Technology Forecasters, Inc.
Strategic Environmental and Manufacturing Consulting
Let’s face it: changing organizations can be hard work. People with better ideas for achieving results face not only personal resistance to change but also sometimes a sluggish organizational pace. In my experience, the most competitive strategy for improving processes is to leap-frog from the status quo to four-to-five levels beyond. Here are some examples — the first from an electronics manufacturing services (EMS) company and the second from a name-brand electronics company (OEM).
Celestica, in response to the Montreal Protocol phasing out ozone-depleting substances was the first electronics contract manufacturer to leap-frog from cleaning printed-circuit-board assemblies with CFC (ozone-depleting) solvents to the no-clean process. In doing so, Celestica leaped over the aqueous-cleaning technique requiring costly capital equipment, floor space and power for the equipment, labor hours, and disposal of heavy-metal water with permits and treatments. I interviewed the parties responsible for this change a few years afterward (for my book Lean and Green: Profit for Your Workplace and the Environment), and the smarts behind the leap-frog move were motivated by environmental conservation and competitive savings of time, cost, real estate, and more.
HP, anteing up for a package-reduction challenge by Walmart, did not do as most of its competitors did — incrementally or even substantively reducing the size and weight of the packaging surrounding the products. One HP employee had the idea to make the packaging part of the product itself. The notebook computers, cables, and accessories were packed in attractive over-the-shoulder “messenger” bags — three to a cardboard shipping box without any other packaging material. In one fell swoop, this leap-frog move resulted in 97% reduction of packaging, conservation of fuel, and reduction of CO2 emissions by removing the equivalent of one out of every four trucks previously needed to deliver the notebooks to Walmart and Sam’s Clubs around the USA.
I encourage you to take advantage of the New Year to use leap-frog thinking — in your companies’ manufacturing strategies, supply-chain and logistics designs, Lean programs, sustainability programs, and every other aspect of your workplaces. Make it easier for yourself! Raise up your company’s efficacy 4-5 steps at once instead of inching upward — facing organizational resistance to change each time. Leave the arduous step-by-step improvements to your competitors, who will arrive at the finish line much later and with far more cost.
Will you face more organizational resistance to this one leap-frog improvement than to a more routine change? Perhaps yes. But if you are like me, one of the reasons you get up in the morning and head to your desk is to make your organization and the world better places.
Do you want to try on some leap-frog ideas with the TFI and TFI Environment consultants and/or community (reply below)?
You’d think that for-profit corporations’ chief financial officers might be the last ones to endorse company-wide strategies for reducing environment impact. Wrong.
When the CFO at furnishings company Herman Miller became the CEO, the director of Environment, Health, and Safety Paul Murray felt nervous. Murray had convinced the CFO to allocate $40,000/month to invest in resource efficiencies for the company. When Brian Walker moved from CFO to CEO, he asked to meet with Murray. At that point, Murray feared that a CFO-turned-CEO would nix the investment altogether. To Murray’s surprise and relief, Walker suggested increasing the monthly investment to $50,000! Walker explained that while he was CFO he witnessed that the return on investment (ROI) from the environmental investments was simply excellent. In fact, Herman Miller ($2 billion in revenues) not only makes smart investments to reduce its own environmental footprint, but also the company is a design-for-environment leader for office chairs (I’m sitting on one) and other furnishings, and – through subsidiary Convia, Inc. — helps to reduce energy consumption of customers’ buildings with energy-management tools. CEO Walker says, “Sustainability is becoming as prevalent in customer requirements as quality was 10 or 15 years ago, and we’re at the tipping point of this movement where our customers, at least, are no longer saying it’s nice to know you do it. It’s a requirement” (Industry Week, Sep. 2009, p. 24). By the way, 20% of Walker’s compensation is based on the company’s environmental performance.
Last month, a CFO-turned-CEO at a TFI electronics-company client reviewed the High-ROI Environmental Roadmap we had prepared in concert with a multifunctional green team. The roadmap listed a half-dozen Lean and Green initiatives along with their financial and environmental benefits (cost reductions, new revenue, carbon emission reductions, and less use of paper, water, and energy). From reviewing both the environmental and financial ROI, the CEO’s response was immediate: he said he’s one-hundred percent behind one-hundred percent of the projects as outlined.
