International Journal of Quality & Reliability ManagementChallenges in implementing a functional ISO 14001 environmental management systemCory Searcy Oguz Morali Stanislav Karapetrovic Kristine Wichuk Daryl McCartney Sheldon McLeod DonFraser

Article information:To cite this document:Cory Searcy Oguz Morali Stanislav Karapetrovic Kristine Wichuk Daryl McCartney Sheldon McLeod DonFraser, (2012),"Challenges in implementing a functional ISO 14001 environmental management system",International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 29 Iss 7 pp. 779 - 796Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656711211258526

Downloaded on: 19 March 2015, At: 17:04 (PT)References: this document contains references to 68 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 1260 times since 2012*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Evangelos L. Psomas, Christos V. Fotopoulos, Dimitrios P. Kafetzopoulos, (2011),"Motives,difficulties and benefits in implementing the ISO 14001 Environmental Management System",Management of Environmental Quality: An International Journal, Vol. 22 Iss 4 pp. 502-521 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14777831111136090Henk J. de Vries, Deniz K. Bayramoglu, Ton van der Wiele, (2012),"Business and environmental impact ofISO 14001", International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 29 Iss 4 pp. 425-435 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02656711211224866Daniel Prajogo, Ailie K.Y. Tang, Kee-Hung Lai, (2014),"The diffusion of environmental managementsystem and its effect on environmental management practices", International Journal of Operations &Production Management, Vol. 34 Iss 5 pp. 565-585 http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/IJOPM-10-2012-0448

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 434496 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Challenges in implementinga functional ISO 14001

environmentalmanagement system

Cory SearcyDepartment of Mechanical and Industrial Engineering, Ryerson University,

Toronto, Canada

Oguz MoraliEnvironmental Applied Science and Management, Ryerson University,

Toronto, Canada

Stanislav KarapetrovicDepartment of Mechanical Engineering, University of Alberta,

Edmonton, Canada

Kristine Wichuk and Daryl McCartneyDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Alberta,

Edmonton, Canada

Sheldon McLeodSLMcLeod Consulting, Winnipeg, Canada, and

Don FraserDevRo Consulting, London, Canada

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to present the key findings of a colloquium on ISO 14001. Thecolloquium focused on three key areas: critical loops and synergies among management systemelements, the full spectrum of management system auditing, and integrating management systems.

Design/methodology/approach A total of 40 Canadian experts on environmental managementsystems from a wide variety of sectors participated in the colloquium.

Findings The colloquium provided insights into implementation issues around the three key areasnoted above. The colloquium focused on discussing issues associated with corrective and preventiveaction, objectives and targets, internal and external auditing, and integrating change into managementsystems. The issues are presented in detail in the paper.

Originality/value The participants in the colloquium believed that the findings will be of interestto both practitioners and academics in environmental management systems. The findings will also beof interest to practitioners and academics in quality and other standardized management systems.

Keywords Environmental management systems, ISO 14001, Auditing,Integrated management systems, Management system standards, Management techniques, Canada

Paper type Research paper

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0265-671X.htm

An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 14th International Conference on ISO 9000and Total Quality Management (ICIT) held in Scranton, Pennsylvania, USA in April 2010.

Environmentalmanagement

system

779

Received 13 July 2010Revised 21 March 2011Accepted 17 May 2011

International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management

Vol. 29 No. 7, 2012pp. 779-796

q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0265-671X

DOI 10.1108/02656711211258526

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

1. IntroductionManagement system standards (MSSs) have been developed to help address stakeholderneeds with respect to quality (e.g. based on the ISO 9001 standard), the environment(e.g. ISO 14001), safety (e.g. OHSAS 18001), and social accountability (e.g. SA 8000),among others. However, many questions remain with respect to the effectiveimplementation of these standards. Examples include establishing objectives andtargets linked to the business planning process, developing an effective auditingprogram that builds on the strengths of both internal and external audits, and effectivelyintegrating the organizations management systems (MSs) (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003;McDonald et al., 2003; Wasche and Sciortino, 2007).

This paper seeks to explore the key challenges associated with implementing one ofthe worlds most popular MSSs: ISO 14001 for environmental management systems(EMSs). ISO 14001 has been the subject of considerable research. Much of the earlierliterature focused on the motivations for implementing the standard (Morrow andRondinelli, 2002; Rondinelli and Vastag, 2000). More recently, many empirical studieshave been conducted that focus on the impacts of the standard (Poksinska et al., 2003;Schylander and Martinuzzi, 2007; Turk, 2009) and on the integration of an ISO 14001EMS into organizational MSs (Bernardo et al., 2009; Karapetrovic and Casadesus,2009). These important contributions notwithstanding, there is a need for furtherresearch on the challenges in implementing a functional ISO 14001 EMS.

In recognition of these challenges, a colloquium focusing on implementing ISO 14001in Canada was held. There have been few papers that specifically focus on the impact ofthe ISO 14001 standard in Canada (Yiridoe et al., 2003; Berthelot et al., 2003; Bronson andNoble, 2006; Barla, 2007). The colloquium was organized to share knowledge andexperiences and to develop perspectives on key issues related to ISO 14001. Building onthe challenges described above, the focus of the colloquium was on three key areas:

(1) critical loops and synergies among MS elements;

(2) the full spectrum of MS auditing; and

(3) integrating MSs.

To address these issues, 40 Canadian experts on EMSs were invited to participate inthe colloquium. The participants were drawn from a broad range of sectors, includingregistrars, consultancies, electrical utilities, consumer organizations, industryassociations, mining, government, standards bodies, oil and gas industries, academicinstitutions, waste management, and water and wastewater management.

The purpose of this paper is to present the key findings of the colloquium. Theremainder of the paper is organized into four sections. First, a review of literature onISO 14001, auditing of MSs, and integration of MSs is presented. Second, a descriptionof the methodology used in the research is provided. These sections provide the contextneeded for the next section, which focuses on the findings of the colloquium. Finally,the paper finishes with a brief summary, conclusion, and recommendations for furtherresearch. It is anticipated that the findings will be of interest to both practitioners andacademics in environmental, quality and other standardized MSs.

2. Literature surveyThe literature survey is organized into three sections. The first section provides a briefreview of the key literature published on ISO 14001. The second section focuses

IJQRM29,7

780

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

on the key challenges associated with auditing a standardized MS. The third sectioncenters on a review of literature on integrated management systems (IMSs). In allcases, focus is on literature published since the 1996 release of the original version ofthe ISO 14001 standard.

