Development of a Competency Framework for … Framework...Development of a Competency Framework for...

FINAL REPORT

Development of a Competency

Framework for Business Resource

Efficiency

A study to develop and test, using qualitative surveys, a competency model for Business Resource Efficiency (BRE) and prepare a BRE competency framework relevant to SMEs Project code: FRA0035-094 Research date: Oct 2010-Mar 2011 Date: 21 March 2011

WRAP’s vision is a world without waste, where resources are used sustainably. We work with businesses, individuals and communities to help them reap the benefits of reducing waste, developing sustainable products and using resources in an efficient way. Find out more at www.wrap.org.uk Document reference: [e.g. WRAP, 2006, Report Name (WRAP Project TYR009-19. Report prepared by…..Banbury, WRAP]

Written by: Jayne Cox, Anthea Hawke, Keith Lawton, Daren Luscombe

While we have tried to make sure this report is accurate, we cannot accept responsibility or be held legally responsible for any loss or damage arising out of or in

connection with this information being inaccurate, incomplete or misleading. This material is copyrighted. You can copy it free of charge as long as the material is

accurate and not used in a misleading context. You must identify the source of the material and acknowledge our copyright. You must not use material to endorse or

suggest we have endorsed a commercial product or service. For more details please see our terms and conditions on our website at www.wrap.org.uk

http://www.wrap.org.uk/

http://www.wrap.org.uk/

Development of a Competency Framework for Business Resource Efficiency

1

Executive summary

Research overview WRAP has been tasked by Defra to deliver Business Resource Efficiency (BRE) by supporting resource efficiency amongst Small and Medium-sized Enterprises (SMEs). This research complements WRAP’s existing knowledge and experience of working with SMEs and aims to help WRAP better understand the sectors and/or types of SME that will be more willing to act than others; to better understand SMEs generally; and to understand how different types of intervention will be more appropriate to different types of business. The objectives for this work were to:

Consider the types of resource efficient behaviours WRAP should seek to influence during

their next business plan, and to establish a framework of key competencies to benchmark

progress.

Develop a competency framework for resource efficiency for SMEs in the UK by

parameters that may include sector, size and use of resources.

Better understand the motivations and barriers for SMEs to act in a resource efficient way

and in particular their levels of competence in respect of agreed resource efficient forms

of behaviour.

Develop a repeatable method of measuring behaviour change in SMEs (related to BRE)

that includes, where possible, understanding of the links between behaviours and

outcomes.

Entec and Brook Lyndhurst carried out the following primary and secondary research from October 2010 to March 2011 to meet these objectives:

A review of secondary evidence sources;

Development of an outline competency model for resource efficiency for SMEs;

Original primary research (in depth interviews in two phases) to test the initial framework

and to cognitively test questions; and

Producing a finalised competency framework.

The initial research plan included an optional quantitative survey with approximately 2,000 SMEs, subject to the findings of the qualitative research. A second phase of in-depth interviews was proposed as a better alternative, as few of the businesses in the first phase of in depth interviews demonstrated higher levels of BRE capability that would enable segmentation through quantitative analysis. Developing a competency model A focused literature review was carried out to identify the characteristics, skills, resources, and other factors that may influence resource efficiency in SMEs. A conceptual framework was developed to help frame the many different types of factors considered, these being grouped into four different types; ethos; governance; skills and resources; and ‘fixed’ characteristics such as size and location. The evidence review identified a long list of characteristics and competencies that may be important for BRE, from which a core set of BRE competencies were defined. This competency model – and SMEs’ wider understanding of BRE - was tested through in-depth interviews with 43 SMEs, across a range of sizes and sectors.


2

The extent to which SMEs displayed different BRE competencies was assessed using a qualitative scoring system. This scoring had some significant limitations, but some interesting trends and differences within the sample of SMEs were found. The three main groups of competencies that emerged were those that were:

Found across the majority of businesses, regardless of their overall level of competence;

Only demonstrated by businesses with higher overall levels of competence; and

Not demonstrated by the SMEs interviewed, or were only shown by a very small number of businesses.

The competency framework is shown below, using the following key to summarise these three groups:

Bold text - commonly found ‘entry level’ competencies Normal text - ‘advanced level’ competencies found in SMEs with higher BRE capability Greyed text - competencies shown by few or no SMEs

Figure 1: SME resource efficiency competency framework

Behaviour change

dimension

Organisational norms

(acceptance of

importance)

Commitment

(willingness to change)

Action

(ability to change)

Know-how

(self-

efficacy/capability)

Ethos Governance Practice Skills & resources

Headline

competency

Recognises

environmental

impacts of business

Has an operational

business strategy with

defined accountabilities

Integrates BRE into

business strategy

Has awareness of

gaps in knowledge

regarding BRE

Supporting

competency

Recognises the

importance of individual

action on BRE

Encourages and

empowers staff to

improve BRE

performance

Links BRE with business

performance

Has a system in place for

managing business

activities (E,H&S)

Uses BRE information to

support decision-making

Works with supply-chain

to identify and implement

opportunities for BRE

Measures & monitors use

of resources

Has in-house

expertise on BRE

Collateral

Competency

Has a participatory

management structure

Has values and attitudes

that consider the

environment to be

important

Staff roles, responsibilities

& accountability relating

to or influencing BRE are

clearly defined and

regularly reviewed

Actively seeks feedback

on performance from

supply-chain

BRE and/or env’t

considerations integrated

into procurement

processes

Has means of

accessing external

information, know-

how & support

Organisation

understands how to

optimise process

and/or equipment

performance

Staff appropriately

trained in BRE

The research suggests that the size, age and sector of a SME influences its overall BRE competence, although this is based only on the small sample of SMEs interviewed for this research. For non-service based SMEs in manufacturing, construction, printing and utilities, SMEs with over 50 staff became increasingly competent, although this pattern was not found for SMEs in the service sector, where increasing size did not affect overall levels of


3

competency. Non-service based SMEs, such as manufacturing and construction, which had been in operation for less than 20 years were much more likely to have low BRE capability. Almost all of the service-based SMEs interviewed were less than 20 years old, and there was no trend linking age and BRE capability.

