Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359www.cleanerproduction.net

When case studies are not enough: the influence of corporateculture and employee attitudes on the success of cleaner

production initiativesq

Lesley Stone*

School of Environmental and Marine Sciences, University of Auckland, Morrin Road, Glen Innes, Auckland 92019, New Zealand

Abstract

Cleaner production is not only about changing raw materials, processes and products. It is also about changing corporate cultureand the attitudes of people. An understanding of the dynamics of change within organisations undertaking cleaner production canhelp educators, consultants and project champions to improve the potential for success. The purpose of this paper is to provideinsight into the range of key human dimensions that are potentially relevant to the success of cleaner production initiatives. Thepaper includes examples of the literature relevant to the subject as well as a summary of the results of research into elements ofchange within 22 organisations participating in a major cleaner production demonstration project in New Zealand. The researchwas designed to provide insight into changes in key indicators of environmental management and cleaner production, as well aselements of organisational culture and attitudes. For control purposes, a group of randomly selected organisations was also included.Organisations were surveyed before the start of the demonstration project and approximately a year later. Not surprisingly, resultsfor the demonstration group show trends towards indicators of environmental management and cleaner production. Conversely,results for the control group indicate a trend away from environmental management and cleaner production. Trends in organisationalculture and attitudes are less predictable. The paper provides a discussion of the implications of the results and suggests thatorganisational change theory should be incorporated into cleaner production research and programme development, implementationand evaluation. 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords:Organisational change; Environmental management; Environmental performance improvement; Cleaner production

1. The human dimensions of change inorganisations

Over the past two decades, numerous case studieshave been generated to illustrate “cleaner production”,“pollution prevention” or other similar concepts [1–3]1.The most common types of changes that are demon-strated by such case studies are: changes to the type,quality or quantity of resources used; improved mainte-nance or “housekeeping”; equipment modification orsubstitution; changes to processes; and, more recently,changes to products and services. While valuable, infor-

q Presented at the Asia Pacific Roundtable on Cleaner Production,Brisbane, 21–24 April 1999.

* Tel.: +64-9-373-7599; fax:+64-9-373-7042.E-mail address:lj.stone@auckland.ac.nz (L. Stone).

1 All references are examples only and have been chosen becausethey have good overviews including the range of key elements.

0959-6526/00/$ - see front matter 2000 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.PII: S0959-6526 (00)00037-8

mation on these technical types of changes is unlikelyto be enough by itself to bring about cleaner productionin organisations. This is because of the human dimen-sions of organisational change.

An understanding of these human dimensions has thepotential to improve the likelihood of success in influ-encing people to progress towards more sustainable pro-duction and consumption systems. In order to gaininsight into human dimensions and their relevance forcleaner production uptake, it is necessary to considerhow people behave in organisations, the reasons for theirbehaviour, the factors that contribute to change, and themethods for bringing about change. Some insight intothe range of contributing factors can be gained from theliterature covering the theories and practices of organis-ational change. These theories and practices have theirroots in various branches of psychology (concerning thebehaviour of individuals) and sociology (concerningtheir behaviour within a social context). Branches of

354 L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

particular interest in terms of cleaner production uptakeinclude organisational and industrial psychology. Theformer covers the cognitive aspects of human behaviouras well as motivation, attitudes, commitment, values,personality processes, decision making, and leadership,and their implications for organisational development.The latter tends to cover these aspects from an occu-pational perspective, i.e., in terms of selecting people forpositions, analysis and evaluation of jobs, performanceappraisal, training and development, and occupationalhealth and safety [4]. In contrast, organisational soci-ology tends to cover the social nature of organisations,including their place within society as a whole [5] aswell as internal aspects such as power, authority, com-munications and decision-making. Moreover, industrialsociology tends to cover industrial relations, sources ofconflict such as race and gender, and the theories of tech-nological uptake [6,7].

