Dr. Joseph Fiksel

As we begin a new year, EHS managers will continue to look for ways to demonstrate the business value their programs bring to the company. To give you some food for thought as we look at our programs for the year, I wanted to share some information about a new project we are working on in Ohio. As you know, one effective way for you to improve your company’s financial and environmental performance is to increase resource productivity. Consider this simple performance metric: Dollars of profit per pound of material purchased. As your productivity increases, your raw material requirements decrease and you discard less solid waste, while increasing your profit margin.

3M figured this out 30 years ago with their pioneering “Pollution Prevention Pays” program, and today most companies practice both source reduction and recycling of industrial wastes. If you cannot achieve closed-loop recovery, you may be able to sell your wastes as by-products; for example; electric utilities have found many applications for coal ash and other combustion products.

However, there is still a huge amount of waste flowing into landfills—over 20 billion tons annually in the U.S. An emerging practice called “By-Product Synergy” (BPS) offers a new, collaborative approach to divert waste from landfill. Your waste stream could be a viable feedstock for some other company in a completely different industry. Similarly, you might be able to purchase lower-cost recycled materials from another company’s residuals.

Around the U.S., a number of regional networks have formed where companies work together to discover and implement these types of BPS opportunities. The Chicago network (www.wastetoprofit.com) has diverted over 165,000 tons of waste and its members have saved close to $16 million dollars. In Columbus, Ohio, we have launched a new network (www.OhioBPS.org) with the help of the U.S. Business Council for Sustainable Development, which originally developed the BPS approach. See the website for a brief video that explains more about how to get started. I welcome your thoughts and experiences with any efforts you’ve made to develop a collaborative approach like BPS. Any success stories out there that might inspire your peers or help them overcome common hurdles to getting a network going in your area?

Dr. Joseph Fiksel is Executive Director of the Center for Resilience at The Ohio State University, and Principal and Co-Founder of the consulting firm Eco-Nomics LLC. He is a recognized authority on sustainable business practices, and frequent contributor to NAEM programs and events. His latest book, Design for Environment: A Guide to Sustainable Product Development, was published by McGraw-Hill in 2009.

Stephen Evanoff

Dear Son,

I just returned from the NAEM Forum in Albuquerque, the annual meeting of the association of EHS professionals to which I belong.  I left the meeting thinking about the enormous environmental challenges our world faces as your generation enters college or struggles to enter the work force.

Each generation is defined by the challenges it inherits and what it does with them.  Grandpa and grandma’s generation overcame the Depression, won World War Two, and outlasted the Russians in The Cold War.  Your parent’s generation moved our society to redress discrimination related to race, gender, and sexual orientation and moved environmental conservation into the mainstream.  Of course, we’ve had our failures.  These failures will be your challenges.  Among the environmental challenges we bequeath you are global warming, rapid decline of our ocean habitats, and loss of topsoil and fresh water resources.  As I listened to the keynote speakers at our conference talk about these looming environmental crises, my thoughts turned to you and your generation and I was encouraged.

You’ve said to me, “Dad you’re from the Bronze Age,” and, in relative terms, I hope you are right.  I see in you and your generation a group of people free from the social, governmental and technological limitations of past generations.  I often joke that your friends and classmates look like a United Nations convention and you would all be lost without your iPhones.  But, your desire to befriend people regardless of their backgrounds, your sense that in diversity there is strength, and your skill with information technology, will enable you to tackle these daunting environmental challenges.  It will take the whole planet and all of the technology and creativity we can bring to bear to solve them.  Your generation is equipped to do it.

The writer and historian Wallace Stegner called the American West “the Geography of Hope.”  In your face, and the diverse faces of your generation, iPhones and all, I see a geography of hope for overcoming our global environmental challenges.  Go forward and do good work.  My grandchildren and great-grandchildren are counting on you.

Love,

Pops

Stephen Evanoff will chairperson of the 2010 Forum!  Mark your calendars for October 13-15, 2010, in Indianapolis, IN, at the Downtown Marriott.

Jonathon Porritt, former director of Friends of the Earth and, until recently, chief environmental advisor to the UK Prime Minister and Chairman of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, doesn’t think so.

Porritt is on a mission to challenge the conventional thinking of governments, business leaders, and economists on sustainability. Porritt takes the position that we cannot consume our way to sustainability, i.e,, as long as consumption-based economic growth is top priority, we will never achieve it. In his 2005 book, Capitalism As if the World Matters, Porritt devises a number of strategies to recalculate cost and profit. Among them are more comprehensive ways of defining “capital”, by taking into account social and human values along with ecological capital.

Porritt also takes a strong position on population growth. He recently called for a two-child limit. He told reporters in July: “I am unapologetic about asking people to connect up their own responsibility for their total environmental footprint and how they decide to procreate and how many children they think are appropriate.” (Porritt and his wife have two daughters.)

The other side of this argument is the economic concept of “decoupling,” which posits that, with technological innovation and efficiency, economic growth can continue while environmental impacts diminish substantially. Regarding population growth, as societies prosper they have fewer children and eventually stabilize at a replacement birthrate. It’s happening in affluent societies in Europe and Asia.

