SU+ @ Strathmore 

University Library 
 

  
 

Electronic Theses and Dissertations 

 

 

This work is availed for free and open access by Strathmore University Library.  

It has been accepted for digital distribution by an authorized administrator of SU+ @Strathmore University. 

For more information, please contact library@strathmore.edu 

 

 
2021 

 

Critical success factors and implementation of 

public private partnership projects in the energy 

sector in Kenya 

 
 

 
 
Medrine Mueni Ndile 
Strathmore Business School  
Strathmore University 

 
 
 
 

 

 

 

Recommended Citation  

Ndile, M. M. (2021). Critical success factors and implementation of public private partnership projects in the 

energy sector in Kenya [Thesis, Strathmore University]. http://hdl.handle/11071/12572 

 
 
 
 
 

Follow this and additional works at: http://hdl.handle.net/11071/12572 
 
 
 

https://su-plus.strathmore.edu/
https://su-plus.strathmore.edu/
http://hdl.handle.net/11071/2474
mailto:library@strathmore.edu
http://hdl.handle/11071/12572
http://hdl.handle.net/11071/12572


CRITICAL SUCCESS FACTORS AND IMPLEMENTATION OF PUBLIC PRIVATE 

PARTNERSHIP PROJECTS IN THE ENERGY SECTOR IN KENYA 

(A case Study of Eldosol and Garissa Solar Power Plant) 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
MEDRINE MUENI NDILE 

MPPM/99425/17 

 

 

 

 

 

 
A RESEARCH PROJECT SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE 

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF PUBLIC POLICY AND 

MANAGEMENT, STRATHMORE BUSINESS SCHOOL STRATHMORE UNIVERSITY, 

NAIROBI, KENYA 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2021 



iii  

DECLARATION AND APPROVAL 

 
I declare that this work has not been previously submitted and approved for the award of a 

degree by this or any other University. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis 

contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due 

reference is made in the thesis itself. 

Sign ………………………………………… Date ……2…8…/0…9…/…2…1……….. 

 
MEDRINE MUENI NDILE 

 

 

 

 
Approval 

 

This Research Project by Medrine Mueni Ndile has been submitted for examination with my 

approval as the University Supervisor. 

 

Sign ……………………………………………. Date ……2…8/…0…9…/…2…1………. 

 

 

   PROF. JOHN OSOGO AMBANI 



iv  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 

First and foremost I thank the Almighty God for the good health and granting me His mercies to 

finalize this research project. I also wish to extend my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Dr. 

John Ambani Osogo for his scholarly guidance during the time of carrying out this project. He 

has been of great assistance during the formulation, design and completion of this work. His 

valuable advice has gone a long way in preparation of this project. I also acknowledge the entire 

team at the Strathmore Business School who have tirelessly made this process achievable. I wish 

to thank my fellow classmates at Strathmore Business School who have been of good moral and 

mental support in this process. 



v  

DEDICATION 

 
I dedicate this work to my family for their support. 



vi  

ABSTRACT 

 
The aim of this study is to assess the influence of critical success factors on the implementation 

of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. Public Private Partnership 

projects have been critical for a steady and speedy economic transformation across the globe 

including in the developing world. Kenya has also not been an exception to PPP projects. This 

framework has seen tremendous growth in Kenya’s infrastructure in sectors such as water, 

agriculture, energy and transport. The implementation of these projects, however, has not been 

realized as evidenced by increased cases of project stagnation and slow rate of incompletion. 

This raises the question on whether critical success factors in project management have been 

adequately employed in these projects, hence the subject of the study. The study specifically 

sought to assess the effect of project financing on project implementation, the influence of 

project risk management on project implementation, the influence of project leadership on 

project implementation and the effect of project information technology on the implementation 

of PPP projects. The study was informed by three major theories which are contingency theory 

of leadership, resource dependence theory, and Frank Knight’s theory of project risk 

management. The target population for this study are Eldosol and Garissa solar power  projects. 

Key project personnel include project managers and supervisors were the units of observation for 

the study. The study purposively sampled 40 respondents drawn from the two projects. A 

structured questionnaire was used as the main instrument for the research data collection. This 

was administered through online platforms. The collected data was analysed through descriptive 

and inferential statistics using SPSS software. The findings from the study revealed that project 

financing through adequate budgeting, enhancing accountability and ensuring timely 

disbursements positively influenced the implementation of the PPP projects. Project risk 

management through analysis and identification of the risks and employing risk control measures 

was also found to influence project implementation. The findings revealed that project leadership 

and adoption of information technology are critical success factors that positively and 

significantly influence project implementation. The study concludes that project financing, 

project risk management, project leadership and information technology are critical aspects that 

influence the implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. 

Keywords: Critical success factors, Project Financing, Risk Management, Leadership, 

Information Technology, Project Implementation, Public Private Partnership Projects 



vii  

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................. vi 

LIST OF TABLES ....................................................................................................................... ix 

LIST OF FIGURES ...................................................................................................................... x 

4.3.1 Project Attached To ...................................................................................................... 40 

4.3.2 Distribution of the Respondents by Period Worked .................................................... 41 

4.3.3 Distribution of the Respondents by Position Held at the Projects ............................... 42 

4.4 Descriptive Analysis of the Study Variables ....................................................................... 43 

4.4.1 Project Financing ......................................................................................................... 43 

4.4.2 Project Risk Management ............................................................................................ 45 

4.4.3 Project Leadership ....................................................................................................... 47 

4.4.4 Information Technology .............................................................................................. 49 

4.4.5 Project Implementation ................................................................................................ 51 

4.5 Factor Analysis.................................................................................................................... 53 

4.5.1 Project Financing ......................................................................................................... 53 

4.5.2 Factor Analysis for Project Risk Management ............................................................ 55 

4.5.3 Factor Analysis for Project Leadership ........................................................................ 57 

4.5.4 Factor Analysis............................................................................................................. 58 

4.6 Correlation Analysis............................................................................................................ 60 



viii 

 

4.7 Inferential Analysis of the Regression Model ..................................................................... 61 

CHAPTER FIVE ........................................................................................................................ 65 

DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ 65 

5.1 Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 65 

5.2 Discussion of the Findings .................................................................................................. 65 

5.2.1 Project Financing and Project Implementation ............................................................ 66 

5.2.2 Project Risk Management and Project Sustainability .................................................. 66 

5.2.3 Project Leadership and Project Implementation .......................................................... 67 

5.2.4 Information Technology and Project Sustainability .................................................... 68 

5.3 Conclusion of the Study ...................................................................................................... 69 

5.4 Recommendations of the Study .......................................................................................... 71 



ix  

LIST OF TABLES 

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework .............................................................................................. 28 

Table 3.2: Reliability Results ........................................................................................................ 37 

Table 4.1: Response Rate .............................................................................................................. 40 

Figure 4.1: Distribution by the Project.......................................................................................... 41 

Figure 4.2: Period Worked at the Projects .................................................................................... 42 

Figure 4.3: Position Held at the Project ........................................................................................ 43 

Table 4.3: Descriptive Results on Project Financing .................................................................... 45 

Table 4.4: Descriptive Results on Project Risk Management ....................................................... 47 

Table 4.5: Descriptive Results on Project Leadership .................................................................. 49 

Table 4.6: Descriptive Results on Information Technology ......................................................... 51 

Table 4.7: Descriptive Results on Project Implementation........................................................... 53 

Table 4.8: Factor Loadings for Project Financing ........................................................................ 53 

Table 4.9: Total Variance Explained ............................................................................................ 54 

Table 4.10: Factor Loadings for Project Risk Management ......................................................... 55 

Table 4.11: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 56 

Table 4.12: Factor Loadings for Project Leadership..................................................................... 57 

Table 4.12: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 58 

Table 4.14: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 59 

Table 4.15: Correlation Analysis Result ....................................................................................... 60 

Table 4.16: Model Summary ........................................................................................................ 62 

Table 4.17: ANOVA Results ......................................................................................................... 62 

Table 4.18: Regression Coefficients ............................................................................................. 63 



x  

LIST OF FIGURES 

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework .............................................................................................. 28 

Table 3.2: Reliability Results ........................................................................................................ 37 

Table 4.1: Response Rate .............................................................................................................. 40 

Figure 4.1: Distribution by the Project.......................................................................................... 41 

Figure 4.2: Period Worked at the Projects .................................................................................... 42 

Figure 4.3: Position Held at the Project ........................................................................................ 43 

Table 4.3: Descriptive Results on Project Financing .................................................................... 45 

Table 4.4: Descriptive Results on Project Risk Management ....................................................... 47 

Table 4.5: Descriptive Results on Project Leadership .................................................................. 49 

Table 4.6: Descriptive Results on Information Technology ......................................................... 51 

Table 4.7: Descriptive Results on Project Implementation........................................................... 53 

Table 4.8: Factor Loadings for Project Financing ........................................................................ 53 

Table 4.9: Total Variance Explained ............................................................................................ 54 

Table 4.10: Factor Loadings for Project Risk Management ......................................................... 55 

Table 4.11: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 56 

Table 4.12: Factor Loadings for Project Leadership..................................................................... 57 

Table 4.12: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 58 



xi  

Table 4.14: Total Variance Explained .......................................................................................... 59 

Table 4.15: Correlation Analysis Result ....................................................................................... 60 

Table 4.16: Model Summary ........................................................................................................ 62 

Table 4.17: ANOVA Results ......................................................................................................... 62 

Table 4.18: Regression Coefficients ............................................................................................. 63 



1  

 

CHAPTER ONE 

INTRODUCTION 

1.1 Background of the Study 

 
The Public Private Partnership (PPP) concept denotes the public sector and the private sector 

getting into partnership, putting together their resources in terms of human capital, ideas, funding 

and implementing their outlined goals in the partnership for the purpose of achieving a common 

goal which ultimately benefits the general public (Willems, 2014). PPPs are driven by the 

growing need of governments and local authorities to meet citizens’ needs. Lack of funds by the 

government is the main driver behind worldwide efforts to involve private companies in the 

provision of public services. According to Osmanli (2014) successful PPPs require a careful 

balance between public benefit and private gain. Nederhand and Klijn (2017) state that majority 

of corporations in some countries have started to channel funds through PPPs. 