2.1 ISO 14001 environmental management systemsAs of December 31, 2009, 223,149 organizations had been issued ISO 14001 certificatesin 155 countries (ISO, 2010). ISO 14001 has been the subject of extensive research. Theearly studies generally focused on the motivations for adopting the standard. Thesemotivations are frequently cited as improving environmental performance, integratingpollution prevention programs, managing environmental risks, improving employeeenvironmental awareness, conforming to contractual specifications, gaining marketaccess and competitive advantage, reinforcing environmental strategy, improvingefficiency of operations, improving economic performance, enhancing relationshipswith stakeholder groups, and establishing a strong image of corporate responsibility,among others (Pouliot, 1996; Georgiadou and Tsiotras, 1998; Poksinska et al., 2003;Singh and Perry, 2000; Rondinelli and Vastag, 2000; Florida and Davidson, 2001;Roy et al., 2001; Bansal and Hunter, 2003; Liyin et al., 2006). It is recognized that thecosts and benefits associated with implementing the standard vary broadly. This is inpart due to the fact that the standard provides a high-level of flexibility to develop,integrate, and implement an EMS that is in alignment with an organizations distinctmanagement and operational systems, characteristics, location, and risk tolerance(Morrow and Rondinelli, 2002; Klaver and Jonker, 1998; Benito and Gonzalez-Benito,2005). Notwithstanding the inherent difficulties in determining the costs and benefits ofimplementing the standard, several authors highlight that the costs are generallyoutweighed by the benefits (Chin et al., 1999; Bansal and Bogner, 2002; Bronson andNoble, 2006; Ann et al., 2006; Schylander and Martinuzzi, 2007).

More recent research on ISO 14001 has focused on the challenges in adopting andimplementing an ISO 14001 EMS in a wide range of organizations. These challengesinclude increased time and costs associated with documentation, employee training,information acquisition, lack of management and employee involvement, disclosureof confidential information to third parties, and lack of expertise in administrating thesystem. As a number of authors have highlighted, these challenges may be moresignificant in small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) due to their limitedresources (Van der Veldt, 1997; Berthelot et al., 2003; Strachan et al., 2003; Zutshi andSohal, 2005). Another major obstacle is the lack of detailed guidance in the standardon implementation, which has resulted in procedures that are not clear andreproducible (Pojasek, 2008; Poder, 2006). Despite these challenges, relatively fewpublications have focused on how to address the critical loops and synergies amongMS elements.

2.2 Auditing management systemsAudits are a vital component of any MSS. The ISO 14001 standard (ISO, 2004) definesan internal audit as a:

[. . .] systematic, independent, and documented process for obtaining audit evidence andevaluating it objectively to determine the extent to which the environmental managementsystem audit criteria set by the organization are fulfilled (clause 3.14).

Environmentalmanagement

system

781

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

The audit process enables continuous improvement in a MS because it identifiesnon-conformities, highlights opportunities for improvement, and documents how theMS encourages positive practices (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 2001; Kraus and Platkus,2007; Esposito, 2009). Although limited, the literature illustrates how individual MSaudits help improve overall business performance (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 2000b;Rusjan, 2010). However, many authors have moved beyond a focus on auditingindividual MS standards to the audit of IMSs. This is important, given that a recentstudy based on a survey of 435 organizations registered to both ISO 9001:2000 and ISO14001:2004 showed that the majority integrated their internal and external audits atvarious levels (Bernardo et al., 2009). However, the inadequacy of integrated auditmethodologies has been cited as a major challenge to IMS implementation by severalauthors (McDonald et al., 2003; Von Ahsen and Funck, 2001a; Matias and Coelho, 2002).

Much of the research on integrated audits has focused on the integrated auditsof quality, health and safety, and EMSs. For example, Karapetrovic and Willborn(1998a) presented differences in the audit standards available at the time and identifiedseveral best audit practices for integrated audits. Karapetrovic and Willborn (2000a)introduced the concept of a generic audit based on quality, environmental, andaccounting audit principles. Kraus and Grosskopf (2008) depict several different typesof integrated audits and suggest some implementation guidelines. The literaturehighlights that the level of integration and implementation of MS audits varies greatly(Bernardo et al., 2010).

A number of benefits associated with integrating MS audits have been highlightedin the literature, including increased operational efficiencies, establishment of auditorcompetence for different MS standards, and cost savings as a result of optimizedresource allocation (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 2000a; Douglas and Glen, 2000; Zutshiand Sohal, 2005; Salomone, 2008; Bernardo et al., 2010). Moreover, harmonization ofaudits may facilitate the alignment of internal systems and lead to a more effective useof existing MSSs (Beckmerhagen et al., 2003). Beckmerhagen et al. (2003) discuss howaudits can provide an excellent basis for MS integration efforts by generatingimportant findings, insights, and recommendations.

2.3 Integrating management systemsThe theory and practice of IMS has arisen from the need to address a variety ofstakeholder needs while efficiently employing organizational resources (Asif et al.,2009; Karapetrovic, 2003; Salomone, 2008). One common definition of an IMS is a:

[. . .] set of interconnected processes that share a pool of human, information, material,infrastructure, and financial resources in order to achieve a composite of goals related to thesatisfaction of a variety of stakeholders (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 1998b).

IMS has been extensively discussed in the literature. Early research on IMS focused on therationale for integrating MSs. The published benefits of employing an IMS approachinclude cost savings as a result of increased operational efficiencies, enhanced strategicstructure and direction, improved communication across the organization, increasedemployee motivation, improved internal management methods and cross-functionalteamwork, better company image, and enhanced stakeholder relations (Wilkinson andDale, 1999; Griffith and Bhutto, 2009; Brio et al., 2001; Scipioni et al., 2001; Karapetrovic,2003; McDonald et al., 2003; Zutshi and Sohal, 2005; Pojasek, 2008; Pheng and Pong, 2003).

IJQRM29,7

782

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

As Mackau (2003) and Douglas and Glen (2000) have discussed, SMEs may see particularbenefit in increased employee motivation, reduced paperwork, and reduced audit times.

A number of case studies highlight the potential challenges and obstaclesaccompanying the integration of different MSs. Some of the key challenges cited in theliterature include a high degree of bureaucracy, competing interests between differentbusiness units, high cost and resource demand, lack of transparency of standards,inadequate audit methodologies, lack of suitable implementation tools, difficultyfinding competent personnel, resistance to change by employees, and less-than-optimalresource allocation (Von Ahsen and Funck, 2001a; Matias and Coelho, 2002; Zutshi andSohal, 2005; Salomone, 2008; Asif et al., 2009).

Several papers have also focused on different methodological approaches to IMS.Asif et al. (2009) provides a comprehensive summary of methodologies designedto facilitate integration of MSs. These include approaches based on the sequenceof integration (Karapetrovic and Willborn, 1998a; Labodova, 2004), the systemsapproach to integration ( Jonker and Karapetrovic, 2004; Karapetrovic and Jonker, 2003;Karapetrovic and Willborn, 1998b), the stepwise approach to organizing an IMS(Beckmerhagen et al., 2003; Wilkinson and Dale, 1999), the integration at varioushierarchical levels ( Jorgensen et al., 2006; Zeng et al., 2007), integration through a totalquality approach (Wilkinson and Dale, 2001), and enhancing the MS standards(Rocha et al., 2007). Asif et al. (2009) also present their own methodology, based onprocess embedded design of IMS. Organizations can implement any one of the MSintegration design strategies individually, or in combination, depending on their size,industry, resource capabilities, and culture. Top managements commitment andleadership skills are among the key factors to successful implementation (Zutshi andSohal, 2005; Douglas and Glen, 2000). Imperative to any strategy execution is thealignment of the three processes of people, strategy, and operations. Consequently,leaders need to master the individual processes and the way they work synergistically.They are the foundation for the discipline of conceiving and executing a strategy thatdifferentiates an organization from its competitors (Bossidy and Charan, 2002).

