iso14000-digest Saturday, March 13 1999 Volume 02 : Number 049
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 1 Mar 1999 18:36:50 EST
From: JBSGS@aol.com
Subject: Re: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
Since it looks like we could spiral down into the minutia of this topic for
particular industries, I thought it time to look at the original question once
again:
"When ranking impacts, do most people consider the current control devices or
do people exclude them so as to get a true potential impact? Are there
advantages to either method?"
The truth is, what "most people do" is incorrect according to ISO 14001. To
determine significance of aspects, "most people" have been taught to do some
form of impact risk analysis, taking into consideration (usually in some
mathematical sense) the type/level/degree of control already applied. This
often results in the scoring for a potentially very important environmental
aspect falling below the "significance threshold".
Subsequently (because the entire implement & monitor sections of the standard
essentially have a one to one relationship with those aspects identified which
reached the significance threshold) controls and monitoring for such
"important" issues are overlooked in the EMS.
A little background..
1) The definition of aspect refers to an element which CAN interact with the
environment. (Not one which isn't interacting at the moment because of
controls - or good fortune)
2) The standard requires determination of significance in order that
appropriate (4.2a) control and monitoring may be applied to environmental
aspects. As far as ISO 14001 is concerned, the results of this determination
are black or white - actual/potential significant impact or not.
3) Control measures are what are required to satisfy 4.4.6 of the standard and
should not be considered until the identification requirements of 4.3.1 and
4.3.2 are complete. If some are already in place when the significance and
legal issues are being determined, that's great, but it doesn't mitigate
"significance".
4) As an (admittedly imperfect*) "rule of thumb", if an organization has
already invested in control measures, the aspect is probably significant.
(Business logic)
Summary..
What is really required to determine significance is not a "risk analysis" but
a "consequence" analysis.
This notion did not come easily. Like everybody else, I was taught that risk
analysis was the most useful tool to determine significance. It was not until
I saw (as an auditor and teacher) the erroneous results of many attempts to do
this that I realized something was wrong.
If anybody still has doubts, think about the most severe environmental impacts
of recent years (particularly accidents) and ask yourself if control measures
of one form or another are/were in place. The answer is probably yes. Then ask
should we be comfortable with an ISO 14001 EMS which systematically ignored
them because there are/was control measures in place.
John Brookes
Sr. VP - SGS ICS Inc., Rutherford, NJ
* Many organizations apply controls simply because the aspect is "low hanging
fruit" or the solution is easy and cheap. Recycling is the most common
example. Under ISO 14001, recycling of paper or aluminum cans would not be
deemed significant for most organizations, but they do it anyway.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 08:11:04 -0500
From: "Robert Clifford, Jr."
Subject: re: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
I would be more inclined to consider the "controlled" state of the
environmental aspect under both a time element - past, present, and future
- - and a situation element - normal and abnormal operation. Consider each
controlled emission in terms of what was the impact before the control
(past), with control (present), and with any anticipated controls that
could occur as a result of impending regulatory initiaitves, changes in
permit conditions, or advances in technology (future). This shouldn't add
any undue complexity to the evaluation (although it will add some work
since you're essentially tripling the number of aspects). However, it can
make it beneficially more comprehensive.
When considering normal and abnormal conditions, look at the impact of an
environmental aspect while under control (normal) and what would its impact
be if the control were to fail (abnormal). By the way, this is some what
U.S. companies are already doing under Clean Air Act regulation requiring
them to develop Risk Management Plans, which are due June 1999. This again
doubles the number of potential aspects. It is important to point out,
however, that most organizations are finding on-the-order-of hundreds of
environmental aspects associated with their activities, once they go
through the EMS process, so the sheer numbers shouldn't scare anyone
unduly.
After developing this "multiplied" list of aspects, scoring for
significance can then occur. Again, I would consider the controlled state
of the aspect. The problem with considering the aspect alone, without its
control device, is that the intrinsic hazard of an aspect (its capability
to do harm) is given more weight than its extrinsic hazard (probability of
doing harm, when controlled) - and yet the extrinsic nature of the hazard
is more representative of the real world situation.
