Responsible Travel: Hotels Making Green the New Thing

By Guest Contributor, Sam Marquit, Co-author of Fair Marquit Value (fmarquitv.tumblr.com)
As a commercial contractor, I see a number buildings and facilities that could benefit from going green. The benefits of green materials and sustainable practices are truly amazing for business owners and homeowners, but especially for hotels. Fortunately, there is a real trend in the United States for hotels to become more energy conscious and eco-friendly. They don´t just do it for marketing purposes, but because these big hotels have a responsibility to promote recycling, sustainability and green materials. One of the most important parts of going green is becoming LEED certified.  However, just doing that isn't enough. Businesses should also be recognized for going above and beyond LEED certification, especially when they do more for their communities.  In Asia, community engagement, community development, cultural awareness, natural area preservation, resource efficiency and other eco-friendly practices are all categories in responsible tourism for The Wild Asia Responsible Tourism Awards. Since the award show celebrates what businesses can do for their cultural and environmental surroundings, it's an incredible way to promote businesses, green building and eco-friendly practices as well as responsible tourism. In the United States, there isn't an equivalent awards program like the Wild Asia Responsible Tourism awards, but that hasn't stopped many hotels in U.S. big cities from doing something to be more eco friendly. 
Implementing a recycling program or installing showerheads and faucets with shut off valves that are automatic are good first steps to LEED certification for hotels. Hotels in Las Vegas have done a number of things to become more environmentally conscious and proudly promote the sustainability of their hotels. Since the tourism industry focuses on hotels and lifestyles at these getaway spots, it's important to keep in mind how waste can lead to sustainability. One Las Vegas hotel was awarded for being the "Most Eco-Friendly Hotel in America." The Las Vegas Palazzo Resort incorporated a number of sustainable elements into its hotel and also recycles or reuses waste.  
Other hotels in big cities have also adopted greener practices. For example, in New York City, hotels have begun to implement eco-friendly practices and waste recycling because it helps cut down on energy costs. It also gave them on edge on competition when marketing for new guests. Responsible tourism goes a long way to bring a customer´s eye to your get away spot. Ink48 Hotel was one of the large hotels to even start a program called Earthcare. Members of Earthcare get together and speak about ways that they can affect change on the planet in a positive light.  
It's not every day that you see businesses pulling together in an industry to affect worldwide change. The hotel industry continues to put its best foot forward to advance responsible tourism. Through their eco-friendly practices, they have truly saved a ton of waste and protected some of the precious resources in their areas. Las Vegas hotels see a lot of action.  There are over 124,000 hotel rooms and 40,000,000 travelers to this neon hot spot in Nevada.  For that reason, responsible tourism truly takes on a whole new light for this big city. However, it shouldn't just be hotels that are getting into this LEED certified, waste recycling, eco-friendly world. 
Every business can benefit from eco-friendly and recycling practices, whether it's just to save on energy or to ensure that the local environment is not being affected. We all have a part to play in the future of our planet, and with that in mind, it's essential that business owners as well as homeowners do something sustainable and eco-conscious every day. If we can  affect change within our local communities, then we can affect change throughout the world and truly bring about a positive change for the entire planet. Big city hotels shouldn't be the only ones taking part in responsible tourism. In your travels, I encourage you to look for ways that you can also become a motivating factor for going green and traveling responsibly.

Related Links:


Preferences
§
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
0
-
=
Backspace
Tab
q
w
e
r
t
y
u
i
o
p
[
]
Return
capslock
a
s
d
f
g
h
j
k
l
;
'
\
shift
`
z
x
c
v
b
n
m
,
.
/
shift
English
alt
alt
Preferences

Obama offers hope for responsible business

From: Ethical Corporation
By: Andy Savitz
7 Nov 08

US president-elect Barack Obama will want business to help him heal the nation by working with the state to tackle social and environmental issues
Hope is running rampant in America again, an immediate post-election uplift felt in many quarters like the night we landed on the moon.

Although we had known in advance that the lunar module would land and that Neil Armstrong would get out and speak to us from the moon, we were flabbergasted when it actually occurred. We were simply not prepared for the stunning reality of it. How could we be?

On election might, the only person who seemed prepared was the president-elect himself, Barack Obama. He took the podium to remind us that, appearances to the contrary, the election was not the change he had been talking about. It was merely an opportunity to change, and that hard work of making change would now begin.

Harkening back to our last great awakening in the 1960s, Obama invoked the spirit of John F. Kennedy – the first Catholic to be elected president – to suggest that much would be expected of us – citizens, communities and corporations.

Creating a Facebook for development

September 15, 2008
From: Private Sector Development Blog


If you graduated from college in the last couple of years, you will have heard of a gamut of social networking sites: Friendster, Myspace, and Facebook, to name a few. Even for those without freshly minted college degrees, these websites are hard to ignore - Facebook claims to have at least 90 million active users, and organizations as diverse as Amnesty International and Apple have established social networking presences. And while they're great for certain purposes - what did your friend do last weekend? which NYT's op-ed is he reading - they go only so far in connecting communities with very specific interests. Thus enters Business Fights Poverty, a website that aims to connect professionals who work on the business side of international development.

The trick for any social networking site, of course, is reaching a tipping point in terms of the number of members. It's something like going to a party - who will enter the room first, second, third, etc.? The opportunity facing Business Fights Poverty, though, is that no other organization has really tried to fill this niche yet. Perhaps the time is right for a Facebook for development.

The Growth of Business through Corporate Social Responsibility

* By Jeff Hittner From JustMeans
August 05, 2008

It's not secret that companies are coming under increasing pressure from governments, advocacy groups, investors, prospective employees, and consumers to make their operations, products and services more socially responsible, particularly regarding the environment but also on a range of issues from labor practices to financial transparency to product safety.

In addition, constraints and costs of energy and water usage are rising at an accelerating rate, which can have significant impact on a company’s business operations and financial performance.

It's becoming clear that business leaders understand the growing business and social requirements for addressing CSR concerns, and the rising penalties for failing to do so. In fact, many are starting to understand that there is an advantage to doing so aggressively, strategically and proactively -- those that do will have a significant advantage in attracting customers, investors and talent, as reducing costs and improving efficiency and meeting regulatory requirements.

This is confirmed in a study my company conducted of more than 250 c-suite executives from around the world, which showed the following key findings:

* Sixty-eight percent of businesses surveyed are already focusing on corporate social responsibility activities to create new revenue streams, and 54% believe it's giving them a competitive advantage;
* Customers are the chief stakeholders driving corporate social responsibility, yet 76% of businesses surveyed admit they don't understand their customers' CSR concerns and only 17% of businesses are even asking them;
* Three-quarters said that the amount of information being collected about them by advocacy groups and others has increased in the last three years. The same number said they had increased the amount of information they're making available about their businesses;


Additionally, another study we conducted with more than 1,100 CEOs showed that the majority of them plan to increase their investments in CSR by 25 percent over the next three years.

