Why should SME (Small and Medium Enterprises) implement ISO 14001?

Our senior consultant Tom Venafro has been working on EMS (Environmental Management Systems ) all his life. I was having a discussion with him and asked him, “Why should SME (Small and Medium Enterprises) implement ISO 14001?” In fact more, why are they reluctant to meet this responsibility. Are these companies even aware that just being efficient (using a system based on ISO 9001:2008) may ensure efficiency, however unless the byproducts and pollutants which are the result of a process are controlled the organizations will eventually see a declining “cash in the bank”. Going further, and learning from 9/11 we know that an efficient system should not only take care of the environment to be profitable and viable but must be secure. The implementation of  a system to protect the global supply chain based on ISO 28000 needs to be considered as an asset. Social responsibility is integral to good business today. On ISO 14001 Tom had the following views:

Small and medium business should be considering ISO 14001 EMS for their sustainability in more ways than one. Of course having a certified EMS will provide both a green "sustainable" future as well as a green "monetary" bottom line.

Aside from and implemented EMS being the right thing to do for the environment, it also reaps financial benefits.  Recycling programs means less waste to landfill, less regular waste pick-ups more money saved. The EMS will provide the framework for a company to be a good steward of the environment and help reduce its impact on the environment. This equates to more control over pollution sources and less fines from regulators and huge "cradle to grave" liability.

These items are just the tip of the iceberg. Beneath the water line the hidden benefits begin to pile up. Employee moral improves, process organization and efficiency increases. Employee awareness from a EMS seeps into employee's home lives furthering green living.  These combined activities begin to make an larger positive impact on society. This eventually trickles down to economics, meaning that the positive cumulative effect of pollution prevention contributes to keeping costs to taxpayers low.

An EMS is the guide organizations should use to trigger constructive environmental thought. For example, 14001 clause 4.4.7 Emergency Preparedness and Response is meant for an organization to consider the environmental impact that can be caused from an emergency or natural disaster. This is not a normal consideration that would not usually be made.

The standard requires that employees understand the aspects and targets the organization is trying to obtain. Most importantly, they require that employees and contractors understand the consequences of their departure from specified procedures or operational controls.

Of course the EMS has the same customer benefits in the marketplace as ISO 9001QMS does.  Customers will ask and require a certified EMS more going forward. Having an EMS is a case of "sustainability".

Does implementing a Process Based Management System put my job at risk?

Recently while working with some students in a Lead Auditor class for ISO 9001 one of the students came up with a serious concern about his being committed to ISO 9001! His questions was “With a  well-documented Process Based Management System (PBMS) in place everyone will know what I do. So how can I then ensure the security of my job?”  Over numerous classes that I have taught, this question often comes in one form or the other. This is particularly relevant when I work in other countries where jobs are hard to come by. I am sure there are others who have this job insecurity as their  company begins the process of implementing a PBMS based on a standard. Their worry is “what is in it for me?”

Clause 5.5.3 of the ISO 9001:2008 requires the management to ensure internal communications with regard to the effectiveness of the quality management system. These internal communications must explain and address the doubts of the employees. The employees must appreciate that a bad system can let down the best man every time. Without a system the blame culture will prevail and overall efficiency be adversely affected. Management will then invariably ask “Who?” – meaning blame the employee, instead of asking “How?” and or “Why”- meaning how and why did the system let down the employee. In real terms with the system the blame moves from the individual to the system. Even if the employee’s incompetence caused the deficiency the system failed in terms of ensuring competence either by incorrect hiring, or training or continued education and so on. The organization should improve the system which placed an incompetent employee in a position where he/she could not perform, instead of blaming the employee. Disheartened employees are the result of being always blamed for poor work and the results, leading to the work environment (clause 6.4) not being congenial for achieving product conformity. How can any organization achieve continual improvement (clause 8.5.1) if deficiencies are not addressed.

Employees often forget that their job security is dependent on the organization constantly improving with the continual improvement cycle to be productive and viable. Without the improvements the organization itself will go out of business and so the jobs will be lost. Investing in a system approach and addressing deficiencies by corrective action(clause 8.5.2) can against the recurrence of non-conformities. As the data base builds and the employees can get the information from the data and analyze it (clause 8.4) can they predict potential NCs (clause 8.5.3) and so add value and therefore sustain the organization to enable the organization to continue to meet the expectations of the manpower. After all benefits are an outcome of the “cash in the bank”.

As the PARs (Preventive Action Requests) start coming in and the employee participation increases the system stabilizes creating the environment for innovation. The organization immensely benefits from innovative products (story of Apple is a case in point) and is therefore able to pay its employees better. A system approach therefore not only is an investment in retaining the employees (job security) but a sure way to ensure better future prospects. The success of the organization then contributes to the well-being of the society and the ultimate prosperity of the nation. We could stretch the benefit of the system approach further and say it would meet the futuristic stability too and ensure conduct which is socially responsible (SR).