Robert Clifford, Jr., Vice President
ISO Environmental Consultancy, Inc.
1103 Glenwood Blvd.
Schenectady NY 12308-2503
518-393-3392
clifford@quality.org
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 10:09:36 -0400
From: "Macarena Ortega"
Subject: Type I??
Dear iso-listers:
I am a little confuse about ISO type I label. I know that is a
multicriteria approach, etc, etc, etc..but is a single-issue
approach, for example FSC label, just for the forestry sector, a type
I label?
Any comments would be appreciate.
Macarena Ortega
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 10:36:34 -0400
From: "Macarena Ortega"
Subject: audit report format
Good morning listers,
I am looking for audit report formats. I am developing one for my
project and I would like to have some formats to know general
contents and if there exists differences in contents between a
certification audit and a follow period audit.
Any comments would be appreciate
Thank you very much
Macarena Ortega
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 02 Mar 1999 15:46:52 +0200
From: Angela Boura
Subject: Production of Expanded Polystyrene (EPS) and ISO 14001 or EMAS
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- --------------CEC45CAB28584FA541D6F087
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Dear members
I would like information regarding companies with ISO 140001 or EMAS
that manufacture expanded polystyrene (EPS)
Thanks in advance
Angeliki Boura
- --------------CEC45CAB28584FA541D6F087
Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=iso-8859-7; name="vcard.vcf"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Description: Card for aboura
Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="vcard.vcf"
begin: vcard
fn: aboura
n: ;aboura
email;internet: aboura@aix.meng.auth.gr
x-mozilla-cpt: ;0
x-mozilla-html: FALSE
version: 2.1
end: vcard
- --------------CEC45CAB28584FA541D6F087--
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 09:09:30 -0500
From: "Gehrke, Rick"
Subject: RE: audit report format
> Good morning listers,
>
> I am looking for audit report formats. I am developing one for my
> project and I would like to have some formats to know general
> contents and if there exists differences in contents between a
> certification audit and a follow period audit.
>
> Any comments would be appreciate
>
> Thank you very much
>
> Macarena Ortega
Check out ISO 14011, especially sections 5.2.1 and 5.4.2. You could use the
whole ISO 14011 standard as an outline for an EMS audit procedure, too.
Rick Gehrke
Compliance Manager
Synair Corporation
www.synair.com
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 20:18:49 +0100
From: "Pepper, John"
Subject: RE: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
Beth
When it comes to 14001 certification, the certification body is
basically aiming to determine that the system is focused on the "right
things" and that a sound method has been used for determining which
"things" are in the system. Basically, if an aspect is "significant"
then it should be managed in the EMS. This might be through
investigation, targets or operational control or a combination or
these. If an aspect is not significant, then it doesn't need to be
within the EMS.
So, if there a number of control devices in place, then we would ask
the question why the organisation felt there was a need for the
controls. These controls could either be "end of pipe" solutions or
methods of working. Usually the answer comes back that the controls
are necessary because the environmental aspects are potentially
important (significant) to the organisation, typically because of fear
of prosecution! The evaluation should therefore take into account the
likely potential impacts and take it from there.
To take on example, I have audited a plant where the quality of the
effluent from the effluent treatment plant was probably better than
the upstream water (i.e. in normal conditions, no environmental impact
into the receiving water from the process). But it would be a strange
system indeed if management felt that the operation of the plant was
not to be put into the overall EMS.
Note also that there is no requirement in 14001 to have any form of
scoring or ranking system used in the evaluation.
Hope this helps.
John Pepper
Lead EMS Auditor
Det Norske Veritas QA Ltd
Palace House, 3 Cathedral Street
London SE1 9DE
Tel: +44 171 357 6080
- -----Original Message-----
From: Beth Graves [SMTP:Beth_Graves@p2pays.org]
Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 4:09 PM
To: iso14000@quality.org
Subject: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
Forwarded from one of my co-workers. The question arose as to
whether to
score for significance before or after taking into consideration
control
devices. Thanks for your help.
