Posts filed under ‘EHS Management’
Transparency Begins with Data Management
Connie Prostko-Bell
Meeting the demands of new product regulations requires better data management solutions. We sat down this week with 3E Company’s Connie Prostko-Bell to learn more about this emerging issue and to find out what companies are doing to provide greater supply chain transparency.
GT: Why do companies collect MSDSs and other product data from their suppliers? What is this information used for?
CPB: Operational risk and compliance management is increasingly focused on environmental issues across the supply chain. As companies strive to deliver sustainable ongoing improvements in compliance and risk management, they are closely scrutinizing the management of products in the enterprise, especially chemicals and other hazardous materials, with a special emphasis on fulfilling requirements in environmental, health and safety (EHS) regulatory compliance. A comprehensive view of compliance performance and risk management throughout the supply chain and product life cycle is necessary to promote and sustain ongoing improvement.
This vision is fueled by accurate and comprehensive content, including environmental, health and safety (EHS) product data, such as Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), which can be leveraged to ensure that the products that are incorporated into finished goods meet legal, regulatory, industry and self-imposed standards. Leveraging this type of data helps communicate to a company’s stakeholders that externally sourced processes and materials do not introduce legal, financial, ethical or market access risks to the company. Furthermore, it gives organizations an opportunity to advance their own value-based agendas by leveraging buying power to enforce desired practices.
GT: What trends are driving the management of supplier-sourced product data?
CPB: Manufacturers with complex supply chains are struggling under the burden of spiraling global EHS regulations. More often than not, they possess neither the requisite internal methodologies nor the necessary personnel to collect, analyze, share, and distribute key information related to supplier compliance and corporate risk across the various functional groups within the organization. Compliance issues such as GHS, REACh, RoHS and Frank-Dodd are driving the need for a common source of product data.
The shifting regulatory landscape also burdens suppliers, who often need help gaining access from suppliers and understanding the global EHS laws with which they must comply. Companies are increasingly recognizing supplier compliance as a critical component of business continuity efforts.
GT: A company’s efforts are only as strong as the quality of its data. How can companies ensure data quality, especially when they are dealing with a multitude of suppliers?
CPB: The number of suppliers can vary wildly from company to company. Generally speaking, it is safe to say that the larger the organization, the more suppliers it will have. Many factors influence this number such as geographical diversity of operations and customers, the complexity of the product line, and availability of the required raw materials. It is certainly not uncommon for a large company to have tens of thousands of suppliers. However, regardless of whether the company has hundreds or thousands of suppliers, managing supplier data can be a very challenging task. Finding, maintaining and acting on data is difficult and painstakingly time-consuming.
It is important that companies use documented, best practice methodologies and direct relationships to gather, refine and maintain data.
When it comes to sharing the information, you should choose an easy-to-use and practical system that meet each customer’s specific needs. The data should be broad, dynamically updated, and of the highest quality and accuracy. Substance- level regulatory data and product level MSDS data should be integrated together to provide a view into the impact of regulatory changes across inventories in the enterprise.
At the product level, from its inception to the present day, the vendor supplied product MSDS has evolved into a document that goes far beyond its original purpose, now serving as a source, foundation and clearinghouse for a range of safety and regulatory compliance data, including classification, transportation, environmental, ecological and disposal considerations. MSDS product-level data should be continuously updated with information and search technologies, documented best practice methodologies and through direct data obtainment relationships with raw material and other chemical product manufacturers.
Connie Prostko-Bell is a Senior Solutions Manager with 3E Company. She has 16 years of EH&S and chemical industry experience, spanning the project management, product safety and product stewardship sectors. She will share strategies for getting accurate supplier data during NAEM’s webinar on the topic Feb. 16.
Meet the NAEM Board of Directors: What are the EHS and sustainability trends to watch in 2012?
