Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Page 1 of 89
Blekinge Institute of Technology
THE GREEN STRATEGY: INDUSTRY PERCEPTIONS AND
PERSPECTIVES AS A NEW MARKET-DRIVEN BUSINESS FOCUS
FOR GAINING COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE.
Ozoeze, Joseph Ugwu-Eze
Supervisor: Jan Svanberg
Thesis for the Master’s degree in Business Administration
Autumn 2010
Page 2 of 89
Abstract
All businesses no matter how benign or smart their operations are create some level of
environmental harm. These impacts can be minimized or controlled by a adopting a well
articulated firm-level green strategy. The need to green should not just be to address
companywide environmental challenge but also a proactive strategy to stay on the right side of
the regulation and for profitability. Many factors drive a company to pursue green initiatives but
whatever it is that motivate an organization, it also possible that a company can enjoy a sustained
competitive advantage through greening.
This study examined the green strategies organizations can use to derive competitive advantage.
A multiple case study approach based on intensive field survey was used. The field survey was
carried out in 2010. A total of 268 respondents drawn from ten companies were selected for the
purposes of the survey. These companies operate in different sectors of the economy: 3, from the
oil/gas; 3, from the manufacturing; 2, from banking/insurance; 1, from hospitality/tourism and 1,
from the telecom.
A questionnaire survey (see Appendix A) containing thirty-six (38) questions was sent out to the
companies. The data gathered through the questionnaires was analyzed using the statistical
functions of Microsoft Excel.
Result obtained confirmed that companies‘ activities cause environmental burden and their
impacts can be responsibly controlled using firm-level green strategies. Companies can also
derive other benefits from going green. Ultimately a company can achieve sustained green
competitive advantage in the long run.
Our reason for being: Build the best product, do no unnecessary harm, use
business to inspire and implement solutions to the environmental crisis.
Patagonia’s Mission Statement—Yvon Chouinard, founder
Page 3 of 89
Dedication
To the Glory of God for giving me the inspiration and strength to complete this study against all
odds and for His faithfulness in those challenging moments.
Next, to my priceless wife and children for their wonderful support and encouragement.
And to the environmentally threatened and educationally deprived everywhere in the world.
Page 4 of 89
Acknowledgements
The success of this study would not have been possible without the concerted effort of a good
number of people. Top in the list are my parents, Ozo, my dad (now of blessed memory) and my
mom, Uba for their unflinching supports, encouragement and prayers. Next are my wife for
keeping faith and the children for their constructive nuances. I thank them more so for their
constant love and motivation, and for staying on patiently.
My special gratitude goes to my thesis supervisor, Jan Svanberg for his keen interest, positive
comments, guidance and thoroughness in the supervision at all stages of this research.
I wish also to express my thanks to all the course instructors whose collective and individual
effort formed the foundation of this thesis. Thanks also to the MBA programme Assistants,
Katrin and Eva for their just-in-time assistance. To Lebo Emori and Mudassar Asghar, I say
thanks a lot for your critiques that contributed in shaping the final thesis.
My special gratitude is unreserved for the management of BTH for providing this innovative
green learning via the It‘s Learning platform. The programme has tremendously filled a gap and
has drawn students from across the globe just at click of the mouse. Incontrovertibly the
programme has distinguished BTH as a green and sustainably competitive world-class
institution.
Page 5 of 89
Table of Contents Chapter One: Introduction......................................................................................... 10
1.1 Statement of Problem and Research Focus........................................ 10
1.1.1 Purpose of Study................................................................................11
1.2 Research questions.............................................................................. 11
1.3 Research Method................................................................................. 11
1.4 Data Analysis...................................................................................... 11
1.5 Relevance of Research and Limitations.............................................. 11
Chapter Two: Literature Review and Theory........................................................... 14
2.1 Preamble.............................................................................................. 15
2.2 Understanding Green Strategy............................................................ 15
2.3 Evolution of Green Management Strategy.......................................... 17
2.4 Voluntary Green Initiatives................................................................. 19
2.5 The Green Organization...................................................................... 29
2.6 Total Quality Management (TQM)..................................................... 20
2.7 Total Quality Environmental Management (TQEM)......................... 21
2.8 Total Quality Safety Management (TQSM)....................................... 21
2.9 Green Management and Leadership................................................... 28
2.10 Employee Involvement in greening initiatives................................... 30
2.11 Green Market Focus............................................................................ 31
2.12 Customer Focus.................................................................................. 32
Chapter Three: Research Design and Methodology................................................. 33
3.1 Preamble.................................................. ...........................................33
3.2 Research Design/Methodology........................................................... 33
3.3 Administration of Questionnaire......................................................... 33
3.4 Population of the Study....................................................................... 33
3.5 Determination of Sample Size............................................................ 34
3.6 Statistical Techniques......................................................................... 34
3.7 Sources of Data................................................................................... 34
3.7.1 Primary Data....................................................................................... 34
3.7.2 Secondary Data................................................................................... 35
3.8 Test of Research Instruments.............................................................. 35
Chapter Four: Data Presentation, Interpretation and Analysis................................36
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations.................................................. 72
5.1 Preamble.............................................................................................. 72
5.2 Summary of Findings.......................................................................... 72
5.3 Conclusion..........................................................................................72
5.4 Recommendations..............................................................................73
5.4.1 Implementing Green Strategy.............................................................73
References................................................................................................................75
Appendices...............................................................................................................77
Page 6 of 89
List of Figures Figure 2.1: An illustration of the three principles for enterprise-level green decision making..17
Figure 2.2: Strategy pyramid and operations influenced by a green strategy............................17
Figure 4.1: Industry perception level of environmental impact, effort to reduce the
impact, pursuit of greening, consumers demand for green products
and opportunities in greening…………………………….............…......................38
Figure 4.2: Taking measures to reduce or minimize environmental impact..............................39
Figure 4.3: Significance level of market opportunities presented to your
company by the green movement........................................................ ...................39
Figure 4.4: Potential impacts of the green movement in companies..........................................40
Figure 4.5: Risk Assessment of Green initiatives.......................................................................41
Figure 4.6: Green technology, products and services under development.................................42
Figure 4.6.1: Reasons for greening products and services............................................................42
Figure 4.6.2: Options for companies to derive green opportunities………………......................43
Figure 4.7: Strength of demand for green products and services by different customers..........44
Figure 4.8: Future expectations of demand for green products and services.............................45
Figure 4.9: Factors important for green decision making..........................................................46
Figure 4.10: Likely outcomes for going green……………………………………….................47
Figure 4.11: Impacts felt on various company operations as a result of going green……..........49
Figure 4.12: Expected future impacts of greening on various companies‘ operations.................50
Figure 4.13: Responses on whether to regulate industry and company effort to pursue
environmental stewardship and profit making as a bottom-line..............................51
Figure 4.14: Likely company actions as a result of environmental/regulatory issues..................52
Figure 4.15: Present and likely elements of business operations.................................................53
Figure 4.16: Present and future elements of compliance/control…………………….................55
Figure 4.17: Present and expected future green strategies…………………………...................57
Figure 4.18: Customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green, green concept in products
from design stage, and rejection of greening due to cost limitations………….......58
Figure 4.19: Current and future greening efforts in R & D, engineering and manufacturing…..60
Figure 4.20: Constituencies and interest groups are the most influential in driving
company‘s green initiatives…………………………………....…….....................61
Figure 4.21: Decision factors with regard to environmental consciousness when
purchasing new equipment…………………………………….....………..............62
Figure 4.22: Perception of environmental harm done by industry operations.............................62
Figure 4.23: The importance of putting measures to reduce company‘s environmental
emissions and negative impacts...............................................................................63
Figure 4.24: Benefits of going green to company‘s operation and opportunities
for organization in the future…………………………………………....................64
Figure 4.25: Factors that influences company's commitments to environmental initiatives……64
Figure 4.26: Determining the utilization level of green consumables in the organizations.........65
Figure 4.27: Percentage and frequency distribution of drivers of
organizational interest in green or environmental initiatives…………...................66
Figure 4.28: Anticipated time (in years) for increase in the company‘s use of green products...66
Figure 4.29: Distribution of company relationship with customers, business
clients, and community in terms of environmental performance….....…................67
Page 7 of 89
List of Figures (continued) Figure 4.30: Assessment of company‘s current greening status……………………..................66
Figure 4.31: The impact of top management involvement and commitment on the
implementation of green strategies in the companies..............................................66
Figure 4.32: The respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of green strategies has
impacted the company in the measured aspects.......................................................68
Figure 4.33: The impact of quality and environmental management certifications on the
market acceptability of company‘s product/services, its position, reputation/
public image, and competitiveness..........................................................................69
Figure 4.34: Company‘s performance in green initiatives…………………………...................69
Figure 4.35: Distribution of respondents by sector…………………………………..................70
Figure 4.36: Distribution of respondents by company‘s financial strength………….................70
Figure 4.37: Distribution of respondents by job category…………………………....................71
Figure 4.38: Main functional roles of respondents……………………………….. .....................72
Page 8 of 89
List of Tables Table 2.1: Summary of key best practices that support green strategy....................................16
Table 3.1: Distribution of population of respondents by industry............................................34
Table 4.1: Assessing industry perception level of environmental impact, effort to
reduce the impact, pursuit of greening, consumers‘ demand for green
products and opportunities in greening....................................................................36
Table 4.2: Percentage and Frequency Distribution of responses measures
to reduce environmental impacts.............................................................................37
Table 4.3: Significance level of market opportunities presented to companies by
the green movement.................................................................................................38
Table 4.4: Potential impacts of green movement in companies................................................39
Table 4.5: Risk Assessment of Green Initiatives......................................................................39
Table 4.6: Responses to whether company is developing green technology,
products and services...............................................................................................40
Table 4.6.1: Reasons for developing green products and services...............................................41
Table 4.6.2: Options for companies to derive green opportunities..............................................42
Table 4.7: Strength of demand for green products and services by various customers............42
Table 4.8: Future expectations of demand for green products and services.............................43
Table 4.9: Factors important for green decision making..........................................................44
Table 4.10: Likely outcomes for going green.............................................................................46
Table 4.11.1: Percentage distribution of responses to impact on various
operations as a result of going green........................................................................47
Table 4.11.2: Frequency distribution of responses to impact on various operations
as a result of going green.........................................................................................47
Table 4.12.1: Percentage distribution of expected future impacts of greening
on various company operations...............................................................................48
Table 4.12.2: Frequency distribution of expected future impacts of greening on various
company operations.................................................................................................49
Table 4.13: Percentage distribution of responses on whether to regulate industry and
company effort to pursue environmental stewardship and profit making as a
bottom-line...............................................................................................................50
Table 4.14: Likely company actions as a result of environmental/regulatory issues..................51
Table 4.15.1: Percentage distribution of responses to present and likely elements
of business operations..............................................................................................52
Table 4.15.2: Frequency distribution of responses to present and likely elements
of business operations..............................................................................................52
Table 4.16.1: Percentage distribution of present and future elements of compliance/control.......53
Table 4.16.2: Frequency distribution of present and future elements of compliance/control.......54
Table 4.17.1: Percentage distribution of present and expected future green strategies.................55
Table 4.17.1: Frequency distribution of present and expected future green strategies..................55
Table 4.18.1: Percentage distribution of customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green,
green concept in products from design stage, and rejection of greening due to
cost limitations.........................................................................................................56
Page 9 of 89
List of Tables (continued) Table 4.18.2: Frequency distribution of customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green,
green concept in products from design stage, and rejection of
greening due to cost limitations...............................................................................57
Table 4.19.1: Percentage distribution of current and future greening efforts in R & D,
engineering and manufacturing................................................................................57
Table 4.19.2: Frequency distribution of current and future greening efforts in R & D,
engineering and manufacturing................................................................................58
Table 4.20: Percentage and frequency distribution of constituencies and interest groups are
the most influential in driving your company‘s green initiatives............................59
Table 4.21: Decision factors with regard to environmental consciousness when
purchasing new equipment.......................................................................................60
Table 4.22: Percentage and frequency distribution of perception of environmental
harm done by industry operations............................................................................60
Table 4.23: The importance of putting measures to reduce company‘s environmental
emissions and negative impacts...............................................................................61
Table 4.24: Percentage and frequency distribution of benefits of going green to
company‘s operation and opportunities for organization in the future....................61
Table 4.25: Factors that influences company's commitments to environmental initiatives........62
Table 4.26: Determining the utilization level of green consumables in the organizations.........63
Table 4.27: Percentage and frequency distribution of drivers of organizational
Interest in green or environmental initiatives..........................................................63
Table 4.28: Anticipated time (in years) for increase in the company‘s use of green products...64
Table 4.29: Percentage and frequency distribution of company relationship with customers,
business clients, and community in terms of environmental performance..............64
Table 4.30: Percentage and frequency distribution of an assessment of company‘s
current greening status.............................................................................................65
Table 4.31: Percentage and frequency distribution of the impact of top management
involvement and commitment on the implementation of green strategies in the
companies.................................................................................................................66
Table 4.32.1: Percentage distribution of respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of
green strategies has impacted the company in the measured aspects......................67
Table 4.32.2: Frequency distribution of respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of
green strategies has impacted the company in the measured aspects......................67
Table 4.33 Percentage and frequency distribution of the impact of quality and
environmental management certifications on the market acceptability of
company‘s product/services, its position, reputation/public image, and
competitiveness........................................................................................................68
Table 4.34: Percentage and frequency distribution of company‘s performance in
green initiatives........................................................................................................68
Table 4.35: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by sector.............................69
Table 4.36: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by companies‘
financial strength......................................................................................................69
Table 4.37: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by job category...................70
Table 4.38: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by main functional roles....71
Page 10 of 89
Chapter One: Introduction 1.1 Statement of Problem and Research Focus
Growing concerns about quality, environment, safety and health have changed the ways
organizations conduct their businesses. Quality-driven policies are now top management priority
and boardroom agenda all because of the positive effects on the corporate image, finance, and
resource optimization. A better practice will be an integration of quality, environment, safety and
health elements in all corporate policies and processes to drive green business initiatives.
This work intends to contribute to the functional application of quality tools and techniques in
combination with environmental, safety and health management systems necessary for superior
products and service that satisfy the desired end uses and support the safety, health and
environmental well being of all stakeholders in terms of green compliance.
Environmental issues have attracted increased global concern of various stakeholders; and to
remain relevant and competitive in this ‗green era‘ businesses must develop strategies to tackle
the challenges. In the past and even to this day quality management system has been seen and
used by various firms as a tool for improving their operational efficiency and achieving
competitiveness. Also environmental management has been used to a greater or less extent to
achieve competitiveness but recent global environmental issues is giving impetus to current
attention in this area. It is envisaged that ‗green quality‘ will drive the global economy in the
near future. This work will investigate the business opportunities in terms of competitive
advantage and operational efficiency that organizations can achieve by integrating green
strategies into their business processes to stand at a favourable green light. In this study this
collective management system pack is termed ‗green‘ strategy in favour of environmental
success. Green strategy is a collective contribution or application of existing management
systems mainly quality, environmental, health and safety to develop policies and practices,
products and services that meet customers‘ needs in terms of satisfaction and value, safety and
eco-friendliness and sustainability. It is believed that an integrated green management system
(embedded with quality, safety and health dimensions) would have a tremendous impact on
achieving specific business objectives considering compatible relationship existing among them.
The bottom-line is achieving improved operational efficiency, corporate performance, and
market competitiveness (competitive advantage) using appropriate innovative quality,
environmental, health and safety (total green) measures. Achieving competitive advantage is a
culmination of both internal and external strategies aimed at being different and not only staying
in business but also ahead in market position especially under unstable conditions. This should
be part of the bottom-line strategy for organizations. Quality, safety, health and environmental
management systems provide organization with proactive measures to stay on the right side of
regulatory and customers‘ requirements and remain competitively ahead.
Page 11 of 89
1.1.1 Purpose of Study The very aim of this dissertation therefore, is to examine the use and industry perceptions of
green strategy as a new market-driven business focus to achieve competitive advantage,
operational effectiveness, and corporate performance of organizations. The study will draw
positive conclusions on the indispensable gains of integrating green focused strategies in the
overall business policies and strategies.
The purpose of this discourse is inspired by the growing concern on green initiatives necessary to
control and minimize ecological hazards (e.g. climate change, flood, green house gas (GHG),
pollution) resulting from human enterprise activities, economic development, globalization,
infrastructural development, etc.
1.2 Research questions 1. Do global concerns of environmental stakeholders influence the need for organizations to
adopt green strategies or initiatives?
2. What are the benefits of developing and adopting green strategy to an organization?
3. Does top management involvement and commitment bring about positive impact in
the implementation of green strategy?
4. How are green initiatives related to operational excellence, corporate performance
(measured by employees' beliefs/perceptions of company environmental performance) and
competitive advantage of organizations?
5. Do quality and environmental management certifications affect market acceptability of a
product, its position, reputation/public image, and competitiveness?
1.3 Research Method The study will use both qualitative and quantitative research methodology involving interview
and case study to assess the benefits (short- and long-run) of integrating quality, safety and
health of the environment in an organization‘s business policy from the green strategy
standpoint. In addition to the qualitative and quantitative analyses, the study will make use of
structured questions based on the concerns arising from review of various literatures. Moreover,
this dissertation will use materials from both primary (field survey and observations) and
secondary sources (journal articles, textbooks and working papers, etc.)
1.4 Data Analysis Collected data would be evaluated using statistical methods such as frequency distribution tables,
percentages, statistical population – sample size, and the X2 tool (Chi-Squares) for test of the
hypotheses. However, the choice of each analytical tool would be dependent on the suitability
and reliability to address the questions raised in this study.
1.5 Relevance of Research and Limitations
Today most businesses have realized that one of the metrics of performance is not just about the
amount of profit or the volume of production (quantity of products and service) or sales volume
achieved but that customers are more concerned about quality (and the Environment, Health and
Safety) – the reputation or ability of products and services to meet and satisfy the customers‘
Page 12 of 89
needs (not only personal but also environmental needs) at a price that represent value. It can be
argued that market share/performance and competitiveness can be enhanced by operationalizing
‗green quality. It is very important that businesses should begin to align their business policy
with the current global ‘green‘ thinking to abate environmental problems leading to climate
change and depletion of natural resources.
It is envisaged that this ‘green‘ ideology may likely affect the business world and organizations
that are ready to tap into it could be better positioned in the global market and gain competitive
advantage.
The current global environmental issues centering on climate change, green house and depletion
of natural of nonrenewable resources are raising fresh concerns to all stakeholders. It is very
likely that the business arena will be most affected and these ‗green‘ concerns may shape the
business conduct and success of contemporary firms. Therefore this discussion will give insights
to policy makers, scholars, and business managers on the benefits of thinking and acting ‗green‘
in policy formulation, implementation, business practices, and technological or product
innovation.
Quality in production or service provision does not really make sense in today‘s market unless
there is a corresponding ‗quality stamp‘ on the product or service package. An ‗environmental
(`green`) quality stamp‘ should be required of any product or service to show that it is
environmentally safe and conforms to national and international regulations. Due to
globalization all business, big and small, know that even products and services for local markets
should as a matter of strategy meet specified customers‘ expectations, and at the same time
conforming to some acceptable standards. Before the widespread use of ISO certification in
response to global business pressures, most industries and organizations developed their own in-
house procedures or adopted some industry-specific ways of doing things – approaches aimed at
meeting the orders from customers with little or no regard to cost disadvantages resulting from
poor quality and non-compliance to safety, environmental and health requirements.
The application of a generalized standards or benchmarks such as ISO suites has proven useful in
the making of a good number of products and service for markets anywhere in the world. When
used together with an existing system(s), the result is enhanced process methodology and
superior product and service reputation. A product made in the US can now compare and
compete favorably with another made in Nigeria, China or elsewhere in the world because of the
requirements of quality, environmental, safety and health management packages particularly the
ISO 9001:2000, ISO 14001: 2004, and OHSAS 18001.
Although the focus of this study is on the benefits of green strategy – with respect to quality,
safety, and health of environment - especially in the area of competitive advantage, operational
efficiency, profitability, corporate image, and performance; the data presented herein may not
represent a wide spectrum of green management systems as applicable in the organizations used
and as a result may not be representative for the industry in question nor other organizations.
Respondents in the survey may have provided information in bias or in accordance with their
personal mood and circumstances. Opinions survey data are subjective due to time constraints,
level of information and knowledge about area of research. For security reasons, respondents
Page 13 of 89
may have provided the unreal data. So the data for this study and their analysis are correct as an
academic exercise and must be applied with caution for real world situation.
Attempts would be made to identify some green options that organizations have used to improve
their fortunes and launched into limelight and emerging areas that have the capacity to make
them giants. Thinking green is a dominant option to stay competitive so as to continue to remain
the customers‘ haven by providing products and services with desirable safety, health, quality
and environmental characteristics to the customers.