Critical Success Factors (CSF) have been described as the key aspects in an organization that 

when focused on, enable the business to thrive and enhance effectiveness (Raravi, Bagodi & 

Mench, 2013). These aspects are limited and their mix in an organization as well as the extent to 

which the firm gives them the required attention determines their ability to steer performance and 

competitiveness. According to Raravi et al. (2013), CSFs comprise of features revolving around 

the project team’s financial plan, management of risks associated with the project, integration of 

information technology in project implementation, socio-economic factors and the leadership 

competency of the project management. These factors determine how well a project is 



2  

successfully implemented and the sustainability of the project after implementation (Jabbour, 

Jabbour, Foropon, & Godinho, 2018). 

1.1.1 Critical Success Factors 

 
In project management, the success of a project tells the effectiveness of the entire process and 

whether it positively contributes to the overall benefit of the firm or not (Yang, Chen & Chang, 

2016). CSFs therefore, as highlighted by Yang et al. tells how best the project team is prepared to 

focus on the most crucial aspects of a project (critical) and how these factors are aligned to 

contribute to the achievement of the set goals (success). 

Globally, Chuang, Liu and Chen (2017) contemplated that most of the organizations in China 

upheld CSFs such as project risk management and use of the appropriate information technology 

as a way of enhancing success of their projects. According to Chuang et al. (2017), the main 

CSFs in a construction project include the ability of the project management team to embrace the 

appropriate risk management strategies and employ the right technology in the implementation 

of the project. For an aspect in the project to qualify to be a critical success factor, it ought to 

have the ability to determine how well the project will be successful. In the modern era, every 

project utilizes very strong use of technology and the extent to which this technology is 

embraced in the project determines the success of the project. This is the same case with risk 

management. Projects in the 21st century are surrounded by risks and having these risks 

managed appropriately is a move towards enhancing the success of the project (Chuang et al., 

2017 & Perker, 2016). 



3  

In Malaysia, Azlan and Ismail (2016) argued that CSFs were subject to both internal and external 

factors that influenced the success of the project. The authors identified resource mobilization 

including project financing and having the appropriate skills, effective leadership styles and 

project monitoring as the main CSFs that play a significant role in enhancing project 

performance. According to Azlan and Ismail, when the project management has access to 

adequate financial resources and the stakeholders are supportive, there is a high likelihood of the 

project to succeed hence identified the two as the major critical success drivers. They further 

contend that project financing comes as a key project success driver in all the stages of the 

project including project planning stage, implementation and monitoring stages; thus it is one of 

the key CSFs that play a critical role in enhancing the success of a project. 

Regionally, several CSFs have been linked with project performance. In Zimbabwe for instance, 

Nwachukwu and Emoh (2018) indicated that the critical success factors in a project were several 

but mainly determined by the specification of the project as well as other external aspects outside 

the control of the project management. Nwachukwu and Emoh (2018) however indicated 

effective management of risks as the main critical success factor in a modern project. The 

authors argue that projects exist in an uncertain environment just like any other phenomenon. 

This means that despite the financing that may take pace, the planning and other aspects of 

ensuring the success of the project will require analysis and management of the associated risks. 

Elsewhere in Nigeria, Nzekwe, Oladejo and Emoh (2015) contemplated that risk management is 

a core agenda in any project and it requires the full attention of the project management team. 

The authors indicated that in the context of project management, risk 



4  

management is a CSF that focuses on analysing the risks and uncertainties in a project and 

develops ways to reduce the severity of the risks thus enabling the implementation of the project 

to be successful. According to Nzekwe et al. (2015), most of the projects by organizations in 

Nigeria have failed to meet their mandate as a result of poor methods of managing risks or the 

project management team not upholding risk management as one of the critical success factors 

that should be incorporated in the project management. 

Locally, some researchers have pointed out aspects that they attribute to be critical success 

factors for project performance. Kariungi (2014) indicated that completion of projects in Kenyan 

state corporations was affected by lack of critical success factors; one of them being availing of 

funds to the projects timely and adequately. The author argued that project financing was one of 

the undisputed critical success factors that every project would require to attain the set 

objectives. According to Kariungi (2014), project success is built upon the inputs required in the 

latter that include human skills, construction materials, and other consumables. All these require 

adequate financing for effective and reliable supply. This shows the criticality of project 

financing in enhancing the success of the project. 

Chesiyna and Wanyoike (2016) on the other hand, established that involvement of stakeholders 

and information communication played a critical role in enhancing the success of the project. 

They suggested that in the 21st century, technology is the sole aspect that plays a major role in 

every angle of human life. According to Chesiyna and Wanyoike (2016), information technology 

sets the pace of project implementation and it is one of the CSFs that make the work of project 

management teams easy and effective. Wilkina (2017) also suggests that project managers 

should 



5  

embrace information technology as one of the drivers of project success in that technology is 

turning to be a backbone of every aspect in the organization that determines how effective and 

efficient things are done. The bottom line is that while there are so many aspects in a project 

implementation process, there are only a few that qualify to be critical success factors. These are 

the aspects that take the lead in contributing and determining the success of the project. As the 

reviewed background studies have revealed, information technology, project financing, project 

leadership and project risk management are the main recommended CSFs in the modern world. 

1.1.2 Public Private Partnership Projects 

 
 

Globally, between 1985 and 2008, over 2,700 projects valued over USD 1.1 trillion have been 

planned and funded through PPPs. Countries like Canada, India, Britain and Australia among 

other developed countries have used such partnerships to plan, finance, deliver and operate large 

public infrastructural projects (Sebghatullah & Piroozfar, 2015). Ever since its appearance, the 

concept of PPP has aroused keen interest. At the international level, the interest for the promotion 

of public-private partnership is directed towards three main courses: Investing in infrastructure, 

increasing the efficiency of the financial resources usage and better commercial usage of the 

invested funds (Tanja & Gerhard, 2017). However, carrying out an investment project of public 

interest through PPP may generate many problems both for the public authorities, as well as for 

the private investors (Willems, 2014). 

In Africa, countries such as South Africa have upheld PPPs as a strategy towards enhancing the 

continued expansion of the economy through mega projects that do not only target on earning 

revenue for the private partners but also provide social amenities and services that are supposed 



6  

to be done by the government (Burger & Ianchovichina, 2017). According to Ruiters and Matji 

(2016), public private partnerships remain one of the mainly preferred strategies to strengthen the 

collaboration between the government and the private sector and to speed the completion rate of 

public projects in South Africa. Nell (2013) observes that middle economies are gaining speedy 

growth and expansion mainly as a result of enhancing public private partnerships. Besant-Jones 

and John (2014) reported that PPPs constituted 65% of the projects in low-income countries 

compared with 37% for developed countries, reflecting the low starting base of infrastructure in 

developing countries. 

PPPs have reached nearly all developing countries, especially in Africa, generating more than 

USD 400 billion in proceeds in 1990-2003. Activity peaked in 1997 then declined but was 

reactivated in 2001 (eerd, 2013). Proceeds are concentrated in a small group of countries 

(Marendi, 2015). Infrastructure (telecommunications; electricity, transmission and distribution; 

natural gas transmission and distribution; transport and water) accounted for half of PPP 

proceeds in developing countries in 1990-2003 (Trebilcock & Rosenstock, 2013). These sectors 

were followed by the competitive sectors (manufacturing, services, tourism and other firms), 

energy (production of oil and gas, other hydrocarbons and petrochemicals), finance and the 

primary sector (minerals and metals) in terms of revenue generated (Kamau, 2016) 

Kenya’s recognition of the important role of PPP Projects can be traced in its commitment to 

achieving the objectives of Kenya’s Vision 2030, which sets out a 10% per annum GDP 

economic growth target through public private sector participation (Vision, 2030). A study by 

Cambridge Economic Policy Associates (CEPA) in 2015 revealed that though there was an 



7  

increase in private sector financing of public infrastructure projects, this was mainly in 

telecommunication and electricity generation and there was still considerable financing needed 

in other infrastructure sectors. Moreover, even for projects in relatively stable markets like 

independent power providers (IPP’s) delays were still being experienced in the procurement of 

the PPP Projects for example the Turkana wind project which was first developed in 2006 but 

reached financial close in December 2014 (CEPA, 2015). Marendi (2015) posited that budget 

rules and procedures that support timely procurement are inadequate. It is important to note that 

the initial PPP Regulations were based on the Public Procurement and Disposal (PPDA)Act, 

2005 and that significant progress has been made to shift towards PPP specific procurement 

framework starting with the PPP Policy statement of 2011 (DFID, 2015; Babatunde, Perera, 

Udeaja & Zhou, 2013). 

1.1.3 Energy Sector in Kenya 

 
The Energy sector in Kenya is managed by the Ministry of Energy and Petroleum (MoEP) which 

is charged with formulation of policies to create an enabling environment for efficient operation 

and growth of the sector. It sets the strategic direction for the growth of the sector and provides a 

long-term vision for all sector players. 

