Environmental Responsibility Policy

Transcription

1 SHRM SURVEY BRIEF Green Workplace Green Workplace is defi ned as a workplace that is environmentally sensitive, resource effi cient and socially responsible. Key Findings» One-half of HR professionals indicated that their organizations have a formal or informal environmental responsibility policy» The top three environmentally responsible practices reported by HR professionals were encouraging employees to work more environmentally friendly, offering recycling programs for offi ce products and donating/discounting used furniture/supplies» Nearly seven out of ten HR professionals reported contribution to society as the key driver of their environmentally responsible program A Publication of the Society for Human Resource Management The impact of our daily activities on the environment and the desire to go green has expanded from just individuals to organizations. More organizations are volunteering to operate in a more environmentally responsible way. Local municipalities are encouraging businesses to become greener by offering incentives. In the near future, being green could become the norm. In September 2007, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) conducted the SHRM 2007 Green Workplace Survey to examine environmentally responsible practices from the perspective of HR professionals and employees. This survey brief explores types of practices organizations have in place, human resource professionals and employees perceptions of their organizations practices, and HR professionals role in their organizations environmentally friendly programs. Environmental Responsibility Policy Overall 50 percent of HR professionals reported that their organization had a formal (written) or informal environmental responsibility policy. Seven percent indicated that although their organization did not have a policy, they plan to establish a policy in the next 12 months. Fortythree percent reported that their organization had no policy and do not plan to have one in the next 12 months. These data are represented in Figure 1. Environmentally Responsible Practices To gain a better understanding of environmentally responsible practices, HR professionals were asked to identify the environmentally responsible practices in which their organizations participated. HR professionals indicated that encouraging employees to be more environmentally friendly in the workplace was the top practice for their organizations. This means that organizations are encouraging their employees to perform activities such as making double-sided photocopies, Figure 1 Environmental Responsibility Policy (by HR Professionals) Yes, we have a formal policy 22% Yes, we have an informal policy 28% No, we do not have a policy and we do not plan to 43% Note: HR professionals who indicated not sure were excluded from this analysis. (n = 391) No, we do not have a formal or informal policy but we plan to in the next 12 months 7% powering down computers after a few minutes of inactivity, using energy-efficient bulbs for desk lamps, ensuring blinds are lowered in the summer to conserve energy, etc. Employees were asked which environmentally responsible practices they thought were most important for organizations to carry out. They reported that donating/discounting used office furniture/supplies to employees or local charity was the top environmentally responsible practice. The top 10 environmentally responsible practices by HR professionals and employees are depicted in Tables 1a and 1b respectively. Demonstrating Commitment to Environmental Responsibility Among HR professionals who reported that their organizations had formal or informal environmental responsibility policies, 63 percent indicated their organizations demonstrated their commitment to environmental responsibility by including their environmental responsibility efforts in their organizations newsletters and/or publications. Other demonstrations of commit-