Page 14 of 89
Chapter Two: Literature Review and Theory 2.1 Preamble
The importance of quality and compliance to environmental, safety and health standards to
business processes are far-reaching and have attracted a lot of researches both in academic and
non-academic circles. Research work on quality and environmental, safety and health
management – in relation to ‗green‘ strategies as strategic tools to boost organizational
performance, operational efficiency, reputation, and competitive advantage seem to be in its
embryonic stage but rapidly gaining interest. However it is obvious that growing environmental
concerns at all levels and from various stakeholders that have manifested in stringent
environment regulations, government pressures, international environmental certification
standards for quality and environment management ISO 9000 and ISO 14000, changing market
and customer demands and the need to avoid economic waste by pollution (Porter & Van Der
Linde, 1995) are strong drivers of positive environmental behaviours of firms to adapt to new
regulations (Rondinelli & Vastag, 1996). However the environmental practices currently used
by most organizations are not doing much to attain acceptable level of environmental quality,
safety and health (greenness) that is sustainable. The global warming (greenhouse gas), climate
change – a clear and present danger1, ozone layer depletion, etc. are assuming alarming
dimensions that awakens businesses and organizations (including governments) to change the
ways they handle environmental sensitive issues and refocus on greening strategy. If nothing is
done to eradicate or minimize the green worms (pollution, wastes, etc.), the threat of global
warming and climate change challenge will undermine or erode many of the gains enshrined in
the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) that world leaders pledged to achieve by 20151.
This work intends to contribute to the functional application of green quality tools and
techniques (environmental, safety and health management systems) necessary for superior
products and service that satisfy the desired end uses and support the safety, health and
environmental wellbeing of all stakeholders including our earth while ensuring profit
maximization for businesses. The short- and long-term benefits to organizational growth, public
image, and financial performance will be emphasized. Considering the relevance, richness and
diversity of green issues it will be worthwhile to explore deeply green strategies historically and
its link to business process and policy. For the purposes of this study the market-(customer-)
based perspectives, the theoretical development, the determinants, management and leadership
commitments and benefits of green strategy will be reviewed. Attempts have been made to
identify some green options that organizations have used to improve their fortunes and launched
into limelight and emerging areas that have the capacity to make them giants. Thinking, acting
and building green reputation is a dominant option to stay competitive so as to continue to
remain the customers‘ haven by providing products and services with desirable safety, health,
quality and environmental characteristics to the customers.
Over the years many conferences at national, regional and world level have been organized to
discuss issues affecting environmental health. The outcome of these conferences includes
standards and guidelines aimed at effectively managing environmental quality through the
1 Culled from the UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon‘s message to a special session of the UN Environment Programme (UNEP) Governing
Council / Global Ministerial Environment Forum in Bali, Indonesia.
Source: http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=33882&Cr=climate+change&Cr1= Updated: 24 February 2010
Page 15 of 89
reduction of emissions to the environment. The United Nations Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro
in 1992 and Climate Change Conferences held in 1997 in Kyoto and in 2009 in Copenhagen
attended by world leaders and other stakeholders are evidence of the importance of
environmental health. The ISO 14000 is a set of guidelines for environmental management
systems developed by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO). It goes without
saying that the escalating ecological problems at different parts of the world are giving support to
the search for a holistic environmental management system. The depletion of the ozone layer
(that is responsible for climate change) and the nonrenewable resources and the greenhouse
effect are serious ecological problems (Madu, 2004). For the purposes of this study, an
examination of the green strategies/concepts and contributors to the field will be carried out. To
achieve this objective, a good start point will be the origin of green movement, its perceptions
and practice, systems that support the initiative such as TQEM, TQM, EMS, ISO 9000 and ISO
14000, etc.
2.2 Understanding Green Strategy
Green strategy has meant many things to many people and organizations. Generally green
strategy is a new way to strengthen environmental commitment. A green strategy has been
identified as one that complements the existing organization‘s business, operations, and asset
strategies often well understood and articulated by the firm (Olson, 2008). Fundamentally a
green strategy helps an organization to make important policy decisions that favourably address
environmental concerns. (Olson, 2008) observed three principles that form the framework for
organization‘s (firm-level) strategic green decision (see Figure 2.1).
Though green strategy development may be new it is beginning to assume remarkable attention
of industry key players at all levels. As such it is not a standalone programme but one that could
enhance favourable interplay with other corporate strategies. According to (Olson, 2008) it can
be one key ingredient in broader corporate stewardship or social responsibility programme of an
organization.
A green strategy fosters a common culture of awareness and action
A green culture is one that may entails reinforcing desirable behaviour that people are keen to
adopt and the needed change can be achieved using the right tools and orientation. Organizations
with green culture create noticeable impression on the mind of visitors. Nonetheless the impact
of encouraging positive environmental behaviours can be very tremendous when it embedded in
an organization‘s core business strategy to support green considerations in decision making.
Even when the impact seem unnoticeable the sum of the individual effort of all employees can be
very significant in meeting targets.
Attitudes such as littering the environment with pieces of paper can be very disgusting to some
people. Similarly wasting water by leaving a tap to run without closing or due to unattended fault
can be treated as an offence in some companies. Recycling is an important green tool and can be
a source of revenue for some companies.
Table 2.1 show a summary of important current and best practices that cultivate a common
culture of environmental awareness and support a green strategy that are already emerging and
developing in many companies.
Page 16 of 89
Best practice Illustration
Lead by example Corporate sponsorship of environmental improvement initiatives in
the community, such as investment in reforestation.
Support and coordination leadership provided for volunteer work
such as ‗‗beach cleanup day‘‘
Provide training Formal training that connects the science of global warming with
actions that employees can take to make a difference.
Employee new hire training and refresher training that strengthens
conservation behavior, such as turning off running tap, switching off
lights and recycling paper.
Install appropriate
tools
Place appropriate waste and recycling receptacles where they are
most likely to be used.
Provide videoconferencing as an alternative to face-to-face meetings
that require travel.
Measure and report
performance
How many bottles were recycled from various facilities?
How much paper was recycled?
How many people volunteered?
What newspaper articles have been written or local city officials have
recognized the community contributions from employees?
Make it everyone’s
responsibility
Senior executives establish priorities, guiding principles and
governance
Managers apply guiding principles to make operational decisions
aligned with the green strategy
Practitioners complete projects with a greater degree of green benefits
Create a
communication and
change management
plan
Communicate successes early and often, build a knowledge portal and
share lessons learned
Have support available to answer questions and provide facts
Anticipate organizational needs
Table 2.1: Summary of key best practices that support green strategy
Source: Eric G. Olson ‗Creating an enterprise-level ‗‗green‘‘ strategy‘, Journal of Business
Strategy Vol. 29, 2, (2008), pp. 22-30,
.
Figure 2.1: An illustration of the three principles for enterprise-level green decision making2
2 Culled from Eric G. Olson ‗Creating an enterprise-level ‘‘green’’ strategy’, Journal of Business Strategy VOL. 29, 2, (2008), pp. 22-30.
A Green
Strategy That That
Fosters: Facilitates: have
Organizations should work to establish a
2.1.1 culture where green awareness and
2.1.2 proactive attitudes is part of employees
2.1.3 routine activity
2.1.4
Employees and stakeholders should be
2.1.5 given the appropriate tools and training
2.1.6 so that living in this culture is easy, fun
2.1.7 and rewarding
A Common
Culture of
Awarene ss and
Action
Deci sions and
Transformation
Ini tiati ves tha t imp rove
the Environment
The ability to make decisions based on the
effects they have on the environment should
be integrated with other criteria already in
place that facilitate decision making
Priorities set by a green strategy should be
integrated with the business, operations,
and asset strategies so that priorities are
aligned and conflicting interests are easily resolved
The business case for a green strategy
and the actions it supports should seek
to identify benefits to both top-line and
bottom-line costs
New perspectives on benefits realization
need to be adopted for qualitative and
quantified opportunities, and a broader
perspective on the value proposition may need to be taken
Attractive value
Proposi tions tha t
are Cost Ef fec tive
Page 17 of 89
Products and Services Channels and Partners Markets and Geographies
Process and Facilities
Skills and Core Competencies
Reports and Data Visibility
Systems and Platforms
Hardware and Equipment
2.1.8 Operating Strategy
2.1.9 Organizational Strategy
2.1.10 Information Strategy
2.1.11 Applications Strategy
2.1.12
2.1.13
A green strategy facilitates decisions and transformation initiatives that improve the
environment.
According to (Olson, 2008) setting a clear vision and strategy ultimately enables people to make
better decisions that align with the firm priorities to provide goods and services in the global
marketplace. A firm-level green strategy is no different. In fact, unlike most other areas of
strategy formulation in a firm, green strategy affects decisions that are made across the entire
firm, including business strategy, operating strategy, organization strategy, information strategy,
applications strategy, technology strategy, and supporting infrastructure. Figure 2.2 shows how
the different areas of strategy formulation (the strategy pyramid), and the tactical operations
areas they govern, are all influenced by a firm-level green strategy.
Figure 2.2: Strategy pyramid and operations influenced by a green strategy2
2.3 Evolution of Green Management Strategy
Management practices and theories have evolved from several thoughts beginning from the
classical through the behavourial school, through total quality management (TQM), through total
quality environmental management (TQEM) to green management. Contemporary management
practices and theories are culmination of several thoughts spanning several periods of time and
phases of economic development beginning from the period of industrial revolution in the 19th
century to the present day of global rapid change and competition. Different management and
organizational practices, concepts, and theories have emerged to fit the demands and challenges
of the time (Stahl, 1996). These theories/practices emerge to address the circumstances of the
time. The literatures on quantitative, classical, behavioural, and the management function
schools are well established. These pioneering efforts gave birth to the principles for effective
development and management of organizations aimed at promoting organizational performance
and goal achievement. Detailed discussion on the management schools is outside the scope of
this study.
To quote Wikipedia, (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Politics),
―Unease about adverse consequences of human actions on nature predates the
modern concept of ―environmentalism". Social commentators as far apart as
ancient Rome and China complained of air, water and noise pollution (Keys,
2003)3.
3 Culled from http://www.en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Politics . Last modified on 28 September 2010 at 11:11.
Business
Strategy
2.1.14 Supporting Infrastructure
Page 18 of 89
Green ideology is closely associated with green politics that originated in
Germany in the 1970s. The supporters of this ideology share many ideas with the
ecology, conservation, environmental, feminist… movements.
Greens (supporters or adherents of green ideology) today reject the accusation of
Luddism, countering that their policies of sustainable growth encourage 'clean'
technological innovation like renewable energy and anti-pollution technology
(Kassman, 1997)4. Greens have often taken the lead in raising concerns about
public health issues such as obesity.
Green platforms generally favor tariffs on fossil fuels, restricting genetically
modified organisms, and protections for eco-regions or communities. In keeping
with their commitment to the preservation of diversity, greens are often
committed to the maintenance and protection of indigenous communities,
languages, and traditions.
Some claim it also includes feminism, pacifism and the animal rights movements.
Some Greens support policy measures to empower women, especially mothers; to
oppose war and de-escalate conflicts and stop proliferating technologies useful in
conflict or likely to lead to conflict, and Great Ape personhood.
Green politics on the whole is opposed to nuclear power and the buildup of
persistent organic pollutants, supporting adherence to the precautionary principle,
by which technologies are rejected unless they can be proven to not cause
significant harm to the health of living things or the biosphere. Green politics also
encourages political action on the individual level, such as ethical consumerism,
or buying things that are made according to environmentally ethical standards.
Therefore, adherents to green politics (movement) advocate economic policies
designed to safeguard the environment. Greens want governments to stop
subsidizing companies that waste resources or pollute the natural world, subsidies
that Greens refer to as "dirty subsidies".
The philosophical roots of environmentalism can be traced back to enlightenment
thinkers such as Rousseau in France and, later, the author and naturalist Thoreau
in America. Organized environmentalism began in late 19th Century Europe and
the United States as a reaction to the Industrial Revolution with its emphasis on
unbridled economic expansion‖.
The current global economy and politics seem to be tilted to green ideology considering the
heightened environmental problems such as global warming and climate change. The UN has
convened meetings of world leaders to proffer solution. At regional and national levels effort are
ongoing to tackle the issues of environment and sustainability. The outcomes of these efforts are
policies and legislations that will change the business and organizational conducts. Time will tell
whether all is for better or for worse!
4 See footnote (3) above.
Page 19 of 89
2.4 Voluntary Green Initiatives The success of implementation of environmental policies to a large extent is dependent on the
enforcement of the regulation. Firms and industry associations have reduced rising compliance
costs by taking up voluntary green initiatives without compromising environmental standards
(Raine and Prakash, 2005; Bansal and Clelland, 2004). The resource-based view (RBV) has been
recommended as a platform for studying green issues (Dowel et al., 2000; Hart, 1995). The RBV
focuses on the relevance of internal resources and capabilities which determine an organization‘s
competitive advantage. Similarly the institutional theory has the endorsement of researchers as
the most common foundation for investigating green issues (King and Lenox, 2000; Lounsbury,
2001). Institutional theory is external force biased suggesting that organizational behaviours are
influenced by external forces which are coercive, normative or mimetic in nature. In recent time,
the growing pressure for better and responsive environment stewardship come from many
quarters – the stakeholders, market and non-market forces, government and consumer advocates.
Before now not many organizations understood the benefits that may accrue from adopting green
strategies. It is no longer regulatory obligation alone that determines a firm‘s adoption of green
strategies but also economic interests, social responsibility, legitimacy or image making.
Although the institutional theory is well documented, it has been faulted (Scott, 1987) for its
anticipated isomorphic bearings on firms (DiMaggio and Powell, 1983). Institutional theorists
refute the unfavourable claims portraying firms as mere dumps or test ground for imposing
external forces (Hoffmann and Ventresca, 2002). They argue in favour of institutional pressures
as drivers of enterprise- and industry-level heterogeneity in strategies and outcomes but rule out
isomorphic threats. Longstanding relationship between firms and institutions can create diverse
strategic opportunities for the firms (Hoffman, 1999). Green strategy has bolstering propositions
built on the institutional theory to advance a green institutional theory that place coercive,
mimetic and normative forces as core drivers of the response of firms to green initiatives
(Jennings and Zandbergen, 1995). Institutional forces are tripartite with pressure from the
professional associations as normative; government pressure (policies, regulations, treaties and
protocols, etc.) as coercive; and competitive market domination and influence as mimetic.
The green resource based view (RBV) posits that the rareness, inimitability, value, and non-
substitutability of firm‘s green resources and capabilities confer it with competitive advantage. In
support of this proposition several independent researches recommend the integration of
environmental issues in strategic decision to achieve financial performance and competitive
advantage (Hart, 1995; Judge and Douglas, 1998). Superior green resources and capabilities can
enhance flexibility and adaptive manoeuvres over compliance that cannot be paralleled by
competitors.
2.5 The Green Organization The optimal use of natural resources to create green products and services to customers without
jeopardizing the environment in return for economic gain can be termed green management. For
an organization to go green it should be ready to optimally use its scarce resources for managing
the environmental sustainability of enterprise operations and the supply chain, as well as that of
its products, services, and resources, throughout their life cycles. It shares similar objectives with
environmental conscious manufacturing or eco-factory which aims to achieve product and
Page 20 of 89
environmental quality. The approach is to deepen effective use of resources, waste and pollution
reduction, and achieving superior product quality (with desirable characteristics in terms of
consumer and environmental safety and health). It encompasses the entire business processes
from production, supply chain, and waste generation, control and disposal methods. Indeed a
green organization should be interested in seeking ways to make money from waste; for instance
initiating waste-to-cash programme. Some example of companies that have achieved reasonable
green successes include 3M Company‘s Pollution Prevention Pays (PPP), Dow Chemical‘s
Waste Reduction Always Pays (WRAP) programme, and Chevron‘s Save Money and Reduce
Toxics (SMART) program, Westinghouse and ACT (Achievements in Clean Technology) and
Texaco with its WOW (Wipe Out Waste) program. In each case, the goals of the programmes are
the same – to reduce waste and pollution while recovering lost profits (Shrivastava and Hart,
1994; Curkovic et al., 2008).
2.6 Total Quality Management (TQM)
Before the heightened demand for environmental stewardship, most businesses have used the
quality management system (ISO 9000) to partly address the quality issue of the environment.
But that was not enough, a dedicated and elaborate system is imperative. The ISO 14000 series
for environmental management is now widely used by organizations to enhance their
environmental performance. Quality does not only refer to goods and services but also include
quality of time, place, equipment and tools, processes and people, the environment and safety,
information and measurement (Schonberger, 1990). Greening is a systematic way to reinforce
the quality, safety and health of the natural environment and its occupants by incorporating
desirable characteristics in product/service design, production and supply chain, and marketing.
Total Quality Management is a strategic approach to management that takes advantage of all
corporate resources to continually improve performance and processes so that they may
ultimately be error free. The result is a product or service that greatly exceeds customer
expectations. There are several contributors to the development of TQM but the most important
contribution came from Edward Deming who proposed the fourteen (14) points of TQM. He
believes that while quality is everyone‘s responsibility, top management must take the lead. It is
a universal rule wherever quality is desirable. Deming recognizes the importance of training and
argues that one‘s best is not good enough until one knows he/she is doing and there is no
substitute for knowledge. The 14 points of TQM form the foundation of TQM and guide the
entire process. The 14 points rule can be adapted to environmental as well as safety management.
Total Quality Management has been used by a number of firms for producing quality products or
providing quality services (Evans and Lindsay, 1998). TQM is a management approach driven
by participatory management and commitment to attain long-term profit and competitiveness
through satisfaction of the customers (Magrab, 1997).
Integrating desirable characteristics that appeals to customers‘ needs and tastes in design and
manufacturing practices will foster a win-win situation for firms and stakeholders (Besterfield et
al., 1995).
Page 21 of 89
2.7 Total Quality Environmental Management (TQEM) Literature on environmental management indicates that environmental quality is attracting wider
and sustained attention of investors, customers, government, civil right organizations and NGOs,
and host community. Previously the TQEM programme was identified as an essential tool to
minimize waste generation in a cost-effective manner (Curkovic, Scroufe, & Landers, 2005).
TQEM was an approach that replaced the traditional ‗end-of-pipe‘ strategies for pollution
prevention (Bhat, 1998). Indeed TQEM concept is based on several theories mainly that of
Deming, Juran, and Crosby combined with TQM with the goals of environmental management.
It evolved from total quality and addresses all aspects of the environment (Epstein, 1996; Hanna
et al, 2000; Curkovic et al, 2000). The green movement is the next big picture that has received a
larger attention of global dimension. One can argue that green strategy is TQEM in its advanced
form well-suited to address current green demands. Some scholars have defined TQEM as an
economically driven, system-wide and integrated approach to minimize and eliminate waste
streams associated with the design, manufacture, use and/or disposal of products and materials
(Bhat, 1998; Curkovic & Landers, 2000; and Melnyk et al, 2001). In addition to several other
environmental concerns such as aesthetics, green strategy has a broader perspective in that it
incorporates the ideals of TQEM and goes further to deal with safety, health and security aspects
of products and services including resources and processes as it affects the consumer and the
natural environment. Green strategy not only recognizes pollution as waste and threat to the
environment but also seeks options for optimal use of resources to create green products and
services. In addition it seeks opportunity to create wealth from waste, since waste has been
defined as any activity that uses resources or creates cost without generating any offsetting
stream of value (Porter and Van der Linde, 1995a, 1995b). In this paper waste is classified as a
negative uneconomic outcome resulting from the consumption of valuable economic inputs.
Green strategy can create significant benefits including waste disposal or pollution reduction
costs; environmental health and safety (EHS) issues and regulatory compliance; avoidance of
environmental penalties; enhance financial returns; open up new business opportunities;
engagement of workers‘ morale and participation; and protection, security and improved
environmental well-being (Hanna et al., 2000). One cannot underestimate the likely boost to
corporate image, competitive advantage, and community relationship that may come as
dividends of greening the business processes. Just as its precursor, TQEM, going green (green
management) may face acceptance problems compared to other models such as JIT, TQM, TBC
(Angell and Klassen, 1999; Epstein, 1996).
2.8 Total Quality Safety Management (TQSM) A safety and health program is considered to be a comprehensive, employer-provided, site-
specific system to protect worker safety and health (OSHA). Safety should be seen as an
important aspect of both product and process quality in a workplace. Quality definition is an
exclusive reserve of the customer. Businesses thrive on providing values and solutions in form of
products/services to the customers. In doing this companies satisfy or exceed the quality
specifications of the customer. A safe product is one that does not cause injury or illness to
consumer or harm (pollution) to the environment. Customers‘ perception of quality is becoming
more complex and demanding to meet and, safety consideration is an integral part of it. Safety
therefore should be incorporated into products/services right from the design stage. Failure to do
so may lead to creating unsafe and unhealthful characteristics into a product. Process quality is
Page 22 of 89
interconnected with safety in that the former is considered an error-free work while the latter
(safety) as one element of process can be thought of as producing an injury-free work or
pollution-free work. Incidents leading to injury or accidental discharge of hazardous waste to the
environment can cause tremendous loss and catastrophic consequences to a company (see
Appendix D: examples of incidents and costs). Some research has focused on the causes of
catastrophes, particularly those caused by humans (Petersen, 2003). The most fundamental
human factor is obviously management—the capabilities, organization and degree of
involvement in proactive safety and reliability practices.
