Tag <span class=Sustainability" src="/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/cropped-office-building-secondary-1.jpg">

Tag Sustainability

If your investors are assessing your climate risk, shouldn’t you be?

The SSC Team November 12, 2015 Tags: , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments
bear.jpg

This summer, the World Resources Institute and the UNEP Finance Initiative consulted with more than 100 energy, climate, and finance experts to create a discussion framework for investors to weigh exposure to the risks of climate change.

Essentially, it is a toolkit for investors to evaluate a company based on climate risk factors not directly related to physical risk. Most investors can already pick out obvious physical risks, i.e. investing in coastal property as sea levels rise. But non-physical, climate-change effected risks are also important.

The WRI discussion framework addresses those risks, called carbon-asset risks. They include public policy, regulation, technology, unpredictable market conditions, and shifting public opinion.

This discussion framework is an excellent tool for investors to weigh risks as they choose to make investments, but we argue that companies themselves should be looking at this tool to discover their own carbon asset risks and then engaging in some deeper-level analyses and audits.

For example, the assessment recommends that investors look beyond carbon footprinting and delve deeper into company supply chain audits that may uncover risks. For example:

  • Geographic location (are too many of your suppliers in the path of a super-typhoon?),
  • Local regulations (are the countries your source your raw materials from looking to legislate and increase your costs?),
  • Diversification in operations or production (are your products and services too dependent on fossil fuels?).

This discussion framework, while absolutely useful for investors, can also be used as a cheat sheet for your own business. Next step: Start auditing and taking action now to mitigate your climate risk.

Reducing exposure to risk is crucial, not only to become more attractive to investors, but also to become a more sustainable organization overall!

If you’re ready to start looking more deeply at your carbon asset risk, contact us to learn more about sustainability assessment and supply chain analysis.

Sustainability Consulting Round-Up: Best of Our Blog for October

The SSC Team October 29, 2015 Tags: , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

Each month, we highlight some of our more popular content on the SSC blog!

In case you missed them, here's a round-up of our most popular blog posts from this past month. These are the articles that received the most attention from our online audience. Check them out!

  1. Puma, Adidas, Under Armour - Who Has the Best Sustainability 
  2. Companies with GREAT Sustainability Websites
  3. Using Risk as a Lens for Sustainability Decision-Making
  4. Life Cycle Analysis Can Help You Write a Better ‘Continuity Plan’
  5. 5 Ways to Benchmark Your Sustainability Performance

If you like an article, please consider sharing it online via your favorite social media platform. Helping us grow our audience is the #1 way you can show your support for the work that we do.

More evidence that you should wait to act on sustainability

The SSC Team October 22, 2015 Tags: , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

Enjoy this post from the blog archives. 

We wrote, “Why You Should Wait to Act On Sustainability” for Environmental Leader. The comments were...interesting, and showed that there was a lot of disagreement about the premise to move more slowly and thoughtfully on corporate sustainability initiatives. But we're sticking to our guns- and we’re very pleased to see more evidence that supports our position.

In the Inc. article, “How to Make Better Decisions: Slow Down”, author Jessica Stillman provides a great round-up of some of the best thinking and ideas regarding fast vs. slow decision-making. Here are some of the highlights:

In their new book, Decisive: How to Make Better Choices in Life and Work, brothers and academics Chip (of Stanford Graduate School of Business) and Dan Heath (of Duke) explore how to eliminate biases and improve the quality of our decisions. One of the biggest decision-making mistakes they tackle is our tendency not to waffle but to decide too quickly. Stanford's Re:Think newsletter explains that the authors devote a considerable portion of the book to the idea of widening your options, advice that may seem at odds with the very definition of decision making. 

This is huge insight for sustainability practitioners, who should remember that one of the best ways to widen your options is to engage with stakeholders along the value chain. Don't just ask your green team to come up with great ideas -- ask your suppliers, your customers, your contractors, and your investors. 