Consumers play a large and growing role in propelling this issue, as they demand products and services produced, packaged and distributed in a way that's consistent with their personal values. They're using the Web to communicate, organize and share information in ways not previously possible to decide what products and services they’ll buy, who they will work for and also to influence media coverage and government regulation.

Our CSR study identified three major issues regarding how companies should treat CSR and address customers and other key stakeholders:

* First, it has to align these corporate social responsibility values of its customers with its business strategy, treating CSR as an investment instead of an expense. Linking them with core product and services can enhance the value proposition and create a new level of differentiation with consumers. An offering that meets consumer needs and matches their values is much more attractive.
* Second, the company must take the wraps off information it once considered private or proprietary. With relentless pressure from consumers and advocacy groups, restrictions need to fall away, and visibility is best met with transparency. But what seems like an insatiable thirst for information is in reality a drive for relevant information that can reduce complexity and increase consumers’ comfort level.
* And finally, the need for transparency leads to the need to engage consumers and advocates. True communication requires not just context, but interaction among the parties. Companies need to not only talk to these stakeholders but also listen. If they do, they’re likely to gain valuable information that can help them improve their products and services, uncover new market opportunities, and head off problems before they occur.

Company's that follow these three principles can expect to benefit from improved relationships with all of its key constituents, more loyal customers, lower costs, higher revenues and an overall improvement of the business’ standing in society.

2007: A “Pivotal Year” for Corporate Sustainability and CSR

A DOMANI Press Release
From: JustMeans

DOMANI demonstrates how TQM ‘Kano Analysis’ can strengthen brand value

Last year could easily have been called the “Year of Emerging Green.” The top stories in 2006 included General Electric’s ambitious “Ecomagination” campaign and the surprising emergence of Wal-Mart Inc. into the sustainability arena–with bold sustainability goals. Even Vanity Fair dedicated one of its 2006 issues to environmental issues and climate change.

Environmental Awareness Accelerates in 2006. As Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and sustainability programs gathered momentum, 2006 saw a shift toward increased public awareness of environmental issues, particularly regarding climate change. This trend was brought to the forefront of popular awareness by three significant events:



Weather deviations throughout the world, including the warmest year recorded in North America, and news reports that 10 of the warmest years since the 1850s took place in the last 12 years;

Former Vice President Al Gore’s documentary about global warming, An Inconvenient Truth, which is one of the most successful documentaries of all time;

California Assembly Bill 32, the first binding greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction target initiative (25% by 2020).

In response to these notable events, CSR reporting, environmental branding, and sustainability strategies ‘came of age’ in 2006. The year even saw marketers messaging their products and services specifically to target increased customer awareness of corporate environmental performance and responsibility.

Forecasts for 2007 and beyond. What can we expect in 2007 and beyond as a result of the watershed events of 2006?

DOMANI foresees a continued shift in customer expectations and demands across a wide range of industries. We anticipate the imminent coming of a “tipping point” where end users and other stakeholders routinely request companies to move forward with improved environmental performance, including reduced GHG emissions.

DOMANI envisages that many customers will no longer be passive supporters of corporate environmental performance. We anticipate the emergence of active stakeholders who aggressively demand sustainability, CSR branding, and accurate environmental reporting. These stakeholders will only support responsible companies with purchases and investments.

Profiting from Total Quality Management. Companies are asking us how they can capitalize on the profound environmental and sustainability developments of recent years. They want to know how they can benefit from the aforementioned shifts in customer expectations.

The answer lies in the evolving business tool called Total Quality Management (TQM). One important TQM tool, Kano Analysis, helps companies prioritize customer requirements (expectations) based upon customer satisfaction. Kano Analyses reveal which traits are important to customers as they make decisions about whether or not to buy a particular product or service.

Most Kano Analyses have 3 common key characteristics, which are described and illustrated below:



Basic Factors

These are the “must have” traits that a customer requires of a product/service;



Excitement Factors

These are “delighter” factors that increase customer satisfaction but do not cause dissatisfaction if not delivered; and



Performance Factors

These factors result in satisfaction when delivered and dissatisfaction when not delivered.

Domani - Newsletter

A Kano Analysis of 2006 indicates that customers have begun to expect companies to demonstrate environmental performance and communicate their progress to the public. The analysis also suggests that sustainability strategies and CSR are becoming performance factors companies are expected to achieve. In other words, sustainability strategies and CSR are no longer merely excitement factors that, while delightful, are not expected to happen.

With this fresh perspective, the widespread emergence of sustainable business strategies and consumer awareness of environmental issues suggests a coming paradigm in customer expectations. Sustainable business and CSR initiatives, such as the Ecomagination campaign, recyclability and energy efficiency, were historically classified within the realm of excitement factors. As environmental awareness increased during 2006, consumers began switching their perspectives of corporate environmental/sustainability initiatives and deliverables from excitement factors to performance factors.

This switch means that the business value of sustainability initiatives and CSR is now measurable–and real.

A Critical Time for Making Progress. Companies that agree to abide by sustainability and CSR initiatives are reaping significant market benefits, many of which were documented by the media during the year. But what has been less documented is the following: companies that do not engage in environmental performance initiatives will increasingly encounter public scrutiny. Ultimately, they will be penalized in the marketplace–and this will be documented in the media.

DOMANI sees 2007 as a critical point in time for American business– where stakeholders will witness large-scale shifts in business strategies to meet customer expectations for sustainability and CSR. What we expect is that these actions will result in enhanced brand recognition and increased business value.

Corporate America's Social Conscience

From: Fortune Special Sections

Today more and more organizations are awakening to the fact that corporate social responsibility is key to their long- term success and cannot be overlooked.

It's just another training day for Scott Noesen. A pragmatist with a low-key manner, he has rolled up his shirtsleeves and is meeting a cadre of 80 managers at the Dow Chemical petrochemical plant in Plaquemine, La., just off theBayou. Noesen's mission—unlike most corporate trainers—isn't to preach the gospel on customer service or quality-control techniques to his troops. Instead, his task is to spark higher-level thinking on such topics as environmental stewardship, community-based development, and corporate responsibility. "For us, these concerns are now being integrated into every facet of our business—from product design in the R&D lab to global marketing," says Noesen, who is Dow's director of sustainable development. "Our goal is to have every member of the workforce understand the philosophy so they can help us develop grassroots initiatives around it."