Total Quality Safety Management concepts apply to all elements of the safety and health
management system. It is modeled on the Total Quality Management (TQM) particularly on the
14 point quality rules proposed by Deming. The 14 Points of Total Quality Safety Management
are as follows5:
Point 1. Create a constant purpose to improve the product and service, with the aim to be
competitive, stay in business, and provide jobs.
Deming spoke about the "problems of today and the problems of tomorrow," and that
management in America today tends to focus only on today's problems when it should be placing
increased, if not most emphasis on tomorrow's threats and opportunities to improve competitive
position. Management should be focused constantly on improving the safety of materials,
equipment, workplace environment, and work practices today so that it can remain successful
tomorrow. The objective of continually working toward a safe and healthful workplace today, so
that fewer injuries and illnesses occur in the future fits well with Deming's constancy of purpose.
If management successfully communicates the clear, consistent message over the years that
workplace safety is a core value (as stated in the mission statement), that there are "no excuses"
for accidents, the company can be successful in developing a world-class safety culture. If a
company considers safety only a priority that may be changed when convenient, constancy of
purpose is not communicated.
Point 2. Adopt a new philosophy. We are in a new economic age. Western management
must awaken to the challenge, must learn their responsibilities, and take on leadership for
a change.
The emphasis here is that management must step outside itself to reflect, to take a new look at
what its purpose is, long term. Safety can never be understood or properly appreciated if only the
short term view is taken by management. Quick fix programmes to "impose" change will not
work. Only understanding of the long term benefits will give management the vision to properly
and consistently send and act on the message of workplace safety.
The old philosophy accepts as fact that a certain level of injury and illness will result from a
given process, and that the associated costs should represent one of many costs of doing
business.
5 Excerpts from www.oshatrain.org as at July 2009.
Page 23 of 89
The new safety philosophy strives to:
• Prevent injuries and illnesses by continually analyzing and improving upstream factors
such as work practices, equipment design, materials, and the workplace physical and
cultural environment through education, training and recognition.
• Improve product safety for the benefit of the customer.
Point 3. Cease dependence on mass inspection to achieve quality. Eliminate the need for
inspection on a mass basis by building quality into the product in the first place.
Deming was referring to the practice of inspecting every piece of product at the end of an
assembly line to separate out the defects. Instead, he encouraged improving the quality of the
process to decrease the defects, thus eliminating the need for mass inspection. When we apply
this to safety, Deming might consider relying on the results (defects) as measuring our success
solely by counting the number of accidents (also defects) that occur. No consideration is given to
measuring employee and management-level safety activities.
In safety, evaluating only results statistics is like driving a car down the road and trying to stay in
your lane by looking through a rear-view mirror. All you can do to react, after the fact. To only
analyze accident rates, can only cause reaction to the number. Accident rates say nothing about
why the accidents are happening. The old safety philosophy discussed above measures primarily
injury and illness rates (defects) which represent the end results of the safety component of the
process. Incident rates, accident rates, MOD rates, etc. all measure the end point, and since these
measures are inherently not predictive, these statistics provide little useful information about the
surface and root causes (upstream) for injuries and illnesses.
The new philosophy emphasizes measurement along the entire production process, primarily:
• Measurement of management/supervisor safety activities;
• Employee safety education and training;
• Individual worker behaviors; and
• Materials and equipment design prior to purchase.
Point 4. End the practice of awarding business on the basis of price tag. Instead, minimize
total cost. Move toward a single supplier for any one item, on a long-term relationship of
loyalty and trust.
Safe equipment, materials, chemicals may cost a little more but will save in the long-term
through fewer injuries, illnesses, failures, and minimal pollution. Management should write
safety specifications that meet their requirements into contracts. Even today, manufacturers of
equipment and machinery sell equipment that does not meet NEC, NIOSH, ANSI, or other safety
standards for product safety. Employers purchasing such equipment run increased risk of injury
and illness to their employers, customers, and discharge to environment.
With respect to personal protective equipment (PPE), "cheap" is not better. Ensuring high quality
personal protective equipment is smart business when we realize that it's a profit-center activity.
If you spend $6,000 in various types of PPE in a given year and any one piece prevents a serious
injury, your company has just paid for all the PPE for that year and probably for many years into
the future. The money spent on PPE should be thought of as an investment that may result in
substantial returns (reduced direct and indirect accident costs) to the company. Unfortunately,
many consider only the initial cost of PPE. They don't see the big picture benefits.
Relying on a single supplier for safety equipment, such as personal protective equipment, may
have many benefits. Supplier representatives, calling on an employer over a period of years, will
Page 24 of 89
become familiar with the particular safety equipment needs of the employer. The employer who
establishes a long-term close relationship with the supplier is more likely to receive the attention
and higher quality equipment when requested. Developing a close, cooperative partnership
between the employer and the supplier of safety equipment is extremely important for the
success of both parties, and is possible by applying the single supplier principle.
Point 5. Improve constantly and forever the system of production and service, to improve
quality and productivity, and thus constantly decrease costs.
A system refers to a number of processes or procedures that have been standardized. Everyone
does something the same way. It's important to have an effective safety and health management
system. Identify safety process or procedure might be standardized to improve your company's
safety and health management system. Traditionally safety functions have been under the
direction of the human resource department, which places safety and health at odds with the
organization's primary goals: to produce and sell goods/services. Too often, managers in other
departments feel the safety manager (alone) should contain costs, solve safety problems via
training or committees, and reduce injury costs. Yet, in most cases, the safety manager must
accomplish such tasks while other managers increase production goals."
Management must integrate safety as an element of quality into operations so completely that it
disappears as a separate function. It must be viewed by each employee, supervisor and manager
as his or her personal responsibility; one that is important in not only improving the production
process and increasing profitability but in saving lives and the business from catastrophe.
Point 6. Institute training on the job.
Some companies today consider training a cost, not a benefit. An organization should invest in
its workers to ensure they are properly educated and trained in supervisory, management, and
leadership principles as they move up the corporate ladder. Training of new hires is also very
fundamental. Currently many companies rely on the safety director or the human resources
department to train safety. The new employee receives a safety overview when hired, and a
safety "expert," conducts more specific training related to the employee's job exercise. The
supervisor, in many instances, does not think he or she is getting paid to train safety. But, who is
better suited to do the training than the person responsible for the safety and health of his or her
employees? If the supervisor cannot train safety, how can he or she have the knowledge to
effectively oversee safe work practices? How can the supervisor provide effective safety
feedback? How can the supervisor, when needed, properly enforce safety rules?
The supervisor cannot perform any of these responsibilities unless he or she thoroughly
understands safety concepts and principles, the hazards in the workplace, and is competent to
train those subjects specifically related to workplace he or she controls. The human resources
department or the safety director can't provide that quality of training for a couple of reasons:
They don't work in the area, and they're "not the boss."
Point 7. Adopt and institute leadership. The aim of supervision should be to help people
and machines do a better job. Supervision of management is in need of overhaul, as well as
supervision of production workers.
"You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Mahatma Gandhi
Page 25 of 89
The key to adopting and instituting leadership, of course, lies at the top. Management needs to
lead by example, action, and word. The leader "cares" about those he or she leads. After all, the
leader's success is tied to the success of his or her workers. The "servant leadership" model fits
well into the ideas expressed by Deming and others.
There is no better way to demonstrate these principles of leadership than in making sure
employees use safe work procedures in a workplace that is, itself, safe from hazards. Ensuring
safety is one of the most visible undertakings that management can take to show employees that
they are not merely hired hands who can be replaced, but are valued human resources, an
inseparable part of the family.
Point 8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.
Driving out fear is the most important requirement when implementing a Total Quality Safety
Management process. Management controls the workplace. It influences the standards of
behavior and performance of its employees by creating cultural norms in the workplace that
dictate what are, and are not acceptable behaviours. Management may rely solely on safety rules
and progressive discipline (negative reinforcement) in their attempt to control the safety behavior
and performance of its employees. However, a strategy such as this, that may be successful in
forcing compliance, is never successful in producing excellence in product or process. Strategies
using fear and control are rarely, if ever successful. What develops from such a strategy is a
controlling, compliance driven climate of mistrust and disgust; only a shell of an effective safety
and health management system.
In the TQM system, managers and supervisors drive out fear through a real commitment to fact-
finding to improve the system, not fault-finding to punish someone. They emphasize uncovering
the weaknesses in the system that have allowed unsafe work practices and hazardous conditions
to exist. They educate and train everyone so that those weaknesses are strengthened, thus helping
to continually improve the production process. They recognize employees for appropriate safety
behaviors; compliance with safety rules, reporting injuries immediately, and reporting hazards in
the workplace. Trust increases. Morale and motivation improve because employees are not afraid
to report safety concerns to management. Safety is never a complaint in a TQM organization.
Point 9. Break down barriers between departments. People in research, design, sales, and
production must work as a team, to foresee problems of production and in use that may be
encountered with the product or service.
We should only compete with our competitors, not ourselves. Internal cooperation and external
competition applies to safety as well. Cooperation among all internal functions is another key to
effective safety.
Competitive safety incentive programs: Reactive safety incentive programs that challenge
departments to compete against each other for rewards set up a system that may promote illegal
behaviours by creating situations, where peer pressure causes withholding of injury reports.
Consequently, the "walking wounded syndrome" develops that eventually results in increased
injury costs and workers compensation premiums. The performance of one employee impacts the
success of others in the department. Employees will do virtually anything, in some cases, to
ensure the department gets their pizza parties, saving bonds, or safety mugs. The fix:
Reward/recognize employees individually for appropriate behaviors: complying with safety
rules, reporting injuries and reporting workplace hazards. Reward activities that enhance
cooperation.
Page 26 of 89
Bringing management and labor together: Cooperation at all levels of the company to identify
and correct hazards is very important. Of course, the process designed to promote this kind of
cooperation is called the safety committee (or safety improvement team). A world-class safety
system will take advantage of the cross-functional makeup of safety committees to bring
management and employees together in a non-adversarial forum to evaluate programs and make
recommendations for improvement in workplace safety.
Point 10. Eliminate slogans, exhortations, and targets for the work force asking for zero
defects and new levels of productivity. Such exhortations only create adversarial
relationships, as the bulk of the causes of low quality and low productivity belong to the
system and thus lie beyond the power of the work force.
Zero defects may not be considered an appropriate goal. But when applied to safety, it may really
make sense. It should be noted that Deming is talking about product defects here. The related
safety goal might be "zero accidents." Although this goal may be unachievable, it's the only
morally appropriate goal to have because we are dealing with injuries and fatalities. If we set a
goal of anything less than zero accidents, what's going to happen? If we reach the goal, we pat
ourselves on our collective back, sit back with our feet up on the desk, and believe we "have
arrived." When this occurs, you can bet your accident rate will start rising once again.
Contentment is a dangerous condition in safety. If we set zero accidents as our goal, we may
never reach it, but that it keeps the safety drive continually going. We should never be content
anyway. We should always be desirous achieving the target, never satisfied to make sure we
continually improve the system.
If we set a goal to reduce accidents by 50%, we will design a less effective system to get us to
the goal, but no farther. If we set a zero-accident goal, we will design the more effective system
to reach that goal.
On another line of thought: In safety, the "happy poster syndrome" is a common occurrence.
Managers think that by placing a safety poster every thirty feet on a wall, they have a successful
safety awareness program. Employees, for the most part, ignore the posters, and may not believe
the message that management is trying to convey. The Fix: Get rid of the posters and
meaningless slogans. Replace them with action, example, and word. Each supervisor and
manager becomes a walking safety slogan.
Point 11. Eliminate numerical quotas for the workforce, and eliminate management by
objectives. Eliminate numerical goals for people in management. Substitute leadership.
In the safety field, many reward systems and performance appraisals are based on numerical
goals and measures, such as incident rates, that are untested for random variability...this could
mean receiving an undeserved bad performance rating...On the other hand, ignorance of the
concept of random variability also means that work groups often get good safety ratings when
they do not deserve them.
The problem with measuring the success of a company's safety effort using incident rates is that
once the rate has been reduced to what management feels is an acceptable level, complacency
sets in, the effort to reduce incident rates relaxes, and incident rates begin the inevitable rise to
previous unacceptable levels. Management reacts to the increase in incident rate with a renewed
safety emphasis. This reactive management approach to loss control, based on end results
(defects), creates an endless cycle of rising and falling incident rates.
Page 27 of 89
Deming would look upon such a situation with dissatisfaction (and wonder). He would probably
encourage management to do away with any numerical quotas or goals based solely on
unpredictable measures such as incident frequency rates. He would stress the need to measure
upstream activities such as the degree of safety education and training, number of safety
meetings, individual safe work behaviors, and the safety of materials, chemicals, and equipment
purchased by the company.
In emphasizing TQM principles, the company may never realize sustained zero accident rates,
but the critically important ingredient in a successful process, that of continually journeying
closer to that end state would be realized. Focus on the journey, not the result.
Relying solely on quotas in the "production" system results in management looking the other
way, when unsafe work practices, and hazardous conditions exist. An it-is-part-of-the-job
attitude by management, under pressure to produce the numbers, results in higher rates of injury
and illness and equipment failure that may lead to environmental discharge. Very little thought is
given to the human tragedy involved with serious injuries or fatalities. Even less thought to the
indirect and 'unknown and unknowable' losses to the company. Management must understand the
danger of pressure of ever-increasing quotas placed on supervisors and employees. Short cuts in
work practices are inevitable, and along with them, injuries and illnesses.
Remember, managers and employees should be held accountable only for what they can control.
It's difficult to control statistical results. However, as remarked earlier, they can control
activities.
Point 12. Remove barriers that rob people of pride of workmanship.
According to Deming, the responsibility of supervisors must be changed from sheer numbers to
quality. Remove barriers that rob people in management and in engineering of their right to pride
of workmanship. Abolish the annual merit rating and adopt continual feedback processes.
Deming offers some interesting ideas here, but they are crucial to success in safety as well as
production.
Supervisors must ensure their workers receive equipment and materials that are as safe as
possible. Employees should work at stations that have been ergonomically designed for them to
decrease the possibility of strains and sprains, and repetitive motions disease which represent the
greatest category of workplace injury and illness in the workforce today. Workers require and
deserve the highest quality personal protective equipment to protect them from workplace
hazards. The highest quality safety equipment, materials and environment all contribute to pride
of workmanship.
Point 13. Institute a vigorous program of education and self-improvement for everyone.
Continual learning is an important concept. It's important that employees be educated in personal
and professional skills. Safety certainly applies here as well. Return on the investment made in
education is well worth the money.
Weekly or monthly safety education and training sessions, when conducted properly by
supervisors, can go far in improving the performance of employees, and would send a strong
message to all that safety is a core value in the company. Unfortunately, most companies do not
see the wisdom in adopting the principle that to be successful today, each manager and employee
in the company must be continually learning. Currently, most employees receive very little
safety training, internal or external, on safety related topics.
Page 28 of 89
Point 14. Take action to accomplish the transformation.
Put everybody in the company to work to accomplish the transformation. The transformation is
everybody's job. Put everybody to work to accomplish the transformation in safety and health.
Someone must have the vision: If not top management. The effort need the blessing of the CEO
(with action), the transformation may never be successful. The safety committee may serve as
the catalyst to initially begin the planning for the transformation. Expanding the size of the
committee, then breaking it into "safety teams" specializing in various process functions in the
company might be a way to go. However, educating up is crucial if top management balks at the
need for the transformation. The safety committee must provide the education to influence the
perceptions that ultimately shape the transformation.
2.9 Green Management and Leadership To achieve a strong market orientation a business needs to adopt a market-based management
philosophy. According to (Rogers, 2005), it entails restructuring an organization around markets
rather than products or firms and creating an employee culture that is responsive to customers
and changing market conditions. The responsibility of management is to conduct the enterprise
towards its objectives by making optimum use of available resources. It is the executive
authority; it draws up plan of action, selects personnel, sets goals and determines performance,
ensures and controls the execution of all activities (Fayol, 1949).
The objectives and policies (set by the executives) of a firm has been recognized as definitive
instruments for a firm‘s corporate character, philosophy, and role in the society (Newmann,
1993). Drucker6 established the conceptual framework for the business/policy strategy.
According to Drucker the important decision, the decisions that really count are strategic, which
involve either finding out what the situation is, or changing it; either finding out what resources
are or what should be… He stated that a manager is responsible for this kind of decision and the
role increase with hierarchy. The business objectives and the ways to achieve them are among all
these decisions. He added that the important and difficult job is never to find out the right answer
but to ask the right question. Corporate strategy involves formulating objectives and strategy
based on analysis of opportunities in the environment (Ansoff, 1993). Green corporate strategy
not only seeks to identify opportunities but also seeks to solve challenges and problems arising
from the environment. Assumptions on the likelihood of gains of greening is unacceptable,
everything must be given due consideration to establish the true determinants. In this context
frameworks are more preferable rather than models. Porter posits that profitability of the firm is a
function of five competitive forces: threat of entry of new competitors, the bargaining power of
suppliers, the threat of product substitutes, the bargaining power of the buyers, and the rivalry
among competitors. The external factors in the industry structure shape how firms could seek to
create and sustain competitive advantage (Wren, 2005). The SWOT analysis can help managers
understand its internal strengths and weaknesses and external opportunities and threats
(Ghemawat, 2002). From the RBV, green based capabilities are rare and business-specific, this
means that building a strong green reputation is affected by organizational culture, business
climate, etc. and fosters rareness on the firm and its line of business(es). Homogeneity or
diffusion is not a problem with green strategy as it confers diverse choices and opportunities to
organizations to compete differently. In other word greening is a new way to manage creative
6 Drucker, Principles of Management, pp 352-353), quoted in Wren, D. A. ‗The History of Management Thought‘,
(Willey) 2005.
Page 29 of 89
competition in which innovation and desire to provide timeless values and sustainable solutions
without endangering life and the environment drive business conducts.
Green-oriented organizations can create valuable, rare, inimitable positions that competitors may
find difficult to replicate (Wernerfelt, 1984). Creating key competencies in green efforts can be a
source of gaining competitive advantage when the resources committed to the initiative are rare,
valuable, not easily imitated, and non-substitutable (Barney, 1991).
Knowledge-based view (KBV) posits that new knowledge and information do not only benefit
the firm‘s existing products but also provide a foundation which will give advantage in some
entirely new era. In this context green knowledge and technologies are relatively new but it
would be better that organization should extend its capabilities through learning (Kogut and
Zanders, 1992). The dynamic capabilities theory (DCT) disputes the RBV over sustainability of
rare and valuable capabilities in the long term. It suggests that a firm should develop dynamic
capabilities that will enable it to transform itself as competitive conditions change. Teece et al.
(1997) highlighted the key positions of dynamic capabilities as the firm‘s ability to integrate,
build, and recognize internal and external competencies to address rapidly changing
environments. They added that dynamic capabilities reflect an organization‘s ability to achieve
new and innovative forms of competitive advantage, given path dependencies and market
position (Teece et al., 1997). The dynamic capabilities propose that great responsibility for
change lies directly on the firm and its human capital. Management can be gauged by the level of
difference it can make and the ability of its executives to implement incentives, policies, and
actions necessary to achieve change through learning (Langlois and Foss, 1999). Strategic
leadership is required to deliver on critical strategic issues such as green initiatives and
opportunities therein. Strategy is a word derived from Greek verb stratego, meaning to plan the
destruction of one‘s enemies through effective use of resources (Braker, 1980). The executive
strategist can be compared to a war general that plans and leads the exploit to defeat an enemy
troop. The business strategic decisions, choices or managerial discretion mirror the ability of its
top managers to establish a firm‘s character (Hambrick and Mason, 1984). From the foregoing
and keeping the RBV, DCT, and KBV in perspective, green strategy can be described as an
integrated, robust, central and environment-oriented system through which organization can
renew and innovate its objectives, processes, resources, and products/services in line with
environmental realities and challenges of our world using firm‘s established resource position,
adaptive and transformational capabilities, and continuous learning to create rare, valuable,
inimitable and non-substitutable products and services. Indeed green strategy is an attempt to
replicate the natural processes that created the environment we live in within the limits of
resources at our disposal. It is an effort to mimic nature‘s creative and re-creative processes in
our industry in aspects of safety, harmony, simplicity, balance, life-supporting, conservative,
non-self destructive and sustainable characteristics.
The wave of change in organizations in the face of growing legislation and the pressure to save
the natural environment (biosphere) may be unstoppable unless a `change master and leader`
redirects the raging green wave to the benefit of the organization. Evidence shows that
management has substantial roles to play in the implementation of environmental strategies. This
requires that management should be aware of the strong influence of green customer orientation
to be able to achieve competitive advantage using green strengths. Environmental strategies have
Page 30 of 89
been identified as a source of competitive advantage (Azzone et al., (1997). Environmental
initiatives need transformational leaders, champions that can adapt environmental issues to the
requirements and approaches of green strategic management (Fernández et al., 2006; Gladwin,
1993).