The trends identified in this research suggest that engaging younger manufacturers, i.e. those that have been in operation for less than 20 years, could have high potential for improving BRE. Green investment loans, or other start up finance or development loans could include requirements for BRE activities.

Key findings How SMEs think about BRE

There isn’t a tangible area that ‘BRE’ covers; rather it is a set of distributed skills and practices that are covered by different areas of business management. SMEs did not tend to think about BRE issues as a distinct area to be managed, but instead framed them in one or more of the following ways, as either:

Being integrated with health and safety issues.

Common sense and part of an overall internal or wider societal culture and ‘way of doing things’ rather than business practice.

Integrated into process efficiency, and making best use of resources through efficient work scheduling, processes and product design.

Different types of SMEs tended to conceptualise BRE in different ways.

SMEs don’t need to be environmental leaders – or even very interested in the environment – to do BRE. They are ‘waste watchers’ not ‘positive greens’. SMEs are generally committed to using resources well, but this is not usually driven by environmental concerns and the two are often thought of separately. Resource management is often linked to cost saving rather than environmental impact, and even businesses that have an ethical view that saving resources is important may not necessarily hold pro-environmental values. SMEs use different language and terminology to talk about BRE. Cost is a common language amongst SMEs and one that incorporates material, waste, energy, water and other resource costs. Whilst most participants neither used nor fully understood the concept and terminology of BRE, most if not all understood and actively managed business costs. Customer service and quality are important business drivers. Quality was seen to be an important driver and value by manufacturing SMEs, and BRE was often linked to quality control, with wastage or pollution being seen as a sign of poor production. Service-based SMEs emphasised customer service, rather than quality. What SMEs are doing on BRE BRE behaviour is tactical and ad hoc rather than strategic. Even SMEs who are concerned about managing resources may not be focusing on the BRE actions that have the greatest positive impact if they are locked in to what they are already doing. Even though they might manage wastage, BRE is not well embedded in many SMEs; it is often reactive and ad hoc rather than proactive and built into processes. Inclusive learning cultures are important. SMEs, and especially non-service based SMEs, were better at BRE where they reflected on previous jobs or processes, and where they involved staff in identifying improvements to processes or systems. This is borne out in the finding that older non-service SMEs demonstrated higher levels of BRE.


4

It is vital for manufacturers to be able to optimise their own systems and processes. Having a good understanding of their own operations may be more important – or a more important starting point - for manufacturing SMEs than having access to external ideas or best practice. Indications are that engagement should focus on how SMEs can adapt rather than adopt good practice. SMEs that are more resource efficient recognise and manage the direct and indirect BRE impacts of all staff. SMEs used different strategies to manage staff BRE impacts, by encouraging and empowering staff, enforcing action, or modifying the work environment or systems to ‘design out’ staff impacts. Direct and indirect BRE impacts tended to be managed differently. Barriers and motivations SMEs tend to see resources as ‘fixed’ inputs, rather than inputs that can be optimised for each unit of output. Many SMEs measure and monitor their resource use to some degree, but many also believe that there is nothing they can do to optimise their use of resources. Some SMEs are not aware of gaps in their knowledge of BRE. If SMEs believe they have the knowledge and know how that they need, or that other barriers such as lack of time are more significant, then they are very unlikely to take up – or even take notice of – attempts to engage them on BRE. Information is unlikely to be useful to these SMEs, without first demonstrating to them what the gap is and why it should matter to them. Supply chains can be a driver and source of knowledge for BRE. Supply chains are a strong driver of BRE for larger, non-service based SMEs, with some of these SMEs adopting management systems or quality standards as a result of customer demands. Interestingly, these same SMEs were often protective of their own suppliers, as they recognised the administrative burden that such standards imposed on businesses. This suggests that there is limited scope in using larger or more competent SMEs to drive formal or prescriptive systems and standards within their own supply chains. For smaller non-service based SMEs, supply chains can be a useful source of ideas and information, with interactions in both directions with customers and their own suppliers. Have an operational business strategy with clearly defined accountabilities. This was the most commonly occurring headline competency by a clear margin. This competency was interpreted as businesses having clear sales or productivity targets for this analysis, as this was largely the way in which this question was interpreted by SMEs; few of the SMEs had a broader interpretation of strategy. This may be an area that WRAP can focus on to stretch SMEs understanding of strategy, as a focus on sales and productivity can lead to a focus on short term thinking.


5

Box 1: Learning points for WRAP engagement with SMEs on Business Resource Efficiency

Learning points for engaging SMEs:

SMEs frame BRE in different ways, either an overall concept, or a series of specific actions. Being aware of these framings may help WRAP to engage with different groups of SMEs more successfully:

Smaller (less than 50 staff), non-service based SMEs (such as manufacturing, printing, construction) tend to think about BRE as specific actions. WRAP could help these SMEs to ‘join up’ any specific actions as part of a wider business concept, or help them to identify the scope of existing systems and how they could be extended to include aspects of BRE.

Smaller (less than 50 staff), service based SMEs (such as retail, commerce) are more likely to think of BRE as a wider societal issue, rather than either specific actions or a concept that applies to their business. Messages that link business BRE to wider societal issues could help engage this group. This group may also be more influenced by external information and contacts, or by messages that focus on social norms and the general sense that managing BRE is ‘just what you do’.

SMEs put BRE and environmental issues in different mental boxes and using environmental messages to communicate or engage with them are unlikely to ‘hook’ SMEs interest.

