Viewing Posts by Richard Maltzman
Ray Anderson: Let his passing be an inspiration
| Ray Anderson died yesterday (see press release here). Words fail when it comes to discussing Ray Anderson and his importance to sustainabililty and business. He speaks for himself, and for those who (justifiably) count on results to prove something to be correct, Ray Anderson's company, InterfaceFLOR's results also speak for themselves. Watch this video to see what this amazing man had to say.
So - nothing to add except we're here to honor his memory and hope that some of you will take some inspiration from this man.
|
An issue we cannot duck
|
One of the most fundamental and imperative things a project manager must do is to identify stakeholders. We think this is best done by asking two thoughtful questions:
We focus a lot on this last part – the outcome, because many times we’re so caught up in the project itself that we lose (in a forest-for-the-trees sort of way) sight of the steady-state operation of our project. And this is where many of the issues of CSR (corporate social responsibility) and TBL (Triple Bottom Line) come into play. We recently came across a great comedy clip from the August 2, 2011 rendition of The Daily Show (a Comedy Central Network TV show, staring Jon Stewart). In this clip, The Daily Show’s Aasif Mandvi interviews a stakeholder in a proposed wind farm in south Florida, USA. Here, a stakeholder appears and is very concerned about the project’s steady-state use and its effect on a natural resource – ducks. We hate to give too many details because it may spoil the comedy of the clip. So watch the clip and come back here.
Here's the link (below):
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-august-2-2011/fowl-wind
So if you saw the clip – and we hope you did – here are the learnings from our perspective:
-know – and expose as necessary - their true objectives and concerns (not always their spoken ones) -understand drivers of their behaviors
To shift a bit from comedy to reality, check out the actual sites of the involved parties here: http://sugarlandwind.com/Environment.html http://www.unitedwaterfowlersfl.org/ We’re interested in your feedback here. What did you think of the video? Did the stakeholders’ interests surprise you? Where did you see hypocrisy? How would you have dealt with this if you were the wind farm project manager? How would you have dealt with this if you were the Waterfowl representative? We know that this is a difficult part of any project, and so, with tounge firmly in bill, we wish you the best of flock. (snicker) |
Nitrogen is the New Carbon - and why this matters to Projects and Project Managers
|
This post is about an important problem which is being exhibited in several important fishing areas in the US and around the world. It's from a great (and short) article which we assert that you should read. It happens to be from a public TV station based on Cape Cod, but the subject is much more far-reaching and definitely includes a "project management spin". The article focuses on how Cape Cod deals with its waste products (or doesn't) and what effects can be expected when water systems are overburdened with certain chemicals. Here's the link to that article.. It's short, it's interesting - please read it. But just in case you don't - here's a clipping. "The Environmental Protection Agency has mandated that Cape Cod clean up its act (quick aside: Congress is currently considering legislation to curtail EPA’s authority and leave water quality standards up to states). The need to reduce nitrogen loading of coastal waters has sparked heated debates around the Cape, primarily because the leading solution – municipal sewering – is extremely expensive; cost estimates for sewering Cape Cod range between $4 and $8 billion. Opposition to what some have called “the big pipe solution” has grown, giving rise to events like this weekend’s Eco-Toilet Summit (the second of its kind) and increasing demands for deeper exploration of alternatives to sewering. Given the cost and controversy involved, it will likely take a decade or more to enact any solution." Read that paragraph and note the connections to project management 'science'. First, we see references to why a project is triggered or selected (regulatory pressure). Then we see the importance of stakeholder identification, analysis, and management, with the opposition to the solutions. But the two BIG reasons this is important to project managers - beyond the altruistic reasons of caring for the planet, that is - are:
In our book we actually (along with EPA director Mary Ann Curran) covered the topic of hypoxia. This article shows how it is not only still relevant - it is (unfortunately) accelerating as a problem, and it's intertwined with other issues such as carbon dioxide (carbon footprint), in a complex way. That's why the article asserts that "nitrogen is the new carbon". So we leave you with the encouragement to learn about hypoxia - it may not be your main job - but (excuse the pun) it will help put you in your element. |
A Chip Called Wanda
|
I simply could not resist the title. This post actually builds a bit from the former post, "Extra, Extra, Report all About It", in that it shows yet another example of how doing the right thing helps a project manager or other executive do things right. Said otherwise, green (ecologically responsible) begets green (money). In the June 4 edition of The Economist, there's a very worthwhile article called "Following the Footprints". In the article there is a great example of how this "green begets green" thing really works. And it all has to do with cheese-and-onion potato crisps (what Americans call chips - and as you know, Brits call what Americans call French Fries chips...but that's another story). The crips (or chips) in question, are Walkers - a PepsiCo brand. A decision was made to initiate a project to put carbon labels on the Walker's chips in question. There's quite a bit of background to the story but the gist of the green-begets-green element is this: Walkers buys its potatoes based on gross weight of the product. Because this was the measure, farmers who sold to Walkers would keep the potatoes in humidified shed to increase the water content (and the weight) for a higher payout. Due to the extra water content in the potatoes, Walkers had to fry the sliced potatoes for a longer time to dry out the extra moisture. Not only that, but the watered-down-potatoes cost more in transport fuel (and money). By shifting to a measure based on dry potato weight, Walkers was able to reduce frying time by 10%, save fuel, and reduce the carbon