Beth Graves
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Newman
> Sent: Monday, March 01, 1999 10:56 AM
> To: Beth Graves
> Subject: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
>
> Hello everyone,
>
> Our Division is presently working with a company pursuing ISO 14001
> certification here in NC. They have reached the ranking process and
had
> some questions on how to consider control devices for aspects /
impacts
> ranking. When ranking impacts, do most people consider the current
> control devices or do people exclude them so as to get a true
potential
> impact? Are there advantages to either method? Thanks in advance.
Greg
>
> Greg Newman
> NC Div. of Pollution Prevention & Environmental Assistance
> PO Box 29569
> Raleigh NC 27626-9569
> Ph: (919) 715-6515 Fax: (919) 715-6794
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 2 Mar 1999 20:37:09 -0800
From: "MJ Saarelainen"
Subject: QSBN March 1999
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
- ------=_NextPart_000_045F_01BE64EC.71DB27C0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_001_0460_01BE64EC.71E44F80"
- ------=_NextPart_001_0460_01BE64EC.71E44F80
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
- -----------=20
Please, feel free to forward this newsletter (QSBN March 1999) to =
anybody who might be interested in it. If you have not yet subscribed to =
this newsletter, you can do so by sending your email message to =
waeg@ix.netcom.com with the "Subscription to QSBN" subject line.
- ----------
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
QUALITY SYSTEMS BEHAVIOR NEWSLETTER
March, 1999
By
Markku J. Saarelainen
Revitalizing Quality Systems and Their Development Processes=20
The first Quality Systems Behavior Newsletter (QSBN) was published in =
March, 1994 - five years ago. A lot has happened in the ISO 9000 world =
during these years. One of the most delighting and visible changes has =
been the huge increase in the number of ISO 9000 implementations and =
registrations around the globe. From 1994 to 1997, this increase was =
about 270 %. Another delighting fact is the visible and tangible =
start-up of many ISO 14000 development processes. However, this is just =
the beginning and year 2000 changes in the ISO 9000 series shall enable =
many organizations to transform businesses and specific organizational =
behaviors to totally new levels of excellence.
Is your quality system or its development lacking behind its original =
schedule or specific targets? Don't worry, most likely you are not =
alone. Various organizational factors may cause system development =
processes to slow down and fall behind their original schedules. In some =
cases, the scope of quality development efforts, specific processes or =
systems may be reduced to a small portion of the original scope and =
intent. Basic causes of this counterproductive behavior often include =
financial constraints, inadequate planning or scheduling, inadequate =
resources including human assets, political infighting, lack of =
management commitment to development efforts and many others. In some =
cases, these difficult circumstances may lead to the stagnation of =
either the whole development process or the utilization of the existing =
quality system causing additional internal conflicts and resistance =
within an organization. So the question is "How do you revitalize your =
nonperforming quality system or its development process?
There is no one and only technique that would provide the absolute =
guarantee for all revitalization processes. All organizations are unique =
and tailored processes are needed to start and implement specific =
revitalization activities and tasks. In every circumstance, management =
commitment is essential to ensure adequate resources and necessary =
positive organizational communication. Basically, in each revitalization =
process, the objective is to transform the organization's current state =
(the state of quality systems or processes) to its improved state. This =
state depends on the individual organization, its objectives, its =
competitive environment, management styles and behaviors among many =
other factors. It must be understood that "the state" is most often =
different and unique to specific business situations and revitalization =
processes. So the executive leader must understand its current =
situation, desired future situations, current and required future =
resources and the roadmap of how to take a system or a process to this =
new and improved situation. So the revitalization is a process that =
should be used as a tool to initiate both strategic and tactical changes =
in an organization's current situation so that "the driving direction" =
can be changed to meet future capability and competitive requirements. =
By initiating small consistent changes in organizational behaviors, the =
revitalization leader may initiate major changes in an organization's =
future direction. =20
The revitalization process is a management tool. It is very practical =
and should be used as such. Basically, the process often includes a set =
of development areas, specific intervention tools and techniques in =
these areas and established management commitment to organizational =
changes and transformation. An initial system or process assessment =
should be performed to identify causes of specific nonperformances. =
After the assessment and any subsequential review process, these causes =
should be prioritized based on their criticality and importance. In some =
cases, this prioritizing may be difficult and often subjective since =
many initiated changes often have considerable impact on other =
organizational areas. Once the list of main causes (this could be =
limited to 10-20 main causes) is created these items have to be analyzed =
in detail and optimum strategies, tactics and techniques for eliminating =
or minimizing specific causes should be developed. Specific and =
measurable objectives for each change process of high-priority cause =
areas should be defined for future evaluation and improvement purposes. =
Accountabilities and responsibilities for each change process should be =
assigned to qualified and motivated revitalization leaders. Some of the =
following general actions may be considered during the definition of =
specific change actions: 1. Renewed management commitment including =
monetary and human assets, 2. Specific assessments, audits and reviews, =
3. Implementation improvements, 4. Strategic changes in existing =
processes, 5. Strategic changes in key management areas, 6. The =
integration of existing systems, 7. Improved resources allocation, 8. =
The adoption of new and changed standards, 9. Information Technology =
(IT) and 10. Training and education. It is essential that all =
revitalization processes are continuously evaluated and reviewed and =
additional follow-up actions implemented.