That's not surprising. Over the past five years a growing number of U.S. corporations like Dow Chemical have developed what management gurus have coined a "sustainable development plan." Simply put, that is a list of commandments imbedded into the corporate mission statement that guides an organization down a moral path so it can rise to the challenges of today's global economy—including AIDS, human rights, pollution, and poverty.

This attack of conscience is caused by a number of concurrent trends that have put the spotlight on corporate ethics. Probably the most notable is the barrage of financial scandals that blew up giant multinationals such as Enron and WorldCom and prodded Congress to enact the Sarbanes-Oxley Bill, legislation that raises corporate accounting and governance standards. But also driving it are two other forces that haven't gotten as much attention: a UN initiative to get multinationals more involved in solving the world's ills, and institutional investors' demand for companies to become more socially responsible.

"U.S. companies are awakening to the fact that corporate social responsibility is key to success and cannot be overlooked," reveals Andrew Savitz, a partner in PriceWaterhouse-Coopers' environmental sustainability business services practice. "They realize that just one insult to their reputation can cause significant damage to their business, and it really concerns them." As he points out, Martha Stewart's alleged insider-trading scheme is a perfect example. Her company's market cap has plummeted by almost $400 million since the charges were made public, although it has never been proven that she engaged in such illegal activity. "This saga proved to corporate America that any ethical misstep can be explosive and very costly, especially for companies with high public visibility," says Savitz.

While there are no definitive statistics that can reveal just how many companies are taking a more principled approach to business, the PriceWaterhouseCoopers 2002 Sustainability Survey Report, which surveyed 140 U.S. companies, noted that 70% had no broad-based sustainability program in place yet. While some were paying attention to environmental issues, they were not sure how to tackle the myriad of other social concerns that need to be addressed. "Many corporate executives feel this should be the business of government, not private enterprise," explains Savitz. "Others are just not sure how to develop these practices. The undertaking is enormous."

The good news is that about 69% of respondents in the PriceWaterhouseCoopers survey are currently reviewing or revising their ethics programs or corporate-governance process. But thanks to the escalating pressure on organizations to conform to higher standards of integrity, soon companies should also begin looking into the broader array of corporate responsibility issues.



That's because senior managers realize that failing to assess their organization's social, economic, and environmental strategies can seriously hurt the bottom line. Among possible nightmare scenarios: loss of a sizeable portion of the workforce to AIDS; the disruption of customer and supplier relationships because the company lacks a social conscience; flight by shareholders and investors angered by self-dealing or unethical behavior; project delays because of a corporation's unwillingness to address community concerns; labor unrest due to exploitive workplace practices; and government fines or litigation based on the firm's poor environmental or product-safety record.

Also contributing to the trend is recent market research that proves that corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices drive profitability. Increasingly, data from such sources as the Sustainable Asset Management Group, which monitors the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, support the view that companies that engage in such activities outperform those that do not (see chart). Perhaps even more telling is anecdotal evidence of this phenomenon emanating from the public-affairs departments of global corporations.

Profiting From Righteousness

For a snapshot of how corporate social responsibility boosts an enterprise's overall performance, one only has to look at British Telecom (BT). The mammoth telecommunications provider, which boasts annual sales of more than $30 billion, has been active in the field since the late 1980s. At first, only philanthropy and environmental management concerns were on its agenda. But after fully developing expertise in those areas, the company expanded into other fields as well, including community development through training and technology.

BT has become a model of how a company can work to assist disadvantaged communities and inspire its staff to be social stewards. The company gives 1% of corporate profits directly to communities each year, which is largely invested in education. Money goes toward teacher training, in-school workshops, and the transfer of digital technology. Employees are also encouraged to give to charity. British Telecom has a charitable matching plan for workers who want to participate. It matches employee contributions to charity up to $1.6 million.

Over the past ten years the company has been tracking the business case for corporate social responsibility by surveying its customers around the world. Its findings are startling: "Our studies show there is a direct link with our progress in corporate social responsibility, customer satisfaction, and brand reputation," reveals Adrian Hosford, director of BT's social policy in London. "About one-third of our corporate reputation is driven by our socially responsible endeavors." As he points out, that's a huge impact.



British Telecom's experience demonstrates a hard truth: Like it or not, every action a corp-oration takes may be interpreted as a statement of what it stands for. That's why a principled company will fortify its reputation. Research proves this point. According to Corporate Citizen Watch, a study conducted by Hill and Knowlton, nearly four out of five Americans say they consider reputation when buying a company's product, and 36% call it an important factor in their purchasing decision. More than 70% of investors consider reputation in their decisions even if that means lowering their financial returns.



Corporate social responsibility has an additional fallout benefit. It often improves an or-ganization's esprit de corps. "Employees tend to feel better when they work for a company committed to improving society," says Savitz of PriceWaterhouseCoopers. "This can reduce turnover and improve worker productivity."

Considering the benefits, how can a company guard its soul and create a broad-based corporate social responsibility program? The task is huge, since it encompasses so much. That's why many companies are turning to the Global Reporting Initiative, an independent organization in Amsterdam that has developed globally acceptable guidelines and best practices for these endeavors.

At the same time, they are also adopting what's known as the Global Compact, nine universal principles on corporate citizenship developed by UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan in the fields of human rights, labor standards, and the environment. The principles derive from the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Labor Organization's Fundamental Principles on Rights at Work, and the Rio Principles on environment and development.

To date, 900 companies, including BT, Cisco Systems, DuPont, and Nike, have joined the Global Compact since it was launched in July 2000. Not only have they agreed to advocate sustainability strategies in their mission statements and annual reports, but some have also joined with the United Nations in partnership projects. Most are now awaiting the creation of global standards by which sustainability performance can be measured. So far metrics in the field are limited, but that may change. The International Organization for Standardization in Geneva, creator of ISO 9000 and thousands of other business and government standards, is now exploring the issue.

Moving Toward a Higher Ground

While experts have a variety of opinions on how to develop and maintain a successful CSR program, most agree that what is most important is stakeholder dialogue. In order to establish proper long-term sustainability goals, companies need to find out how employees, communities, and investors feel about the array of social concerns—such as pollution and worker safety—that affect their daily lives. One way to do this type of soul-searching is through community focus groups. Another way is to set up an independent corporate advisory council representing a cross-section of interest groups. Dow Chemical has had one for 12 years. Today the panel includes an advisor for the International Institute of Environment and Development, the management editor of The Economist, a social psychologist, and an academic from a developing country. According to Noesen, "their insights are invaluable."