As part of NAEM’s 2012 Member Appreciation Week celebration, we sat down with members of the NAEM Board of Directors to talk about the EHS and sustainability trends to watch in 2012. Featuring Michael Miller of Dean Foods; David Newman; Mark Hause of DuPont; and Verne Shortel of NRG Energy.
Meet the NAEM Board of Directors: What are some of the lessons you learned in 2011?
In honor of this week’s 2012 Member Appreciation Week celebration, we sat down with members of the NAEM Board of Directors to talk about trends in EHS and sustainability management. Featuring Deb Hammond of Abbott Laboratories; Stephen Evanoff of Danaher Corp.; Bruce Karas of The Coca-Cola Co.; and Minda Sarmiento of Shaw Environmental Inc.
NAEM Board of Directors: What project are you most excited about working on this year?
As part of NAEM’s 2012 Member Appreciation Week, we sat down with members of the NAEM Board of Directors to chat about trends in environment, health and safety (EHS) and sustainability management. Featuring Kelvin Roth of AMCOL International Corp.; Sandy Nessing of American Electric Power Co. Inc.; Pat Perry of CVS Caremark; and John Reichling of CDM Smith.
Busting Through the Fear Barrier
Alex Pollock
The innate human drive to defend our territory can make us do strange things. At work, this instinct may compel us to protect the things we feel we’re entitled to, such as salary, headcount, budget, responsibilities, etc.
But imagine what it would be like to belong to an organization where people worked seamlessly together; where leaders collaborated, rather than competed, with one another to achieve their individual agendas?
In his book, “Breaking the Fear Barrier: How Fear Destroys Companies from the Inside Out and What to Do About It,” author Tom Rieger explains that the impediments to this kind of organizational utopia are rooted in fear. Fear creates barriers, he says, which manifest themselves inside companies as bureaucracy, organizational inefficiency and inertia. The top three barriers Rieger says we must overcome are:
- Parochialism: This is the domination of local needs. Standards within a function take precedence over creating engaged customers and business success.
- Territorialism: Some examples of territorialism in the workplace are hoarding headcounts, resources or decision-making authority.
- Empire Building: Assertion of control over other functions and resources to gain enhanced influence are symptoms of empire building.
The following is a list of the advice he offered that I found particularly useful for busting through these barriers.
- Eliminate rules that prevent more than they protect
- Purge administrative tasks that prevent employees from tackling mission-critical work
- Give people the freedom to make decisions, access information and resources, and encourage them to innovate and demonstrate moral courage
- The decision of whom to grant ownership or control should be based upon improving financial performance, improving the workplace, strengthening customer relationships, limiting liability and avoiding catastrophic failure
What forms of parochialism, territorialism and empire building have frustrated you in your work? What barrier busters have you effectively deployed? Any you need help with?
NAEM Forum 2011: Lessons of an Emerging Leader
Kealy Devoy
I recently had the opportunity to attend the NAEM Forum in Tucson, Ariz. My primary motivation for going was to learn about trends in corporate sustainability and start feeling out the job market. As a member of NAEM’s new Emerging Leaders program and a masters student at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment, the Forum was a great way to learn about what sustainability professionals do, and to network with some folks. I heard a lot of bright, innovative people speak throughout the event, and each session was nothing short of inspiring.
With the increased interest in sustainability, companies are faced with tough decisions about how to be competitive. Many companies are improving operational efficiency. Other companies are taking innovation to the next level by making significant and sometimes controversial changes to their operations. Why risk, for example, telling consumers to use less of your product to reduce the lifecycle carbon footprint of the product? One speaker summed it up like this: “If not us, then who? If not now, then when?” If there are unaddressed inefficiencies in the way a company operates, they are essentially creating opportunities for other firms to win out.
As a future EHS and sustainability professional, I believe my generation has a lot to offer in the way of innovation and creativity. We are young, enthusiastic and have a fresh perspective — a combination of traits that can help us see a business differently. But even experienced professionals sometimes have difficulty convincing upper-level management to try something new. So what can newcomers do to get taken seriously without stepping on toes?
