[Editor's Note: To celebrate the launch of our second annual State of Green Business Report, every day for the next two weeks, we'll be running through one of the big trends that are shaping the future of the greening of mainstream business. You can download the report for free from GreenBiz.com.]
Environmental issues have been garnering top-level attention for years -- "Get CEO buy-in," is a well worn piece of advice for aspiring corporate environmentalists -- but for many companies, getting the CEO on board is the least of the challenges. Failure to engage the rank and file -- not to mention that all-too-often impenetrable layer of resistance known as "middle management" -- has thwarted even the more forward-thinking business leaders from realizing their green goals.
Companies are finding new ways to make green thinking top of mind for employees, both at work and in their personal lives. Wal-Mart has engaged its employee base by asking them to create Personal Sustainability Projects,helping them connect personal and corporate missions to make a difference for their own health and the health of the planet. The PSPs -- which range from picking up litter and switching out inefficient light bulbs, to smoking cessation and weight loss -- help motivate and energize employees; teach them how to cut out the fat, literally and figuratively; improve their health and morale; and may even reduce Wal-Mart's health-care costs for its more than one million employees. The idea is that employees often connect to the broader concept of sustainability through the prisms of finances and health and wellness, not just saving the birds and the trees.
Other companies are taking different routes. For example, JCPenney enlisted the help of volunteer"energy captains" at each of its 1,000-plus retail stores, asking them to be the eyes and ears on the ground to look for more ways to conserve energy and green their workplace.
Much of this taps into employees' natural desire to be part of environmental solutions, and to be empowered to do so by their employers. A 2007 survey by Adecco, an international human resources company, found that 52percent of employed adults felt their companies should do more to be environmentally friendly; companies, for their part, wanted to highlight their green activities to market themselves and attract new employees. A classic win-win.
But it's not all smooth sailing. Two surveys of workers, one in the U.S. and another in the U.K., found that workers are largely dissatisfied with their companies' environmental achievements. The U.K. survey found that big companies often hamper employees' willingness to take green actions, with those at smaller firms significantly more likely than employees at larger companies to help curb energy use and climate gases by recycling and turning off lights and computers. Stateside, a survey or workers by the Marlin Co. found that 63 percent considered themselves to be greener than their employers.
That's not encouraging. To achieve their increasingly ambitious environmental goals,companies will need to educate, engage, empower, and activate their employees to think and act green. And learn from them, too, recognizing that when it comes to running a leaner, greener business, no one knows where the waste and inefficiencies lie more than those on the front lines. Despite all the oft-repeated dictums about "top-down" and "bottom-up" management techniques,effectively greening the corporation sometimes requires that companies learn how to lead from the middle.


Browse
Engage
Research











bottom up is bad
Large companies allocate budgets in a top down fashion. So even if a low level worker sees a "green" opportunity, the management are still the ones to decide which opportunities are funded.
Usually what happens in large companies is that lower level employees often have a much better idea of what needs to be done that the management. Many employees think their highest level management are "clueless" - and usually they are.
That's why General Motors directed their hybrid technology towards their SUV's first. That's why General Motors asked for a bailout eight times amount of the actual value (market capitalization) of the company.
Many workers who work for GM know their management is clueless and have known so for decades. But the senior management make the decisions and allocate the budgets, so all an employee can do is shake their head in disbelief or go work somewhere else.
Why do we have clueless management here in the US? It has something to do with the "qualities" that are looked for to "get ahead". People who disagree with management decisions or have to many ideas of their own are viewed as "not focused" on management priorities Those who stay focused get head. Unfortunately, those focused people become so brainwashed that by time they get to the top of the company they no longer have a real thought in their head.
So our management has been taught to suppress real thoughts and real disagreements. As a result you get GM putting hybrid technology in the Escalade, a 6,000 pound monster that gets 24 mpg with the hybrid option.
Go figure?
Green & the Chain of Command
Joel makes a good point. There is likely untapped employee interest and energy (no pun intended) for taking action to improve their companies' sustainability. Paradoxically, there is likely to be strong resistance, as there inevitably is when trying to get people to change their behavior. The central question is how to get people to willingly change their behavior. There are three things we need Two thoughts about how to proactively tap into people’s natural desire to have a positive impact and how to manage resistance:
1) Surveys show that the majority of Americans believe human-caused climate change is real. However, only 30% think it's a critical issue to address in ’09, according to a recent Pew Survey (http://people-press.org/report/485/economy-top-policy-priority) – dead last in the rankings. And only about 25% are actually changing their personal behavior to help address climate change (http://www.purdue.edu/climate/pdf/Patchen OP0601.pdf). So we need to be clear about the gap between beliefs and behaviors. Changing behavior is different from changing beliefs. It’s important to know which goal we’re pursuing and use the strategies and tactics that will further our desired goal.
2) We should distinguish between two types of actions individuals can take. One type is when people reduce their own negative impact on the climate and environment, such as turning off lights and recycling. The second, with potentially far greater positive effects, involves employees doing their work differently, such as modifying a production process or re-negotiating terms with suppliers. The former turns out to be easier than the latter, as getting people to change how they do their work can involve learning new skills, changes in responsibilities and how people are evaluated, the relationships they have with co-workers, etc. Again, we need to be clear on what our objective is, and use methods and techniques that best fit our objectives.
3) Finally, we know that “Employee buy-in is crucial to the success of any climate-related strategy” (from a study of successful corporate climate change efforts by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change - http://www.pewclimate.org/global-warming-in-depth/all_reports/corporate_...). The good news is that we in the field of Organizational Development/Change Management have a strong track record of making behavior change happen and effectively addressing resistance. If we’re going to engage employees, managers and executives, we must employ the tools and approaches that have worked for many other change initiatives.
Helping the environment
Hello everyone,
I saw the comments about helping the environment, and thought I would post a quick message. I think we are all becoming a lot more aware of the state the planet and environment is in. We can all do those little extra bits to help out, whether it be turning of the lights when we leave a room, or make sure the taps are not leaking in the kitchen and bathroom. I do all these, but I have also changed the way I send greetings cards. The amount of paper birthday cards, and Christmas cards we send every I was shocked to think at how much money I was spending, and the amount of resources I was using. To change my ways, I have now become a bit of a fan of e-Cards. I think they are such a good way to help the environment, no paper required, so less trees to be cut down! This has to be a good thing! I have done my research and I have finally come across a really good Environmentally Friendly e-Card site. I love this site because it is free and really simple to use. However, the main point is no matter what e-Card site you use, by sending an e-Card you are helping the environment, no paper, so therefore less trees need to chopped down. This has to be a good thing! I hope this is useful info for you all, kind regards, Nic.