Kenya Vision 2030 and the Second Medium Plan 2013-2017 identify energy as one of the 

infrastructure enablers for transformation into “a newly-industrializing, middle-income country, 

providing a high quality of life to all its citizens in a clean and secure environment”. Access to 

competitively-priced, reliable, quality, safe and sustainable energy is essential for achievement of 

the Vision. The institutional structure of the energy sub sector comprises of the Ministry of 



8  

Energy and Petroleum (MoEP), Energy Regulatory Commission (ERC), Kenya Electricity 

Generating Company (KenGen), Kenya Power and Lighting Company, the Rural Electrification 

Authority (REA), Kenya Electricity Transmission Company (KETRACO), Geothermal 

Development Company (GDC), Kenya Nuclear Electricity Board (KNEB), Kenya Pipeline 

Company (KPC), National Oil Corporation of Kenya (NOCK), Kenya Petroleum Refinery 

Limited, private sector actors and energy service users/customers (MOE &P Website). The 

energy sector in Kenya is largely dominated by petroleum and electricity, with wood fuel 

providing the basic energy needs of the rural communities, urban poor, and the informal sector 

(MOE &P Website). An analysis of the national energy shows heavy dependency on wood fuel 

and other biomass that account for 68% of the total energy consumption (petroleum 22%, 

electricity 9%, others account for 1%). 

Electricity access in Kenya is low despite the government’s ambitious target to increase 

electricity connectivity from the current 15% to at least 65% by the year 2022 (MOE &P 

Website). In the electric power sub-sector, total installed capacity expanded by 18.2% from 

1885MW in 2013/14 to 2299MW in 2014/15 mainly due to increased geothermal capacity. Total 

electricity generation expanded by 5% to 9,280GWh in 2014/15. Hydro and geothermal power 

accounted for the bulk power with a total share of 79.4% during the period. 

Domestic demand for electricity registered a growth of 5.6% to 7,615GWh in 2014/15 from 

7,205GWh in 2013/14. The demand for electric power continued to rise significantly over the 

last five years driven by a combination of normal growth, increased connections in urban and 

rural areas as well as the country’s envisaged transformation into a newly industrialized country 



9  

as articulated in Vision 2030. However, the power market remains unbalanced with this demand 

not fully met by supply. This is mostly due to system constraints and weather challenges. The 

peak demand rose from 1468MW in 2013/14 to 1512MW in 2014/15. The supply of electricity 

showed a 6.8% increase from 8,839GWh in 2013/14 to 9280GWh in 2014/15. The recorded total 

consumption also demonstrated a significant increase, recording a total of 7655GWh compared 

to 7244GWh in 2013/2014. 

As part of its long-term energy plan, the Government of Kenya intends to increase generation 

and expand transmission and distribution networks. Particularly, the Government has set out to - 

increase generation to 33,000+ MW by 2030, add 8,500 km of new lines, increase access to 100 

percent of the population by 2020 and build out of infrastructure cost at $14-18Billion. 

Evidently, Kenya’s power plan is aggressive and the capital expenditure implications for 

accomplishing the plan, are colossal. Kenya has consistently and persistently experienced budget 

deficits and there’s little hope that this will change in the coming years. Unless Kenya adopts an 

alternative option to public sector financing, attaining the Vision 2030 power goals will be a pipe 

dream. 

In this regard, the government can opt for Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). PPPs are various 

forms of collaborations between the public and private sectors for the provision of public 

services or public infrastructure in the public interest. PPPs are a variant of privatization in the 

sense that a public function is deputed to the private sector. With PPPs, however, the government 

continues to participate in some way (GOK, 2019). PPPs offer a veritable alternative to 

traditional financing while also presenting opportunities for technology and expertise leveraging. 



10  

Whilst their benefits may seem apparent, PPPs are delicate and complex and if not structured 

properly can easily become a ball and chain. 

1.1.4 Eldosol and Garissa Solar Power Plants 

 
 

Electricity has been a major economic driver in Kenya. In pursuit of more affordable and 

sustainable energy as pointed out in the SDGs, The Kenyan Government has been committed to 

enhance the tapping of green energy and connecting it to the national grid. To achieve this, the 

government has majorly upheld PPPs which have been at the core of green energy projects. 

Some of the major projects initiated by the Kenyan Government through PPP in the energy 

sector include Eldosol and Garissa solar power plants. These projects have been pointed out to be 

key boosters of the country’s electricity supply once effectively implemented. 

 

Eldosol solar power plant is a 40MW net output solar photovoltaic (PV) power plant located in 

Eldoret, Kenya. Launched in the year 2018, the project is developed as an independent power 

producer (IPP) under the feed-in tariff regime in Kenya. The project is projected to supply 

electricity to the national grid once completed. The project is financed jointly by Frontier 

Investment Management, Selenkei Investment Limited, Cedate Limited, Interpro International 

LLC, Paramount Bank and the Government of Kenya. The project has two phases with phase 1 

expected to produce 40MW of electricity to the main grid and phase 2 also expected to produce 

40MW once complete. The two phases are projected to cost Kshs.25.3 billion. The Eldosol 

project is amongst the first to generate utility-scale solar power in East Africa and its completion 

would diversify Kenya’s electricity supply away from both rain-dependent hydro and fossil fuels 



11  

thus contributing to improved grid stability in Western Kenya and cater for expected increased in 

energy use in the coming years. 

 

The Garissa Solar Power Plant on the other hand is a 50MW solar power project located in 

Garissa County, North-Eastern region in Kenya. The project commenced in December 2017 and 

commissioned in December 2019. The plant consists of 200,200 solar panels connected to 

inverters and installed on an area of 85 hectares. The project is a public private partnership 

between the Kenyan government through the Kenyan Rural Electrification Authority and the 

Exim Bank of China at a cost of Sh13 billion. The project is expected to lower the cost of 

electricity while benefiting more than 70,000 households and 350,000 individuals (GOK, 2020). 

 

An overview of the two projects shows that while Garissa Solar Power Plant has been completed 

and commissioned at the planned timeframe, the Eldosol Solar Power Plant is yet to be 

completed despite the lapse of the planned completion times. It would therefore be appropriate to 

establish the critical success factors behind the completion of one project and whether they have 

been applied in the other project or what could be the cause of the delayed implementation as far 

as CSFs are concerned. 

 

According to the World Bank Economic Report (2019), the energy sector is one of the major 

economic development enablers in the developing countries especially Sub-Saharan Africa 

including Kenya. The Kenya Vision 2030 (GOK, 2010) also considers the energy sector as one 

of the main pillars towards achieving the country’s vision 2030. This makes the sector a key area 

of focus for this study since it addresses the underlying issues in the sector. On the content scope, 

the study focused on four major critical success factors which are: project financing, project risk 



12  

management, project leadership and adoption of Information Communication Technology. These 

four CSFs have been specifically chosen in line with the objectives of the study after evaluation 

of all the CSFs determined that the four CSFs adequately covered PPP projects. The study 

focused on Eldosol and Garissa solar power plants. These are two major energy projects that are 

projected to provide the country with one of the core commodities of development (electricity) at 

a lower rate and sustainably. Focusing on the two projects allows a room for comparison as far as 

CSFs and implementation of the projects is concerned since one (Garissa SPP) has been 

successfully implemented while the other one (Eldosol SPP) has not been completely 

implemented despite having been officially commissioned and the set timelines having elapsed. 

The two projects give two different scenarios as far as project implementation is concerned. 

Focusing on the two projects also helped the study to establish whether the CSFs used in one 

project were available in the other and whether there were any disparities in the CSFs that could 

have led to the disparities in the rate of implementation. The project managers in these projects 

were surveyed in the study. 

1.2 Statement of the Problem 

 
In a move to ensure speedy completion of government projects and effective service delivery as 

well as promoting local businesses and industrialization, the Kenyan government has embraced 

PPPs (Government of Kenya, 2017). However, despite the continued investment by the 

government and the private investors on PPPs, the energy sector projects under PPP such as the 

Eldosol solar power plants, dualling of Nairobi-Nakuru Highway, 980 Megawatt Coal Plant; a 

two-phase Geothermal Development Project to generate a total of 1,200 megawatts (GOK, 2018) 

among others, record low rate of implementation, low rate of completion, and poor quality of the 



13  

implemented projects (KBA, 2018). According to the Public Private Partnership Unit (PPPU) 

there were projections of an expenditure of Kshs. 6.2 trillion in over 25 PPPs across the country 

between 2012 and 2020 with 90% of these projects being in the energy and construction sector. 

This has not been the case with evidence showing that only 20% of these projects have been 

implemented with projects such as the 140MW Olkaria Geothermal PPP project, 35MW 

Menegai Phase 1 (Sosian), the Transmission Grid Expansion programme, dualling of the 

Nairobi-Mombasa Highway, the construction of the Mombasa Convention Centre and the 

construction of a dual-carriage from Nakuru to Nairobi still stuck at the feasibility study stage 

eight years down the line (KETRACO, 2018; KENGEN, 2019; KAM, 2015; GOK, 2018; 

ICPAK, 2016). While the available evidence shows that the PPPs play a critical role in enhancing 

economic growth and development (World Bank, 2014), this remains unattainable in Kenya due 

to low rate of implementation of these projects. The problem being addressed by this study 

therefore is the influence of critical success factors on the implementation of the projects under 

PPP in energy sector in Kenya. The study focused on Eldosol and Garissa Solar Power Plant 

projects. 

1.3 Objectives of the Study 

 

1.3.1 General Objective 

 
 

The main aim of this study was to establish the influence of critical success factors on 

implementation of the PPPs in the energy sector in Kenya. 