Relatively little research has specifically focused on integrating an ISO 14001 EMSwithin an IMS. As Von Ahsen and Funck (2001b) explain, a major success factor incorporate environmental performance is the strategic priority of environmentalprotection within the organization, not the implementation of an isolated EMS or anIMS. With regard to the variables of human resources, goals, documentation, andprocedures, Bernardo et al. (2009) provide empirical evidence that not all organizationsintegrate an ISO 14001 EMS with other MSs in the same way. Similarly, a surveycarried out by Karapetrovic and Casadesus (2009) in 176 organizations registered toboth of the ISO 14001:2004 and ISO 9001:2000 standards reveal that organizations haveapproached EMS implementation with other MSs in a number of different ways.

Research on the integration of sustainability and corporate social responsibility(CSR) with existing MSs through an IMS approach is also limited. Rocha et al. (2007)emphasize a systems approach to viewing an IMS and provide a framework for theintegration of sustainable development into mainstream business systems. Baumgartner(2003) introduces MSs as administrative tools for managing environmental, quality,and risk aspects of sustainable development implementation in businesses.MacDonald (2005) asserts that while a useful start, MSs such as ISO 14001 donot support an organization in strategic planning of their sustainability initiatives.

Environmentalmanagement

system

783

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

To address this issue, MacDonald proposes a strategic planning framework for ISO14001 to help organizations navigate a broad range of approaches, tools, frameworks,principles, strategies, and processes. Oskarsson and Von Malmborg (2005) questionwhether standardized MSs, integrated or not, are able to address corporate sustainabledevelopment. They found that existing MSs are not sufficient to realize a proactiveapproach to management within the framework of sustainable development. Jorgensen(2008) proposes a product-oriented and stakeholder-focused approach to MS integrationwhile highlighting the need for changes in the organization of society and lifestyles topromote corporate sustainable management practices. Despite this research, questionsremain on how to integrate sustainability and CSR with existing MSs.

3. MethodologyThe colloquium was organized by a committee of two university professors and threeprivate consultants. Details on the participants are presented in Table I. The details weregathered from questionnaires completed at the colloquium. As Table I illustrates, theparticipants were specifically selected to ensure a broad range of perspectives.The majority of the participants were EMS managers or EMS coordinators. Theseindividuals represented organizations from a number of different sectors, includingelectric utilities, mining, oil and gas, water utilities, consumer organizations, andmunicipal governments. Consultants, auditors, registrars, standards developers, andacademics focusing on EMS also participated in the colloquium.

The colloquium focused on discussions around the three main topics listed in Table II.The topics were briefly introduced to the participants in a package provided in advanceof the colloquium. For each of the three main topics, there were multiple sub-topicsto help focus the discussion. At the start of each sub-topic, two seeders tookapproximately 5 minutes to share some preliminary thoughts on the topic. After seeding,attendees took part in small group discussions with five or six participants per table.

Sector representeda Size of organization Sector represented Size of organization

Auditing 400 Electrical utility 5,000Auditing N/A Energy service provider 5,000Auditing/industryassociation

N/A Industry association 65

Auditing/registrar 100 Mining 1,500Consulting 1 Municipal government 12,000-14,000Consulting Micro Municipal structure 200Consulting 3 National standard system 100Consumer organization 75 Oil and gas 3,500Electrical utility 300-500 University 33,000Electrical utility 4,500 University 46,000Electrical utility 1,500 Waste management 650Electrical utility 2,800 Waste management 4,000-5,000Electrical utility 5,500 Water and wastewater

utility610

Notes: aIn some cases, multiple participants from the same organization attended; in such cases, thereis only a single entry for that organization in the table; bone attendee did not fill out the statistics form,so this persons data is missing from the table

Table I.Participants inthe colloquium

IJQRM29,7

784

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Top

icD

escr

ipti

on

Top

ic1

.C

riti

cal

loop

san

dsy

ner

gie

sam

ong

man

agem

ent

syst

emel

emen

ts

Th

em

anag

emen

tsy

stem

(MS

)m

odel

isre

pre

sen

ted

asa

seri

esof

dis

cree

tel

emen

ts.

Inre

alit

y,

the

elem

ents

are

hig

hly

inte

rrel

ated

,an

dsh

ould

not

be

vie

wed

as,n

orex

pec

ted

toac

tas

,mu

tual

lyex

clu

siv

e.T

wo

ofth

eel

emen

ts(n

on-c

onfo

rmit

ies

(NC

s)an

dco

rrec

tiv

ean

dp

rev

enti

ve

acti

ons

(CA

PA

s),o

non

eh

and

,an

dob

ject

ives

,tar

get

san

dp

rog

ram

s,on

the

oth

er)h

ave

an

um

ber

ofco

nn

ecti

ons

and

syn

erg

ies

that

are

not

wel

lre

cog

niz

ed,

nor

emp

loy

edto

the

max

imu

mad

van

tag

efo

rri

skco

ntr

olA

tth

eou

tset

,nei

ther

ofth

ese

elem

ents

isty

pic

ally

dev

elop

edan

dim

ple

men

ted

asad

equ

atel

yan

def

fect

ivel

yas

each

can

be.

As

are

sult

,m

any

org

aniz

atio

ns

are

fail

ing

tog

etth

eb

enefi

tsof

ap

rop

erly

des

ign

edan

dim

ple

men

ted

NC

and

CA

PA

pro

cess

Th

ein

itia

lta

sk,i

nth

isse

ssio

n,w

ill

be

toex

plo

reth

isis

sue,

and

then

sub

seq

uen

tly

exp

lore

the

crit

ical

loop

san

dsy

ner

gie

sb

etw

een

the

two

elem

ents

Top

ic2.

Th

efu

llsp

ectr

um

ofm

anag

emen

tsy

stem

aud

itin

g

Bas

edon

ISO

1901

1(Q

ual

ity

and

EM

SA

ud

itin

g),

CS

A-Z

773

(Com

pli

ance

Au

dit

ing

),an

dth

ed

evel

opin

gIS

O17

021-

2(t

hir

d-

par

tyau

dit

s),

inte

rnal

and

exte

rnal

aud

itin

gh

asa

sig

nifi

can

tsu

ite

ofac

tiv

itie

s,ap

pro

ach

es,

and

resu

lts

that

can

be

don

e,an

did

eall

yle

adto

full

val

ue

add

edto

the

clie

nt

and

the

aud

itee

.Is

the

full

spec

tru

mof

thes

ep

oten

tial

su

nd

erst

ood

and

emp

loy

ed?

