Tag Archives: sustainability

Free Webinar: Sustainability in the Supply Chain

Green Research is hosting a free webinar to share highlights of its latest research on the best practices, latest trends, and new tools for managing and improving sustainability in the supply chain.

Please register for “Sustainability in the Supply Chain: Tools, Trends & Best Practices? on Aug 9, 2012 11:30 AM EDT at:

https://attendee.gotowebinar.com/register/1670708262142123520

The research was conducted over three months and drew on executive interviews, a global survey of sustainability executives, briefings with technology providers, and a review of public documents outline corporations’ sustainability initiatives.  Green Research recently published the complete results of the study in a report available for purchase and immediate download here.

Key questions answered by the research include:

  • Can companies improve sustainability in their supply chains without compromising their business goals?
  • What are leading corporate practices for improving sustainability in the supply chain?
  • How should companies assess supply chain sustainability management vendor solutions?

Who should attend?

  • Sustainability executives and practitioners
  • Supply chain and procurement executives
  • Corporate leaders
  • Sustainability and strategy consultants
  • Vendors of IT solutions
  • Non-governmental environmental organizations
  • Universities and sustainability research centers
  • Sustainability public relations and marketing agencies

Attendance is limited. Priority will be given to to retailers, manufacturers and their agencies.

Register now by clicking here.

After registering, you will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.

Leave a Comment

Filed under Supply chain, sustainability

Knowing Your Supply Chain from a Hole in the Ground

A new standard of accountability and traceability for supply chains is emerging. Companies are increasingly faced with the need to be able to trace their supply chains back to the hole in the ground their raw materials came from. This is one of the implications of Section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, a U.S. Federal law passed in 2010. Section 1502 requires any company that must file reports with the SEC to assess its supply chain for the presence of “conflict minerals” and determine whether they originate in mines in the Democratic Republic of Congo or surrounding nations.

There are lots of nuances and implications to the law. (For more information, see Dodd-Frank Section1502.) But an essential one is that companies are being asked to know far more about where the raw materials in their products came from, and the conditions under which those materials were obtained, than ever before.

On behalf of a client I am currently researching the impacts of Dodd-Frank Secdtion 1502 on companies. A number of the firms I’ve interviewed see a broader trend toward ever higher standards of visibility, traceability and accountability in company supply chains. As they work to design processes that will enable them to comply with the new rules, they are trying to think ahead and design them to be able to accomodate new requirements, which they believe are all but inevitable.

Another example of these heightened standards for traceability and accountability is the recent announcement by fruit producer Chiquita Brands that it had committed to identifying – and eliminating from its list of fuel suppliers – all of the companies that it believes sell diesel made from Canadian tar sands oils. This action came after a pressure campaign from the environmental group ForestEthics.

We are entering an era when “fungible commodities” such as petroleum and tin are not as fungible as they once were. Companies are going to need to improve their supply chain game to keep pace with rising expectations for traceability and accountability.

What are your thoughts?

Leave a Comment

Filed under oil, Supply chain

I Laughed, I Cried, I Responded

Critics are raving about the Green Research sustainability executive survey:

“When it was all over, I felt exhausted, but also possessed of a strange need to scream, or laugh, or run all the way home, or pick up parked cars and flip them over.” — Peter Bradshaw, Guardian UK

“It’s about corporate manners—the protocols of hierarchy, the rituals of power, and, most of all, the difficulty of confronting flagrant habits of speculation with truth.” — David Denby, New Yorker

“Surely such an ordinary man could not have written these masterpieces.” — Roger Ebert, Chicago Sun-Times

“…it shows a clear kinship with other eccentric, permanent works of the American imagination…” — A.O. Scott, New York Times

I admit that I’ve taken these quotes out of context, and that they have nothing to do with our survey. But my point is that executives actually like filling out our survey. Why? Because it is thought provoking. It asks smart questions. And it gives you a sense of what your peers are asking about. We also provide an executive summary of the survey highlights to participants who want it.

Your individual responses remain anonymous: we only report on the aggregated results.

So if you are a senior sustainability executive, are not already on our list (you know it if you are) and would like to receive our upcoming sustainability executive survey, please drop me a line from your work e-mail address today: dschatsky at greenresearch.com

Leave a Comment

Filed under sustainability

Sustainability Leaders Say Tracking and Reporting Systems Fall Short

Over Next 12 Months, a Majority Will Invest in Systems Upgrades

New York City (October 17, 2011) – Green Research, a New York-based corporate sustainability research and advisory firm, today released a study of the market for sustainability performance management systems—IT systems that help companies monitor, track and analyze environmental and sustainability data. These systems are crucial tools for large and medium companies that want to bring professional management standards to their sustainability programs. The study found that while sustainability executives at leading companies are broadly satisfied with the accuracy and completeness of the data in their current systems, those systems fall short in other ways. “Many sustainability leaders say it is too hard to get the data they need,” said David Schatsky, principal analyst and founder of Green Research. “Companies need better integrated tools and more analytical firepower to help drive decisions.”