14  

1.3.2 Specific Objectives 

 
 

The study sought to fulfil the following specific objectives; 

 
 

i. To examine the effect of project financing on implementation of PPPs in the energy 

sector in Kenya 

 

ii. To establish the influence risk management plays on implementation of PPPs in the 

energy sector in Kenya 

 

iii. To analyse the effect of project leadership on implementation of PPPs in the energy sector 

in Kenya 

 

iv. To determine the effect of information communication technology on implementation of 

PPPs in the energy sector in Kenya 

1.4 Research Questions 

 
The study sought to answer the following research questions; 

 
 

i. What is the effect of project financing on implementation of PPPs in the energy sector in 

Kenya? 

 

ii. What is the influence risk management plays on the implementation of PPPs in the 

energy sector in Kenya? 

 

iii. What is the effect of project leadership on implementation of PPPs in the energy sector in 

Kenya? 



15  

iv. What is the effect of Information Communication Technology on implementation of PPPs 

in the energy sector in Kenya? 

1.5 Significance of the Study 

 
The study aimed at unveiling the influence of critical success factors on the implementation of 

the Public Private Partnerships Projects in the energy sector in Kenya. The findings from the 

study will be significant to a number of parties including the managers of PPPs in the energy 

sector in Kenya, private organizations, government and policy makers as well as future scholars 

and academicians. 

1.5.1 Management of PPPs in the Energy Industry 

 

The managers of projects under PPPs in the energy industry will benefit from the study findings 

in that they will identify the critical aspects of project management that ought to              enhance 

the implementation and performance of the projects under PPP model. Based on the fact that 

these projects are very crucial in Kenya’s economic growth and development, the findings will 

enable the management to identify where to tap in order to enhance the success of such projects. 

The findings will be of importance to organizations such as NGOs and others in the private 

sector that will identify the need to focus on critical success factors as a way of promoting the 

implementation and success of their projects. 

1.5.2 Government and Policy Makers 

 

The projects under PPP model directly connect with the government mandate of service delivery 

to the people. The findings from the study will form a basis for the government agencies to 



16  

establish the major aspects to focus on in order to steer the implementation of PPPs. The policy 

makers will also identify the prospects to consider when regulating projects under PPP model. 

This will ensure that the management of the state corporations are enshrined from getting into 

PPP partnerships without considering the ability of the projects to be successful. 

1.5.3 Future Academicians and Scholars 

 
The study addresses a key and critical area in the field of business performance, which is project 

management. The findings will provide a reference material to the future academicians on the 

critical success factors and how they affect implementation of projects under PPP model. Future 

academicians will also identify gaps which they will seek to fill in their future endeavors. 



17  

CHAPTER TWO 
 
 

LITERATURE REVIEW 

2.1 Introduction 
 

This chapter presents the review of previous studies on the influence of critical success factors 

on the implementation of PPPs in the energy sector in Kenya. The chapter summarizes the 

information gathered from other researchers who have conducted the same type of research in 

the same field of study. The chapter presents a theoretical background, empirical review, research 

gap as well as the conceptual framework. 

2.2 Theoretical Review 

 
Several theories were reviewed in this study based on the study variables. The theories include; 

Contingency theory, Resource Dependency theory, and Frank Knight's Risk Bearing Theory. 

2.2.1 Contingency Theory of Leadership 

 
Contingency theory of leadership was first introduced by Woodward (1958). The theory 

extensively focuses on organization leadership as well as emphasizing on how organization 

managers can grow to global leaders full of leadership capabilities in all business sectors. 

According to Robbins, Judge and Campbell (2010), contingency theory of leadership 

contemplates that the methods of leadership and tactics used to provide leadership by a certain 

leader depends on the contextual situation that the leader experiences. 

In a clearer view, the theory states that the traits and the methods of leadership that are exercised 

in one sector of an organization may not fit in the same way in another sector or another 

organization. This is as of influence on the various changing factors such as advancement of 



18  

technology, dynamic change of market, environmental vitality as well as change of the 

organization size. Therefore, in this perspective, when a leader is dealing with a different 

organization from the previous one, or there have been changes in the organization’s 

management, the leader should embrace these changes as well as the strategies of leadership to 

accommodate and be able to cope with the resulting new changes (Aver & Cadez, 2009). 

Robbins et al. (2010), suggest that as most organizations expand, change is inevitable. However, 

other organizations start using new operational methods that may result due to changes in 

technology and innovations. Therefore, for the organizations manager to ensure the firm 

succeeds, he or she needs to adopt new methods of leadership as well and change the direction of 

management so as to enhance success of the organization. 

2.2.2 Resource Dependence Theory 

 
The Resource dependence theory (RDT)was established by Pfeffer and Salancik (1978) in an 

attempt to publish the need for resources in an organization to propel performance and growth. 

The theory states that all organizations depend on resources for them to keep their operations on- 

going and effective. Therefore, on this basis, the organizations have to invest on the organization 

resources in order to ensure that they sustain their daily operations (Yeo, 2013). According to 

Ullah (2013), Pfeffer refers to resources as the basis of power to any organization thus, the 

needed resources for one organization are sometimes held by another organization. This 

therefore shows the need for the organization to seek these resources and allocate them to its 

operations. 



19  

According to Pfeffer and Salancik’s (1978), independent organizations will at some point also be 

in need of resources for some of its operations and should therefore maintain a good relationship 

with the neighbouring organizations. Smerek and Denison (2007) cite Pfeffer and Salancik and 

state that resources and power go hand in hand thus any organization that seeks to be powerful in 

an organization will eventually seek resources for sustaining itself as a powerful organization. 

2.2.3 Frank Knight's Risk Bearing Theory 

 
The risk bearing theory by Frank Knight consists of one of the most effective theories on risk 

management that has gained attraction from various researchers and scholars globally. The 

theory configures the need for organizational managers to take risks while on the other hand 

considering the way in which they can mitigate the risks in case they turn to be severe (Rejda, 

2013). Frank Knight first introduced the dimension of risk-taking as a central characteristic of 

entrepreneurship. Knight adopts the theory of early economists such as Richard Cantillon and 

Say, and adds the dimension of risk-taking. This theory considers uncertainty as a factor of 

production, and holds the main function of the project manager as acting in anticipation 

of future events. According to Wenk (2011) Knight states that risk taking aspects enhance the 

possibility of realization of bigger opportunities and grabbing such opportunities before the 

competition increases. 

When carrying out a project, many risks are encountered by the project while others are 

encountered by the project manager in an attempt of ensuring the productivity of the projects. 

These risks therefore call for management techniques in order to reduce the severity of such risks 

and in turn convert them to project opportunities (Knight, 1921; and Zakari, Poku & Owusu- 



20  

Ansah, 2013). According to the risk bearing theory, the ability of the manager to withstand risks 

and maintain proper mechanisms of keeping track on them, enhances the manager’s ability of 

realising more outdoors for the opportunities hence promoting enhanced project performance. 

When managing a project, the aspects undertaken may not be familiar to the project manager or 

the contractor. Therefore, as a practice of enhancing proper care of such scenarios, the aspect of 

risk bearing is essential to such managers (Sant, 2010). 

2.3 Empirical Review 

 

2.3.1 Project Financing and Implementation of PPPs 

 
Project financing is mainly the process of availing funds to the projects from the first stage to the 

final stage and ensuring that the finances are effectively used as intended (McCarthy & Zald, 

2012). It also involves the act of making better use of financial resources as well as maximizing 

the existing financial resources in a project. Studies have been carried across the globe on the 

relationship between project financing and project success. A study by Yalegama, Chileshe and 

Ma (2016) on critical success factors for community-driven development projects focused on Sri 

Lankan community projects. The study sought to establish the influence of project financing and 

project monitoring as the main critical success factors on the success of community projects. An 

exploratory research design was used while the study targeted project managers in selected 

community projects in Sri Lanka. Their findings revealed that through appropriate financing, the 

success of the projects was enhanced. According to Yalegama et al. (2016), availing enough 

finances to projects serves as a critical success factor in which the projects are pulled to effective 

implementation and completion. 



21  

Carvalho, Patah and Bido (2015) studied the effect of project financing on project success. The 

study was empirical-based and the scholars carried out a cross-country and cross-industry 

comparison. This is to mean that they surveyed studies from different industries and from 

different countries to come up with conclusions and recommendations. Their study established 

that the main role of project management was to ensure that the projects were effectively and 

adequately financed as a way of keeping the operations of the projects running. Through 

adequate financing and accountability of the funds allocated to the projects (which is ensured by 

the project management team) the projects are able to continue without being disrupted by lack 

of workforce or materials that require funds to acquire (Carvalho et al., 2015). 

Haysom (2016) carried out a study on resource mobilization and sustainability of rural water 

supplies in 38 villages in Tanzania on local financing and cost recovery. The study applied cross- 

sectional survey design to guide the research process. A direct correlation between local 

contributions and project functionality was established in the study. Whereas some communities 

had established water saving accounts in which communities deposited local contributions for 

operation and maintenance others did not. The study found that over 85% of projects in which 

communities deposited local contributions into a water account were regularly operating and 

repairing their water systems. However, none of the communities with a failed system had a 

water account. This is indicated that a lack of local contribution of funds led to system failure. 

This underscores the importance of the role played by funds contributed by the community in the 

sustenance of community projects. 



22  

Further, an empirical study relating community resource mobilization and sustainability of 

community water was carried out by Okungu (2011) in Kisii County in Kenya. The study 

examined the influence of community driven projects, participatory appraisal and resource 

mobilization on sustainability of donor funded projects. The study involved 50 villages where by 

for each village 2 to 3 members were interviewed. It was established that community 

participation in donor funded projects was high during implementation but waned in the post 

project period. 