2 2 ment to environmental responsibility by organizations included environmental responsibility as part of their organizations stated goals (4) and mission/vision (38%). HR professionals employed by large-staff-sized (76%) and medium-staffsized organizations (71%) were more likely to report that environmentally responsible efforts are included in their organization s newsletters and/or other publications than those employed by small-staff-sized organizations (26%). These findings are shown in Table 2. Drivers and Barriers of Environmentally Responsible Programs HR professionals and employees were asked to select their top three drivers of environmentally responsible programs for organizations. Almost seven out of ten HR professionals and about one third of employees reported contribution to society as the top driver of environmentally responsible programs. HR professionals and employees differed in their perceptions for their second and third drivers of environmentally responsible programs. HR professionals more frequently perceived environmental considerations and economic considerations among the top drivers. Employees perceived public relations strategy and health and safety considerations among the top three drivers. These drivers are listed in Tables 3a and 3b. Table 1a Top 10 Environmentally Responsible Practices (by HR professionals) Encouraging employees to work more environmentally friendly (e.g., by making double-sided photocopies, powering down computers after few minutes of inactivity, using energy-effi cient bulbs for desk lamps, ensuring blinds are lowered in the summer to conserve energy) Offering recycling program for offi ce products (e.g., paper, Styrofoam, plastic, glass, cans) Donating/discounting used offi ce furniture/ supplies to employees or local charity (e.g., set up a re-use area where employees can take unneeded supplies/materials rather than throwing them away and encourage staff to shop there) Using energy effi cient lighting systems and equipment (e.g., occupancy sensors, ENERGY STAR equipment, changing from desktops to laptops) (n = 195) 83% 83% 73% 66% Installing automatic shutoff for equipment 63% Buying or leasing refurbished goods (e.g., refurbished toner cartridges; copiers, printers, fax machines, retread tires, re-refi ned oil) 59% Promoting walking, biking, taking public transit 59% Partnering with environmentally friendly suppliers/companies Minimizing pollution (e.g., emissions to air/water from your production) Participating in or sponsoring projects/events in the community to improve the environment (e.g., a trash pick-up day, plant-a-tree day, fundraiser for local nature preserve) 55% 53% Note: Percentages do not total 10 due to multiple response options. Table 1b Top 10 Environmentally Responsible Practices (by Employees) Donating/discounting used offi ce furniture/ supplies to employees or local charity (e.g., set up a re-use area where employees can take unneeded supplies/materials rather than throwing them away and encourage staff to shop there) Promoting walking, biking, taking public transit Using energy effi cient lighting systems and equipment (e.g., occupancy sensors, ENERGY STAR equipment, changing from desktops to laptops) Offering recycling program for offi ce products (e.g., paper, Styrofoam, plastic, glass, cans) Encouraging employees to work more environmentally friendly (e.g., by making double-sided photocopies, powering down computers after few minutes of inactivity, using energy-effi cient bulbs for desk lamps, ensuring blinds are lowered in the summer to conserve energy) Encouraging/promoting/providing carpooling for employees Using recycled materials in the construction or remodeling of your building Offering recycling program for selected personal products (e.g., cell phones) Minimizing water consumption by using water-conserving plumbing fi xtures (e.g., using faucet aerators, low fl ow toilets) (n = 483) 53% 49% 43% 39% 36% 36% 25% 22% 21% Installing automatic shutoff for equipment Note: Percentages do not total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents were asked to select their top fi ve choices. Table 2 Demonstrating Commitment to Environmental Responsibility by Organization Staff Size (by HR professionals) What are the barriers to environmentally responsible programs? HR professionals and employees had similar perceptions on the top three. Cost of implementing environmentally responsible programs was reported by more than eight out of ten HR professionals (85%) and 78 percent of employees as the main barrier. The second and third most frequently reported barriers by both HR professionals and employees were cost of maintaining programs and lack of support from management. These data are depicted in Tables 4a and 4b. Environmentally responsible efforts are included in the organization s newsletters/ other publications Environmental responsibility is part of the organization s stated goals Environmental responsibility commitment is included in the organization s mission/vision Environmentally responsible efforts are covered in the organization s annual report Issues a report dedicated exclusively to environmental responsibility Overall (n = 116) Small (1-99 employees) (n = 19) Medium ( employees) (n = 48) Large (500 or more employees) (n = 34) Differences by organization staff size 63% 26% 71% 76% Medium>Small Large>Small 4 47% 33% 38% 38% 37% 35% 35% 23% 21% 17% 32% 1 5% 8% 9% Other 1 16% 1 6% Note: Data sorted in descending order by overall data. The sample sizes and percentages shown are based on the actual number of respondents who provided organization staff size and information about participation in environmental responsibility practices. Blank cells in the last column indicate that no statistically significant differences were found. Percentages do not total 10 due to multiple response options.