Effective management can lead to high environmental performance but not a guarantee because
companies may copy (benchmark) practices of high performing companies without putting in
place the right administrative structure and management commitment to enable implementation
(Wood, 1991). Apart from the internal risks associated with pollution activities, negative
environmental practices cause several other external menaces depending on location, ecological
characteristics of the physical environment, demography, infrastructure, awareness level and
attitudes towards environmental issues (Vastag et al., 1996). Neglect and other negative attitudes
on the part of managers contributed to pressure for environmental stewardship. Consequently
companies tend to develop reactive strategies, at least to stay within the requirements of the law
and thus narrowing their opportunity to benefit from green initiatives (Ashford, 1993). However
the environmental pressure is hydra-headed coming from various stakeholders but because
managers have limited knowledge of green requirements and how to successfully implement
one, its implications for companies, and the best form of response (Fineman and Clarke, 1996,
Banerjee, 2001); the result is a lost opportunity to develop a competitive advantage. Therefore
the best position for management is to respond positively to stakeholders‘ (government, market
and non-market) green pressures as a source of competitive advantage. Literature also links
managers‘ sense of duty to entrepreneurial spirit that yield non-economic advantages such as
clean environment, lower level of waste, and sustainable development; and economic advantages
such as profit, market share, and growth (Fernández et al., 2006). Management‘s capability to
recognize strategic opportunities is essential. Personality characteristics of managers are
identified to be associated with such attitudes is openness to change.
2.10 Employee Involvement in greening initiatives Green initiatives may not be very successful without active participation of employees. Because
employees have different expertise and experience they can positively affect the performance of
an organization greenwise when they are involved in greening initiatives. Incorporating
programmes designed to boost employee involvement in greening decisions such as open
suggestion, profit sharing and gainsharing can guarantee employee participation as long as the
employees are assured of fair treatment and sense of belonging. Employee involvements have
been linked with improved productivity, product quality, and customer service and their non
inclusion have also led to lower employee morale, poor customer loyalty, and organizational
performance. In response to these problems, firms have incorporated a variety of policies
designed to increase employee involvement and create a more satisfying workplace. Companies
can attract and motivate employees through the provision of free on-site primary healthcare at
the firm, on-site child care centers, recreational facilities, gym and various other work-life
programs, and health care program for retirees (Bryan et al., 2008).
Pollution prevention, in particular, requires employee involvement and empowerment, which is
consistent with the social equity principle because it incorporates more stakeholders in decision-
making. It also involves continuous improvement, which is consistent with environmental
management systems The participation level and cultural impact can be tremendous when a
small part of employee bonuses are tied to green initiatives such as recycling, etc. In the long
run, new roles will emerge where at least a good number of people will have critical
Page 31 of 89
responsibilities associated with delivering results on a green strategy (Olson, 2008).
Environmental education and training of employees should be encouraged to update skills and
boost efficiency of personnel in green roles.
2.11 Green Market Focus Given that the need to go green is market-driven (the environment being an essential part of the
market), it is important that businesses understand the underlying market forces that shape
business performance. A market-based business is one that has a strong market orientation that
permeates all functions (Rogers, 2005). The embers of growing market competition across the
globe are fanned by multiple expectations and choices of customers. Consequently organizations
are constantly strategizing to fit into these fleeting market situations in a bid to satisfy customers‘
changing needs and survive market competition. Market dominance is no longer a function of
size, long presence or first-mover advantage but rather a product of a complex interplay of
leadership, strategy, business clime, technology, innovation, and the ability of the business to
recognize opportunity when available. It is a function of change adaptation and management
acumen, versatility, responsiveness, attitudes, innovation drive, and knowledge (awareness).
Obviously customers will continue to change in needs, demographics, lifestyles, consumption
attitudes; competitors will also change as new technologies emerge and market globalization
strengthens; and the business climate will continue to change as economic, political, social, and
technological forces shift (Rogers, 2005).
The survival and growth of businesses in this turbulent economic time will be determined by a
company‘s ability to understand change, and in most cases initiate the change. Those not able to
anticipate or even reluctant and slow to understand the change exhibit the `follow-follow`
syndrome, while some leave the scene disappointedly not knowing how to change or follow.
Businesses that go where the puck flows are most likely to understand the needs of their
customers, strategies of their rivalry, the changing business clime, and new technologies. They
exhibit first-mover instinct and set the pace. Indeed they continuously seek ways to improve in
their product/service pack. Business prosperity and growth can be achieved when an
organization can sense the direction of change and position itself to set the pace and lead in the
change. As a first-mover in greening efforts an organization can shape the future of the market
and even influence future regulations (Fri, 1992). Greening creates simple solutions to
environmental problems but demands cost intensive and high-end technologies to attain. It is
likely that organizations with stronger resources and capabilities will lead the change and if anti-
competition motivated, will tend to raise the cost of entry for rivals. In effect greening may usher
in a market ouster mechanism promoted by industry leaders to suppress trailers.
Green strategies from marketing perspective can be described as the all strategies to promote
products or services by using environmental claims regarding their green characteristics or those
of the systems, policies and processes of the organizations providing them (Prakash, 2002).
Consequently green strategy is not a standalone system; it is best utilized when used together
with other corporate strategies. Incorporating environmental concerns into corporate strategy
based entirely on economic motivated decisions may not be possible (Drumwright, 1994) and
limits the firms to unexploited opportunities. Adopting green strategy is a way to checkmate
regulatory ‗teeth’ that often bite off companies‘ profit.
Page 32 of 89
2.12 Customer Focus Businesses with strong customer focus stays in close contact with the customer in an effort to
deliver high level of customer satisfaction and build strong customer loyalty. Marketing
strategies in a customer-focused business is built around customer‘s needs and other sources of
customer satisfaction (Rogers, 2005). The strength of an enterprise‘s market focus depends on
the extent it understands key competitors and emerging competitive forces. Thorough mastery of
this aspect of market focus helps a firm to track its relative competitiveness in such areas as
pricing, product quality and availability, service quality, and customer satisfaction. Marketing
strategy development and implementation is linked to strong customer focus, that is, a business
with a strong market orientation is in the best position to develop and implement strategies that
deliver high levels of customer satisfaction and high level of customer retention. Market
orientation is driven by three basic factors including marketing knowledge – the degree to which
managers and employees have been educated and trained in marketing; marketing leadership –
no level of marketing excellence can be established if market orientation is not given
management priority; and employee satisfaction – no matter management‘s effort without a
happy workforce well-informed on customer relationship, it will be almost impossible to achieve
even minimal effectiveness.
Page 33 of 89
Chapter Three: Research Design and Methodology 3.1 Preamble
This chapter focuses on the methods and procedure employed in this study to bring the subject of
research to the scope where an acceptable set of data for analysis can be obtained. The chapter
will show how the conceptual framework of this study translates to operational or functional
solution to the identified problems. The highlights include the research design, population size of
sample, and the sampling technique used in acquiring the data sample. Additionally, the data
collecting instrument, design and procedures used in processing and analyzing the data will be
discussed.
3.2 Research Design/ Methodology This study adopted a multiple case study approach based on intensive field survey. The field
survey was carried out in 2010. A total of 268 respondents drawn from ten companies were
selected for the purposes of the survey. These companies operate in different sectors of the
economy: 3, from the oil/gas; 3, from the manufacturing; 2, from banking/insurance; 1, from
hospitality/tourism and 1, from the telecom. The companies were selected on the basis of their
economic importance; noticeable presence as key players and perceived popularity; size
(measured by staff strength and installed facility capacity) and perceived environmental
performance. However these companies requested absolute confidentiality as a condition of their
participation. In line with this request for strict confidentiality, the real names of the firms will
not be used here but where necessary each will be denoted by acronyms not associated with the
firm‘s identity.
A questionnaire survey (see Appendix A) containing thirty-eight (38) questions was sent out to
the companies. A separate letter (see Appendix B) requesting for follow-up was also sent
together with the questionnaire to those companies. Interview appointments with the companies
were received for separate dates. In line with the green objective of this study, telephone and
emails communications were used at various stages of the survey to follow-up, (re)schedule
appointments and clarification of issues. Return, via email, of scanned copies of completed
questionnaires was also solicited and many responded well. Public transport was used on the
days of visit to the company. This saved costs and reduced personal carbon footprints.
3.3 Administration of Questionnaire To enhance response rate and generate a reasonable data and minimize loss of data or delay of
data retrieval, and ensure timeliness, the questionnaires were administered by hand to the
company staff available on first day of visit. However not all staff were reached same day, so a
good number of questionnaires was left with the Personnel Department for distribution to the
members of staff not reached earlier. All questionnaires issued out were completely returned and
successfully filled out.
3.4 Population of the Study The population of this study is the members of staff of the participating companies. They consist
of top management, middle management, senior staff and select number of junior staff. The
Page 34 of 89
number of employees that participated in all is 268 comprising 90 from the oil/gas, 84 from the
manufacturing, 42 from telecom, 30 from banking/insurance, and 22 from tourism/hospitality.
3.5 Determination of Sample Size
The participating respondents in the case companies were randomly sampled due to difficulty in
reaching all staff of the companies. Other constraints include time and costs. Consequently the
choice of respondents was informed by the desire to obtain relatively accurate data and this made
it possible to select respondents based on perceived level of knowledge of staff about
environmental initiatives and their implication for corporate existence. Employees were
categorized accordingly in the following order: top executives, managers, supervisors/senior
staff, and junior staff. The larger the size of sample, the greater the accuracy of the data obtained.
*Sector Oil & Gas
Manufacturing Bank/
Insurance
Tourism Telecom Total
Category of
Employee
Top Executives 14 13 7 5 3 42
Managers 25 24 12 8 6 75
Supervisors / Senior
Staff
34 32 16 11 8 101
Junior Staff 17 16 8 6 4 50
Total 90 84 42 30 22 268
Table 3.1: Distribution of population of respondents by industry
*Names of the participated companies not indicated due to request for complete anonymity.
3.6 Statistical Techniques The statistical techniques adopted in this study include frequency distribution table,
complemented by bar and pie chart representations using Microsoft Excel statistical functions.
Although the Chi-Square, X2
test was considered, the result obtained adequately satisfy the intent
of the study which may not have significantly varied from that obtained using the Chi-Square
test.
For a study of this nature it may be revealing to know the percentage of the total number of
responses that fall into a given class than knowing the actual class frequency. The actual or
absolute distribution of each case is therefore expressed in percent. Thus the percent relative
frequency is obtained.
3.7 Sources of Data
The data employed in this study were obtained from two main sources, the primary and
secondary sources.
3.7.1 Primary Data The primary data for this study were obtained through field survey using questionnaire to elicit
information from respondents. Interviews also provided further data to support or clarify
information obtained in the questionnaire.
Page 35 of 89
3.7.2 Secondary Data The secondary data were obtained from already published materials such as text books, journal
articles, the internet (web search), academic dissertations, etc. available in the libraries including
virtual libraries such as SFX-Blekinge, Google Scholar.
3.8 Test of Research Instruments Validity is the measure of the degree to which an instrument measures its intended variable.
Questionnaire instruments or test concern the content of the variable or rational determinants the
research has identified as the elements of these variables and which the research assumes to
provide similar answer (Odo, 1992). Test of quality of a field survey as proposed by (Yin, 1994)
to test validity of construct, internal and external validity was employed.
Internal validity was tested by administering the questionnaire to a small number of
respondents across the sample population prior to the actual survey. The pattern of the result of
the survey was consistent with the intended purpose. The observed patterns were also cross-
matched with theory to identify conformance and non-conformance.
External validity was done by cross-examining and comparing the case findings. Replication
logic of cases was applied to establish pattern repetition or replication of similar observation.
Where the observations were also consistent with the theory, it was concluded as strengthening
the validity of the theory. Effort was made to understand and explain the variations of the
observations from theory.
In addition the reliability was tested using similar questions in the oral interview as those
contained in the questionnaire. Both instruments were used for the prototype survey and the main
survey. Similarity of results at differently conducted surveys with nonvariant questions in the
questionnaire and interview (as measuring instruments) administered on a fraction or whole
population confirmed the reliability of the research instruments.
Parts of the questionnaire are based on a survey conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit
(EIU) of PricewaterhouseCoopers in late 2007 according to (Cobourn, 2008), though the
questions were modified to suit the study purpose. Ostensibly most of the questions are designed
to measure perceptions and industry practices of greening effort.
Page 36 of 89
Chapter Four: Data Presentation, Interpretation and Analysis 4.1 Preamble
In this chapter the presentation, interpretation and analysis of survey data was carried out. This
was achieved by tabular presentations and bar and pie charting. Microsoft Excel statistical
functions were used.
Table 4.1: Assessing industry perception level of environmental impact, effort to reduce the
impact, pursuit of greening, consumers‘ demand for green products and opportunities in
greening. *See the Figure 4.1 for denotations of the alphabets.
Table 4.1and Figure 4.1 show the industry perception level of environmental impact of their
operations, their effort to reduce the impacts, pursue greening and opportunities in greening,
and the consumers demand level for green products and services in the companies studied.
About 71% of respondents believe that their company relative to other companies does little
harm to the environment while about 47% agree that their company do little harm to the
environment. This shows that all company no matter how small and clever they are create some
kind of environmental burden. Nonetheless the type and level of impact vary across industries.
About 94% indicated that customers express their desires for green products but often are not
willing to pay for it. Consequently this means that companies that pursue green initiatives does
so at an added cost with little or insignificant benefit. But that may not be the case as nearly 90%
of respondents agree that greening create significant opportunities for their companies.
Percentage distribution (%) Frequency distribution
Res
pon
se
Str
ongly
agre
e
Agre
e
Not
sure
Dis
agre
e
stro
ngly
dis
agre
e
Res
ponse
Str
ongly
agre
e
Agre
e
Not
sure
Dis
agre
e
Str
ongly
dis
agre
e
Tota
l
*
A
66.08 5.47 24.21 2.60 1.64 A 177 15 65 7 4 268
B 31.58 15.48 17.32 23.23 12.39 B 85 41 46 62 33 268
C 87.91 4.93 2.90 1.29 2.96 C 236 13 8 3 8 268
D 88.58 6.23 1.19 0.26 3.74 D 237 17 3 1 10 268
E 87.53 4.01 4.56 1.50 2.41 E 235 11 12 4 6 268
F 88.33 5.80 1.88 0.50 3.48 F 237 16 5 1 9 268
G 85.92 4.49 4.11 2.79 2.70 G 230 12 11 7 7 268
Page 37 of 89
Figure 4.1: Industry perception level of environmental impact, effort to reduce the impact,
pursuit of greening, consumers demand for green products and opportunities in greening
From Table 4.2 and Figure 4.2, about 73% of the respondents indicated that it is very important
(31%) or important (42%) that their companies are doing something to reduce their impacts on
the environment. This is almost the same ranking with the respondents that say their companies
do little harm to the environment. This can be explained by saying that even as the impacts are
seemingly insignificant there are some compelling needs to go greening. Whatever the reasons is
cannot be concluded at these stage and may be revealed in subsequent analysis.
Response
Very
important
Important Not sure Moderately
important
Not at all
important
Total
A. Other
industries
31.48% 46.41% 20.49% 0.81% 0.81% 100.00%
B. My
company
41.89% 26.04% 28.24% 2.20% 1.63% 100.00%
Frequency Distribution
A.
Other
industries
84 124 55 2 2 268
B. My
company
112 70 76 6 4 268
Table 4.2: Percentage and Frequency Distribution of responses measures to reduce
environmental impacts.
66.0
8%
31.5
8%
87.9
1%
88.5
8%
87.5
3%
88.3
3%
85.9
2%
5.4
7%
15.4
8%
4.9
3%
6.2
3%
4.0
1%
5.8
0%
4.4
9%24.2
1%
17.3
2%
2.9
0%
1.1
9%
4.5
6%
1.8
8%
4.1
1%
2.6
0% 23.2
3%
1.2
9%
0.2
6%
1.5
0%
0.5
0%
2.7
9%
1.6
4%
12.3
9%
2.9
6%
3.7
4%
2.4
1%
3.4
8%
2.7
0%
0.00%10.00%20.00%30.00%40.00%50.00%60.00%70.00%80.00%90.00%
100.00%
A. R
elat
ive
to o
ther
in
du
stri
es, m
y
com
pan
y d
oes
lit
tle
har
m t
o th
e
env
iro
nm
ent.
B. M
y c
om
pan
y d
oes
lit
tle
har
m t
o
the
env
iro
nm
ent.
C. M
y c
om
pan
y c
an d
o s
ign
ific
antl
y
mo
re t
o r
edu
ce i
ts e
nv
iro
nm
enta
l
imp
act w
ith
ou
t co
mp
rom
isin
g
pro
fita
bil
ity
.
D. T
he
mo
st i
mp
ort
ant co
ntr
ibu
tio
n
ou
r in
du
stry
can
mak
e to
war
d
imp
rov
ing th
e en
vir
on
men
t is
to
pro
vid
e to
ols
to h
elp
oth
er i
nd
ust
ries
d
evel
op
bre
akth
rou
gh
env
iro
nm
enta
lly
fri
end
ly s
olu
tio
ns.
E. T
he
pu
rsu
it o
f gre
enin
g
con
trib
ute
s to
hig
her
pri
ces
for
pro
du
cts/
serv
ices
.
F. C
on
sum
ers
say
th
ey w
ant
gre
en
pro
du
cts,
bu
t th
ey a
re h
igh
ly
resi
stan
t o
r u
nw
illi
ng to
pay
th
e
hig
her
pri
ces
asso
ciat
ed w
ith
th
at
pri
vil
ege.
G. T
he
arri
val
of
the
gre
en
mo
vem
ent cr
eate
s si
gn
ific
ant
op
po
rtu
nit
ies
for
my
co
mp
any
.
strongly agree agree not sure disagree strongly disagree
Page 38 of 89
Figure 4.2: Taking measures to reduce or minimize environmental impact.
Table 4.3 and Figure 4.3 show that about 45% of respondents indicated that green initiatives
presented a significant level of market opportunities for their companies whereas about 51% say
the opportunities are insignificant. The reason for the gap cannot be far from the low level of
awareness of greening in this part of the world.
Response Very
significant
Significant Not
sure
Moderately
insignificant
Very
insignificant
Total
Percentage 36.60% 8.03% 4.37% 40.01% 10.98% 100.00%
Frequency 98 22 12 107 29 268
Table 4.3: Significance level of market opportunities presented to companies by the green
movement.
Figure 4.3: Significance level of market opportunities presented to your company by
the green movement.
31.4
8%
46.4
1%
20.4
9%
0.8
1%
0.8
1%
41.8
9%
26.0
4%
28.2
4%
2.2
0%
1.6
3%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
Ver
y im
port
ant
Imp
ort
ant
Not
sure
Moder
atel
y
import
ant
Not
at a
ll
import
ant
A. Other industries B. My company
36.60%
8.03%4.37%
40.01%
10.98% Very significant
Significant
not sure
Moderately
insignificant
Very insignificant
Page 39 of 89
Impact
A.
Hig
her
oper
atin
g
cost
s
B.
Gre
ater
regula
tory
ris
k
C.
Hig
her
pro
cure
men
t co
sts
D.
Hig
her
com
pli
ance
cost
s
E.
Hig
her
tax
es
F.
None
of
the
above/
Not
sure
G.
Low
er s
ales
as
a
resu
lt o
f nec
essa
rily
hig
her
pri
ces
Tota
l
Percentage 38.44% 18.46% 15.16% 15.74% 3.94% 5.95% 2.30% 100
Frequency 103 49 41 42 11 16 6 268
Table 4.4: Potential impacts of green movement in companies
Given the impacts of greening on companies, respondents alluded to the fact that greening
creates high costs (operating, 38%; procurement, 15%; and compliance, 16%) and 18% of the
respondents observed that companies may face more regulatory risk when nothing is done at all.
Figure 4.4: Potential impacts of the green movement in companies.
Response Highly
detailed
assessment
Detailed
assessment
Don‘t
know
Cursory
assessment
No risk
assessment
Percentage 6.10% 23.60% 31.10% 30.40% 8.80% 100.00%
Frequency 16 63 83 81 24 268
Table 4.5: Risk Assessment of Green Initiatives
An assessment of the risk level imminent without greening is shown in Table 4.5 and Figure 4.5.
However, very few respondents understand the potential risks facing a company when necessary
environmental efforts are not pursued.
38.44%
18.46%
15.16%
15.74%
3.94%
5.95%2.30% A. Higher operating costs
B. Greater regulatory risk
C. Higher procurement costs
D. Higher compliance costs
E. Higher taxes
F. None of the above/Not sure
G. Lower sales as a result of
necessarily higher prices
Page 40 of 89
Figure 4.5: Risk Assessment of Green initiatives
Response Yes No Not sure Total
Percentage 60.10% 21.50% 18.40% 100.00%
Frequency 161 58 49 268
Table 4.6: Responses to whether company is developing green technology, products and
services.
