Key Practices for Incorporating Sustainability in Project Management from the Perspective of Brazilian Professionals

Abstract

Project management has incorporated sustainability concepts, but their relationship is still widely discussed. In this article, we research key practices for incorporating sustainability in project management from the perspective of 919 Brazilian professionals with experience in the field. We used factor analysis to explore the relationship between 37 sustainability practices. The results showed that these sustainability practices can be grouped into five key practices: environmental efficiency, compliance, social responsibility, continuous improvement and lessons learned, and project success. We also used word clouds to highlight the main themes in the practices encompassed by each key practice. The results contribute to project leaders and other project management professionals directing their efforts toward improving sustainability actions related to these practices in project management processes.

1. Introduction

With the growing demand for more adequate responses to sustainability challenges, interest in studies relating sustainability to project management has grown among researchers [1,2,3]. Examples are studies focusing on the operationalization of the triple bottom line concept through indicators and success factors [4,5,6,7], an elaboration of checklists [8,9], and frameworks [10,11,12,13,14,15] for integration of aspects of sustainability into project management.

The influence of projects is influenced by the environment. Projects use resources and produce social, economic, and environmental impacts to achieve their goals, whose intensity and scope define their degree of sustainability. For example, a significant portion of civil construction projects require large investments and are classified as unsustainable, due to the impacts on the population, fauna, flora, landscape, climate, water, and cultural heritage [16,17], in addition to increasing pollution [18] and the impact on the well-being of communities [19].

Simplistically, the logic behind the relationship between project and sustainability is that the project consumes resources to produce the deliverables, while sustainability rationalizes the use of resources and evaluates deliverables concerning economic, social, and environmental impacts [12]. From the sustainability perspective, the project’s success is greatly influenced by how the sustainability requirements are considered in the project delivery process [12,20,21,22]. In addition, the assessment of project success through traditional scope, time, and cost metrics [23,24,25] has reduced effectiveness by not covering the challenges of sustainability expressed by social and environmental issues [12,25,26,27,28,29,30,31].

Even though the project management area, like many others, has adopted the concept of sustainable development [32,33], the term sustainability has been used and interpreted in various ways. As projects presuppose integrating different stakeholders and professionals [14], having different views of sustainability is understandable. However, the lack of consensus among stakeholders about what sustainability is and how to measure it [34], as well as unsustainable project management practices, are important barriers to more sustainable deliveries [6,35].

Much of the work relates to the integration of sustainability into project management. Although the main idea behind the triple bottom line is to seek a harmonious balance between economic, social, and environmental sustainability [36], most studies have focused more on the economic dimension [37,38,39], which highlights the importance of studies more focused on environmental and social aspects. Among the reasons that may justify the higher prevalence of studies related to economic sustainability is the fact that an important objective is to reward investors’ capital [40], and that the cost aspects are already considered in traditional metrics, being, for example, one of the knowledge areas of the project management body of knowledge (PMI) [41].

Although there are many studies on project management and sustainability, the relationship between them still lacks new approaches and greater depth, especially concerning the dualism of these two fields and their interactions within project dynamics [12,25]. There is still a lot to be considered for incorporating and integrating sustainability practices in project management to be more present and effective [21,25,26,33,35,42].

This work contributes to filling this gap by researching the sustainability practices most used in Brazilian project management processes from the perspective of 919 professionals with experience in the field.

This work also contributes to the enrichment of the literature on the incorporation of sustainability in project management by synthesizing important approaches and contributions from researchers who publish on the topic, and by identifying a set of key practices that encompass important sustainability practices that are logically related and that collaborate so that the project management is developed in a more sustainable way.

By identifying key practices for integrating sustainability into project management, this work also helps project leaders and other professionals working in project management to direct their efforts toward improving actions related to these practices.

This article is structured as follows: Section 2 presents the literature review, Section 3 presents the methodological procedures, and Section 4 presents and discusses the research results. Finally, the conclusions are presented in Section 5.

2. Literature Review

Several authors have structured their studies focusing specifically on a single theme, or, more broadly, considering a set of themes, such as Azapagic [10], Chen et al. [43], Fellows and Liu [44], Gareis et al. [45], Raven et al. [46], Xing et al. [47], Fernández-Sánchez and Rodríguez-López [5], Sarkis et al., 2012 [48], Silvius et al. [33], Liu et al. [49], Valdes-Vasquez, R. and Klotz [50], Martens and Carvalho [40], Silvius et al. [3], Wang et al. [51], WD Yu et al. [52], M. Yu et al. [22], and Stanitsas et al. [53].

Azapagic [10] presented a framework of sustainability indicators as a performance and improvement assessment tool. The framework comprises economic, environmental, and social indicators that the company can use internally and externally, providing sustainability reports involving stakeholders. It also supports and standardizes corporate reports and enables cross-comparisons, converging with the general indicators proposed by the Global Reporting Initiative [17].

Chen et al. [46] investigated the critical factors to assess the potential negative impacts of a construction plan and framed two decision-making models for environmentally conscious construction planning. This study shows that the problem of selecting the best construction plan based on distinguishing the degree of its potentially adverse environmental impacts still needs further investigation.

Fellows and Liu [44] examined how values related to construction projects, especially those related to sustainability, determine the performance variables to be considered and their relative importance. Gareis et al. [45] linked sustainable development to project management through a model based on a definition of sustainability related to processes. They also addressed the challenges and potentials for project management, considering the principles of sustainable development.