2.3.2 Project Risk Management 

 
Risk management is the process of identifying the unprecedented circumstances that may occur 

and taking keen measures to ensure that the circumstances are controlled to minimize their 

severity. In project management, project risk management entails coming up with key measures 

to mitigate the identified risks in a project and coming up with ways and strategies to curb the 

situations for them not to severely affect the project’s success (Williams & Heins, 2014). Risk 

management entails establishing or identifying objectives, gathering of information that is 

relevant in regard to the nature of the problem as well as the environment, evaluating the costs 

and benefits of alternatives using modern analytical techniques, and choosing the alternative that 

is most consistent with the goals and objectives of the project. According to Embrechts and 

Straumann (2012), one of the most important function of managing risk is the identification 

process. Failure in recognizing the existence of the organization potential event may result to 

financial disaster. 



23  

Fisayo and Nwankwo (2014) conducted a study on risk management techniques and project 

performance in manufacturing firms in Nigeria. The study aimed at establishing the relationship 

between risk management strategies and project completion. The study adopted an experimental 

research design and had a sample of 118 respondents from projects in manufacturing firms in 

Nigeria. The study established that risks were part and parcel of most projects in manufacturing 

firms in Nigeria and thus the project managers needed risk management strategies to curb the 

impacts. The study concluded that risk management was essential in project completion through 

identification of the flaws in a project and coming up with strategies to mitigate the flaws early 

enough. 

Kpodo and Kofi (2016) conducted a study on the effects of risk management on project 

performance. The scholars focused on financial institutions in Ghana. Among their objectives 

was to find out the influence of risk management on performance of financial institutions. Kpodo 

and Kofi (2016) adopted a descriptive research design and had a sample of 202 respondents from 

selected financial firms in Ghana. Among their findings was that organizations mostly relied on 

risk assessment measures to forecast on the uncertainty of several operations and thus kept track 

of the essentiality of the risks to affect the performance of their projects (Kpodo & Kofi, 2016). 

2.3.3 Project Leadership 

 
Leadership has been recognized as one of the key aspects that determine the extent to which a 

project ought to be successful. The project leader is an individual who is tasked to ensure that the 

day to day activities of a project are effectively run and every individual in the project is doing 



24  

the assigned roles towards achieving the project goal. The leadership qualities and capabilities of 

the project leader mark the beginning of the project success (Zaccaro & Klimoski, 2013). 

Bergh and Aguinis (2016) conducted a study on the impact of team leadership on the growth of 

an organization. The study involved 10 organizations in the United States of America. In each 

organization, 5 members were involved in the study. A functional approach to team leadership 

used interviews and filling of questionnaires to obtain the data. According to their findings, it 

was established that team leadership must meet obligations such and building of trust and 

inspiration to other team members, must facilitate and support the team decision and expand the 

capability of the team. In addition, the author emphasized that other factors such as creation of 

team identity, making of team differences as well as foreseeing and influence of change must be 

considered. 

Manz and Sims (2016) studied the impact of the role of a leader in an organization in Brazil. The 

study was carried out among 15 organizations whereby for each organization, 8 respondents 

were picked. The study adopted a descriptive research design and the data was collected through 

use of structured interviews. From the study findings, it was established that in order to promote 

self-management, leaders must encourage rehearsal, self-goal-setting, self-criticism, self- 

reinforcement, self-expectation, and self-observation/evaluation among the team members. 

Adrian and Transt (2017) in their research on the influence of project leadership on the 

organization growth established that good governance within an organization contributes highly 

to revenue generation as well as increased customer loyalty. The study involved 10 companies in 

Moldavia. For each company, 5 members were considered and picked to respond to the study 



25  

questions. From the study findings, it was established that almost 50% of any organizations 

income was as a result of the influence of the organization leaders and their relationship with 

other work members. Further, the study established that some leaders governing criteria such as 

awarding of the most performing employees as well as duty negation in the organization 

facilitated to high performance in the organizations. 

2.3.4 Information Communication Technology 

 
Information Communication technology (ICT) refers to technologies that provide access to 

information through telecommunications. In the past few decades ICT has provided society with 

a vast array of new communication capabilities. Li-Ren (2012) in their research on the impact of 

ICT on project success, established that adoption of ICT has a positive effect on project 

performance in terms of schedule and cost success and as well as quality and safety performance. 

Louis (2008) conducted a study on the impact of project management ICT systems and their 

impact on project managers and project performance. This was an empirical assessment and the 

study analysed questionnaire data from project managers. It was observed that advantages 

obtained from ICT use are not only limited to manager’s performance but also to project 

performance. ICT systems were found to have direct impact on project success by contributing to 

improving budget control and meeting project deadlines as well as fulfilling technical 

specifications. 

Marzagão and Carvalho (2016) analysed the effect of critical success factors for Six Sigma 

projects in Malaysia. The study sought to analyse the effect of information technology adoption, 

risk management and planning on the success of six-stigma projects where quality control 



26  

through a six-step model is upheld. The study utilized a cross-sectional research design and 

targeted 23 projects in Malaysia. The findings revealed that adoption of Information 

Communication Technology was one of the CSFs that significantly influenced the completion 

and success of six-sigma projects. According to Marzagão and Carvalho (2016), upholding 

technology enhances the ability to monitor the progress of the projects while increasing 

efficiency and effectiveness in the implementation process. 

Mavi and Standing (2018) studied the influence of critical success factors on sustainability of 

project in energy projects in Nigeria. The study specifically sought to assess the role played by 

ICT and project team commitment as the main CSFs on project sustainability. The study targeted 

118 projects with the project managers as the main respondents. The findings portrayed that 

information technology was a critical success factor adopted by most of the leading projects in 

the energy sector in Nigeria through which accuracy and responsiveness in the implementation 

process was enhanced. Mavi and Standing (2018) noted that using the modern technology in the 

energy project was one of the drivers of success to the projects that could be a game changer if 

adopted by more projects. 

Carvalho, Poleto, and Seixas (2018) analyses the impact of Information technology outsourcing 

and integration as a critical success factor on the success of projects in South Africa. The study 

sampled 99 respondents and established that project implementation and success highly relied on 

how well the project management was committed towards embracing the modern technology. 

Carvalho et al. (2018) indicated that information technology in the modern project world was a 

key requirement for any project to achieve the projected results. Yadav and Singh (2020) support 



27  

this by indicating that ICT is one of the CSFs that determine the ability of effective 

communication, innovation and coordinated monitoring in a project. 

2.4 Research Gap 

 

The empirical studies reviewed have shown compelling arguments on the influence of Critical 

Success Factors on the project implementation. Most of the studies focus on different contexts 

with studies such as Yalegama et al. (2016) focusing on community driven projects, Fisayo and 

Nwankwo (2014) on projects by manufacturing companies and Adrian and Transt (2017) on the 

overall organization performance. This implies that little has been done as far as the CSFs and 

energy projects are concerned. Most of the studies address varied CSFs with no study focusing 

on the four CSFs (financing, risk management, leadership and information technology) at a go. 

Most of the studies have addressed the effect of CSFs in different types of projects which may 

not be duplicated in the case of Public Private Partnerships (PPPs) while others focused on 

developed countries where systems and frameworks of PPPs are more advanced than in 

developing countries, specifically Kenya. This therefore paves way for this study to address the 

influence of Critical Success Factors on the implementation of energy projects under PPP in 

Kenya. 

The research gaps are as shown in Table 2.1. 

Table 2.1: Research Gaps 

Study Research Gap 

Yalegama, Chileshe and Ma (2016) The study focused only on two CSFs i.e. 

project financing and project monitoring. 



28  

Carvalho, Patah and Bido (2015) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project financing. 

Haysom (2016) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project financing in the water sector in 

Tanzania. 

Okungu (2011) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project financing in the water sector in Kisii. 

Fisayo and Nwankwo (2014) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project risk management in the manufacturing 

sector in Nigeria. 

Kpodo and Kofi (2016) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project risk management in the financial sector 

in Ghana. 

Bergh and Aguinis (2016) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project leadership in ten organizations in 

various sectors in the United States of 

America. 

Manz and Sims (2016) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project leadership in fifteen organizations in 

various sectors in Brazil. 

Adrian and Transt (2017) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project leadership in ten organizations in 



29  

various sectors in Moldavia. 

Marzagão and Carvalho (2016) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project ICT in six sigma projects in Malaysia. 

Carvalho, Poleto, and Seixas (2018) The study focused only on one CSF i.e. 

project ICT in various projects in South 

Africa. 

 

2.5 Conceptual Framework 

 

Kellstedt and Whitten (2013) define a conceptual framework as the systematic representation of 

variables of a study in a flowing structure that clearly shows the relationship between the 

independent and the dependent variables. It is the tool researchers use to guide their inquiry; it is 

a set of ideas used to structure the research, a sort of a map (Kothari, 2011). In this study, the 

conceptual framework is as shown in Figure 2.1. The independent variables are project 

financing, project leadership, adoption of information technology and project risk management. 

The dependent variable is project implementation. 

 

 

 

 

 

 



30  

 
 

 
 

Independent variables     Dependent Variable 

 

Figure 2.1: Conceptual Framework 

 

 

Project Financing 
• Adequate Budgeting 

• Accountability 

• Timely disbursements 

 

Adoption of Information 

Technology 
• Project monitoring Systems 

• Information sharing platforms 

• ICT training on use of ICT 

Project Risk Management 
• Risk analysis and identification 

• Risk control measures 

• Insurance covers 

 

Project Leadership 
• Contractors’ skills 

• Teamwork 

• Example setting 

Implementation of Projects 

under PPP  
• Completion on time 

• Completion within the budget 

• Project meeting the intended 

purpose 

 



31  

The conceptual framework for this study shows how the critical success factors lead to the success 

of PPP project management process. Identifying critical success factors and pitfalls early enough 

during the assessment of projects is a vital start for ensuring successful PPP projects completion. 