3 3 Table 3a Drivers of Environmentally Responsible Programs (by HR professionals) Table 3b Drivers of Environmentally Responsible Programs (by Employees) Table 5 Positive Outcomes of Environmentally Responsible Program Contribution to society (i.e., good corporate citizenship, ethical considerations) (n = 333) 69% Environmental considerations 53% Contribution to society (i.e., good corporate citizenship, ethical considerations) (n = 490) 32% Public relations strategy 26% Improved employee morale HR Professionals (n = 133) Employees (n = 481) 44% 36% Economic considerations (i.e., saving money on operating costs) 46% Health and safety considerations 34% Employee activism 24% Health and safety considerations 24% Environmental considerations 22% Economic considerations (i.e., saving money on operating costs) Stronger public image Increased consumer/customer confi dence/choice 42% 67% 1 Public relations strategy 23% Local/Federal regulations 18% Consumer activism/grassroots pressure 16% Competitve advantage 15% Competitve advantage 17% Local/Federal regulations 18% Local/Federal incentives 11% Consumer activism/grassroots pressure 1 Positive fi nancial bottom line as a result of your organization s environmentally responsible program 19% 12% Local/Federal incentives 11% Local/Federal proactive initiatives 5% Market share improvement 4% Employee activism 1 Local/Federal proactive initiatives 3% Market share improvement 3% Increased employee loyalty Increased brand recognition 16% 12% 16% 11% Shareholder activism 3% total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents Shareholder activism 3% total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents Position as an employer of choice Gained competitive advantage 14% 13% 13% 23% Increased workforce productivity 6% 8% Table 4a Barriers to Environmentally Responsible Programs (by HR professionals) Table 4b Barriers to Environmentally Responsible Programs (by Employees) Increased employee retention Increased recruitment of top employees 3% 4% 2% 3% (n = 333) Cost of implementing programs 85% Cost of maintaining programs 74% Lack of support by management 43% Lack of support by employees 25% Concerns about workplace ineffi ciency Lack of governmental support 16% Concern organization will be held at a higher standard than competitors if there are lapses in organization s stated values 5% total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents Positive Outcomes of Environmentally Responsible Programs HR professionals and employees again had similar perceptions about the top three positive outcomes of their organization s environmentally responsible program, although they ordered them slightly differently. These outcomes are depicted in Table 5. HR professionals indicated that improved employee morale (44%) was the top positive outcome for their organizations environmentally responsible program. This is not (n = 490) Cost of implementing programs 78% Cost of maintaining programs 6 Lack of support by management 38% Lack of support by employees 22% Lack of governmental support 17% Concerns about workplace ineffi ciency 16% Concern organization will be held at a higher standard than competitors if there are lapses in organization s stated values 5% total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents surprising, because 61 percent of employees whose organization participated in environmentally friendly practices reported that they are very likely or likely to stay with their current organization because of their organization s environmentally responsible program (Figure 2). Employees reported strong public image (67%) as the top positive outcome of environmentally responsible programs for organizations. Note: Data sorted in descending order by HR professional data. Percentages do not total 10 due to multiple response options. Respondents were asked to select their top three choices. HR professionals in small organizations were more likely than those in medium or large organizations to indicate that environmentally responsible programs improved employee morale. Nancy C. Nelson, SPHR, member of SHRM s Corporate Social Responsibility Expertise Panel and director of HRProse, LLC, reports, I am seeing a real trend among small companies I work with: they want to adopt green business practices, separate from any compliance requirement that may come into play. This suggests that incorporating green practices into the workplace may be more conducive at smaller organizations and a way to bring employees together to work toward a common cause.

4 4 Figure 2 Likelihood of Staying at Current Organization as Result of Organization s Environmentally Responsible Program (by Employees) (n = 168) Table 6 Responsible for Creating and Implementing Environmentally Responsible Program (by HR professionals) Creating (n = 129) Implementing (n = 126) 4 39% Senior Management Team 32% 31% Employee taskforce/committee 27% 19% 21% 22% CEO/President 15% 4% Administrative Services 12% 14% 1 Unlikely Note: Employees whose organization did not participate in environmentally friendly practices were excluded. Percentages do not total 10 due to rounding likely HR Professionals Role in the Green Workplace According to 43 percent of HR professionals, HR departments were directly involved in their organizations environmentally responsible program. Although HR was directly involved, the creation and implementation of environmentally responsible programs were perceived by HR professionals to be the responsibility of the Likely Very likely Figure 3 Direct Involvement of HR in Environmentally Responsible Program (by HR professionals) 43% Yes Note: Respondents whose organization did not have environmentally responsible policy were excluded. 57% No (n = 128) senior management team of their organizations. These data are shown in Figure 3 and Table 6. HR 11% 18% Board of Directors 4% 1% CFO 2% 1% CSO (Chief Sustainability Offi cer) Outside consultant 2% 2% 2% Note: Data sorted in descending order by Creating column. Respondents whose organization did not have environmentally responsible policy were excluded. Percentages do not total 10 due to rounding. How interested are organizations without an environmentally responsible program in adopting one? About one-third of HR professionals (36%) believed their organization would be very interested or somewhat interested in adopting an environmentally responsible program. However, when employees whose organizations did not have environmentally responsible program were asked how important it was for their organization to begin to do so, nearly three quarters (73%) of employees felt that it was very important or somewhat important. Gerlinde Herrmann, CHRP, member of SHRM s Corporate Social Responsibility Expertise Panel and president, The Herrmann Group, believes that green/csr (corporate social responsibility) initiatives are a selling feature for many of the younger generation. She added, However, these potential employees check the background of organizations and talk with employees or past employees to find out for themselves whether the green/csr messaging delivers on its promise. She warns, Better to have genuine green/csr initiatives which are grassroots and inexpensive than to have a massive promo campaign involving significant funding it s the realness that is the selling feature. HR professionals are in a position to leverage their organizations environmentally responsible program as an