Raven et al. [46] developed a methodology to give the project manager a structure capable of better understanding society’s acceptance level of new energy projects. The framework supports the project professional in evaluating the technical, economic, and social dimensions.

Xing et al. [47] adapted a sustainability assessment model for construction projects and urban sustainability assessment initially developed in the oil industry, targeting a set of economic, environmental, and social indicators for different assessment contexts.

Fernández-Sánchez and Rodríguez-López [5] addressed a set of sustainability indicators and the need to establish a method to identify and select a guideline capable of supporting managers involved in the life cycle of a project, thus finding an adequate balance between all interested parties. The framework can identify, classify, and prioritize sustainability indicators based on the inherent risks of managing civil construction projects.

Sarkis et al. [48] proposed a model based on the use of the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and the analytic network process (ANP) to provide a foundation for the decision-making process and elaboration of the structure for selecting subcontractors and forming teams in the context of the built environment, considering commercial, economic, environmental, and social aspects. The proposed model and decision framework are intended to assist decision-makers in forming construction project teams to achieve sustainability and compatibility between subcontractors from various commercial industries.

Silvius et al. [33] reported an analysis of a case study compilation on integrating sustainability concepts in how organizations initiate, develop, and manage projects. The study uses the sustainability integration maturity model presented at the IPMA 2010 World Congress to assess the level of sustainability consideration. It demonstrates that sustainability is currently regarded as a traditional (“less bad”) approach to mainstreaming sustainability and not a more modern social responsibility approach.

The study by Liu et al. [48] presents an approach to investigating the implementation of sustainable development practice in a large-scale project, using a case study as an example. The same research concludes that the private sector and the State Council can act together to manage environmental, economic, and social sustainability issues in large-scale projects. It also establishes sustainable practices based on a hydroelectricity sustainability assessment protocol developed by the International Hydropower Association to achieve numerous social and economic benefits to stakeholders.

Valdes-Vasquez and Klotz [50] addressed integrating and evaluating social considerations in construction projects. The study features multidimensional scaling and hierarchical cluster analyses to organize categories that define social sustainability in construction projects, connecting stakeholder engagement, user considerations, team building, management considerations, impact assessment, and local context.

Martens and Carvalho [40] addressed the challenge of introducing sustainability into project management. The author investigates how sustainability can impact project success through multiple case studies, concluding a gap between the perception of the importance of introducing sustainability into project management and its materialization in management practice.

Silvius et al. [3] presented a study considering sustainability in project management decision-making based on the “Q-methodology” tool. They investigated aspects of sustainability in project managers’ decision-making processes from the perspectives of time, cost, and quality, concluding that sustainability principles are under-represented.

Wang et al. [51] proposed a method for acquiring a more sustainable project so that a project’s sustainability goals can be better achieved. The method is focused on conducting moderately heterogeneous projects. It has proven beneficial and sustainable to customers in terms of cost-effectiveness and delivery performance of the project’s products/results.

Yu et al. [52] proposed a construction project sustainability assessing system, considering the environmental, social, and economic dimensions. The system is formed by indicators inherent to the project phases.

Yu et al. [22] explored project planning practices to integrate sustainability into construction management practices. The results indicated that using sustainable project planning as a practice combines the principles of sustainability to ensure sustainable construction and predict the success of construction engineering projects from three dimensions: management control, response to risk, and work consensus.

Stanitsa et al. [53], aiming to contribute to the holistic view of sustainability, explored the concept of sustainability in the management of construction projects and identified economic, environmental, and social sustainability indicators.

Concerning environmental sustainability in project management, the most common themes are water, energy, waste, materials, transport, and procurement. Environmental aspects of water and energy usually focus on reducing consumption and waste through intelligent use [54]. Concerning waste, they focus on themes such as collection, disposal, and reuse [43,55]. Materials are considered based on their contribution to waste reduction, reuse capacity, and energy consumption for their production [56,57]. In transport, topics such as reducing transportation use and incorporating environmental variables in selecting types and means of transport are addressed [58,59]. Finally, procurement considers suppliers’ selection based on how they use natural resources, their policies to improve sustainability, and their contribution to more sustainable results based on technical knowledge and level of engagement [60,61,62].

Regarding social sustainability, the main focuses have been labor practices and decent work, health and safety, training, education, organizational learning, diversity and equal opportunity, human rights, society and customers, bribery, and anti-competitive behavior. Studies on labor practices and decent work, health and safety, diversity and equal opportunity, and human rights typically address the adequacy of standards, regulations, and good practices related to the project team, partners, and suppliers and the minimization of risks associated with health and safety through adjustments in the deliverables process [48,63,64,65]. Regarding training, education, and organizational learning, end-user training and education topics are addressed as part of the project deliveries, and team members and partners from the lessons learned [46,66]. Regarding society and customers, social responsibility towards stakeholders, suppliers, and partners with their stakeholders is addressed, as well as the translation of social responsibility through replanning the deliverables process. Finally, bribery and anti-competitive behavior are approached from anti-corruption policies and unethical behavior related to the project and suppliers [45,67,68,69].

Concerning economic sustainability, an important focus is on economic, financial, and administrative practices that ensure the economic-financial return of projects for organizations [70,71]. Return on investment (ROI), which considers sustainability’s costs and benefits, helps the decision-making process, showing tangible financial gains for companies and a competitive differential [72,73,74]. The financial benefits stem mainly from good practices. Examples are the cost reduction provided by rationalizing means of transport, reducing consumption and waste of materials, energy, and water, and incorporating ethical aspects [6,44,75].