Th

esu

spic

ion

isth

atso

me

aud

itor

san

dcl

ien

ts/a

ud

itee

sn

eith

eru

nd

erst

and

nor

emp

loy

the

full

spec

tru

m.W

hat

exac

tly

isth

efu

llsp

ectr

um

,how

can

aud

itor

s(fi

rst

and

thir

dp

arty

),cl

ien

ts,a

nd

aud

itee

sb

em

ade

mor

eaw

are

and

exp

ect

toem

plo

yan

dg

ain

full

val

ue

from

the

MS

aud

its?

Top

ic3.

Inte

gra

tin

gm

anag

emen

tsy

stem

s

Th

isis

sue

was

con

sid

ered

ata

pre

vio

us

coll

oqu

ium

and

was

emp

has

ized

atse

ver

alre

cen

ten

vir

onm

enta

lco

nfe

ren

ces

and

wor

ksh

ops.

Isth

ere

ah

igh

erle

vel

ofin

teg

rati

ng

MS

sto

be

con

sid

ered

toen

able

anor

gan

izat

ion

tom

anag

eb

usi

nes

sri

sks

bot

hef

fect

ivel

yan

def

fici

entl

y?

Th

isse

ssio

nw

ille

xp

lore

the

pot

enti

alof

ah

igh

erle

vel

ofis

sues

and

app

roac

hes

inad

dit

ion

toth

ose

reco

gn

ized

inth

eq

uot

eb

elow

.T

hes

eh

igh

erle

vel

sof

inte

gra

tion

may

incl

ud

esu

chid

eas

asco

rpor

ate

soci

alre

spon

sib

ilit

yan

dch

ang

em

anag

emen

tIS

O14

001

has

alw

ays

reco

gn

ized

the

pot

enti

alof

inte

gra

tin

gM

Ss:

Th

eIn

tern

atio

nal

Sta

nd

ard

doe

sn

otin

clu

de

req

uir

emen

tssp

ecifi

cto

oth

erm

anag

emen

tsy

stem

s,su

chas

thos

efo

rq

ual

ity

,occ

up

atio

nal

hea

lth

and

safe

tyfi

nan

cial

orri

skm

anag

emen

t,th

oug

hit

sel

emen

tsca

nb

eal

ign

edor

inte

gra

ted

wit

hth

ose

oth

erm

anag

emen

tsy

stem

s.It

isp

ossi

ble

for

anor

gan

izat

ion

toad

apt

its

exis

tin

gm

anag

emen

tsy

stem

(s)i

nor

der

toes

tab

lish

anen

vir

onm

enta

lman

agem

ent

syst

emth

atco

nfo

rms

toth

ere

qu

irem

ents

ofth

isIn

tern

atio

nal

Sta

nd

ard

.H

oww

ellh

asth

eab

ove

qu

ote

from

the

stan

dar

db

een

ack

now

led

ged

,con

sid

ered

,an

dim

ple

men

ted

?Is

itE

MS

-cen

tric

?T

his

top

icis

also

ati

mel

yon

e,as

anIS

OH

and

boo

kon

The

Inte

grate

dU

seof

Manage

men

tS

yste

mS

tandard

sw

asre

cen

tly

pu

bli

shed

a

Note:

aT

his

han

db

ook

was

pu

bli

shed

inJu

ly20

08(I

SO

,20

08)

Table II.Main topics discussed

at the colloquium

Environmentalmanagement

system

785

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Each table was assigned specific questions related to the topic, in order to keep thediscussion on track. A recorder was present at each table to capture the main pointscoming from the discussion. After about an hour of small group discussions, each tablepresented highlights to all colloquium participants. A short plenary discussion followed.The key points from the plenary discussions were also recorded.

4. FindingsThis section presents the key findings of the small group and plenary discussions onthe topics highlighted in Table II. It is important to acknowledge that consensus wasnot obtained, nor sought, around every key issue.

4.1 Critical loops and synergies among management system elementsThis topic focused on exploring two sub-topics, namely:

(1) non-conformities (NCs) and corrective and preventive actions (CAPAs); and

(2) objectives, targets, and environmental programs.

The key findings from the discussions are summarized in Table III.4.1.1 Non-conformities and corrective and preventive action. A wide variety of

feedback was received on the keys to a successful NC and CAPA process, the mostcommon weaknesses in these areas, and the importance of root cause analysis in theinvestigation of NCs. Throughout the discussion, the participants noted that manyorganizations are not taking full advantage of the NC and CAPA element in ISO 14001due to an underlying focus on the negatives rather than the positives. Part of thereason for this may be the facts that the standard is very non-prescriptive in theseareas, that there is no clear distinction between a major and a minor NC in thestandard, and that there is considerable variation in the way organizations deal withthese issues both formally and informally. Another challenge is that it is rare fororganizations to lose registration to ISO 14001 over NCs, which can undermine thecommitment to the system. Nonetheless, the experts emphasized that the true value ofthese elements is the opportunity their identification allows to improve the system.

Sub-topic Key points

Non-conformitiesand corrective andpreventive action

NCs and CAPA are rarely viewed in a positive light

There is no clear distinction between minor and major NCs in the standardThere is considerable variation in terms of how organizations address NCsThe true value in NCs and CAPAs are the opportunity they provide forimproving the EMSRoot cause analysis is a key to improvementAccountability for implementing the required changes is critical

Objectives, targets,and environmentalprograms

Continual improvement of the EMS heavily relies on these elements

Stakeholders must be considered when developing these elementsThe auditors perspective should be considered when developing theseelementsOrganizations must tailor these elements to their own needsOrganizations should focus on a limited number of objectives at any one timeThese elements must be linked to the organizations core managementprocesses

Table III.Key points related tocritical synergies amongmanagement systemelements

IJQRM29,7

786

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

One of the keys to improvement in this area is root cause analysis. Although it wasacknowledged that the level of analysis should be related to the magnitude ofthe problem, the experts emphasized the need to determine the systemic issuesunderlying the obvious major problems. The experts felt that the responsibilityfor investigations should be assigned to specific people who have been trained andwho will be provided with the time required to do a good causal analysis andthe required follow-up. It is essential that the analysis is not seen as a paper exercise toget something off of someones desk. These issues may, in part, be related tothe organizational culture. For these elements to function properly, there needs to bea focus on rewarding process improvements, rather than the basic surface-level fixesof a problem. Critically, senior management must be committed to the NC andCAPA process and must accept accountability for any needed changes. Topmanagement must continually communicate the importance of NCs and CAPAs toemployees and must emphasize the need to fill gaps in the system on a timely basis.Suggestions for doing these included addressing NCs in the business plan and usingpractical and operational terms, rather than the ISO jargon, when communicating withemployees.

