ev0548: encouraging and supporting smes to improve their...
TRANSCRIPT
EV0548: Encouraging and supporting
SMEs to improve their resource efficiency
Piloting shared resource efficiency
manager models in SME manufacturers
Appendices
Version: 1 Date: 05 August 2016 Authors: Ann Stevenson, Ed Gmitrowicz, Chris Hillier, Einir Young This research was commissioned and funded by Defra. The views expressed reflect the research findings and the authors‟ interpretation; they do not necessarily reflect Defra policy or opinions.
Appendices 1
1 Introduction
The aim of the project was to research and evaluate the effectiveness of using a shared resource efficiency manager (SREM) in small and medium sized (SME) manufacturing businesses to move smaller businesses from a cyclical approach to resource management to a continual model of improvement which locks in systems to support long term behaviour change.
The research was designed to investigate a model that addresses the key barriers to action in SMEs, namely lack of expertise, knowledge and resource to investigate and implement resource efficiency measures. The model investigated also aimed to address issues of traditional consultancy/support services often being transitory, where knowledge and skills developed during support is lost when the consultant or advisor leaves. The model aimed to help to retain this information within the organisations. The research was led by EandSP (the Environment and Sustainability Partnership Ltd) working with Bangor University, EEF (the manufacturer’s organisation) and Rolls -Royce plc. This document is the Appendices for the final report on the research.
Appendices 2
Appendices
Appendix 1 Workshop outputs
Appendix 2 Business application form
Appendix 3 Business profiling
Appendix 4 SREM job description and application form
Appendix 5 Initial data request
Appendix 5b Summary of responses to initial data request
Appendix 6 A-DoR review
Appendix 7 Baseline report opportunities classification
Appendix 8 Action plan outline
Appendix 9 Resource efficiency activities agreed
Appendix 10 IEMA training
Appendix 11 Dissemination activities
Appendix 12 Research and evaluation protocol
Appendix 13 Organisational Cultural Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and
Motivation Towards the Environment Scale (MTES)
Appendix 14 Reference group questionnaire
Appendix 15 Resource efficiency improvements made
Appendices 3
Appendix 1: Workshop outputs
Summary
Three interactive workshop questions were asked at the workshops. The questions were as follows:
1. What would you expect a resource efficiency manager to do at your company?
2. What are the priority areas in your business which would benefit most from improved resource efficiency?
3. What are your reasons for not being able to maximise resource efficiency in your business? At both workshops the answer to Question 1 above covered areas such as utilities and waste, but at neither workshop was the reduction in materials use explicitly mentioned as an area to be covered by the SREM. The range of tasks to be undertaken by the SREM was more comprehensive at the Bristol workshop (reflecting the greater number of attendees), and covers the wide range of skills required by the SREMs. The responses to Question 2 at the Bristol workshop covered process improvements, materials management and efficiency, waste management, labour and time efficiency as well as broader areas such as supply chain management and lack of expertise and knowledge. At Derby the responses were more specific to individual companies, but the responses also identify possible projects that could be undertaken collaboratively, including the marketing and selling of surplus materials and best practice in the use of oils and lubricants. In Bristol the reasons for not being able to maximise resource efficiency in each business (Question 3) focused on the key areas of lack of skills, knowledge of time in the group response. However, the individual responses covered other barriers that will need to be addr essed during the project (scepticism, low relevance of resource efficiency, staff stuck in their ways). Additional reasons given at Derby were lack of scale, the Procurement Department and trust, further issues to be addressed by the SREM. In addition to the facilitated exercise during the extended morning break attendees were asked to write down on post-it notes “what worked” and “what didn’t work” in relation to previous actions they had taken on resource efficiency. The actions were to be placed on the appropriate place of the waste hierarchy. This activity was aimed at providing us with an understanding of the willingness of attendees to share positive and negative experiences and to give us a brief insight into the focus of resource efficiency activities (in relation to the waste hierarchy) in the businesses.
BRISTOL WORKSHOP
Question 1
Individual business responses
The responses break down broadly into the areas of each business to be examined and the tasks to be undertaken. The responses under these two headings are as follows:
Areas of business to be examined
Utilities – Electricity, gas water Waste
Energy efficiency
Appendices 4
Time
Tasks to be undertaken
To provide advice on the processes involved in resource efficiency Identify improvements that could be made
Identify efficiencies Improve resource efficiency and reduce waste
Understand the business and what can be achieved Identify gaps and potential exposures Identify energy improvements
Help and support the implementation of initiatives/ projects Be a coach/ guide to internal HSE staff
Provide expertise Measure impacts and adjust programme in the light of results Save money through improved efficiencies
Implement ISO 14001 Feed into ISO 14001
Improve operational efficiency Win hearts and minds Put business on a more sustainable footing
Ensure materials security Share best practice
Help cost projects
Group responses
The responses from the groups focused more on the areas of the business to be addressed and included:
Materials Waste Time
Utilities
The tasks to be addressed were also discussed and included:
Understand each business Understand the current gaps
Get the internal team on board Advise, guide and assist others in implementation of initiatives Improve efficiency
Save money ISO 14001
The individual and group responses were broadly similar with regard to the areas of the business to be examined, though materials efficiency was mentioned explicitly in the group discussions and not by the individual businesses. Individual businesses focused more on the obvious areas of utilities and waste. There was also no discussion in the groups of the
Appendices 5
interaction between different types of improvements, e.g., improved materials efficiency may impact on production times, etc.
The tasks to be undertaken by the SREM are well described, though there is a lack of clarity on what SREM) would do and what would be required of staff in other roles. There is also a lack of clarity on what the response ‘ISO 14001’ actually means. Do companies expect such a system to be implemented, which is not the function of the SREM, or for there to be interaction with internal staff on the updating/ populating of ISO 14001, which could be part of the role of the SREM.
Question 2
Individual business responses
The priority areas identified by individual businesses are:
Process/ production wastes Waste/ recycling
Packaging and recycling of packaging Materials variance Inventory reduction
Materials security/ scarcity Utilities – electricity, gas , water
Energy use Process layout Process development and innovation
Standard operating procedure for production More sustainable products and packaging
Benchmarking with others in the industry Obsolescence issues Time efficiency
Group responses
The group responses are similar to those from the individual companies, apart from highlighting the need for expertise and knowledge (to be provided by the SREM) and the need for clear business cases for resource efficiency.
Process variance and material variance
Process innovation and efficiency Process layout
Obsolescence issues Materials management Materials efficiency
Materials scarcity Supply of key materials
Supply chain management Waste reduction/ recycling Time efficiency
Utilities – electricity, gas , water Energy efficiency Labour efficiency
Time efficiency
Appendices 6
Lack of expertise and knowledge Need for internal champion
Need for business case for resource efficiency
It is interesting that in neither the individual company or group responses that reduced material s use is not mentioned, or product design to reduce materials use. Materials efficiency is mentioned, though it is not clear how this is being interpreted. Also waste is mentioned, but not explicitly waste prevention and waste re-use.
Question 3
Individual business responses
The reasons why individual businesses are not identifying and implementing resource efficiency opportunities are quite wide ranging and include the following:
Lack of expertise and skills in resource efficiency
Other business priorities consuming limited staff time Lack of knowledge
No time Limited understanding of RE benefits Focus on short term issues
Cost to identify and implement resource efficiency opportunities Nobody with responsibility
Scepticism Resource efficiency is an emerging are of relevance, but not yet mainstream Staff are stuck in their ways
Group responses
Lack of skills
Lack of knowledge Lack of time
Lack of understanding of financial and broader benefits Other priorities
A large portion of the reasons for not taking action on resource efficiency are likely to be overcome by having a SREM in place. Other barriers are due in part to company culture (e.g., scepticism, staff stuck in their ways) and will need to be addressed by the SREM.
Actions on Resource Efficiency
During a coffee break in presentations the participants were asked to note the resource efficiency actions that their company had put in place and to indicate if they’d been successful or not. Actions were specifically related to the waste hierarchy and participants were asked to stick post-its of their actions on wall mounted waste hierarchy diagrams, with one diagram for successful interventions and the other for those that had not worked. The successful and unsuccessful actions posted are as follows:
Appendices 7
Successful Actions
Prevention Engineering out waste due to better tool design Design products for lowest cost production Preparing for re-use Refurbishment of old M/Cs Reclaim rejects Refurbishment of returns for spares Recycling Wood recycling at zero cost by an external company Closed loop recycling and remanufacturing of high grade materials Segregation of recyclable wastes Other recovery None Disposal Segregation and disposal of hazardous wastes Unsuccessful actions Prevention Use of lead free solder Recyclable packaging (ended up costing significantly more than cardboard) Preparing for re-use Re-use of packaging materials Re-use of metal offcuts/ swarf Recycling Recycling initiative – did not work due to contamination of waste streams Mixed recycling in fabrication department Other recovery Zero to landfill project – limited success and did not achieve goal Disposal None It is interesting that some technically more complex interventions were successful (e.g., redesign of products or tooling), while some behaviour based activities were not successful (e.g., segregation and recycling of wastes). It would be useful to look at activities that have previously been tried with the companies chosen to participate in the study.
Appendices 8
DERBY WORKSHOP
Three interactive workshop questions were asked at the Derby workshop. The questions were as follows:
1. What would you expect a resource efficiency manager to do at your company? 2. What are the priority areas in your business which would benefit most from improved
resource efficiency? 3. What are your reasons for not being able to maximise resource efficiency in your
business?
At the Derby workshop the preference of the businesses present was to discuss the questions in turn as a single group. The answers to the above questions that came out of that discussions were noted on a flip chart and are as follows:
Question 1
Group response
The subjects that the attendees saw the SREMs addressing are as follows:
Energy efficiency (easier to identify and quantify)
Waste (more difficult to identify) Brokering of sale of excess materials
Development of business cases Development of business cases for and implementation of existing ideas Implement smaller actions that add up
It was considered that some of the opportunities would be common to a number of companies and identifying such collaborative projects could be important
The required capabilities of the SREM were described as follows:
Authority
Clarity Good communicator
Ability to access and use information Ability to analyse and recommend priority areas
The key requirement of the SREM was considered to be authority
Question 2
Group response
Priority topics for the SREMs are considered to be:
Generate cost savings
Identify and implement energy savings (including heating and cooling) Best practice in use of oils and lubricants
Options for heat recovery Implement sustainable, but workable, processes between Rolls Royce and suppliers
Appendices 9
Maintaining integrity of different grades of materials (e.g., swarf from CNC machines) to maximise prices
Processes for marketing and selling surplus materials
Sharing good practice amongst supply chain companies Skills development Implications of the REACH Directive
Transport and logistics Business case for foundry sand reclamation
A number of the above projects options could be undertaken as collaborative projects, including the marketing and selling of surplus materials, best practice in the use of oils and lubricants and the agreement of sustainable processes between Rolls Royce and suppliers.
Question 3
Group response
The main reasons for not implement resource efficiency measures put forward by the companies are:
Don’t know what to tackle No time to do it
Lack of scale Competitiveness/ trust
Procurement department Lack of waste collection services by council or other providers
Apart from the first two bullet points, these reasons are different to those given by businesses at the Bristol workshop. There is still a lack of knowledge and time, which having an SREM in place will address, but there are also other internal and external factors holding companies back. Participants indicated that these other issues may be linked to the lack of time to resolve them, and the SREM will therefore also be able to assist in resolving these.
Actions on Resource Efficiency
During a break in presentations the participants were asked to note the resource efficiency actions that their company had put in place and to indicate if they’d been successful or not. Actions were specifically related to the waste hierarchy and participants were asked to stick post-its of their actions on wall mounted waste hierarchy diagrams, with one diagram for successful interventions and the other for those that had not worked. The successful and unsuccessful actions posted are as follows:
Successful Actions
Prevention Auto lighting Laser cleaning LED lighting Roof extraction Preparing for re-use Inventory management Changes to plastic products
Appendices 10
Recycling Carbide tip recycling Reclamation of foundry sand Other recovery Reclamation from sludge Disposal None Unsuccessful actions Prevention Air blade dryers Turning lights off Unused tools back to customers and ebay Preparing for re-use None Recycling Swarf recycling Oil recycling Segregated swarf recycling in small batch production Other recovery Waste acid recovery Heat treatment furnace relining Disposal None Some actions that at first sight might have been successful have not been successful (oil and swarf recycling, turning lights off). It would be interesting to examine such failures more closely in the companies being supported.