In this context, the process of measuring project results has the challenge of proving that investing in sustainable actions contributes to the economic performance of the business, this being essential for the construction of a new paradigm in which investments in sustainability are more valued [76,77].

Researchers have presented some proposals aiming to operationalize the incorporation of sustainability in project management. Chawla et al. [78], from the understanding that the association of sustainability with project management is strongly influenced by the levels of the company in which human resources work, proposed an integrated structure for sustainability in projects at three levels: project team (staff, supervisor and junior managers), project management (manager, senior manager, general manager) and project company management (directors, executive director, vice president, and president).

The Halcrow sustainability toolkit and rating—HalSTAR [79]—system proposed a five-stage model of a closed dynamic cycle: (1) scoping, to determine which issues are important by consulting with client/stakeholders and desk study analysis; (2) criteria, which is associated with the development of criteria for implementation and to access performance against relevant issues (e.g., objectives, questions, indicators); (3) assessment, which shows the project performance at appropriate stages; (4) review, which summarize the project’s results and shares it with the client/stakeholders; and (5) system intervention, in which actions are taken to improve performance.

Silvius et al. [80] proposed a four-level maturity model to represent the scope of sustainability in project management: project resources, business processes, business model, and project products/processes. Based on this model, Silvius et al. [80] developed an assessment instrument to assess the integration of sustainability concepts on the level of individual projects.

In the researched literature, it is possible to verify the convergence of the researchers regarding the importance attributed to the triple bottom line (TBL) concept, the participation of the stakeholders, and the evaluation of the project’s performance.

Concerning TBL, the vast majority of authors focus mainly on the benefits it provides for projects and companies. Authors such as Labuschagne and Brent [4], Martens and Carvalho [6], and Silvius et al. [14] highlight the need to consider sustainability in project management from the perspective that increasing the sustainability of projects should also be seen as an opportunity for companies to create economic, social and environmental value. Furthermore, they emphasize that sustainable project management can lead to long-term benefits for companies, such as greater operational efficiency and improved reputation.

Silvius et al. [3] also reinforce the importance of using TBL to improve project sustainability and argue that project managers must explore sustainability concepts in the project environment further. The author points out that the project leader is responsible for the work done on the project but not for managing the business and that, most of the time, sustainability is embedded in the company’s strategy, not the project. Thus, projects play a fundamental role in realizing more sustainable businesses.

However, implementing TBL in the project management process still demands greater company commitment. It includes investing in training, technology, and processes that allow the incorporation of sustainability in all its processes and projects and a more holistic and integrated approach that does not prioritize only technical and economic aspects, but also social and environmental aspects.

Regarding the influence of stakeholders in improving the sustainability of project management, in general, there is a perception that one of the main ways to ensure the incorporation of sustainability is through stakeholder engagement, since when those involved with the project are aligned with the sustainable objectives, the chances of success are more significant.

From the perspective of sustainability, stakeholder engagement comprises several approaches. Stakeholder management is seen as an important guideline [81] and is intrinsically related to the project’s success [82]. Bernat et al. [83] address the sustainability improvement in project management, considering the correlation between knowledge management and stakeholder engagement. Silvius and Schipper [14] highlight the importance of providing project managers with instruments that collaborate to incorporate the perspective of sustainability in the evaluation and planning of stakeholder engagement. Cvijovi et al. [84] identified that the main strategies used by stakeholders to influence project sustainability are communication, partnership and capacity-building, complaints and legal actions, and direct action.

Project performance measurement concerning its sustainability has also been frequently addressed in the literature. For example, Stanitsa and Kirytopoulos [85] addressed important indicators for sustainable project management; Shaukat et al. [86] associated indicators with the life cycle, highlighting that in addition to good indicators, it is essential to incorporate the main aspects of sustainability in the various stages of the project life cycle; Shen et al. [8] developed a checklist for assessing the sustainability performance of construction projects; and Chawla et al. [78] highlighted the role of computational procedures in estimating and optimizing sustainability issues in project management, and that they can be applied to formulate decision-making considering critical sustainability factors in projects.

3. Materials and Methods

In this study, we work with the hypothesis that by analyzing the existing correlation between sustainability practices, it is possible to group them into dimensions (factors) that simplify the understanding and analysis of the set of practices. Thus, the main objective of this work is to research these dimensions. Then, project management professionals can use them to direct their efforts to improve the sustainability of project management processes.

The dimensions we researched can be considered latent variables because they cannot be identified directly but through the behavior of observable variables and because they represent manifestations of the reality in which they are inserted. A robust statistical technique widely used to identify latent variables is factor analysis. We use this technique since its main objective is to identify the structure of correlations between several variables and represent them through a set of dimensions (factors) that identify the latent variables that influence respondents’ judgment and simplify the understanding and analysis of this set of variables. It makes it possible for the original variables to be replaced by these dimensions, which summarize the reality contextualized by the variables represented by each dimension. Thus, the five factors identified in this work were named according to the reality contextualized by the practices that compose it, being considered key practices for incorporating sustainability in project management. The Results and Discussion section will present and discuss the key practices.

To achieve the objective of this work, we adopted an approach formed by two main steps: A survey of experts’ opinions, and data analysis.