This is with the belief that there are certain major factors whose influences are considerable to 

PPP project performances such that they will enhance the successful completion of projects. 

Identifying critical success factors and potential pitfalls will help PPP project teams to minimize 

fire-fighting and intuitive approach in managing uncertainties and changes 

encountered during project implementation. The aim is not the avoidance of problems but 

knowing how to respond to them when they arise. 

Critical success factors in a project, such as project risk management, are important for a project 

to be successful (chrysostome & Diawara, 2019). A study on critical success factors for 

community-driven development projects established that critical success factors in a project such 

as adoption of information technology, project leadership, project financing, and project risk 

management had a positive and significant influence on project success (Yalegama & Ma, 2016). 

This was also revealed by (Besteiro, 2015), (Carvalho, 2015) and (Ofori, 2013).  

It is thus postulated that the presence of critical success factors leads to successful PPP project 

implementation with the net outcome being completion on time, completion within the budget 

and the project meeting the intended purpose. 

2.6 Summary of the Chapter 

 
In this chapter, a conceptual framework to guide the study was developed and used to analyse the 

relationship between critical success factors and implementation of PPP projects. In conclusion, 

the literature reviewed suggests that there is a positive relationship between PPP projects 



32  

implementation and critical success factors, that is; project financing, risk management, project 

leadership and ICT. Some of Kenya’s PPP projects are failing due to lack of the critical success 

factors discussed herein. The next chapter will present the methodology that will be used for this 

study. The chapter begins by introducing the research design. This is then followed by target 

population and sampling, data collection techniques, data collection procedure, reliability of the 

research instruments and finally ethical considerations. 



33  

 

CHAPTER THREE 

 

 

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 
 
 

3.1 Introduction 

 
This chapter focuses on the methods and design that was used to carry out the study. The target 

population, sampling, data collection methods, research quality and data analysis were captured 

in the chapter. 

3.2 Research Design 

 
Taylor (2007) defines research design as the guide that contains instructions and framework of 

implementing a study to achieve the desired results. Descriptive research design was considered 

appropriate for the study at hand based on its ability to incorporate and provide a detailed 

description of the study variables. According to Kumar (2010), descriptive research design also 

offers other new ideas on the study variables thus giving the study a more understandable and 

reliable perspective. Descriptive research design in this context was therefore, helped in 

revealing the specific answers to the critical success factors and implementation of PPP projects. 

By the virtue of incorporating both qualitative and quantitative data, the descriptive research 

design helped in getting deeper and more detailed information regarding the use of CSFs and 

how they have influenced implementation of the projects. 

3.3 Target population and Sampling 

 
The target population for this study comprised Eldosol and Garissa Solar Power Plants in Eldoret 

and Garissa. This is a PPP project under the government of Kenya financed by European 



34  

Investment Bank and the Dutch Entrepreneurial Development Bank. The project personnel and 

the representatives of the project financiers were the units of observation. According to the data 

from the Rural Electrification Authority and the Eldosol and Garissa Solar Power Plants head 

offices, Garissa Solar Power Plant project has 59 personnel in the managerial and supervisory 

capacity while Eldosol Solar Power Plant has 74 personnel in managerial and supervisory 

capacity. The study therefore targeted a total of 133 respondents from the two projects. 

 

Sahin and Anil (2017); and Chen, Xu, Zhu, Yuan, and Yu (2019) suggest that based on the size of 

the target population, a sample size of 30% is adequate for a study to be representative of the 

population. Nielsen, Eden, and Verbeke (2020) also suggest that in a population where most of 

the respondents are likely to repeat the same information, a sample size of 30% is adequate for 

an effective representation of the population. This is backed by Rutberg, and Bouikidis (2018) 

who suggest that in a population where the characteristics of the respondents could mean 

repetition of the responses, narrowing down the sample size to a lower number is appropriate. 

Based on the nature of the targeted respondents in this study (the respondents are in managerial 

positions and have the same information regarding the implementation of the projects and the 

CSFs), therefore, 30% of the target population as the sample size. This will give 18 respondents 

from the Garissa Solar Power Plant project and 22 respondents from the Eldosol Solar Power 

Plant project. The total sample size for the study will therefore be 40 respondents. The study 

purposively picked the respondents in managerial positions specifically those attached to 

financial docket, risk management, information technology and the overall management of the 

projects. These were more knowledgeable on the specific CSFs focused on in the study. 



35  

3.4 Data Collection Techniques 

 
 

Bagaka and Kobia (2010) define data collection as a means by which information is obtained 

from the selected subjects of an investigation. The study utilized primary data. The data was 

obtained by use of a structured questionnaire. The questionnaire was self-administered to the 20 

sampled respondents drawn from the employees of the two projects.  

3.5 Data Analysis 

 
 

The data obtained by use of questionnaires was organized, cleaned, sorted, and analysed using 

SPSS Version 25. Qualitative data obtained from the open-ended questions on the questionnaire 

was aggregated by content analysis and presented in form of themed survey reports. This 

facilitated the analysis of respondents’ opinions on the critical success factors and 

implementation of PPPs. Descriptive statistics computed from the primary data were analysed to 

obtain mean, standard deviation, frequencies and percentages. This data was presented in form of 

carts and frequency tables. Multiple regression analyses was conducted to establish the statistical 

relationship between independent variables and the dependent variable. Multiple regression 

analysis allows for the examination of relationships between several independent variables and 

one dependent variable. In addition to the independent variables’ collective prediction of the 

dependent variable, this statistical method determines the individual contribution of each of the 

individual variables to the dependent variable (Wiid & Diggings, 2015). The model adopted in 

the study was of the form; 



36  

Y = ß0 + ß1X1 + ß2X2 + ß3X3 + ß4X4 + e 

 

Where: 

 
Y = Implementation of Public Private Partnership Projects (dependent variable) 

 
X1 = Project Financing 

 
X2 = Project Risk Management 

 
X3 = Project leadership 

 
X4 = Adoption of Information Technology 

 
e = Error term 

 
 

ß1, ß2, ß3 and ß4 are the coefficients for the independent variables 

The variables in the study were measured as shown in Table 3.1. 

Table 3.1: Measurement of the Variables 

Variable Indicators Measure
me nt 
Scale 

Researc
h 

Approac 
h 

D a t a 
analysis 
techniqu e 

Tools  of 
d a t a 
analysis 

Test 
conducte
d 

Project 

Financing 

• Adequate 
Budgeting 

• Accountabilit y 
• Timely 

disbursements 

Ordinal Qualitati
v e and 

Quantitat
i ve 

techniqu
e s 

Descripti v
 e 
Statistics 

M e a n 

, s 

tandard 

deviation

s 

, 

measures 

Regression 
coefficients
, ANOVA, 
t- 
test 

    of central  

    tendency,  

    measures  

    o f  

    dispersion  



37  

Project Risk 

Management 

• Risk analysis 

and 

identification 
• Risk control 

measures 

• Insurance 

covers 

Ordinal Qualitativ 
e and 

Quantitati 
ve 

technique 
s 

Descripti 
v e 
Statistics 

M e a n , 

s tandard 

deviations 

, 

measures 

Regression 
coefficients, 
ANOVA, t- 
test 

    of central  

    tendency,  

    measures  

    o f  

    dispersion  

Project 

Leadership 

 
• Contractors’ 

skills 
• Teamwork 

• Example 

setting 

Ordinal Qualitativ 
e and 

Quantitati 
ve 

technique 
s 

Descripti 
v e 
Statistics 

M e a n , 

s tandard 

deviations 

, 

measures 

Regression 
coefficients, 
ANOVA, t- 
test 

    of central  

    tendency,  

    measures  

    o f  

    dispersion  

Adoption of 

Information 

Technology 

• Project 

monitoring 

Systems 
• Information 

sharing 

platforms 
• ICT training 

on use of 

ICT 

Ordinal Qualitativ 
e and 

Quantitati 
ve 

technique 
s 

Descripti 
v e 
Statistics 

M e a n , 

s tandard 

deviations 

, 

measures 

Regression 
coefficients, 
ANOVA, t- 
test 

    of central  

    tendency,  

    measures  

    o f  

    dispersion  

Implementation 

of Projects 

under PPP 

• Completion 

on time 
• Completion 

within the 

budget 
• Project 

meeting the 

intended 

purpose 

Ordinal Qualitativ 
e and 

Quantitati 
ve 

technique 
s 

Descripti 
v e 
Statistics 

M e a n , 

s tandard 

deviations 

, 

measures 

 

    of central 
    tendency, 
    measures 
    o f 

    dispersion 



38  

3.6 Research Quality 

 
A pilot test was carried out to ensure that the research instrument meets the required quality in 

addressing the research questions. This was done through use of 20% of the sample size (4 

respondents) who were drawn from other PPP projects. The data from the pilot study was not 

included in the actual study. 

3.6.1 Reliability of the Research Instrument 

 
Reliability is the extent to which data collection techniques or analysis procedures will yield 

consistent findings (accuracy and precision of a measurement procedure) (Creswell, 2014). It 

establishes if the measure is able to yield the same results on other occasions, similar 

observations are reached by other observers and transparency in the data. The data from the pilot 

study was analysed to establish the Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient. A threshold of 0.70 was used 

(Daniel, 2017). 