I asked this very question during one of the keynote sessions at the Forum. The three-member panel had a lot to say on this topic. After listening to them discuss solutions to my dilemma, I came away with several great ideas that all Emerging Leaders should know:
- Don’t be afraid to step on toes. Just because you don’t have as much experience as your supervisor doesn’t mean that he or she will be offended if you bring new ideas to the table. And if someone does get miffed that the new kid is trying to make a meaningful contribution, don’t let it get to you. Firms these days need new ideas to stay competitive. Don’t shy away from your desire to be heard.
- Do your homework. Have an idea? Get out there and find out as much about it as you can. Are other companies doing it? Will it help your firm gain competitive advantage? What do experts have to say about the issue? Whether it is a simple efficiency improvement, a new product, or a drastic change to the business model, you should have as many details about it as you can. If you can get in front of upper-level management to pitch the idea, they are going to have a lot of questions, and you need to be prepared.
- If at first you don’t succeed: try, try again. You may have heard this a lot growing up, and it is no less applicable now. When you’re new to an organization it might take time for those around you to realize the value of a fresh pair of eyes. Don’t let one (or two or three) “no’s” get you down. If your idea is sound and makes good business sense, you can make it happen. Try finding someone else in the organization that has been there for a few years. Ask them about how different managers like to get information, what questions they might ask, and what their primary concerns are. A more seasoned professional can guide you to the right person and help you collect the information they will want.
With these tactics, any young professional can pioneer a new process or project. I continue to be amazed by some of the initiatives being announced by NAEM member companies, all due to creative problem-solving on the part of their internal environmental leaders. The private sector has the opportunity to make serious changes in the way that they operate with no losses in the quality of their products and services. All it takes is the courage to be unconventional. What other advice might you have for Emerging Leaders?
Kealy Devoy is a second-year at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment pursuing a Master of Environmental Management in the Energy and Environment concentration. She is originally from St. Louis, Missouri and received a B.A. in Environmental Studies at the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at Davidson College. After earning her degree, she worked as the first Sustainability Coordinator at Davidson. Most recently, Kealy was a Climate Corps Public Sector Fellow with the Environmental Defense Fund, where she helped the Town of Cary, NC identify energy efficiency upgrades in fire stations, water and wastewater treatment facilities, and municipal buildings. At the Nicholas School, she is an Energy Improvement Management Intern with the Duke Carbon Offsets Initiative.
Small Companies Can Make a Big Difference
Mark Posson
I recently had the pleasure to speak with Larry O’Connor , the CEO of Other World Computing and I came away with a stronger realization that leadership is arguably the largest factor in an organization’s environmental performance.
The company, which was started by Larry at age 14, has been providing quality hardware products and support to the computer industry since 1988. It provides peripherals for Macs and PCs with a focus on higher performance, energy efficient solid state drives to give computer users faster, more responsive systems with battery life approaching that of today’s increasingly popular tablet computers. Since its beginning, OWC has focused on developing innovative products that also meet the organization’s environmental concerns.
Under Larry’s leadership, OWC also has achieved sustained business growth, profitability and environmental excellence. The company’s environmental philosophyis elegantly simple: doing the right thing for the most effective utilization of natural resources makes for good business. And for a small firm, OWC has made a big environmental difference.
How has this enlightened leadership philosophy translated into specific actions? Here are just a few examples:
- When designing a new 37,000-square-foot headquarters and warehouse building in 1998, OWC chose to followed Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) criteria. This included the use of porous pavers led to smaller storm water retention basins, allowing for more space for future development. The company also used natural light to lower energy use and boost employee morale. The headquarters building houses the product development and customer s support teams, keeping the jobs in the United States. The attractive work environment has undoubtedly allowed OWC to attract top talent.