Another high-tech company CFO (not yet a CEO!) uses his sharp focus on ROI to support his company’s environmental program, with this advice: Determine priorities for the environmental initiatives according to greatest reduction of environment impact and the highest monetary ROI. For example, if you had $500,000 to spend, what projects would you choose to most efficiently maximize the environmental and monetary savings? “It’s important to prioritize in this way,” he said, “because the environmental program could be one of 50 initiatives all fighting with each other for resources. List the overhead, capital, and expense investments separately. Get on the executive agenda and carve out the initiative — just like any other business function.” The CFO added that environmental programs – like training – need to be elevated to the executive level for planned investments, because they span all company departments; the executive staff needs to dedicate funding to be appropriated to the departmental budgets in a way in which the funds cannot be “cannibalized.”
So, if you are running (or starting) your company’s strategic environmental initiatives, don’t tippy-toe around your CFO. Enlist him or her in sharpening the ROI and advocating in the executive suites for these surprisingly large-return programs.
All CFOs (and other financially-minded) readers are welcome to weigh in. (Leave a reply at the bottom of the blog.)
Increasing numbers of corporate customers are requesting that their network-equipment suppliers offer more power-efficient products. Of course they are — it saves them money in both electricity costs to power the systems and cooling costs to mitigate heat. Plus, consuming less electricity helps corporate customers to report to investor groups (such as the Carbon Disclosure Project) lower Scope 2 Greenhouse Gas Emissions.
And the networking industry has responded by using more efficient power supplies. But this is an incremental improvement. Significant market growth is available to companies disrupting the way that networking equipment consumes power through alternative designs and innovative power management.
So, this is a call-to-action for network-equipment designers everywhere, as well as to innovative software and parts suppliers serving the networking industry. Let’s discuss ways you’ve considered power reductions and together create a roadmap of likely alternatives for growing up while powering down the networking industry.
Here are some ideas to get us going, so we can discuss these approaches’ benefits from a Design-for-Environment (DfE) perspective and discuss any downsides of using these for standard product operation:
- Solid state drives
- Low Power Dual Quad Core processor and chip set
- A rack that can better manage power efficiency and have the power redundancy at the rack level rather than the system level
- Smart cooling: Fan-less, fewer variable speed fans, liquid cooling, or Pulsed Air Jet Cooling (liquid-cooled racks can reduce the amount of cooling required to keep the environment around the systems at around 25 degrees Celsius)
- Developing an idle mode for systems that currently run 24/7 — while still supporting customers applications and traffic
- Scalable or dynamic power supplies that monitor actual usage and only turns on the power needed
- Active power management with monitoring system vitals
- Use of ultra-capacitors instead of a Lithium button cell batteries
- Modular design for power supplies that grows with additional hardware
And to make our roadmap as Lean and Green as possible, we’ll discuss business questions such as…
- Under which circumstances or application does a power supply with a 90%-and-higher-efficiency rating provide enough savings over a standard 80+ power supply to justify the significantly higher investment cost?
- How do you convince your own company’s management to invest in more efficient designs / components (80+ GOLD power supplies, active power management, solid state drives, de-materialization, fan-less design, etc.) given that it’s the customer and not the OEM that saves money and carbon footprint?
- What are the affects of delivering systems with 1-2 dozen-drive capacity (and power ratings accordingly) initially populated with just a handful of drives from Design for Environment (DfE) perspective, and what alternate techniques can be used to minimize this impact?
- How can we influence regulators around the world to develop highly technical-and-cost savvy (e.g., through EuP study groups)?
Reply below or write to me (PGordon@TFIenvironment.com) to let me know you are interested in creating, exploring, and sharing ideas that will help address one of the most pressing issues today and tomorrow for networking equipment — vital to corporate customers, to cost reductions, and of course to reducing global Greenhouse Gas emissions. I look forward to the challenge!
by Kent Romanoff, TFI Leadership Effectiveness Consultant
If you frequent TFI’s Friday Best of Blogs, then you know that we recommend changes to profitably streamline tech companies’ product design, supply chain, product movement, and other operational functions. Our clients know that change is necessary, otherwise they would not have engaged us. But often they need help in overcoming their teams’ or managers’ resistance to change. Organizations have an unfortunate habit of acquiring blockages that impede progress and stymie performance.