No process will ever be perfect; this is the case with the =
revitalization process too. There are always some problems such as =
resistance to change, which is present in most organizational =
development activities and require some special skill, talent and care =
to lead our people with minimum resistance. However, this resistance is =
not always bad; in fact, sometimes resistance may be your best "friend", =
if you understand it and learn from it. With open communication, =
learning from perceived problems and timely preventive and corrective =
actions, we are able to proactively eliminate or minimize any future =
causes of potential organizational or individual resistance. Often, =
after some detailed analysis, the revitalization leader finds out that =
there is always some rational cause that leads an individual, a group, a =
system or an organizational structure to resist new initiatives, =
developments and changes. And the sooner the leader shall identify these =
causes and initiate preventive actions, the more effective his/her =
transformation process shall be.
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
M. 'Mark' J. Saarelainen
P.O. Box 1672
Roswell, GA 30077
Email: waeg@ix.netcom.com
Home page: http://pweb.netcom.com/~waeg/home.htm
DISCLAIMER: =20
No thought written in this message is a statement=20
of any organization by which I am employed or for=20
which I work. =20
" ... nothing is more certain than change !"
- -----------------------------------------------------------------=20
- ------=_NextPart_001_0460_01BE64EC.71E44F80
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
-----------
Please, feel free to forward this newsletter (QSBN March 1999) to =
anybody=20
who might be interested in it. If you have not yet subscribed to this=20
newsletter, you can do so by sending your email message to
waeg@ix.netcom.com with the=20
"Subscription to QSBN" subject line.
----------
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
QUALITY SYSTEMS BEHAVIOR=20
NEWSLETTER
March, 1999
By
Markku J. Saarelainen
Revitalizing Quality Systems and Their =
Development=20
Processes
The first Quality Systems Behavior Newsletter (QSBN) was published =
in=20
March, 1994 - five years ago. A lot has happened in the ISO 9000 world =
during=20
these years. One of the most delighting and visible changes has been the =
huge=20
increase in the number of ISO 9000 implementations and registrations =
around the=20
globe. From 1994 to 1997, this increase was about 270 %. Another =
delighting fact=20
is the visible and tangible start-up of many ISO 14000 development =
processes.=20
However, this is just the beginning and year 2000 changes in the ISO =
9000 series=20
shall enable many organizations to transform businesses and specific=20
organizational behaviors to totally new levels of excellence.
Is your quality system or its development lacking behind its =
original=20
schedule or specific targets? Don't worry, most likely you are not =
alone.=20
Various organizational factors may cause system development processes to =
slow=20
down and fall behind their original schedules. In some cases, the scope =
of=20
quality development efforts, specific processes or systems may be =
reduced to a=20
small portion of the original scope and intent. Basic causes of this=20
counterproductive behavior often include financial constraints, =
inadequate=20
planning or scheduling, inadequate resources including human assets, =
political=20
infighting, lack of management commitment to development efforts and =
many=20
others. In some cases, these difficult circumstances may lead to the =
stagnation=20
of either the whole development process or the utilization of the =
existing=20
quality system causing additional internal conflicts and resistance =
within an=20
organization. So the question is "How do you revitalize your =
nonperforming=20
quality system or its development process?