The results of the pilot test as reported in Table 3.2 indicate that that all the variables in the study 

had reliable coefficients of more than 0.70. The first variable which is project financing had a 

Cronbach’s (α) of 0.897 which implies that 89.7% of the variance in the scores is reliable and 

only 10.3% (100%-89.7%) is not reliable. The second variable which is project risk management 

had a cumulative Cronbach’s (α) of 0.876 indicating that 87.6% of the variance in the scores is 

reliable and only 12.4% is not reliable hence all the 6 questions were maintained in the 

questionnaire for the actual study. Under the third variable – project leadership, the Cronbach’s 

Alpha was 0.899 which is an implication that all the 6 items were reliable to a variance of 89.9% 

which is higher than the threshold of 0.70 hence all the items were reliable. Information 



39  

technology had a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.931 implying that the variable had a reliability variance 

of 93.1% while project implementation (dependent variable) had a Cronbach’s Alpha of 0.887 

hence the questions under this variable were reliable. 

 
Table 3.2: Reliability Results  

Variable Coefficient 

(α) 

Number of 

Items 

Comment 

Project Financing 0.897 5 Reliable 

Project Risk Management 0.876 6 Reliable 

Project Leadership 0.899 5 Reliable 

Information Technology 0.931 6 Reliable 

Project Implementation 0.887 5 Reliable 

 

 

 

 

3.6.2 Validity of the Research Instrument 

 
Validity was tested to ensure that the research instruments answer the research questions in the 

anticipated framework. Content validity and construct validity were used. For these two types of 

validity, experts’ opinion was used whereby two experts on PPPs and the supervisor was given 

the questionnaire to read through and give any recommendations/observations. To verify content 

validity, a thorough literature review was conducted to identify necessary items to measure the 

variables of the study as shown in the conceptual framework. The questionnaire was further 

subjected to supervisors and two experts in the field of project management for scrutiny in order 

to ascertain face validity, coherency and comprehensiveness of the suitability of the survey 

items. This was meant to assess the clarity of the instrument items so that those items found to be 



40  

inadequate in measuring the variables were either discarded or modified to improve the quality 

of the research instrument thus increasing its validity. 

3.7 Ethical Considerations 

 
The study protected the confidentiality of the respondents. This was done through assuring the 

respondents of their confidentiality and asking them not to include any personal information of 

the questionnaire. They were also informed on the use of the study and the data they provide 

(academic). Moreover, permission from the university was sought as well as the ethical review 

committee. A research permit was obtained from the National Commission of Science, 

technology and Innovations (NACOSTI). These permits/letters were attached on the 

questionnaire to assure the respondent on the use of the information provided. Scientific integrity 

was adhered to by avoiding plagiarism, forging data and also acknowledging those who 

contributed to the study during the desk reviews. 



41  

CHAPTER FOUR 

 

 

RESEARCH FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 
 
 

4.1 Introduction 

 
This chapter presents the findings of the study on the influence of project critical success factors 

on the implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. The 

chapter covers the response rate of the research instrument, the pilot study results, the 

presentation of the demographic results, and presentation of the main findings. The main findings 

are presented in two phases; the descriptive and inferential analysis which is done systematically 

as per the study objectives. 

 

4.2 Response Rate 

 
According to Young (2013), a response rate analysis is essential to determine whether a study 

obtained a threshold of participants required to make it valid and effective as well as to be a 

representative of the targeted population. The study had a sample of 40 respondents drawn from 

the two projects. Questionnaires were distributed to these respondents and 37 respondents 

returned the fully filled questionnaires for analysis. This represented a response rate of 92.5% 

which was considered adequate for analysis. According to Mulei (2016), a response rate of 

between 60% and above is appropriate for a study to make conclusion and recommendations, an 

implication that this study met the threshold. Table 4.1 shows the summary of the response rate. 



42  

 

 

Table 4.1: Response Rate 
 

Sample Size Response Non-response 

Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage Frequency Percentage 

40 100% 37 92.5% 3 7.5% 

 

 

 
4.3 Analysis of Demographic Data 

 
Finchman (2008) argues that no population has homogeneous characteristics and hence it’s 

important to assess their demographic characteristics. This sub-section presents the descriptions 

of the respondents in terms of their project, length of service in their respective projects, and 

their current position at the projects. 

 
4.3.1 Project Attached To 

 
The study sought to find out the specific project that the respondents were working for between 

the two projects. As the findings in Figure 4.1 portray, 61.1% of the respondents were attached to 

the Eldosol power plant project while 38.9% were working at the Garissa power plant project. 



43  

 
 

 

Figure 4.1: Distribution by the Project 

 

 

 
 

4.3.2 Distribution of the Respondents by Period Worked 

 
The study sought to find out the period in years that the respondents had been working at their 

respective projects. The findings as shown in Figure 4.2 revealed that most of the respondents 

(50.0%) had been working in their respective projects for a period of between 1 and 2 years, 

33.3% had been working in the projects for less than a year while 16.7% of the respondents had 

been in their respective projects for a period of more than 2 years. The findings imply that the 

retention of workers at the projects is relatively low provided that they have been in operation for 

over 2 years and only 16% of the respondents have been there for this period. 

0.389 

Garissa Power Plant 
Eldosol Power Plant 

0.611 



44  

 

 

Figure 4.2: Period Worked at the Projects 

 

 
 

4.3.3 Distribution of the Respondents by Position Held at the Projects 

 
The study sought to find out the position held by the respondents in their respective projects. The 

findings as shown in Figure 4.3 revealed that 44.4% of the respondents were project managers 

managing different sub-sections of the projects, 38.9% were assistant project managers, 11.1% 

were team leaders while 5.6% of the respondents were supervisors. The findings imply that the 

study cut across different positions hence there could be diverse views on the adoption of project 

critical success factors in the projects. 

50.0% 
50.0% 

37.5% 
33.3% 

25.0% 

16.7% 

12.5% 

0.0% 
Less than 1 Year 1 – 2 Years Above 2 years 



45  

 
 

 

Figure 4.3: Position Held at the Project 

 

 

 
 

4.4 Descriptive Analysis of the Study Variables 

 
This sub-section covers the descriptive analysis of the data based on the specific study 

objectives. Descriptive analysis according to Young (2014) helps describe things the way they 

are in a study through means, standard deviation, frequencies and percentages. The analysis 

herein is done systematically as per the study’s specific objectives. 

 

4.4.1 Project Financing 

 
The first objective of the study was to assess the influence of project financing on the 

implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. The main 

aspects of project financing focused on in this study included adequate budgeting, accountability 

and timely disbursement of funds. The respondents were asked to indicate their level of 

Team Leader 11.1% 

Supervisor 5.6% 

Assistant Project Manager 38.9% 

Project Manager 44.4% 

0.0% 12.5% 25.0% 37.5% 50.0% 



46  

agreement or disagreement on specific statements drawn from these aspects based on a five- 

points Likert’s scale. The findings are as shown in Table 4.3. 

 

As the findings portray, majority of the respondents (Agree = 11.1%, strongly agree = 44.4%; 

mean = 3.50) agreed that their respective projects had adequate budget to cater for their financial 

needs and material needs until their completion. They also agreed that there had been 

accountability on the use of funds allocated to the projects to ensure effective implementation as 

evidenced by a mean of 3.22 and a standard deviation of 1.73. However, 38.9% of the 

respondents disagreed with this statement an indication that there could be some incidences of 

lack of accountability among the projects on the use of allocated funds. The respondents further 

disagreed that the funds allocated to the projects were disbursed on time to ensure efficient 

operations at the projects (Disagree = 27.8%, strongly disagree = 21.1%; mean = 2.08). This is 

an indication that while there could be an adequate budget for the projects’ operations, lack of 

timely disbursement could derail the operations thus affect project implementation. 

 

The findings further revealed that majority of the respondents agreed that the use of 

funds  allocated to their respective projects affected the effective implementation of the projects 

as evidenced by a mean of 3.88 and a standard deviation of 1.07. The respondents further agreed 

that the findings of their respective projects had been a concern among the project management 

team as shown by a mean of 3.78 and a standard deviation of 1.00. The findings imply that 

project financing is a key factor in the implementation of the public private projects in the energy 

sector  hence there is need for the stakeholders to uphold this aspect through timely disbursement 

of funds and embracing accountability on the use of the allocated funds. 



47  

 

 

 

Table 4.3: Descriptive Results on Project Financing 
 

Statement Disagree Neutra l Agree Mean Std. 
Dev. 

The project had adequate budget to cater for its 

financial and material needs to completion 

27.8% 16.7% 55.5% 3.50 1.65 

There has been accountability on the use of 

funds allocated to the implementation of the 

project 

38.9% 11.1% 50.0% 3.22 1.73 

The funds allocated to the project have been 

timely disbursed to ensure efficient operation 

of the project operations 

48.9% 17.8% 33.4% 2.08 1.13 

The use of funds allocated to this project 

have  affected its effective implementation 

24.5% 11.1% 74.5% 3.88 1.07 

The financing of the project has been a concern 

among the project management 

38.9% 3.3% 57.8% 3.78 1.00 

 

 

 
 

4.4.2 Project Risk Management 

 
The second objective of the study was to assess the influence of project risk management on the 

implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. Project risk 

management was assessed through risk analysis and identification, risk control measures and 

insurance covers. The respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or 

disagreement with specific statements drawn from these aspects. A five-points Likerts scale was 

adopted where 1 = strongly disagree; 2= disagree, 3= neutral; 4= agree and 5= strongly agree. 

Table 4.4 shows the findings. 



48  

As the results portray, the respondents disagreed that the project management had been keen on 

assessing the risks that could be encountered in the project implementation process as shown by 

a mean of 2.77 and a standard deviation of 1.16. The respondents further disagreed that the 

procedure of assessing risks in their respective project had been objective towards achieving the 

project goals as evidenced by a mean of 2.33 and a standard deviation of 1.02. They also 

disagreed that there were risk control measures in their respective projects put across by the 

project management to reduce losses in the project and this is as shown by a mean of 2.61 and a 

standard deviation of 1.19. The respondents further disagreed that the project team in their 

respective projects was trained on risk management strategies and practices as shown by a mean 

of 2.72 and a standard deviation of 1.22. This is an indication that the employees at the projects 

could be unaware of the right strategies and skills to avoid and mitigate risks. 