Having seen the needs to go green, most of the companies are making efforts to develop products
and services that conform to environmental requirements stipulated by regulation/government,
customers and various environmental management systems including ISO 14000. As shown in
Table 4.6 and Figure 4.6, sixty percent of respondents say their companies are developing green
products and services, 22% say no, and 18% are not sure.
6.10%
23.60%
31.10%
30.40%
8.80%
Highly detailed assessment
Detailed assessment
Don‘t know
Cursory assessment
No risk assessment
Page 41 of 89
Figure 4.6: Green technology, products and services under development
Reasons for going green as illustrated in Table 4.6.1 and Figure 4.6.1 are mainly dominated by
the market opportunities as confirmed by 42% of the respondents, followed by customers‘
demands, 24%. Management‘s commitments to environmental responsibility accounted for 21%
and concern for regulatory or customers‘ complaints represent 12%.
Response A. The
market
opportunities
B.
Customers
demand we
do so
C. Our
management‘s
commitment to
environmental
responsibility
D. Out of
concern for a
regulatory or
consumer
complaint.
Total
Percentage 42.43% 24.23% 21.19% 12.16% 100.00%
Frequency 114 65 57 33 268
Table 4.6.1: Reasons for developing green products and services.
Figure 4.6.1: Reasons for greening products and services.
60.10%21.50%
18.40%
Yes
No
Not sure
42.43%
24.23%
21.19%
12.16%
A. The market opportunities
B. Customers demand we do
so
C. Our management‘s
commitment to
environmental responsibility
D. Out of concern for a
regulatory or consumer
complaint.
Page 42 of 89
To derive the most market opportunities including competitiveness companies need to green by
offering new products and services. About 50 percent of the respondents indicated that new
products and services give the most opportunities, 25% by attracting new customers, 18%
through product differentiation and brand building, and 7% through premium pricing for green
products and services. The above observations are depicted in Table 4.6.2 and Figure 4.6.2
respectively.
Response A B C D E
Percentage 49.53% 25.23% 17.79% 7.45% 100.00%
Frequency 133 68 48 20 268
Table 4.6.2: Options for companies to derive green opportunities.
Figure 4.6.2: Options for companies to derive green opportunities.
As shown in Table 4.7 and Figure 4.7 the demand for green products and services is not limited
to a single segment of the market but comes from all sectors including personal, business and
government consumers and will have various shapes in the future.
Response Very
strong
demand
Moderate
demand
Weak
demand
No
demand
Don't
know
Total
A 23.27% 10.59% 36.90% 22.89% 6.35% 100.00%
B 9.45% 10.14% 38.96% 35.17% 6.28% 100.00%
C 27.50% 10.37% 31.64% 19.20% 11.29% 100.00%
Frequency Distribution
A 62 28 99 61 17 268
B 25 27 104 94 17 268
C 74 28 85 51 30 268
Table 4.7: Strength of demand for green products and services by various customers.
49.53%
25.23%
17.79%
7.45%A. By offering new products
and services
B. By attracting new
customers
C. Through product
differentiation/brand-
building
D. Through premium pricing
for green products and
services
Page 43 of 89
A look at Table 4.7 and Figure 4.7 reveals that the strength of demand from these customers
varies very significantly. For the government consumers, the demand level account for 71% of
the respondents‘ opinions. However, the very good demand level is about 34% whereas 37% is
considered weak. The weak demand is stronger and cuts across all segments of the customers.
For the business customers, the demand level is apparently not encouraging. Good demand
position is 20% whereas 39% is weak, and there is 35% complete demand void. This shows that
for most companies green initiatives are only important to businesses that consider it worthwhile
either for economic benefits or regulatory reasons.
At present demand for green seem to be weak largely due to low activism. But future expectation
is that there will be an increase in the green orientation and environmental performance of
companies.
Figure 4.7: Strength of demand for green products and services by different customers.
Response Very
strong
demand
Moderate
demand
Weak
demand
No
demand
Don't
know
Total
A 12.18% 24.32% 45.27% 15.34% 2.90% 100.00%
B 30.15% 28.14% 28.49% 11.21% 2.01% 100.00%
C 21.57% 23.09% 33.47% 13.22% 8.64% 100.00%
Frequency distribution
A 33 65 121 41 8 268
B 81 75 76 30 5 268
C 58 62 90 35 23 268
Table 4.8: Future expectations of demand for green products and services.
23
.27
%
10
.59
%
36
.90%
22
.89
%
6.3
5%
9.4
5%
10
.14
%
38
.96
%
35
.17%
6.2
8%
27
.50
%
10
.37
%
31
.64
%
19
.20
%
11
.29
%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
ver
y st
ron
g d
eman
d
mod
erat
e d
eman
d
wea
k d
eman
d
no d
eman
d
don
't k
now
Government customer business customers individual customers
Page 44 of 89
Figure 4.8: Future expectations of demand for green products and services
However the future expectation of the demand strength for the green customers is very
impressive especially for the business customers. Overall the demand will be about 80% for the
business customers with 30% very strong, 28% moderate, weak 28% and 11% no demand.
Government customers demand at 45% was weak but all together the expected future demand
from the government will be stronger at 12% and moderate at 24% amounting to about 81%.
The demand from individual customers is good enough though with about 32% weak demand,
the overall strength is about 70% almost equal to that from the government customers.
Factor Percentage Frequency
Potential cost saving from energy efficiency 21.61% 58
Complying with environmental legislation and regulation 18.23% 49
Meeting customer expectations/requirements 16.03% 43
Potential for gaining competitive advantage 15.53% 42
Obtaining tax incentives 6.33% 17
Matching the environmentally focused actions of
competitors
8.04% 22
Attracting and retaining staff 7.66% 21
Meeting investor/shareholder demands 4.75% 13
Don‘t know/not applicable 1.83% 5
Total 100.00% 268
Table 4.9: Factors important for green decision making.
12
.18
%
24.3
2%
45.2
7%
15.3
4%
2.9
0%
30.1
5%
28.1
4%
28.4
9%
11.2
1%
2.0
1%
21.5
7%
23.0
9%
33.4
7%
13.2
2%
8.6
4%
0.00%
5.00%
10.00%
15.00%
20.00%
25.00%
30.00%
35.00%
40.00%
45.00%
50.00%
very strong
demand
moderate
demand
weak demand no demand don't know
Government customers Business customers Individual customers
Page 45 of 89
Going green demands strong management commitments by decision making executive in a
company, considering the cost involvements and the potential opportunities. In Table 4.9 and
Figure 4.9 about 22% of the respondents believe that the potential cost saving from energy
efficiency influences green decision, complying with environmental legislation and regulation
accounts for 18%, and meeting customers‘ expectations represent 16% opinions. Another
important factor is the potential for gaining competitive advantage which represents close to
16%. Market factors such as customers‘ expectation and competitive drive both account for 32%
meaning that green is at least driven by market opportunities.
Figure 4.9: Factors important for green decision making
21.61%
18.23%
16.03%
15.53%
6.33%
8.04%
7.66%
4.75% 1.83%
Potential cost saving from
energy efficiency
Complying with
environmental legislation and
regulationMeeting customer
expectations/requirements
Potential for gaining
competitive advantage
Obtaining tax incentives
Matching the
environmentally focused
actions of competitorsAttracting and retaining staff
Meeting investor/shareholder
demands
Page 46 of 89
Response
Increased
costs
(costlier
processes,
costlier
materials,
more
compliance)
Increased
opportunities (new
products / services,
new branding
/differentiation)
Increased
business
risks
(lawsuits,
consumer
boycotts)
Don’t
know/Not
applicable
Total
Percentage 38.28% 36.37% 16.73% 8.62% 100.00%
Frequency 103 97 45 23 268
Table 4.10: Likely outcomes for going green
Figure 4.10: Likely outcomes for going green.
As illustrated in Table 4.10 and Figure 4.10, the very likely outcome for green going for a
company is the cost challenges representing about 38% but about 36% of the respondents believe
that the opportunities are worth the investment.
Greening has varying impacts on different business segments of a company as shown in Table
4.11.1 and Figure 4.11. The most major impact is on the R &D represented by 11%. The R & D
efforts are receiving greater emphasis because greening is still in its early stage in these
companies. The choice of products and services for greening is the next to R & D effort to ensure
the right products and services are developed to meet expected environmental standards.
38.28%
36.37%
16.73%
8.62%
Increased costs (costlier
processes, costlier
materials, more
compliance)
Increased opportunities
(new products/ services,
new
branding/differentiation)
Increased business risks
(lawsuits, consumer
boycotts)
Don‘t know/Not
applicable
Page 47 of 89
Response Major
impact
Moderate
impact
Minor
impact
No
impact
Don’t
know/Not
applicable
Total
Manufacturing 5.13% 34.27% 9.39% 49.67% 1.54% 100.00%
Sourcing/supply chain 3.63% 13.12% 18.38% 61.96% 2.91% 100.00%
Sales/Marketing 4.06% 17.97% 25.62% 49.91% 2.44% 100.00%
Research/
Development 11.40% 13.57% 20.17% 48.02% 6.84% 100.00%
Choice of product/
services 5.25% 20.92% 22.65% 48.03% 3.15% 100.00%
Employee
recruitment/Diversity
management
3.19% 12.69% 23.82% 58.38% 1.91% 100.00%
Employee
development
/training/retention
3.97% 13.98% 24.51% 55.15% 2.38% 100.00%
Table 4.11.1: Percentage distribution of responses to impact on various operations as a result of
going green.
Response Major
impact
Moderate
impact
Minor
impact
No
impact
Don‘t
know/Not
applicable
Total
Manufacturing 14 92 25 133 4 268
Sourcing/supply chain 10 35 49 166 8 268
Sales/Marketing 11 48 69 134 7 268
Research/Development 31 36 54 129 18 268
Choice of product/services 14 56 61 129 8 268
Employee recruitment/Diversity
management 9 34 64 156 5 268
Employee
development/training/retention 11 37 66 148 6 268
Table 4.11.2: Frequency distribution of responses to impact on various operations as a result of
going green.
Based on major and moderate impacts, the R & D effort will intensify in future rising to 34%,
manufacturing will be 44%, sales/marketing will increase to 5%, and employee development /
training / retention will appreciate significantly to 6%.
Page 48 of 89
Figure 4.11: Impacts felt on various company operations as a result of going green
Response Major
impact
Moderate
impact
Minor
impact
No
impact
Don‘t
know/Not
applicable
Total
Manufacturing 7.27% 36.57% 7.80% 46.18% 2.18% 100.00%
Sourcing/supply chain 5.81% 15.56% 15.44% 58.54% 4.65% 100.00%
Sales/Marketing 7.33% 22.36% 20.74% 45.17% 4.40% 100.00%
Research/Development 14.91% 18.52% 13.25% 44.37% 8.95% 100.00%
Choice of product/services 6.24% 25.39% 18.72% 45.89% 3.74% 100.00%
Employee recruitment /
Diversity management 4.59% 19.18% 22.83% 50.65% 2.76% 100.00%
Employee
development/training/retention 6.09% 16.49% 25.60% 48.16% 3.66% 100.00%
Table 4.12.1: Percentage distribution of expected future impacts of greening on various company
operations.
As represented in Table 4.12.1 and Figure 4.12, the future expectations in R & D effort will grow
significantly to 15%, choice of products/services will be 6%. The slow growth of the choice of
product/service greening could be attribute to customers‘ unwillingness to pay extra charge for
green even when they request for it. Manufacturing efforts will likely increase to 7% from
current 5% level.
5.13%3.63%4.06%11.40%5.25%3.19%3.97%
34.27%13.12%17.97%13.57%20.92%12.69%13.98%
9.39%
18.38%25.62%20.17%22.65%
23.82%24.51%
49.6
7%
61
.96
%
49.9
1%
48.0
2%
48.0
3%
58.3
8%
55.1
5%
1.54%2.91%2.44%6.84%3.15%1.91%2.38%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Man
ufa
cturi
ng
Sourc
ing/s
upply
chai
n
Sal
es/M
arket
ing
Res
earc
h/D
evel
opm
e
nt
Ch
oic
e of
pro
duct
/ser
vic
es
Em
plo
yee
recr
uit
men
t/D
iver
sity
man
agem
ent
Em
plo
yee
dev
elopm
ent/
trai
nin
g/
rete
nti
on
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact
No impact Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 49 of 89
Response Major
impact
Moderate
impact
Minor
impact
No
impact
Don‘t
know/Not
applicable
Total
Manufacturing 19 98 21 124 6 268
Sourcing/supply chain 16 42 41 157 12 268
Sales/Marketing 20 60 56 121 12 268
Research/Development 40 50 36 119 24 268
Choice of product/services 17 68 50 123 10 268
Employee recruitment
/Diversity management 12 51 61 136 7 268
Employee
development/retention 16 44 69 129 10 268
Table 4.12.2: Frequency distribution of expected future impacts of greening on various company
operations.
Figure 4.12: Expected future impacts of greening on various company operations.
From Table 4.13 and Figure 4.13 below, about 39% of respondents strongly agree (10%) and
agree (29%) that regulation of their company is not very necessary since their companies are
making environmentally responsible decisions on their own. Over 50% disagree and 10% are no
sure. This wide gap is attributed to the low involvement of the non-management staff in decision
making. Moreover it may be that stronger regulation is preferred to drive greening.
Similar trend is observed in the responses to the assertion that board and management are
committed to the pursuit of a bottom-line that include not only profits but also environmental
stewardship. About 24% agree, 69% disagree and 7% are not sure.
7.27%5.81%7.33%14.91%
6.24%4.59%6.09%
36
.57
%
15
.56
%
22
.36
%
18
.52
%
25
.39
%
19
.18
%
16
.49
%
7.80%
15.44%
20.74%13.25%18.72%
22.83%25.60%4
6.1
8%
58
.54
%
45
.17
%
44
.37
%
45
.89
%
50
.65
%
48
.16
%
2.1
8%
4.6
5%
4.4
0%
8.9
5%
3.7
4%
2.7
6%
3.6
6%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Man
ufa
ctu
rin
g
Sou
rcin
g/s
up
ply
ch
ain
Sal
es/M
ark
etin
g
Res
earc
h/D
evel
op
men
t
Ch
oic
e of
pro
du
ct/s
ervic
es
Em
plo
yee
recr
uit
men
t/D
iver
sity
man
agem
ent
Em
plo
yee
dev
elop
men
t/tr
ain
ing/r
eten
tion
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact
No impact Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 50 of 89
Response Strongly
agree
Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly
disagree
Total
There is no need to
regulate our company or
industry; we are making
environmentally
responsible decisions on
our own.
28.92% 10.21% 47.72% 3.03% 100.00%
Our board and
management team are
committed to the pursuit of
a bottom line that includes
not only profits but also
environmental stewardship.
15.40% 8.30% 7.42% 56.56% 12.32% 100.00%
Table 4.13: Percentage distribution of responses on whether to regulate industry and company
effort to pursue environmental stewardship and profit making as a bottom-line.
Figure 4.13: Responses on whether to regulate industry and company effort to pursue
environmental stewardship and profit making as a bottom-line.
As clearly seen in Table 4.14 and Figure 4.14 respondents representing 21% believe that
collaboration with suppliers and customers to achieve regulatory compliance, together with 20%
of respondents say that changing company operations/procedure in line with greening initiatives
are actions companies can take when faced with regulatory/environmental issues. Over 50% of
the respondents do not know the actions their companies take. This is alarming but perhaps this
is because green decision making resides more or less with management which is represented by
fewer individuals.
10.12%15.40%28.92%8.30%
10.21%7.42%
47.72%56.56%
3.03%12.32%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
Th
ere
is n
o n
eed
to
reg
ula
te o
ur
com
pan
y
or
ind
ust
ry; w
e ar
e
mak
ing
envir
on
men
tall
y re
spon
sible
dec
isio
ns
on
ou
r ow
n.
Ou
r boar
d a
nd
man
agem
ent t
eam
are
com
mit
ted
to t
he
pu
rsu
it o
f a
bott
om
lin
e th
at in
clu
des
not
on
ly p
rofi
ts b
ut
also
envir
on
men
tal
stew
ard
ship
.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree
Page 51 of 89
Response
A.
Coll
ab
orate
wit
h
sup
pli
ers/
cu
stom
ers
to
ach
ieve
regu
lato
ry
com
pli
an
ce
B.
Ch
an
ge o
ur
op
erati
on
s/p
roced
ures
C.
Resp
on
d t
o c
ust
om
er
qu
est
ion
nair
es,
cer
tifi
cati
on
s or
au
dit
s
D.
Su
bm
it q
uest
ion
nair
es
to, or
con
du
ct
cer
tifi
cati
on
s/au
dit
s of,
sup
pli
ers
E.
Ren
egoti
ate
/mod
ify
sup
pli
er
con
tracts
F. E
xp
an
d p
rod
uct
portf
oli
o
G. R
en
egoti
ate
/mod
ify
cu
stom
er c
on
tracts
H. W
ith
draw
a p
rod
uct
I. D
on
’t k
now
/not
ap
pli
cab
le
Tota
l
Percentage
(%) 20.88 20.33 16.53 14.01 11.45 10.43 6.36 5.08 53.06 100
Frequency 56 54 44 38 31 28 17 14 142 268
Table 4.14: Likely company actions as a result of environmental/regulatory issues.
Figure 4.14: Likely company actions as a result of environmental/regulatory issues.
Assessing the present elements of greening in companies‘ business operations as shown in Table
4.15.1 and Figure 4.15, 26% of the respondents say their companies support and encourage
telecommuting, 30% say their companies incorporate green concepts into product/service design,
19% practice environmentally preferred purchasing, 15% say managers are given incentives to
devise environmental friendly business practices, and 9% say they purchase green power. These
figures are expected to rise tremendously to 65%, 39%, 56%, 48%, and 36% respectively in the
next 2 years.
20.88%
20.33%
16.53%
14.01%
11.45%10.43%6.36%
5.08%
53.06%
A. Collaborate with
suppliers/customers to achieve
regulatory compliance
B. Change our
operations/procedures
C. Respond to customer
questionnaires, certifications or
audits
D. Submit questionnaires to, or
conduct certifications/audits of,
suppliers
E. Renegotiate/modify supplier
contracts
F. Expand product portfolio
G. Renegotiate/modify customer
contracts
H. Withdraw a product
I. Don‘t know/not applicable
Page 52 of 89
Response Now Likely
within 2
years
Not likely Don‘t
know/Not
applicable
Total
A. We support/encourage
telecommuting. 25.68% 64.87% 6.60% 2.85% 100.00%
B. We purchase green power. 8.83% 36.47% 35.69% 19.01% 100.00%
C. Managers are incentivized
to devise environmentally
friendly business practices.
15.43% 48.48% 30.87% 5.22% 100.00%
D. We incorporate green
concepts into product design 30.40% 39.29% 24.47% 5.84% 100.00%
E. We practice
environmentally preferred
purchasing
18.79% 56.25% 20.92% 4.04% 100.00%
Table 4.15.1: Percentage distribution of responses to present and likely elements of business
operations.
Response Now Likely
within
2
years
Not
likely
Don‘t
know/Not
applicable
Total
A. We support/encourage telecommuting. 69 174 18 8 268
B. We purchase green power. 24 98 96 51 268
C. Managers are incentivised to devise
environmentally friendly business practices. 41 130 83 14 268
D. We incorporate green concepts into
product design 81 105 66 16 268
E. We practice environmentally preferred
purchasing 50 151 56 11 268
Table 4.15.2: Frequency distribution of responses to present and likely elements of business
operations.
Page 53 of 89
Figure 4.15: Present and likely elements of business operations
Responses A B C D E F G H I J Total
Now
17.0
0%
14.5
8%
5.8
7%
4.6
6%
4.6
6%
21.7
4%
6.3
8%
9.3
2%
8.2
0%
7.5
9%
100
%
Likely
within 2
years 13.5
0%
11.5
2%
8.8
9%
8.6
9%
8.1
4%
12.9
4%
8.1
4%
11.3
2%
8.5
5%
8.3
0%
100%
Not likely
5.5
9%
7.5
2%
12.0
9%
12.4
3%
13.2
3%
5.4
2%
12.2
6%
7.6
9%
11.6
8%
12.0
9%
100%
Don’t
know/Not
applicable 7.7
9%
9.5
6%
10.1
8%
10.8
0%
9.5
6%
5.4
0%
11.3
3%
14.9
6%
10.2
7%
10.1
8%
100%
Table 4.16.1: Percentage distribution of present and future elements of compliance/control.
25
.68
%
8.8
3%
15.4
3%
30
.40
%
18.7
9%
64.87%
36.47%
48.48%
39.29%56.25%
6.60%
35.69%
30.87% 24.47%20.92%
2.8
5%
19.0
1% 5.2
2%
5.8
4%
4.0
4%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
A. We
support/encourage
telecommuting.
B. We purchase
green power.
C. Managers are
incentivised to
devise
environmentally
friendly business practices.