Public reporting on corporate citizenship is also key. With investors and shareholders focused on transparency issues, it's critical that companies publish information about their activities. This helps increase public awareness about an organization's socially responsible business strategies. It also helps legitimize these practices in the eyes of investors, explains Don Carli, president at Nima Hunter, a New York management consulting firm specializing in CSR.

Another crucial task is to develop an environmentally friendly supply chain. Stonybrook Farms is one company that has a model approach. Besides sourcing products with natural ingredients so they are organic, it has assembled a network of suppliers that agree to refrain from using hormones in their milk production. In addition, it supports family farms whenever possible.

But like any other management credo, corporate responsibility initiatives will never work without a champion. It's up to the CEO and other senior executives to wave the CSR flag for all to see. Those leaders set the policy and align the organization on all of these issues. One of their goals should be to integrate all sustainability practices into the core processes of their organizations. As Sarah Macleod, chief executive of Echo Research in London, explains, "Unless it is part of the way the company operates in business every day, it can never catch fire and be effective."



Ivan Seidenberg, chairman and CEO of Verizon, agrees. That's why he's made this a broad issue by integrating the company's social responsibility goals into the core of the company's mission statement, which is known as Verizon's Promise. Its mantra: We bring the benefits of communications to everybody—our customers, communities, shareholders, and employees. "We believe just earning a profit is not good enough," Seidenberg explains. "We have to make sure we are serving the public and are the most respected brand in communications." It's not surprising, then, that some of the company's well-known CSR programs include grants geared to improving literacy, enriching communities through technology, and encouraging employee volunteerism through the Verizon Foundation, in addition to supporting the efforts of minority suppliers through the Verizon Supplier Diversity Initiative.

Seidenberg has also appointed officers to oversee each of the many areas of corporate social responsibility—from community development to corporate governance to diversity to ethics to philanthropy. "Each of these directors drives our CSR efforts through the whole organization," he explains. And they are incentivized to make sure their efforts succeed. As Seidenberg reveals, 10% of the annual bonus of the company's top 2,500 managers is tied directly to diversity and service goals, on top of the regular financial and operational objectives.

For the rest of the staff there are corporate recognition awards, which are dollar awards for those employees who have made big contributions towards the company's many social causes, including service to the community and work-environment initiatives. Under this company program, $1.24 million was doled out to winners this year.

"Over time you build a culture rooted in social responsibility," notes Seidenberg. "To succeed you must enlist the support of everyone in the organization." The only way this can be accomplished is through training and incentives. That's why at Verizon all of the 227,000 employees get ethics training.

For visionary chieftains dedicated to CSR, the crusade is a lot like John the Baptist's. "They are spreading a new orthodoxy that's just started to gain widespread recognition," says Carli. "You can't have this kind of a paradigm shift overnight."
— Lori Ioannou

Editorial Consultant and Contributor

Stan L. Friedman has served as a corporate social responsibility consultant and senior marketing executive for a number of consumer products, packaged goods, entertainment, publishing, media, and health care companies and nonprofit and government organizations. He has written about CSR-related issues for Red Herring, Brandweek, The San Francisco Business Times, Variety, The Hollywood Reporter, Corporate Philanthropy Report and The Chronicle of Philanthropy. Friedman is also an adjunct professor at San Francisco State University and Golden Gate University.

The Natural Step Framework Provides a Simple Vehicle for Change to Sustainability

From: Sustainable Industries
The Natural: Karl-Henrik Robèrt
by Becky Brun - 7.15.08

One of Sweden’s leading cancer scientists, Karl-Henrik Robèrt has become one of the most influential figures in the global sustainable business arena. The Natural Step Framework, which Robèrt authored with input from dozens of scientists in 1989, has helped countless businesses take a scientific approaching sustainability.

Hatched in Sweden,The Natural Step organization today has licensees in 11 countries and has made its way into the boardrooms of international corporations, including Nike (NYSE: NKE), The Home Depot (NYSE: HD), Bank of America Corp. (NYSE: BAC) and McDonalds Corp. (NYSE: MCD). Municipalities, schools and even the U.S. Marine Corps have adopted The Natural Step Framework.

Sustainable Industries caught up with Dr. Robèrt via phone days before he departed Stockholm for his summerhouse in Öland, Sweden.

SI: We interview many business leaders who point to The Natural Step Framework as their vehicle for change. Why do you think the framework is a more successful vehicle for change than, say, government regulation?

KHR: The reason is comprised by our explanation of Level 1. We explain how they can improve their financial records if they are a bit ahead of the game. A metaphor that we often use is the funnel.

We are systematically losing room in the funnel: Climate change is increasing, we have more and more people, the gaps between the haves and have-nots is increasing, the water tables are decreasing, there is more asphalt. We are gradually losing the potential to sustain civilization. The whole world is part of the funnel.

If you are more part of the problem relative to your competitors, your risk of being hit by those walls of the funnel increases. Then you have increasing insurance costs, resource costs, waste management costs, etc., because you are part of the problem. Other examples are that you are not seen by others as trustworthy, you lose talent wars because it’s not as fun to be employed by you.

All of these are financial punishment for those players who are part of the problem. You fail to recognize new market opportunities and new products that will suit tomorrow’s markets.

Sustainable principles are at the opening of the funnel. They explain where you are no longer part you can capture not only climate change and child labor and a few other items we find the whole world talking about today, but you capture the full power of your problems and assets.Thereafter follows a brainstorming session. In this, you make a list of the possibilities of solving your problems and being innovative for the future.

The solutions are creatively proposed and scrutinized by using the same basic principles by which you assessed the challenges. You end up with a long list [of possibilities] and most are very expensive. You make that list nevertheless. Next you ask, “How do I prioritize the solutions I just listed so I do the stuff relatively early on that is smart?”

You can prioritize by asking:

1. Which of those solutions is moving me toward sustainability?

2. Which solutions are providing a platform for the other smart options in the list so they can be added later?

3. Which of those solutions do all of these things while at the same time giving me a return in investment? Then you re-evaluate the game as it unfolds. There is always something that you can do that is smarter than the stuff you are already doing.

Many businesses think, “If I choose the sustainable option, it will be far too expensive, and that will make shareholders angry.” That’s based on a flaw. There are many more options than two. Choose the ones that satisfy the shareholders and provide a platform for smart investments.

SI: Can you explain the theory of “backcasting” and why you think it leads to higher environmental, social and economic returns than traditional forecasting?