Cost and reducing wastage are top priorities for SMEs, but simple messages about saving money may not be enough to engage SMEs as many SMEs see costs as fixed for a given level of output. SMEs will be very keen to reduce costs but may need more proactive engagement to be convinced that this can actually be done.

Messages about quality (for non-service based) and customer service (for service based) SMEs may be a good way to engage them. SMEs frequently associate cost and quality, and WRAP would need to be careful that messages about reducing costs aren’t perceived by SMEs to risk quality, or that improving quality would increase costs.

Messages or communications that present BRE in a strategic way are unlikely to chime with SMEs and engagement needs to start from where SMEs are at. WRAP can then look to ‘stretch’ SMEs from starting with things they already recognise into developing a more strategic outlook on BRE. The approach is not about single easy actions, but creating a pathway on BRE. SMEs are unlikely to think about the whole range of BRE actions they can take, or to evaluate which are likely to have the most benefit to their business. As SMEs conceptualise BRE in different ways, some groups of SMEs – larger (more than 50 staff), non-service based (e.g. manufacturing) are more likely to think about BRE as a wider business concept, and so be more open to strategic thinking about the benefits of different actions. Objective advice from WRAP may help influence these SMEs, such as case study information and data on the savings of different BRE actions for different businesses.

Encouraging SMEs to review previous jobs or processes is likely to be very beneficial, particularly for smaller (less than 50 staff), newer (less than 20 years old) SMEs in non-service based sectors, to help them to a learning culture. This could also be useful for larger, older non-service based SMEs that have lower BRE capability, in other words, those SMEs that are performing below average for their size, age and sector.

WRAP should be aware of the different methods that SMEs use to manage direct and indirect staff BRE impacts, and consider the range of empowering, enforcing, incentivising and ‘designing out’ techniques that SMEs use.

SMEs may be more engaged by information on cost-savings where this is given in terms of costs per unit of output or turnover, rather than in absolute terms. WRAP need to be aware that high cost is often linked with high turnover and/or high quality, when developing cost-saving messages.

WRAP may need to use more proactive approaches than information or awareness-raising to engage those SMEs who are not aware of the gaps in their knowledge of BRE.


6

Next steps This research found that the types of competencies shown most often by SMEs were those focused on practical action and delivery rather than systems and strategy. The research indicates that there are some competencies that may be more important for SMEs in terms of behaving in a resource efficient manner:

The SME operates within a strategy within which key roles and accountabilities are defined and has a participatory management structure; one that engages employees across the hierarchy on key issues to do with operational, resource and organisational management.

The SME has a structured system of managing risks associated with business activities (e.g. Health & Safety management system), which arms it with a framework within which BRE measures can be implemented.

The SME links BRE with business performance; in effect perceiving resources not as fixed costs but elements of the business that can be managed in the same way as other issues.

The SME integrates BRE into how, what and why it procures goods and services from its supply chain and engages those suppliers in a dialogue – this provides a forum upon which incremental step changes in procurement lead to wider efficiency gains within the business.

Possibly most important of all;

The SME is aware of gaps in its knowledge regarding BRE and has a means of accessing further information, support and know-how on BRE, either from external or internal sources (such as staff involvement). This competency fundamentally requires the SME to acknowledge BRE as a concept and to have understood its interaction within its own organisation such that it becomes aware of what it does not know as well as what it does.

Working with SMEs in non-service based sectors The following diagram shows one way of organising the competencies that were found to be important for higher levels of BRE capability, and how WRAP and other users of the framework might think about applying it. For manufacturers (and other non-service based sectors, such as printers, utilities and construction SMEs), the ability to optimise their own processes and systems is key to BRE, and the competences that support this – those that were also found to be important for higher levels of BRE capability by the research – are then the areas for WRAP to focus on in working with this group.


7

Figure 2: Competencies identified for higher levels of BRE capability

This diagram is unlikely to work for SMEs in service sectors, largely as there is less scope for processes and systems to be optimised. Limited evidence from this research suggests that external information, ideas and know-how may be more important in influencing SMEs in service sectors. This is possibly because the BRE actions that service sectors can take are simpler, and so it is easier for these SMEs to implement an idea without needing more complex tools or delivery methods. For this group, ‘optimising processes and systems’ may be limited to basic actions that are simple green-accounting measures, or procurement processes. The model in Figure 3 highlights the importance of capability and action in three different parts of a business: Figure 3: Optimum systems for BRE

Optimises processes

and systems for BRE

Works with supply chain to identify/implement BRE

Encourages/empowers/ enforces staff action

Recognises the need for individual action on BRE

Links BRE with

business performance

Uses BRE information to support decision-making

Operational strategy with defined accountabilities

Measures and monitors use of resources

Information

Strategy Participation

Optimum systems for

BRE

External information, know-how, support


8

Other competencies that were found to of importance (and shown by SMEs with low overall levels of BRE capability) can be thought of as the tools or delivery methods needed to deliver these three aspects. In general, the primary or entry-level competences (those found in SMEs with lower overall BRE capability) represent these tools or delivery mechanisms. In other words, SMEs with low BRE capability have some of the tools or delivery mechanisms needed for BRE in place, but aren’t using them in a purposeful way, or necessarily with BRE in mind. This supports the research finding that BRE activities are largely ad hoc and reactive.

WRAP could engage with SMEs, by helping to identify the tools or delivery mechanisms that SMEs already have in place and showing how they can contribute to a more strategic approach to BRE. The simplified triangle model could be a useful communication tool for businesses that already have some level of BRE capability.

Some wider questions that WRAP, and any other stakeholders, may want to consider are as follows:

How should different levels of competence be defined? This research used the subjective judgement of the research team to assess competence, but WRAP and others may want to develop a more rigorous definition of competence. This could be generic and applicable across all of the elements of the framework, or more practically focused and specific for each competency.