Appendices 11
Appendices 12
Appendices 13
Appendices 14
Appendices 15
Appendix 2: Business Application Form
As part of the application process, businesses were requested to answer the “Briefly list the kinds of issues would you like to tackle to improve your resource efficiency and its impact on operations and profitability.” The responses were:
Reduce electricity costs and lean production processes.
Measure and improve energy efficiency and waste management and increase material reclamation.
Understand where can achieve significant benefits as currently no real insight. Implement ISO14001.
Unsure what more can do to improve but being able to do better analysis and calculate carbon footprint etc.
Any means of improving efficiencies and making savings. Lower costs, better environmental/ utilities management, improving pathways of
materials around the business and business efficiency. Highlight the areas within the company that are not running efficiently, and would
benefit from outside professional guidance. Improved understanding of process utilisation costs and waste reduction
opportunities, space heating costs vs efficiency improvements, process waste solutions’ environmental guidance.
Management of waste products, reduction of costs, energy efficiency and most cost effective energy supplier, recycling options and link with local suppliers to
lever purchase price advantage. Power usage, heating, water usage and waste streams. Identify high energy usage areas; to reduce scrap; paperless systems; recycling
and create partnerships to get best cost/ leverage for waste and scrap.
A copy of the application form is given below.
Appendices 16
Businesses wishing to participate in the action research project funded by Defra for a minimum period of 12 months starting September 2014 are asked to answer the questions below. The aim of the project is to test the effectiveness of using a Shared
Resource Efficiency Manager in embedding resource efficiency behaviours in small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). The questions in the application form are designed to identify those companies that would most benefit from involvement in the project and the information provided will be used to invite businesses to form the membership of one of
three groups: Group 1: Rolls Royce supply chain (maximum of 6 businesses)
Group 2: South West and South Wales geographical cluster (max 6 businesses)
Group 3: Reference group (up to 8 businesses)
Q1: SME Status
These questions will help us understand your business and confirm if your businesses meets the SME criteria for participation. The criteria are embedded in in a number of the questions below.
Organisation:
Site Address:
Primary contact:
Telephone:
Email:
Briefly explain
what your business does
Enterprise
structure
Please indicate which of the following ownership structures
applies to your business. Answer ‘yes’ to the applicable option. Autonomous, stand-alone business
Fully or partially owned by another business or businesses
Fully or partially owning another business or businesses
Business
operation
Do you operate as an autonomous business unit? (Answer
yes or no)
Appendices 17
Number of employees (full time equivalents)
Answer ‘yes’ to the appropriate ranges
In autonomous business unit
In all group companies
Less than 10
More than 10 and less than 50
More than 50 and less than
250
More than 250
Annual turnover Answer ‘yes’ to the appropriate ranges
In autonomous business unit
In all group companies
Less than £2M
More than £2M and less than
£10M
More than £10M and less than
£50M
More than £50M
Balance sheet Answer ‘yes’ to the appropriate ranges
In autonomous business unit
In all group companies
Less than £2M
More than £2M and less than £10M
More than £10M and less than £43M
More than £43M
Q2: Environmental responsibilities and performance
These questions will help us understand how your business will benefit from participating in the project. Do you currently monitor resource use and its impact on your business?
Yes/ No
Beyond monitoring/ compliance, is resource efficiency part of your business strategy/
operations?
Yes/ No
Is there an individual or team with current responsibilities for:
a) Environmental management Yes/ No
b) Resource management/ efficiency Yes/ No
Appendices 18
If ‘yes’ to either (a) or (b) above, please briefly list the responsibilities of the individual/ team, identifying whether the focus is resource efficiency or environmental management/ compliance.
Briefly list any actions you have already taken to improve the resource efficiency of your
business in the last two years. Include relevant information on materials use, waste, energy and water.
Briefly list the kinds of issues would you like to tackle to improve your resource efficiency and its impact on operations and profitability.
Briefly list any barriers there might be to developing or implementing a more resource efficient approach.
Do you have an environmental management system in place?
Yes/No
If yes, name the type of system.
If yes, is the system externally verified or not?
Appendices 19
Q3: Staff skills, training and development
These questions will help us understand the types of skills we may need to develop
Please list any standards you have in place (or are working towards) relating to staff
development and training, e.g. Investors in People.
Please briefly describe any programme you have in place for the training, mentoring and
coaching of employees.
Q4: Change management
These questions will help us understand the ability of the organisation to adapt to
change
Has the business undergone organisational restructuring in the past 5 years? Includes ownership, mergers, acquisitions, operational structures or other aspects of the business.
Yes / No
If yes, briefly describe the nature of the organisational changes.
Appendices 20
Has the business undertaken any technology or product change programmes in the past
5 years?
Yes / No
If yes, briefly describe the nature of the technology or product change programmes and
the reason for putting the programmes in place.
Q5: Reasons for participating
Please very briefly describe why you would like to participate in the project and what you
would like to gain.
Please confirm that you understand that involvement in the project requires:
Participating in the project for a minimum period of 12 months
Considering part funding of the role from month 9 onwards to extend support to 15 months
Allowing the sharing of learnings and non-confidential information with other participating
businesses
Signature: Date:
Name: Position:
Appendices 21
Appendix 3: Business Profiling
The following criteria are used in the selection of businesses to invite to participate in the project: Overarching
Small or medium size. The business must be a self-managed independent
business or autonomously managed if associated with a larger organisation. Decisions in the business must be able to be taken independently of other associated organisations.
Low environmental maturity. There is limited evidence that the business has
successfully taken action to improve its material resource efficiency and reduce its environmental impact other than that dictated by legislation. The business does not currently have an externally certified environmental management system in place
(e.g. ISO14001, EMAS), or if a certified system is present this is not effectively driving environmental improvement.
Limited dedicated environmental responsibilities. The business does not
currently have dedicated defined roles in the organisation with responsibility for
environmental management. Less than 10% of an individual’s (e.g. a health, safety, quality and environmental manager) time is dedicated to environmental improvements – on top of ensuring legal compliance.
Preferred profile makeup per cohort – maximum of 2 businesses per profile per cohort
Profile S1: Traditional small SME Profile S2: Future small SME Small1: Staff< 50, turnover:≤ € 10 million, balance sheet:≤ € 10 million.
Low skills: Overall low level of
qualification attainment, limited training and development in place
High skills: Overall high level of
qualification attainment with recognition of benefits of training and development in place
Profile M1: Established medium SME Profile M2: Transitional medium SME
Medium: Staff: < 250, turnover: ≤ € 50 million, balance sheet:≤ € 43 million
Limited experience of change: The
business has undergone little change over recent years in terms of products, markets, operations,
management structures.
Change management experience:
Business has had experience of a variety of change management processes – management structures,
IT, product design, markets etc.
1 The new SME definition, User guide and model declaration, EC, ISBN: 92-894-7909-4
Appendices 22
Appendix 4: SREM Job Description, Person Specification and Application Form
Job Description and person specification Job title Shared Resource Efficiency Manager (SREM) Job description To work with a group of SME manufacturing businesses to improve the resource efficiency of the businesses and to assist in the evaluation of the effectiveness of the SREM model. The company The Environment and Sustainability Partnership Ltd (EandSP) is a small consultancy that designs, manages, and delivers environment and sustainability projects and programmes. We bring together teams of experts to meet the needs of clients across a range of disciplines, including resource use and efficiency, waste management, water management, energy efficiency, carbon management and sustainable procurement. Department These are project related posts and the post holders will report to Ann Stevenson, a Director of EandSP. Ann is also the Director of the project under which this post is funded. The job - background Research has shown that many SME businesses do not have the expertise, knowledge or time to investigate, identify and implement resource efficiency measures to improve their busineses and need practical external support. Whilst many larger businesses may have dedicated environmental managers who can implement a continuous model of improvement and have the relevant skills to reduce direct impacts and implement adaptation measures, few smaller businesses have such resources. There are a number of traits common to smaller businesses that affect their behaviour in relation to adopting the more sustainable resource efficiency model. There is great potential for smaller businesses, through “sharing” of services and expertise to save money, improve their environmental performance and protect themselves from the future implications of increased resource scarcity and climate change. To investigate how to improve resource efficiency within SMEs, EandSP is leading a project with Defra funding to research the effectiveness of a shared resource efficiency manager (SREM) model. The core model is one whereby an individual is shared among a group of SMEs in the same sector or along a supply chain. This has a number of potential advantages, including: sharing of costs so SMEs can afford high calibre support, technologies and tools; increased co-operation between SMEs on resource efficiency; and the potential to share innovations and information more readily. The project will provide a shared employee over a fixed period of 12 months to assist SMEs to:
Access qualified and experienced staff cost effectively Improve the resource efficiency of their business Achieve cost savings Evaluate the effectiveness of resource efficiency support
The SREMs will fill exciting and central roles within an action research project designed to test the effectiveness of a practical approach to helping businesses become resource efficient and to evaluate the factors that influence the success or otherwise of the model. The job involves the practical aspects of working with businesses to identify and implement cost effective resource
Appendices 23
efficiency improvements, but importantly includes ongoing monitoring and reporting of the impact of resource efficiency measures. This ongoing evaluation will provide information that will be used broadly in two ways:
To adjust the way the SREM model is applied to improve impact through an iterative approach to delivery: planning of action, taking action, evaluating the action and feeding back into the planning for the next action.
To provide information for the evaluation of whether the SREM model can be successful,
and what factors influence the success of the SREM model.
Key responsibilities The key responsibilities of the SREMs will include undertaking the following activities with each of a group of approximately 6 SMEs:
A baseline survey to quantify the current use of materials and other resources in the production process, a procurement strategy review, assessment of existing levels of awareness and training and use of management systems
Identification of where resource efficiencies (materials, energy, water) could be made and quantification of the potential cost savings (including impacts on labour costs, production times and other costs)
Development of resource efficiency action plans and support in implementing targeted measures within each business to realise identified improvements, including awareness raising, training and process enhancements
Monitoring progress against the action plans to determine the effectiveness of interventions
Sharing of monitoring data with production staff and embedding of resource efficiency into the working practices of each company
Ongoing evaluation and quantification of the overall impact and savings achieved, working closely with the other members of the project team
Work as a team with other SREM and with staff of participating companies Involvement in broader evaluation of changes in attitudes and behaviours of participating
SME companies Participation in structured interviews and other interaction with the project eva luation
team. Regular progress reporting Sharing of knowledge with other companies to optimise the overall benefits to each
business
In addition, the SREMs will be involved in other activities, depending on the requirements of the project. Consults with The SREMs will work closely with staff and associates of a number of organisations that will be involved in the project:
Both directors of EandSP The management and operational staff of SME participants Project staff Bangor Universities and associated staff Relevant staff from the EEF Relevant staff of Rolls Royce Defra staff
Appendices 24
Support in undertaking the role will be provided primarily by the directors of EandSP, project staff from Bangor University and staff from the individual SME participants. Role requirements
Knowledge and experience of the manufacturing sector and specific subsectors Knowledge and experience of resource efficiency and an understanding of the emerging
focus on the circular economy and cradle to cradle (C2C) thinking Good interpersonal skills and ability to influence and engage at all levels within a
company Proven ability to work as part of a team and to share knowledge and experiences Development of business cases for resource efficiency Monitoring and reporting of business improvements A flexible attitude to work to facilitate working across a group of companies Self-motivated with the ability to work to deadlines and constantly juggle priorities. Ability to be able to travel to various locations of work whilst managing time effective ly Good written and verbal communication skills
Essential qualifications A good first degree and experience of working in a manufacturing business in an
environmental, production or management role. Candidates without a degree but with significant relevant experience in the manufacturing sector will also be considered.