KHR: It is only an academic term for being really strategic. Good visionaries see that goal of winning—they can almost touch it. They can turn back in time and look at where they are today, and see themselves as a vision standing in success. Backcasting arrives as a term to help bridge the gap between the present and the future. Forecasting means that you are instead departing in your planning from the current situation and trying to foresee where [current] trends can carry you.

Robust principles in the future can guide our thinking. They open up much greater freedom because they are not based on today’s trends and technologies. It’s also good for community building: When everyone in the company shares robust principles, they are spinning ideas back and forth because they know the same language.

This connects to what we said about the list of solutions: If you understand what you want to achieve, you can think outside of the box; you can see that you have more than just two options.

SI: TNS Framework is based on reaching a consensus among scientists about how to approach environmental change. Reaching consensus, especially in large corporations or government agencies can be daunting. When a company is undergoing TNS Framework to envision and create goals for the future, why is it so critical that the management team gain both buy-in and agreement among everyone?

KHR: The overall strategic plan, based on an understanding of the system a company is operating is, is the responsibility of top management. To understand the big picture and draw the right strategic conclusions is a task that cannot be abandoned to anyone else, for instance experts.

They are generally amateurs when it comes to orienting big complex organizations in the big complex world. This means that the “game” TNS plays, is a game that successful leaders get increasingly aware of. Not understanding the big picture is a way of having “bad luck” all the time. So, top management must not only “bye in” and “coach the green manager”. Top management must take ownership all together, and RUN the sustainability agenda.

With green managers and experts as sounding board, asking them the right questions that follow from the understanding of the big picture. If this is done right, top managements learn the framework, communicates its principles and guidelines to staff, and then allows people in the organization to come up with solutions like in a big family game.

One of the greatest benefits is, besides avoiding costs and other disasters at the walls of the funnel and being able to do smarter and more strategic investments to gain new market shares, community building. It is extremely beneficial for team building to have a shared mental model for what it is all about, and to learn that the organization you are working in is taking the big challenges of the world seriously.

SI: To what do you attribute the rapid growth of The Natural Step Network in recent years?

KHR: There are a few things that coincide.

1. Through the early adopters of the framework, through their engagement and practices, we have learned the game ourselves, so we have quite sophisticated tools for teaching the framework. We know how to make management systems that are cohesive with the framework: We know how to make a lifecycle assessment. We can suddenly help more organizations more efficiently than in the early days.

2. We very largely attribute our growth to awareness around climate change, which is a very obvious aspect of the walls of the funnel that has caused tension. Events such as Katrina; the UN panel on climate change, Al Gore, the Stern Report, the Iraq War…all made an impact and have made this part of everyone’s agenda.

This is good to the extent that it brings people to our arms. There is also risk, of course. The risk is that people believe that sustainability is mainly about climate change. And that is a flaw. There is no scientific evidence that climate change would be worse than: global poverty, declining food resources, nuclear power and its linkage to nuclear arms, to name a few.

We must not solve climate change with solutions that worsen other problems. You cannot solve climate change outside the context of systems thinking. If your solutions–new energy systems, for example– must be based on the same kind of assessment: How does the solution affect the agriculture, forest, etc. How do all those look like from a sustainability point of view today? What are the possible solutions for those systems tomorrow? How can we solve those in a smart way?

We just launched an international research program called Real Change based on a methodology of systematic planning for sustainability. We’re working with universities, businesses and municipalities. We are going to report back to the funders with deliverables-not only publications, but more importantly, real change.

SI: About a decade ago, in an interview with Sarah Van Gelder of YES! Magazine, you said “The green movement attacks business, and business reacts defensively.”Do you think that trend has changed in the last 10 years – have more businesses begun to take initiative rather than wait to be attacked?

KHR: No. …Those who react are still reacting. The reason is they don’t understand how to play the new game. We are in a new paradigm now. We are further along in the funnel. There is a loss of trust between people and…businesses are still a bit defensive, and not proactive enough. They are caught in the paradigm of either being good and poor, or bad and rich….If I had to pick one element of reward for us when we use [The Natural Step] model, I would say we are, in Ray Anderson’s words, “doing well, by doing good.”

Recently, in Portland, I heard him say, “We are doing better than ever, but not at the cost of the economic or social system—but rather at the cost of our competitors, that still haven’t got it.”

It requires some practice, very much like chess. Once you have explained the rules of chess, someone might say this is a very sophisticated game. You can’t remember the rules without practicing the game. Our challenge is getting people to play—we explain the framework and then they go home and they seem enthusiastic. And then they continue to do what they did before. Once you understand the framework, go play the game.

Five Levels of The Natural Step Framework

Think of The Natural Step Framework as a game of chess:

Level 1 is the systems level, the organization in the biosphere. In chess, this level is provided by the rules of the game. Based on our overall understanding of this level, we have asked, “How do we define success in this system? What would success look like?”

That gave us Level 2, which is defined by the “four principles,” or system conditions of a sustainable society.

Level 3 provides a set of strategic guidelines to stepwise approach Level 2.

Level 4 is any concrete action we do.

And Level 5 is the tools level, where we find management tools and indicators to guide and monitor our actions (Level 4) so as to be strategic (Level 3) to arrive at success (Level 2) in the system (Level 1).

We don't know what checkmate would look like beforehand. Just like a chess player moves their pieces toward checkmate, it's the same with sustainable development. Applying the principles of sustainable development in the system is like, step-by-step, approaching those principles of success

-Karl-Henrik Robèrt

All business must adopt a People, Planet, Profit Model if we are to curb social and environmental disaster in the 21st century

From Wikipedia:


"People, Planet and Profit" are used to succinctly describe the triple bottom lines and the goal of sustainability.

"People" (Human Capital) pertains to fair and beneficial business practices toward labor and the community and region in which a corporation conducts its business. A TBL company conceives a reciprocal social structure in which the well being of corporate, labor and other stakeholder interests are interdependent. A triple bottom line enterprise seeks to benefit many constituencies, not exploit or endanger any group of them. The "upstreaming" of a portion of profit from the marketing of finished goods back to the original producer of raw materials, i.e., a farmer in fair trade agricultural practice, is a not unusual feature. In concrete terms, a TBL business would not knowingly use child labor, would pay fair salaries to its workers, would maintain a safe work environment and tolerable working hours, and would not otherwise exploit a community or its labor force. A TBL business also typically seeks to "give back" by contributing to the strength and growth of its community with such things as health care and education. Quantifying this bottom line is relatively new, problematic and often subjective. The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) has developed guidelines to enable corporations and NGO's alike to comparably report on the social impact of a business.