The goal, in other words, isn't to go fast and eliminate options. It's to slow down and add them. So how do you accomplish this? The key, the authors say, is taking the time to gather information and alternatives. Using devil’s advocates, asking people who have solved similar problems, gathering relevant statistics, and soliciting the advice of friends and family members can all help.

While you're gathering all of this information, it can be helpful to have a structured process in order to capture insights for later review. After all, it's easy to lose track of who said what, emerging themes and where they are coming from, and ideas worth following up on. So take some time BEFORE you begin your decision-making process to think about how you will engage, and how you'll manage the inflow of information.

You might object that today's market moves too fast for such lollygagging. But Heath replies that considering less information rarely actually saves time, either because we make bad decisions (and then stick with the path we've chosen long after we should abandon it) or because we waste time anyway waffling over limited data and alternatives.

Yes! Based upon our sustainability consulting experience, we have found that taking the time to gather lots of options has allowed our clients to make confident decisions and execute them fully -- rather than make half-cocked initiatives that get only partial support or just lip service.

The Heath brothers aren't the only people warning leaders not to be seduced by quick decision making, of course. Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman wrote a whole best-selling book on the limitations of quick thinking called, appropriately, Thinking, Fast and Slow. If you haven't picked it up yet, it's well worth a read in full and is packed with examples of how our knee-jerk decision-making machinery can lead us astray, as well as techniques to short-circuit bias. But for the quick-and-dirty summary, look to Harvard Business Review, which offers this article on one technique, the premortem, and another article by Kahneman himself outlining the basics of why quick decision making is often bad decision making

So what do you think? Leave a comment here, or join the conversation on Twitter 

Using Risk as a Lens for Sustainability Decision-Making

The SSC Team October 1, 2015 Tags: , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

Dispatch from SSC President Jennifer Woofter

I often tell clients that sustainability is not a stand-alone concepts, but a lens through which  companies can make good business decisions. It's another set of criteria, another flowchart of questions, that lead to optimal choices.

That said, sustainability is not a perfect lens in and of itself. Sure, there are sustainability concepts and frameworks (like materiality, zero waste, and The Natural Step) that aim to provide guidance on how to think about sustainability, and protocols on how to use sustainability to make decisions. But I find that it's often lackluster -- at the end of the materiality process, or the Natural Step "ABCD process" we often look around the table and say "okay, that seems reasonable, but what does it mean for ACTUAL planning for next quarter? And what does it tell us about changes needed for next year's budget?"

Here is where risk, and it's associated tools, comes in. By marrying traditional risk assessment, mitigation, and adaptation methodologies with sustainability concepts, we can start to answer questions like:

  • How likely is it that climate change is going to have a significant impact on our operations in the next three years?
  • How big of an impact is water scarcity going to be for our supply chain in the next decade?
  • How resilient is our business to labor unrest in Asia?
  • Of all the options for adapting to increasing sustainability regulation, which ones are likely to be the most effective?

There is SO MUCH WORK to be done at the intersection of sustainability and risk. It's really exciting work, and if you've done any reading on the subject lately, I'd love to hear your thoughts in the comments below! 

5 Ways to Benchmark Your Sustainability Performance

The SSC Team September 24, 2015 Tags: , , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments
A dispatch from SSC President Jennifer Woofter As we work with clients to advance their sustainability journey, we're always looking for ways to slice and dice the information we gather. I thought it might be helpful to share some of the common ways we analyze an organization's performance:

Company Now vs. Company Then

How does the client's current performance compare against it's performance in the past (1 year ago, 5 years ago, etc.). This works best when we've been working with a client for a while and can judge how much progress has been made since our initial assessment.

Company vs. Industry Peers

We look at client performance against a representative peer group -- so for example, a midsize mining company would be compared against other midsize mining companies.

Company vs. Industry Leaders

We look at client performance against the sustainability leaders in the industry -- so we might compare a midsize mining client against the current mining constituents of the Dow Jones Sustainability Index (DJSI).

Company vs. Value Chain Partners

We look at the client's performance against its key upstream suppliers and downstream customers. This analysis provides great insight into risk mapping and alignment -- is the client paying attention to the things its customers care about?