Managers can regularly embark on search-and-destroy missions to root out barriers and obliterate them. These barriers can be difficult to find, because they morph into familiar forms and hide in plain sight. If you look carefully, you can uncover these barriers to change:
1. EXCUSES — When you start hearing excuses for why things can’t change, you have encountered a blockage.
2. FEAR — When people get scared, they freeze and plug up everything they are involved in.
3. SECRETS – This is a sure sign of a dysfunctional organization.
4. INSECURITY — When people are in over their head, they know it and their main purpose in life becomes trying to make sure other people don’t figure it out.
5. POSTURING — When people fixate on their image, you are in the presence of a blockage.
6. ROUTINES — Doing things the same way for too long creates “comfort zones,” which are places where fearful, insecure, posturing people go to avoid detection.
By contrast, positive change thrives in healthy organizations, characterized by:
1. Strong, enlightened, progressive, free-thinking, open-minded LEADERSHIP.
2. An appreciation of the value and importance of SETTING AND ACHIEVING GOALS.
3. An atmosphere of HIGH-ACHIEVEMENT, where good enough is not good enough.
4. FULL DISCLOSURE and a willingness to share virtually all information.
5. Employees who understand WHAT IS EXPECTED and WHAT THEY WILL GAIN when they achieve it.
6. A sense of TEAMWORK where everyone believes they are working for the benefit of all, not enriching the few.
7. The ability to EMBRACE CHANGE and LEARN FROM MISTAKES.
8. The capacity to GET THINGS DONE.
How many organizations truly possess all of these attributes? Precious few. The first step to positive change is creating the right conditions for improvements to exist. Life on earth didn’t emerge until there was an oxygen-rich atmosphere. The Renaissance couldn’t happen until dogma gave way to enlightened thought. And an organization plugged with barriers cannot strategically progress.
We at TFI have succeeded in having upper and middle management and all employees understand the imperative of positive change. How? We gain enthusiastic buy-in through addressing key leaders’ business and budgetary goals, inspire people through real-life examples of other companies’ success, show how it’s good for business, educate about the cost of wasted materials/processes, and tie compensation to results. We use a host of approaches depending on the company’s culture. It’s very rewarding.
How have you removed barriers to change in your company? (Please reply below.)
There is no understating the importance of a CEO’s vision to a company’s policy decisions and corporate culture. The choice about where to locate manufacturing, for example, has been driven by many a CEO. In the past decade, Wall Street analysts’ belief that manufacturing in China was the ticket to increasing shareholder value (regardless of product types or customer locations) propelled countless CEOs to declare that their companies, too, would manufacture products in China — often to the surprise of their Chief Operating Officers.
This week I had the pleasure of meeting a CEO whose vision is driving him to move manufacturing from Southeast Asia to Midwest USA. But this was no shock to his COO (sitting with us at the coffee house), because this company — Vista International — is founded on CEO Johan Smith’s bold vision to power a cleaner world and to “Reducing carbon footprint one step at a time” (trademarked). Vista, headquartered near Denver, Colorado, is a technology holding company in the renewable energy industry. During the past 20 years the company has acquired technologies as diverse as energy-efficient lighting for facilities, converting waste to high-octane fuels, high-efficiency wind and hydro turbines, and higher-BTU coal with less pollutants.
Though Smith has lived and worked in several countries and has advised government officials in China, Mexico, St. Lucia (Caribbean), Bulgaria, and Israel, he wants to build the company’s largest-yet production facility in the Midwest USA, serving both domestic and international customers. He mentioned tactfully that he is not entirely comfortable with manufacturing in China. It’s likely also that the energy-efficiency investment portion of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 strengthens his decision.