Organisational theory brings many of these branchestogether, covering: (1) the structure of the organisation,(2) the environment in which it operates, (3) the way inwhich decisions are made (i.e. management), (4) thepeople in an organisation, and (5) the dynamics ofchange [8]. Insight into the theories relevant to theseelements could be useful in overcoming the non-techni-cal barriers to cleaner production. Such barriers couldbe organisational (e.g., non-involvement of employees;vested decision-making powers; emphasis on pro-duction; high staff turnover; lack of recognition); sys-temic (e.g. poor record keeping & reporting; inad-equate & ineffective management systems; lack ofsystems for professional development; ad hoc productionplanning) or attitudinal (e.g. lack of good housekeepingculture; resistance to change; lack of leadership; lack ofeffective supervision; job insecurity; fear of failure) [9].The organisational change theories mentioned previouslycan provide insight intowhy these barriers exist. Changemanagement theory and practice can provide insight intohow they can be overcome [10].

Elements of management theories and practice havealready been applied to cleaner production. Earlymaterials developed in support of cleaner productionprogrammes include management systems for achievingthe desired outcomes. System elements include: policy;planning and organisation; auditing/assessment; identi-fication, evaluation and implementation of options forimprovement; and review [9,11]. These elements areconsistent with those developed for quality and environ-mental management [12,13] and have been formalisedthrough inclusion in the ISO 14000 series and the Euro-pean Union’s Eco-Management Audit Scheme (EMAS).

The apparent success of demonstration projects theworld over indicates that the above management systemscan contribute significantly to the uptake of cleaner pro-duction. However, how well do they deal with other bar-riers that may be linked to organisational culture and

employee attitudes, for example? Before answering thisquestion, it is useful to step back and examine some ofthe dynamics of change within organisations that areinvolved with cleaner production implementation. Thefollowing sections provide a summary of the preliminaryresults of an analysis into the organisational changes ina group of organisations participating in a major cleanerproduction demonstration project in New Zealand.

2. Characteristics of the demonstration project

The demonstration project that was used as the sourceof data for this analysis is a multi-company project thatwas initiated by the country’s major power generator andwholesaler, the Electricity Corporation of New Zealand(ECNZ). The project is funded by ECNZ and the NewZealand Ministry for the Environment (MfE) through itsSustainable Management Fund. Funding includes finan-cial and in-kind contributions from the 22 demonstrationorganisations, the local power retailers and local auth-orities (or councils) in two regions in New Zealand, con-sultants, and students. The two regions involved in theproject together account for approximately 15% of NewZealand’s “business activity units” (AU’s) and 19% of“full-time equivalent persons engaged” (FTEs)2 [15]).

Most of the organisations in the demonstration groupare from the manufacturing sector (17 out of 22), butthe group also includes five organisations from the ser-vice sector: two hotels, three councils (acting as oneorganisation), one hospital and one educational facility.The manufacturing sector is the highest employer inNew Zealand, accounting for over 19% of FTEs(254,178 FTEs) and employing two thirds more peoplethan the second highest employer (retail trade). It is alsothe highest employer in each of the two regions includedin the demonstration project (22% and 24% of all FTEs).The four other sectors that are represented — govern-ment administration, education and health — are alsoimportant employers, accounting for 24% of FTEs inNew Zealand. In the two regions they account for 26%and 24% of FTEs.

The project is greater in scale than any other individ-ual cleaner production projects that have been carriedout in New Zealand. The project has been running forabout 18 months and organisations have been submittingregular reports (with the assistance of consultants andstudents) that include details of progress, difficulties,expenditure on cleaner production projects and staffinput. Each organisation has been assigned a consultantto assist it (largely in a facilitation role) and some have

2 Statistics New Zealand defines “full-time equivalent personsengaged” as full-time employees and working proprietors plus halfthose that are part time.

355L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

engaged students to help with analyses. The project isalso using the “club” approach, used for example in theAire and Calder project in the UK [14]. This approachincludes facilitated interaction between organisations via“club” meetings for the duration of the project.