4.1.2 Objectives, targets, and environmental programs. In this sub-topic, discussionscentered on establishing successful objectives, targets, and programs, establishinglinks with the organizations business planning and budgeting processes, and gettingsenior management interested in these areas. The experts noted that continualimprovement of the system greatly relies on these EMS elements. In addition, objectives,targets, and programs are influenced by both internal and external drivers, mustreflect both short- and long-term goals, should be tied to explicit metrics, and must bechanged as necessary. It should be clear how stakeholders feed into these elementsand it may be useful to consider the auditors perspective when developing them. Sincethe standard does not specify how many objectives, targets, and programs are required,organizations must tailor these elements to their own unique needs. There is nothingin the standard that says the organization cannot have a single goal. Whether theorganization develops single or multiple goals may depend on the size of theorganization, the wording of the goal(s), and what organizational level the goal(s) isaimed at. In any case, the organization should be cautious about developing anoverwhelming list of things to achieve. It was suggested that the organization focus ondeveloping a small number of core objectives, work on achieving them, and then addnew objectives as necessary.

Throughout the discussion, the experts emphasized that objectives, targets, andprograms drive performance and should be clearly linked to business planning andbudgeting processes. This will help highlight that using ISO 14001 can be a businessopportunity. A key piece here is to link these elements both to and from theorganizations strategic plans. Since EMSs tend to be an add-on in most organizations,linkages with strategic planning is necessary to ensure top management is engaged inthese elements and to integrate environmental issues into business management overtime. Moreover, it is senior managements responsibility to align objectives, targets, andprograms with organizational processes. While communication on these elements mustbe both up and down within the organization, and employees and stakeholders should beengaged in goal setting, there can be no success without top management commitmentin these areas.

Environmentalmanagement

system

787

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

4.2 The full spectrum of management system auditingThis area focused on two sub-topics, namely first- and third-party auditing, as well astheir interactions. Table IV presents a summary of the key points raised during thediscussions.

4.2.1 First-party (internal) auditing. The discussions on this sub-topic focused onmaximizing the value of internal audits, the role of auditors and auditees, the auditscope, and the most common weaknesses in internal auditing. The participantsemphasized that the objectives, scope, and expectations of the audit must be clarified inadvance. It is also essential that the auditors are well trained and that they know thesystem ahead of time so that the audit can be based on the way the system is actuallyset up. Further insights could potentially be gained by using internal auditors fromanother facility where possible. In any case, the auditors should avoid focusing toomuch on minutiae, or things that do not actually lead to system improvements.Whether the internal audit report should address recommendations for improvementwas extensively debated. Those in favour of including recommendations noted thatthey could be seen as the main value of the internal audit program, that they could bean opportunity to share experience between business units, and that they could providethe opportunity for creativity in addressing organizational issues. Possible drawbacksof including recommendations in the audit report included that those audited shouldtake ownership of their solutions, that recommendations may vary from one auditor toanother, that recommendations may be seen as authoritative statements of what needsto be done, and that there may be some concern about the objectivity of auditors auditingsystems for which they have previously made recommendations. The participants didagree that audits can and should be used as learning tools.

Many organizations are increasingly suffering from audit fatigue. Manydepartments are audited multiple times per year. The participants noted that thevalue of the audit is reduced when audits occur too frequently. To reduce the numberof audits, it may be possible to combine EMS audits with other organizational audits.The organization should also explore the implementation of a flexible, rather than afixed, audit schedule, so that audits may occur during periods of lulls or of greater risk.To ensure the internal audits are taken seriously, the benefits of the audits must bedemonstrated to everyone in the organization. For example, the audit could be sold as ameans to achieve continuous improvement.

Sub-topic Key points

First-party (internal)auditing

The objectives, scope, and expectations of the audit must be clarified inadvanceProper training of internal auditors is essentialAudits should be used as learning toolsIntegrated audits should be explored where practical

Third-party(registrar) auditing

There are frequently large inconsistencies between auditors auditing the samesystemImproved communication between auditors and auditees is neededInternal audits reports should not overly influence the external auditsInternal and external audits should be coordinated so as to minimize auditfatigue

Table IV.Key points related to thefull spectrum ofmanagement systemauditing

IJQRM29,7

788

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

4.2.2 Third-party (registrar) auditing. The discussions focused on weaknesses inthird-party audits and potential improvements to them. As with the internal audits, theparticipants felt that there is often poor presentation and/or quality of the auditfindings. Large inconsistencies between auditors auditing the same system, even onmajor findings, are not uncommon. This raises questions regarding the competency ofsome auditors. One other challenge noted was that many registrars/auditors are notgeographically close to their clients. This can inhibit the building of relationshipsbetween clients and auditors.

Improved communication between the auditors and auditees was one of the keyimprovements suggested by the participants. To help improve consistency, theparticipants felt that the auditors themselves should be periodically audited. A singleregulated body of auditors may help eliminate the differences in the quality ofregistrations. There was some debate on whether the auditor needed experience in theorganizations industry sector. As with the internal audits, there was debate onwhether recommendations should be included in the audit report. Although they couldadd value, it was noted that consulting is not the job of the auditor and their role is toidentify compliance, or a lack thereof, with the standard.

The participants felt that the internal audits should function independently of theexternal audit process. However, it was noted that internal audits can be goodpreparatory exercises for external audits and that there could be value in having aninternal auditor shadow the third-party auditor. The participants felt that, althoughsenior management tends to pay more attention to external audits than to internal audits,most people within the company tend to prefer being audited internally and feel that theyget more useful information. It was noted that the external auditing process is supposedto take into account the internal auditing process, but some participants felt that theinternal reports should not be provided until the end of the external audit so thatthe external auditor will not be biased by the internal findings. Finally, it was suggestedthat the organization plan internal and external audits so as to minimize audit fatigue.

4.3 Integrating management systemsDiscussions first focused on exploring general issues associated with integrating MSs.This was followed by a debate on integrating change management and CSR into MSs.The key points from the discussions are summarized in Table V.

4.3.1 General issues. Discussions in this area focused on the value of an integratedsystem, the pitfalls of integration, and making an integrated system work. The participantsnoted that if environmental procedures are separate from operational procedures,

Sub-topic Key points

General issues The EMS should be integrated with other MSs where practicalThere are limitations to integration that should be kept in mindEnvironmental issues could potentially be buried in an IMSAuditors are not yet fully equipped to deal with an IMS

Integrating changemanagement and corporatesocial responsibility intomanagement systems

Change management is a critical component of any IMSChange management is often unstructured and reactiveEffective change management requires engaging key stakeholdersTransparent decision-making is a key to CSRCSR can be a key link in an IMS

Table V.Key points related to

integrating managementsystems

Environmentalmanagement

system

789

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

they rarely get looked at. Alignment of the EMS with other MSs and the organizationsbusiness processes is therefore important. When integrating, the commonalities betweenthe systems should be used to reduce confusion and unnecessary redundancies. However, itis recognized that there may be limitations to completely integrating systems. For example,certain aspects of some systems may not fit well into an integrated system. It could be achallenge to get buy-in from all involved and identifying responsibilities could becomeproblematic. One key issue is that it is possible that critical components of individualsystems could be buried within the bigger picture. To have an effective integrated system,it is essential that senior management sees environmental issues as equal to other issues.Another consideration is that registrars and auditors are not yet fully equipped to deal withintegrated systems. Although this is not an excuse to avoid integrated systems, it may addchallenges to internal and external audits. Recommendations for the process of integrationincluded establishing an integration team, starting with common elements between thesystems, treating specific aspects of different systems differently where necessary, andincorporating integration issues into training.