Company vs Sustainability Standard

Comparing a client's sustainability performance against other external standards (ISO 14001, GRI, CDP, SASB, DJSI, etc.) is another way to spot omissions and mis-alignment. It can also help to spot the areas where the standards overlap -- where the client may get the most bang for the buck in closing a gap. What other ways to benchmark are we missing? Let us know in the comments!

RILA’s 2015 Retail Energy Management Report: 3 Takeaways

The SSC Team September 22, 2015 Tags: , , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

By: Alexandra Kueller

Last week, we took a look at RILA’s Retail Sustainability Management Report, and today we’ll be looking at RILA’s Retail Energy Management Report.

Earlier this year, the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) announced their brand new Retail Energy Management Maturity Matrix, which hopes to be a tool that will be used by retail executives, individual companies, and industry-wide to help companies focus on energy management. In September 2015, RILA released their Retail Energy Management Report that uses the matrix to analyze energy management initiatives from over 100,000 RILA member companies.

Taking the 23 dimensions related to energy management RILA has identified from six key sectors, the report looks at where the companies rank in terms of maturity: are they starting, just standard, excelling, leading, or at the next practice already. RILA presents their key findings from each dimension, then provides resources for companies to reach the next level, case studies to look over, and how to get involved on a greater scale.

Here are three observations that really stood out to us:

Dedicated energy management teams

At 85%, a large majority of the retailers surveyed indicated they have at least one fill time energy staff person, with the average company retaining about 3 full time staff members. Despite only 15% of respondents not having a full time energy management staffer, roughly 50% of the companies indicated that they use a third-party or consultant to help with their energy management. With energy management often linked to sustainability, less than 25% of the energy teams report to their company’s sustainability/CSR department, instead a lot of the energy teams report to either the Facilities or Real Estate departments.

Continuous energy management improvement

From 2014 to 2015, all dimensions except for five saw improvement in overall energy management. The sectors People & Tools and Energy Consuming Systems saw the biggest gains, with almost every dimension hitting the maturity level of “standard”. While there weren’t significant strides from last year (except for “Food Service”), the growth is still positive. As more robust energy teams and goals are put in place, there will hopefully be an increase in energy management maturity in the future.

No one has hit a plateau

And speaking of increasing energy management over the next couple of years, many retailers indicated that there are many new initiatives in place. RILA has even forecasted that many of these new initiatives, plans, and goals will help push many of the retailers to an average maturity level of “excelling”, with some companies reaching “leading” status. Even retailers that are currently at “leading” or “next practice” have indicated that more work is going to be done with energy management within their company.

Looking to start a new sustainability project but need to gain support? Find out ways to gain that support for your new project or idea here!

3 Observations from RILA’s Retail Sustainability Management Report

The SSC Team September 17, 2015 Tags: , , , , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

By: Alexandra Kueller

This past spring, the Retail Industry Leaders Association (RILA) announced their brand new Retail Sustainability Management Maturity Matrix, which hopes to be a tool that will be used by retail executives, individual companies, and industry-wide to help companies become more sustainable. Fast-forward to September 2015, and RILA just released their Retail Sustainability Management Report that uses that matrix to analyze sustainability initiatives from over 50,000 RILA member companies.

Taking the 27 dimensions related to sustainability management RILA has identified from seven key sectors, the report looks at where a lot of the companies rank: are they starting, just standard, excelling, leading, or at the next practice already. RILA presents their key findings from each dimension, then provides resources for companies to reach the next level, case studies to look over, and how to get involved on a greater scale.

Here are three observations that really stood out to us:

What comprises a retail-based sustainability team?

RILA offered a breakdown of how many retailer’s sustainability teams look like, and over 50% of those surveyed indicated that there is one person or no full time employee dedicated to sustainability (and a surprising 10% of companies have 10 or more people working on sustainability full time). Often times, the sustainability team will set the sustainability goals for the company, but almost a quarter of the retailers said they do not have sustainability goals. And in terms of budgeting for sustainability, almost 75% of companies said their budget either stayed the same or increased over the past year.