footprint of the product. Oh, and by the way, the farmers could save the money and energy they were putting into humidifying their potatoes. Green begets green. So what's the reference in our title? It's from A Fish Called Wanda, in which actor Kevin Kline, as one of the best characters ever imagined, "Otto", philosophizes about "The Chip". For your entertainment we provide a link to a key scene here. Enjoy! For project managers, the takeaway (excuse the weak reference to fish and chips) is this: the process that PepsiCo and Walkers followed, to add a carbon label to their crisps bag, yielded process savings. Similarly, if you put that extra up-front work into planning your projects with sustainability in mind, you will not only yield the altruistic benefit of a more sustainable project, you will likely also save your sponsors money. The Economist put it very well: "It is not so much the (carbon) label itself that matters, but the process that must be gone through to create it". Not a bad deal, eh? *crunch* |
Extra, Extra, Report All About It
|
This is a post about reporting. In particular, it's about how reporting on sustainability - which seems like a drag - has actually demonstrated benefits in a recent detailed study by Harvard Business School. The authors would like to acknowledge Tarja Mottram of Action For Results for pointing us to these reports. In this post, we'll point you to the studies and let you in on how the studies were done. Our main point, though, is one we've made since we started our journey at the intersection of sustainability (or green thinking) and project management: doing the right thing helps the project manager do things right. This assertion we've made seems to be proven over and over in every reputable study we see. This is no exception. There are actually two particular/related articles we'll refer to here.
Both come from Harvard Business School's excellent "Working Knowledge" series, which we recommend you check out as a great resource, not just for sustainbility issues but for general management - and project management - wisdom. Corporate Sustainability Reporting: It's Effective The executive summary of this report is basically this: "new research from Harvard Business School and London Business School demonstrates the first real evidence that mandatory CSR reporting works, and could give policymakers and companies themselves added impetus to increase transparency around environmental, social, and governance (ESG) performance." "After the data were analyzed, a clear pattern emerged: Countries requiring corporate sustainability reporting experienced a significant improvement in most categories. For social responsibility, for example, those countries improved their ranking by 8 percent relative to countries that lacked mandatory reporting." The study compared 16 countries that require sustainability reporting to 42 that didn't. It noted improvements as stated above, but also noted that the imporovements would have been even more significant, if like South Africa and France, companies were required to report their financial and ESG performance in a single integrated annual report. This makes sense to us because we have always insisted that these measures are often stated in an integrated mission and vision, and so should - if at all possible - be measured that way. Doing this would also stengthen the connection to project management, because Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) that project managers use could be tied to corporate (or organiazational) KPIs - so that project charters could gain 'strength' from corporate mission and vision statements. Leading and Lagging Countries in Contributing to a Sustainable Society This report is really the basis for the first report - where the "meat" of the research is located. The process started by identifying 4 categories of countries: In Sustainable countries—such as Germany and the United Kingdom—there was a high degree of integrated reporting by companies and a high level of investor interest in the respective nonfinancial performance metric. Companies and investors in these countries are on the vanguard of integrated reporting and should continue to exercise leadership in order to help create a more sustainable global society. In Unsustainable countries—including China, Hong Kong, and South Korea—there was very little integrated reporting by companies and very little interest by investors in nonfinancial performance metrics. These countries need a regulatory shock in order to break out of the equilibrium they are in. Because neither investors nor companies are paying much attention to ESG issues, it is unlikely that market forces will be sufficient to generate a change in behavior. In Sustainable Companies countries—such as Brazil, South Africa, and Sweden—there is a high degree of integrated reporting by companies but very little interest by investors in nonfinancial performance metrics. Companies in these countries need to educate investors on the importance of nonfinancial metrics in evaluating company performance and making investment decisions. Investors can leverage experiences from investors in other countries and learn emerging practices on ESG integration and engagement. In Sustainable Investors countries—such as India, Japan, and the United States—there is very little integrated reporting by companies but a high level of interest by investors in nonfinancial performance metrics. Investors in these countries need to demand more integrated reporting by the companies they invest in. Companies need to actively engage with various stakeholders and identify and report in an integrated way the material ESG topics for their business. For those of you who have read Green Project Management by the authors of this blog, you may notice a striking similarity to the Spectrum of Green Projects that we introduced (proudly, we can say before this survey began). The research goes on to use these categories to analyze (in detail) investor interest, corporate reporting in social and environmental issues, and the relationship that this all has with their performance. We'd highly suggest that you read through the reports - they're not that long - from a project management perspective. If you wish, there is also a forum at the end of the articles for passing along your comments. As we said earlier, all of this seems to continue to provide evidence for our ideas that sustainability thinking in orgnanizations, and in particular in its projects, is (although an up-front investment) a strong benefit. And it's really, really nice to see Harvard Business School reports echoing those thoughts! |