"Planet" (Natural Capital) refers to sustainable environmental practices. A TBL company endeavors to benefit the natural order as much as possible or at the least do no harm and curtail environmental impact. A TBL endeavor reduces its ecological footprint by, among other things, carefully managing its consumption of energy and non-renewables and reducing manufacturing waste as well as rendering waste less toxic before disposing of it in a safe and legal manner. "Cradle to grave" is uppermost in the thoughts of TBL manufacturing businesses which typically conduct a life cycle assessment of products to determine what the true environmental cost is from the growth and harvesting of raw materials to manufacture to distribution to eventual disposal by the end user. A triple bottom line company does not produce harmful or destructive products such as weapons, toxic chemicals or batteries containing dangerous heavy metals for example. Currently, the cost of disposing of non-degradable or toxic products is borne financially by governments and environmentally by the residents near the disposal site and elsewhere. In TBL thinking, an enterprise which produces and markets a product which will create a waste problem should not be given a free ride by society. It would be more equitable for the business which manufactures and sells a problematic product to bear part of the cost of its ultimate disposal. Ecologically destructive practices, such as overfishing or other endangering depletions of resources are avoided by TBL companies. Often environmental sustainability is the more profitable course for a business in the long run. Arguments that it costs more to be environmentally sound are often specious when the course of the business is analyzed over a period of time. Generally, sustainability reporting metrics are better quantified and standardized for environmental issues than for social ones. A number of respected reporting institutes and registries exist including the Global Reporting Initiative, CERES, Institute 4 Sustainability and others.

"Profit" is the bottom line shared by all commerce, conscientious or not. In the original concept, within a sustainability framework, the "profit" aspect needs to be seen as the economic benefit enjoyed by the host society. It is the lasting economic impact the organization has on its economic environment. This is often confused to be limited to the internal profit made by a company or organization. Therefore, a TBL approach cannot be interpreted as traditional corporate accounting plus social and environmental impact.

Several books are available on the topic:

Harvard Business Review on Corporate Responsibility by Harvard Business School Press;

The Soul of a Business: Managing for Profit and the Common Good by Tom Chappell;

Capitalism at the Crossroads: The Unlimited Business Opportunities in Solving the World's Most Difficult Problems by Professor Stuart L. Hart;

The Triple Bottom Line: How Today's Best-Run Companies Are Achieving Economic, Social and Environmental Success -- and How You Can Too by Andrew W. Savitz and Karl Weber;

The Sustainability Advantage: Seven Business Case Benefits of a Triple Bottom Line (Conscientious Commerce) by Bob Willard.

Sustainable Business Approaches Explored In New Executive Program at Standford University

Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability

2008 Dates: September 14 - 20
Limited spaces available
Please contact Brett Cicerone or apply directly online
Program Tuition: $9,000 USD
*Additional funding for applicants from nonprofit/education/government organizations available on a limited basis.
Location: Stanford Sierra Conference Center

True innovators set the bar. They redefine the terms of competition and dictate the future of industries. The Stanford Center for Social Innovation introduces a pioneering new executive program for leaders in business, government, nonprofit, and political action organizations. Drawing from a multi-disciplinary curriculum designed and taught by professors at Stanford Business School, this five-day program delivers innovative approaches to advancing environmental sustainability across organizations.

Content Overview

Business Strategies for Environmental Sustainability, hosted at the Stanford Sierra Conference Center, offers executives a camp-like retreat where they can explore what it means to turn sustainable business practices into competitive advantage. The program is designed to cover a range of issues on the topic of sustainability that are central to those who are leading sustainability initiatives in their roles as leaders in business, government, public agencies, and environmental advocacy organizations.
This program was recently highlighted by the Graduate School of Business.

Key Takeaways

* Frameworks to understand how organizations can strike a balance between business and environmental objectives while managing complex stakeholder relationships
* Strategies to gain competitive advantage through environmentally sustainable practices, including product and process innovation and sustainable supply chain management
* Deeper awareness of best practices across industries in the area of environmentally sustainable business and leadership skills to enable action as an internal change agent

Today, environmental sustainability has become an objective both in our public policies and our business strategies. Consequently, best practice in environmental sustainability needs to be understood by business executives, environmental activists, public administrators, and regulators alike. The goal of our program is to bring together executives from each of these worlds, to expose them to state-of-the-art knowledge on environmental sustainability in business, and to facilitate their learning from one another. The program aims to be a watershed event in each participant's career, accelerating the development of those who will shape tomorrow's sustainable business and public policies.

William P. Barnett
Faculty Director
Programs, dates, fees, and faculty are subject to change.

More info at:

Brett Cicerone
Associate Director, Programs
Office of Executive Education
Stanford Graduate School of Business
Phone: 650.723.0544
Toll Free: 866.542.2205 (US and Canada)
Fax: 650.723.3950
Email: cicerone_brett@gsb.stanford.edu

Deloitte Makes its 2008 Report Available and highlights environmental sustainability and globalization as top priorities

From: Deloitte


Deloitte: The Business Issues That Will Matter Most in 2008
Published: 1/14/08
Contact: Francine Fiano
Deloitte Services LP
(203) 708-4254

NEW YORK, January 14, 2008 – The 2008 Presidential election. Energy costs expected to continue their upward climb in 2008. Customers demanding more environmentally friendly products than ever before. Each are challenges and opportunities that will frame 2008, and are three areas that will have dramatic impacts across multiple industry sectors in the coming year, according to a Deloitte report being released today by Deloitte & Touche USA LLP.

“Executives who deeply understand the issues in their industry sector can better position their organizations for competitive advantage in an uncertain marketplace,” said Ed Carey, vice chairman and national managing partner, U.S. Industries, Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. “Our experience tells us that breakthrough ideas in one industry sector are often realized by adapting leading practices from other industry sectors. Our analysis takes a ‘horizontal view’ of leading practices that transcend industry sectors and helps to give executives new insights about issues and trends that are ‘around the corner.’"

The business issues that resonated across multiple industry sectors and could have a dramatic impact this year include:

* Globalization
* Convergence
* Environmental Sustainability
* Rising Energy & Health Care Costs
* Transparency
* Technology Use & Integration
* The 2008 Presidential Election
* Talent Management

The “2008 Industry Outlook: A Look around the Corner” report features the combined insights, analyses and recommendations from Deloitte & Touche USA’s industry sector leaders and more than a dozen subject matter specialists collected during a series of in-depth, one-on-one interviews.

There are outlooks, some with trends and projections, for the following sectors: Aerospace & Defense; Automotive; Banking & Securities; Consumer Products; Energy & Resources; Health Sciences; Insurance; Media & Entertainment; Private Equity, Hedge Funds & Mutual Funds; Process & Industrial Products; Real Estate; Retail; Technology; Telecommunications; Tourism, Hospitality & Leisure; and U.S. Federal & State Government.