Drawing on a proprietary survey of 32 senior sustainability executives at major companies in North America and Europe, the study found that nearly 40 percent say their systems are poorly integrated and it remains too difficult to get the data required. A majority of respondents say their companies have slated funds for system upgrades in the coming year; a third of companies surveyed plan to spend over $50,000 to upgrade their sustainability information systems in the coming year.

The study also finds that dissatisfaction by sustainability leaders with current systems, coupled with spending plans, equals opportunity for vendors in this crowded market, including companies such as CSRware, Carbon Guerrilla, Carbon Systems, Cloud Apps, e3 Solutions, Enablon, Enviance, ENXSuite, FirstCarbon Solutions, Hara, Locus Technologies, ProcessMAP and Verisae, to name a few. Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) vendors such as SAP and Oracle, and consultants and systems integrators such as Accenture and Deloitte are also positioned to tap this opportunity. The study also reveals which departmental budgets control the funds for the planned systems upgrades.

The study, “Sustainability Performance Management Systems,” is available online at greenresearch.com. To learn more about the research, please visit greenresearch.com or contact David Schatsky at 646-783-8337 or info@greenresearch.com.

Contact:
David Schatsky
info@greenresearch.com
646-783-8337
###

Leave a Comment

Filed under press release

More on Sustainability and the Finance Department

A while back I wrote about some of the practices that finance departments follow to support sustainability strategy at their companies. (The blog post is here.) Just a couple of things to add today:

In case you missed it, a couple of years ago Jones Lang LaSalle sponsored a study (free registration required) of finance departments and their role in corporate sustainability. The study was more descriptive than prescriptive. One set of stats that stood out for me related to the role of the finance department in environmental reporting:

Only about one tenth of survey respondents say that finance is a leading contributor to these efforts at their companies. One quarter of respondents say that finance contributes little, if anything, to environmental reporting.

 

That’s especially interesting in light of the anecdote I will share in a moment.

Much more recently, the International Federation of Accountants released this past March a comprehensive (194 short pages) vision of the role that professional accounts can and should play to help companies integrate sustainability into their core. You can find the “framework” here.  If you are browsing, consider pausing on the pages titled “Key Considerations for Professional Accountants” for the highlights.

One of the most helpful insights I’ve heard on this topic recently came from Richard Ellis, Group Head of Corporate Social Responsibility at Alliance Boots, the UK-based health & beauty retailer and pharmaceutical wholesaler. Richard suggests that the finance department own the responsibility of collecting and reporting on environmental sustainability data. Given its expertise in managing and reporting on quantitatve data and credibility that finance departments generally have when it comes to presenting financial data, having finance be responsible for environmental data raises the profile and credibility of the measures of a company’s environmental performance. Richard and the finance director jointly present this non-financial informaiton to their board of directors.

That seems like an outstanding practice to me. At your company, who is responsible for collecting and reporting on non-financial sustainability information? Feel free to share your experience in a comment or an e-mail to me.

1 Comment

Filed under sustainability

Setting Goals for Environmental Performance

This is the season that many companies publish their corporate sustainability reports, and in those reports updates on their sustainability goals. Some companies have recently announced meeting or exceeding goals they’d set.  Apparel maker H&M, for instance, recently reported that it blew through its goal on the use of organic cotton. Others, such as Walmart (carbon emissions) and Starbucks (energy consumption) received attention (here and here) for falling short of some of theirs.

There are broad differences in how companies set sustainability goals and which goals they choose to communicate publicly. In my many conversations with sustainability executives it’s become clear to me that many of them are not sure they are going about this in the best possible way.

Which Goals to Set?

With global warming the most prominent public environmental policy issue, it’s increasingly common for companies to establish goals for reducing carbon emissions. The specifics vary—from a percentage absolute reduction versus a prior year benchmark, to a reduction in “carbon intensity”—but carbon emissions reductions goals are table stakes for companies seeking to establish sustainability credentials.

Beyond carbon, many companies sensibly identify goals related to their major environmental impacts, or ones thematically related to their business. Given the attention that e-waste has received, it makes sense that electronics manufacturers like HP and Dell have set electronics recycling goals. The Coca-Cola Company has set a goal of neutralizing its water footprint by 2020.