4.3.2 Integrating change management and CSR into management systems. Thefocus herein was on the value, pitfalls, and keys to a successful integration of changemanagement and CSR. The participants noted that change management is a criticalcomponent for maintaining a good system and that it is essential in knowledgepreservation. However, change management is typically not seen as an inherent part of anISO 14001 system. Often, there is no official change management process, just informalactions and a heavy reliance on reactive measures. One view expressed by the participantsis that the greater the degree of the integration of systems, the more structure is needed forchange management. Moreover, effective change management involves embeddingcritical stakeholders, particularly the employees, in the process, as well as organizing theplanning component of ISO 14001 along the lines of other business systems.

Transparent, engaged decision making is at the root of CSR. The participants notedthat public interest is often the main driver for CSR, but that this interest is typicallylow until a big issue arises. The lack of consistent CSR standards and the baggageassociated with the terms CSR and sustainability can also be challenges inimplementing CSR in an organization. To implement CSR internally, an understandingof the organizations key stakeholders, the social issues involved, and incentives areneeded. The participants noted that CSR can be a link in an overarching MS. Althoughthe existence of separate standards has institutionalized the concept of separate MSs inmany ways, CSR inherently incorporates quality, environmental, safety, and economicissues and the effect of these on stakeholders.

5. ConclusionsThe colloquium offered a variety of insights into the practical challenges of implementingISO 14001. The challenges were explored in detail under three main topics:

(1) critical loops and synergies among MS elements;

(2) the full spectrum of MS auditing; and

(3) integrating management systems.

In each of these areas, a number of issues were discussed by the participants.The discussions of the critical loops and synergies among MS elements focused on

two sub-topics:

IJQRM29,7

790

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

(1) non-conformities (NCs) and corrective and preventive actions (CAPAs); and

(2) objectives, targets, and environmental programs.

The discussions on these topics highlighted a number of key points, including thatthere is considerable variation in terms of how organizations address NCs, the truevalue in NCs and CAPAs are the opportunity they provide for improving the EMS,continual improvement of the EMS heavily relies on these EMS elements, stakeholdersand the auditors perspectives must be considered when developing these elements,and these elements must be linked to explicit metrics and to the organizations coremanagement processes. Several key recommendations for implementing a functionalISO 14001 EMS can be derived from the comments provided by the participants. Forexample, to ensure that NCs are addressed, responsibility for a root cause analysisshould be assigned to a specific person with appropriate training. Where practical, NCsshould also be addressed in the organizations business plan. Objectives, targets, andprograms must be tailored to the unique context of the organization. To increase thechance of success, organizations should focus on a small number of core objectives,targets, and programs that are updated as necessary. In any case, it is essential thatthese elements are linked to the organizations strategic plan.

The discussions of the full spectrum of MSs auditing also focused on two sub-topics,namely:

(1) first-party auditing; and

(2) third-party auditing.

The key points raised during these discussions included that the objectives, scope,and expectations of the audit must be clarified in advance, the inclusion ofrecommendations for improvement in an audit report has its benefits and drawbacks,there are frequently large inconsistencies between auditors auditing the same system,improved communication between auditors and auditees is needed, and internal andexternal audits should be coordinated so as to minimize audit fatigue. These commentsprovide the basis for several additional recommendations on implementing a functionalISO 14001 EMS. For instance, internal auditors must be trained to enhance theconsistency and quality of the audits. Internal audits should focus on issues thatcan actually lead to system improvements rather than overemphasising minutiae.For external audits, it is critical that organizations focus on developing open channels ofcommunication with the external auditors. This will help provide needed clarity toexpectations for the EMS.

The discussions of the third key topic, integrating management systems, centeredon (1) general issues in integrating management systems (MSs) and (2) on integratingchange management and CSR into MSs. The key points discussed by the participantsincluded that the EMS should be integrated with other MSs where practical, there arelimitations to integrating MSs that should be kept in mind, auditors are not yet fullyequipped to deal with an IMS, change management is a critical component of any IMS,transparent decision-making is a key to CSR, and CSR can be a key link in an IMS. Keyrecommendations for implementing a functional ISO 14001 EMS that is integrated withother MSs include building on the elements common to the systems being integratedand incorporating integration issues in employee training. The process of managingchange within the EMS must be structured where practical to avoid an overreliance

Environmentalmanagement

system

791

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

on reactive measures. Finally, organizations that have implemented CSR programsshould leverage those programs in the implementation of an IMS.

The discussions at the colloquium reinforced several of the points made in theliterature. For example, the paper supports the fact that the level of integration andimplementation of MS audits varies greatly. However, the colloquium also addressedseveral issues that have not been adequately addressed in previous publications. Forexample, the paper addresses the challenges of integrating an ISO 14001 EMS within anIMS, provides practical advice to addressing NCs and CAPAs, and highlights the notionof applying research on change management in the context of an EMS. In addition to thecontributions to the literature on EMS, the findings from the colloquium may haverelevance to practitioners and academics working on other standardized MSs. Althoughthere are certainly many differences in the requirements of other standardized MSs, suchas ISO 9001 and OHSAS 18001, the process of implementing these standards share manysimilarities with implementing an ISO 14001 EMS. For example, all MSSs require theimplementation of systems to address NCs, CAPAs, and objectives, targets, andprograms. Likewise, they all require internal audits and provide an opportunity forthird-party registration. The discussions in this paper provide insight into howchallenges associated with these issues may be addressed. The paper also reveals manyof the opportunities and challenges of integrating these MSSs with each other.

In most organizations, successful implementation of an ISO 14001 EMS will requirean identification of challenges and opportunities in the areas highlighted by thecolloquium. However, while the colloquium provided some insight into how thesechallenges and opportunities may be addressed, it is acknowledged that there is a needfor further research on ISO 14001, particularly as it relates to areas for improvement. Forexample, future research could focus on the specific updates that should be made to thedefinitions and clauses in ISO 14001. As one example, there is a need to clarify thedistinction between a minor NC and a major NC. There is also a need for further researchon many of the recommendations offered by the participants in the colloquium. Forexample, there is a need for further research on developing metrics linked to the EMS,tying an EMS to organizational strategic plans, determining the competencies neededfor internal and external auditors, conducting integrated audits, establishingmethodologies for implementing an IMS, incorporating change management withinan EMS, and exploring the influence of CSR programs on EMSs. In any case, the resultsfrom this colloquium should provide a starting point for future research on ISO 14001.

References

Ann, G.E., Zailani, S. and Wahid, N.A. (2006), A study on the impact of environmentalmanagement system (EMS) certification towards firms performance in Malaysia,Management of Environmental Quality, Vol. 17 No. 1, pp. 73-93.

Asif, M., De Bruijn, E.J., Fisscher, O.A.M., Searcy, C. and Steenhuis, H. (2009), Process embeddeddesign of integrated management systems, International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 261-82.