3. Elements of the research programme

In addition to the characteristics mentioned in Section2 above, the demonstration project includes a formalresearch programme. The research programme wasdesigned to provide insight into the factors that influencethe successful uptake of environmental performanceimprovement through cleaner production within partici-pating organisations and the broader business com-munity. The results presented in this paper cover only asmall part of the research programme, i.e. the results oftwo sets of surveys designed to identify changes in keycomponents of environmental management systems, cle-aner production, organisational culture and attitudes. Thesurveys were conducted before the official launch andthen again just over a year later. The results presentedhere are from the analysis of surveys from two groupsof people: (1) the “demonstration” group with one keyperson from each organisation participating in the dem-onstration project, and (2) the “control” group with onekey person from each organisation in a randomly selec-ted representative sample.

All selected people were surveyed prior to the begin-ning of the project and a year later. Surveys were hand-delivered to those in the demonstration group, while atelephone survey was used for the control group. For theinitial telephone survey, surveyors were instructed to askto speak to the production or operations manager of eachorganisation and, if no such person could be identified,then the person responsible for environmental manage-ment within the organisation. Those selected for thedemonstration group had a similar profile in terms oftheir positions. The same people from each group werecontacted for the follow-up surveys. Company sizeswere consistent, although there was a wider range in thecontrol group because of random selection.

The surveys were designed to provide insight into thefollowing areas of interest:

1. Key elements of organisational change considered tobe indicative of environmental management withinorganisationsO Chief Executive Officer (CEO) commitment to

improving environmental performanceO Formal environmental policyO Environmental management system (EMS)O On-going process for improving environmental

performance

O Inclusion of environmental criteria in staff per-formance appraisals

2. Key elements of organisational change considered tobe indicative of cleaner production uptakeO Formal programme to reduce wastesO Waste audit carried outO Cleaner production options identifiedO Economic benefits recognisedO Regular repeat of audit

3. Key elements of organisational culture considered rel-evant for cleaner production uptakeO Senior management presents barriers to improving

environmental performanceO Organisational structure makes it difficult for

environmental improvementsO Organisation has a steeply hierarchical structureO Environmental performance is a low priority for

the organisationO Staff are actively encouraged to identify environ-

mental improvementsO Environmental management is carried out in an ad-

hoc wayO Environmental programme driven purely by com-

pliance needsO Waste treatment and disposal are the main focus

of the environmental programmeO Community input is actively sought and encour-

aged4. Key attitudes considered relevant for cleaner pro-

duction uptakeO It makes good business sense to improve environ-

mental performanceO Improving environmental performance will

enhance our competitivenessO The best way to reduce wastes is by changing pro-

ducts and processesO Wastes are best dealt with by treatmentO Improving environmental performance always

costs moneyO Our organisation is already doing all it can to

reduce wastesO Wastes are an inevitable consequence of business

4. Indicators of environmental management

An analysis of the survey data shows differencesbetween the demonstration and control groups of organ-isations as well as changes that have occurred during theperiod between the surveys. From Fig. 1 it can be seenthat respondents in the control group show a trend awayfrom key environmental management indicators, whilerespondents in the demonstration group show a trendtowards such indicators. This is particularly evident withrespect to the existence of a formal environmental policy

356 L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

Fig. 1. Indicators of environmental management and cleaner production in demonstration and control groups, before and a year after the start ofthe demonstration project.

and an on-going process for improvement. The percent-age of respondents within the control group who believethat their organisations have a formal environmental pol-icy decreases by almost half from 41% to 23%. In thedemonstration group the percentage increases from 47%to 64%. The percentage of those in the control groupwho believe their organisations have an on-going pro-cess for environmental performance improvementreduces by almost half from 77% to 45%, while percent-ages in the demonstration group increase more thanthree-fold from 20% to 69%.

The trend in the control group away from other keyindicators of environmental management is less pro-nounced, but it is also evident in terms of the existenceof environmental management systems (from only 16%down to 4%) and the inclusion of environmental criteriain staff appraisals (from 43% down to 37%). In contrast,the percentages of organisations in the demonstrationgroup with environmental management systems remainconstant (only a fifth of organisations), but environmen-tal criteria in staff appraisals are believed to double (froma low of 9–19%).

The percentage of respondents in the control groupwho believe that their CEO is committed to improvingenvironmental performance decreases by a third from96% down to 62%. However, contrary to the trend withrespect to previously mentioned environmental manage-ment indicators, the percentage of respondents in thedemonstration group who believe that their CEO is com-mitted also decreases, although not as markedly, from66% to 55%.