The right to work in the UK A valid driving license
Desirable but not essential experience Background knowledge of evaluation processes Training skills and experience Knowledge and implementation of environmental management systems Understanding of lean manufacturing
Location The two SREM posts will be based in different parts of the UK as follows:
Derby area (working with SMEs in the Rolls Royce supply chain) SW England/ SE Wales (working with SME members of the EEF in this region) Successful applicants will also be expected to travel in the UK and possibly overseas,
depending on the requirements of the project.
Term of employment This is a fixed term, full time appointment. The term of the employment is 12 months, which may be extended by 3 months subject to funding availability. The appointment is also subject to confirmation of funding by the project sponsor. Salary Up to £35,000 per annum
Appendices 25
Application form Personal information (confidential)
UNIQUE IDENTIFICATION NUMBER:
(Please leave blank)
ORGANISATION NAME: The Environment and Sustainability Partnership Ltd
For which location are you applying. (Please indicate ‘yes’ or ‘no’. Answer
‘yes’ to both if you are interested in either location).
Derby area SW England/ SE Wales
APPLICATION FOR EMPLOYMENT
The information provided on this application form will remain private and confidential and will be used for the purpose of selection/recruitment.
The form is divided into three parts. Please complete all three parts. Please do not separate any part of the form. Where the application is successful the organisation may wish to process this
information (as updated periodically) for personnel and business management purposes. Where this is the case, processing will take place in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998.
Please also note that the organisation may approach third parties to verify the information that you have given. By signing this form you will be providing the organisation with your consent to all these uses.
On completion please e-mail this form to Ed Gmitrowicz (Director of EandSP) at the following address: [email protected] You may also send a 2 page summary CV as supporting information to this application form. Please indicate if you are including a CV. Yes/ No.
Appendices 26
PERSONAL INFORMATION (CONFIDENTIAL)
Please refer to the guidance when completing your application.
POST TITLE: Shared Resource Efficiency Manager
1. PERSONAL DETAILS
Name:
Address:
Contact details (Calls to business numbers will be made discreetly.)
E-mail:
Telephone Home:
Telephone Work:
Mobile:
Please indicate your preferred method of contact:
2. GENERAL
Do you hold a current full UK driving licence? Yes No
Is your driving licence free of endorsements? Yes No
Please give details of any points or driving convictions, including any pending convictions. (Any declarations are subject to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act
1974 (as amended).)
Transport is essential for the advertised posts.
Please indicate if you have access to your own transport.
Yes No
If required for the job
1 Will you relocate? Yes No
2. Are you willing to travel? Yes No
Are there any adjustments that may be required to be made should you be invited for interview? If yes, please give details:
Please indicate two people who can provide references - one of whom should preferably be your present/most recent employer.
1. Name: 2. Name:
Address: Address:
Tel. no.: Tel. no.:
E-mail: E-mail:
Occupation: Occupation: I give/do not give permission to take up my reference prior to an offer of
employment being made. (Please delete clearly as appropriate)
Appendices 27
3. EMPLOYMENT HISTORY
Please give details of all jobs held including part time and unpaid work, starting with your current or most recent employer (expand the box below as necessary)
Name and full address of employer; nature of business.
Job title(s); key responsibilities & key achievements
Period of employment and reason for leaving
Please indicate how the experience and knowledge that you have gained from your two most recent jobs would help you be successful in the job for which you
are applying. (Please bear in mind the requirements of the job as given in the job description when answering this question. 250 words maximum for each employment. Please expand the box below as necessary).
Job(company name)
Relevance of previous experience and knowledge (Provide information separately for each job)
4. EDUCATIONAL, TECHNICAL AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
Appendices 28
Please name any awarding institute or professional body in full and include attainment level specifying relevant grades or grade of membership. (Please include ‘A’ levels or equivalent and higher qualifications)
5. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON EXPERIENCE
Describe, by reference to a specific situation, how you have managed significant change in a business, include the key challenges you faced, the lessons you learnt
(max 500 words).
Appendices 29
What do you see as the main challenges of working as a shared resource efficiency manager across several SME businesses? How would you address these challenges? (Please refer to the job description when answering this
question. Max 500 words).
6. PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT
Please include any courses, membership, voluntary work or responsibilities you have obtained that you consider relevant, with outcomes where applicable.
7. OTHER SKILLS
Languages spoken/written (please indicate level of competence).
Computer literacy (please specify software and level of competence).
Appendices 30
Do you have armed service/public duty commitments? (eg are you a member of the TA/ a JP/ a
councillor, etc.)
Yes No
If yes, please give details:
8. OTHER INFORMATION
Are you currently eligible for employment in the UK?
Yes No
Please state what documentation you can provide to demonstrate this, eg British passport/European Economic Area identity card/full birth certificate/passport or travel document showing an authorisation to reside and work in the UK.
Have you ever been convicted of a criminal offence?
Yes
No
If yes, please give details. (Declarations are subject to the provisions of the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974 as amended.)
DATA PROTECTION STATEMENT
The information that you provide on this form and that obtained from other relevant sources will be used to process your application for employment. The personal
information that you give us will also be used in a confidential manner to help us monitor our recruitment process. If you succeed in your application and take up employment with us, the information
will be used in the administration of your employment with us and to provide you with information about us or a third party via your payslip. We may also use the information if there is a complaint or legal challenge relevant to this recruitment process.
We may check the information collected, with third parties or with any other information held by us. We may also use or pass to third parties, information to prevent or detect crime, to protect public funds, or in other ways as permitted by
law. By signing this application form we will be assuming that you agree to the processing of sensitive personal data (as described above), in accordance with
our registration with the Information Commissioner.
Appendices 31
DECLARATION
I declare to the best of my knowledge and belief, all particulars I have given in all parts of this application form are complete and true. I understand that any false declaration or misleading statement or a significant omission may disqualify me from employment and render me liable to dismissal. I understand that any job offer
is subject to references, checks on relevant qualifications, employment eligibility and criminal convictions, a probationary period and (if the organisation believes it appropriate) a medical report, all of which must be deemed by the organisation as satisfactory.
Signed: Date:
Appendices 32
Appendix 5: Initial Data Request
The first step in a resource efficiency review is to collect existing data on resource use, where
those resources are being used, the cost of those resources, and resources being wasted. This
information can then be used to identify data gaps and help in the design of the on -site resource
efficiency baseline review. Information is required for all company activities (e.g., including
offices) as well as manufacturing processes and facilities. The primary sites of interest are those
in the UK, though any transfer of materials or products between UK and overseas sites will need
to be flagged.
The types of data that are likely to be required are listed in the table below. The lists the item of
data that is required and there are boxes against each item for each company to indicate if the
information is readily available, available but not immediately, or difficult to obtain. The first step
is to indicate into which of these categories each data item falls. The form should then be
returned to the Shared Resource Efficiency Manager (SREM), who will request that readily
available information is collated and sent to them. The SREMs will also discuss with you the
best way of collecting and forwarding the rest of the information.
Data types to be requested
Readily available
Available but not immediately
Difficult to obtain
Materials
Types and quantities of raw materials and consumables used in production processes (e.g., per annum , per month)
Types and quantities of parts (finished or part finished) manufactured off-site and used in production (e.g., per annum, per month)
Types and quantities of materials and consumables used in other business functions (e.g., back office)
Costs of each major material resource used by unit of purchase and total per annum or per month
Use of recycled materials in production Use of materials and consumables in cleaning and other non-production processes (e.g., per annum, per month)
Total amount of each product produced (e.g., per annum, per month)
Toxic and hazardous materials List of types and amounts of toxic or hazardous materials used in the production process (e.g., solvents, oils and other hydrocarbons, cutting fluids, coolants, etc). Give amounts used per annum, per month or another convenient unit.
List of types and amounts of toxic materials or hazardous materials used in non-production activities (e.g., cleaning). Give amounts used per annum, per month or another convenient unit.
Storage of all toxic or hazardous materials.
Packaging Use of primary packaging for company products (amounts, types for each product made)
Use of additional packaging for transit of products off site (amounts, types for each product)
Appendices 33
Use of packaging for internal movements of materials or goods (within a site or between sites)
Types and costs of packaging materials purchased (e.g., per annum, per month)
Amounts of packaging materials received from suppliers (e.g., per annum, per month)
Fate of packaging materials received from suppliers, by material type (e.g., returned, recycled, general waste, etc). Also include packaging from office, canteen and other non-production functions.
Solid waste Waste contracts by type, cost (or income) and treatment/ disposal option (e.g., recycling, energy from waste, landfill) including waste separation and collection protocols
Waste generated through materials handling (unloading, loading, storage, transport)
Main sources and amounts of solid wastes from production (specify production process and include offcuts, other production waste, defects, reworking, etc) (e.g., per annum, per month)
Wastes from other on-site activities (e.g., office, laboratories, etc)
How are individual waste streams segregated, stored and collected Any take back schemes (materials, packaging, drums, end of life equipment, WEEE)
Any internal reuse of materials/ wastes
Voluntary/ casual uses of wastes (e.g., pallet wood for use on domestic fires)
Energy Energy types used on site (e.g., electricity, gas, diesel, etc)
Electricity and gas meter types, frequency of readings, supplier/broker Amount of each fuel type used and the cost (e.g., from utility bills) and provided by month, quarter or annually
Tariff for gas/ electricity Indication of areas that are sub-metered Heating, lighting, cooling, HVAC, chilling, compressed air systems and other energy using systems in use
Building heating control systems and insulation/ draft proofing of buildings
Energy used in production process, heating, lighting, cooling, HVAC, steam systems, compressed air, etc) if sub-metered
Energy use and costs for individual sub-metered areas
Water
Sources of water used on site (mains, local borehole, local surface water source, rainwater harvesting)
Fate of waste water (e.g., discharged to sewer, treated and discharged to sewer, treated and reused, discharged to controlled waters, etc)
Amount and cost of mains water used (e.g., per annum, per quarter, per month) from water bills, and any water from other sources (e.g., through a metered borehole source)
Trade effluent charges (from bills)
Appendices 34
Main uses of water on site (e.g., cleaning, in production process, steam production, cooling water, etc)
Use of water pre-treatment (e.g., de-ionisation) Sub-metering of water use on site
Quality and quantity of waste water (e.g., from sampling data) History of water leaks on site Quality, quantity and cost of interceptor wastewater/ liquid process wastes taken off site by tanker and fate or destination of material / destination
Management systems Quality management systems in place and persons responsible
Environmental management systems (e.g., ISO14001) in place and persons responsible
Other systems on which environment/ resource data is recorded Copy of company environmental policy
Environmental permits/ authorisations in place Any environmental permits or other authorisations required to operate, including operating under an exemption (copy of permit/ exemption required)
Permits required to emit to atmosphere or discharge to sewer or local surface waters (copy of permits required)
Reports Reports prepared for by the customer by internal staff or external bodies that cover resource efficiency, lean production or other efficiency improvements. External bodies might include Carbon Trust, WRAP, or commercial companies.
General Any staff engagement schemes in place (e.g., cycle to work, environmental champions, performance rewards, etc)
Performance targets in place related to resource efficiency (e.g., energy reduction, waste reduction, etc)
Any staff suggestion schemes, action groups or forums for RE or operational performance
Appendices 35
Appendix 5b: Availability of data as indicated in the completed IDR forms
Readily available
Available but not immediately
Difficult to obtain
Materials
Types and quantities of raw materials and consumables used in production processes (e.g., per annum , per month)
5 3 1
Types and quantities of parts (finished or part finished) manufactured off-site and used in production (e.g., per annum, per month)
1 7 1
Types and quantities of materials and consumables used in other business functions (e.g., back office)
3 5 1
Costs of each major material resource used by unit of purchase and total per annum or per month
5 2 2
Use of recycled materials in production 5 4 Use of materials and consumables in cleaning and other non-production processes (e.g., per annum, per month)
3 1 4
Total amount of each product produced (e.g., per annum, per month) 2 4 3
Toxic and hazardous materials List of types and amounts of toxic or hazardous materials used in the production process (e.g., solvents, oils and other hydrocarbons, cutting fluids, coolants, etc). Give amounts used per annum, per month or another convenient unit.