Bansal, P. and Bogner, W.C. (2002), Deciding on ISO 14001: economics, institutions, andcontext, Long Range Planning, Vol. 35 No. 3, pp. 269-90.

Bansal, P. and Hunter, T. (2003), Strategic explanations for the early adoption of ISO 14001,Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 46 No. 3, pp. 289-99.

IJQRM29,7

792

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Barla, P. (2007), ISO 14001 certification and environmental performance in Quebecs pulp andpaper industry, Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Vol. 53 No. 3,pp. 291-306.

Beckmerhagen, I.A., Berg, H.P., Karapetrovic, S.V. and Willborn, W.O. (2003), Auditing insupport of the integration of management systems: a case from the nuclear industry,Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 560-8.

Benito, J. and Gonzalez-Benito, O. (2005), An analysis of the relationship between environmentalmotivations and ISO 14001 certification, British Journal of Management, Vol. 16 No. 2,pp. 133-48.

Bernardo, M., Casadesus, M., Karapetrovic, S. and Heras, I. (2009), How integrated areenvironmental, quality and other standardized management systems? An empiricalstudy, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 742-50.

Bernardo, M., Casadesus, M., Karapetrovic, S. and Heras, I. (2010), An empirical study on theintegration of management system audits, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 18 No. 5,pp. 486-95.

Berthelot, S., McGraw, E., Coulmont, M. and Morrill, J. (2003), ISO 14000: added value forCanadian business?, Environmental Quality Management, Vol. 13 No. 2, pp. 47-58.

Bossidy, L. and Charan, R. (2002), Execution: The Discipline of Getting Things Done, CrownBusiness, New York, NY.

Brio, J.A.D., Fernandez, E., Junquera, B. and Vazquez, C.J. (2001), Joint adoption of ISO14000-ISO 9000 occupational risk prevention practices in Spanish industrial companies:a descriptive study, Total Quality Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 669-86.

Bronson, J. and Noble, B. (2006), Measuring the effectiveness of parks Canadas environmentalmanagement system: a case study of Riding Mountain National Park, CanadianGeographer/Le Gegraphe Canadien, Vol. 50 No. 1, pp. 101-13.

Chin, K., Chiu, S. and Tummala, V.M.R. (1999), An evaluation of success factors using the AHPto implement ISO 14001-based EMS, International Journal of Quality & ReliabilityManagement, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 341-61.

Douglas, A. and Glen, D. (2000), Integrated management systems in small and mediumenterprises, Total Quality Management, Vol. 11, pp. 686-90.

Esposito, P.A. (2009), Safety audits: comparing three types of assessments, Professional Safety,Vol. 54 No. 12, pp. 42-3.

Florida, R. and Davidson, D. (2001), Gaining from green management: environmentalmanagement systems inside and outside the factory, California Management Review,Vol. 43 No. 3, pp. 64-84.

Georgiadou, M. and Tsiotras, G. (1998), Environmental management systems: a new challengefor Greek industry, International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15No. 3, pp. 286-302.

Griffith, A. and Bhutto, K. (2009), Managing quality, safety and environment as one,Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers, Civil Engineering, Vol. 162.

ISO (2004), Environmental Management Systems Requirements with Guidance for Use,International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.

ISO (2008), The Integrated Use of Management System Standards, International Organization forStandardization, Geneva.

ISO (2010), The ISO Survey of Certifications 2009, International Organization forStandardization, Geneva.

Environmentalmanagement

system

793

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Jonker, J. and Karapetrovic, S. (2004), Systems thinking for the integration of managementsystems, Business Process Management Journal, Vol. 10 No. 6, pp. 608-15.

Jorgensen, T.H. (2008), Towards more sustainable management systems: through life cyclemanagement and integration, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 10, pp. 1071-80.

Jorgensen, T.H., Remmen, A. and Mellado, M.D. (2006), Integrated managementsystems-three different levels of integration, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14No. 8, pp. 713-22.

Karapetrovic, S. (2003), Musings on integrated management systems, Measuring BusinessExcellence, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 4-13.

Karapetrovic, S. and Casadesus, M. (2009), Implementing environmental with otherstandardized management systems: scope, sequence, time and integration, Journal ofCleaner Production, Vol. 17 No. 5, pp. 533-40.

Karapetrovic, S. and Jonker, J. (2003), Integration of standardized management systems:searching for a recipe and ingredients, Total Quality Management & Business Excellence,Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 451-9.

Karapetrovic, S. and Willborn, W. (1998a), Integrated audit of management systems,International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 15 No. 7, pp. 694-711.

Karapetrovic, S. and Willborn, W. (1998b), Integration of quality and environmentalmanagement systems, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 204-13.

Karapetrovic, S. and Willborn, W. (2000a), Generic audit of management systems:fundamentals, Managerial Auditing Journal, Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 279-94.

Karapetrovic, S. and Willborn, W. (2000b), Quality assurance and effectiveness of audit systems,The International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 17 No. 6, p. 679.

Karapetrovic, S. and Willborn, W. (2001), Audit system: concepts and practices, Total QualityManagement, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 13-28.

Klaver, J. and Jonker, J. (1998), The significance of recent EMS standards as an impetus forimprovement, Eco-Management and Auditing, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 1-5.

Kraus, J.L. and Grosskopf, J. (2008), Auditing integrated management systems: considerationsand practice tips, Environmental Quality Management, Vol. 18 No. 2.

Kraus, J.L. and Platkus, W. (2007), Incorporating continuous improvement principlesinto EMS auditing strategies, Environmental Quality Management, Vol. 16 No. 4, pp. 7-12.

Labodova, A. (2004), Implementing integrated management systems using a risk analysis basedapproach, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 571-80.

Liyin, S., Hong, Y. and Griffith, A. (2006), Improving environmental performance by means ofempowerment of contractors, Management of Environmental Quality: An InternationalJournal, Vol. 17 No. 3, pp. 242-57.

McDonald, M., Mors, T.A. and Phillips, A. (2003), Management system integration: can it bedone?, Quality Progress, Vol. 36 No. 10, pp. 67-73.

MacDonald, J. (2005), Strategic sustainable development using the ISO 14001 standard,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13 No. 6, pp. 631-43.

Mackau, D. (2003), SME integrated management system: a proposed experiences model,The TQM Magazine, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 43-51.

Matias, J.C.D.O. and Coelho, D.A. (2002), The integration of the standards systems ofquality management, environmental management and occupational health andsafety management, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 40 No. 15,pp. 3857-66.

IJQRM29,7

794

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Morrow, D. and Rondinelli, D. (2002), Adopting corporate environmental management systems:motivations and results of ISO 14001 and EMAS certification, European ManagementJournal, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 159-71.

Oskarsson, K. and Von Malmborg, F. (2005), Integrated management systems as a corporateresponse to sustainable development, Corporate Social Responsibility and EnvironmentalManagement, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 121-8.

Pheng, L. and Pong, C. (2003), Integrating ISO 9001 and OHSAS 18001 for construction, Journalof Construction Engineering and Management, Vol. 129 No. 3, pp. 338-47.