As used in this document, “Deloitte” refers to Deloitte & Touche USA LLP. Please see www.deloitte.com/about for a detailed description of the legal structure of Deloitte & Touche USA LLP and its subsidiaries.

Download a complimentary copy of the report here.

Social Responsibility is Now a Business Imperative, says Roberts of WWF

From Stanford Graduate School of Business News

Environmental Challenges are Profit Opportunities, Says Roberts of World Wildlife Fund

October 2007

STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS — “Companies still thinking about the environment as a social responsibility rather than a business imperative are living in the dark ages,” said Carter Roberts, President and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund (WWF). Roberts delivered the annual von Gugelberg Memorial Environmental Lecture at the Stanford Graduate School of Business on October 23, describing how a new era of global threats is changing the work of the world’s largest conservation organization, an organization that represents the concerns of its 6 million members in 100 countries.

What started as a mission to save animals — associated with the widely recognized panda bear logo—has morphed, by necessity, into a broader mandate to address the economics, the science, and the politics of conservation around the world, Roberts said.

Increasingly people’s livelihood needs and the consequences on the environment of global warming and resource scarcity have to be considered along with measures for species preservation and biodiversity, he said.

Conservationists used to worry about getting people’s attention and keeping it, said Roberts, “but now the facts are in: Climate change and increased resource scarcity will likely be one of the most disruptive forces in business since the Industrial Revolution.”

Many businesses commit to do the right thing environmentally, and then under pressure to enhance the bottom line they see initial steps fade away unless confronted by regulation. Roberts said, “My vision for saving the planet holds that you not only need to work with communities and governments but also the forces … that are driven largely by business. We will fail if we don’t change the behavior of business and how it touches the places we care about.”

Under Robert’s leadership, the WWF is partnering with Wal-Mart, Google, Coca-Cola, Ikea, and others to work with government institutions and indigenous communities to address environmental challenges and sustainable growth needs. With large corporations controlling 70 percent of the choices consumers make, such partnerships are the source of greatest leverage, Roberts said.

“The world is finally waking up to the fact that our lifestyle (choices) are threatening the very fabric of the planet.” The WWF’s most recent Living Planet Report estimates that current demands on the earth’s resources are outstripping what the planet can sustain, Roberts said.

“Most people don’t know it but deforestation and land degradation contribute about 20 percent of all C02 emissions. Ironically at WWF, we realize if we want to save the Amazon, we need to head to China.”

“If China catches up to U.S. standards of consumption it will require two planets to sustain our livelihood for the long run, and if the rest of the world catches up, it will require eleven,” he adds.

Instead of pointing fingers at countries such as China and India, the better choice is to help them invest in technologies and practices that will reduce their respective footprints. “The developed world is going to have a difficult time telling the developing world that they won’t be allowed to enjoy the same fruits of economic success and higher living standards,” he said.

The United States needs to view its own behavior in the mirror, Roberts said. “Consider a simple cup of latte. If we think about Starbucks’ footprint, we have … the amount of water to grow the sugarcane to make the sugar, process the milk, harvest the coffee, make the cup, the lid, and to produce the wrapper. If a company looks at the actual numbers, the water to produce a latte adds up to 208 liters per cup.”

“Add energy to transport the raw materials, electricity to grind the beans, brew the coffee, power the lights, the WiFi internet connectivity (in every Starbucks), the gasoline burned getting customers and employees to the store, and the message for companies is clear. They cannot just consider their own business operations when it comes to environmental impact. The way any business buys and sells products has repercussions around the world,” Roberts said.

“It doesn’t matter what industry you’re in, the supply chain will include products from all around the world,” Roberts emphasized. “Whether we’re talking about fabric made in China, soybeans grown in the Amazon, palm oil harvested in Indonesia, biofuels created in Africa—companies will have to know how their products and the raw materials they use in their operations are affecting places, people, biodiversity, and the environment.”

These facts underscore the solid business reasons why sustainability is no longer just a nice thing to do, Roberts said. More importantly, conservation is a way of protecting business. “The smartest, most strategically focused companies are calculating climate change and resource risks into their operations. True visionaries know that if their business practices aren’t sustainable long term, their businesses aren’t either.”

—April Neilsen

What is Corporate Sustainability?

Corporate sustainability is a business approach that creates long-term shareholder value by embracing opportunities and managing risks deriving from economic, environmental and social developments.

Corporate sustainability is an evolution on more traditional phrases describing ethical corporate practice. Phrases such as corporate social responsibility (CSR) or corporate citizenship continue to be used but are increasingly superseded by the broader term, corporate sustainability. Unlike the other phrases that focus on “added-on” policies, corporate sustainability describes business practices built around social and environmental considerations.

The phrase is derived from two keys sources. The Brundtland Commission’s Report – Our Common Future which described sustainable development as, “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This desire to grow without damaging future generations’ prospects is becoming more and more central to business philosophies.

Within more academic management circles Elkington (1999) developed the concept of the Triple Bottom Line which proposed that business goals were inseparable from the societies and environments within which they operate. Whilst short-term economic gain could be chased, a failure to account for social and environmental impacts would make those business practices unsustainable.

It is the inclusively of the term that makes it so attractive to business looking to fundamentally change the way they deal with social and environmental issues.

More frequently, companies focused on sustainability are appointing a Chief Sustainability Officer leading a department with a mandate to proactively develop and implement a corporate sustainability strategy. Corporate sustainability is an area where companies collaborate with competitors sharing ideas and tips using professional networking communities like Viridus.

Defition from Wikipedia

Earning income can help create positive social change

Upcoming Seminar:

Earned Income Ventures

Sponsored by CAN (California Association of Non-Profits) in association with the Social Enterprise Institute, this one day conference will provide you with the tools for creating positive social change within the context of sustainable business models.

When: Tuesday, April 8, 9 am to 4:30 pm

Where: The Center for Healthy Communities at the California Endowment

Cost: $149 for CAN members; $199 for non-members

To register, visit www.regonline.com/earnedincome

Hurry, the registration deadline is Friday, April 4.

‘11 Step Guide’ To Writing Environmental Reports

From: Environmental Leader

August 7, 2007

The Low Carbon Innovation Network has surveyed its members to producee a “11 step guide” for writing the environmental section of corporate social responsibility reports.

While some subjects may vary for different companies, according to the Low Carbon Innovation Network, here is a list of key topics that every organization should mention in the environmental section of their CSR report:

Introduction

The introduction provides an opportunity to demonstrate how important environmental issues have become to an organization.

