Understanding The Big Picture How Big Data Analytics Software Can Improve Quality, Safety And Environmental Risk Management

 

Abstract

For organizations to truly benefit from Quality 4.0, leaders must move beyond using data and computing technology to perform business-as-usual tasks toward managing the organization’s information footprint using data and information as an element of sustainability. The author outlines the 11 axes of the research institute LNS Research’s Quality 4.0 model and presents a case study showing how the model was applied to a train operating company in the United Kingdom to improve quality, safety and environmental risk management.

American Society for Quality (ASQ) Sustainability Survey

ASQ Sustainability Survey

Scan the QR Code to benchmark your Sustainability & CSR performance against best practice within your industry 

https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/ASQSustainabilitySurvey
 

#quality #sustainability #csr #climatechange #environment

Quality and Essesntial Element of Sustainable Development - American Society for Quality EED Summer Newsletter 2020

 

American Society for Quality EED Sutstainability Committee Strategic Plan - ASQ EED Summer Newsletter 2020

 

 

 

Sustainability Footprint: A Case of Persception in Two SMEs - American Society for Quality EED Summer Newsletter 2020

 

The Four Swans of Sustainability and more...

Learn more about sustainability in my easy to read, jargon free eBooks.

Get 2 eBooks for the price of 1 during European Sustainable Development Week 2018

With each eBook bundle receive a 75% discount on the online CPD accredited ©​Certificate in Sustainability Strategy  

Start your sustainability strategy journey by clicking the link below:

https://bit.ly/2LB0DNw

10 Sustainability Megaforces (10MF) Guides

Celebrate European Sustainable Development Week by future proofing your business using the SMART actions outlined in each 10MF guide.

The 10MF toolbox can be used as posters in your sustainability or CSR awareness campaign posters, on social media posts or as flashcards team building strategy sessions.

Download your toolbox by clicking the link below:

https://bit.ly/2LDmILA

#sustainability #csr #quality #ESDW #environment #sustainabilitystrategy

European Sustainable Development week 30 May - 5 June 2018

To celebrate European Sustainable Development Week #ESDW we are sharing strategic resources for business growth such as our 10 #sustainability megaforces (10MF) toolbox. 

Click the link below to get your 10MF toolbox now! 

https://bit.ly/2LDmILA 

#CSR #environment

#quality

Garthdee Field Allotments and Community Garden Project

Garden allotments are often an overlooked mechanism to foster sustainability connecting individuals to the environment by growing food and building community engagement. In this episode I showcase the work of Stuart Oram Chairman of the Garthdee Field Allotments and Community Garden. To learn more on how you can incorporate CSR in to your business strategy, register for the upcoming Certificate in Sustainability Strategy and Diploma in Sustainability Strategy course www.SustainabilityStrategy.org 

Vattenfall European Offshore Wind Development Project Presentation

For further insight into embedding sustainability into your business. Register for the upcoming Certificate in Sustainability Strategy and Diploma in Sustainability Strategy by visiting our website www.SustainabilityStrategy.org

Back draught - the need for continuous improvement in the Wind Energy Industry

Renewable energy and in particular wind energy has seen a rapid increase in deployment within the past decade to meet the UK’s renewable energy targets. Within Scotland there has an exponential increase in renewable energy projects accounting for 61% of proposed and installed UK onshore wind farms. Onshore wind farms have also contributed to economic prosperity providing 8,600 jobs yielding £548 million in GVA. However critics claim that wind farms are not labour intensive and jobs are subsidised at a cost of £100,000 per job created. Therefore economic benefits can appear to be illusory are in spite of reductions in fossil use in the energy supply grid. The question can be asked is the wind energy revolution truly sustainable.

Although the economic costs are readily disclosed and debated in the public however the hidden cost of wind energy accidents is suppressed by the industry and externalised at times by environmental champions. Caithness Wind Farm Information Forum  an advocacy group that campaigns against wind turbines categorise wind sector accidents as Fatal accidents, Human injury, Human health, Blade failure, Fire, Structural accidents, Ice throw, Transport, Environmental damage and other miscellaneous events e.g. lightning strikes, electrical failure.
During the period 2009 – 2011 over 1500 accidents were admitted to have occurred within the wind energy sector highlighting the need for improved non-financial risk management.