D. We incorporate
green concepts
into product
design
E. We practice
environmentally
preferred
purchasing
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 54 of 89
Response A B C D E F G H I J Total
Now 46 39 16 12 12 58 17 25 22 20 268
Likely
within 2
years
36 31 24 23 22 35 22 30 23 22 268
Not likely 15 20 32 33 35 15 33 21 31 32 268
Don’t
know/
Not
applicable
21 26 27 29 26 14 30 40 28 27 268
Table 4. 16. 2: Frequency distribution of present and future elements of compliance/control.
Figure 4.16: Present and future elements of compliance/control.
Table 4.16.1 and Figure 4.16 both show the responses to the current compliance/control elements
in companies operations: 17% say they maintain a formal and widely distributed environmental
policy, 15% say they conduct audits and self assessment of compliance and performance of their
environmental policy, 22% agree that they promote the importance of compliance with green
initiatives internally via newsletters, etc. In the next 2 years, there will be a marked decline for
17.00% 14.58%
5.87% 4.66% 4.66%
21.74%
6.38% 9.32% 8.20% 7.59%
13.50%11.52%
8.89% 8.69% 8.14%
12.94%
8.14%
11.32%8.55% 8.30%
5.59%7.52%
12.09% 12.43% 13.23%
5.42%
12.26%7.69%
11.68% 12.09%
7.79% 9.56%
10.18% 10.80% 9.56%
5.40%
11.33%14.96%
10.27% 10.18%
A.
We
mai
nta
in a
form
al a
nd w
idel
y
dis
trib
ute
d e
nvir
on
men
tal
poli
cy.
B. W
e co
ndu
ct a
udit
s an
d s
elf-
ass
essm
ents
of
com
pli
ance
and p
erfo
rman
ce o
ur
envir
onm
enta
l poli
cy.
C. P
erfo
rmance
on g
reen
init
iati
ves
is
an
elem
ent
of
senio
r ex
ecu
tive
com
pen
sati
on.
D. P
erfo
rman
ce o
n g
reen
init
iati
ves
is
an
elem
ent
of
line-
man
ag
er e
val
uat
ion.
E. P
erfo
rman
ce o
n g
reen
init
iati
ves
is
an
elem
ent
of
emplo
yee
eval
uat
ion.
F. W
e pro
mote
the
import
ance
of
com
pli
an
ce
wit
h g
reen
init
iati
ves
inte
rnall
y v
ia
new
slet
ters
, ca
mpaig
ns,
etc
.
G. W
e hav
e a
form
al a
war
ds
pro
gra
mm
e fo
r
emplo
yee
/man
ag
er a
chie
vem
ents
in g
reen
init
iati
ves
.
H. W
e sh
are
gre
en c
om
pli
ance
dat
a w
ith
shar
ehold
ers.
I. W
e co
ndu
ct o
ngoin
g a
udit
s of
the
envir
onm
enta
l pra
ctic
es o
f ou
r su
ppli
ers.
J. W
e co
ndu
ct o
ngoin
g a
udit
s of
the
envir
onm
enta
l pra
ctic
es o
f ou
r par
tner
s.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 55 of 89
these elements in the order 14%, 12% and 13% respectively. In contrast all other elements
currently in their low ebbs will rise appreciably in the next 2 years.
Response A B C D E F Total
Now 17.90% 22.24% 20.98% 10.35% 16.22% 12.31% 100%
Likely
within 2
years
16.17% 15.47% 16.62% 19.91% 15.97% 15.87% 100%
Not likely 16.72% 17.36% 13.94% 15.86% 17.10% 19.02% 100%
Don’t
know/Not
applicable
16.56% 13.25% 20.30% 16.56% 17.41% 15.92% 100%
Table 4.17.1: Percentage distribution of present and expected future green strategies.
Now 48 60 56 28 43 33 268
Likely
within 2
years
43 41 45 53 43 43 268
Not likely 45 47 37 43 46 51 268
Don’t
know /Not
Applicable
44 36 54 44 47 43 268
Table 4.17.2: Frequency distribution of present and expected future green strategies.
Table 4.17.1 and Figure 4.17 both illustrate the current green strategies in the companies.
According to respondents they are third party certification of suppliers (18%), audit and
certification of suppliers to company‘s standards (22%), company products/services certified by
third party in green initiatives (21%), created green branded products/services (10%), formal
presentation of reports on green initiatives and performance to shareholders (16%), and top level
executive in charge of executing and evaluating company‘s green policies (12%). In the next 2
years the following figures are likely: 16%, 15%, 17%, 20%, 16%, and 16% respectively for the
above strategies.
It is observed that the creation of green branded products/services and the appointment of a top
level green executive are the only strategies expected to rise in the next 2 years. The reason for
this could be that increased green branding of products/services is expected to give the
companies the attention of consumers and stakeholders as green compliant citizens and this may
positively affect their competitiveness. During this time a top executive may be needed to
execute and evaluate the progress and performance of the green effort.
Page 56 of 89
Figure 4.17: Present and expected future green strategies.
Response Strongly
agree
Agree Not
sure
Disagree Strongly
disagree
Total
A. Our customers are willing
to pay a premium for
environmentally friendly
products and services.
7.99% 27.90% 12.77% 48.94% 2.40% 100.00%
B. We are actively
incorporating green concepts
in the design phase of our
products and services.
9.00% 7.85% 12.29% 63.66% 7.20% 100.00%
C. We have rejected a
significant number of green
concepts (such as alternative
materials) due to cost
considerations.
11.45% 9.30% 16.59% 55.79% 6.87% 100.00%
Table 4.18.1: Percentage distribution of customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green, green
concept in products from design stage, and rejection of greening due to cost limitations.
From Table 4.18.1 and Figure 4.18, 36% of respondents agree that customers are willing to pay a
premium for green products but over 50% disagree while 13% are not sure. As also shown is the
table, 17% agree (strongly, 9% and 8% agree) their companies incorporate green concepts in the
design phase of their products/services, 71% disagree and 12% are not sure. About 21% agree
their companies have not rejected a number of green due to cost considerations, 63% disagree
while 17% are not sure.
17.90% 22.24% 20.98%10.35% 16.22% 12.31%
16.17%15.47% 16.62%
19.91%15.97%
15.87%
16.72%17.36% 13.94%
15.86% 17.10% 19.02%
16.56% 13.25% 20.30%16.56% 17.41% 15.92%
A. W
e re
quir
e su
ppli
ers
to
bec
om
e ce
rtif
ied
by
thir
d
par
ties
in
gre
en in
itia
tives
(NIS
/IS
O 1
4000, E
ner
gy
Sta
r, e
tc.)
B. W
e au
dit
an
d c
erti
fy
suppli
ers
to o
ur
ow
n
stan
dar
ds.
C. O
ur
ow
n p
roduct
s ar
e
cert
ifie
d b
y th
ird
par
ties
in
gre
en in
itia
tives
.
D. W
e h
ave
crea
ted g
reen
-
bra
nded
pro
duct
s/se
rvic
es.
E. W
e p
rovid
e
shar
ehold
ers
wit
h a
form
al
report
on
our
gre
en
init
iati
ves
an
d
per
form
ance
.
F. W
e h
ave
put
a to
p-l
evel
exec
uti
ve
in c
har
ge
of
exec
uti
ng a
nd e
val
uat
ing
our
envir
on
men
tal p
oli
cies
.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 57 of 89
A. Our customers are willing
to pay a premium for
environmentally friendly
products and services.
21 75 34 131 6 268
B. We are actively
incorporating green concepts
in the design phase of our
products and services.
24 21 33 171 19 268
C. We have rejected a
significant number of green
concepts (such as alternative
materials) due to cost
considerations.
31 25 44 150 18 268
Table 4.18.2: Frequency distribution of customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green, green
concept in products from design stage, and rejection of greening due to cost limitations.
Figure 4.18: Customers‘ willingness to pay premium for green, green concept in products from
design stage, and rejection of greening due to cost limitations.
Response A B C D E F G Total
Now 16.47% 12.70% 14.41% 12.70% 20.00% 10.63% 13.10% 100.00%
Likely
within 2
years
11.86% 12.78% 11.86% 15.90% 14.11% 16.54% 16.95% 100.00%
Not likely 11.02% 16.85% 17.60% 13.93% 11.88% 16.85% 11.88% 100.00%
Don’t
know/Not
applicable
16.40% 16.40% 15.36% 14.26% 9.70% 14.26% 13.63% 100.00%
Table 4.19.1: Percentage distribution of current and future greening efforts in R & D,
engineering and manufacturing.
7.99% 9.00% 11.45%
27.90%7.85% 9.30%
12.77%
12.29%16.59%
48.94%63.66% 55.79%
2.40% 7.20% 6.87%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
A. O
ur
cust
om
ers
are
wil
lin
g to p
ay a
pre
miu
m
for
envir
on
men
tall
y
frie
nd
ly p
rod
uct
s an
d
serv
ices
.
B. W
e ar
e ac
tivel
y
inco
rpora
tin
g g
reen
con
cep
ts i
n th
e d
esig
n
ph
ase
of
ou
r p
rod
uct
s an
d
serv
ices
.
C. W
e h
ave
reje
cted
a
sig
nif
ican
t nu
mber
of
gre
en c
on
cep
ts (
such
as
alte
rnat
ive
mat
eria
ls) d
ue
to c
ost
con
sid
erat
ion
s.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly disagree
Page 58 of 89
Response A B C D E F G Total
Now 44 34 39 34 54 28 35 268
Likely
within 2
years
32 34 32 43 38 44 45 268
Not likely 30 45 47 37 32 45 32 268
Don’t
know/Not
applicable
44 44 41 38 26 38 37 268
Table 4.19.2: Frequency distribution of current and future greening efforts in R & D, engineering
and manufacturing.
From Table 4.19.1 and Figure 4.19, current greening efforts in R & D, Engineering and
Manufacturing are shown. 16% represent designs that minimize / eliminate / reduce
environmentally sensitive materials (e.g. mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, etc.), 13%
stand for designs that incorporate recycled materials, 14% represent designs that incorporate
recyclable materials, 13% is for products that are more upgradeable or modular to increase
longevity, 20% go for products that are more energy efficient, 11% are into designs that
incorporate end-of-life management (recycling, repurposing, etc.), and 13% denotes packaging
that meets or exceeds current environmental standards.
Figure 4.19: Current and future greening efforts in R & D, engineering and manufacturing.
16.47%12.70% 14.41% 12.70%
20.00%
10.63% 13.10%
11.86%12.78% 11.86% 15.90%
14.11%
16.54%16.95%
11.02% 16.85% 17.60%13.93%
11.88%
16.85%11.88%
16.40% 16.40% 15.36% 14.26%9.70%
14.26% 13.63%
A. D
esig
ns
that
min
imiz
e /
elim
inat
e
/ re
duce
en
vir
on
men
tall
y se
nsi
tive
mat
eria
ls (e.
g. m
ercu
ry, ca
dm
ium
,
hex
aval
ent c
hro
miu
m, e
tc.)
B. D
esig
ns
that
in
corp
ora
te r
ecyc
led
mat
eria
ls.
C. D
esig
ns
that
in
corp
ora
te
recy
clab
le m
ater
ials
.
D. P
roduct
s th
at a
re m
ore
upgra
dea
ble
or
modula
r to
in
crea
se
lon
gev
ity.
E. P
roduct
s th
at a
re m
ore
en
erg
y
effi
cien
t.
F. D
esig
ns
that
in
corp
ora
te e
nd
-of-
life
man
agem
ent (
recy
clin
g,
repurp
osi
ng, e
tc.)
.
G. P
ackag
ing th
at m
eets
or
exce
eds
curr
ent e
nvir
on
men
tal s
tan
dar
ds.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 59 of 89
Res
ponse
A.
Cust
om
ers
B.
Reg
ula
tors
C.
Corp
ora
te
cust
om
ers
D.
Gover
nm
ent
cust
om
ers
E.
Man
agem
ent
team
/CE
O
F. E
mplo
yee
s
G.
Shar
ehold
ers
H.
Indust
ry
gro
ups
I. S
uppli
ers
J. P
artn
ers
K.
Envir
onm
enta
l
acti
vis
ts
L.
Oth
er
M.
Don‘t
know
/Not
appli
cable
Tota
l
Per
cen
tag
e
18
.93
%
15
.88
%
14
.76
%
13
.65
%
12
.00
%
6.9
7%
5.8
6%
3.6
3%
3.3
4%
3.0
5%
1.1
1%
0.8
2%
1.4
0%
10
0.0
0%
Fre
qu
ency
51 43 40 37 32 19 16 10 9 8 3 2 4 268
Table 4.20: Percentage and frequency distribution of constituencies and interest groups are the
most influential in driving your company‘s green initiatives
Figure 4.20: Constituencies and interest groups are the most influential in driving your
company‘s green initiatives.
As seen in the Table 4.20 and Figure 4.20, the most influential interest groups that drive
companies green initiatives are shown. The customers represent 20% followed by regulation
(17%), corporate customers (16%), government customers (14%), management interest (13%),
employee (6%), shareholders (4%), industry group (4%), suppliers (3%), and Partners (1%).
18
.93
%
15
.88
%
14
.76
%
13
.65
%
12
.00
%6
.97
%
5.8
6%
3.6
3% 3.3
4%
3.0
5%
1.1
1%
0.8
2%
1.4
0%
A. Customers
B. Regulators
C. Corporate customers
D. Government customers
E. Management team/CEO
F. Employees
G. Shareholders
H. Industry groups
I. Suppliers
J. Partners
K. Environmental activists
L. Other
M. Don‘t know/Not applicable
Page 60 of 89
Response A.
Technological
innovation
and product
reputation
B.
Green or
environmental
considerations
C.
Energy
savings
and fuel
economy
D.
All of
the
above
E.
None
of the
above
Total
Percentage 25.10% 24.44% 19.87% 16.84% 13.76% 100.00%
Frequency 67 65 53 45 37 268
Table 4.21: Decision factors with regard to environmental consciousness when purchasing new
equipment.
Purchase decision factors shown in Table 4.21 and Figure 4.21 reveal that technological
innovation and product reputation (environment-wise) account for 25%, followed by green or
environmental considerations (24%), energy saving and fuel economy (20%) and 17% say all the
factors are equally important. About 14% represent no consideration for any of these factors. But
obviously whatever inform their decisions is perhaps more important given their circumstances.
Figure 4.21: Decision factors with regard to environmental consciousness when purchasing new
equipment.
From Table 4.22 and Figure 4.22 about 49% agree that their companies‘ operations cause harm
to the environment, 35% disagree and 14% are not sure. However, observation in Table 4.23 and
Figure 4.23 show that 53% of respondents believe it is important that companies put measures to
reduce environmental emissions and negative impacts, 28% say it is unimportant, and 19% are
neutral.
Response Strongly
agree
Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly
Disagree
Total
Percentage 25.83% 22.88% 16.40% 24.40% 10.50% 100.00%
Frequency 69 61 44 65 28 268
Table 4.22: Percentage and frequency distribution of perception of environmental harm
done by industry operations.
25.10%
24.44%
19.87%
16.84%
13.76% A. Technological innovation
and product reputation
B. Green or environmental
considerations
C. Energy savings and fuel
economy
D. All of the above
E. None of the above
Page 61 of 89
Figure 4.22: Perception of environmental harm done by industry operations.
Response Very
important
Important Cannot
say
Unimportant Very
unimportant
Total
Percentage 30.21% 22.96% 18.80% 19.98% 8.06% 100.00%
Frequency 81 62 50 54 22 268
Table 4.23: The importance of putting measures to reduce company‘s environmental emissions
and negative impacts.
Figure 4.23: The importance of putting measures to reduce company‘s environmental emissions
and negative impacts.
Response Very
significantly
Significantly Not
sure
Insignificantly
Very
insignificantly
Total
Percentage 32.13% 30.24% 11.20% 20.83% 5.60% 100.00%
Frequency 86 81 30 56 15 268
Table 4.24: Percentage and frequency distribution of benefits of going green to company‘s
operation and opportunities for organization in the future.
25.83%
22.88%
16.40%
24.40%
10.50%
Strongly agree
Agree
Not sure
Disagree
Strongly Disagree
30.21%
22.96%
18.80%
19.98%
8.06%
Very important
Important
Cannot say
Unimportant
Very unimportant
Page 62 of 89
Table 4.24 and Figure 4.24 both show information on the benefit of going green. The benefit of
going green is significant by 62% with 32% very significant and 30% significant. On the
contrary, 27% represent insignificance, while 11% are not sure of the future benefits.
Figure 4.24: Benefits of going green to company‘s operation and opportunities for organization
in the future.
Response Regulation/
compliance
costs
Customers‘
needs and
market
forces
Desire to be
different /
competitive
advantage
Stakeholders‘
requirement
Economic
motives
Total
Percentage 25.25% 21.49% 20.97% 17.77% 14.52% 100.00%
Frequency 68 58 56 48 39 268
Table 4.25: Factors that influences company's commitments to environmental initiatives.
Figure 4.25: Factors that influences company's commitments to environmental initiatives.
32.13%
30.24%
11.20%
20.83%
5.60%
Very significantly
Significantly
Not sure
Insignificantly
Very insignificantly
25.25%
21.49%
20.97%
17.77%
14.52%
Regulation and compliance
costs
Customers‘ needs and market
forces
Desire to be
different/competitive advantage
Stakeholders‘ requirement
Economic motives
Page 63 of 89
Regulation and compliance costs have been identified as one of the compelling factors that
influence company‘s commitments to environmental initiative as confirmed by 25% of
respondents as depicted in Table 4.25 and Figure 4.25. Customers‘ needs and market forces
represent 21%, desire to be different and competitive advantage (18%), and economic motives
(15%). Overall market forces, economic motives and competitive advantage put together
represent well over 50% of the driving forces behind greening.
Most companies that embrace greening utilize green consumables as a way of promoting the
initiatives. As shown in Table 4.26 and Table 4.26 about 47% of respondents say their
companies have strong consumption of green products, 34% say theirs‘ is weak and 19% are not
sure.
Response Very
Strong
Strong Not sure Weak Very weak Total
Percentage 22.62% 24.31% 19.10% 18.70% 15.28% 100.00%
Frequency 61 65 51 50 41 268
Table 4.26: Determining the utilization level of green consumables in the organizations.
Figure 4.26: Determining the utilization level of green consumables in the organizations.
Response Global
concerns
Customer
advocacy/
requirements
Profitability Regulatory/
government
requirements /
environmental
fines
All of
the
above
Total
Percentage 29.07% 14.74% 18.35% 19.50% 18.35% 100.00%
Frequency 78 40 49 52 49 268
Table 4.27: Percentage and frequency distribution of drivers of organizational interest in green or
environmental initiatives.
A look at Table 4.27 and Table 4.27 show respondents‘ opinion on further drivers of
organizational interest in green initiatives. Global concerns represent 29%, regulatory /
government and environmental fines (20%), profitability (18%), customers‘ requirements (15%),
and 18% say all the factors are all together important drivers.
Table 4.28 and Table 4.28 reveal the anticipated increase in green products consumptions as a
further means to buttress green commitments. There is a progressive increase from 1 year to 5
years. In one year it will be 14% and 26% in 5 years. In between in the third year it will be 19%.
22.62%
24.31%
19.10%
18.70%
15.28%Very Strong
Strong
Not sure
Weak
Very weak
Page 64 of 89
Figure 4.27: Percentage and frequency distribution of drivers of organizational interest in green
or environmental initiatives.
Response 5 years 4 years 3 years 2 years 1 year Total
Percentage 26.23% 23.60% 18.65% 17.34% 14.17% 100.00%
Frequency 70 63 50 46 38 268
Table 4.28: Anticipated time (in years) for increase in the company‘s use of green products.
Figure 4.28: Anticipated time (in years) for increase in the company‘s use of green products.
Response Excellent Good Not sure Somewhat
good
Moderately
good
Total
Percentage 24.37% 27.86% 12.90% 19.19% 15.68% 100.00%
Frequency 65 75 35 51 42 268
Table 4.29: Percentage and frequency distribution of company relationship with customers,
business clients, and community in terms of environmental performance.
The companies‘ external relationship with customers, business clients and community in terms
of green as shown Table 4.29 and Table 4.29 is 24% excellent, 63% good and 13% not sure.
29.07%
14.74%
18.35%
19.50%
18.35%
Global concerns
Customer
advocacy/requirements
Profitability
Regulatory/government
requirements/environmental
fines
All of the above
26.23%
23.60%18.65%
17.34%
14.17%5 years
4 years
3 years
2 years
1 years
Page 65 of 89
Figure 4.29: Distribution of company relationship with customers, business clients, and
community in terms of environmental performance.
Response A B C D E Total
Percentage 27.23% 24.85% 14.73% 18.26% 14.92% 100.00%
Frequency 73 67 39 49 40 268
Table 4.30: Percentage and frequency distribution of an assessment of company‘s current
greening status.
Figure 4.30: Assessment of company‘s current greening status.
An assessment of current companies‘ greening status depicted in Table 4.30 and Figure 4.30
show 27% of respondents indicating that their companies are greening efforts are in the pilot
stage, 25% in planning stage, 14% fully in use in departments considered fit for greening, 18%
fully in use companywide, and 14% say implementation will commence soon.