5 5 Figure 4 Organizations Interested in Adopting Environmentally Responsible Program (by HR professionals) 49% (n = 167) This research shows improved employee morale as one of the positive outcomes of environmentally responsible programs. A greener workplace can mean productive and healthy employees and strengthen an organization s financial bottom line through operating efficiencies and innovations. Victoria Johnson, MS, PHR, member of SHRM s Corporate Social Responsibility Expertise Panel and Human Resources Director of Fellowship House, believes that it is possible for every organization to provide some level of environmentally responsible practices % 28% 8% Endnote 1 The SHRM 2007 Corporate Social Responsibility Pilot Study Report is available free to all SHRM members on the Survey Program page of the SHRM web site at Not at all interested Note: Percentages do not total 10 due to rounding. Respondents whose organizations have environmentally responsible program were excluded. Slightly interested interested Figure 5 Importance of Environmentally Responsible Organization (by Employees) 4 1 8% 18% Very interested 23% (n = 331) Methodology HR Professional Sample In September 2007, the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) conducted a survey of HR professionals and employees about environmentally responsible programs in their organizations (the survey instrument is available upon request by contacting the SHRM Survey Program at surveys@shrm. org or by phone at ). An that included a link to the online survey was sent to 3,000 SHRM members located in the United States. Overall, 2,757 s were received and 429 members responded, yielding a response rate of 16%. The survey was accessible for two weeks. Two reminders were sent to nonrespondents in an effort to increase response rates. Very unimportant unimportant additional recruiting/retention tool because of the increasing competition for talent. These data are depicted in Figures 4 and 5. Media focus on global warming and corporate social responsibility could be encouraging organizations to re-think some of their business operations. According to the SHRM 2007 Corporate Social Responsibility Pilot Study Report 1, contribution to society and environmental considerations were among the drivers of organizations corporate social important Very important responsibility programs. The findings of this survey also show contribution to society as a top driver of environmentally responsible programs. Employee Sample A sample of 504 employees was randomly selected by an outside survey research organization s Web-enabled employee panel, to complete the 2007 Green Workplace Online Survey over a period of six days. The employee panel is based on a random sample of the entire U.S. telephone population. All panelist households are provided with a custom-designed Web device so that they can complete surveys online. A response rate of 57% was achieved. All respondents were employed either full time or part time.

6 6 Project Team Project leader: Justina Victor, survey research specialist Project contributors: Evren Esen, manager, survey program; Steve Williams, Ph.D., SPHR, director, research External reviewers and contributors: SHRM Corporate Social Responsibility Special Expertise Panel Members: Teresa A. Bailey; Lin L. Blair, SPHR; Sarah Cairns; Scott Freehafer, SPHR; Gerlinde Herrmann, CHRP; Mark Hough; Victoria Johnson, MS, PHR; Nancy C. Nelson, SPHR; Tareyece Scoggin-Aranda; Nancy Tallent, SPHR Editing: Courtney Cornelius, copy editor Design: Kristen Cox, graphic designer Production: Bonnie Claggett, production traffic specialist About SHRM The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) is the world s largest association devoted to human resource management. The Society serves the needs of HR professionals and advances the interests of the HR profession. Founded in 1948, SHRM has more than 225,000 members in over 125 countries and more than 575 affi liated chapters. Visit Disclaimer This summary is published by the Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM). All content is for informational purposes only and is not to be construed as a guaranteed outcome. The Society for Human Resource Management cannot accept responsibility for any errors or omissions or any liability resulting from the use or misuse of any such information. January 2008 Society for Human Resource Management. All rights reserved