The return to regional manufacturing — making products close to customers — is a strategy TFI has been recommending to clients brave enough to counter a trend. The benefits include meeting regional customers’ requirements more quickly and precisely, mitigating risk compounded across multiple national borders, and reducing carbon footprint — the latter being more visible these days to investors and corporate customers. The CEO must share this vision because an operational shift this far-reaching is rarely championed by a singular manager outside the executive suite.
The electronics contract manufacturing industry is full of CEO visionaries who dictated manufacturing locations: former Flextronics CEO Michael Marks envisioned complete supply-chain campuses in Mexico and Eastern Europe to serve customers on those continents. Former Sparton Electronics CEO David Hockenbrocht foresaw that keeping manufacturing in North America would appeal best to his regulated-industry customers; then in the last years of his tenure he pioneered (amongst his EMS peers) the building of a facility in Vietnam (when I asked why, he spoke about the comparatively high education and low labor rates there; I always wondered if his reasons came from his values as well).
I invite you to comment (below): Has your company’s CEO been instrumental in determining manufacturing locations? Does your company’s manufacturing-location strategy prioritize cheap labor rates or a regional strategy emphasizing customer responsiveness, risk mitigation, and smaller carbon footprint?
Several mid-sized tech companies have had us create business-travel-reduction programs, for significant Lean (money savings in the millions annually) and Green (carbon reduction in the hundreds or thousands metric tons annually) benefits. In every case, we’ve reduced travel — sometimes more than projected. Yet in the process of customizing travel-reduction programs we run across five myths that we must bust to give clients’ profitability and environmental benefit a full shake.
Myth #1: Employees will resent travel reduction. If because of business travel you have ever (1) missed your kid’s graduation or performance, (2) not registered for an evening course that requires steady attendance, or (3) felt reluctant to book vacation in a fabulous distant place because flying has worn you down, then you know to question this myth. We begin customizing a client’s travel-reduction program by interviewing frequent travelers; these interviews quickly reveal that most travelers would like to curb non-essential travel.
Myth #2: The Sales Department must be insulated from travel-reduction programs, to prevent sales erosion. We used to go along with this view: after all, no consultant wants a client to experience lower sales based on a cost-savings recommendation. But then the evidence starting flowing in, such as from Oracle’s Green Sales program, which has the sales force reduce travel via web-based demos and reduce the number of demos needed based on consultative insights. For example, instead of sending about 5 sales-related people to a customer’s site, they’ll send 1-2 and have the others participate by the web. And what was the affect on company performance? –Profits up and sales decline (owing to the economy) lower than anticipated. For effective travel reduction in the Sales function, conduct objective interviews with Sales as well as customers to uncover non-essential travel, and provide easy-to-use travel-avoidance tools.
Myth #3: Travel reduction is only about reducing airfare. Corporate expenditures on airline tickets can be only 40% to 60% of total business-travel expenses, which include steep costs for rental cars, ground transportation, parking, lodging, and meals. When you capture all travel-related costs and carbon emissions, the significant savings may surprise you.
Myth #4: Travel is a long-term strategy for integrating combined business units. Travel can help bring acquired-companies’ employees into the parent-company culture, but frequent travel is not necessary for the long term. Our research has shown that “internal meetings” is the business-travel category that travelers report they can reduce most readily — even at companies that have grown recently through acquisition. Company culture is driven in large part by the CEO, who — along with other top executives — can regularly address employees using video recordings, video-conferencing, web-conferencing, conference calls, employee newsletters, monthly “What’s on my mind” emails, and other inspiring travel alternatives. This sends a strong message that employees can likewise work productively with off-site employees without traveling each time.
Myth #5: We’ve already reduced business travel as much as we can. Owing to the economic climate many companies have recently reduced business travel. By analyzing why employees travel — through interviewing frequent travelers and requiring all travelers to specify how the trip contributes to corporate objectives — we discover process changes that render classes of business travel unnecessary.
It is undeniable that sometimes face-to-face meetings are best. Having lived and worked a year in EMEA and now back in the San Francisco Bay Area, I can attest to the value and enjoyment of having met with TFI’s EMEA clients in-person during the past year, and now reuniting with my Silicon Valley clients and colleagues. But by using a green lens to re-look at conventional business processes, we find new ideas for savings. And instead of finger-wagging employees (”Don’t spend so much money!”), we inspire them to improve the quality of our lives and the environment.
