 1997.
Summary of Municipal Governments Purchasing Benchmarks, Center for Advanced
Purchasing Studies (CAPS), 1997.
The Buy-It-Right Business Products Guide: Ratings, Rankings and Everything You
Need to Know About the Best Products for Almost Every Business Need, Krantz,
Les, 1998.
The Contract Cookbook for Purchase of Services, 2nd
ed., National Association of State
Purchasing Officials/The Council of State Governments, Short, John, 1990, 61 p.
“The Organizational Buyer Behavior Learning Organization,” Hult, G. Tomas M. and
Ernest L. Nichols Jr., Industrial Marketing Management, 25, 1996, pp. 197-207
“The Worldwide Web and Government Purchasing,” King, Deborah, Information
Technology Manager, National Institute of Government Purchasing, Inc., State
Purchasing Conference, Tallahassee, FL, February 10, 1997.
TQM for Purchasing Management, Cale, James F., 1993, xii, 223 p.

07/17/00 58
Transforming Dollars Into Sense: The Economic and Environmental Benefits of High-
Efficiency Distribution Transformers, ICF Incorporated for US Environmental
Protection Agency, Atmospheric Pollution Prevention Division.
"Tried and True Readings," Bibliography, Business & Sustainability Conference, Fall
1998.
Vendor Consideration and Switching Behavior for Buyers in high technology markets,
Heide, Jan B. and Allen M. Weiss, Journal of Marketing, 1995, 59 (July), pp. 30-
43.
"What Technology Wrought: Distribution Channel in Flux," Briones, Maricris, Marketing
News, 2/1/99, Vol. 33, No. 3, p.1.

Energy Efficient Procurement Methods

More Related Content

What's hot (17)

Similar to Energy Efficient Procurement Methods (20)

Energy Efficient Procurement Methods