There is no one and only technique that would provide the absolute=20
guarantee for all revitalization processes. All organizations are unique =
and=20
tailored processes are needed to start and implement specific =
revitalization=20
activities and tasks. In every circumstance, management commitment is =
essential=20
to ensure adequate resources and necessary positive organizational=20
communication. Basically, in each revitalization process, the objective =
is to=20
transform the organization's current state (the state of quality systems =
or=20
processes) to its improved state. This state depends on the individual=20
organization, its objectives, its competitive environment, management =
styles and=20
behaviors among many other factors. It must be understood that "the =
state" is most often different and unique to specific business =
situations=20
and revitalization processes. So the executive leader must understand =
its=20
current situation, desired future situations, current and required =
future=20
resources and the roadmap of how to take a system or a process to this =
new and=20
improved situation. So the revitalization is a process that should be =
used as a=20
tool to initiate both strategic and tactical changes in an =
organization's=20
current situation so that "the driving direction" can be =
changed to=20
meet future capability and competitive requirements. By initiating small =
consistent changes in organizational behaviors, the revitalization =
leader may=20
initiate major changes in an organization's future direction. =
The revitalization process is a management tool. It is very =
practical and=20
should be used as such. Basically, the process often includes a set of=20
development areas, specific intervention tools and techniques in these =
areas and=20
established management commitment to organizational changes and =
transformation.=20
An initial system or process assessment should be performed to identify =
causes=20
of specific nonperformances. After the assessment and any subsequential =
review=20
process, these causes should be prioritized based on their criticality =
and=20
importance. In some cases, this prioritizing may be difficult and often=20
subjective since many initiated changes often have considerable impact =
on other=20
organizational areas. Once the list of main causes (this could be =
limited to=20
10-20 main causes) is created these items have to be analyzed in detail =
and=20
optimum strategies, tactics and techniques for eliminating or minimizing =
specific causes should be developed. Specific and measurable objectives =
for each=20
change process of high-priority cause areas should be defined for future =
evaluation and improvement purposes. Accountabilities and =
responsibilities for=20
each change process should be assigned to qualified and motivated =
revitalization=20
leaders. Some of the following general actions may be considered during =
the=20
definition of specific change actions: 1. Renewed management commitment=20
including monetary and human assets, 2. Specific assessments, audits and =
reviews, 3. Implementation improvements, 4. Strategic changes in =
existing=20
processes, 5. Strategic changes in key management areas, 6. The =
integration of=20
existing systems, 7. Improved resources allocation, 8. The adoption of =
new and=20
changed standards, 9. Information Technology (IT) and 10. Training and=20
education. It is essential that all revitalization processes are =
continuously=20
evaluated and reviewed and additional follow-up actions =
implemented.
No process will ever be perfect; this is the case with the =
revitalization=20
process too. There are always some problems such as resistance to =
change, which=20
is present in most organizational development activities and require =
some=20
special skill, talent and care to lead our people with minimum =
resistance.=20
However, this resistance is not always bad; in fact, sometimes =
resistance may be=20
your best "friend", if you understand it and learn from it. =
With open=20
communication, learning from perceived problems and timely preventive =
and=20
corrective actions, we are able to proactively eliminate or minimize any =
future=20
causes of potential organizational or individual resistance. Often, =
after some=20
detailed analysis, the revitalization leader finds out that there is =
always some=20
rational cause that leads an individual, a group, a system or an =
organizational=20
structure to resist new initiatives, developments and changes. And the =
sooner=20
the leader shall identify these causes and initiate preventive actions, =
the more=20
effective his/her transformation process shall be.
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
------------------------------------------------------------------
M.=20
'Mark' J. Saarelainen
P.O. Box 1672
Roswell, GA 30077
Email: waeg@ix.netcom.com
Home page: =
http://pweb.netcom.com/~wa=
eg/home.htmDISCLAIMER:
No thought written in this =
message=20
is a statement
of any organization by which I am employed or for =
which I=20
work.