What travel purposes are sacrosanct at your organization, and should they be? (Please leave a reply below.)
This post’s title is borrowed from a chapter in Thomas L. Friedman’s book Hot, Flat, and Crowded. In the chapter, entitled “China for a Day (but Not for Two),” Friedman nearly wishes that the US Government would make as speedy and sweeping change as does China’s Central Government — that is when it’s for environmental and economic benefits. I thought of Friedman’s book chapter after a recent conversation with long-time China-based TFI Analyst Mark Natkin, who specializes in the telecom space in China and elsewhere in Asia.
This month Mark wrote in his newsletter the Marbridge Daily about China’s “Old-for-New” recycling program. In short, residents and organizations can trade in old consumer electronics and receive a 10% subsidy on the selling price of new consumer electronics. The program makes sense to me, and yet in China fashion the regulation is different from those in all other global regions. In fact “Old-for-New” is an even greater departure from the European Union’s WEEE Directive (reuse/recycling) than was China’s substance-labeling program from the EU’s RoHS Directive (substance restriction).
I asked Mark about China’s bold new law, and Mark said, “China is gradually working to improve the environment, both through recycling programs like the ‘Old for New’ program for consumer-electronics recycling, and also through use of more energy-efficient products, like “green” mobile-telephone base stations.”
Then he proceeded to give one person’s view of the impact of these laws, from the streets of Beijing: “We’ve had one of the most hospitable summers in my 7 years here – neither too hot nor humid and more blue skies than I ever thought possible for Beijing. I thought the clearer skies might be due, at least in part, to some improvements in environmental policy, such as replanting of forests between here and the Gobi Desert in the north, and even-odd license plate regulations. But the other day someone reminded me that one potentially major contributing factor is the economic downturn, which has seen a lot of factories reduce output (and the accompanying pollution).”
By the way, Friedman’s chapter “China for a Day” also reminded me of my 2004 visit to China (meeting executives at EMS and ODM companies in Shanghai and Suzhou), when with no apparent warning the Central Government banned filter-less cigarettes — without years-long deliberation by politicians in tobacco states or investments by the tobacco lobby. I found it both impressive and scary.
What do you think about China’s environmental policies and the way they are created?
By Kim Allen, PhD, TFI Environment Consultant
At home, you likely have already experienced the benefits and fun of locating used items through online forums, rather than spending time and (too much) money shopping for them new. Freecycle, Zwaggle, and of course Craig’s List have saved people millions of dollars while simultaneously benefiting the environment through avoided production, shipping emissions, and landfill burden.
Smart companies are starting to realize that they can profit from the same concept within their four walls.
Why purchase a new stapler when an employee upstairs has ended up with three in his desk drawer? Why order new equipment for the test lab when the research lab has a spare one used last year that is no longer needed? A glance at the monthly spend of a typical company for office supplies, equipment, and research materials will convince any manager that this type of sharing and swapping is tremendously beneficial to the bottom line, not to mention conserving the Earth’s resources. The question is, how to set it up practically?
Luckily, most companies already have all the tools they need to create their own “swap meet.” The corporate intranet is a natural place to set up a forum for posting “offers” and “needs.” It can be done through most types of collaboration platforms, discussion boards, or common drive spaces that all employees can access and search.
One example is the Cisco® Resource Exchange and Disposal Online (CREDO) program. Program manager Gideon Schroeder explains that CREDO is “an in-house virtual equipment exchange” that also helps Cisco handle its scrap. “The ultimate goal is to prevent any Cisco equipment or parts from ending up in landfills.” The system – which is ISO 14001 certified – is saving company money and employees’ time, and diverting electronic waste from landfills.
CREDO is for equipment. Another tech company, a TFI client in the electronic hardware business, is setting up an online swap site that will include standard office supplies, monitors, printers, chairs, and other items that tend to accumulate in people’s cubes. It is one antidote to purchasing departments’ practice of blithely buying a fresh set for every new hire.