5. Indicators of cleaner production

Opposing trends within the control and demonstrationgroups are again apparent when survey data on key indi-

cators of cleaner production are analysed (Fig. 1). Notsurprisingly, key indicators of cleaner production in thedemonstration group increase significantly during theperiod between the surveys. In the control group, thepercentage of respondents who believe their organisationhas a formal waste reduction programme decreases from68% to 51%. In contrast, the increase in the demon-stration group is marked (a more than three fold increasefrom only 14% to 46%). The percentage of respondentsfrom the control group who believe that their organis-ations have conducted a waste audit decreases from 64%to 50%. The percentage of control group respondentswho believe in the regularity of waste audits alsodecreases (by more than half from 51% to 19%). Inmarked contrast, the percentage in the demonstrationgroup who believe that a waste audit has been carriedout increases three fold from only 27% to 82%. Theincrease in the percentage of respondents in the demon-stration group who believe that audits are carried outregularly is not as marked (from 19% to 28%).

The percentage of respondents in the control groupwho believe that their organisations have identified cle-aner production options decreases slightly, from 95% to87%, but remains high. Identification of cleaner pro-duction options in the demonstration group almostdoubles, increasing from 55% to 96%. Recognition ofthe economic benefits of cleaner production is high inboth groups, but decreases slightly in the control group(from 82% to 78%) as opposed to the demonstrationgroup where it increases slightly from 82% to 87%.

6. Indicators of organisational culture

Since only one respondent from each organisation hasbeen included in the data sets that were analysed for thepurposes of this paper, their perceptions of organis-

357L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

ational culture cannot be interpreted as representingthose of other employees. In both groups, however, mostrespondents (approximately 80%) are in a senior man-agement position, either as overall managers,production/operations managers or managers with otherkey non-production responsibilities. They are thereforelikely to have reasonable insight into various aspects ofthe culture of their organisations.

Like previous indicators, some of the indicators oforganisational culture that are relevant to cleaner pro-duction uptake show similar opposing trends (Fig. 2).These different trends are most marked in terms of theextent to which environmental management is carriedout on an ad-hoc basis and is compliance driven, as wellas the extent to which staff are actively encouraged toidentify environmental improvements and communityinput is sought.

There is an increase in the percentage of respondentsfrom the control group who believe that environmentalmanagement is carried out on an ad-hoc basis in theirorganisations (up from 37% to 59%). In contrast, per-centages of respondents believing so in the demon-stration group decreased by almost half from 33% to18%. A similar decrease is seen in the demonstrationgroup in terms of the extent to which environmentalmanagement is driven purely by compliance needs (from37% to 19%). Perceptions that staff are actively encour-aged to identify environmental performance improve-ments decreases from 77% to 60% in the control group,but increases four-fold from 14% to 55% in the demon-stration group. The percentage of respondents in the con-trol group who believe that their organisations activelyseek and encourage input from community groupsdecreases by almost two thirds from 27% to 10%. Incontrast, those who believe this to be the case in thedemonstration group double from 29% to 59%.

The trend is reversed in terms of the extent to whichsenior management presents barriers to improvingenvironmental performance. Percentages of respondents

Fig. 2. Indicators of organisational culture relevant to cleaner production uptake in the demonstration and control groups, before and a year afterthe start of the demonstration project.

who believe that this is the case decrease in the controlgroup (from 14% to 0%), while they increase in the dem-onstration group (from 0% to 18%).

In contrast, some indicators show worsening trendsfor both groups. The percentage of respondents whobelieve that organisational structure makes it difficult forenvironmental performance improvements increases fivefold in the control group (from 5% to 24%) and threefold in the demonstration group (from 10% to 32%). Therise is not as marked in terms of the perception of thenature of that structure. The percentage of respondentsfrom the control group who believe that their organis-ation has a steeply hierarchical structure doubles (from14% to 29%), while the increase is less marked for thedemonstration group (from 27% to 32%). The percent-age of respondents who believe that environmental per-formance is a low priority in their organisation doublesin both groups: from 23% to 46% in the control groupand 9% to 18% in the demonstration group.