Aside from the rapid expansion of the industry into offshore areas one of the root causes of the increase in accidents is the absence of industry wide standards for quality, safety and environmental management and a desire by the wind industry to value the guarantee confidentiality in regards to incident and accident reporting above organisational transparency (Fig 1). 

The UK’s Health and Safety Executive has been reticent to impose a minimum safe distance between wind turbine developments and occupied buildings and presently does not maintain a database of wind turbine failures making accident trend analysis nearly impossible. At an operational level fire brigades are at times ill-equipped to deal with wind turbine fires as working heights can be more than 80 metres. Wind farms have also accounted for the deaths of endangered birds and bats exacting an environmental toll despite the carbon friendliness of wind energy.

Within this context the Wind Industry must begin the process of standards development in consultation with all stakeholders i.e. government, NGOs and businesses to ensure that environmental claims can be substantiated and more importantly continuous improvement is embedded within the sector.

Download a free chapter from my new book Sustainability Footprints in SMEs

To celebrate the upcoming launch of my new book Sustainability Footprints in SMEs in January.

I am offering a free chapter to all my friends: https://lnkd.in/bxrgZbc

Help us spread the word by sharing on social media!

AMEC/ Robert Gordon University World Quality Day 2014

Yesterday I enjoyed facilitating the World Quality Day Seminar 2014 at Robert Gordon University with the support of my colleagues at RGU and AMEC.

Excellent presentations were delivered from both our guest speakers Steve Wright, CEO Benncon Limited and Dr Natalia Alvarez, CEO PhD Transition.

I am grateful for the support of Chartered Quality Institute members specifically Hilary Smith-Milne and Jessica Horne. 

To celebrate our 3rd year of our event, exclusive access to the AMEC/ Robert Gordon University World Quality Day 2014 presentations are now available by clicking the following link http://bit.ly/1sMIoDF

National Air Traffic Control Service - the need to pursue "Absolute Zero"

The National Air Traffic Control Service (NATS) traces its history back to the early days of commercial aviation in the United Kingdom in its pioneering role utilising a rudimentary form of air traffic control based on flag signals. Modern commercial aviation however demands both the use of complex information management systems and highly skilled human labour with the NATS employing just over 2000 air traffic controllers handling 2.2 million flights annually.  To meet this challenge the organisation is “committed to delivering exemplary service performance and, through consultation with our customers, identifying and implementing new standards in service quality”.

National Air Traffic Control Service £623M Swanwick site which serves as the nerve centre for the management of UK airspace has seen its share of teething problems at its inception and software issues during the summer but the 7^th December 2013 witnessed a catastrophic failure of its management systems which Eurocontrol, Europe’s air traffic control monitor, reported "Around 130,000 minutes of delay are currently expected with approximately 1,300 flights (almost 8% of the European traffic today) being severely delayed".

An investigation into the incident revealed that there was a breakdown in the IT systems with "more than a million lines of software" compromised significantly affecting the internal phone network that not only supports interaction between air traffic controllers within the same room but also with regional air traffic control authorities on the European continent. This seemingly straight forward technical issue was blamed on the "difficulty switching from night time to daytime operation" thereby making it impossible to reconfigure voice communication systems which is organised into sectors to cope with the demands of daytime UK airspace traffic.

The inability of NATS to meet its service plan objectives contributed to poor service performance levels with 20% of departures at Gatwick Airport hit by delays and 50% of flights at London City Airport faced disruption.

A cursory review of NATS 10 year business plan reveals a limited emphasis on contingency planning with quality issues shrouded by terms such as efficiency and innovation despite having a quality management system. Unfortunately there has not been a balanced strategic approach to the management of non-financial risk with effort being expounded on safety and emissions reduction to the detriment of the reliability of mission critical information management systems. This was compounded by a failure to test contingency measures or effectively mobilise contingency plans in the event of catastrophic failure.

