his section examines how the implementation of the sustainable framework was measured at
s is
ECTION ONE: THE CREATION OF A CORPORATE CULTURE
he literature shows that for sustainable programs to be a success, participation and support of ts
the time
ere
he survey contained twenty questions to determine increased awareness of environmental
(both T
Winkler Partners. Methods include assessing the perceptions of the employees towards this new framework and the examination of energy and resource conservation using concrete metrics.
Finally, for sustainable initiatives where metrics are not available a description of WP’s effort provided.
S
T
management and staff is crucial. To this end, we look at the culture created at WP and whether i
“green shift” has been successful. This new direction is certainly a radical departure for a law firm and it is important to assess the reaction of employees. Given the importance of culture in implementing a sustainable framework, a survey was conducted to assess the attitude of employees towards the new environmental initiatives. The total number of employees at of the survey was 47, including 20 legal staff (partners, lawyers, associates and paralegals), 22 administrative staff (secretarial, finance, human resources, information systems and general affairs) and 5 translators. Surveys were given to the total population (47) and 44 responses w received, yielding a response rate of 94.6 percent. All the responses received were useable (see Appendix III).
T
issues, general support for the firms efforts, perceived impact on the working environment, participation levels (in the firms efforts), the effect of the program beyond the office, the perceived success or failure of the program and thoughts on communication of the results
internal and external). The survey used a five point scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree), with 3 representing no opinion on the issue/question. Respondents were also encouraged to provide personal comments. The following are detailed descriptions of the question groupings:
1) Awareness of environmental issues was determined by two questions in the survey
) General support for the firms efforts was determined by six questions in the survey (1, 10, 11,
too much
) The perceived impact on the working environment (positive or negative) was measured by e
) Participation levels were measured by four questions (4, 5, 7, 8) including general questions
sess real
ture.
(Questions 3, 7) that asked whether working at the firm had increased awareness of environmental issues and/or caused a reconsideration of consumption patterns.
2
12, 13, 15) and covered issues such as the general importance of environmental issues, support for the firms efforts to become more sustainable, whether environmental considerations should figure into business decisions, and whether the firm devoted time to environmental issues.
3
four questions (2, 9, 16, 17) and asked whether WP’s environmental efforts had improved th working environment, whether adjusting to the new sustainability measures was perceived as difficult or whether these measures had disrupted respondents’ work.
4
such as whether working at WP had caused respondents to live in a more sustainable manner, or specifics such as whether respondents used reusable items such as water bottles,
chopsticks and food containers. Given that such a small study would be unable to as participation, it should be noted that the survey measures perception of participation, reflecting whether or not the sustainable ideas have been ingrained in thinking and cul
5) Conservation beyond the office refers to whether the measures taken at WP were used item
) The perceived success/ failure of the program was covered by two questions (18, 20) that ity.
) Communication and promotion of the firm’s efforts was covered by two questions (14, 19)
s should be
he question groups and specific questions posed in the questionnaire reflect various cultural
ECTION TWO: THE USE OF TRACKING TOOLS
or any assessment of change, a benchmark must be established and metrics created to measure beyond the office, at home and whether employees general behavior was affected. This was measured by three questions (4, 6, 7) and covered the use of reusable items such as water bottles, chopsticks and food containers and general changes in lifestyle and consumption patterns.
6
asked about the general progress and perceived success of WPs efforts towards sustainabil
7
measuring whether the firm’s sustainable activities and results were successfully communicated internally and whether employees believed that these efforts/result
communicated to clients. Only question 19 (internal communication) was included in the statistics reported in Chapter Four. Ideas on external communication were asked for management consideration.
T
factors complied from the literature review for this paper as well as conversations with firm partners regarding information they would like to obtain on the cultural transformation at the firm.
S
F
the change in relation to the benchmark. Polly Coultice, co-director of the Business and the
Environment Programme at Cambridge University, says that businesses are often unaware of exactly the impact they are having and that “ it is the companies that do measure [environmen and social impact] that know and understand that impact and so are best able to mitigate the negative” (Hanson, 2005, p. 48). Barnhizer (2006) admits “to an absolute distrust of cheap an easy proclamations of lofty ideals and commitments to voluntary or unenforceable codes of practice. The only thing that counts is the actor’s actual behavior”. Therefore, our examinatio the sustainable framework implemented at Winkler Partners is not based on rhetoric and stated goals, but on actual measurable data. Various areas are targeted for changes, adjustments and improvements and specific metrics are used with which to measure progress. For this study, th benchmark is the data collected on resource use in Winkler Partners in 2004. The data collected are measurements of electricity, water and gas use as well as the total amount of recycling and waste. Comment will also be provided on the appropriateness of these metrics and whether they accurately reflect the total impact of business activities.
tal
d
n of
e
ECTION THREE: THE PHYSICAL SPHERE – QUANTIFIABLE METRICS
his section assesses WP’s efforts to reduce its environmental impact using specific quantifiable
amine
metrics. Discussion is also provided on the methods used to that have brought about these measurable changes. To assess WP’s progress in energy conservation and efficiency, we ex metrics for electricity use (with specific discussion on WP’s efforts relating to general efficiency, lighting, and air-conditioning) and gas use. Efforts at resource conservation and
dematerialization are then evaluated using metrics for water use as well as for wa
recyclables (including efforts relating to sorting and recycling, purchasing, reducing food-waste and the use of web-based systems). Finally, there is a brief discussion on how WP has implemented cleaner and more natural methods around the office. These metrics are all poste
on the company’s intranet, so that employees can track progress. Reports are also given to employees once or twice times a year to highlight new initiatives, provide a progress updat to discuss possible further improvements.
e and