" ... nothing is more certain than change=20
!"
--------------------------------------------------------------=
- ---
- ------=_NextPart_001_0460_01BE64EC.71E44F80--
- ------=_NextPart_000_045F_01BE64EC.71DB27C0
Content-Type: image/gif
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-ID: <045701be652f$7fed9ee0$17199696@MJS.ix.netcom.com>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- ------=_NextPart_000_045F_01BE64EC.71DB27C0--
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 1999 05:35:00 -0500
From: HY BRAVERMAN
Subject: Re: Aspect / Impacts and Controls
Look before you leap, measure twice-cut once.
>From my perspective, the discussions at hand is going in circles, what
is important are the "AS IS" contitions, versus the "TO BE" situations.
To get to the "TO BE" situation, you have to have a baseline information
architecture. To get to that architecture you need the help of the
Information or data processing people and cooperation from those in mail
room all the way to the boardroom.
If you have to know the how much is flowing, at what rate, the to and
from some location, along with all the regulations, rules and policies.
You don't want all that data to be stale and out of date, do you?
The future belongs to the innovators. Environmental data as with any
data, is organic and changing, it needs to be used to gain knowledge
about what needs to be done. Exploitation versus innovation, status quo
versus the future, the use of information determines how your
organization is positioned. The information architecture leverages data
assets to go beyond the immediate bottom line needs, to finding new
things to do and new ways to do them. Gaining competitive advantage is
the result and a new dynamic for the organization.
But how do you get there, how does the organization with its many
departments and fiefdoms talk to eachother as well as sharing
information. That job belongs to the top management and their
committment to the "TO BE" versus the "AS IS" situation.
My 2 cents worth..........
Hy Braverman
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 1999 09:06:10 -0800
From: "MJ Saarelainen"
Subject: QSBN March 1999
- -----------
Please, feel free to forward this newsletter (QSBN March 1999) to anybody
who might be interested in it. If you have not yet subscribed to this
newsletter, you can do so by sending your email message to
waeg@ix.netcom.com with the "Subscription to QSBN" subject line.
- ----------
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
QUALITY SYSTEMS BEHAVIOR NEWSLETTER
March,
1999
By
Markku J. Saarelainen
Revitalizing Quality Systems and Their Development Processes
The first Quality Systems Behavior Newsletter (QSBN) was published in March,
1994 - five years ago. A lot has happened in the ISO 9000 world during these
years. One of the most delighting and visible changes has been the huge
increase in the number of ISO 9000 implementations and registrations around
the globe. From 1994 to 1997, this increase was about 270 %. Another
delighting fact is the visible and tangible start-up of many ISO 14000
development processes. However, this is just the beginning and year 2000
changes in the ISO 9000 series shall enable many organizations to transform
businesses and specific organizational behaviors to totally new levels of
excellence.
Is your quality system or its development lacking behind its original
schedule or specific targets? Don't worry, most likely you are not alone.
Various organizational factors may cause system development processes to
slow down and fall behind their original schedules. In some cases, the scope
of quality development efforts, specific processes or systems may be reduced
to a small portion of the original scope and intent. Basic causes of this
counterproductive behavior often include financial constraints, inadequate
planning or scheduling, inadequate resources including human assets,
political infighting, lack of management commitment to development efforts
and many others. In some cases, these difficult circumstances may lead to
the stagnation of either the whole development process or the utilization of
the existing quality system causing additional internal conflicts and
resistance within an organization. So the question is "How do you revitalize
your nonperforming quality system or its development process?
There is no one and only technique that would provide the absolute guarantee
for all revitalization processes. All organizations are unique and tailored
processes are needed to start and implement specific revitalization
activities and tasks. In every circumstance, management commitment is
essential to ensure adequate resources and necessary positive organizational
communication. Basically, in each revitalization process, the objective is
to transform the organization's current state (the state of quality systems
or processes) to its improved state. This state depends on the individual
organization, its objectives, its competitive environment, management styles
and behaviors among many other factors. It must be understood that "the
state" is most often different and unique to specific business situations
and revitalization processes. So the executive leader must understand its
current situation, desired future situations, current and required future
resources and the roadmap of how to take a system or a process to this new
and improved situation. So the revitalization is a process that should be
used as a tool to initiate both strategic and tactical changes in an
organization's current situation so that "the driving direction" can be
changed to meet future capability and competitive requirements. By
initiating small consistent changes in organizational behaviors, the
revitalization leader may initiate major changes in an organization's future
direction.