Increasingly in our technological age firms and nation states are exposed to information risk either through limited access to information, loss of information and inaccurate information that affects not only competiveness but also safety and security. In essence sustainability is now a four legged stool consisting of the economic, ecological, social and information.  Sustainable organisations must combine the goals of "zero errors” and “zero emissions” into the pursuit of the strategic goal of "Absolute Zero" the point at which no more adverse risk can be removed from a system which is a benchmark upon which sustained customer satisfaction can be achieved.

BP's Deepwater Horizon - A Quality issue or a Safety issue?

Its been more that two years since the tragedy of the Deepwater Horizon incident costing the lives of some of its crew,  damage to the environment besides the strain on the lives and livelihoods of individuals living in US states along the Gulf coast.
There appears to be a return to business as usual oil production has improved in the Gulf of Mexico. BP the defendants in this case have moved from "beyond petroleum" to above suspicion recently rewarded by the financial markets with a share price increase for negotiating £4.9 million in damages with victims. Policymakers and the industry have opted for more compliance focused on safety and environmental dimensions of performance which will necessitate the need for more audits and auditors. An uneasy hush has fallen as the incident slowly fades from the headlines and the collective memory of the public. A scenario that seems oddly familiar....

Background

Dr. Tony Hayward was appointed CEO of BP after the less than savory departure of Lord Browne his mentor and predecessor. As CEO he promised to focus on safety "like a laser" knowing full well as a BP insider the spate of safety incidents that occurred prior to his appointment at their Texas city refinery in 2004 - 2005, the near sinking of the Thunder-horse platform in the Gulf of Mexico, oil spill in Alaska in 2006 and US Labor Department  fines for safety violations at its Toledo refinery in 2006.
Tony Hayward a geologist by profession also adopted a strategy of doing more with less by immediately cutting over 5000 jobs  early in his now fateful tenure. This decision to cut jobs may have made an accident like Deepwater Horizon predestined. To his credit he instituted risk management training for executives at BP's "Operations Academy" at MIT and established the company's Operations Management System (OMS) which although innovative now seem painful inadequate.


Quality Failure

The Chartered Quality Institute defines quality management as "an organisation-wide approach to understanding precisely what customers need and consistently delivering accurate solutions within budget, on time and with the minimum loss to society". This inclusive understanding of quality especially minimizing loss to society was not understood by Tony Hayward and BP's senior management. The company cautioned employees against having  uncovered cups of hot beverages but no procedure for the "negative pressure test" critical in terminating drilling operations.
The question may be asked... was the Deepwater Horizon fit for purpose?
 As a drilling platform the Deepwater Horizon was state of the art; built by Hyundai at a cost of $365 million, it was a unique combination of ship and drilling package. Operated by a crew of 160 it was kept relatively motionless when at sea by four metal pontoon legs and GPS positioning systems. At the time of construction its 28000 tonne drilling package set a world record for the heaviest object ever lifted.

Despite state of the art equipment the Deepwater Horizon as with other platforms had an Achilles heel it was the absence of a quality culture within the oil and gas sector which traditionally has been dominated by a risk taking attitude necessary for oil  and gas exploration.

This absence of a quality culture gave rise to the following quality failures leading to the explosion aboard the Deepwater Horizon:

1. Incorrect parts - centralizers key equipment used in drilling operations were received from supplier not to specification
2. Breach of existing well design - to little centralizers used in operations 6 instead of 21 -  a casualty of the misdirected focus on reducing cost not reducing the cost of quality
3. No Product verification -  incoming inspection tests were not conducted on the cement foam upon receipt from the supplier Haliburton
4. Poor Supplier Management - cement supplied by Haliburton failed in-house tests. The need to develop mutually beneficial supplier relationships is a corner stone of total quality management and quality management standards such as the ISO 9001. BP's relationship with their supply chain Transocean and Haliburton as events has revealed can be described as combative at best.
5. Poor Process Management - "Negative Pressure Test" was not on the platforms work plan. There was no procedure for conducting the "Negative Pressure Test"
6. No Management of Change Procedure - Negative Pressure Test added to the work plan at the "eleventh hour". This confusion led to the acceptance of one positive test result despite three failed negative pressure tests a decision that sealed the fate of the crew of the Deepwater Horizon.