24.37%
27.86%
12.90%
19.19%
15.68%Excellent
Good
Not sure
Somewhat good
Moderately good
27.23%
24.85%14.73%
18.26%
14.92%
A. Pilot programme already in
place
B. Planning stage
C. Fully in use in departments
considered appropriate for going
green
D. Fully in use company-wide
E..Implementation to commence
soon
Page 66 of 89
Response
A.
Very
positively
B.
Somewhat
positively
C.
Not sure
D.
Relatively
poor
E.
Very
poorly
Total
Percentage 38.43% 34.16% 11.39% 14.12% 1.90% 100.00%
Frequency 103 92 31 38 5 268
Table 4.31: Percentage and frequency distribution of the impact of top management involvement
and commitment on the implementation of green strategies in the companies.
As shown in Table 4.31and Figure 4.31, top management involvement and commitment in the
implementation of green strategies in the companies is about 73% positive ( 38.43% very
positive and 34.16% somewhat positive), while about 16% represents poor involvement and
commitment of top management. Eleven percent is not sure of whether there is top management
involvement and commitment. The results show that there is real management involvement and
commitment to the implementation of green strategies.
Figure 4.31: The impact of top management involvement and commitment on the
implementation of green strategies in the companies.
It can also be deduced that with this level of top management involvement the company
employees will find it interesting to contribute to the success of the greening efforts and may
increase their support when the management provide further incentives to the employees to
participate in the implementation of green strategies in their company.
The results depicted in Tables 4.32.1 and 4.32.2 and Figure 4.32 reveal the perception of
respondents on how the introduction of green strategies has impacted the companies in terms of
operational excellence, environmental performance, profitability/competitiveness, reputation/
public image, and market acceptability of products/services. Operational excellence is impacted
positively at about 87%, environmental performance affected positively by 78%, profitability is
positively tuned at 63%, reputation/public image positive impact represented by 64% and market
acceptability of products/services has 62%.
On the other hand some respondents believe that the impact is poor. The poor impact felt by the
introduction of green strategies in the companies are expressed as about 7% for operational
excellence, 9% for environmental performance, 13% for profitability, 8% for reputation/public
image and market acceptability of products/services respectively. Other respondents are
undecided about the impacts and this represent 6%, 13%, 24%, 29%, and 30% for operational
excellence, environmental performance, profitability/ competitiveness, reputation / public image,
and market acceptability of products/services respectively. Operational excellence is the most
positively affected followed by environmental performance while the other aspects are almost at
par by 63%, 64% and 62%.
38.43%
34.16%
11.39%
14.12%1.90%
A. Very positively
B. Somewhat positively
C. Not sure
D. Relatively poor
E. Very poorly
Page 67 of 89
Response Very
positively
Somewhat
positively
Not
sure
Relatively
poor
Very
poorly
Total
Operational Excellence 46.28% 40.38% 6.16% 5.24% 1.94% 100.00%
Environmental performance 41.82% 36.50% 12.69% 4.78% 4.21% 100.00%
Profitability/Competitiveness 36.71% 26.48% 23.62% 4.90% 8.29% 100.00%
Reputation and public
image
35.72% 27.70% 28.90% 4.08% 3.59% 100.00%
Market acceptability of
product/services
33.06% 28.85% 30.10% 4.25% 3.74% 100.00%
Table 4.32.1: Percentage distribution of respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of green
strategies has impacted the company in the measured aspects.
Response Very
positively
Somewhat
positively
Not
sure
Relatively
poor
Very
poorly
Total
Operational Excellence 124 108 17 14 5 268
Environmental performance 112 98 34 13 11 268
Profitability/Competitiveness 98 71 63 13 22 268
Reputation and public
image 96 74 77 11 10 268
Market acceptability of
product/services 89 77 81 11 10 268
Table 4.32.2: Frequency distribution of respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of green
strategies has impacted the company in the measured aspects.
Figure 4.32: The respondents‘ perception of how the introduction of green strategies has
impacted the company in the measured aspects.
46.28% 41.82% 36.71% 35.72% 33.06%
40.38% 36.50% 26.48% 27.70% 28.85%
6.16% 12.69% 23.62% 28.90% 30.10%
5.24% 4.78% 4.90% 4.08% 4.25%
1.94% 4.21% 8.29% 3.59% 3.74%
0.00%
20.00%
40.00%
60.00%
80.00%
100.00%
120.00%
A.
Oper
atio
nal
Exce
llen
ce
B.
En
vir
on
men
tal
per
form
ance
C.
Pro
fita
bil
ity/
Com
p
etit
iven
ess
D.
Rep
uta
tion
an
d
publi
c im
age
E.
Mar
ket
acce
pta
bil
ity
of
pro
duct
/ser
vic
es
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure
Relatively poor Very poorly
Page 68 of 89
Response
A.
Very
positively
B.
Somewhat
positively
C.
Not sure
D.
Relatively
poor
E.
Very
poorly
Total
Percentage 26.60% 35.47% 15.76% 19.55% 2.63% 100.00%
Frequency 71 95 42 52 7 268
Table 4.33: Percentage and frequency distribution of the impact of quality and environmental
management certifications on the market acceptability of company‘s product/services, its
position, reputation/public image, and competitiveness.
A look at Table 4.33and Figure 4.33, show that the impact of quality and environmental
management certifications on the market acceptability of company‘s product/services, its
position, reputation/public image, and competitiveness is positive to the tune of about 62% and
poor by about 23% whereas about 16% are uncertain about the impact. This indicates that
external certifications to quality and environmental standards such as ISO 9000 and ISO 14000
series contribute a lot to the market acceptability of products, public image and competitiveness.
Similar opinions would have come from external (market/customers) respondents other than the
companies‘ employees but it is believed the opinions of the employees are good enough to
evaluate the market potentials of greening since they are internal customers and directly affected
by the market. That is, if the market is not accepting the companies‘ products/services, then the
employees will be affected adversely in terms of their salaries and other benefits but if the
products are well accepted the employees would be happy as that will amount to better salaries
and welfare packages. Corporate (environmental) performance could also be indexed by the level
of satisfaction employees derive from the pursuit of green strategies by their companies.
Figure 4.33: The impact of quality and environmental management certifications on the market
acceptability of company‘s product/services, its position, reputation/public image, and
competitiveness.
Response Very
Excellent
Excellent Very
Good
Moderately
Good
Not sure Total
Percentage 10.10% 12.12% 17.06% 33.41% 27.30% 100.00%
Frequency 27 32 46 90 73 268
Table 4.34: Percentage and frequency distribution of company‘s performance in green initiatives.
The respondents‘ view on their companies‘ overall green performance as represented in Table
4.34 and Figure 4.34 show 22% (10% very excellent and 12% excellent), 50% say performance
is good (17% very good and 33 moderately good), and 27% represent not sure.
This means that greening is still in its infantry but the outlook is generally good.
26.60%
35.47%15.76%
19.55%
2.63%
A. Very positively
B. Somewhat positively
C. Not sure
D. Relatively poor
E. Very poorly
Page 69 of 89
Figure 4.34: Company‘s performance in green initiatives.
Response Manufacturing Oil /
gas
Telecom /
ICT
Banking /
Insurance
Tourism /
Hospitality
Total
Percentage 33.58% 31.34% 15.67% 11.19% 8.21% 100.00%
Frequency 90 84 42 30 22 268
Table 4.35: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by sector.
Table 4.35 and Figure 4.35 both show about 34% of the respondents are from the manufacturing
sector, 31% from oil/gas, 16% from ICT/Telecom, 11% are Banking/Insurance and 8% from
Tourism/Hospitality.
Figure 4.35: Distribution of respondents by sector.
Table 4.36 and Figure 4.36 show twenty seven percent of the respondents indicating that their
companies highly capitalized with ten billion Nigerian Naira and over, 18% say their companies
fall between 5billion and 10billion Nigerian Naira capital base, 22% of respondents believe their
companies have between 5million and 1billion Nigerian Naira, and 18% come from companies
capitalized between 500million and 1billion Nigerian Naira, and 15% capitalized at 500million
or less.
Response *₦10bn
or more
₦5bn to
₦10bn
₦1bn
to ₦5bn
₦500m
to ₦1bn
₦500m
or less
Total
Percentage 27.33% 17.74% 21.63% 18.33% 14.98% 100.00%
Frequency 73 48 58 49 40 268
Table 4.36: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by company‘s financial
strength. *₦ denote the unit of Nigerian Naira. Visit http://www.oanda.com/currency/converter/ for current
exchange rate to a US dollar or other currency.
10.10%
12.12%
17.06%
33.41%
27.30%
Very Excellent
Excellent
Very Good
Moderately good
Not sure
33.58%
31.34%
15.67%
11.19%
8.21%
Manufacturing
Oil/gas
Telecom/ICT
Banking/Insurance
Tourism/Hospitality
Page 70 of 89
Figure 4.36: Distribution of respondents by company‘s financial strength.
Table 4.37 and Figure 4.37 both show that the respondents from the top management category
represent 16%, 28% are managers (HODs‘, etc.), 38% are senior (non-management staff)
comprising supervisors, officers, etc, while 17% are the junior employees. Members of top
management are naturally fewer in number but exert remarkable control influence on the
company‘s operation and strategic decision making. The junior employees of the companies
were randomly selected based on their closeness to senior ranking.
Response Top Management
Executive (CEO/
President/Managing
director/SVP/
VP/ Director)
Manager
(Head of
business
unit/HOD,
etc.)
Senior staff
(non
management
staff -
Supervisor/
Officer, etc.)
Junior staff
(Operator /
Technician/
Clerk, etc.)
Other
(please
specify)
Total
Percentage 15.67% 27.99% 37.69% 18.66% 0.10% 100.00%
Frequency 42 75 101 50 0 268
Table 4.37: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondent by job category.
Figure 4.37: Distribution of respondents by job category.
27.33%
17.74%
21.63%
18.33%
14.98% ₦10bn or more
₦5bn to ₦10bn
₦1bn to ₦5bn
₦500m to ₦1bn
₦500m or less
15.67%
27.99%
37.69%
18.66%
0.10%Top Management Executive
(CEO/President/Managing
director/SVP/VP/Director)
Manager (Head of business
unit/HOD/etc.)
Senior staff ( non management
staff - Supervisor/Officer, etc.)
Junior staff
(Operator/Technician/Clerk, etc.)
Other (please specify)
Page 71 of 89
Job function Percentage Frequency
General management 13.08% 35
IT 12.74% 34
Strategy and business development 11.65% 31
Marketing and sales 4.49% 12
R&D 8.07% 22
Information and research 9.87% 26
Accounts/Finance 3.95% 11
Legal 7.35% 20
Customer service 3.58% 10
Human resources 6.10% 16
Operations and production 7.70% 21
Supply-chain management 11.41% 31
HSE/Risk 8.49% 23
Total 100.00% 268
Table 4.38: Percentage and frequency distribution of respondents by main
functional roles.
Figure 4.38: Main functional roles of respondents.
Table 4.38 and Figure 4.38 show respondents‘ profile by main functional roles. Respondents
with general management function represent 13%. Another 13% are IT personnel, strategy and
business development (12%), marketing and sales (4%), R & D (8%), information and research
(10), accounts/finance (4%), Legal (7%), customer service (4%), human resources (6%),
operations/production (8%), supply chain (11%), and HSE/Risk (8%).
12%
12%
11%
4%
7%9%
4%
7%
3%
6%
7%
10%
8%
General management
IT
Strategy and business development
Marketing and sales
R&D
Information and research
Accounts/Finance
Legal
Customer service
Human resources
Operations and production
Supply-chain management
HSE/Risk
Page 72 of 89
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations 5.1 Preamble The main focus of this chapter is to provide a summary of findings, and draw positive
conclusions on the indispensable gains of integrating green initiatives in the overall business
policies and strategies of an organization. While emphasizing lessons learnt, the study will
subjectively make recommendations in other areas or emerging opportunities that organizations
can explore for further benefits in business green strategizing.
It is hoped that the recommendations advanced in this work will in part contribute positively to
providing foundation for an organization‘s life-cycle problems solving approach. Insights and
thoughts concerning the use of green strategies for enhanced operational efficiency, improved
corporate performance and achieving competitive advantage would be pointed out.
5.2 Summary of Findings: 1. All businesses no matter how benign or smart they are create some level of environmental
burden,
2. These harm or impact can be minimized or prevented by responsible greening efforts,
3. Apart from genuine need to safeguard our natural environment, the following are other
reasons for going green:
a) Economic motives
b) Market opportunities
c) External influence by government, regulation, customer and other stakeholders
d) Altruistic or genuine commitment by companies to environmental stewardship
e) Potential energy saving, and
f) Potential for gaining competitive advantage
4. Greening involve some costs but the cost of not greening at all may far outweigh the real
cost of greening.
5. These companies are making reasonable efforts though at various maturity stages to green
their operations and products/services.
6. Companies can derive the dividends of greening by offering new products/services that
really meet green expectations, by attracting new customers, through product
differentiation/brand building and through premium pricing for green products/services.
7. Current demand level for green products/services is relatively low but is expected to rise in
future. To step up the demand level green activism and advocacy may be needed.
8. Elements of greening in practice in the companies at present include teleconferencing/
videoconferencing, incorporating green concepts from design stage, offering incentives to
employees for greening effort, purchase of green power and consumables.
9. Current green strategies include third party certification of suppliers, third party
certification of products/services of company in green initiatives, and creating green
branded products/services.
5.3 Conclusion Most of the companies investigated have before now made and are still making significant effort
in green-going strategies. This notwithstanding few of the companies are yet to embrace fully the
Page 73 of 89
strategic possibilities in greening and the tremendous opportunities they can benefit from it in the
long run. A firm level green strategy is very important for any company to reap from a green
initiative. The benefits of greening are enormous but will vary from industry to industry and
company to company even with a well formalized and articulated green strategy. Sustainable
green strategic advantage is possible when an organization takes advantage of the early move in
any green opportunity in sight. Green prospects are really very high.
From the results it has been observed that no industry or company can be exempted from
contributing to causing environmental harm through its operations. This also indicates that
organisations should have no excuses for not implementing responsible green strategies. It is also
evident that not doing so may attract undesirable consequences including stakeholders'
complaints and punitive actions from government regulation.
The motivations for going green are multifaceted. Some companies believe it is for the potential
market opportunities and the customers' demand which is on the increase is driving the green
effort. Currently the green strategies in most companies are still in the research and development
stage and are expected to bloom and boom in the future.
There is apparent movement to green in the industries and this shows that companies are
appreciating sustainable issues as it affects the environment perhaps for no reason more than the
desire to be perceived as supporting environmental sustainability or to avert negative
consequences or to meet green demand or to accomplish all. Market acceptability of green is
believed to be good at present, there is positive relationship between corporate (environmental)
performance and green initiatives, and top management's involvement and commitment is
supporting the green initiatives.
5.4 Recommendations Drawing from the insights gained in this study, it is very important that organizations embrace
green strategizing not only for being on the right side of the law but also for profits.
5.4.1 Implementing Green Strategy Going green transcends providing products and services that meet ordinary needs of customers
and the natural environment. Greening is phenomenal and will bring about a total shift from
traditional approaches to simple but systematic and sustainable solutions. However what makes
the greening initiatives difficult to achieve may be related with the inherent nature of an
organization, its age and size, business area and type of operation, corporate value system and
culture. This issue varies from company to company, therefore situational approach is
recommended since there is no best way to ensure absolute green success other than adapting the
green best practices to suit an organization‘s circumstance. First top management must
understand the green ideology and its imperatives, the benefits and opportunities. This is
necessary because the CEO and top management executives must show strong commitment and
leadership in green strategy. The driving force for change lies in top management having
accurate knowledge of green strategy/benefits and being able to defend management‘s desire to
change the status quo.
Set Clear Green Goals: This makes it possible to understand the objectives and targets. A well
defined goal makes it easier to follow through initiatives to successful implementation. Clear
goals also make it possible to ascertain the areas to focus on. Measurable performance indices
should be set and monitored as the initiative progress.
Page 74 of 89
Train for Green Behaviour: The benefits of greening will be better appreciated when workers
are given practical orientation and training on green issues. Green awareness can be created in
this way to educate the employee, gain their support and eliminate or minimize resistance to
change. Continuous learning is a crucial part of green strategy. More specific training can be
given to team members in areas such as problem identification and solving methods. Develop
tools and training to explain the threat of global warming and how the business environment can
contribute to slowing down the effects. Make it standard procedure that all staff should have
training on environmental issues.
Most importantly green objectives must be well designed and embedded into organizational
strategy. Proper design of a green programme enhances implementation. Install incentives to
reward performance. When the efforts of the departments and employees are recognized through
incentives such as promotion, awards, and prizes, it will further attract the support, commitment,
and acceptance of greening initiatives by employees.
Developing a recruitment policy based on diversity and green consciousness can significantly
enhance a company‘s green performance and competitiveness. Greening also significantly
affects employee development/training and retention.
Other simple steps that can make a big difference across a whole company
Keep waste/recycling bins in visible places in the workplace, and encourage people to use
them by communicating how recycling can improve global environmental trends.
Encourage a culture that is always aware of waste. Request that lights are turned out in
meeting rooms when not in use and that electrical equipment is not left on. Turn televisions
and computers off rather than leaving them in stand-by mode. Let staff know how much
energy this collective effort will save over a year if everyone makes an effort.
Show that the company as a whole is actively involved in supporting the environment.
Sponsor initiatives in the local area such as reforestation, litter collection and so on and invite
staff to partake in relevant volunteer work.
Avoid unnecessary travel by using video-conferencing.
Ensure operational decisions are made in line with green strategy from the top down.
Ensure that top management executives lead by example and display proactive behaviour.
Take advantage of an opportunity to establish strategic differentiation and prioritize product
development projects based on their green contribution.
Recognize safety and health of stakeholders and the environment as an inseparable part of
corporate policy.
Install safety equipment in all HSE critical operations and processes to control the occurrence
of incidents that can lead to catastrophic environmental consequences or reduce the effects to
as low as is reasonable possible.
Finally, it would be wise for companies to thread the path of greening with great care as false
claims about the greenness of their business and products could provoke a damaging public
image and further investigations into the company‘s operations. Company executives must
understand their core competencies and industry dynamics. It is rather essential to know that as
much as greening is desirable if there is no trade-off, it may never be possible to achieve a
sustainable competitive advantage through greening initiatives. Therefore do not try to be
everything in the name of green. Operate within your capabilities and shed or discard those
activities that offer less or costly advantage.
Page 75 of 89
References
1. Angell, L.C. and Klassen, R.D. (1999) Integrating Environmental Issues into the
Mainstream: An Agenda for Research in Operations Management. Journal of Operations
Management 17(5): pp. 575–598.
2. Ansoff, I. H. ―A Profile in Intellectual Growth‖ in Arthur G. Bedeian, ed, Management
Laureates, Vol. 3, Greenwich, Conn; JA1 Press (1993); pp. 1-39.
3. Ashford, N.A. (1993) Understanding technological responses of industrial firms to
environmental problems: implications for government policy. In Environmental Strategies
for Industry: International Perspectives on Research Needs and Policy Implications, Fischer
K, Schot J (eds). Island: Washington, DC; 277–307. 4. Azzone, G.; Bertelè, U.; and Noci; G. 1997. At Last we are Creating Environmental
Strategies which Work. Long Range Planning 30: pp. 562–571. 5. Bansal, P. (2005). Evolving Sustainably: A Longitudinal Study of Corporate Sustainable
Development. Strat. Mgmt. J., 26: 197–218.
6. Bansal, P. and Clelland, I. (2004) Talking trash: legitimacy, impression management and
unsystematic risk in the context of the natural environment. Academy of Management
Journal 47(1): pp. 93–103.
7. Barney, J. B., ―Firm Resources and Sustained Competitive Advantage‖ Journal of
Management, 17 (1991), pp. 771-792.
8. Besterfield, DH; Besterfield-Michna C; Besterfield GH; Besterfield-Sacre M. (1995). Total
Quality Management. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
9. Bhat, V. N. (1998) Total Quality Management – an ISO 14000 Approach. Quorum:
Westport, CT. 10. Braker, J. (1980) ―The Historical Development of Strategic Management Concept‖.
Academy of Management Review 5, pp. 219-224.
11. Bryan, D., Robert, S. D., Jeffery, D. H., Christopher, P. N., and Trish, B. (2008) Corporate
Social Performance: Creating Resources To Help Organizations Excel Global Business and
Organizational Excellence, pp 26-41
12. Castillo, Jeffrey E. (1995) "Safety Management: The Winds of Change." Professional Safety
in Geigle, Steve (2008) www.oshatrin.org. Geigle Communications, LLC.
13. Cobourn, Bill (2008). Going green: Sustainable growth strategies. Technology executive
connections Vol. 5. PricewaterhouseCoopers, pp. 1-74.
14. Curkovic S, and Landeros, R. (2000) An environmental Baldrige? Mid-American Journal of
Business 15(2): pp. 63–76.fm
15. Curkovic, S.; Sroufe, R.; and Landeros, R. (2008) ―Measuring TQEM Returns from the
Application of Quality Frameworks‖ Bus. Strat. Env. 17, pp. 93–106.
