252
Renault adopted a model structured around management practices. The FICCI
maturity assessment was tailored to the needs of its members, and the yes-no format
was easier to connect to corrective actions. Another potential problem for the maturity assessment is that it can be viewed as just another environmental audit. This can
drive a “check the box” strategy to achieve a “good” score across all elements.
Research on organizational health has shown that the key to success is to focus on
fi xing broken processes and target a few key capabilities that were critical to the
success of the company’s selected strategy. Attempting to exceed benchmarks on all
practices was ineffective and wasted resources (Keller and Price 2011 ). It is important to fi rst identify the core tasks a company must perform to successfully execute
its strategy, and then link competencies to these tasks to prioritize improvement
efforts (Wesselink et al. 2014 ). The maturity assessment questionnaire did provide
examples of key tasks and the LCM CMM focuses on decision-making processes to
help target actions, but it was clear that additional guidance on how to effectively
align LCM improvement projects with a company’s business strategy would be
helpful.
Another risk for any improvement project is that the softer organizational development objectives get lost due to a singular focus on performance outcomes. It is
natural for any business to emphasize the immediate demands of customers, investors, regulators, etc. The LCM CMM is designed to promote a balanced approach
that addresses both performance and organizational development goals in parallel.
Change programs with well-defi ned goals for both were more than four times more
likely to succeed (Keller and Price 2011 ). This can be challenging for the change
agent. Typically, the organizational development efforts have a delayed impact.
Support for the longer-term changes depends on delivering near-term performance
gains. Sometimes resolving this apparent dilemma is easy, such as improved maintenance procedures at Somos K, which provided fuel savings, reduced emissions
and better trained employees. Other cases can be more diffi cult and required a management commitment. The ability of Multidimensionales or India Glycols to benefi t
from improved data collection systems supporting their LCA studies will depend on
the success of customer education programs. The ability to communicate the business value of the organizational systems and structures necessary to embed the new
practices is vital to maintain ongoing management support.
The structure of the pilot studies, specifi cally requiring identifi cation of a dual
objective for each project to meet both performance and organizational development goals, was a strength that resulted in numerous positive outcomes, such as
NEHSU developing a Food Safety Management System, Finca Mountain a motor
management system, RUCID developing procedures for employees to monitor
energy use and so on. Examples from the companies with more mature programs
reinforce the importance of providing the enabling infrastructure to embed the
improved procedures into normal routines. GE founded the Ecoassessment CoE to
support the business units. AQUA + TECH tapped university support to obtain
added capability for LCAs. Freudenberg Nonwoven also benefi ted from a corporate
support function. For SME companies in particular, a local resource, such as FICCI
or SDA, is a critical success factor for providing the enabling infrastructure to help
T.E. Swarr et al.
Renault adopted a model structured around management practices. The FICCI
maturity assessment was tailored to the needs of its members, and the yes-no format
was easier to connect to corrective actions. Another potential problem for the maturity assessment is that it can be viewed as just another environmental audit. This can
drive a “check the box” strategy to achieve a “good” score across all elements.
Research on organizational health has shown that the key to success is to focus on
fi xing broken processes and target a few key capabilities that were critical to the
success of the company’s selected strategy. Attempting to exceed benchmarks on all
practices was ineffective and wasted resources (Keller and Price 2011 ). It is important to fi rst identify the core tasks a company must perform to successfully execute
its strategy, and then link competencies to these tasks to prioritize improvement
efforts (Wesselink et al. 2014 ). The maturity assessment questionnaire did provide
examples of key tasks and the LCM CMM focuses on decision-making processes to
help target actions, but it was clear that additional guidance on how to effectively
align LCM improvement projects with a company’s business strategy would be
helpful.
Another risk for any improvement project is that the softer organizational development objectives get lost due to a singular focus on performance outcomes. It is
natural for any business to emphasize the immediate demands of customers, investors, regulators, etc. The LCM CMM is designed to promote a balanced approach
that addresses both performance and organizational development goals in parallel.
Change programs with well-defi ned goals for both were more than four times more
likely to succeed (Keller and Price 2011 ). This can be challenging for the change
agent. Typically, the organizational development efforts have a delayed impact.
Support for the longer-term changes depends on delivering near-term performance
gains. Sometimes resolving this apparent dilemma is easy, such as improved maintenance procedures at Somos K, which provided fuel savings, reduced emissions
and better trained employees. Other cases can be more diffi cult and required a management commitment. The ability of Multidimensionales or India Glycols to benefi t
from improved data collection systems supporting their LCA studies will depend on
the success of customer education programs. The ability to communicate the business value of the organizational systems and structures necessary to embed the new
practices is vital to maintain ongoing management support.
The structure of the pilot studies, specifi cally requiring identifi cation of a dual
objective for each project to meet both performance and organizational development goals, was a strength that resulted in numerous positive outcomes, such as
NEHSU developing a Food Safety Management System, Finca Mountain a motor
management system, RUCID developing procedures for employees to monitor
energy use and so on. Examples from the companies with more mature programs
reinforce the importance of providing the enabling infrastructure to embed the
improved procedures into normal routines. GE founded the Ecoassessment CoE to
support the business units. AQUA + TECH tapped university support to obtain
added capability for LCAs. Freudenberg Nonwoven also benefi ted from a corporate
support function. For SME companies in particular, a local resource, such as FICCI
or SDA, is a critical success factor for providing the enabling infrastructure to help
T.E. Swarr et al.