But how do you actually get employees to use the “swap meet” when they are accustomed to ordering something new, and how do you quantify the monetary and carbon-emission savings from the program? We recommend the following four steps (which we customize for each client according to their company culture and accounting systems):
(1) Generate interest and educate employees on how to use the system, emphasizing the time-saving benefit.
(2) Give employees incentives to track their swaps. To measure the monetary and environment-footprint savings, it is critical to know what swaps have been completed. If employees swap items by walking down the hall, they need a reason to record the transaction online. One way is to reward both the giver and the receiver with “points,” redeemable for rewards or recognition.
(3) Track transactions using categories that match purchasing or accounting conventions. In particular, it is critical to know when an asset item (as opposed to an expense) has been transferred between departments.
(4) Show progress: Create a graphic for the intranet and company newsletter that shows how much money or waste has been saved to date. Also, make it easy also for employees to suggest how to maximize the program’s utility.
Has your company benefited from an internal swapping system? Let’s make this an “information swap” — please send us your comments!
One of the rewarding aspects of being consultants to electronics-company executives is the occasional opportunity to give away “freebies.” In this instance, I am pleased to report that this week one of our clients asked us to offer to TFI’s network a head start on enterprise-wide sustainability measurement, for free.
If you have not yet heard the term “enterprise carbon accounting” you can rest assured that — as with financial accounting — the smarter the tools and more automated the approach the easier it is to collect, analyze, and make decisions based on the data. Our client wants to work with sustainability champions at a handful of mid-sized-to-large electronics companies who aim to reduce environmental footprint in operations, facilities, product design, supply chain, and logistics.
If you work for an electronics contract manufacturer, electronic-product company, or component supplier (annual revenues of $500 million or more) and you are up to playing a sustainability-pioneer role, I look forward to hearing from you (PGordon@TFIenvironment.com).
Electronics contract manufacturers no longer have the exclusive privilege of operating with low margins;* this year many of their customers — electronic product companies — also are experiencing rare tightening. Not a minute too soon are two “less is more” strategies for adding margin to both types of companies: One has to do with your stuff, and the other with your time.
Corporations habitually buy IT equipment, furniture, supplies for offices and cafeterias, capital equipment, marketing collateral, and product-related materials. Managers fear that if they don’t buy enough stuff to consume this year’s budget, then next year’s budget will be smaller. So the process has been “Buy it, then Use it or Store it.” Employees are starting to get disgusted with how their companies are laying off people while offices and storage rooms brim with unused or underused investments.
Replace the old procurement habit with “Identify the need, then Find a solution” — whether that solution is borrowed, second hand, leased, a service, or a better process requiring no additional stuff whatsoever. CFOs need to start rewarding departments that use “Identify the need, then Find a solution” instead of those tactically following “use it or lose it.”
Cisco had it right when they created CREDO — an online inventory that matches surplus items to identified needs. Several years ago we consulted to a client trying to bring this buying-stuff alternative to other companies, but you can easily create one on your intranet. And expand your thinking to include strategic solutions that avoid opening new facilities and taking on other major expenses.
Secondly, imagine the time we’d free up if we halved the time we spent in meetings. Check out four smart tips to reducing hours (even minutes) from meetings that do not further corporate objectives. Executives can insist on dogged project-management practices, comprising milestones and accountability for accomplishing corporate objectives. Leverage priority-only meetings and on-line tools for collaboration and accountability.
Corporations will not overcome their addictions to buying stuff and holding unlimited meetings until a “less is more” culture is embraced by top management and frequently re-enforced through employee training, fun competitions, and rewards.
Before you run to your next meeting or fill out a purchase requisition, take a minute to share with the TFI network your successes with repairing margins, by leaving a reply.
*Watch for an upcoming post in which we’ll write about notable mid- and smaller-sized contract manufacturers whose margins have actually been good.
Contact TFI | 2000 Santa Clara Avenue, Alameda, CA 94501 USA. Phone 1-510-601-9107
Copyright © 2009 Technology Forecasters, Inc., all rights reserved. | 
RSS Feed | Friday Best of Blogs