An indicator that is especially relevant to the uptakeof cleaner production is the extent to which waste treat-ment and disposal are the main focus of an organis-ation’s environmental programme. The percentages ofrespondents from control groups who believe that theirorganisations’ environmental programme focuses ontreatment and disposal remains constant at 64%, but, sur-prisingly, increases in the demonstation group (from20% to 32%).

7. Attitudes relevant for cleaner production uptake

While previous sections generally showed a move-ment away from indicators of environmental manage-ment and cleaner production in the control group andtowards them in the demonstration group, the trends arenot as consistent with regard to attitudinal changes. Mostrespondents agree that it makes good business sense toimprove environmental performance, and there is a slight

358 L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

increase in this belief in the demonstration group. Thereis a decrease in the percentages of respondents in bothgroups who believe that improving environmental per-formance enhances competition (from 69% to 41% inthe control group and from 82% to 72% in the demon-stration group) (Fig. 3).

It is notable that there are markedly low percentagesof respondents in the demonstration group who agreewith attitudes that could be considered to be contrary tothose necessary for cleaner production to succeed. Thepercentages of respondents in the demonstration groupwho agree that wastes are best treated and that environ-mental improvements always cost money decrease fromlows of 10 and 18%, respectively, to 5 and 9%. Thepercentages of respondents in the control group whoagree are five and three times higher initially and thenten and five times higher, respectively, although theyremain at similar percentages. The percentage of respon-dents from the demonstration group who believe thatthey are doing all they can to reduce wastes, while alsobeginning low (only 5%), triples to 14%. Conversely,agreement in the control group decreases from 73% to59%.

There is a marked decrease in the percentage ofrespondents from the control group who agree that pro-cess and product changes are best (down by almost halffrom 86% to 46%). The percentage in the demonstrationgroup decreases only slightly. There are decreases inpercentages of respondents in both groups who agreewith the statement that wastes are inevitable, althoughthe control group starts off with a third more in agree-ment (87% down to 78%) than the demonstration group(60–41%).

One of the more obvious results of the research is theapparent trend in demonstration companies towards whatcould be considered to be key systemic requirements for

Fig. 3. Attitudes relevant for cleaner production uptake, in the demonstration and control groups before and a year after the start of the demon-stration project.

environmental management and cleaner production.There appear to be increases in the existence of anenvironmental policy, an on-going process for improvingenvironmental performance, a formal waste reductionprogramme, a waste audit, the identification of cleanerproduction options, encouragement of staff to identifyimprovements, and efforts to encourage communityinput. These results are not surprising, given that theorganisations had been participating in a cleaner pro-duction demonstration programme between the two sur-veys. All of the above components were included in theoriginal training session, with environmental policiesand waste audits given the most emphasis. Encourage-ment of staff was mentioned, but not given particularemphasis. It is likely that this component has developedas the project has progressed and the process, as well asthe initial focus on team building [16], has encouraged it.

Seeking community input was mentioned but hasreceived little attention, so it is surprising that the trendis so strong with respect to this component. All of theorganisations have been assigned a consultant whofacilitates progress, and many have also had assistancefrom students. The club approach also means thatrespondents would have had the opportunity to regularlytalk with others, including speakers from outside thegroup. These experiences may have contributed torespondents’ perceptions of enhanced community input.

Less marked, but also following the trend towardsimprovement, are an increased recognition of economicbenefits, the inclusion of environmental performance instaff appraisals, and regular (as opposed to one-time)audits. Because recognition of economic benefits wasvery high in both the demonstration and control groups,it is possible that this reflects perceptions than actualmeasurement.

It is interesting to note that while there have been

359L. Stone / Journal of Cleaner Production 8 (2000) 353–359

marked increases in the above indicators, the initial per-centages for systems components, apart from environ-mental policy, were very low in the demonstration groupwhen compared with the control group. Does this indi-cate that demonstration companies were far worse tobegin with, or does it indicate that respondents had agreater understanding of the concepts and that theirresponses were therefore more of a true reflection of thereal situation? The relatively high percentage of respon-dents from the control group who perceive their environ-mental programmes to be ad-hoc, compliance-driven,and focusing on treatment/disposal indicate that the latteris more likely to be the case.