Should competences be weighted, and if so, how? It was not possible within the scope of this research to assess the relative importance of different competencies within the framework. WRAP and stakeholders may be able to use their expert knowledge and experience of working with SMEs to assign a weighting to the competencies in the framework.

How does WRAP define BRE? This study has used a broad interpretation of BRE, reflecting the exploratory nature of the research, and also the wide range of resources identified by businesses that were interviewed. There may therefore be value in developing a common definition of BRE if the framework is to be developed further or used as a tool to work with SMEs. WRAP may also want to consider which aspects of BRE can be measured (or are already measured) so that BRE outcomes can be linked back to competencies.

How can links between competencies and actual BRE behaviours be demonstrated? Some further work to quantify the links between behaviours and outcomes is needed, although a representative survey may not be the best way to do this.


9

Contents

1.0 Introduction ............................................................................................... 11 1.1 Research aims ......................................................................................... 11 1.2 Methodology ............................................................................................ 11

1.2.1 Evidence review ............................................................................. 11 1.2.2 Development of a competency model .............................................. 12 1.2.3 Qualitative research ....................................................................... 12 1.2.4 Quantitative research ..................................................................... 13

2.0 Developing a competency model ................................................................ 13 2.1 Key findings from the evidence review ....................................................... 13

2.1.1 Conceptual model .......................................................................... 13 Figure 2.1 Model of resource efficiency competencies and characteristics of SMEs ......

2.1.2 Evidence review: key findings ......................................................... 16 2.2 Development of a competency model ........................................................ 19 Figure 2.2 Draft BRE Competency Model prior to phase one qualitative testing ........ 22

3.0 Qualitative research: in depth interviews ................................................... 23 3.1 Overview of qualitative research ................................................................ 23 3.2 Interview analysis: overview ..................................................................... 25 3.3 Analysis of competencies .......................................................................... 26

3.3.1 Organisational norms ..................................................................... 26 3.3.2 Commitment/willingness to change ................................................. 29 3.3.3 Action/ability to change .................................................................. 34 3.3.4 Know-how/self-efficacy and capability .............................................. 37

3.4 New competencies and indicators .............................................................. 42 3.5 Entry level and advanced competencies ..................................................... 44 3.6 Factors that affect BRE competence........................................................... 47

4.0 Wider results .............................................................................................. 51 4.1 Elements of BRE ...................................................................................... 54

5.0 A competency framework for SMEs ............................................................ 57 6.0 Conclusions and recommendations ............................................................ 59

6.1 Summary of deliverables ........................................................................... 59 6.2 Conclusions ............................................................................................. 60

6.2.1 Insights into how SMEs think about BRE .......................................... 60 6.2.2 Insights into what SMEs are doing on BRE ....................................... 63 6.2.3 Insights into barriers and motivations .............................................. 65

6.3 Next steps and applying the research ........................................................ 66 6.3.1 Suggested interventions for SMEs in non-service based sectors .......... 67 6.3.2 Suggested interventions for smaller SMEs and SMEs in service based sectors .................................................................................................... 69 6.3.3 Next steps ..................................................................................... 70 6.3.4 Implications for quantitative work.................................................... 71

Appendix A - Coded Competency model ............................................................... 72


10

Glossary

BRE Business Resource Efficiency RE Resource Efficiency SME Small and Medium-sized Enterprise

Acknowledgements

WRAP and its consultants would like to acknowledge the support of the organisations who agreed to participate in the qualitative element of this study and the contributions of the Project Partners: Defra, the Federation of Small Businesses and the Carbon Trust.


11

1.0 Introduction 1.1 Research aims WRAP has been tasked by Defra to deliver resource efficiency along four key themes, including Business Resource Efficiency (BRE), by supporting resource efficiency amongst small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). This research builds on WRAP’s existing knowledge and experience of working with SMEs to improve resource efficiency, in order to inform WRAP’s business planning. In particular, this research was commissioned to better understand the sectors and/or types of SME that will be more willing to act than others; the need to better understand SMEs generally; and to understand how different types of intervention will be more appropriate to different types of business. WRAP’s objectives for the work were:

To consider the types of resource efficient behaviours WRAP should seek to influence

during their next business plan, and to establish a framework of key competencies to

benchmark progress.

To develop a competency framework for resource efficiency for SMEs in the UK by

parameters that may include sector, size and use of resources.

To better understand motivations and barriers for SMEs to act in a resource efficient way

and in particular their levels of competence in respect of agreed resource efficient forms

of behaviour.

The main focus of the work was to develop a repeatable method of measuring behaviour

change in SMEs (related to BRE) that includes, where possible, understanding of the links

between behaviours and outcomes.

1.2 Methodology Primary and secondary research was carried out from October 2010 to March 2011, to identify the different factors, or competencies, which are important in supporting resource-efficient behaviours in SMEs. The following stages of research were planned:

A review of secondary evidence sources;

Development of an outline competency framework for resource efficiency for SMEs;

Primary research (in depth interviews) to test the initial framework and to cognitively test

questions for a quantitative survey; and

A quantitative survey with approximately 2,000 SMEs to develop a segmentation of SMEs

based on the competency framework (subject to the findings of the initial qualitative

research and its implications for the feasibility of a survey)

The different methodologies used are described in more detail below. 1.2.1 Evidence review A focused literature review was carried out to inform the development and testing of a resource efficiency competency framework for SMEs. The aim of the evidence review was to identify the characteristics, skills, resources, and additional contextual factors that are important in supporting resource efficiency in SMEs.