Some companies, especially service businesses but also products manufacturers, are in setting goals regarding the environmental impacts their customers have while using their products and services.  A common form of this is energy efficiency targets for products.

Where in the Organization Are Goals Set?

Where in a company do sustainability goals originate? Are they set from the top down? Are they derived from the bottom up? In our interviews, we’ve seen approaches that are all over the map.

We heard the story about the global packaged goods company whose CEO set a goal that the sustainability team thought was absurd, unrealistic and unachievable. The sustainability lead at a large retail and pharmacy chain tells the story of how his CEO went on television and publicly announced a carbon emissions reduction target that was 50 percent higher than what he had agreed to the day before–to keep the sustainability leader “on his toes.”

Some companies take more of what might be called a bottoms-up approach. Dell told me, for instance, that it sets its sustainability goals with reference to science, input from engineering teams, and the product roadmaps of key partners.

A major automaker tells me that they’ve seen success setting sustainability goals from “the middle,” meaning that mid-level managers are asked to study a problem and establish a goal. They get together with their peers across different functions and look at technology trends, projections for the future size of the vehicle fleet, consumer expectations, regulatory trends, competitor behavior and so on. Middle management then proposes goals and an executive committee reviews and ratifies them.

Which Goals to Communicate Publicly?

Some companies are very sparing in which sustainability goals they choose to communicate publicly, regardless of how many internal goals they may set. Alliance Boots, the British retailer, has dozens of business units operating in dozens of countries. Each unit has its own environmental goals. But the company overall has publicized just one quantitative target: to reduce the carbon footprint of “Boots legacy stores” by 30 percent by 2020 compared to 2005. Real estate management firm Jones Lang LaSalle  has communicated a handful of sustainability goals but only one specific, measurable one: to reduce its clients’ carbon emissions by an amount at least ten times greater than its own carbon footprint each year. By contrast, some of the electronics firms I’ve spoken with have literally dozens of specific, quantitative goals. And UK retailer Marks & Spencer has received much attention for the 100 commitments it made in 2007 and the additional 80 in 2010, many of which are quantitative and specific.

New Research on Sustainability Goal Setting

We are researching this topic further and intend to publish a study on best practices for sustainability goal setting. If you’d like to participate in our research, have any suggestions, or have your own best practices to share, please leave a comment or drop me a line.

Leave a Comment

Filed under efficiency, emissions, sustainability, water

Life Cycle Assessment for Suits

We’ve kicked off a new research project looking at the market for life cycle assessment services. Life cycle assessment (LCA) is going to have a major impact on the world of sustainability in the coming years. LCA involves looking in a holistic way at a system that produces products or services through all stages of its life cycle, from acquiring raw materials to manufacturing to use and recycling or disposal.

Why are we looking at LCA? Our most recent study of senior sustainability executives revealed the growing importance of life cycle assessment to the sustainability movement. A number of the executives cited LCA as the cornerstone of their sustainability programs. Others were at work on simplified LCA-lite measures, which they felt would be more accessible to smaller companies that may not have the resources to conduct full LCAs. A prominent executive at one well known company I spoke with suggested that there is a need for greater research and information on LCAs for the use of business executives who are responsible for their companies’ sustainability programs.

Life cycle assessment is about 50 years old. Initially, it was developed in response to concerns about uncertain access to resources, including energy. In its early years LCA tended to be employed in industries that handled scarce, toxic and/or regulated materials or (and I’m speculating a big because I haven’t fully researched it yet), where margins were low and the benefits from material stewardship are high.
LCA is a highly technical discipline and its practitioners tend to be highly trained and with advanced degrees. Executives with technical responsibilities, such as process engineers and manufacturing heads, are ones who traditionally have commissioned made use of LCA studies.

Source: Green Research

Today, the application of LCA is beginning to change, making this an excellent time to do fresh business-oriented research in this area.  First, interest in the topic is spreading beyond technical management at companies, reaching strategy and even marketing functions. Marketers are interested in LCA for its potential in supporting ecological product claims. And sustainability minded executives generally are interested because LCA provides a structured way to understand a company’s environmental impact. (That’s what I mean by “Life Cycle Assessment for Suits.”) Interest in LCA is spreading not just within companies but across industries. We now have apparel makers and consumer packaged goods makers investing in LCA.

Our research will be conducted over the next 5-6 weeks. If you have expertise in LCA–as a practitioner, a tool vendor or a user of LCA services (such as a sustainability executive)– and would like to have input to our research, please leave a comment. I’m also happy to hear from anyone else with thoughts on the topic as well.

2 Comments

Filed under efficiency, Life Cycle Assessment