 
The findings further revealed that majority of the respondents agreed that the projects through 

the management had insurance covers for their property to minimize losses associated with risks 

as shown by a mean of 3.11 and a standard deviation of 1.32. The respondents further agreed that 

the management of risks in their respective projects played an important role in enhancing the 

project success as evidenced by a mean of 3.94 and a standard deviation of 0.91. The findings 

imply that while some aspects of risk management have been upheld such as insurance cover, 

there is still a huge gap in upholding risk management due to poor efforts in risk assessment and 

control measures to reduce the occurrence of risks. 



49  

 

 

 

Table 4.4: Descriptive Results on Project Risk Management 
 

Statement Disagree Neutra l Agree Mea n Std. 
Dev. 

The project management has been keen on 

assessing the risks that could be encountered in 

the project implementation process 

44.5% 16.7% 38.9% 2.77 1.16 

The assessment procedure of risks in the project 

has been objective towards achieving the project 

goals 

61.1% 22.2% 16.7% 2.33 1.02 

There are risk control measures put across by 

the project management to reduce losses in the 

project 

55.6% 16.7% 27.8% 2.61 1.19 

The project team is trained on risk management 

strategies and practices 

38.9% 33.3% 27.8% 2.72 1.22 

The project through the management has an 

insurance cover for its property to minimize 

losses associated with risks 

27.8% 33.3% 38.9% 3.11 1.32 

The management of risks in the project plays an 

important role in enhancing the project success 

23.4% 7.8% 68.9% 3.94 0.91 

 

 

 
 

4.4.3 Project Leadership 

 
The third objective of the study was to assess the influence of project leadership on the 

implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. In order to 

assess the project leadership as applied in the surveyed projects, key specific aspects of 

leadership were adopted. These included: contractors’ leadership skills, teamwork and example 

setting of the project leadership team. Specific statements were drawn from these aspects and the 



50  

respondents required to indicate their level of agreement or disagreement based on a five-points 

Likert’ scale. The findings are as shown in Table 4.5. 

 
As the findings show, majority of the respondents disagreed that the contractors in their 

respective projects had the right leadership skills to steer the success of the projects as evidenced 

by a mean of 2.66 and a standard deviation of 1.18. The findings further revealed that most of the 

respondents were of the opinion that the project management team did not uphold teamwork 

among the project personnel as shown by a mean of 2.38 and a standard deviation of 1.28. One 

of the qualities of a good leader is to encourage teamwork and uphold the essence of employees 

working as a team. However, in this case it was established that most of the leaders in the 

projects were not effectively upholding teamwork and this could affect the projects’ performance 

and implementation. 

 
The findings further revealed that most of the respondents were of the opinion that teamwork 

was not encouraged hence the work was not done effectively (mean – 2.22; standard deviation 

1.16). They also indicated that the project team followed examples set by the team leaders as 

shown by a mean of 3.55 and a standard deviation of 0.94. The respondents further disagreed that 

the leadership of their respective projects had been at the forefront of enhancing the 

implementation of the projects as shown by a mean of 2.05 and a standard deviation of 1.39. The 

respondents further agreed that the leadership of their respective projects was always committed 

towards achieving the goals of the projects as shown by a mean of 3.66 and a standard deviation 

of 1.01. The findings imply that through project leadership, the projects are effectively 



51  

implemented due to embrace of teamwork and adequate involvement of the employees in the 

project through showing them by example rather than only commanding them on what to do. 

 
 

Table 4.5: Descriptive Results on Project Leadership 

Statement SD D N A SA Mean Std. 

Dev. 

The project contractor in the project has 

key leadership skills 

22.2% 22.2% 22.2% 33.3% 0.0% 2.66 1.18 

The project management upholds 

teamwork among the project personnel 

33.3% 22.2% 22.2% 16.7% 5.6% 2.38 1.28 

Through teamwork encouraged by 

project leaders the work is done more 

effectively 

33.3% 33.3% 11.1% 22.2% 0.0% 2.22 1.16 

The project team follows examples from 

the team leaders 

12.2% 7.8% 22.2% 37.8% 20.0% 3.55 0.94 

The leadership of the project has been at 

the forefront of enhancing the 

implementation of the project 

55.6% 11.1% 11.1% 16.7% 5.6% 2.05 1.39 

The leadership of the project always 

shows commitment towards achieving 

the goals of the project  

10.2% 12.2% 20.2% 33.3% 24.0% 3.66 1.01 

 

 

 

4.4.4 Information Technology 

 
The fourth objective of the study was to establish the influence of information technology on the 

implementation of public private partnership projects in the energy sector in Kenya. Information 

technology was assessed through project monitoring systems, information sharing platforms and 

Training on use of ICT. The respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement or 



52  

disagreement on statements drawn from these aspects. A five-points Likert’s scale was adopted. 

The findings are as shown in Table 4.6. 

 
As the findings show, the respondents disagreed that there were project monitoring systems to 

ensure effective management of their respective projects as shown by a mean of 2.72 and a 

standard deviation of 1.31. The respondents however agreed that the project team in their 

respective projects had information sharing platform to enhance communication among the 

project personnel as evidenced by a mean of 3.72 and a standard deviation of 0.97. The 

respondents further disagreed that the personnel in their respective projects were trained 

frequently on the use of technology in project implementation processes as shown by a mean of 

2.88 and a standard deviation of 1.56. Lack of effective and frequent training on the use of ICT 

implies that the staff may not be well-conversant with technology hence applying it in the 

operations of the project may not be effective. 

 
The findings further revealed that majority of the respondents were of the opinion that the 

management of their respective projects did not effectively emphasize on the use of technology 

in performing given project activities as shown by a mean of 2.83 and a standard deviation of 

1.50. The respondents further indicated that as a result of advanced technology use in their 

respective projects, carrying out the operations of the projects had been easier and this is as 

shown by a mean of 3.38 and a standard deviation of 1.08. The respondents also agreed that use 

of technology in the implementation of their respective projects had been enhanced as shown by 

a mean of 3.72 and a standard deviation of 1.01. The findings imply that technology is a 

crucial project critical success factor that enhances the communication and flow of operation 

in the  project thus enhancing the implementation process. 



53  

 
Table 4.6: Descriptive Results on Information Technology 

 

Statement  Disagre e Neutral 
 

Agree Mea n Std. 
Dev. 

There are project monitoring systems to ensure 55.6% 11.1% 33.3% 2.72 1.31 

effective management of the project      

The project team has an information sharing 

platform to enhance communication among the 

project personnel 

14.4% 13.3% 72.3% 3.72 0.97 

The personnel in the project are trained 

frequently on the use of technology in project 

implementation processes 

50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 2.88 1.56 

The management of the project emphasizes on 

the use of technology in performing given 

project activities 

50.0% 0.0% 50.0% 2.83 1.50 

Advanced technology has made it easier in 

carrying out operations at the project 

41.1% 2.2% 56.7% 3.38 1.08 

Through use of technology the implementation 

of the project has been enhanced 

16.6% 13.1% 70.3% 3.72 1.01 

 

 

 
 

4.4.5 Project Implementation 

 
The study sought to establish the implementation of the projects under the public private 

partnerships in the energy sector in Kenya. This was the dependent variable of the study. Project 

implementation was assessed through project completion through the set time, completion within 

the set budget and ability of the project to meet the set goals and objectives. A five-points 

Likert’s scale was used where the respondents were asked to indicate their level of agreement on  

specific statements drawn from the aspects of project implementation. Table 4.7 shows the 

findings. 

 



54  

As the findings portray, majority of the respondents disagreed that their respective project had 

been completed within the set timelines for the Garissa project while for the Eldosol project, 

majority of the respondents indicated that the project would not be completed within the set 

timelines. This compares with the actual situation on ground where the Eldosol project is yet to 

be completed despite the elapse of the set timelines while Garissa project was completed after 

the elapse of the timelines. The findings further revealed that the projects had seen adjustments 

of expected completion timelines due to inability to meet the initially set deadlines as shown by a 

mean of 3.73 and a standard deviation of 0.98. The findings further revealed that most of the 

respondents disagreed that the project implementation was within the set budget at the project 

initiation stage as shown by a mean of 2.88 and a standard deviation of 1.27. They also agreed 

that their respective project management team had sought other external funding for the project 

to facilitate its completion as shown by a mean of 3.72 and a standard deviation of 0.97. The 

respondents however disagreed that their respective projects would produce the expected amount 

of electricity to the national grid an indication that the projects may not meet the expected quality 

and production capacity. This could be attributed to ineffective use of the project success factors 

as it has been portrayed in the previous analysis. 



55  

Table 4.7: Descriptive Results on Project Implementation 
 

Statement Disagree Neutral Agree Mea n Std. 

Dev. 

The project has been/will be completed on 

the set timeline 

61.1% 22.2% 16.7% 2.33 1.18 

There has been adjustment of the timelines 

for the project completion 

24.6% 7.8% 67.7% 3.73 0.98 

The project implementation is within the 

budgeted costs at the initiation 

27.8% 44.4% 27.8% 2.88 1.27 

The project management has sought other 

extra funding for the project 

50.0% 22.2% 27.8% 3.72 0.97 

The project is/will produce the amount of 

electricity projected to the national grid 

50.0% 38.9% 11.1% 2.