The leaders are well ahead of the pack

When looking at how the retailers did across all dimensions, it becomes apparent most companies are falling firmly in the "standard" category (or rather a 2 on a 1-5 scale). But the leading companies aren't just one or two steps higher, they are already at the "next practice" level (or a 5 on a 1-5 scale). Looking at all of the dimensions, over half the time the leading company was getting top marks - only in 4 dimensions was the leading retailer at the "excelling" level (or a 3 on a 1-5 scale). Leading companies obviously know what they're doing when it comes to sustainability, so now there needs to be an effort to get everyone else up to their level.

A shift to the supply chain

Overall, the supply chain section was one of the weakest, with many companies falling between the “starting” and “standard" category, but as retailers begin to solidify their internal sustainability, there is a growing focus on supply chain sustainability. Companies have started to engage suppliers about various sustainability issues, such as the need to reduce energy and water.

Looking to start a new sustainability project but need to gain support? Find out ways to gain that support for your new project or idea here!

How Sustainability Practitioners Should Give Feedback

The SSC Team September 15, 2015 Tags: , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

Enjoy this article from the SSC blog archives:

As consultants, it's our job to deliver feedback to our clients throughout the sustainability consulting engagement--and we've gotten pretty good at identifying, refining, and delivering news (both good and bad) about a company's "state of sustainability" and roadmap for action. But when we read the article, Don’t Sugarcoat Negative Feedback, in Harvard Business Review, we realized that the art of providing feedback has a much broader application to companies pursuing sustainability initiatives. Here are some of our takeaways:

USE FACTS IN YOUR FEEDBACK

Berglas: Deliver constructive feedback rapidly in its raw form. This doesn’t mean harshly; there’s a way to soften blows without delaying them if you strive to be empathic. Just never make it seem like you’re avoiding hard cold facts. All that does is make the facts seem worse than they are.

Focusing our feedback on facts is a great way to create some space between participants, so that no one feels blamed, guilty, or shamed. It also allows everyone to (more) objectively assess the situation--including whether the feedback being provided is correct, how a solution should be constructed, and how responsibility and accountability for change should be allocated.

Wrong: [After 20 minutes of praise and exultation about everyone's awesome sustainability work.] "Look, even though we're all doing our best, it's not enough. We're falling behind on our performance data, and that's shown up in some recent press. We can't let our industry leave us in the dust. Come on, guys, we've got to improve!"

Right: "Our three-year carbon emissions are up 4.3%, while Competitor A is holding steady and Competitor B actually decreased its emissions by 1.1%. A report, which is getting press coverage this week in the New York Times and a number of "green blogs", calls us out for poor energy and climate performance in our industry. Let's talk about what that means in light of last month's board meeting where there was consensus about aiming for the top 25% of our industry across all sustainability issues."

DON'T PREDICT THE OUTCOME

Berglas: Resist the urge to prophesy. The absolute worst thing a CEO, coach, or consultant can do when offering constructive criticism to someone is to provide a timetable for the process that a person who must change should be expected to conform to.

While goals and targets are critical elements of effective sustainability planning, changing people (and institutions) is an uncertain process. When you need to address employee engagement and organizational culture issues, don't make promises that you can't keep. Yes, you can get a new Code of Ethics in place by the end of the year, but can you put a clear time line on when your emerging-market suppliers are going to really *get* the concepts of anti-bribery and corruption? You can provide a clear road-map, but putting calendar dates down for personal and organizational change is a dangerous proposition.

BE HONEST ABOUT THE EFFORT REQUIRED TO CHANGE

Berglas: Don’t minimize the challenge. When you critique someone with a history of success you have to assume that the flaws you see in them are (a) entrenched, and, (b) something they have long grappled with to suppress or get past. Saying, “No big deal” to that sort of issue can scare the socks off someone who knows that what you’re targeting for change is an issue they have battled unsuccessfully for years.