These 6 quality failures resulted in catastrophic loss of life and environmental disaster- the safety consequence - a cost we can only estimate.

The cost to BP for the absence of a quality culture has been a $91 billion loss of market value between April - June 2010, over 350 lawsuits from the general public, damage to its brand image, loss of support from environmental groups with the US Audubon Society "largest uncontrolled science experiment in our country", shareholder dissatisfaction and loss of industry leadership.

Safety is not the issue it is a lack of an understanding of quality and its impact on the triple bottom-line economic, social and environmental. Its time for BP, the oil and gas industry and regulators to adopt an industry-wide approach that embraces continuous improvement that goes "beyond quality"

Scotland - A future with Zero Waste?

Image via Wikipedia

Scotland’s devolved government launched an ambitious Zero Waste Plan on 9 June 2010. The Zero Waste Plan aims to achieve waste recycling rates of 70 per cent with 5 per cent of waste going to a municipal landfill by 2025.


The UK has been considered as one of the laggards within the European Union, in terms of its efforts to promote waste recycling. Only two other EU member states – Greece and Portugal – have a worse track record when it comes to recycling waste. In the long term, this exposes Great Britain to the threats of landfill fines imposed by the European Union. In parallel with this, the export of UK waste to China for recycling also reduces opportunities for developing UK-based competency in recycling.
Within this context, the challenge for Scotland appears daunting. Its own track record over the past decade shows that 92 per cent of municipal waste was transferred to landfill during the period 2001/2002, reducing only to 63 per cent in 2008/2009. With a relatively small population size of 5.19m, the Scottish economy generated 20m tonnes of waste in 2008, of which 8.6m tonnes were attributable to construction sector activity. The rest of the commercial sector accounted for 7.6m tonnes of waste, with household consumption contributing 2.9m tonnes of waste.

This situation is exacerbated by the closure of landfill sites on the Shetland Islands and the Hebrides, whose  municipal waste is now pre-treated and used to generate Energy from Waste (EfW) as part of their district heating scheme.

Zero Waste Plan
Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan is influenced by three main drivers:
•The European Union Waste Directive 2008/98/EC. This European wide policy instrument is aimed at developing a “recycling society” within the European Union, whereby waste prevention, recycling and waste recovery options are explored for their environmental and economic feasibility. Landfill disposal is the least preferred option.

•The Climate Change Act (Scotland) 2009. This is an innovative legal instrument binding the Scottish Government to an 80 per cent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, with an interim target of a 42 per cent reduction by 2020. Specifically, Part 5 of the Act requires the Scottish Government to initiate programmes to improve waste reduction. Waste in landfill sites releases hazardous methane gas, contributing to overall greenhouse gas emissions. The Scottish government is keen to apply carbon measurement techniques to help reduce the impact of waste on climate change, in addition to using traditional weight measures which are used to analyse its waste management performance.

•The Courtauld commitment. This is an agreement between government and the retail sector established in 2005 to reduce packaging, increase packaging recyclable content and improve packaging design by participants in the UK retail sector supply chain.

The philosophy behind Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan is rooted in the six steps of the Waste Hierarchy Model proposed in the EU’s Waste Directive (as seen in the box on the previous page).

Articulated in the Zero Waste Plan are initiatives to translate the broad philosophical approach of the Waste Hierarchy model into practical measures which are illustrated in the box below.