3.1. Survey of Expert’s Opinion

We used a questionnaire on an online platform (Google Forms), available for ten weeks, to carry out the survey. Respondents were asked to indicate how often the sustainability practice presented in each questionnaire item was used in project management, based on their experience in the projects in which they participated. Thus, the form contained a table in which each line presented a sustainability practice, and the columns contained a five-point Likert scale, ranging from very infrequent to very frequent.

The sustainability practices were defined based on simplifying the questions proposed by Silvius et al. [80] to assess the integration of sustainability concepts on the level of individual projects. The practices that were submitted to the survey respondents were:

• Materials are selected based on the materials’ energy consumption arising from their production process.
• The project uses policies to promote the intelligent use of energy to reduce its consumption, such as using equipment with low energy consumption.
• The project’s principle is to minimize energy consumption by using “green” energy.
• The project presents policies to promote the smart use of water and, when possible, equipment with low water consumption is used.
• Reusability and value are among the criteria used to choose the materials.
• Materials are selected considering their contribution to waste reduction.
• The project has policies to minimize waste whenever possible by recycling it within the project.
• The means of transport are selected taking into account environmental aspects.
• Suppliers are selected based on the way they use natural resources and their policies to improve environmental sustainability.
• Suppliers are selected considering their contribution to more sustainable results based on their technical knowledge and level of engagement.
• The project uses a selective garbage collection system.
• The project has policies to minimize and/or optimize the use of transport.
• The project complies with health and safety standards and regulations.
• The project requires suppliers and partners to exercise good health and safety practices.
• The project requires suppliers and partners to exercise good labor practices and decent work.
• The project complies with standards and regulations on labor practices and decent work.
• The project (re)plans its delivery processes so that health and safety risks are minimized.
• The project is developed in compliance with human rights standards and regulations (such as non-discrimination, freedom of association, and non-use of child labor).
• The project uses anti-corruption and unethical behavior policies.
• The project includes activities for training and education of end-users as part of the project deliverables.
• The project includes activities to train and educate team members and partners for better individual and team performance after the project ends.
• The project requires that suppliers and partners carry out practices that provide equal opportunities in gender, race, religion, etc.
• The project (re)plans its delivery processes to promote and encourage gender diversity and equal opportunities.
• The project complies with applicable standards and regulations on equal opportunity in gender, race, religion, etc.
• The project requires suppliers and partners to also comply with human rights standards and regulations.
• The project also requires suppliers and partners to assume a social responsibility towards external stakeholders in the society in which it operates.
• The project actively (re)plans its delivery processes to translate its social responsibility towards external stakeholders in the society in which it operates.
• The project assumes a social responsibility toward external stakeholders in the society in which it operates.
• The project requires suppliers and partners to also act in accordance with anti-corruption and unethical behavior policies.
• Project progress reports contain social sustainability indicators related to the physical resources used.
• Project progress reports contain social sustainability indicators about project deliverables or results.
• Project progress reports reflect environmental sustainability indicators about the use and disposal of project deliverables or results.
• Depending on the results obtained, the project reports contain proposals for improving the design and production processes.
• Project reports show lessons learned and improvements for the project.
• Projects are predominantly evaluated and selected based on their long-term strategic value, together with their short/medium-term payback.
• Projects are evaluated and selected based on the payback period.
• Projects are predominantly evaluated and selected based on a balanced set of qualitative and quantitative criteria that reflect both short- and long-term perspectives, in addition to economic, social, and environmental aspects.

The practices were presented simultaneously and randomly so that the order in which they appeared did not influence the answers [87,88]. For the pre-test, a printed questionnaire was used so that professionals could give their opinion on the general design, clarity of the questions, and layout.

To make sure that the respondents were able to participate in the survey, we adopted the strategy of using purposeful sampling, in which the invited professionals would have to be considered by at least one of the authors as capable of meeting only one inclusion criteria: having worked in at least one of the following project activities: planning, monitoring, execution, or inspection. We used email and social networks to invite professionals working in project management, of which 919 participated in the survey.

3.2. Data Analysis

We used Cronbach’s alpha to assess the reliability of the data collection instrument and the respondents. It evaluates the mean of the correlations between the items that are part of an instrument and how much the measured factor is present in each item, based on the calculation of variance attributed to the subjects and the variance resulting from the interaction between subjects and items.

The data were submitted to exploratory factor analysis to identify the relationship between the factors. We assessed data adequacy for factor analysis using Bartlett’s sphericity test and Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin’s sample adequacy measure (KMO) [89]. From the correlation matrix analysis, we considered aspects related to the determinant’s value, sampling adequacy measures, and commonalities. We also researched the possibility of multicollinearity or singularity in the correlation matrix.

We performed several simulations to decide the most representative set of factors for reality, mainly considering aspects related to the correlation matrix, commonality, convergence between the screen plot and the Kaiser criterion (eigenvalue more significant than one unit), and the results provided by the Varimax rotation method. To analyze the statistical significance of the factor loadings [90], we used as criteria a power level of at least 80.0%, a significance level of 0.05, and factor loadings of at least 0.4. The best solution was to extract five factors that explain 66% of the total variance. The selected factors were named considering their latent nature and the reality contextualized by the variables represented by each factor. To prioritize the sustainability practices, we use the results of factorial analyses.

We also used word clouds to highlight the main themes represented in the adopted practices. The word cloud is a data visualization technique based on word frequency. Thus, for each key factor, we identified the keywords in the practices they encompassed and the frequency with which they appeared. The list of themes with their respective frequencies was inserted into a data visualization software (PowerBI) to generate the word cloud.