Although these results may appear encouraging interms of the success of the demonstration project, itneeds to be noted that some participating organisationshave not exhibited the same trends. Also, as far as thepositive performers are concerned, some results maybring into question the durability of the systemic changesthat have occurred. The perceived decrease in CEO com-mitment, for example, is of significance since this is con-sidered by many authors [3,11–13] to be of paramountimportance for the success of cleaner production initiat-ives. Interestingly, there is a strong relationship (95%confidence) between reduced CEO commitment and awaste audit having been conducted. Has the need to haveoptions implemented given respondents somethingagainst which to measure CEO commitment and haveperceptions of this commitment decreased as a result?This scenario could be consistent with increased percep-tions that environmental performance is considered a lowpriority, that senior management and organisationalstructure present barriers, and that programmes focus ontreatment and disposal.

8. Conclusion

Changes in organisational culture and attitudes are notas clear cut as the systemic components, and theirsources and effects are not easily identified. From thisvery brief discussion of the preliminary results of theresearch conducted with a group of New Zealand organ-isations, it appears that human dimensions have a sig-nificant role to play in the uptake of cleaner production.A more detailed understanding of the relevance of organ-isational theory and practice for cleaner productionwould be of benefit in the development, initiation, pro-gress and evaluation of cleaner production projects. Itcould potentially also help to enhance the likelihood ofenduring and on-going change within the organisationsinvolved.

Acknowledgements

Electricity Corporation of New Zealand (ECNZ), NZMinistry for the Environment (MfE) Sustainable Man-agement Fund and Greg Brown (Ecosense). All thepeople from the organisations who willingly agreed tobe surveyed, as well the council officers, power retailstaff, consultants, students and surveyors who have con-tributed to the overall project. Professor Don Huisingh,University of Lund, Sweden. Professor John Craig, Uni-versity of Auckland.

References

[1] USEPA. Pollution prevention case studies compendium. Wash-ington, DC: US Environmental Protection Agency, 1992.

[2] UNEP/IE. Cleaner production in the Asia Pacific economiccooperation region. Paris: United Nations Environment Pro-gramme, Industry & Environment Programme Activity Centre,1994.

[3] NZMfE. Cleaner production guidelines. Wellington: NZ Ministryfor the Environment, 1994.

[4] Miner JB. Industrial–organisational psychology. 2nd ed. NewYork: McGraw-Hill, 1992.

[5] Deeks J. Business and the culture of the enterprise society. West-port, CT: Quorum, 1993.

[6] Joseph M. Sociology for business. Cambridge, UK: PolityPress, 1989.

[7] Grint K. The sociology of work: an introduction. Cambridge, UK:Polity Press, 1991.

[8] Pugh DS, editor. Organisation theory: selected readings, 4th ed.London: Penguin Books, 1997.

[9] French WL, Bell CH Jr, Zawacki RA, editors. Organisationdevelopment and transformation: managing effective change, 4thed. New York: Irwin/McGraw-Hill, 1994.

[10] Dieleman H, de Hoo S. PRISMA: The development of a prevent-ative, multimedia strategy for government & industry. TheHague: Erasmus Centre for Env. Studies & Netherlands Org.Technol. Assess, 1991.

[11] USEPA. Facility pollution prevention guide. Washington, DC:USEPA, 1992.

[12] Ledgerwood G, Street E, Therivel R. The environmental auditand business strategy: a total quality approach. London: Pit-man, 1992.

[13] Welford R. Environmental strategy and sustainable development.London: Routledge, 1995.

[14] CEST. Waste minimisation and cleaner technology: an assess-ment of motivation in the Aire and Calder experience. London:Centre for Exploitation of Science & Technology, 1995.

[15] Statistics NZ. Business activity ’96. Wellington: NZ Departmentof Statistics, 1997.

[16] Stone LJ. Improving the effectiveness of cleaner production edu-cation for business. In: Proceedings of the European Roundtableon Cleaner Production, 1997 November; Oslo, 1997.