- A geothermal heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) system, which produced lower long-term operating costs
- The company installed a 500-kilowatt wind turbine to meet all of their present and planned power needs. Long-term thinking? Absolutely. It’s expected to pay back in 10 to 14 years, a hedge against escalating energy costs, energy self-sufficiency and alternative technology, all of which are good long-term sustainable business strategies.
- OWC also doesn’t rest on their laurels, but rather looks for ways to continually improve its environmental performance. As an example, OWC is in the process of upgrading the efficiency of its conveyor system, its largest production power user. The upgrade is projected to yield a 70 percent reduction in energy usage and increase product through-put.
During my conversation with Larry, I kept coming back to ‘Why? What was driving this desirable business behavior?’ He summed it up for me like this:
“At the end of the day, we work to do as much right as we can for all concerns. By being long-term, we can look at the long-term win-wins for both conserving our resources and with a competitive long-term cost benefit as well. As I had said – very arguably, if there isn’t a long term cost-benefit to a technology in the current time, there is likely something to question about the real net conservation benefit of the technology as well.”
Enlightened leadership: it’s a beautiful thing.
Mark Posson is the former Director of Environment, Safety and Health at Lockheed Martin Space Systems Company and the current Chair of the city of Pleasanton’s Energy and Environment Committee. He will be teaching environmental and sustainability management at University of California, Davis in the Spring. He recently began offering consulting services to help organizations improve their environment, safety and health performance.
Signs of a Strong EHS Culture
Stephen Evanoff
At this year’s NAEM Forum in Tucson, several speakers and participants made the point that a strong environment, health and safety (EHS) culture is a prerequisite to achieving and sustaining a high-level of EHS performance, and EHS managers are better served by focusing on building an EHS culture than focusing strictly on outcomes. Building a culture that values EHS is difficult and takes years, so it’s important to have a clear vision of what a strong EHS culture looks like. Here are my thoughts on the core characteristics of a strong EHS culture.
- Top management is involved and visibly supportive: Senior managers include EHS in enterprise goals, metrics, and operations reviews. They engage in safety-related activities, such as safety walks and self-audits, and set a clear and consistent tone through their actions that EHS is a core value.
- All levels of management are accountable: EHS comprises a significant portion of performance evaluations for managers and supervisors. Managers and supervisors are expected to create a safe work environment for their associates, and ensure the people under their supervision tend to their EHS responsibilities with the same rigor as they do quality, productivity and schedule.
- EHS is integrated into core business processes: The EHS program is made operational through the enterprise business management system and standard operating procedures. In enterprises where EHS is well-integrated, EHS doesn’t require special attention or management exhortations. It is simply how business is done.
- EHS is communicated effectively and frequently: EHS requirements are understood by all associates. New associates receive EHS training appropriate to their jobs as part of orientation. Management realizes that the importance of EHS must constantly be reinforced to achieve and maintain a high-level of performance.
- Doing the right thing is innate: Associates have a high-level of EHS awareness, receive sufficient and continuous EHS training and are given the tools to ensure effective EHS management. Associates do the right thing and do things right, even when nobody is watching.
- Associates are motivated: People find intrinsic value in high EHS performance. They understand its contribution to the success of the enterprise and take pride in doing their part.
What characteristics do you think are essential for a strong EHS culture?
The Cost of Incivility
Alex Pollock
The world of college football recently reminded us of the impact an individual’s behavior can have on the health and culture of an entire organization.