To implement its Zero Waste Plan, the Scottish Government is turning to the Scottish Environmental Protection Agency (SEPA) and the recently rebranded Zero Waste Scotland (formerly WRAP Scotland). The Sustainable Development Commission (SDC) also provided support to develop Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan. The latter’s role is now in doubt, however, as it has fallen victim to UK government fiscal austerity measures. In the absence of the Commission, it is envisaged that the Scottish Parliament and Audit Scotland will monitor the success of the Zero Waste Plan and the overall development of a sustainable economy in Scotland, although the effectiveness of this proposed arrangement is yet to be demonstrated.
Critical to the success of the Zero Waste Plan is the development of infrastructure to segregate and reduce the contamination of recyclable materials, such as contamination from food waste. This issue can be resolved through an increase in the composting of food waste, and consumer awareness campaigns encouraging individuals to see food waste as an importance resource. According to the Plan, waste materials could contribute 31 per cent of Scotland’s renewable heat target and 4.3 per cent of its renewable electricity target; but in order to make this happen, a shift in public attitudes is vital. Rather than waste being perceived as a liability, or an unavoidable consequence of consumption, it must be seen as an asset.
Waste management infrastructure developments such as aerobic and anaerobic composting sites, Mechanical Biological Treatment (MBT) facilities and Energy from Waste (EfW) schemes require a high level of capital investment, but they can contribute to long term economic growth and job creation. Initial projections indicate Scotland needs investment in waste management infrastructure of £1,046m above current levels, over the next 15 years, if it is to meet EU and Scottish Government waste reduction targets. A possible revenue option could be the redirection of costs incurred from the collection and disposal of waste, amounting to £404m during the period 2007 -2008. The onus is on businesses and households to help achieve this by reducing their own waste.
Improving the awareness of waste as a revenue source and its impact on the environment and human health has been a key programme of Zero Waste Scotland – the body mandated to implement the Scottish Zero Waste Plan. Through its partnerships with local councils and SEPA, Zero Waste Scotland has provided workshops, seminars, as well as consultancy support to encourage both individuals to change their attitudes to waste, and organisations to implement environmental management systems.
A recent waste awareness initiative conducted by Zero Waste Scotland showed the financial cost of cleaning litter on Scottish highways amounts to £100m annually, besides its environmental impact on the Scottish landscape and safety risk implications for litter collectors.

Legal framework
Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan provides business and society with a sustainable approach to development, but an intellectual appeal may not be enough. The Scottish Parliament is also backing up the programme through statutory instruments. The cornerstones of this future legal framework of waste management are found in the following proposed regulations:

Zero Waste Scotland Regulations 2011
Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) (Scotland) Regulations 2011.
•The introduction of the above regulations also necessitates amendments to the existing regulations, including:

•Environmental Protection Act 1990

•Waste Management Licensing Regulations 1994

•Pollution Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2000

•Landfill (Scotland) Regulations 2003

•Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) Regulations 1999.

•The Zero Waste Scotland Regulations 2011 will enshrine in law five key zero waste management goals:

•A landfill ban on key recyclable materials

•Bans on mixing separately collected recyclable materials

•The segregation, separation and collection of key recyclable materials

•Restrictions on the inputs to energy from waste processes

•A property-based ban on waste disposal of organic content to landfill.

Scotland has chosen to develop its Zero Waste Plan as part of a wider low carbon strategy for economic growth. However, if it is to achieve these waste management targets, and reap the rewards of both economic growth and job creation, it requires investment to upgrade its existing waste management infrastructure in an age of fiscal austerity. And that is only half of the battle: Scotland’s real challenge is to create a “Zero waste society” in which all its stakeholders participate in making “Scotland plc” a sustainable entity through the efficient use of resources.
Vital to the success of the Zero Waste Plan are the proposed Zero Waste Regulations which will provide a legal framework driving the implementation of sustainable approaches to waste management. The recent enactment of the Waste Information (Scotland) Regulations 2010 provides a clear indication of the intention of Scotland’s lawmakers to require the business sector to embrace sustainability. Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan was rolled out with little fanfare or hype, but its potential consequences for the way Scottish businesses currently operate are yet to be understood by Scottish CEOs and business leaders.
Six steps to “Zero Waste” Prevention

This is the cornerstone of Scotland’s approach to Zero Waste. Prevention includes any steps taken before a substance or material becomes waste, such as reducing the quantity of waste, product life span extensions, improved packaging and environmental and safety impact mitigation.

Re-use
This is the process of using products again for the same purposes for which they were initially designed.

Preparing for re-use
The cleaning and treatment of waste so that it can be re-used without further processing.


Recycling
Converting waste materials into products or substances for commercial or industrial use.



Recovery
Use of waste material as a substitute for other primary resources e.g. energy from waste schemes.