Sustainability is probably the biggest, most complex challenge that the world has ever faced -- and individual organizations trying to navigate a highly interconnected system in which it has limited leverage and resources is not an easy task. (Hah, understatement!) So don't portray the journey as all rainbows and kittens. It's going to be hard, and there are going to be really tough decisions. People need to understand that the road is going to be long, and the challenges are going to be scary--but that all great, epic adventures start with a seemingly insurmountable mountain to climb.

Looking to start a new sustainability project but need to gain support? Find out ways to gain that support for your new project or idea here!

What Sustainability Practitioners Need to Know About Water

The SSC Team September 8, 2015 Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments
Enjoy this article from the SSC blog archives: While carbon emissions management and reporting tend to be the first "big picture" sustainability issues that companies tackle, water is poised to become "the next big thing" in terms of corporate sustainability risk management. As always, we're staying on top of it--culling through the best resources and guides to help our clients effectively tackle the issue. Because we love to share- and don't want to re-create the wheel- here are three articles that bring home the most important tools, concepts, and frameworks related to corporate water management. Enjoy!

The four pillars of water risk assessment

In this economic climate and as part of our natural lives we are all familiar with undertaking risk assessments in our everyday professional and personal existence; from the most basic travel decisions ensuring punctuality, to the most comprehensive health and safety issues ensuring the safety of our colleagues in the workplace.

How far away is a standardised approach to water reporting? 

With corporate awareness of water-related risk growing exponentially, so the demand for a standard means of measuring and reporting water usage increases. Katharine Earley explores current practice in benchmarking usage at a global level, and examines the tools and guidelines available to companies as they unravel the complex web of their water footprint.

Reporting water risks: A step-by-step guide

An increasing number of companies are experiencing detrimental water-related business impacts, including operational or supply chain disruptions and property damage from flooding, to name a few. These impacts can be costly -- in 2011 they cost some companies up to $200 million -- and have caught the attention of investors around the world. To make the reporting process easier, WRI has aligned its Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas with CDP’s water questionnaire. If you are interested in corporate water management, you'll love our free white paper Every Last Drop: Water and the Sustainable Business. Got another water resource to share? Leave a comment, or talk to us on Twitter (@jenniferwoofter).

What Sustainability Practitioners Need to Know About Water

The SSC Team September 8, 2015 Tags: , , , , Strategic Sustainability Consulting No comments

Enjoy this article from the SSC blog archives:

While carbon emissions management and reporting tend to be the first "big picture" sustainability issues that companies tackle, water is poised to become "the next big thing" in terms of corporate sustainability risk management. As always, we're staying on top of it--culling through the best resources and guides to help our clients effectively tackle the issue.

Because we love to share- and don't want to re-create the wheel- here are three articles that bring home the most important tools, concepts, and frameworks related to corporate water management. Enjoy!

The four pillars of water risk assessment 

In this economic climate and as part of our natural lives we are all familiar with undertaking risk assessments in our everyday professional and personal existence; from the most basic travel decisions ensuring punctuality, to the most comprehensive health and safety issues ensuring the safety of our colleagues in the workplace.

How far away is a standardised approach to water reporting? 

With corporate awareness of water-related risk growing exponentially, so the demand for a standard means of measuring and reporting water usage increases. Katharine Earley explores current practice in benchmarking usage at a global level, and examines the tools and guidelines available to companies as they unravel the complex web of their water footprint. 

Reporting water risks: A step-by-step guide 

An increasing number of companies are experiencing detrimental water-related business impacts, including operational or supply chain disruptions and property damage from flooding, to name a few. These impacts can be costly -- in 2011 they cost some companies up to $200 million -- and have caught the attention of investors around the world. To make the reporting process easier, WRI has aligned its Aqueduct Water Risk Atlas with CDP’s water questionnaire. 

If you are interested in corporate water management, you'll love our free white paper Every Last Drop: Water and the Sustainable Business. Got another water resource to share? Leave a comment, or talk to us on Twitter (@jenniferwoofter).