1 6 2
List of types and amounts of toxic materials or hazardous materials used in non-production activities (e.g., cleaning). Give amounts used per annum, per month or another convenient unit.
1 5 3
Storage of all toxic or hazardous materials. 6 2 1
Packaging Use of primary packaging for company products (amounts, types for each product made)
2 5 1
Use of additional packaging for transit of products off site (amounts, types for each product)
2 5 2
Use of packaging for internal movements of materials or goods (within a site or between sites)
2 3 1
Types and costs of packaging materials purchased (e.g., per annum, per month)
2 3 2
Amounts of packaging materials received from suppliers (e.g., per annum, per month)
1 5
Fate of packaging materials received from suppliers, by material type (e.g., returned, recycled, general waste, etc). Also include packaging from office, canteen and other non-production functions.
1 3 2
Solid waste Waste contracts by type, cost (or income) and treatment/ disposal option (e.g., recycling, energy from waste, landfill) including waste separation and collection protocols
3 4 2
Waste generated through materials handling (unloading, loading, storage, transport)
2 2 5
Appendices 36
Main sources and amounts of solid wastes from production (specify production process and include offcuts, other production waste, defects, reworking, etc) (e.g., per annum, per month)
3 2 4
Wastes from other on-site activities (e.g., office, laboratories, etc) 1 2 4 How are individual waste streams segregated, stored and collected 4 2 2 Any take back schemes (materials, packaging, drums, end of life equipment, WEEE)
4 3 2
Any internal reuse of materials/ wastes 3 3 2 Voluntary/ casual uses of wastes (e.g., pallet wood for use on domestic fires)
2 2 4
Energy Energy types used on site (e.g., electricity, gas, diesel, etc)
7 2
Electricity and gas meter types, frequency of readings, supplier/broker 5 2
Amount of each fuel type used and the cost (e.g., from utility bills) and provided by month, quarter or annually
6 1
Tariff for gas/ electricity 5 1 Indication of areas that are sub-metered 4 3 2
Heating, lighting, cooling, HVAC, chilling, compressed air systems and other energy using systems in use
5 1 2
Building heating control systems and insulation/ draft proofing of buildings
5 1 2
Energy used in production process, heating, lighting, cooling, HVAC, steam systems, compressed air, etc) if sub-metered
2 1 4
Energy use and costs for individual sub-metered areas 2 4
Water
Sources of water used on site (mains, local borehole, local surface water source, rainwater harvesting)
5 2
Fate of waste water (e.g., discharged to sewer, treated and discharged to sewer, treated and reused, discharged to controlled waters, etc)
5 3
Amount and cost of mains water used (e.g., per annum, per quarter, per month) from water bills, and any water from other sources (e.g., through a metered borehole source)
7
Trade effluent charges (from bills) 1 3 4 Main uses of water on site (e.g., cleaning, in production process, steam production, cooling water, etc)
4 1 2
Use of water pre-treatment (e.g., de-ionisation) 2 3 2 Sub-metering of water use on site 2 1 3 Quality and quantity of waste water (e.g., from sampling data) 1 5
History of water leaks on site 2 1 3 Quality, quantity and cost of interceptor wastewater/ liquid process wastes taken off site by tanker and fate or destination of material / destination
2 1 3
Management systems Quality management systems in place and persons responsible 8 1
Environmental management systems (e.g., ISO14001) in place and persons responsible
3 1 5
Other systems on which environment/ resource data is recorded 3 1 3 Copy of company environmental policy 5 1 2
Appendices 37
Environmental permits/ authorisations in place Any environmental permits or other authorisations required to operate, including operating under an exemption (copy of permit/ exemption required)
2 2 5
Permits required to emit to atmosphere or discharge to sewer or local surface waters (copy of permits required)
1 3 4
Reports Reports prepared for by the customer by internal staff or external bodies that cover resource efficiency, lean production or other efficiency improvements. External bodies might include Carbon Trust, WRAP, or commercial companies.
2 2 5
General
Any staff engagement schemes in place (e.g., cycle to work, environmental champions, performance rewards, etc)
2 6
Performance targets in place related to resource efficiency (e.g., energy reduction, waste reduction, etc)
3 5
Any staff suggestion schemes, action groups or forums for RE or operational performance
2 1 5
Appendices 38
Appendix 6: A-DoR review
Piloting shared resource efficiency manager models in SME manufacturers to create a
continuous improvement approach to embedding resource efficiency practice
A-dor Resource Efficiency review meeting with xxxxxxxxxx
Background:
You are part of a project researching and evaluating the effectiveness of using a shared resource efficiency manager in small and medium sized (SME) manufacturing businesses. The aim is to move smaller businesses from a cyclical approach to resource management, involving limited planning and generally as a response to a short term need, to a continual model of improvement which locks in systems to support long term change.
As a first step you are invited to take part in a facilitated discussion or a ‘review’ of how your business
currently addresses resource issues. During the scoping phase of the project participants made it very
clear that there are conflicts of interest when it comes to making environment or resource efficiency-
related decisions and investments and we are interested in exploring these at the outset with key
members of your management team – ideally the people responsible for Finance, Human Resources,
Procurement, Marketing and the Environment Manager.
It is essential that the meeting is as open and honest as possible. We know that participants will feel
more relaxed to speak their minds if they can be assured that their individual opinions will not be made
public. The Chatham House Rules will apply so that you the participants are free to speak as individuals
as well as representatives of your own department to encourage a free and frank discussion. The sole
purpose of these discussions, using the established a-dor review tool, is to enable the businesses
participating to set their own agenda for the project and to focus on those aspects that are a genuine
priority for them and are achievable and appropriate for the business. The discussions are not against
any ‘benchmark’ and are not about ‘scoring’ or assessing a business – they are an opportunity for
each business, in confidence, to identify their own priorities as regards resource efficiency, to ensure an
appropriate action plan for the work that the project undertakes with them.
Agenda:
1. An introduction to sustainability in its broadest context, what the broader business world says on the ‘green’ topic.
2. A discussion of selected issues, focussing on:
Management
Vision Training
Communication Priorities
3. A discussion on Constraints and willingness/ability to change 4. How do we ensure that all three dimensions of sustainability are considered in the decision
making process surrounding the environment – e.g. what are the financial and human resource implications of any carbon reduction measures/energy saving initiatives or what are the human & environmental implications of increasing environmental costs to the business?
Appendices 39
5. AOB
Preparation:
Sustainability and our current position:
Sustainability is often perceived as being either to do with financial viability or environmental issues such
as climate change, cutting emissions, saving the planet. However, sustainability is more than ‘just’
keeping afloat or saving the planet, it is about people, the planet, our prosperity and wellbeing as well.
Increasingly businesses that are part of supply chains are being asked to demonstrate their commitment
to sustainability. In other words can we show that we are contributing to enhancing the economic, social
and environmental wellbeing of people and communities, achieving a better quality of life for our own
and future generations in ways which:
• promote social justice and equality of opportunity
• enhance the natural and cultural environment and respect its limits - using only our fair share of
the earth’s resources and sustaining our cultural legacy.
Selected issues for discussion:
There are three dimensions to SD – Generating Prosperity, Respecting People and Protecting the planet.
For the purpose of this project we will be confining our discussion to issues associated with resource
efficiency. If you would like a comprehensive review to include the other two dimensions in the future,
this can be discussed.
Prior to the meeting it would be useful if you could give some thought to resource efficiency issues that
you have already identified but would like help in tackling. We are also interested in hearing about any
areas of the business where there may be opportunities associated with improved resource efficiency
but where as yet you have not identified specific opportunities or developed a convincing business case.
It would be useful also if you could give some thought to:
How are these issues currently managed?
Is there a clear vision? What sort of training if any is available?
How is information communicated; who is the audience/s? What are your priorities?
Summary
The discussion will be completely anonymous both on an individual and a business level. We will only
pass information that you choose to share with the projects resource efficiency manager in order to help
them develop an appropriate action plan for resource efficiency in your business. We will provide a
confidential report to you summarising the discussion and the priority areas and we will undertake a
follow-up meeting at the end of the project to assess how priorities may have changed and where
impacts have been made.
Appendices 40
Appendix 7: Baseline Report Opportunities Classification
Category Criteria Example Short term – Stepping stone
Combination of one or other of following criteria:
“Low hanging fruit”
Opportunity identified with benefit
Low financial cost Quick fix short time frame (3
to 6 months) with resource and financial costs being repaid back within months
Low risk
monitoring energy/material/waste
prevention/ reduction/ recycling awareness for staff (switching off, re-use, recycling)
changing suppliers improved control of general
equipment (e.g. heating/ lighting)
improved repair and maintenance
waste segregation
compliance issues
Medium term - Improvement
Combination of one or other of following criteria:
Further investigation needed to make business case
Potential need for some financial investment
Time frame to completion up to 1 year
Staff resource input needed Payback 6months to 2 years Moderate risk
establishing EMS
staff skills development researching production/
process improvement changes and technology options
Changing production scheduling
piloting use of new/replacement technologies and materials
piloting reuse/recycling/rework of materials and products
changing quality control practices
changing sales/ supply practices
testing changes in working practice
Longer term – Change
Combination of one or other of following criteria:
Significant capital investment
Significant change
Payback > 2 years Higher risk
Change of product/ new product
Major change of production process
Substitution of materials Replacing machinery
Installation of renewable energy technologies
Appendices 41
Appendices 42
Appendix 8: Action Plan
The SREMs worked with each business until September 2015, on implementation of the priority actions with the aim of achieving identified savings. The way in which action plans were implemented was tailored to the needs of each business and the scope of each action plan for each business varied depending on the potential benefits and priorities for each business. The range of different activities undertaken with participating companies is given in the following table, with the number of companies with which a particular activity was undertaken shown in brackets. The range of activities undertaken with companies encompassed materials, energy, waste and waste management, water and waste water management behaviour/ culture change and internal capacity building. The activities undertaken with most companies are further highlighted in green and amber, with amber indication an activity undertaken with between 3 and 5 companies and green an activity undertaken with more than five companies.
RESOURCE/ SUBJECT AREA
ACTIVITIES
Materials Process review, including materials and labour use (7) Materials mass balance (3)
Recommendation of process improvements to reduce resource use (5) Investigation of technologies to improve the resource efficiency of
processes (3) Investigation of design changes to improve resource efficiency
Calculation of potential materials cost savings (2) Development of improved materials monitoring/ management system (4)
Supplier review to reduce wastage, improve quality and/or save money Negotiation of materials take back scheme with suppliers (2)
Packaging audit/ review (4) Development of packaging data monitoring system (2)
Development of procedures to reduce packaging use Energy efficiency Review of energy use (3)
Investigation of improvements to reduce energy use (3) Development of system for monitoring energy use (4)
Monitoring of high energy use process equipment Investigation of increased energy use and costs due to compressed air
leaks Investigation of heat energy recovery and re-use
Development of energy use key performance indicators (linked to production)
Review of travel and fuel use/ costs (2)
Renewable energy supply
Review of potential for solar PV (3)
Waste and waste management
Waste audit/ review(9)
Hazardous waste audit/ review (5) Development of improved waste management practices (7)
Renegotiation of waste management contracts (5)
Appendices 43
Investigation of pre-treatment of wastes to enhance value Water and waste water management
Water use and waste water audit (2)
Review of trade effluent consent (2)
Behaviour/ culture change
Resource efficiency workshops with management and non-management staff (8)
Frequent dialogue with management and shop floor staff (10) Integration of resource efficiency into staff communications (2)
Capacity building Workforce training (resource efficiency and/ or waste management) (3) Working with procurement staff to build resource efficiency into
procurement practices (4)
Assistance in developing or improving an environmental management system (3)
Development of resource efficiency job descriptions (2)
Appendices 44
Appendix 9: resource efficiency activities agreed
Appendices 45
OUTCOMES
Date Jan 2015Action area Existing baseline Future benefits
Current practice Cost Quantity OutcomesResource Efficiency Awareness
/ Behaviour Change
No ongoing RE or environmental awareness
training other than H&S training
unknown An informed and aware workforce contributing to overall objectives
through amended behaviour, diligence and ideas generation.