Poder, T. (2006), Evaluation of environmental aspects significance in ISO 14001,Environmental Management, Vol. 37 No. 5, pp. 732-43.

Pojasek, R.B. (2008), Framing your lean-to-green effort, Environmental Quality Management,Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 85-93.

Poksinska, B., Dahlgaard, J.J. and Eklund, J.A.E. (2003), Implementing ISO 14000 in Sweden:motives, benefits and comparisons with ISO 9000, International Journal of Quality& Reliability Management, Vol. 20 Nos 4/5, pp. 585-606.

Pouliot, C. (1996), ISO 14000: beyond compliance to competitiveness, ManufacturingEngineering, Vol. 116 No. 5, p. 51.

Rocha, M., Searcy, C. and Karapetrovic, S. (2007), Integrating sustainable development intoexisting management systems, Total Quality Management and Business Excellence,Vol. 18 Nos 1/2, pp. 83-92.

Rondinelli, D. and Vastag, G. (2000), Panacea, common sense, or just a label? The value of ISO14001 environmental management systems, European Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 5,pp. 499-510.

Roy, M., Boiral, O. and Lagace, D. (2001), Environmental commitment and manufacturingexcellence: a comparative study within Canadian industry, Business Strategy and theEnvironment, Vol. 10 No. 5, p. 257.

Rusjan, B. (2010), Contribution of the ISO 9001 internal audit to business performance,International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management, Vol. 27 No. 8, pp. 916-37.

Salomone, R. (2008), Integrated management systems: experiences in Italian organizations,Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 16, pp. 1786-806.

Schylander, E. and Martinuzzi, A. (2007), ISO 14001 experiences, effects and futurechallenges: a national study in Austria, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 16No. 2, pp. 133-47.

Scipioni, A., Arena, F., Villa, M. and Saccarola, G. (2001), Integration of management systems,Environmental Management and Health, Vol. 12 Nos 2/3, pp. 134-46.

Singh, S. and Perry, M. (2000), Voluntary environmental initiatives: ISO 14001 certifiedorganisations in Singapore, Asia Pacific Viewpoint, Vol. 41 No. 3, pp. 269-78.

Strachan, P.A., Sinclair, I.M. and Lal, D. (2003), Managing ISO 14001 implementation in theUnited Kingdom continental shelf (UKCS), Corporate Social Responsibility andEnvironmental Management, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 50-63.

Turk, A.M. (2009), ISO 14000 environmental management system in construction:an examination of its application in Turkey, Total Quality Management & BusinessExcellence, Vol. 20 No. 7, p. 703.

Van der Veldt, D. (1997), Case studies of ISO 14001: a new business guide for globalenvironmental protection, Environmental Quality Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. 1-19.

Von Ahsen, A. and Funck, D. (2001a), Integrated management systems opportunities and risks forcorporate environmental management, Corporate Environmental Strategy, July, pp. 165-76.

Environmentalmanagement

system

795

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

Von Ahsen, A. and Funck, D. (2001b), Integrated management systems opportunities andrisks for corporate environmental protection, Corporate Environmental Strategy, Vol. 8No. 2, pp. 165-76.

Wasche, T. and Sciortino, N. (2007), Improving the internal audit experience, Quality Progress,Vol. 40 No. 11, p. 32.

Wilkinson, G. and Dale, B.G. (1999), Integrated management systems: an examination of theconcept and theory, The TQM Magazine, Vol. 11 No. 2, p. 95.

Wilkinson, G. and Dale, B.G. (2001), Integrated management system: a model based on totalquality approach, Managing Service Quality, Vol. 11 No. 5, pp. 318-30.

Yiridoe, E.K., Clark, J.S., Marett, G.E., Gordon, R. and Duinker, P. (2003), ISO 14001 EMSstandard registration decisions among Canadian organizations, Agribusiness, Vol. 19No. 4, pp. 439-57.

Zeng, S.X., Shi, J.J. and Lou, G.X. (2007), A synergetic model for implementing an integratedmanagement system: an empirical study in China, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15No. 18, pp. 1760-7.

Zutshi, A. and Sohal, A.S. (2005), Integrated management systems: the experiences of threeAustralian organisations, Journal of Manufacturing Technology Management, Vol. 16No. 2, pp. 211-32.

About the authorsCory Searcy is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Mechanical and IndustrialEngineering at Ryerson University. His current research focuses on corporate sustainabledevelopment indicators. He teaches a graduate course on environmental management systems.

Oguz Morali is a PhD student in the Environmental Applied Science and ManagementProgram at Ryerson University. He has over 15 years of work experience in the banking andconsulting industries. His current research focuses on supply chain management, environmentalmanagement systems, and sustainability indicators.

Stanislav Karapetrovic is based at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, where he isa Professor of Mechanical Engineering. His current research focuses on integrated managementsystems, quality auditing, international quality management standards and engineeringeducation.

Kristine Wichuk is a Research Associate in the Department of Civil and EnvironmentalEngineering at the University of Alberta. Her current research focuses on solid waste management.

Daryl McCartney is a Professor of Environmental Engineering at the University of Alberta.He is also an Associate of the Edmonton Waste Management Centre of Excellence.His current research focuses on environmental analysis, integrated solid waste management,and compost engineering.

Sheldon McLeod is a Consultant specializing in managing relationships, decision-making,sustainable development policy, management systems and measurement systems. He is also amember of the Task Group Management Systems (TG-MS) of the Standards Council of Canadaand an Adjunct Professor and Sessional Lecturer at the University of Manitoba.

Don Fraser is a Consultant with over 40 years experience in environmental management andsustainable development implementation and review. His practice focuses on evaluatingenvironmental and health and safety management systems, and developing and implementingrelated risk controls.

IJQRM29,7

796

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)

This article has been cited by:

1. Rose Sebastianelli, Nabil Tamimi, Kathleen Iacocca. 2015. Improving the quality of environmentalmanagement: impact on shareholder value. International Journal of Quality & Reliability Management32:1, 53-80. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

2. Maria Gianni, Katerina Gotzamani. 2015. Management systems integration: lessons from an abandonmentcase. Journal of Cleaner Production 86, 265-276. [CrossRef]

3. A. Tung, K. Baird, H. Schoch. 2014. The association between the adoption of an environmentalmanagement system with organisational environmental performance. Australasian Journal ofEnvironmental Management 1-16. [CrossRef]

4. Ambika Zutshi, Andrew Creed. 2014. An international review of environmental initiatives in theconstruction sector. Journal of Cleaner Production . [CrossRef]

5. Kannan Govindan, Ali Diabat, K. Madan Shankar. 2014. Analyzing the drivers of green manufacturingwith fuzzy approach. Journal of Cleaner Production . [CrossRef]

6. Kanokporn Tangkittipong, Natcha Thawesaengskulthai, Damrong Thawesaengskulthai. 2013. GreenIndustry System Development by Applying International Standards. Journal of Advanced ManagementScience 1:10.12720/joams.1.1, 96-101. [CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

nive

rsiti

Tek

nolo

gi M

ARA

At 1

7:04

19

Mar

ch 2

015

(PT)