In their book, “The Cost of Bad Behavior,” authors Christine Pearson and Christine Porath highlight how destructive a particular type of bad behavior, “incivility,” is to American business. As many as 48 percent of employees experience incivility at work at least once per week, the authors say, arguing that the problem is more than just a minor inconvenience: it’s a “largely preventable ill that begs to be addressed.” Employees who experience incivility intentionally lowered their productivity, cut back work hours, lost respect for their bosses, put in minimal acceptable effort and sometimes even left their jobs- all because of disrespectful words and deeds, according to the authors. Workplace incivility comes in many forms and includes:
- Shutting someone out of a network or team
- Setting others up to look bad
- Spreading rumors about colleagues
- Leaving snippy voice mail messages
- Talking down to others
- Taking credit for the work of others
- Making demeaning or derogatory remarks
- Being aloof
- Belittling the work of others
- Using emails to send personal information instead of spending face-to-face time
- Failing to return messages
Civility takes time and effort. It’s not just about being “nice” but it’s about mutual respect. Some of the desired behaviors include:
- Assume positive regard
- Listen eagerly without interrupting
- Seek out and integrate diverse perspectives when making a decision
- Never act in a way that could be perceived as threatening or intolerant
- Maintain objectivity when conflict arises
- Be approachable to all people
- “Serve” rather than waiting to be “served”
How is all of this making you feel? Not sure? What can you add from your experiences? Do you need to add more civility to your mix? Begin by asking those around you a few questions like:
- Do I behave respectfully to all around me?
- Do I treat those on whom I closely rely better than I treat others?
- Do I keep control of my emotions regardless of the pressures I’m facing?
- Do I take out my frustrations on those who have less “power” than me?
I’m humbled by the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson, “Do not believe that you can possibly escape the reward of your action.” Let’s make sure we’re excited about getting our reward.
Sustaining a Safe Workplace through Design
Walt Rostykus
As safety practitioners, we know that engineering controls (elimination, isolation or substitution) are the first and preferred levels in the Hierarchy of Controls. By eliminating or reducing the exposure to a hazard through the design of a job or workstation, we establish a level of safety for all people working there. Engineering controls, also called Prevention through Design (PtD), also reduce the need for administrative (behavioral) controls and use of personal protective equipment. PtD is not a new concept, but is a recent initiative that is taking hold again.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) is leading a national initiative to promote this concept and highlight its importance in all business decisions. The concept continues to focus on planning and design of new workstations and process through two steps:
- Identifying hazards and
- Designing out the hazards through engineering controls.
It sounds easy. But if it is, why do environment, health and safety (EHS) programs struggle to control hazards after the fact? Why do safety professionals and management still rely heavily on behavioral and administrative controls instead of engineering controls? In my experience and through Humantech benchmarking studies, we’ve identified the three key elements for successful PtD processes as “At the right time, by the people (in the right role), and with the right criteria.”
- Right time: Prevention starts at the design phase when layout and tool design are concepts. This is where chemical, musculoskeletal disorders (MSD), and pinch-point hazards (to name a few) are easily identified by reviewing drawings and mock-ups. Changes made during the design phase to add capture ventilation, reduce reach distances, and add guarding cost 1/10 to 1/100 of what they would cost if made retroactively.
- Right people (role): The person(s) who designs the workplace or tool or specifies equipment is the best person to find and fix unacceptable exposures. Typically, these people are in an engineering role (process, production, mechanical, facilities or new product design engineers). Benchmarking studies continue to show that a common characteristic of companies with effective ergonomic improvement processes is that engineers, not solely the safety staff, are responsible and accountable for low-hazard design of the workplace.
- Right criteria: For engineers to be successful in designing jobs and workstations with low risk/hazard, they need the right tools. I am not referring to a shelf of engineering textbooks, but a limited and focused set of design guidelines, specific to that product or industry, that quickly provides the acceptable limits for design. Examples of ergonomic design guidelines include standing workstation height; reach distance; force limits for reaching, pulling or pressing; and viewing distance and placement. From this, engineers can quickly design the physical parameters of the workplace to fit the capability of the working population.
The concept of PtD sounds simple. And, in fact, it is simple. As simple as patching a leaky boat so you can paddle, not bail. Is PtD working in your organization? Is it practiced at all levels of the organization, or does EHS have to be the cheerleader and driver of the process? If success relies on EHS, what are the barriers you’ve encountered and how have you overcome them?