12

The review drew on a range of material, including both published and unpublished reports; personal communications, academic papers, reports and web-based tools; material from government departments, agencies, and government-funded business-support organisations; qualitative and quantitative primary research, and desk-based secondary reviews. The majority of the material reviewed was academic research, with the rest being from government or government bodies. Most of the sources were UK-focused, with two European and two international sources. The research team had a high level of existing knowledge and awareness of a range of reports from previous work, which generated most of the material that was reviewed. Internet searches were also used to check for additional sources of information. A separate briefing was produced on the literature review, and the main findings are presented in section 2.1.2. 1.2.2 Development of a competency model The results of the literature review were reviewed to produce a draft competency model (see section 2.2). The draft model summarised the factors identified by the evidence, and a tiered system/categorisation of headline, supporting and collateral competencies was proposed. The competency framework was developed through series of steps which can be summarised as follows:

The evidence review findings were assessed from which an initial ‘long list’ of 50

competencies was defined. The competencies were categorised into four groups (ethos,

governance, skills and resources and practice). These competencies could theoretically

apply to any business (regardless of size or type);

The ‘long list’ was then translated into a BRE ‘Competency Framework Model’ that further

categorised the competencies into enabling, supporting and indicator competencies. The

question of which competencies were relevant to SMEs in particular remained;

The subsequent qualitative stage of the project tested the Competency Framework Model

to identify which competencies are representative in SMEs (see below).

1.2.3 Qualitative research In depth interviews were carried out with SMEs to test the findings of the first evidence review and competency model. Two phases of qualitative research were conducted, and interviews were held with a total of 42 SMEs. In the first phase of research, 15 paired interviews were completed with 28 participants in November 2010, and 15 interviews were conducted with single participants in February 2011 in phase two. Further detail on the methodology and analysis of the qualitative interviews is given in section 3.1. From information and observations of the qualitative research, a BRE Competency Model together with a draft framework for assessing competence levels was subsequently developed.


13

1.2.4 Quantitative research The first phase of interviews found lower levels of competency than had been anticipated. This had several implications for the next planned phase of research, which was proposed to be a quantitative survey of 2000 SMEs. It was not possible to fully test the competency model, or to make a judgement about whether or not it contained the right elements, as few of the businesses interviewed in phase one demonstrated higher levels of BRE capability. Lack of conceptual understanding about BRE or some business competencies among the first set of interviewees raised concerns that the questions intended for the larger quantitative survey would be fully understood and therefore deliver robust results. The first phase of qualitative interviews had a large proportion of smaller and service-based SMEs, and given the low levels of competency found, this suggested that the sampling strategy would need to boost numbers of larger and non-service based SMEs. The reliability of this type of sample would be low at the level of granularity desired (i.e. size by sector) because of lack of available sample in some size/sector bands. The larger quantitative survey was not conducted because of the reasons outlined above. A second phase of in depth interviews was planned instead, with a sample of larger SMEs, to try and determine whether the competency model was valid. On the basis of the first interviews, the hypothesis that there was a size threshold (that did not correspond with official SME size bands) at which a competency approach would kick-in and begin to make sense to businesses needed to be tested. The outputs from this would then be used to inform the development of the final strategy for WRAP to evaluate competency levels amongst SMEs. 2.0 Developing a competency model This section outlines the process that was followed in developing the initial competency model, by summarising the key findings from the evidence review, and how these findings were used to develop a competency model. 2.1 Key findings from the evidence review 2.1.1 Conceptual model The scope of the review was deliberately broad, and not restricted to particular sectors, size of business, or behaviours. The review identified a range of very different types of factors that may affect the resource efficiency of an SME. It did not provide detailed analysis, or attempt to compare or rank the relative importance of these different factors, due to the limited time available and wide scope of the review. It was also not possible to demonstrate links between a particular factor and an environmental outcome given the scope and time available. A conceptual framework was developed (shown below) to help frame the many different types of factors that were considered during the review, including psychological and sociological factors and wider market/societal conditions, as well as the presence (or absence) of appropriate skills and resources. The factors were categorised into four different types:

Ethos (including factors such as personal values and attitudes of owner-managers,

business values and priorities);

Governance (including ways of working, management systems, relationships with

supplychain);


14

Skills and resources (including finance and knowledge); and

Fixed (including size, location and legal requirements).

These factors were considered at three different levels: for the individual SME; its direct business contacts such as supplychain and regulators; and indirect business contacts such as trade associations and business networks. Many of the findings from the review are familiar, for example from the work of Envirowise and BREW. The review adds to this knowledge by attempting to organise findings into a framework, from which competencies can be inferred. It also attempts to model the system of influences that affect the resource efficiency behaviours of an SME, rather than presenting factors in isolation. Limitations of the review The findings of the review were generalised in nature due to its broad scope, and not necessarily specific to particular types of business. There will be important additional factors to be considered for specific issues, such as energy, water, waste, or carbon reduction, and specific sectors or types of business, such as retail or manufacturing. In particular, the differences between sectors were not examined in detail, although forthcoming research from Defra will provide an extensive review of sectoral differences related to waste prevention. Much of the evidence is focused on smaller SMEs, and may be less applicable to larger SMEs. The conceptual model that was developed is presented below (Figure 2.1), followed by a summary of the key findings.