4. Results and Discussion

A total of 919 project management professionals answered the survey instrument. Figure 1 presents the demographic data. Of the respondents, 81% were male, 59% were between 35 and 55 years old, and 67% had more than five years of experience in sustainability practices applied to project management.

The value of Cronbach’s alpha (0.97) confirmed the reliability of the questionnaire and data. The multivariate analysis results revealed that Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin index values (KMO = 0.91) and the Bartlett sphericity test (2358.93, degrees of freedom [DF] = 378, p < 0.0001), indicated the factorability of the correlation matrix. The determinant value was higher than 0.00001 (0.00006802), suggesting the correlation matrix’s absence of multicollinearity or singularity. The degree of intercorrelation between variables was considered adequate for factor analysis since the sampling adequacy (MSAs) measures were higher than 0.8. The commonalities ranged from 0.6 to 0.7, indicating a high degree of covariance between the variables.

After several simulations considering the convergence between the screen plot and the Kaiser criterion (eigenvalue higher than one unit), and the Varimax rotation method, extracting five factors that explained 66.0% of the total variance was the best solution. These factors were named according to the reality contextualized by the practices that compose it, being considered key practices for incorporating sustainability in project management. They received the following denominations: environmental efficiency, compliance, social responsibility, continuous improvement and lessons learned, and project success.

Regarding the statistical significance of the factor loadings [90], we used as criteria a power level of at least 80.0% and a significance level of 0.05. We consider factor loadings equal to or greater than 0.4 to be significant.

Table 1. Variance explained by factors.

Factors	Approach	% Variance Explained by the Factor	% Cumulative
Factor 1	Environmental efficiency	19.6	19.6
Factor 2	Compliance	18.2	37.8
Factor 3	Social responsibility	13.3	51.1
Factor 4	Continuous improvement and lessons learned	9.6	60.7
Factor 5	Project success	5.3	66.0

presents the factors with their respective variances.

Figure 2 summarizes the number of practices represented by each factor, and

Table 2. Practices grouped and named according to the aspect of reality represented by each one.

Approach	Sustainability Practices	Factor Loading
Environmental efficiency	Materials are selected based on the materials’ energy consumption arising from their production process	0.793
	The project uses policies to promote the intelligent use of energy to reduce its consumption, such as using equipment with low energy consumption	0.752
	The project’s principle is to minimize energy consumption by using “green” energy	0.748
	The project presents policies to promote the smart use of water and, when possible, equipment with low water consumption is used	0.731
	Reusability and value are among the criteria used to choose the materials	0.705
	Materials are selected considering their contribution to waste reduction	0.703
	The project has policies to minimize waste whenever possible by recycling it within the project	0.658
	The means of transport are selected taking into account environmental aspects	0.639
	Suppliers are selected based on the way they use natural resources and their policies to improve environmental sustainability	0.613
	Suppliers are selected considering their contribution to more sustainable results based on their technical knowledge and level of engagement	0.588
	The project uses a selective garbage collection system	0.548
	The project has policies to minimize and/or optimize the use of transport	0.477
Compliance	The project complies with health and safety standards and regulations	0.871
	The project requires suppliers and partners to exercise good health and safety practices	0.786
	The project requires suppliers and partners to exercise good labor practices and decent work	0.777
	The project complies with standards and regulations on labor practices and decent work	0.761
	The project (re)plans its delivery processes so that health and safety risks are minimized	0.739
	The project is developed in compliance with human rights standards and regulations (such as non-discrimination, freedom of association, and non-use of child labor)	0.568
	The project uses anti-corruption and unethical behavior policies	0.556
	The project includes activities for training and education of end-users as part of the project deliverables	0.546
	The project includes activities to train and educate team members and partners for better individual and team performance after the project ends	0.448
Social Responsibility	The project requires that suppliers and partners carry out practices that provide equal opportunities in gender, race, religion, etc.	0.758
	The project (re)plans its delivery processes to promote and encourage gender diversity and equal opportunities	0.746
	The project complies with applicable standards and regulations on equal opportunity in gender, race, religion, etc.	0.616
	The project requires suppliers and partners to also comply with human rights standards and regulations.	0.612
	The project also requires suppliers and partners to assume a social responsibility towards external stakeholders in the society in which it operates	0.592
	The project actively (re)plans its delivery processes to translate its social responsibility towards external stakeholders in the society in which it operates	0.577
	The project assumes a social responsibility toward external stakeholders in the society in which it operates	0.550
	The project requires suppliers and partners to also act in accordance with anti-corruption and unethical behavior policies	0.500
Continuous improvement and lessons learned	Project progress reports contain social sustainability indicators related to the physical resources used	0.745
	Project progress reports contain social sustainability indicators about project deliverables or results	0.726
	Project progress reports reflect environmental sustainability indicators about the use and disposal of project deliverables or results	0.621
	Depending on the results obtained, the project reports contain proposals for improving the design and production processes	0.553
	Project reports show lessons learned and improvements for the project	0.514
Project success	Projects are predominantly evaluated and selected based on their long-term strategic value, together with their short/medium-term payback	0.574
	Projects are evaluated and selected based on the payback period	0.522
	Projects are predominantly evaluated and selected based on a balanced set of qualitative and quantitative criteria that reflect both short- and long-term perspectives, in addition to economic, social, and environmental aspects	0.431

presents the factors named according to their approach, the corresponding sustainability practices, and the factor loading.