Disposal
Processing options which do not include the recovery of waste materials.



Waste Hierarchy Model, from the European Union Waste Directive 2008/98/EC

Waste hierarchy model

Prevention


• Implementation of Clean Technology, Eco-design and Best Available Techniques (BAT)

• Development of pertinent indicators, promotion of ISO 14001 and waste awareness programmes


Re-use
• Improve product durability

•Encourage the use of non disposable product alternatives

Preparing for reuse
•Development of reuse and repair networks


Recycling

•Implementation of carbon metrics and optimising the collection of recyclate (material that is capable of being recycled)

• Mandatory sorting of waste by commercial and industrial organisations

Recovery

• Institution of landfill bans for unsorted waste and restrictions on waste that is incinerated

• 25 per cent cap on local authority waste used for waste to energy schemes

Disposal

•Landfill reduction targets

ISO 26000 Standard - defining good corporate governance

Image via Wikipedia

Public concern over the increasing disparity amongst the rich and poor, gender inequality, human rights, climate change and environmental degradation has elevated sustainability and corporate social responsibility from the realm of public relations to the core of progressive business strategy. The recent BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is testimony to the financial and reputational risk that can befall CEO’s and their organisations that fail to put sustainability at the heart of business decisions.

Historically the International Organisation for Standardisation (known by its French acronym ISO) efforts have been focused on issues surrounding quality, product specification and information technology management. Therefore it was late in understanding the shift in the debate as to the role of business in society from being catalyst of economic growth to also enablers in the development of society as a whole. This concept of the role of business beyond profit making was crystallised in the Brundtland Commission’s definition of Sustainable development as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs”. This definition subsequently influenced the development of the “triple bottom line” approach whereby business performance can no longer be viewed exclusively from the lens of economic performance but must also include social and environmental performance criteria as part of any evaluation of its effectiveness (Elkington 1999, Savitz and Weber 2006).

In 2002 sensing the growing need for comprehensive guidance on social responsibility the International Organisation for Standardisation began work on developing the ISO 26000 standard. To ensure that all stakeholders’ views and concerns were included in the developmental stages of the ISO 26000 standard its working group included well known non-governmental organisations such as the Consumers International and the International Organisation for Employers. Support was also enlisted from other sustainability initiatives such as the International Labour Organisation (ILO), the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and the UN Global Compact whose sustainability framework established a decade earlier includes over 8700 participating organisations. Well known NGOs such as Amnesty International and the World Wild Life Fund (WWF) International also contributed to the development of the ISO 26000 standard, however both organisations have since refocused their attention to other initiatives.

The ISO 26000 standard builds on the Brundtland definition of sustainable development by defining social responsibility as the responsibility of an organization for the impacts of its decisions and activities on society and the environment, through transparent and ethical behavior that

• contributes to sustainable development, including health and the welfare of society
• takes into account the expectations of stakeholders
• is in compliance with applicable law and consistent with international norms of behaviour; and is integrated throughout the organization and practised in its relationships

This definition confirms the interconnectedness of social responsibility and sustainability as core operational concepts with the ISO 26000 standard. To incorporate social responsibility and sustainability within its business operations organisations are required to define their priorities in respect of the following core subjects:

• Organisational governance – the systems, structures and processes whether formal or informal by which an organisation makes decisions in regards to social responsibility and sustainability.
• Human rights – are accepted norms regarding the sanctity of life such as civil, political, economic, and social rights which it is implied that an organisation should actively support and respect.
• Labour practices – are policies and procedures regarding the selection, recruitment and retention of labour including subcontractors and their ability solicit the assistance of external bargaining or develop their own bargaining mechanism within the organisation
• The environment – the ISO 26000 standard encourages organisations to review its impact on the environment from a global perspective by improving the its environmental performance using the precautionary approach, sustainable procurement techniques, environmental risk management, climate change adaptation, adoption of clean technology and eco-efficiency programs.
• Fair operating practices – this core subject encompasses the ethical values of the organisation in respect of its dealings with other organisations e.g. competitors, suppliers and government authorities in areas such as anti-corruption and fair competition.
• Consumer issues – are all activities that communicate and reduce risk, improves product performance and longevity, increase sustainable consumption of products and services during all stages of its lifecycle from material extraction, manufacturing, marketing, distribution and recycling or disposal.
• Community involvement and development – are activities in which the organisation participates that strengthens the civic institutions from which the organisation gains its wealth but also builds a bond between the organisations internal stakeholders i.e. owners, shareholders, employees, suppliers, subcontractors and its external stakeholders in the community and the wider society.