Development of a Competency Framework for Business Resource Efficiency 15

Figure 2.1 Model of resource efficiency competencies and characteristics of SMEs

Ethos

Governance

Skills and resources

Fixed

Trust and legitimacy

Attitudes Size

Place

E

Business priorities

Sector

Past behaviour

Structure

E

Roles and responsibilities

Strategy

Processes E

SME

Staff skills and capacity Finance

Knowledge and information

Customer values

Training

E

Adaptability

Legal duties

Ability to enforce regulation

Supply chain requirements

Ability to communicate

Clear role or ‘offer’

Regulator’s attitudes

Regulator’s structure

Informal networks

KEY: Inner circle – SME Middle circle – direct business contacts (e.g. supply chain, regulators) Outer circle – indirect business contacts (e.g. trade association

networks)


16

2.1.2 Evidence review: key findings The summary of findings from the evidence review is given below, arranged by the four sections of the model (Figure 2.1). They are expressed below as the characteristics and competencies that the review suggests are important for BRE. Much of the source material described an absence of a capability, skill, or resource in businesses which act as barriers to RE behaviour, rather than demonstrating evidence of good practice. Therefore, many of the competencies are inferred from an absence or barrier evident in SMEs, rather than the observation of existing competencies in high-performing companies. Fixed and contextual characteristics of an SME Size:

Size influences the resources and time available within SMEs to reflect on current practice,

consider and research alternatives, and implement changes.

Developed managerial and organisational structures help businesses to manage their

resources and time effectively, and allocate time to environmental management.

Small SMEs lack the strategic management required to integrate resource efficiency into

everyday practice.

Access to external expertise and support where internal capability is low.

Skills and resources of an SME Finance:

Awareness of the business benefits of resource efficiency, in particular the financial

implications of taking action, and of not taking action.

Access to accurate information on the likely costs and benefits of resource efficiency

improvements, and ability of managers to make appropriate judgements based on this.

Access to affordable support and expertise.

Staff skills and capacity:

SMEs need sufficient time, resources and skills to devote to changing business practices.

Resource efficiency activities are seen as compatible with or resulting from, everyday

business activities.

An understanding of how environmental issues and regulation relate to day-to-day


The ability to identify and access external sources of affordable support and expertise.

The ability to recruit staff with suitable skills, or to develop internal expertise on

environmental issues.

Access to environmental management tools that are proportionate, relevant and

meaningful to small businesses.

Owner-manager communication skills and ability to publicise efforts and achievement to

external stakeholders.

Corporate knowledge and information:

Knowledge of how to undertake improvements for efficiency.

Awareness of wider market changes, and the opportunities for implementing resource

efficiency that these create.

Owner-manager or responsible staff member who is proactively looking for relevant

information.

Access to accurate information about the environmental impacts of business activities.


17

Understand the impacts of efficiency improvements – in particular the financial impacts –

including having access to accurate information about the costs and benefits of specific

actions.

Governance of the SME Structure, roles and responsibilities of staff:

A participatory management approach, and a non-hierarchical structure, which

encourages staff involvement.

Staff who are encouraged and empowered to take personal responsibility for their work,

and working conditions.

Processes for internal communication and feedback between staff and managers,

together with good communication skills in owner-managers.

Staff with specific responsibilities for resource efficiency/environmental management (or

staff with a dedicated role in larger businesses).

Top-level support and leadership, and the ability to inspire change in staff and work

strategically on resource efficiency.

Processes and procedures that support and clarify staff duties, such as role profiles, staff

objectives, reviews of performance, mentoring and access to training.

BRE processes and policies, and environmental management systems:

A statement of values or ‘policy’ on environmental management and resource efficiency,

and a plan of how this will be implemented. Both should be proportionate to the size of

the business.

Business planning that incorporates environmental management.

Generic management skills to support planning, strategic thinking, and implementation of

policies and plans.

Strategy:

Owner-managers with the ability to think strategically about their business, and plan over

the longer term.

Environmental management and resource efficiency issues are integrated into strategic

plans.

Strategy and plans developed that are proportionate to the size of the business.

Training:

Ability to identify existing skills gaps.

A commitment to training existing staff, rather than paying for external expertise.

An awareness of the advice, training and funding that is available to small businesses,

and a willingness to take advantage of these opportunities.

Ethos of the SME Business priorities:

Environmental management/resource efficiency activities are seen as part of ‘core’


Environmental regulation is viewed as legitimate, and company culture and ways of

working support compliance.

An awareness of environmental regulation, and basic levels of compliance.

A belief that adopting environmental friendly technologies or practices will not be costly or

risky, and that the financial benefits of compliance/good practice will outweigh any

investment.


18

Attitudes of the SME:

Owner/manager belief in the importance of environmental management and a personal

belief in the value of the environment.

An understanding of the actual impact of a SMEs impact on the environment, or of the

cumulative impact of SMEs, and the importance of individual action.

The ability of the owner-manager to translate their personal values into the business, and

communicate these to staff. This includes both formal mechanisms (such as strategies,

policies, training, and objectives) and also less tangible aspects such as leadership and

communication skills, and fostering a company culture.

Past behaviour and the ability to reflect and learn; agency and adaptability:

A progressive and gradual approach taken to environmental management/resource

efficiency.

Recognition of the limitations and constraints of management systems and business

processes, and how environmental management activities can be delivered within these.

Recognition of the social influences – such as company culture, or habits and ways of

working – and how these may support or deter any changes.

Owner-managers who are willing and able to delegate decision making to other staff

members.

Owner-managers with the management skills and capacity to take advantage of the

flexibility within SMEs, due to simple structures, high levels of personal contact, and lack

of burdensome procedures.

Connections between an SME and the wider society in which it operates, and openness to

wider influences.

Fixed and contextual characteristics of direct business contacts

An awareness of relevant regulation, and basic compliance with this.

The ability to assess the impacts of levels of compliance with legislation on business

activities, including accurate information on costs and benefits, and management abilities

to make appropriate judgements based on this information.

Consistent messages via regulation put pressure on SMEs to maintain and improve their

environmental performance.

Businesses should keep awareness of regulatory requirements and ensure they know

where to turn for advice and support where regulations relate to what they do.

Businesses should identify ways to overcome the challenges the face within the contexts

within which they operate and integrate measures that they take into their actions to

address regulatory requirements where relevant.

Governance of direct business contacts Ethos and attitudes of direct business contacts:

Businesses should be open to and actively seek advice on implementing regulations that

affect them or relate to what they do.