The revitalization process is a management tool. It is very practical and
should be used as such. Basically, the process often includes a set of
development areas, specific intervention tools and techniques in these areas
and established management commitment to organizational changes and
transformation. An initial system or process assessment should be performed
to identify causes of specific nonperformances. After the assessment and any
subsequential review process, these causes should be prioritized based on
their criticality and importance. In some cases, this prioritizing may be
difficult and often subjective since many initiated changes often have
considerable impact on other organizational areas. Once the list of main
causes (this could be limited to 10-20 main causes) is created these items
have to be analyzed in detail and optimum strategies, tactics and techniques
for eliminating or minimizing specific causes should be developed. Specific
and measurable objectives for each change process of high-priority cause
areas should be defined for future evaluation and improvement purposes.
Accountabilities and responsibilities for each change process should be
assigned to qualified and motivated revitalization leaders. Some of the
following general actions may be considered during the definition of
specific change actions: 1. Renewed management commitment including monetary
and human assets, 2. Specific assessments, audits and reviews, 3.
Implementation improvements, 4. Strategic changes in existing processes, 5.
Strategic changes in key management areas, 6. The integration of existing
systems, 7. Improved resources allocation, 8. The adoption of new and
changed standards, 9. Information Technology (IT) and 10. Training and
education. It is essential that all revitalization processes are
continuously evaluated and reviewed and additional follow-up actions
implemented.
No process will ever be perfect; this is the case with the revitalization
process too. There are always some problems such as resistance to change,
which is present in most organizational development activities and require
some special skill, talent and care to lead our people with minimum
resistance. However, this resistance is not always bad; in fact, sometimes
resistance may be your best "friend", if you understand it and learn from
it. With open communication, learning from perceived problems and timely
preventive and corrective actions, we are able to proactively eliminate or
minimize any future causes of potential organizational or individual
resistance. Often, after some detailed analysis, the revitalization leader
finds out that there is always some rational cause that leads an individual,
a group, a system or an organizational structure to resist new initiatives,
developments and changes. And the sooner the leader shall identify these
causes and initiate preventive actions, the more effective his/her
transformation process shall be.
Copyright 1999 Markku J. Saarelainen
- ------------------------------------------------------------------
M. 'Mark' J. Saarelainen
P.O. Box 1672
Roswell, GA 30077
Email: waeg@ix.netcom.com
Home page: http://pweb.netcom.com/~waeg/home.htm
DISCLAIMER:
No thought written in this message is a statement
of any organization by which I am employed or for
which I work.
" ... nothing is more certain than change !"
- -----------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 9 Mar 1999 12:02:34 -0500
From: "Robert Clifford, Jr."
Subject: TSDF's
Are there many other TSDF's, beside Stablex Canada, Inc., that have
registered to ISO 14001 ? It seems that the $38-billion solid and
hazardous waste treatment market would consider aligning itself with
environmental management systems and ISO, considering the environmental
aspects of their operations.
Robert Clifford, Jr., Vice President
ISO Environmental Consultancy, Inc.
1103 Glenwood Blvd.
Schenectady NY 12308-2503
518-393-3392
clifford@quality.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 1999 19:44:24 +0100
From: "Pedro Gonçalves"
Subject: Eco-citations
Dear ISO 14K's,
A looooong time ago someone posted on this list a file called
"eco-quotations", environmental citations from many different (known)
people. As anyone kept it? Is the ISO 14k-person who first posted it still
on the list? Can he/she post it again or send it directly to me?
I'm doing a brochure on the necessity of Environmental Management and some
quotations from several "personalities" would be interesting.
Thanks a lot.
Pedro Gonçalves
catarinos@mail.telepac.pt
------------------------------
End of iso14000-digest V2 #49
*****************************