The ISO 26000 standard does not provide a prescription for social responsibility by highlights key areas which define corporate social responsibility excellence. Organisations should adapt the standard to suit its size, mission, values, cultural and regulatory environment. This tailored approach ensures that stakeholders are engaged for their opinions using communicative means that are beyond mere consultation on issues regarding the centrality of social responsibility to the organisational strategy but importantly their as stakeholders role in implementing sustainability and social responsibility within the organisation.

The interdependence of each core subject is embodied in the holistic approach to social responsibility and sustainability espoused by the ISO 26000.

The holistic approach to sustainability also implies that any organisation embarking on implementing the core subjects of the ISO 26000 must conduct a gap analysis of its existing performance regarding social responsibility and the requirements of the standard to determine the relevance of the each core subject to the stakeholders within its competitive environment. Therefore also ensuring that the relative emphasis placed by the organisation on each core subject will vary regionally e.g. businesses that operate in Bangladesh and India that are implementing social responsibility may place greater emphasis on issues surrounding Labour practices and Community involvement and development due to the socioeconomic environment that exists on the Indian sub continent.

The organisation having understood which core subjects are relevant to its stakeholders then proceeds to integrate social responsibility into the fabric of the organisation through policy development, the establishment of sustainability targets, sustainability awareness raising campaigns, transparent reporting of the organisational performance in a manner that is timely and balanced.

The use of social responsibility reporting as tool for benchmarking and communicating sustainability performance is another key requirement of the ISO 26000 standard. Recently there has been a proliferation of corporate social responsibility reports by companies in the United Kingdom which has spurred the creation of various reporting schemes such as the Global Reporting Initiative – a voluntary scheme that seeks to measure an organisations sustainability performance facilitating comparisons within and across sectors. The ISO 26000 standard has cross referenced its framework across existing corporate social responsibility initiatives such as the GRI thereby ensuring its applicability to all organisations irrespective of reporting requirements.

Safety and Environmental practitioners are already burdened with the management of ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems; ISO 9000 Quality Management Systems and OSHAS 18001 Safety Management Systems may view the ISO 26000 standard as an unwelcomed distraction from other technical issues. As with any organisational change initiative senior management commitment and support is paramount as the implementation of social responsibility policies may be in direct competition for resources with other business initiatives at a time where budgets are constrained. Therefore the business case for sustainability and social responsibility must be developed, however despite these challenges using the ISO 26000 standard as a template for implementing sustainability and social responsibility can provide organisations with following benefits:

• No certification costs - the ISO 26000 standard is not yet a certifiable standard
• Easy integration with existing standards e.g. ISO 14001 and OSHAS 18001 using the holistic approach to sustainability social responsibility
• Reduced reputational risk arising from poor labour practices and unethical conduct
• Enhanced brand and product image
• Incorporates the criteria of existing corporate social responsibility schemes such as the GRI and UN Global Compact
• Facilitates good corporate governance ensuring that senior management adopt a long term outlook to decisions making
• Develops and improves stakeholder engagement and building trust with the organisations immediate community
• Improves environmental efficiency and resource use within the organisations supply chain
• Improves organisational safety and builds employee morale
• Facilitates organisational innovation

The parallel concepts of sustainability and social responsibility are evolving areas of management taught and practice, this is reflective in the rather broad approach of the ISO 26000 standard. The ushering of the ISO 26000 on the global stage has not been without its controversy with some nations viewing the new standard as a potential barrier to free trade or a threat to their national sovereignty in terms of its support for human rights. Organisations that do not subscribe to such myopic views will use the framework of the ISO 26000 standard to create new competitive models and produce products and services that not only sustain corporate growth but contribute to the development of society.