I think Porritt deserves credit for bringing our ever-increasing consumption of goods and services and population growth into the discussion of sustainability.

For a more complete summary of Porritt’s ideas:

http://www.ethicalcorp.com/content.asp?ContentID=6596

For a provocative assessment of the two perspectives, see, “Can Industrial Civilization Really Become Sustainable”:

http://www.grist.org/article/shaw1/

What do you think? Can we have our cake and eat it too?

James Strock

The current president of the United States holds his office in no small measure because of his social networking mastery of his 2008 electoral campaign. It enabled his organization to overcome what appeared to be, in traditional terms, insuperable advantages for his foremost intra-party opponent.

Authoritarian governments—from China to Iran—quake because of a social networking sites, such as the incongruously named Twitter. Suddenly, the worst fear of unstable regimes—outside interference to the aid of their own oppressed citizens—is becoming a reality far, far beyond their control.

In corporate America social networking is having many impacts. It breaks through internal silos—both organizational and ingrained in minds by custom and expectation. It enables customers to share information among themselves, on their own terms. It gives communities new tools. It affords regulatory agencies new sources of information. It enables advocacy groups to organize worldwide to deal with what used to be regarded as local matters.

How is your company approaching social networking as it relates to issues in the energy-environment-sustainability rubric? Are you able to create new value consistent with your company’s business plan? Are you concerned about additional liabilities of various types? Are you creating deeper relationships with key stakeholders? How will you evaluate your company’s—and your own—social networking? How will it affect your own value proposition over time, as well as that of your company?

Alex Pollock

We’ve likely all heard the mantra “Manage stuff and lead people.”  Maybe too simplistic a way to differentiate the responsibilities of a manager versus those of a leader I will concede. But few would disagree that one of the great challenges facing leaders continues to be putting the right people in the right roles at the right time. The latest book by Jim Collins of “Good to Great” fame is “How the Mighty Fall..And Why Some Companies Never Give In.” Collins’ research yields six generic characteristics of who these “right” people may be:

1. The right people fit with the Company’s Core Values
2. The right people don’t need to be tightly managed
3. The right people understand that they do not have “jobs”; they have responsibilities
4. The right people fulfill their commitments
5. The right people are passionate about the Company and it’s work
6. The right people display “window and mirror” maturity (give credit and take blame appropriately)

What’s your gut telling you about these characteristics? How well do they align with your experiences? How would you describe the role of Company culture and HR philosophies in making this responsibility of leadership seamlessly occur? We’re awaiting your thoughts. Thanks for sharing.

Stephen Evanoff

My family and friends know that I’ve been working in the environmental field for over 20 years. My wife proudly tells people, “Stephen got awards from Carol Browner and the Secretary of Defense for his environmental leadership work.” So when an environmental issue enters the zeitgeist friends will ask me about it. The question is usually posed with an expectation of a good news story. You know what I’m talking about.

Unfortunately, over the past several years we’ve witnessed a steady stream of negative news stories about how certain businesses acted while a de-regulatory philosophy prevailed within the federal government. I am not going to cite specific examples here, but I bet you can name one or two off the top of your head.

Since the modern EHS movement became part of the mainstream, business has advocated that voluntary standards are a more efficient and effective way of managing EHS issues than regulation. But, in the wake of numerous stories on environmental misdeeds during an era lacking in aggressive oversight and enforcement, and coming on the heels of the banking and finance meltdown, my family and friends have become wary. As my teenage son put it, “gee pops, looks like business blew it.”

Yes, it’s not fair and it paints business and industry with one very broad brush. But, I’ve been unsuccessful coming up with a persuasive response. I wonder…has the worm turned? Are we entering an era of re-regulation and public skepticism of business in EHS issues? What have your family and friends been telling you?

What do you think?

Stephen Evanoff is active on NAEM’s Board of Directors and leads EHS for AIMCO, one of the largest owners and operators of apartment communities in the US. He resides in Denver, CO with his son and wife, and can regularly be found on his days off skiing, hiking, or being dragged around the neighborhood park by his Great Danes, Natasha and Neala.

You can meet Stephen and hear him speak at the NAEM EHS Management Forum in October on the topic of  corporate survival skills for EHS managers.

James Strock

A number of companies maintain some or complete separation between their EHS divisions and those specifically aimed toward sustainability initiatives.  Sometimes this is the result of the serendipity of organizational development.

Sometimes it an arguably incomplete conception of sustainability—not recognizing that reducing liabilities and creating asset value can be related, indeed mutually reinforcing.

Have you noticed this phenomenon? If so, what do you think about it? Is it a missed opportunity or a sensible approach?

James Strock is an author, speaker and executive educator who works in the nexus between sustainability and leadership.  In addition to these endeavors, he also served as the founding secretary for environmental protection for the state of California, as well as the chief law enforcement officer of  US EPA.  His third book, Serve to Lead®, will be released in 2009.