Compressed Air Utilisation Maintenance programmes and reactive
measures undertaken to address leakage.
Unknown not measured Establishment of a compressed air protocol including maintenance
procedures and frequencies, an ongoing monitoring programme for
energy use / productivity related measures, user engagement, SOP
review and appropriate technology deployment. Resulting in
reduced compressed air generation.
Lighting Provision Lux assessments for inspection, quality and
H&S reasons, ongoing regular replacement and
maintenance
Unknown not measured A rolling process of assessment, (needs and requirements), technical
review and energy quantification, replacement proposals and
benefits measured.
Heat Treatment Processes Previous studies undertaken indicate areas for
action
no -sub-
metering or
measures per
unit production
not measured Review of existing and assess new data availability for
recommendations on operational parameters and asset
improvements (control and insulation) will lead to measurable
improvements in energy consumption per unit
production/treatment.
Waste Management Various waste streams are managed across
the site associated with various waste
contractors but no coordinated system exists.
No regular reporting is conducted and no
waste reduction targets are in place to drive
cost reduction or performance improvements.
Various Various A coordinated waste strategy, monitoring system and a review of
assets, coordination and review of associated contracts/value
streams would improve control, reduce costs, maximise recovery
values, ensure compliance and provide information to satisfy the
developing information needs for an EMS.
Material Flows Internal metal recycling is an integral part of
the foundry process and materials are
measured and assured for quality, however
this information is not communicated as
performance or beneficial objective.
The development of information systems that demonstrate the
internal performance of certain material flows would support the
engagement of staff in objectives to improve environmental
performance and create a sense of added value while contributing
to performance management.
Appendices 46
Action planning summary
Date Jan 2015
Barriers Behaviours Motivators Overcoming Barriers Influencing Behaviours Using MotivatorsResource Efficiency
Awareness / Behaviour
Change
An informed and aware workforce contributing
to overall objectives through amended
behaviour, diligence and ideas generation.
Establishing/Maintaining the
drive/motivation within the
workforce, introducing new
culture/additional values against a
long legacy of working habits.
Develop personal ownership
for immediate work area locus
of control. Recognise and
reward efforts to contribute
through appraisal process
Offer incentives and
recognition for ideas,
contribution, monthly/annual
awards. Develop additional role
profiles and specific
responsibilities.
Orchestrate tangible Senior Mgt
support for the programme
with key messages on
sustainability and profitability,
brand the change initiative and
communicate regularly
Develop specific and generic
workshops for groups of staff,
build rapport, assist them with
their own objective setting and
ownership, task/role specific
actions logged and followed
up.
Work with HR/team
leaders/supervisors to create a
process for submitting and
assessing ideas, and rewarding
for successful implementation.
Development of role profiles to
include RE personal
objectives/appraisal
Compressed Air
Utilisation
Establishment of a compressed air protocol
including maintenance procedures and
frequencies, an ongoing monitoring programme
for energy use / productivity related measures,
user engagement, SOP review and appropriate
technology deployment. Resulting in reduced
compressed air generation.
Complexity and scope of the
system. Legal operational
compliance issues/pressure
testing/control. Lack of
monitoring/sub-meters. Wide range
of SOP's and tooling, selection of
appropriate technology (air guns,
connectors, hoses) etc. ability to
monitor whole system for leaks.
Cooperation of Maintenance
department.
Perception of all staff toward
environmental and financial
cost of leaks. Flippant attitude
towards the use of air brooms
etc., reluctance to adopt lower
impact procedures. Challenge
years of bad habits. Few
effective alternatives.
Compressed air being expensive
to produce can yield large
returns on efficiency measures
which could be partially
harvested for financial
incentives. Investment in
maintenance, appropriate
technology and behavioural
investment can bring significant
returns.
Compartmentalise the system.
Assign local ownership -
Compressed air
Champions/monitors. Tackle
the issues for each role and
examine each SOP with
individuals. Install sub meters
or other production measures
to assess use prior to
intervention. Seek expert
knowledge on tools, fixtures
and fittings.
Run an awareness campaign
with facts on the cost of
compressor operation and
associated leaks and excesses.
Offer viable tried and tested
alternative techniques, engage
staff to adopt their own or
evaluate options.
Quantify the cost of a
percentage drop in energy use.
Set a target and offer period
and offer an appropriate sum
(fraction of the saving) as a
shared financial incentive
simply to demonstrate the
concept to all compressed air
users. Once achieved it should
be able to be maintained.
(ensure that the performance is
productivity related)
Lighting Provision A rolling process of assessment, (Bay or section
by section), technical review(needs and
requirements) and energy quantification,
replacement proposals and benefits measured.
Adequate site plans, technical
information of existing installations,
lack of sub-metering, cooperation
of maintenance department,
specification of proposed
alternatives
Commitment to trial first
tranche and assess benefits
Illustration of longevity
benefits, whole life cost
principles
Support the provision of
updated site plans
Identify areas of the factory
that are permanently lit but
that only require occasional
lighting, stores, washrooms,
mess rooms etc.
Communicate industry
examples
Heat Treatment
Processes
Review of existing and assess new data
availability for recommendations on operational
parameters and asset improvements (control
and insulation) will lead to measurable
improvements in energy consumption per unit
production/treatment.
Access to new data or design of
additional trial, Technical
information to support options
cooperation of staff who
already completed these trials
previously
The opportunity to modernise
and become actively efficient.
Offer support to help promote
their wish list of improvement
with new vigour and additional
tangible benefits
(environmental credibility)
Assist with the phraseology of
the business case and report
writing to build convincing and
technically competent reports.
Sell the role of the SREM as a
support function, independent
but engaged and a champion of
their objectives.
Waste Management A coordinated waste strategy, monitoring
system and a review of assets, coordination and
review of associated contracts/value streams
would improve control, reduce costs, maximise
recovery values, ensure compliance and provide
information to satisfy the developing
information needs for an EMS.
Complexity, diverse and dispersed
facilities, no/few recording systems,
no single ownership or management
of contracts. Availability of
specification/cost/revenue data for
recyclables.
Delegation of
tasks/responsibilities and
coordination of data to single
point of contact. Empower
though engagement and joint
development of solutions.
Greater sense of ownership and
responsibility
Physical plan, schematic and
reporting structure, break it
down to build it up.
Name and communicate those
with responsibilities, the Waste
Team
Effective deployment will
receive recognition through
mgt schemes.
Material Flows The development of information systems that
demonstrate the internal performance of certain
material flows would support the engagement of
staff in objectives to improve environmental
performance and create a sense of added value
while contributing to performance management.
Ownership of the data, ability to
translate it into real-time
performance data alongside other
relevant measures.
RE measures to be seen as valid
as other KPI's
RE measures to be seen as valid
as other KPI's
Convince the owner of KPI's
that some can be non-fiscal
measures
Incorporate RE measures into
overall performance objectives
and strategies
Part of the Greening image of
the company supported by the
MD
Action area OpportunityChange Factors Actions
Appendices 47
Business Company name
Date Jan 2015
02-Feb 09-Feb 16-Feb 23-Feb 02-Mar 09-Mar 16-Mar 23-Mar 30-Mar 06-Apr
Resource Efficiency
Awareness / Behaviour
Change
An informed and aware workforce contributing to overall
objectives through amended behaviour, diligence and ideas
generation.Workshops and focus groups, facilitated to explore and at upon specific components of the action plan
Compressed Air Utilisation Establishment of a compressed air protocol including
maintenance procedures and frequencies, an ongoing
monitoring programme for energy use / productivity related
measures, user engagement, SOP review and appropriate
technology deployment. Resulting in reduced compressed air
Kick -off
Meeting to
start
measuring
Review
collected
info
Implement
Recommendation
Lighting Provision A rolling process of assessment, (Bay or section by section),
technical review(needs and requirements) and energy
quantification, replacement proposals and benefits measured.
Kick-off
and form
focus
groups
Review Collected
info
Implement /
recommend
Heat Treatment Processes Review of existing and assess new data availability for
recommendations on operational parameters and asset
improvements (control and insulation) will lead to measurable
improvements in energy consumption per unit
production/treatment.
Kick-off
and form
focus
groups
Review Collected
info
Implement /
recommend
Waste Management A coordinated waste strategy, monitoring system and a review
of assets, coordination and review of associated
contracts/value streams would improve control, reduce costs,
maximise recovery values, ensure compliance and provide
information to satisfy the developing information needs for
Waste
Contract
Review Waste Data Waste Asset
Summary
findings Proposals
Material Flows The development of information systems that demonstrate
the internal performance of certain material flows would
support the engagement of staff in objectives to improve
environmental performance and create a sense of added
value while contributing to performance management.Discuss KPI
and measures
Action area Opportunity
Appendices 48
Appendix 10: IEMA Training
Working with Environmental Sustainability
Aim: The course will provide individuals with an introduction to environmental sustainability, resource efficiency and pollution prevention and so enable them to actively contribute to the environmental or sustainability strategy of their organisation. Entry Requirements This qualification is aimed at all individuals in an organisation where environmental sustainability is not the primary part of their job role. Duration and format: 7 hours of teaching, exercises and discussion (including 1 hour examination). Learning objectives: The course comprises of 5 learning objectives. At the end of the course delegates will know:
1. the main environmental risks and opportunities for organisations
2. the importance of resource efficiency
3. the impacts of pollution, prevention, control and environmental legislation in organisations
4. the impact of transport on the environment and organisations
5. how employees support environmental sustainability.
End of course assessment: This will comprise of a multiple choice assessment.
Appendices 49
Leading with Environmental Sustainability Aim:
This session will provide cross functional senior executives with an understanding of the short, mid and long term opportunities and challenges environmental sustainability presents to value creation. It will provide the basis for developing an environmental sustainability strategy and imbed leadership and commitment as required by the new
ISO14001 standard to be published in 2015. Duration and format:
Half day of facilitated learning which is highly interactive and engaging through
discussion and reflection. Overview of the session:
Session 1 - Defining environmental sustainability and how it will benefit the organisation
• What is environmental sustainability? • What are the drivers and opportunities?
• What is your existing strategy? Is it fit for purpose? • Why is leadership and commitment fundamental to successful environmental
sustainability and ISO14001:2015? Session 2 – Environmental sustainability in the value chain and the importance of cross
functional support, including:
- Product and service design - Sales and marketing
- Operations, engineering and manufacturing - Procurement and supply chain management - Organisational governance
Session 3 - Who is leading on environmental sustainability?
• What value is being created
• What makes a good environmental sustainability strategy? Session 4 - Understand the implications of complying with environmental legislation
• Overview of relevant environmental legislation • What are the main consequences of breaching this legislation?
Session 5 – Developing the strategy
What do individual senior executives need to do to deliver environmental
sustainability?
Each delegate is asked to make a number of commitments which are recorded
Appendices 50
Appendix 11: Dissemination Activities
A dissemination plan was agreed and provided in a separate project report. The report outlined the approach to dissemination taking account of different routes and mechanisms for dissemination and the different target audience groups. The overarching dissemination plan is depicted in Figure 1 below:
Dissemination activities included:
Development and distribution of press releases. Initiation and distribution of a project newsletter. Creation of an on-line resource centre.
All business workshops.
In addition, a project webpage was kept refreshed as new material was approved and a case
study for the RSA Great Recovery was prepared.
Three newsletters were produced and circulated to the reference group of companies, EEF, Rolls-Royce and the participating businesses. The primary scope of the newsletters was to cover updates on individual progress of participating businesses and highlight particular findings of the project. In the development of the first project newsletter, the participating businesses were found to be willing to have their organisation and achievements profiled. For the production of the second newsletter, businesses not featured in the initial newsletter were quick to volunteer to be included or agree to be included. Material for the on-line resource centre were collected during the course of the project and sorted for use by the participating and reference businesses. The key target for this material was, however, the reference group of businesses as they did not have access to direct support from the SREMs. The reference centre was an online database of free ly available reports from key resource efficiency organisations in the UK including Defra, WRAP, Resource Efficient Scotland, Zero Waste Scotland, The Carbon Trust, EEF, DECC and The Environment Agency. Care was taken not to include too many tools and publications so as not to overwhelm businesses. The information included was also chosen to avoid overlap between publications.