An organization should highlight the motivation behind its drive to tackle climate change. A brief comment on areas of focus has proved popular in the CSR reports of many of the Low Carbon Innovation Network’ members, often produced in a bullet-point format.

Energy and Climate Change

Companies should summarize the impact its organization has. Outline the areas and include energy spending in all areas; supply chains, transport, the disposal of goods, offices etc., to show complete understanding. Outline carbon footprints thoroughly, describing the areas where carbon is emitted. Give a detailed account of infrastructure employed, such as the kind of boiler system used.

Monitoring

In this section, highlight the year round efforts made to improve environmental performance. Monitoring methods of each new initiative should be clearly outlined and any occasion where monitoring led to improvements being made should be described.

This section expresses that the improvement of environmental credentials is high up on the agenda all year round, and that initiatives are not only employed but also adjusted to have maximum impact.

Transport

Transport can make up a large part of the overall carbon footprint. It is important to indicate all the types of business travel, from delivery trucks to the mode of transport used by staff when on business trips.

Lay out all of the carbon emission statistics of each mode of transport. If this has not been previously done, the results could prove to be valuable in targeting the areas where carbon efficiency can be improved.

It is a good opportunity to out-line the use of green transport in this section. If bicycle storage and showers have been installed which have led to more people cycling to work, give a brief description of the impact this has had.

Flexible Working

Flexitime can be employed in one of two ways: first, staff may be given a choice of hours to work; for example employees can begin work at any time between 7:30 and 10:00, and can finish anytime between 3:30 and 7:00, providing they have completed their contracted hours of work. It seems an apt idea when you think many carbon emissions are released from the long traffic jams in the morning when everyone is trying to get into work by nine o’clock.

‘?Flexi-days’ is another way in which to reduce carbon emissions. Staff can earn a day of leave by coming in early or leaving late. Similar programs have been adopted by some of the Low Carbon Innovation Network members where employees work from home. The number of journeys into work is therefore reduced and as a result carbon emissions are cut down.

Waste and Recycling

A calculation of the amount of waste created is advisable, with a view to stating the figure on the CSR report. The kinds of waste should be mentioned, giving a percentage of how much waste is recycled from the overall amount of waste produced.

Supply Chain

It is now common practice that organizations have a responsibility to check that their supply chain reaches the correct environmental standards. List the companies within the supply chain. Make clear that the importance given to environmental performance is understood by each of these companies, and outline ways increased efficiency is encouraged.

Involvement

This section should demonstrate your company’s interest in educating both staff and consumers on becoming more energy efficient. Some examples of things to mention include; staff training, the addition of carbon labelling on products, incentives provided to encourage the recycling of packaging, information supplied on the company web page that encourages awareness, programs carried out with the local community to improve environmental credentials.

Targets

In the UK, the primary target is to reach the government set aim of a 15 percent carbon emissions reduction by 2010. However, there are other targets that relate to each organization that are often dependent on extenuating circumstances, such as the organization’s sector.

Furthermore, rather than being in a statistical format, some aims will be in a pledge form that will help the organization’s general drive to reduce carbon emissions. Each target should be noticeably marked out in this section, so that readers of the report are clear on the efforts your organization is making to become more energy efficient.

Next Steps

Each year, organizations can look to improve its policy on the environment by using a multitude of methods, ranging from employing new technology to changing company targets.

Feedback

The developments from the last CSR report need to be shown in the current report. Here is the section where you can show why you went for certain programs, based on the feedback on successes or failures from previous years. Feedback can directly relate to the ‘?Next Steps’ section in previous reports, allowing interested parties to view clear examples where progression has taken place over the last 12 months.

U.S. Companies Lead Europe in Corporate Social Responsibility Data Integration

From: AMR Research
Friday, March 02, 2007
Nigel Montgomery, Derek Prior

Within the next two years, 89% of companies in the United States and 62% in Europe plan to use technology to manage their corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives, according to a new AMR Research survey. However, while environmental issues are of prime importance in Europe, U.S. firms seem to be ahead in the integration of CSR-related data systems.

Currently, 47% of European companies either gain no CSR-related data from IT systems or have numerous disconnected systems; compare this to just 19% in the same position in the United States. Nearly half of U.S. companies (49%) claim to have some or fully integrated systems to provide information on CSR topics; 32% claim to have just started the integration process. Just 17% of European-based companies have fully integrated systems.

The survey of 150 companies, spanning multiple industries in the United States, UK, Germany, and France also revealed that close to 70% of companies have a dedicated budget for CSR initiatives, with 48% of companies having a dedicated budget for environmental initiatives.

This is particularly clear in Europe where respondent companies spend more of their CSR budget on environmental initiatives. And the budget allocation isn’t just among large companies. The survey was evenly spread across companies of all sizes, from those with less than $100M in revenue to those with more than $5B in revenue, with little variation in percentage dedicated to the initiatives because of size. Respondents were qualified based on active involvement in selecting their company’s enterprise applications and technology, and were evenly split between line-of-business (LOB) and IT roles.

Of those that are tackling the subject, the leading business reasons were as follows:

* Customer satisfaction/loyalty
* To strengthen corporate brand and reputation
* Business opportunities (cost savings, improved profits)
* Compliance to regulatory requirements
* Moral imperative
* Board of directors pushing organization in that direction
* Competitive advantage
* Strategic risk management
* To encourage product innovation
* To elevate employee morale

Disappointingly, less than one-third of the respondents are using their ERP systems to help them manage these big issues. Yet because they are integrated and enterprise-wide, ERP systems should form the foundation for managing to environmental and social business objectives, a fact backed by numerous surveys that show companies wish to use their enterprise systems.

The challenge is often that these systems can help collect historical data, but they aren’t very good at helping companies be proactive, monitoring changes in real-time and helping operatives reduce poor decisions that create more waste of environmental impact. Enterprise-wide visibility and complex proactive control requires enterprise-level information systems. Dashboards and portals on top these systems are likely to provide the answer. 43% of the respondents say a CSR dashboard would be very useful; 29% saying it is critical.

Implications for businesses of the change in attitudes toward environmental sustainability are manifesting faster than predicted. Companies are spending money now on IT systems to support initiatives; it’s not simply a future spend area.

Yet few companies have yet responded organizationally. Operations, IT finance, and IT manufacturing operations seem to play a greater role in the United States; whereas in Europe, involvement is widely spread. But a lack of a single owner could create difficulties when trying to enforce processes. Companies must have a clear idea of all the groups that should be included.

If you would like more information on this survey or are trying to tackle CSR and the environment in particular, please get in touch with nmontgomery@amrresearch.com.