Businesses should be aware of the role of the regulators and seek information and advice

when functions are not clear.

SMEs should let the regulators know if they feel that regulations impose too severe a

burden on them or are difficult to implement in the context of their business.

SMEs need to be sensitive to/aware of the needs of customers and purchasers and have

the ability to respond to those needs. This will be contingent on formal processes, such


19

as monitoring sales and feedback, and informal networks and relationships within the

supplychain.

Awareness of the wider market opportunities presented by improved environmental

performance, or resource efficiency innovation (or potential for losses due to poor

performance).

Characteristics and competencies of indirect business contacts:

SMEs benefit most from participation in local and sector specific networks.

SMEs benefit from participation in monitoring activities when involved in resource

efficiency projects.

For stakeholders supporting SMEs:

Effective business support needs to be specific and meet a clear need, or make a clear

‘offer’ to SMEs.

Local networks can support individual SMEs in understanding and taking appropriate

action on environmental issues/resource efficiency.

Business support organisations need to have an established and trusted relationship with

SMEs, and ideally be free of charge.

Organisations that are business-focused, but also provide support on environmental

management, will be more successful than environmental organisations who want to

engage businesses.

2.2 Development of a competency model ‘Competency’ is a cluster of the behaviours, knowledge, understanding or skills needed to achieve a required outcome. This contrasts with ‘competence’ that relates to a system of standards and can be an indicator of level of performance i.e. there are levels of competence within a particular competency. A model of resource efficiency competencies will therefore set out the behaviours etc. that are required to progress resource efficiency in business. It is possible that the required competencies may vary to account for the range of organisation size and sectors covered (e.g. services vs. manufacturing). The focus of this work is on organisational competencies rather than those of individuals. To develop a competency model, the findings of the evidence review were assessed. From this assessment, an initial ‘long list’ of BRE competencies was defined with competencies placed into four categories. The long list was subjectively assessed and core BRE competencies selected within each category. These core competencies selected from the long list are presented in the following tables.


20

Ethos – Core BRE competencies

Competency Explanatory Notes

Commitment by owner/senior manager to BRE

Has a written statement or part of a company policy/mission statement. Has made senior management staff responsible. Competency is demonstrated by adequate demonstration of support.

Organisation recognises the importance of individual action on BRE

Organisation recognises importance of empowered individuals to identify measures and implement them. Facilitated by a participatory management approach.

Organisation has a vision that incorporates and facilitates BRE

Could include a commitment to the elements of BRE (energy, water, materials, processes, supplychain working etc.) or a broad statement (e.g. CSR statement) that supports BRE.

Organisation has a culture that is open and willing to change and is adaptable

Organisation demonstrates culture and ability to readily respond and adapt to BRE opportunities.

Governance – Core BRE competencies


Accountability for BRE is clearly defined

Organisation has senior management team member identified with responsibility for BRE (i.e. cost optimisation for energy, materials, resources, supplychain working, etc.)

Organisation dedicates management time for BRE

Includes the evaluation of BRE performance and discussion of operational BRE issues.

Organisation has a business strategy and action plan that incorporates BRE

The elements of BRE are incorporated into day-to-day operational and business strategy and planning

Organisation has a participatory management structure

Management structure is open to and seeks staff input in decision-making.

Staff duties and responsibilities relating to or influencing are clearly defined

Elements of BRE responsibility are incorporated into role descriptors - throughout all staff roles as appropriate. E.g. monitoring, evaluation, option appraisal, business case development, implementation of change.


21

Practice – Core BRE competencies


Organisation can demonstrate supplychain working to exploit opportunities for BRE

Examples includes product performance, packaging, green design, recyclability of products, logistics, end-of-life etc (requirement of competency needs to be able to examine the supplychain up and down). Organisations work to optimise performance of the supplychain (e.g. scheduling, logistics, contracts).

Organisation reports and communicates BRE performance

Includes internal and external communications. Reporting will include relevant aspects from energy, water, materials, process efficiency, packaging use/waste, supplychain working, etc.

Organisation evaluates impact of BRE measures

The organisation uses monitoring information to carry out evaluations of opportunities to become more efficient rather than purely monitoring and recording information. Includes costs, benefits, barriers, potential market advantage, USP etc.

Organisation measures and monitors the use of resources

Organisation has systems in place to collect and use information. Examples include energy, carbon, CO2, staff time, water, materials, product specifications, product standards etc.

Organisation can demonstrate implementation of BRE measures

Can demonstrate and evidence measures adopted to increase BRE and reduce cost. Backed up by monitoring and evaluation.

Organisation can demonstrate that it has carried out a review of BRE

Can demonstrate that it has collected information and evaluated opportunities for BRE. Examples may include for energy, carbon, CO2, staff time, water, materials, product specifications, product standards etc.

Skills and Resources – Core BRE competencies


Staff are appropriately trained in BRE

Includes raising awareness of BRE - internal marketing - and ensuring the correct staff are trained in the required skills such as monitoring, evaluation, reporting, development of business cases for measures and implementation of change.

Organisation has in-house expertise on BRE

Appropriate expertise and skills are available internally.

Organisation is aware of the external networks and expertise relating to BRE

Demonstrates awareness of networks including WRAP, Business Links, trade bodies.

Organisation understands how to optimise process and/or equipment performance

I.e. understands specifications and limitations of equipment. This may be manufacturing process equipment through to printers, lighting and heating in offices.

These competencies, although relevant to SMEs, were not exclusive to SMEs. Qualitative research was carried out to understand this better (see Section 3). The core BRE competencies were refined and developed into a Competency Framework Model presented in the Figure 2.2. The model further categorises the competencies by behavioural change dimension and whether a headline, supporting or collateral type competency. The qualitative research tested the model and identified those competencies that are relevant and recognised by SMEs.