16. DiMaggio, PJ and Powell, WW. (1983). The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism
and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields. American Sociological Review 48: pp.
147–160.
17. Dowell, G.; Hart, S.; and Yeung, B. 2000. Do Corporate Environmental Standards Create or
Destroy Market Value? Management Science; 46 (8): 1059– 1074.
18. Drucker, Principles of Management, pp. 352-353.
19. Fayol, General and Industrial Management, (1949) pp. 60-61.
Page 76 of 89
20. Fernández, E; Junquera, B; and Ordiz, M. (2006) Managers‘ Profile in Environmental
Strategy: A Review of the Literature. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental
Management 13, pp. 261–274.
21. Gladwin, T.N. (1993) The Meaning of Greening: A Plea for Organizational Theory. In
Environmental Strategies for Industry: International Perspectives on Research Needs and
Policy Implications, Fischer K, Schot J (eds). Island: Washington, DC; pp. 37–61. 22. Hambrick, D. and Mason, M. (1984) Upper Echelons: the Organizational as a Reflection of
its Top Managers. Academy of Management Review 9: pp. 193–206.
23. Hanna, M. D. and Newman, R. W. (1995) Operations and environment: an expanded focus
for TQM. International Journal of Quality and Reliability Management 12(5): pp. 38–53.
24. Hart, SL. (1995) A Natural-Resource-Based View of the Firm. Academy of Management
Review 20(4): pp 986–1,014.
25. Hoffman, A. J. (1997). From Heresy to Dogma. New Lexington: San Francisco, CA.
26. Hoffman, A. J. (1999). Institutional evolution and change: Environmentalism and the US
Chemical Industry. Academy of Management Journal, 42(4): pp. 351–371.
27. Hoffman, AJ and Ventresca, MJ. (2002) Organization, Policy, and the Natural Environment:
Institutional and Strategic Perspectives. Stanford University Press: Stanford, CA.
28. Jennings, P. and Zandbergen, P. 1995. Ecologically sustainable organizations: an institutional
approach. Academy of Management Review 20: pp. 1015–1052.
29. Judge, W.Q. and Douglas, T. J. (1998) Performance implications of incorporating natural
environmental issues into the strategic planning process: an empirical assessment. Journal of
Management Studies 35: pp. 241–262.
30. Kassman, K. (1997). Envisioning Ecotopia: The U.S. Green Movement and the Politics of
Radical Social Change, Praeger in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Politics. Last modified on 28
September 2010.
31. Keys, D. (December 2003). "How Rome polluted the world," Geographical.
32. King, A. A. and Lenox, M. J. (2000) Industry Self-Regulation without Sanctions: The
Chemical Industry‘s Responsible Care Program. Academy of Management Journal 43(4): pp.
698–716.
33. Kogut, B. and Zander, U. (1992) Knowledge of the firm, combinative capabilities, and the
replication of technology. Organization Science 3: 383–397. 34. Langlois, R. and Foss, N. (2005) Capabilities and Governance: The Rebirth of Production in
the Theory of Economic Organization, Kyklos, 52 X, pp. 201-218.
35. Lounsbury, M. (2001) Institutional Sources of Practice Variation: Staffing College and
University Recycling Programs. Administrative Science Quarterly; 46 (1): pp. 29– 56.
36. McCormick, J. (1995) The Global Environmental Movement. London: John Wiley.
37. Melnyk, S. A.; Handfield, R.B.; Calantone, R.J.; and Curkovic, S. (2001) Integrating
environmental concerns into the design process: the gap between theory and practice. IEEE
Transactions on Engineering Management 48(2): 189–208.
38. Newmann, William H, ― The Take Off‖ in Arthur G. Bedeian, ed, Management Laureates,
Vol. 2, Greenwich, Conn; JA1 Press (1993); pp. 375-397.
39. Odo, O. M. (1992), Guide to Proposal Writing in Social and Behavioural Science, Enugu
(Nigeria). Snap Press Ltd.
40. Petersen, D. (2003) Techniques of Safety Management. 4th ed. 15es Plaines, IL: ASSE.
41. Porter, M. E. and Van der Linde, C. (1995a) Green and competitive: ending the stalemate.
Harvard Business Review 73(5): 120–134.
Page 77 of 89
42. Porter, M.E. and Van der Linde, C. (1995b) Toward a new concept of the environment–
competitive relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives 9(4): 97–118.
43. Prakash, A. (2002) Green Marketing, Public Policy and Managerial Strategies. Business
Strategy and the Environment 11, 285–297.
44. Raines, S. S. and Prakash, A. Leadership matters: policy entrepreneurship in corporate
environmental policy-making. Adm Soc 2005; 37 (1): pp. 3– 22.
45. Schonberger, R. (1990), Building Chain of Customers. London: Free press.
46. Scott WR. (1987) The Adolescence of Institutional Theory. Administrative Science Quarterly
32(4): pp. 493–511.
47. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A. 1997. Dynamic Capabilities and Strategic Management.
Strategic Management Journal 18(5): pp. 524.
48. Vastag, G.; Kerekes, S.; and Rondinelli, D.A. (1996) Evaluation of Corporate Environmental
Management Approaches: A Framework and Application. International Journal of
Production Economics 43: 193–211.
49. Wernerfelt B. (1984) A Resource-Based View of the Firm. Strategic Management Journal 5:
pp.173.
50. Wren, D. A. (2005) The History of Management Thought., Wiley (5 edition).
51. Yin, R. K. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, revised ed., Thousand Oaks,
Sage Publications, Newbury, CA.
Page 78 of 89
Appendices
Appendix A: Sample Questionnaire Blekinge Institute of Technology
School of Management
Karlskrona, Sweden
Autumn 2010
Dear Respondent,
Research Questionnaire
This is to solicit your kind participation in this survey in respect of a research study as part of the
fulfillment for the award of an MBA by the School of Management, BTH Sweden.
The research focuses on Green Strategy as a New Market-Driven Business Focus. The topic is an
emerging concept and your sincere understanding and response is implored.
The purpose of the survey is exclusively for academic exercise and all information provided here
would be treated with strict confidence and respondents will be treated as anonymous.
Thanks immensely.
Yours sincerely,
Ozoeze Joseph.
Page 79 of 89
Appendix B: Interview Request Letter
Blekinge Institute of Technology
School of Management
Karlskrona, Sweden
Autumn 2010
The MD/HRM,
Company ABC.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Request for Interview
Following the survey successfully conducted in your company recently on Green Strategy – A
New Market-Driven Business Focus for Competitive Advantage, for an MBA Thesis at the
above institution, I wish to request for an interview appointment with your company‘s key
officers mainly the top executives, managers, supervisors and selected number of the staff in the
lower ranks.
The interview is designed to elicit further information on previously questionnaire-obtained data.
It is expected to last for 2 – 3 hours on a one-on-one discussion and it is hoped it will not
consume your useful office hours.
I will appreciate if you could notify your participating staff in good time. The schedule is as
follows:
Date: (fix date here)………………….
Venue: Company premises/Department office
Time: 10am – 12 noon
Thanks for your kind assistance.
Yours sincerely,
Ozoeze Joseph.
Page 80 of 89
Appendix C: Questionnaires 1. Do you agree or disagree with following statements?
A. Relative to other industries, my industry sector does little harm to the environment.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
B. Do you think that your company‘s operations, products/services do any harm to the
environment?
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
C. My company can do significantly more to reduce its environmental impact without
compromising profitability.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
D. The pursuit of green technologies/products contributes to higher prices for products/services.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
E. Consumers say they want green products, but they are highly resistant or unwilling to pay the
higher prices associated with that privilege.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
F. The arrival of the green movement creates significant opportunities for my company.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
2. How important do you believe it is for organisations to take measures to reduce or minimize
their environmental impact? How important do you think it is for your company to take such
measures? Rate on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=Very important and 5=Not at all important.
Very important Important Not sure Moderately important Not at all
important
3. How significant are the market opportunities presented to your company by the green
movement?
Rate on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1=Very significant and 5=Not at all significant.
Very significant Significant Don‘t know Moderately significant Not at all
significant
4. Which of these real or potential impacts of the green movement is the most significant one
faced by your company, in your view?
Higher operating costs Greater regulatory risk Higher procurement costs
Higher compliance costs Higher taxes
Lower sales as a result of necessarily higher prices Other (specify)
5. How detailed a risk assessment has your organisation carried out to determine the impact of
the green movement to your business?
Highly detailed assessment Detailed assessment Don‘t know Cursory assessment
No risk assessment
6. Is your company developing green technology, products and services?
Yes No
6a. If ―yes,‖ which of these describe your reason?
The market opportunities Customers demand we do so
Page 81 of 89
Our management‘s commitment to environmental responsibility
Out of concern for a regulatory or consumer complaint.
6b. If ―yes,‖ how do you think your company will derive the most opportunity?
By offering new products and services By attracting new customers
Through product differentiation/brand-building
Through premium pricing for green products and services
7. How strong is the demand for green products and services among these types of customers?
A. Government customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand Don‘t
know
B. Business customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand
Don‘t know
C. Individual customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand
Don‘t know
8. In two years‘ time, how strong do you expect demand will be for green technology
products and services among these customers?
D. Government customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand Don‘t
know
E. Business customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand
Don‘t know
F. Individual customers
Very strong demand Moderate demand Weak demand No demand
Don‘t know
9. Which of the following factors are most important in your organisation‘s environmental
decision making? Select at least 5 that apply.
Potential cost saving from energy efficiency
Complying with environmental legislation and regulation
Meeting customer expectations/requirements
Potential for gaining competitive advantage Obtaining tax incentives
Matching the environmentally focused actions of competitors
Attracting and retaining staff Meeting investor/shareholder demands
Don‘t know/not applicable
10. Which one of these three outcomes do you think is the most likely for your company as a
result of going green?
Page 82 of 89
Increased costs (costlier processes, costlier materials, more compliance)
Increased opportunities (new products/ services, new branding/differentiation)
Increased business risks (lawsuits, consumer boycotts)
Don‘t know/Not applicable
11. How much impact is being felt on these operations at your company as a result of the
migration to green operations?
A. Manufacturing
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
B. Sourcing/supply chain
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
C. Sales/marketing
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
D. R&D
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
E. Choice of product/service lines
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
F. Employee recruitment/Diversity Management
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable 15.5% 23.0% 18.9% 8.8% 33.8
G. Employee development/training/retention
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
12. Over the next two years, how much impact do you think will be felt on these operations?
A. Manufacturing
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
B. Sourcing/supply chain
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
C. Sales/marketing
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
Page 83 of 89
D. R&D
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
E. Choice of product/service lines
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
F. Employee recruitment
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
G. Employee development/training/retention
Major impact Moderate impact Minor impact No impact Don‘t know/Not
applicable
13. Do you agree or disagree with following statements?
A. There is no need to regulate our company or industry; we are making environmentally
responsible decisions on our own.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
B. Our board and management team are committed to the pursuit of a bottom line that includes
not only profits but also environmental stewardship.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
14. Do you think your company is likely to have to take any of the following actions as a result
of environmental issues or regulation? Select all that apply.
Collaborate with suppliers/customers to achieve regulatory compliance
Change our operations/procedures Expand product portfolio
Respond to customer questionnaires, certifications or audits
Submit questionnaires to, or conduct certifications/audits of, suppliers
Renegotiate/modify supplier contracts Renegotiate/modify customer contracts
Withdraw a product Don‘t know/not applicable
15. Which of the following are now, or are likely to become, elements of your business
operations?
A. We support/encourage telecommuting.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
B. We purchase green power.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
C. Managers are incentivised to devise environmentally friendly business practices.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
D. We incorporate green concepts into product/service design.
Page 84 of 89
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
E. We practice environmentally preferred purchasing.
Now Likely within 2 years Not likely Don‘t know/Not applicable
16. Which of the following elements of compliance/control are now, or will be, in evidence at
your company?
We maintain a formal and widely distributed environmental policy.
We conduct audits and self-assessments of compliance and performance our
environmental policy.
Performance on green initiatives is an element of senior executive compensation.
Performance on green initiatives is an element of line-manager evaluation.
Performance on green initiatives is an element of employee evaluation.
We promote the importance of compliance with green initiatives internally via
newsletters, campaigns, etc.
We have a formal awards programme for employee/ manager achievements in
green initiatives.
We share green compliance data with shareholders.
We conduct ongoing audits of the environmental practices of our suppliers.
We conduct ongoing audits of the environmental practices of our partners.
17. Which of the following strategies does your company have in place, or is likely to have in
place within 2 years?
We require suppliers to become certified by third parties in green initiatives (*NIS/ISO
14000, Energy Star, etc.). *National Industrial Standard
We audit and certify suppliers to our own standards.
Our own products are certified by third parties in green initiatives.
We have created green-branded products/services.
We provide shareholders with a formal report on our green initiatives and performance.
We have put a top-level executive in charge of executing and evaluating our environmental
policies.
18. Do you agree or disagree with following statements?
A. Our customers are willing to pay a premium for environmentally friendly products and
services.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
B. We are actively incorporating green concepts in the design phase of our products and services.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
C. We have rejected a significant number of green concepts (such as alternative materials) due to
cost considerations.
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
19. Which of the following R&D, engineering and manufacturing efforts is your company
making now, or is likely to make within two years?
Designs that minimize / eliminate / reduce environmentally sensitive materials (e.g.
mercury, cadmium, hexavalent chromium, etc.)
Designs that incorporate recycled materials.
Page 85 of 89
Designs that incorporate recyclable materials.
Products that are more upgradeable or modular to increase longevity.
Products that are more energy efficient.
Designs that incorporate end-of-life management (recycling, repurposing, etc.).
Packaging that meets or exceeds current environmental standards.
20. Which of the following constituencies and interest groups are the most influential in driving
your company‘s green initiatives? Select up to three.
Customers Regulators Corporate customers
Government customers Management team/CEO Employees
Shareholders Industry groups Suppliers
Partners Environmental activists Other
Don‘t know/Not applicable
21. What informs your decision with regard to environmental consciousness when you want to
purchase a new equipment?
Technological innovation and product reputation
Green or environmental considerations
Energy savings and fuel economy All of the above None of the above
22. Do you think your operation, product(s) and/or services create any kind of harm to the
environment?
Strongly agree Agree Not sure Disagree Strongly Disagree
23. Does your company believe it is very important or at least important to put measures to
reduce its environmental emissions and negative impacts?
Very important Important Cannot say Unimportant Very unimportant
24. Do you think that going green will benefit your company‘s operation and create opportunities
for your organization in the future?
Very significantly Significantly Not sure
Insignificantly Very insignificantly
25. What influences your company‘s commitments to environmental initiatives? (please tick all
that apply)
Regulation and compliance costs Customers‘ needs and market forces
Desire to be different/competitive advantage Stakeholders‘ requirement
Economic motives
26. How can you describe the consumption/demand level of green consumables in your
company?
Very Strong Strong Not sure Weak Very weak
27. What drives your organization‘s interest (if any) in green strategy or environmental
initiatives?
Global concerns Customer advocacy/requirements Profitability
Regulatory/government requirements/environmental fines
All of the above
Page 86 of 89
28. Do you anticipate or expect that your company‘s investments in or use of green products will
increase in the next ------------------ years?
5 4 3 2 1
29. How do you relate with your customers, business clients, and community in terms of
environmental performance?
Excellent Good Not sure Somewhat good Moderately good
30. How can you describe your company‘s current greening status?
Pilot programme already in place Planning stage
Fully in use in departments considered appropriate for going green
Fully in use company-wide Implementation to commence soon
31. In your opinion how have your company‘s top management involvement and commitment
(if any) impacted the implementation of green strategies in your company? Skip if there is no top
management involvement and commitment.
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
32. In your perception how have the introduction of green strategies impacted your company
in the following aspects?
A. Operational Excellence
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
B. Environmental performance
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
C. Profitability/Competitiveness
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
D. Reputation and public image
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
E. Market acceptability of product/services
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Relatively poor Very poorly
33. Do you think quality and environmental management certifications have affected the
market acceptability of your company‘s product/services, its position, reputation/public
image, and competitiveness?
Very positively Somewhat positively Not sure Insignificantly Very poorly
34. Overall, what grade would you give to your company in terms of its green initiatives?
Very Excellent Excellent Very Good Good Moderately good Not sure
Industry/Respondent Profile
35. What is your industry sector?
Manufacturing Oil/gas Power/Energy/Renewables
Telecom/ICT Banking/Insurance Property/Real Estate
Construction/Building Education/Research Consulting
Page 87 of 89
36. What is your assessment of your company‘s financial strength in Nigerian Naira (NGN)?
₦10bn or more ₦5bn to ₦10bn ₦1bn to ₦5bn ₦500m to ₦1bn
₦500m or less
37. Which of the following best describes your title?
Manager CEO/President/Managing director SVP/VP/Director Other
Head of business unit CIO/Technology director Head of department
Board member CFO/Treasurer/Comptroller Supervisor/Officer
Operator/Technician/Clerk Other (please specify)
38. What are your main functional roles?
Please choose no more than three functions.
General management IT Strategy and business development
Marketing and sales R&D Information and research
Accounts/Finance Legal Customer service
Human resources Operations and production
Supply-chain management Risk Other
Page 88 of 89
Appendix D: Examples of Incidents & Costs Incident Date Incident type Details Costs
Texas City
Explosion
April 16, 1947
French ship exploded while
docked.
Ammonia nitrate blew up.
Costs: 576 fatalities; 5,000 injures.
Mexico City
Gas Storage
Explosion
Nov. 19, 1983
Four spherical 420,000 gallon
tanks ignited from propane truck
at loading dock.
Homes were allowed to be built near
the facility.
Costs: 30 acres of homes destroyed, 30
acres damaged; 540 fatalities; 2,200+
injures; 10,000+ homeless.
Soviet Nuclear
Incident at
Chelyabinsk-
65 Near
Kyshtym in
Urals
Sept. 29, 1957
Tank of radioactive waste
exploded.
Discharged 20 million curies of
radiation.
Probably contaminated 357 square
miles. 10,000 evacuated.
Costs: Possibly several hundred
fatalities; 200 million rubles.
Farmer's
Export Grain
Elevator
Explosion
Dec. 27, 1977
Not provided
Grain dust ignited by spark.
Costs: 18 fatalities.
Vila Soco
Pipeline Fire
Feb. 25, 1984
Pipeline gasoline blaze
exploded, burned at over 1,000 oC through Brazilian village.
The wrong pipeline was opened the
day preceding the fire.
Costs: 500+ fatalities (child casualties
under age five had to be estimated
since they were totally incinerated).
Proposed/reported fines/penalties:
Petrobras paid hospital costs and
damages.
San Juanico
Pemex Gas
Explosion
Nov 19, 1984
Series of liquefied gas storage
explosions in
San Juanico, Mexico.
Fireball flashed through suburban area
at 5:43 am.
Costs: 503 fatalities; 4,000+ injures.
Proposed /reported fines /penalties:
Pemex held liable by federal attorney
general. By 1986, Pemex had S5
million in claims
Chernobyl
April 26, 1986
Nuclear plant meltdown and
radiation
release. Poor engineering and
operation combined.
Released 50 million curies of radiation
into surrounding area.
Costs: 250-1- deaths; $26 billion
planned to move 200,000 additional
residents; $2 billion planned to rebury
the plant.
Alaskan Oil
Spill
March 24, 1989
987-foot tanker smashed into
Captain left the bridge during
maneuvers. He and crew have been
Page 89 of 89
Bligh Reef and spilled 11
million gallons of oil into Prince
William Sound.
blamed by government officials and
others.
Costs: Eventually labeled as a human
fatigue incident by NTSB investigators.
Proposed/reported fines/penalties:
Ongoing. U.S. Congress passed a bill
allowing states to adopt stricter spill
liability laws than the federal
government requires.
Phillips
Petroleum
Pasadena
Explosion
Oct. 23, 1989
Gas release led to explosion that
destroyed
portion of a polyethylene plant.
Phillips Petroleum said the company's
own investigation showed the
explosion was the result of a departure
from established routine procedures.
Costs: 23 fatalities; 314 injuries;
Phillips experienced $431million
decrease in net income that year.
Proposed/reported fines/penalties:
OSHA first proposed
$6.4 million in fines. Later reduced
them in exchange for promise to
institute process safety management
procedures at Pasadena and three other
plants.
Channelview
Texas
Chemical Plant
Explosion
July 5, 1990
Houston Arco Channelview
plant suffered explosion that
burned city-block-sized area.
Fire lasted more than four hours.
Inadequate training and excessive
overtime work have been mentioned as
possible causes of the accident.
Costs: 17 fatalities.
Proposed/reported fines/penalties:
$3.48 million in fines.
This list of sample incidents and costs was generated from accessible CNN, AF, safety and press
reports, and is only a small sample of what has occurred.
** Adapted from Petersen, D. (2003) Techniques of Safety Management. 4th ed. 15es Plaines, IL:
ASSE.