4.1. Factors Presentation

4.1.1. Environmental Efficiency

This factor gathered 32% of the 37 total practices as the factorial analysis results. To understand the 12 practices related to the environmental efficiency factor, Figure 3 illustrates the main themes based on the frequency with which they appear. Topics such as the intelligent use of resources (materials, energy, and water), recycling and waste management, use and selection of low-consumption equipment were among the themes considered in this factor.

The objective of sustainable project management is to reduce the consumption of resources by the project team during its life cycle [12]. Environmental sustainability focuses on the responsible management of resources, such as energy, water, and materials, as well as reducing waste production and emissions from human activities [12].

There are several approaches to environmental efficiency, although the terms used to describe it may vary [91]. According to Verfaillie and Bidwell (2000), it is derived from the concept of eco-efficiency, which is characterized by the World Business Council for Sustainable Development based on three pillars: recycle, reuse, and reduce the resource’s consumption [92].

Assuming that projects are temporary endeavors based on resource usage to achieve the objectives of their conception, the sustainability aspects with economic, social, and environmental impacts can support project managers on resources management. As a field of study, sustainability can provide project management with new perspectives, supporting their decision-making in managing the project resources [12].

To guarantee commitment in terms of intelligent use of resources, the United Nations Department of Sustainability Development introduced regulations for companies to decrease resource consumption and to adopt energy efficiency technologies in production [62].

An important result of the project management professionals’ responses is that practices based on energy consumption in the production process (0.793), on policies to promote intelligent use of energy (0.752), on principles on the use of “green” energy (0.748), and on policies to promote smart use of water (0.731) were gathered into the same factor and returned the highest factor loadings.

On the waste management aspect, one of the first objectives of any waste policy should be to minimize the adverse effects of waste generation and its management on human health and the environment, as Directive 2008/98/EC of the European Parliament indicates, as well as to stimulate members to adopt the policies and to promote them in the material’s reuse and recycling processes [5]. The practices related to the selection process for materials that consider the reusability and the contribution to waste reduction obtained factor loadings of 0.705 and 0.703. Other practices related to waste minimization and recycling policies (0.658) and the selective garbage collection system (0.548) were also gathered into the environmental efficiency factor.

It is important to indicate that the themes in each practice related to the environmental efficiency factor discuss the project’s point of view and cover other stakeholders, such as suppliers and partners. Regarding the supplier selection process, the idea is that by recognizing the impact of sustainability as an important key factor of the selection process, each supplier would develop capabilities and create a competitive differential, seeking to adhere to and incorporate the criteria of their customers [62]. As a result, practices related to supplier selection, based on how they use natural resources and their contribution to achieving more sustainable results, were gathered into the environmental efficiency factor, with factor loadings equal to 0.613 and 0.588, respectively.

Another theme related to the two remaining practices in the environmental efficiency factor is about transport, understanding how project managers professionals evaluate practices related to transport selection, considering environmental aspects, and policies to optimize its usage. Both practices were gathered into this factor, with factor loadings of 0.639 and 0.477, respectively.

4.1.2. Compliance

The second factor with the most practices is the compliance factor, with 24% of the 37 practices. To help understand the nine practices related to the compliance factor, Figure 4 illustrates the main themes based on the frequency with which they appear. To summarize, these practices consider the project’s compliance with standards and regulations, policies, and good practices in themes such as health and safety, decent work, human rights, anti-corruption, and unethical behavior. It is important to indicate that in addition to the sphere of the project team, the practices also involve relationships with other stakeholders, such as suppliers and partners.

The importance of complying with rules related to the organization’s activities has led to the growing implementation of compliance, which is linked to the integrity program, strengthening corporate governance processes and contributing to the sustainability of the business. Compliance is related to the duty to respect external and internal standards, policies, and culture that guide the organization and its stakeholders’ activities and projects. In Brazil, it gained repercussions with the approval of Law No. 12,846/13 (anti-corruption law) and Decree No. 8420/15, which regulates the referred law [93]. Many studies have been carried out about corruption in recent decades, which is a recurring problem in construction projects and influences project success [94].

Regarding standards and processes and their relationship with sustainability, industries and government institutions have standardized and determined that operations, processes, and governance are governed by elements that reinforce the sustainable perspective. Assuming that processes and decisions are responsible for translating strategy into projects, they become a set of corporate management practices. As a result, these practices define the context of management at the individual level. In this way, the stakeholders involved with the project implementation are influenced by these standards, policies, and corporate practices [12].

The compliance with rules and regulations and the demand for good practices from third parties (suppliers and partners) related to health and safety, labor practices, and decent work obtained the highest factor loadings in the compliance factor. Regarding health and safety, compliance with standards and regulations and the exercise of good practices from third parties obtained factor loadings of 0.871 and 0.786, respectively. For labor practices and decent work themes, the results indicate factor loadings of 0.761 (standards and regulations) and 0.777 (good practices from suppliers and partners). In addition to the health and safety theme, another practice was gathered into the compliance factor, related to the project’s replanning of the delivery process to minimize health and safety risks, with a factor loading of 0.739.

Standards and regulations guide and enable products and services derived from projects to meet minimum standards of quality, stability, safety, and reliability. One of the alternatives for companies to guarantee these criteria is to obtain quality certifications with a sustainability bias. The motivations of companies to receive certificates can be categorized as ethical (response to perceived ecological responsibility), competitive (desire to secure an advantage over other companies in the market), and relational (desire to gain legitimacy and improve relationships with stakeholders). Such motivations for environmental certification are repeatedly encouraged by environmental protection legislation and influenced by institutions that promote ethics and environmental protection [44].