Two group workshops were held for all participating and reference group businesses. Due to
the wide-spread geography of the businesses the workshop were held at Bristol Aztec West with
April '14 to September
•Stage 1 – Awareness of the concept and the project to build a “following” of interested organisations.
October to May '15
•Stage 2 – Early learnings to encourage investigation of options by business and stimulate complimentary research.
June '15 to December
•Stage 3 – Case study led activity to encourage replication of activity in businesses and further investigation of model by business support organisations.
January to March '16
•Stage 4 – Dissemination of overall findings following completion of research to stimulate policy discussion, review of business support provision and adoption of service model successes.
Appendices 51
easy access to public transport and motorways. The purpose of the workshops were to bring all
businesses involved in the SREM project together to share experiences and network and obtain
an update on resource efficiency support. There was a rapid response to the invitation to attend
the workshops.
Press Releases
Embargoed until: 27 May 2014
Manufacturing SMEs to lead the way on environmental collaboration Two clusters of manufacturing SMEs will have the chance of having their own environmental manager for up to 15months thanks to funding from Defra. Defra is funding a pilot project to test a collaborative approach to sharing resource efficiency managers amongst clusters of manufacturing SMEs. By supporting the
placement of a skilled resource efficiency manager in each of two clusters of businesses for up to 15months, the project aims to provide insight into the potential of shared employee models in helping SMEs access quality staff cost effectively. The project is based on an idea developed by micro SME, The Environment and
Sustainability Partnership Ltd (EandSP), who will be leading the project in a partnership with Bangor University, EEF (the manufacturers’ organisation) and Rolls-Royce plc. Nigel Marsh, Global Head of Environment at Rolls-Royce plc, stated “We are planning to roll out our global Resource Efficiency Action Programme this year to help us reduce
waste in our own operations. Whilst focusing on our internal operations we also recognise that there are even greater benefits to be achieved across our external supply chain. We are keen to share our programmes, successes and best practice with our suppliers. This project provides us with a timely opportunity to try a new approach to
working with our suppliers as part of our supplier development programmes for business efficiency.” To build on Rolls-Royce’s approach, a resource efficiency manager will be provided full time to be shared amongst a cohort of SMEs who are part of their UK supply chain. A
second resource efficiency manager will be in place for a cohort of EEF member businesses in the South West and Wales region. Phil Brownsord, EEF’ southwest Regional Director, said: “Although increasing resource costs are a significant risk to our members SMEs are
unable to justify a dedicated employee to manage this issue. By sharing an environmental manager members will have dedicated expertise but at a cost that is proportionate to their turnover. This project has the potential to deliver cost savings, innovative products and improved partnerships with customers, and importantly for EEF
promotes a growing and sustainable manufacturing base in the UK”. Businesses wishing to access resources used by the resource efficiency managers will also be able to join a network group and keep abreast of progress on the project.
Researchers, advisors and other interested bodies are also welcome to be part of a wider stakeholder group for the project to help share learnings and experiences. A project website is being established at www.environmentandsustainability.co.uk/SREM and if you would like to be kept
informed of the project you can email [email protected] Ends
Appendices 52
Notes for Editors
This research was commissioned and is funded by Defra. The views expressed reflect the research findings and the authors ’ interpretation; they do not necessarily reflect
Defra policy or opinions. Background to the work Over a number of years Defra has invested in building and developing a robust evidence base on understanding and influencing sustainable and resource efficient behaviours. Defra has developed a strong analytical framework, based on available evidence, which has focused on developing an in-depth understanding of current activities and how to drive transitions towards more sustainable behaviours in the future. Over recent years Defra has sought to further extend understanding by testing out ideas for driving change through action based research projects. This is the fourth round of projects to be commissioned as part of Defra’s programme of action based research to test innovative approaches for encouraging sustainable and resource efficient behaviours. Details of the projects commissioned under previous calls are available at: http://randd.defra.gov.uk/Default.aspx?Menu=Menu&Module=ProjectList&Completed=0&AUID=1701 (See EV0532, EV0534, EV0535) This project builds upon previous feasibility research carried out by EandSP with funding under the Support for Sustainable Living grant scheme, managed by Cynnal Cymru/ Sustain Wales (http://www.cynnalcymru.com/SSL%20Grants).
About Defra Defra priorities are to grow the rural economy, improve the environment and safeguard animal and plant health. The UK’s economy and businesses depend on global trade and resources. However, factors like climate change and a growing world population mean there’s more pressure on energy, natural resources and the wider environment. Encouraging businesses and consumers to manage their impact on the environment through improved production processes and more sustainable product offerings are core elements of achieving these policy goals. https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/encouraging-businesses-to-manage-their-impact-on-the-environment
About EandSP EandSP (The Environment and Sustainability Partnership ltd) design, manage and deliver environment and sustainability projects, programmes and research, working in partnership with specialist teams of experts to meet the needs of each project. The Environment and Sustainability Partnership was formed by Ann Stevenson and Ed Gmitrowicz to provide practical advice and support to private and public sector organisations in achieving sustainable change. Ann and Ed have jointly spent more than 50 years working in environmental and sustainability consultancy. The philosophy is to work honestly and openly with organisations, to be clear about the improvements that can be made and to work in partnership with other organisations to deliver measurable change. http://www.environmentandsustainability.co.uk/home
About Bangor University Founded in 1884, Bangor University is a research-intensive university with a strong track record of collaborative research with industry. Areas of particular excellence include Accounting & Finance, which is rated as the best for research in the UK, and Electronic Engineering, which is rated second in the UK. Sports Science is placed in the top 10 in the UK and Psychology is 11th in the UK. The University has also made its own internal commitment to behave as a ‘living lab’ in terms of its own sustainable practices and on an ongoing basis is committed to trialling and evaluating interventions within its own culture, systems
Appendices 53
and processes in order to create an evidence based platform for successful collaborations with industry and the public sector addressing the challenges of a sustainable future.
About EEF EEF, the manufacturers’ organisation, is the representative voice of manufacturing in the UK. It has a growing membership of almost 6,000 companies of all sizes, employing some 900,000 people from every sector of engineering, manufacturing, engineering construction and technology-based industries. www.eef.org.uk
About Rolls Royce plc Recent studies in Rolls Royce have identified the opportunity to realise very significant cost savings and a reduced environmental footprint by a more rigorous application of the waste hierarchy to operations. Rolls Royce has developed waste mapping tools and training and trialled these at 2 UK sites during 2013. A global programme (REAP – Resource Efficiency Action Programme) will be rolled out during 2014 based on these trials. This programme builds on success in the Rolls Royce Global Revert Programme (see http://www.rolls-royce.com/sustainability/casestudies/revert.jsp). Further information on Rolls Royce targets can be seen at http://www.rolls-royce.com/sustainability/environment/environment_operations.jsp
Contact information:
Name: Ann Stevenson Tel:07917 324343
Email:[email protected] Release: To be published before 31 March 2015.
SME manufacturers benefitting from sharing resource efficiency expertise Ten manufacturing SMEs in England and Wales have embarked on a ground-breaking programme of collaboration to improve resource efficiency.
The businesses are sharing two resource efficiency managers to help them identify, make the business case and take action on cost effective resource efficiency improvements. The two posts are funded as part of a Defra action based research programme and
supported by Rolls-Royce plc and EEF (the manufacturers’ organisation).
Resource Management Minister, Dan Rogerson said:
“We are pleased to support this pilot project, which will help these SMEs save valuable time and money by giving access to the advice and support of a shared resource efficiency manager. This project is part of our wider approach to enable businesses to be more sustainable.”
Four of the businesses are being supported as part of the Rolls-Royce plc aerospace components supply chain. The four businesses taking part, alongside Rolls-Royce plc,
are: CW Fletcher and Sons in Sheffield; McBraida plc in Bristol; Rotadata in Derby, and Stone Foundries Ltd in London. The other six businesses in South West England and South East Wales are part of the EEF regionally based company cohort. The six businesses are: Arada Ltd in Axminster;
Hymid Multi Shot Ltd in Torquay; Seetru Ltd in Bristol; Shine Food Machinery Ltd in Newport, Stirling Dynamics Ltd in Bristol, and Universal Engineering in Weymouth and Llantrisant. Jointly the ten businesses employ 1150 staff and have a combined turnover of £110 million.
Appendices 54
Each business has now had a baseline review carried out and the shared resource efficiency managers are helping them work through delivery of action plans. To date it is clear that although data is generally available on electricity, gas and water in SMEs, data
on materials use, production and waste is far more variable and less comprehensive. For the great majority of companies participating in the project the cost of materials is significantly greater than that of energy. For the cluster of businesses located in the SW of England and SE Wales the reviews have shown that energy costs in the business are
generally only 6% of the cost of material use in the business. For every £100k spent on materials a 5% improvement on material efficiency will result in £5,000 of savings compared to a £300 saving for a 5% reduction in energy use. However, the fact that many of the businesses derive an income from valuable material waste such as
stainless steel has meant few businesses have looked up stream at material use. Helping the businesses unlock the opportunities to improve material efficiencies upstream is the priority challenge for the resource efficiency managers going forward. Fundamentally, an important aspect of the project is answering the question “What is it
that encourages SMEs do more to improve resource efficiency?” After three months the research is already providing a range of valuable insights that will start to help answer this question. Motivators and expectations
Awareness of resource efficiency and environmental issues amongst all the businesses was found to be high and the reduction of impacts on the environment is seen as beneficial. Not surprisingly improving environmental performance isn’t the primary driver for
resource efficiency in the group of businesses. All the businesses want the same outcome from improved resource efficiency: commercial benefit – preferably at low cost. But, all the businesses in the project are willing to invest, where there’s a convincing business case.
The work completed to date has reinforced findings from previous studies that engagement is most effective with SMEs where there is strong senior management commitment to taking action, irrespective of company size or type. Company culture
Early evidence is that there are other factors influencing enthusiasm for taking forward action and the pace at which action is taken. These factors relate to the culture within each business and what the businesses perceive as being ‘achievable’ and within their control. The interaction with companies has also highlighted stark cultural differences
between different businesses. Just because a business is labelled an SME or a manufacturer they are not all the same and appear to have significantly different operational cultures than larger organisations. Data and SMEs
The first step for the resource efficiency managers in making the business case has been baseline data collection to understand where the businesses are starting from and the potential for improvement. Key findings to date include: All SMEs have struggled to some extent with being able to provide good quality,
quantitative data on materials, production and waste, while data on energy and water
has been more readily available.
Appendices 55
Sub-metering of any utility is rarely carried out at the SMEs, so resource use data for
individual systems (e.g., compressed air, lighting) or at individual process or machine
level is usually not available.
Monitoring of process wastes, other than rejects, is not a priority at most companies
as it is usually seen as just a part of the process.
For areas seen as ‘fixed costs’ or ‘overhead’ monitoring of use tends to be carried
out to address a specific issue or when a change occurs but not in monitoring and
improving on-going performance.
Quality and health and safety management systems are well established in all
participating businesses, but the majority of companies do not have a systematic way
of recording and accessing information on environmental performance and resource
efficiency.
The experience so far has shown that being able to understand what data is needed and be able to collect it is generally going to take longer than anticipated. This is an area
where the businesses potentially need most practical support to help them focus efforts on where there will be greatest gain through resource efficiency. As part of the process reviews undertaken with the senior management in the businesses have reinforced that the key barriers to taking action on resource efficiency
are: Capacity/Staff time
Cost/payback cycles/expected return on investment (RoI)
Availability of specialist knowledge
The shared resource efficiency manager model aims to overcome the key barriers of
staff resource and availability of specialist knowledge. By the end of the research project there should be a better insight into what value SMEs are likely to place on the availability of such a resource in addition to any direct financial returns from improvements in resource efficiency.
If you would like to be kept informed of future insights from the research email [email protected]. Information is also available on the project website at www.eandsp.co.uk/SREM.