Alex Pollock

Management fads come and go. It seems like yesterday that knowing and quoting Deming’s 14 Points was the “in” thing. More recently being equipped with tools from programs with titles like Existing for the Customer, Investing in People, Empowering People and Six Sigma was critical to leadership effectiveness. You’re thinking of you own examples I’m sure. Some were life changing..most were not.

As you’ve likely concluded from my previous blogs I’m an avid reader of Gallup research and I found one of their latest books ,”Strengths Based Leadership” by Tom Rath and Barry Conchie, very interesting. Gallup has been studying high performing teams for nearly four decades and have published their “telltale signs”:

• conflict doesn’t destroy strong teams because strong teams focus on results
• strong teams focus on what’s best for the organization and then move forward
• strong teams embrace diversity
• strong teams are magnets for talent

Some questions to stimulate discussion…from you experience leading or participating on teams, how does this list grab you? Is there one “sign” more important than the others? What essentials are missing? What were some life changing take-a-ways you left management/leadership programs with over the years? In what way did they change your paradigm?

Thanks for sharing!

Frank Brandauer

After attending The Auditing Roundtable’s Spring Meeting I was struck by just how far EHS Auditing has come for something that effectively did not exist 25 years ago.

While often viewed as just a compliance tool, I believe that its true capabilities are often misunderstood and undervalued. Audits, like nothing else can actually drive change, deliver training, demonstrate organizational commitment, administer internal consequences, provide Board of Director level exposure and finally, improve compliance.

So how are we doing, what is the state of EHS Audit Programs today? To me it is not so clear, here are some of the view points that I heard being discussed;

• Most programs are doing remarkably well given the impacts of recent cost cutting efforts.
• Many programs have been slowing falling behind given acquisition growth over the last decade and recent budget cuts.
• Only a small number of companies still have a robust EHS Audit function and those are limited to organizations that have experienced compliance driven consent orders or Board mandated compliance programs.
• With the rise of EHS Management Systems and related System Audits, the actual need for Compliance Audits has been reduced.

Initially, auditing emerged in reaction to the fear of enforcement actions. Have we lost this driver given changes in enforcement in the U.S. and the lack of enforcement in developing countries? Or will our current financial problems bring enforcement back into popularity?

How robust and effective is your Audit program? Given the maturity of many audit programs and the current economic and regulatory situation, is it a time for a change?

Tim Mohin

Over the past couple of weeks, I have been in several conversations about employee engagement in sustainability. While not a new trend, employee engagement in corporate greening is gaining ground and emerging as a strong force to move corporate social responsibility forward.

I recall about nine or 10 years ago, when I led the environmental function at Intel and several employees from our Oregon site formed the Intel Employee Sustainability Network … I used to call them my own personal NGO.

While some saw a new hassle, the fresh perspective and new ideas injected vitality into our program. We had to work out some boundary conditions around areas like setting corporate policy and public relations, but these were easily managed and, on balance, the collaboration was a benefit to the program, the company and the employees.

When the Intel group started we brought in a speaker from the well established HP green team for some tips on how to get started. Fast forward a few years at Apple when a rep from Intel “paid it forward” to help “Apple Earth” get rolling. There are so many of these groups now that networks are beginning to form to share ideas and resources:

• Green Team Project: Participate on a Green Team
• Bay Area Green Team Program
• Sustainable Silicon Valley’s New Green Teams Resources Page

Typically, the members of these groups have little or no involvement in the official corporate environmental or sustainability efforts. They are environmentally minded individuals who are driven to green their lives at home and work.

More than a common interest club (think chess club), these teams want to change the way their company functions. Usually, it starts with the most visible items — e.g., cafeteria waste, lighting, commuting, landscape irrigation etc. After some success with these items, these groups can transition into influencing corporate business practices from design to manufacturing to purchasing and more.

While I am certain there are numerous examples of success (please send me yours!), here is a random, unscientific survey of a few employee engagement approaches:

• Coming in first for best name is “GreenGenes” at Genentech.
• The trophy for most employees engaged goes to WalMart’s “personal sustainability plans.”
• Topping the “wired” list is eBay’s green team with the recently announced e-Bay Ink.
• And, not to be outdone, my former colleagues at Intel are rewarding green with green by building sustainability criteria into the bonus formula for all employees.

Looking ahead, employee engagement in corporate sustainability will continue to grow as the “millennials” (young folks) enter the workforce. The next generation may the greenest yet, having been raised with Captain Planet, Mom’s Prius and curbside recycling.

The folks in HR have not missed the trend and are becoming big fans of the sustainability group. A recent survey found that American workers are paying growing attention to companies’ environmental policies and an increasing number (36 percent) report that they would be more inclined to work for “green” companies.

The bottom line: a key benefit of corporate sustainability programs may be the corporation itself. Increasingly sustainability is becoming a tool to recruit, retain, inspire and motivate your workforce.

Tim Mohin is a NAEM Member and principal consultant and team leader for EORM’s sustainability and corporate social responsibility practice. Formerly, Tim was Apple’s senior manager for supplier responsibility and led Intel’s environmental and sustainability efforts.