Thus, companies are subject to legal requirements that, with their non-compliance, often result in penalties and damage to the company’s reputation. In this regard, practices related to the regulation of human rights (non-discrimination, non-use of child labor) and the fight against corruption/unethical behavior were also included in the compliance factor, with factor loadings of 0.568 and 0.556, respectively.

Finally, the last topic discussed among the practices gathered in the compliance factor relates to the theme of training and education. One practice is related to activities for training and education of end-users as a project deliverable, and the other is related to improving individual and team performance after the end of the project. They obtained factor loadings of 0.579 and 0.483, respectively.

4.1.3. Social Responsibility

The third most representative factor, social responsibility, gathered 22% of the 37 total practices from the survey instrument. To understand the eight practices related to the social responsibility factor, Figure 5 illustrates the main themes based on the frequency with which they appear. Equal opportunity and diversity (gender, race, religion, etc.), human rights standards and regulations, social responsibility towards external stakeholders in society, anti-corruption, and unethical behavior from third parties are some of the themes considered in social responsibility.

According to Lin et al. [95], social responsibility is a self-regulating approach, which is a response to contemporary social demands, to pursuing organizational success [96,97], and it can extend contractual or legal limited requirements to contribute voluntarily to the environment and society [98,99]. Furthermore, Lin et al. [95] point out that, from the design point of view, social responsibility requires a collaborative governance system that can bring together the main stakeholders, such as the public, government, and companies [100], and consider the specificities. For example, construction projects may require the involvement of suppliers, NGOs, and contractors with different interests and bargaining power in the scope and objectives of the project [101].

Regarding equal opportunity and diversity, it’s important to indicate that a sustainable community is a social foundation that provides for the health of all community members, respects cultural diversity, is equitable in its actions, and considers the needs of future generations [44].

The equality of opportunity and diversity (of gender, race, religion, etc.) are in three of the eight practices gathered into the social responsibility factor and obtained the highest factor loading. Additionally, it is important to indicate that four of the eight practices are related to the project’s relationship with third parties (suppliers and partners).

The practice with the highest factor loading (0.758) is related to the project’s requirements for third parties which promote equal opportunity and diversity. The two other practices, on the same theme, also obtained high factor loading; however, the practices focus on the project’s point of view. One is how the project replans its delivery process to encourage gender diversity and equal opportunity (0.746). The other relates to the project’s compliance with applicable standards and regulations on equal opportunity in gender, race, religion, etc., with a factor loading of 0.616.

Regarding the human rights theme, the project’s requirements for third parties’ compliance with human rights standards and regulations obtained a factor loading of 0.612. It is important to indicate that unlike what was observed in the compliance factor, which involves projects’ development following human rights standards, this theme is gathered into the Social Responsibility factor, from perspective of the project’s relationship with third parties. The same occurred for anti-corruption and unethical behavior policies, which, when involved in the relationship with third parties, obtained a factor loading of 0.500.

The corporate social responsibility concept is based on the theory of strategic management, which considers that managers can add value to a company by considering the economic and social effects of the company’s operations in decision-making [102]. Reporting a company’s performance in this area is, therefore, a means of providing shareholders and other stakeholders (as well as managers) with an explanation of a company’s impact on society. Furthermore, this transparency can lead to greater company accountability toward key stakeholders [103].

Regarding social responsibility towards external stakeholders in society, three practices gathered into the social responsibility factor are related to this theme. One related to the project’s requirements for third parties regarding the social responsibility theme, which obtained a factor loading of 0.592. The two other practices are based on project practices in terms of social responsibility assumption, with a factor loading of 0.550, and last but not least, if projects actively replan their delivery process to assume social responsibility, with a factor loading of 0.577.

4.1.4. Continuous Improvement and Lessons Learned

The continuous improvement and lessons learned factor gathered 5 (14%) of the 37 practices, and the main themes, based on the frequency with which they appear, are illustrated in Figure 6. All practices are related to project reports content, and whether or not they include items such as social and environmental sustainability indicators, improvement proposals of design and production processes, and lessons learned from the project.

In the project management processes, special attention should be given to the learning processes since they contribute significantly to reducing errors and inefficiencies, thus collaborating with the increase in the degree of success of the project [12].

Learning is critical for the improvement of sustainability assessment. Companies committed to sustainability concepts should use the lessons learned from previous projects, considering portfolio and single-project perspectives, especially concerning the waste of energy, resources, and materials. In addition, companies must make training available to teams that enable consistent learning about sustainability to enhance the project’s success [12].

Knowledge-sharing among team members concerning sustainability practices is crucial for a project’s critical success factor constitution. It is in line with the statements by other authors, such as Silvius and Schipper [104], in which the role of knowledge and the involvement of stakeholders were discussed in delivering sustainable projects [7].

Regarding social sustainability indicators on project progress reports, two practices refer to the theme; one related to physical resources used and the other regarding project deliverables or results. Both obtained high factor loading, with 0.745 and 0.726, respectively. Additionally, the practice of environmental sustainability indicators on the project’s results and deliverables obtained a factor loading of 0.621.

Social sustainability encompasses many approaches, such as improving the population’s quality of life and enhancing their skills, increasing the ability of the less privileged to meet their needs, and fair distribution of the social burdens of construction and equality between generations [8].