Appendices 56
Appendices 57
Appendices 58
Appendices 59
Appendices 60
Appendices 61
Appendices 62
Appendices 63
Appendices 64
Case Study for the RSA Great Recovery Don’t forget to send us pictures (and credits) to go with your case study! A
minimum of 1 and maximum of 10, no smaller than 640px wide at 72dpi (we will resize if necessary). Please also include relevant links to explain terminology or highlight an organisation.
Name (organisation or individual): The Environment and Sustainability Partnership Ltd
(EandSP) Logo (please copy and paste here or attach as a separate pdf /jpg file):
Title (of the project or case study): Piloting shared resource efficiency manager models
in SME manufacturers to create a continuous improvement approach to embedding resource efficiency practice. Introduction (please tell us a bit about how the project came about and its relevance for
the circular economy. What was the original inspiration for the idea, who was involved, and how did things get off the ground? @100-200 words) Having designed and managed programmes for decades supporting SMEs to reduce material use and waste, the directors of EandSP recognised that although much had
been done to encourage, exemplify and engage business on resource efficiency through policy and funding, practical on the ground support was often limited and not available to most UK SMEs. EandSP experience and other research clearly showed that for many SMEs action isn’t taken because they have insufficient internal staff resource,
knowledge or skills to move forward. To overcome these barriers EandSP developed the concept of a Shared Resource Efficiency Manager (SREM) and with funding from Environment Wales, EandSP carried out qualitative research on the viability of providing a SREM to SMEs, with costs spread in relation to the level of need of each organisation.
The initial research found that 35% of participating businesses would value such a service. This feasibility work formed the basis of a proposal to Defra, working with EEF (the manufacturers’ organisation), Rolls Royce plc and Bangor University to pilot the SREM model as a mechanism for embedding a change in behaviour of SMEs on
resource efficiency.
Appendices 65
Development (how did the project expand and develop? What were the initial findings
and what changes were made as a result? How did the team work together and/or with collaborators? @100-200 words)
The SREM model aims to move SMEs from a cyclical approach to resource management to a continual model of improvement and overcome issues of traditional consultancy/support services often being transitory, where knowledge and skills
developed during support is lost when the consultant leaves. Ten manufacturing SMEs in England and Wales are involved in the project. Four of the businesses are being supported as part of a Rolls-Royce plc aerospace components supply chain. The other six businesses are part of a EEF regionally based cohort. Jointly
the ten businesses employ 1150 staff and have a combined turnover of £110 million. The SREMs will be in place for at least 12 months but early activity has shown that although data is generally available on electricity, gas and water in SMEs, data on materials use, production and waste is far more variable and less comprehensive.
The project is already showing that for the great majority of companies participating in the project that for every £100k spent on materials a 5% improvement on material efficiency will result in £5,000 of savings compared to a £300 saving for a 5% reduction in energy use.
Helping the businesses unlock the opportunities to improve material efficiencies upstream is the priority challenge for the SREMs going forward.
Outcomes (what lasting changes have been made as a result of the project? What was
learnt by the different partners? What lessons would be transferable to other situations? What would have been done differently in hindsight? If this project is ongoing, please just give as much detail as you are able. @150-300 words)
Following three months of the SREMs being in place the research is already providing a range of valuable insights, such as:
Many of the participating businesses are already active in addressing issues
relating to resource efficiency but these are usually tactical opportunities driven
by operational or cost-based necessity.
Companies do not systematically monitor use of any of the resources used in
production or other business activities and none of the businesses have a
strategic approach to resource efficiency.
Senior management of businesses see key barriers to taking action on resource
efficiency as: lack of capacity/staff time; cost/payback cycles/expected RoI,
availability of specialist knowledge.
Business cultures and internal communication vary significantly, both of which are
expected to impact on the rate of adoption of resource efficiency measures.
Engagement activities have also provided insight to how best to initiate and develop relationships with and within companies, and highlighted how certain techniques and
interventions should be adopted if the model were to be adopted in future. A vital aspect to the success of the SREM model is the relationship management skills of the SREMs and their ability to understand technically challenging processes. Other key engagement learning points include:
Appendices 66
Establish a structured menu of delivery and data collection needs.
Obtain insight into the culture of the businesses and staff attitudes.
Ensure early, regular on-site presence of SREMs to build trust, relationships and
detailed knowledge of operations.
Engage staff across the business through practical action.
Comments (please comment on the potential of this project in the wider context of
transitioning to a circular economy. What were the main challenges you encountered?
What opportunities did you come across or make use of? Any other comments that you think would be useful for our network! @200-300 words) The piloting of the SREM model is at an early stage of development. However early insights indicate that an SREM model has the potential to be replicated and lead to
resource efficiency being embedded into SME operations. Early recommendations for developing a sustainable SREM model include;
Ensuring SREMs have highly developed relationship management skills and an
ability to understand potentially technically complex operations.
Determining the optimum geographical spread of businesses for an SREM to
maximise on-site presence of SREMs.
Establishing an approach to understanding the ‘cultural readiness’ as well as
the more established “technical readiness” of businesses to enable embedding
of resource efficiency behaviours.
Recognise the difficulties for SMEs in obtaining and understanding data and
support the establishment of pragmatic business-centric data collection,
monitoring and analysis programme that can underpin existing strategic
business priorities whilst determining the resource efficiency potential for the
business.
Presenting resource efficiency recommendations and actions in line with the
established investment decision requirements of individual businesses.
Recognising and building on existing action that has led to resource efficiency
improvements in individual businesses, especially where it has not been driven
by resource efficiency.
Creating opportunities for the businesses to engage with each other and share
experiences, knowledge and insight.
The economic viability of the SREM model will be determined by the value perceived by the participating businesses of the SREM support. As the project moves into the action implementation phase the direct and indirect benefits will be monitored and help answer
the question “What is it that encourages SMEs do more to improve resource efficiency?” Further information on the SREM project can be found at www.eandsp.co.uk/SREM By providing this case study you agree that it can be used solely by The RSA Great
Recovery project, on our website and in other materials. All case studies will be attributed to the original authors.
Appendices 67
Appendix 12: Research and Evaluation Protocol
Data collection, analysis and feedback. Overview
Data collection must have minimum footprint/impact on the business and SREM to avoid undermining the effect of the project
Where possible data collection should reflect ‘real world’ application – i.e., using a similar process to one that would be necessary in any case for the SREM to develop action plans with the businesses and carry out their role
Fundamental questions:
Does it work? Where/when does it work? (differences between geographic and supply chain groups)
Why does it work in these scenarios? (key factors/key barriers to success) Data collection The data collection has been grouped into two aspects related to the fundamental questions above; data to report overall impact and data to provide insight into why we are seeing this impact. There is also a third use for the data which is to continually feed back into the action research process. Impact Data Collection points: baseline (at outset of project) and post-intervention (end of project). Hard Metrics - cost, carbon, materials, utilities, staff time etc.
These data to be collected by the SREMs at the outset of the project prior to developing their action plans
Tools are under investigation to capture this dataset Soft metrics - attitude and priorities of business.
These data to be collected through the A-DoR review both pre and post project Data to be used to both assess impact on attitude and priorities of business and to feed
directly into the SREM action plans and the project evaluation
In addition, and where approved by participating companies, we will use online surveys to collect attitudinal data from staff. This will enable us to seek additional insight into potential correlation between existing levels of staff engagement and the adoption of resource efficiency initiatives by the participating businesses.
Insight data 1. Culture of the business, its current situation and priorities
Collected through A-DoR review and online staff survey. Timing: pre and post intervention
2. Reflective feedback from SREMS. Fortnightly reflective audio (no more than 5 minutes) to
cover:
Progress
Barriers to progress Relationship with businesses Observed differences between businesses
Aspirations/expectations for coming fortnight
Appendices 68
These headings are intended as a guide and not as a restrictive or exhaustive list. The audio diary should reflect the experiences of the SREMs with a less operational focus than the update calls with EandSP Reflective audio feedback to be sent to Bangor University and EandSP Directors every other Friday afternoon/evening (starting from Friday 19 th September 2014) any audio file format is fine (e.g., Mp3, wmv etc)
3. Weekly diaries to be prepared by SREMs and sent to Bangor University and Ann Stevenson
EandSP Directors by end of the day on Friday of each week. To commence on Friday 19 th September 2104. Diaries to cover headings under Item 2 above, but to also cover the wider topics considered in the Implementation and Evaluation Plan.
4. Weekly interviews with SREMs. The weekly interviews will be held on the Friday morning of
each week at a time to be arranged between EandSP Directors and SREMs. The notes of each weekly telecon will be written up by EandSP Directors during the day and forwarded to Bangor by the end of play on Friday. The topics to be covered in the weekly telecons will be similar to those covered in the weekly diary. The interviews will provide a chance to discuss important issues in more detail, to look at the week’s activities in a more integrated fashion or to address how the experiences of the week might affect expectations or aspirations for the coming week or weeks. The weekly interviews will commence on Friday 12th September 2014 and by forwarded by EandSP to Bangor University.
5. Feedback from EEF and Rolls Royce – monthly telecom/ quarterly meeting.
6. Feedback from/to EandSP – fortnightly – teleconf (Tuesday after the audio data is sent)
7. Feedback from/to EandSP - informal – ongoing as required. 8. Feedback from the business - through the SREM and (directly where appropriate) to
EandSP. 9. Escalated issues reported on an ongoing basis Feedback into the project Analysis of audio diaries, weekly diaries and weekly interviews will be fed back into the
project via a fortnightly telephone conference to be held every second Tuesday at 8:30am between EandSP and Bangor University.
Key issues and learning fed-back into project through EandSP and to SREMs
Specific advice provided where appropriate – e.g. waste specific issues, engagement issues etc.
Appendices 69
Appendix 13: Organisational Cultural Assessment Instrument (OCAI) and Motivation Towards the Environment Scale (MTES)
The purpose of the on line survey was twofold, firstly to ascertain from a research perspective whether there appeared to be any correlation between the overall culture type of the business (as perceived by its employees) and the experience of the SREMs and the project. Secondly the aim was to provide a layer of insight to the participating businesses in addition to the resource efficiency baselines taken at the start of the project. Two survey tools were used : the OCAI and MTES these are described below.
Organisational Cultural Assessment Instrument (OCAI) The purpose of using this tool was twofold, firstly to ascertain from a project perspective whether there appeared to be any correlation between the overall culture type of the business (as perceived by its employees) and the experience of the sREMs and the project. Secondly the aim was to provide a layer of insight to the participating companies in addition to the resource efficiency baselines taken at the start of the project. The OCAI tool is based on the competing values framework (CVF). The CVF was developed following a series of studies on the notion of organizational effectiveness (Quinn & Rohrbaugh, 1983). They discovered two dimensions relating to the effectiveness of organisations. The first dimension relates to organisational focus, from an internal emphasis on people in the organization to an external focus. The second dimension relates to stability and control versus flexibility and change. It is clear that differing levels of focus in these dimensions could well impact the adoption and successful implementation of initiatives under projects such as the SREM model. Equally, there could be an effect on the readiness to change in response to information provided, which brings us back to one of the major questions from Defra in in itiating this project, namely; why are SMEs not taking advantage of the economic savings potential of resource efficient practices? Within the framework described above there are four quadrants: Internal Process Model: organizations in this quadrant have hierarchical systems, they emphasize measurement, documentation and information management, processes that bring stability and control. Open Systems Model: this is a more organic system, in which adaptability, readiness for change and growth are important. Innovation and creativity abound. People are not controlled but inspired. Rational Goal Model: this system focuses on profit, targets and goal setting to achieve productivity and efficiency. Human Relations Model: this type of organization focuses on teamwork, human relations and working together towards common goals. Cameron and Quinn (1999) further developed the Competing Values Framework (CVF) and renamed the quadrants Hierarchy, Adhocracy, Market and Clan respectively and these are illustrated in Figure 1. The four quadrants are sometimes also ‘branded’ by verbs which describe the main emphasis of each, so the clan quadrant is also known as the ‘collaborate’
Appendices 70
quadrant, the hierarchy as the ‘control’ quadrant, market as the ‘compete’ quadrant an d adhocracy as the ‘create’ quadrant.