Regarding lessons learned and continuous improvement, two other practices connected to the theme complete the set of practices gathered into this factor. One practice, related to proposals of project design improvement and production processes depending on the project results, obtained a factor loading of 0.555; the other practice, about the project’s report with lessons learned, obtained a factor loading of 0.514.

4.1.5. Project’s Success

The last factor, project success, gathered 3 (8%) of the 37 practices, and the main themes, based on the frequency with which they appear, are illustrated in Figure 7. The remaining practices are about the project’s short- and long-term value if projects are selected and evaluated through criteria that reflect these strategic values and, finally, the project’s financial and economic return.

Regarding the project’s success, the concept is reflected by the Project Management Institute (PMI) [41], which has dedicated its annual seminars and symposiums since 1986 to this topic. A project’s success is intrinsically related to meeting its initial objective and the other benefits planned for the organization. In addition to the traditional role, which evaluates project success with metrics linked to scope, time, and costs, with the evolution of the literature, other successful dimensions were incorporated in six dimensions: efficiency, impact on clients, impact on the team, direct business and success, and preparation for the future and sustainability [6].

In project management, sustainability should be considered a new school of thought. Therefore, it must be a critical criterion that enhances the project’s chances of success. In addition, challenging elements of project success, such as time and cost, must also be addressed [105].

One of the dimensions of a project’s success, related to direct business and success, analyses the direct consequences of the project’s development, observing factors such as an increase in sales, revenue, and profitability, for example [6]. The practice concerning the project’s financial and economic return during a certain period (payback) was gathered into the project success factor, and obtained a factor loading of 0.522. Regarding the other two practices, related to short- and long-term value and projects evaluated through criteria, both were gathered into project success, with factor loadings of 0.574 and 0.431, respectively.

5. Conclusions

Articles and studies about increasing use of sustainable practices in project management have incorporated evolutions and expansions over the years, adding variables that respond to the challenges of society’s growing demand for better socio-environmental practices upon the impacts resulting from companies’ projects.

As regards the need to first identify and analyze how sustainability practices are incorporated into project management, this work considered the most important studies and articles from researchers who publish on the topic. However, a complete understanding of how to implement better practices that could translate sustainable concepts in project management is still challenging, and has been in construction and development by companies and authors.

This work sought to contribute to the theme by analyzing the results of a survey, containing 37 practices generated from a simplification of questions about assessing the sustainability concept’s integration on individual project’s level, using 919 responses from Brazilian professionals with experience in the concerned field.

Using Cronbach’s alpha to assess the reliability of the data collection instrument and exploratory factor analysis to identify the relations between the factors, the results showed that the 37 sustainable practices could be gathered in five key practices: environmental efficiency (32% of the practices), compliance (24%), social responsibility (22%), continuous improvement and lessons learned (14%), and project success (8%).

The environmental efficiency factor gathered 12 practices related mainly to the intelligent use of resources (materials, energy, and water), recycling and waste management, and low-consumption equipment use and selection. The compliance factor gathered nine practices related to compliance with standards and regulations, policies, and good practices in themes such as health and safety, decent work, human rights, anti-corruption, and unethical behavior. Social responsibility encompasses eight practices related to equal opportunity and diversity (gender, race, religion, etc.), human rights standards and regulations, social responsibility towards external stakeholders in the society, anti-corruption, and unethical behavior from third parties. Continuous improvement and lessons learned encompasses five practices related to the project’s report content, which consider whether this includes themes such as social and environmental sustainability indicators (for physical resources usage and project’s deliverable and products), whether it contains lessons learned from the project, and if the improvement proposals of design and production processes are contemplated. The last, the project’s success factor, gathered three practices concerning the project’s short- and long-term value if projects are selected and evaluated through criteria that reflect these strategical values, and finally, the project’s financial and economic return.

Understanding sustainability practices gathered into five key factors, this work sought to contribute to minimizing the gaps of the challenge between sustainability and project management, guiding project leaders to criticism and reflection on issues of how to drive sustainable practices into project activities.

The present study has two main limitations. The first is inherent to all bibliographic research, and concerns the risk that some important contribution may not be added to our analysis. The second is that the research was based on the evaluations of Brazilian project managers, whom the Brazilian reality may have influenced.

This study has practical implications for organizations and project leaders to make sustainability more tangible. Companies can consider the concepts and approaches inherent in key practices as drivers to improve the mechanisms and criteria to select and manage their portfolio, adding perspectives to develop dimensions to evaluate projects according to their strategy.

For project leaders, key practices can be used to expand the traditional view of project management, focused mainly on time, cost, and scope. By understanding the themes and key factors, leaders can also establish goals (OKRs), processes, and mechanisms to meet the company’s and society’s demand for more sustainable practices. In addition, key practices can pose new challenges for project managers, especially in developing new skills and competencies. Concerning policymakers, it is also important that public policy and regulatory instruments are developed that encourage the improvement of the sustainability of project management processes.

We envision some developments for this work. The first concerns the carrying out of new surveys with project management professionals from other countries. It would enable important conclusions about similarities and differences. The second involves the identification of the main competencies and skills that the incorporation of sustainability in project management demands from project managers. Finally, we recommend that new studies be carried out to expand the set of sustainable practices of project management.

We hope that future developments of this research will also encourage other researchers to deploy further analysis regarding the evaluation of the most and least used sustainability practices in project management.