Figure 1. Competing Values Framework. Adapted from Cameron & Quinn (1999) Figure 1 illustrates the cultural dimensions on the competing values map. The horizontal dimension maps how inwardly or outwardly focussed an organization is. On the left hand side the organization is primarily inward looking, whilst on the right hand side, its attention is focussed outside the organization towards the external environment – its markets, suppliers, customers and other external stakeholders. External focus is important to an organization if it operates in situations where competiveness and/ or customer or other stakeholder needs are paramount. If this is not the case then an internal focus can be more useful. Externally focussed organisations have an emphasis on rivalry, differentiation and competition, internally focussed organizations emphasise collaboration and integration. The vertical dimension maps stability and control. At the lower end, control, regulation and decision-making is centralised, lying solely with management whereas at the upper end it may be devolved to employees giving them greater autonomy. In terms of stability versus flexibility, flexibility is necessary when forces, external or internal, push for change whereas stability is necessary in organizations where efficiency, consistency and reliability are dominant requirements. Again, it is clear that position on the vertical (stability and control axis) could be an important factor where adaptability and acceptance of change is concerned. These aspects wi ll be vital ingredients in influencing the acceptance and outcome of the project as delivered by the SREMs.
Flexibility and Discretion
Stability and Control
Internal focus and integration
External focus and differentiation
CLAN ADHOCRACY
HIERARCHY MARKET
Appendices 71
The four broad culture types as shown in Figure 1 are: Clan; Adhocracy; Hierarchy and Market cultures. An outline of each culture and the broad implications of that culture for business focus are outlined below.
Clan culture This type of culture, displayed in the upper left quadrant of the diagram, has an internal focus but is flexible. Organizations displaying clan cultures are people orientated with a focus on collaboration, commitment, communication and development. Leadership takes the form of mentoring, team building and facilitation. The focus is on working together. Adhocracy culture The adhocracy, in the upper right quadrant, is also focussed externally yet has greater independence and flexibility than the Clan. Organizations with an adhocracy culture will foster dynamism, innovation, creativity, entrepreneurial spirit and risk taking. Leaders in an adhocracy are visionaries, innovators and risk takers. The organization is committed to innovation and being at the cutting edge. The focus is on advancement and being first. Hierarchy culture The hierarchy culture, in the lower left quadrant of the diagram can be seen as a typical bureaucracy; it has centralized control, a clear pecking order, well defined policies and procedures and is stable rather than flexible. It has an internal focus and leaders are efficient, reliable and well organized. There is respect for position and power and the focus is on control, stability and doing things right. Market culture The market culture in the lower right quadrant also seeks control but is outwardly focussed; organizations with market cultures are driven by results and success is defined by the extent o f market share acquired or by market penetration. Leaders in market cultures are competitive, tough and demanding. The organization is committed to beating the competition, becoming market leaders and increasing share price. The focus is on winning. The OCAI assesses six dimensions of organizational culture, namely: dominant organizational characteristics; leadership style; management of employees; organizational glue; strategic emphasis; and criteria for success. It is a simple questionnaire which asks a question about each of the six dimensions above with a choice of four answers for each – the respondent gives each of the four possible answers a share of one hundred points depending on the applicability to their organization as it is now. Scores are then plotted on a chart that overlies the CVF (as shown in Figure 1), showing which quadrant the organization scores most highly on. For the purposes of the interim report we will show only the overall, or summary, outputs for each of the five organisations. It will be interesting in the final reporting however, with the possible inclusion of the remaining participating companies, to look in more detail at the six dimensions for each business.
Motivation Towards the Environment Scale (MTES) The Motivation Toward the Environment scale (MTES) is designed to rate an individual’s level of intrinsic, extrinsic, and overall motivation for environmental behaviors. It consists of 24 items in which respondents are asked to respond to the question “why are you doing things for the environment?” They then respond to each of the randomly presented 24 statements on a 7
Appendices 72
point likert scale with responses ranging 1 (does not correspond at all) to 7 (corresponds exactly).
The scale consists of six subscales: Intrinsic Motivation, Integrated Regulation, Identified Regulation, Introjected Regulation, External Regulation, and Amotivation. These are described in the main report in section 3.1.1
A score can be created for each subscale by taking the mean of the items within the subscale.
For the purposes of this project the MTES survey was completed online. A text version of the items in the scale is included below.
References
Pelletier, L.G., Tuson, K. M., Green-Demers, I., Noels, K., & Beaton, A. M. (1998). Why are you doing things for the environment? The Motivation Toward the Environment Scale. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 437-468.
Villacorta, M., Koestner, R., & Lakes, N. (2003). Further validation of the Motivation Toward the Environment Scale. Environment and Behavior, 35(4), 486-505.
The MTES questionnaire Why are you doing things for the environment? Please indicate the extent to which each statement corresponds to your personal motives for engaging in environmental behaviors by selecting the appropriate number on a 7-point scale, ranging from 1 (does not correspond at all) to 7 (corresponds exactly).
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Does not
correspond at all
Corresponds moderately
Corresponds exactly
________1. For the pleasure I experience while I am mastering new ways of helping the environment.
________2. For the pleasure I experience while I’m improving quality of environment.
________3. Because I like the feeling I have when I do things for the environment.
________4. For the pleasure I get from contributing to the environment.
________5. Because taking care of the environment is an integral part of my life.
________6. Because it seems to me that taking care of myself and taking care of the environment are inseparable.
________7. Because it’s part of the way I’ve chosen to live my life.
________8. Because being environmentally-conscious has become a fundamental part of who I am.
Appendices 73
________9. Because it’s a sensible thing to do in order to improve the environment.
________10. Because it’s a way I’ve chosen to contribute to a better environment.
________11. Because it is a reasonable thing to do to help the environment.
________12. Because I think it’s a good idea to do something about the environment.
________13. I think I’d regret not doing something for the environment.
________14. Because I would feel guilty if I didn’t do anything for the environment.
________15. Because I would feel bad if I didn’t do anything for the environment.
________16. Because other people will be upset if I don’t
________17. For the recognition I get from others.
________18. Because my friends insist that I do it.
________19. To avoid being criticized.
________20. I wonder why I’m doing things for the environment, the situation is simply not improving.
________21. Honestly, I don’t know; I truly have the impression I’m wasting my time doing things for the environment.
________22. I don’t know; I can’t see how my efforts to be environmentally-conscious are helping the environmental situation.
________23. I don’t really know; I can’t see what I’m getting out of it.
________24. Because I would feel ashamed of myself if I was doing nothing to help the environment.
Appendices 74
Appendix 14: Reference group questionnaire
Background
The aim of this project is to research and evaluate the effectiveness of using a shared resource efficiency manager (SREM) in small and medium sized (SME) manufacturing businesses.
The research is designed to investigate a model that addresses the following originally identified key barriers to action in SMEs:
Lack of resource efficiency and environmental expertise and knowledge.
Limited internal human resource.
Lack of time to investigate and implement resource efficiency measures.
The model being investigated also aims to address issues of traditional consultancy/support services often being transitory, where knowledge and skills
developed during support is lost when the consultant or advisor leaves. The model aims to help to retain this information within the organisations. The research is being led by EandSP (the Environment and Sustainability Partnership Ltd) working with Bangor University, EEF (the manufacturer’s organisation) and Rolls -
Royce plc. Supported Businesses
The businesses being supported as part of the research are in two cohorts:
South West geographical
cohort
Rolls Royce supply chain cohort
Arada Ltd CW Fletchers & Sons Ltd
Hymid Multi-shot Ltd McBraida PLC
Seetru Ltd Rotadata Ltd
Shine Food Machinery Ltd Stone Foundries Ltd
Stirling Dynamics Ltd Universal Engineering Ltd
Support was provided for 12months to September 2015. In addition, organisations originally invited to become a supported organisation2 (“reference group”) have been kept informed of progress through:
Newsletter updates (February, May, July 2015 – last one September).
Webpages and password protected information library (including press releases).
Invitations to all business workshops (May and September 2015).
Resource Efficiency
In the context of this project resource efficiency relates to improvements in: use of materials
production/ segregation/ recycling of waste
energy use
water use
2 Invited by EEF and attended a workshop in May 2014 and provided with an application
form.
Appendices 75
How will the information be used?
The information obtained will be used in a report for Defra that will be available in the public domain. Organisations providing the information will not be named in the report
and therefore will not be identifiable.
Questionnaire: “reference group” businesses Q1: What was the main reason for NOT applying to obtain the free support
available at the outset of the project?
Prompts: Nature of response Further questioning
Didn’t think it would benefit our business Why not?
Couldn’t commit to a year project
Not important for our business
Was already involved in other initiatives/ taking action
Obtain details – what? How support was provided?
Didn’t have time Has the situation changed? Didn’t have internal resource to support
Q2. How have you used the information made available to you through the project? (newsletter, information library, workshops)
Prompts: If they haven’t used the information - enquire as to why not?
If they have used the information - ask what has been used and how it has been
used?
Q3. What action on material resource efficiency or environmental improvements have you taken in the last year?
Prompts:
If no action - enquire as to why not?
If action taken – enquire as to what, how, when and why? – question prompts below:
Follow up questions Further prompts
Why did you take action? Customer requirements? Need to reduce
costs? Already taking action?
How did you decide what action to take?
In-house or external support? Cost savings?
What activity have you carried out?
Energy, waste, recycling, water, procurement, Environmental Management Systems, training
Did you receive external support? Obtain details, e.g. Who from? What type of support?
What impact has been achieved? Obtain information on resource and financial savings where possible.
Appendices 76
Q4. What plans do you have to take forward activities to improve your environmental performance and material resource efficiency in the future?
If no plans - enquire as to why not?
If plans - enquire as to what, when and why and what expect to achieve?
Q5. Where would you look to receive resource efficiency/ environmental advice and support?
Enquire as to why and the nature of support they’d look for (e.g. advice, funding,
consultancy, free or paid for etc.)
Appendices 77
Appendix 15: Resource efficiency improvement
The types of resource efficiency improvements made by the participating companies during the implementation phase of the project are given in the table below. The number of companies with which a particular improvement was made shown in brackets and the types of improvements made with most businesses are highlighted in green and amber, with amber indication an activity undertaken with between 3 and 4 companies and green an activity undertaken with five or more companies. It should, however, be noted that the details of the changes made will vary by company and will depend on the existing situation and that company, what the company wished to achieve and the staff resource available to help implement the improvement. The materials, energy, waste and waste management, water and waste water management behaviour/ culture change and internal capacity building. RESOURCE/
SUBJECT AREA
IMPROVEMENTS Financial savings
Materials Changed materials supplier – improving quality and reducing cost
£36k pa (actual)
Negotiated a materials take back scheme with supplier (2) Put in place a packaging reduction plan/ reduction in
packaging (2)
Instituted packaging monitoring system
Changed production practices and procedures (5) £4K pa (actual) £707K pa (potential)
Change in design to reduce materials use New materials use monitoring procedures (4) £3K pa (actual)
Adoption of KPIs to reduce material waste and improve resource use (2)
Improved materials stock management Change in company culture towards resource efficiency and
waste prevention (2)
Energy efficiency
Adoption of KPIs to reduce energy use (2) £17K pa (potential)
System for monitoring energy use put in place (4) £20K (actual)
Detailed energy use breakdown and identification of energy savings
£70K pa (potential)
Waste and waste management
New waste management procedures and/or renegotiation of waste contract (7)
£57K pa (actual) £3K pa (potential)
Pre-treatment of wastes to increase value £40K pa (potential)
Water and waste water management
Alternative treatment method of liquid wastes £5K pa (actual)
Renegotiation of trade effluent consent £1K pa (actual)
Appendices 78
Behaviour/ culture change
Resource efficiency integrated into company’s programme of staff engagement (2)
Capacity building
Revised roles, responsibilities and organisational structure to improve resource efficiency and/ or waste management (3)
Staff training to reduce wastage and improve resource use (4)
Resource efficiency built into procurement aims and practices (4)
Appendices 79