22

Figure 2.2 Draft BRE Competency Model prior to phase one qualitative testing

Behaviour change

dimension


(acceptance of

importance)

Commitment


Action

(ability to change)

Know-how

(self-


Factors (linked to

evidence review)


Headline

competencies

Seeks to demonstrate

leadership on

environmental issues

Operates within a business

strategy with defined

accountabilities

Integrates BRE into

business strategy

Applies business strategy to

improve BRE performance

Understands requirements

to make positive changes

Recognises the need

for BRE expertise

within organisation

Routinely evaluates

skills and knowledge

Supporting

competencies

Recognises the importance

of individual action on BRE

Encourages and empowers

staff to improve BRE

performance

Communicates on the

importance of the

environment


performance



Communicates business

aims/objectives on BRE

internally and externally


of resources , reviews

performance and defines

actions to achieve

measurable outcomes

Works with supply chain to

identify and implement


Evaluates & adopts

external best practice on

BRE

Has in-house expertise

on BRE

Uses external

networks & expertise

to improve BRE

Collateral

Competencies

Has a participatory


Policy commitment by

owner/senior manager

that includes elements of

resource efficiency


& accountability relating to

or influencing BRE are

clearly defined and

regularly reviewed

Dedicates time to

understand and improve

resource efficiency

Sets targets, reports &

communicates BRE

performance (KPIs)

Benchmarks performance

on BRE against sector best

practice

Actively seeks feedback on

performance from suppliers

and customers

BRE and/or environment


into procurement

processes

Reviews emerging


Staff appropriately

trained in BRE

Understands how to

optimise process

and/or equipment

performance

Seeks and evaluates

benefits of external

training on BRE for its

staff

Uses external business

networks to import

expertise or resources

on BRE


23

3.0 Qualitative research: in depth interviews 3.1 Overview of qualitative research Qualitative interviews were conducted in two phases to test the competency framework. An overview of the interviews conducted across both phases, by sector and size band, is given in Error! Reference source not found. below with an overall summary in Table 3.2. Table 3.1: Number of interviews conducted

Sector Size band Actual size (number of staff)1

Services (retail) 2 to 9

Services (commerce) 2 to 9

Services (commerce) 2 to 9 4

Printing 2 to 9 4

Manufacturing (food & drink) 2 to 9 6




Manufacturing (metal/furniture) 10 to 19


Services (retail) 10 to 19 11











Manufacturing (electronics) 20 to 49

Manufacturing (furniture) 20 to 49 28


Hospitality 50-99

Manufacturing 50-99 55


Manufacturing (metal) 50 to 249 60

1 Some SMEs did not provide information during the interviews on the actual number of staff employed.


24

Printing 50-99 65

Services (commerce) 50-99 65

Hospitality 100-149 80



Construction 100-149 120


Manufacturing 50 to 249 125

Construction 50 to 249 150

Manufacturing 150-199


Construction 150-199 200


Utilities 200-249 250

Construction 50 to 249 250

Table 3.2: Summary of interviews conducted by business sector

Size (number of

staff)

Sector

Services Manufacturing Construction Other

(printing/utilities)

2 to 49 14 9 1

50 to 99 2 3 1

100 to 149 1 4 1

150 to 199 1 1 1

200 to 249 1 2 1

Qualitative research was conducted in two phases, with a total of 43 in depth interviews with SMEs. In the first phase of research, 15 paired interviews were completed with 28 participants, covering manufacturing, construction, retail, and other services. The interviews were conducted in November 2010. The competency framework was used as the basis for an interview topic guide. The interviews also included more general questions, to explore the language and terms that SMEs used in talking about resource efficiency, and to test their understanding of different competencies. A set of questions for the in depth interviews was developed and refined during the first 12 interviews, moving from open to closed questions where possible, and testing how terms and phrases were understood. The topic guide was modified during the first phase of interviews, to try and formulate a set of questions that could be used in a telephone or internet survey. A set of closed questions that could be used for a quantitative survey were used for the final three interviews, with participants given the questions to answer, followed


25

by discussion about how well they understood them and their understanding of terms and phrases used. The first phase of interviews found lower levels of competency than had been anticipated. One possible reason for this was that the first phase of interviews tended to be with smaller SMEs (less than 50 staff). It was not possible to test the competency framework, and to assess whether the low levels of competence were due to a genuine lack of BRE competency, or because the framework did not include the factors that determine BRE. As a result, the second phase of interviews focused on larger SMEs, and involved 15 interviews with SMEs of 50+ staff, covering manufacturing, construction, retail and other services. These interviews were held with individual participants rather than pairs. The second phase of interviews used the same topic guide that had been refined during phase one of qualitative research. 3.2 Interview analysis: overview The survey questions and responses were coded according to the competencies in the framework that they related to (See Appendix A). Some competencies mapped directly onto questions in the topic guide; others were inferred from indirect or related questions. This mapping and coding of responses meant that businesses could be assessed against competencies in the framework. A preliminary qualitative scoring system was used for all of the businesses we interviewed against the framework. Businesses were scored as having high, medium or low competence for each element that they displayed, and this rating was then converted into a score (high=3, medium=2, low=1). Where businesses stated that they actively were not doing something, and had no intention to (for example, seeing staff training as unnecessary, or stating that they would not talk to suppliers) they were given a negative score of -1. This analysis has limitations, and is only intended to provide a means of being able to quickly identify more and less competent businesses, and also the most commonly occurring competencies. The scoring is not intended to be definitive and was based on subjective criteria of what high, medium and low levels of competence looked like in SMEs. There were also considerable gaps where it was not possible to score a competency, based on what was said in response to a particular question. This was partly due to the fact that questions were refined as the interviews progressed, and so some interviews covered slightly different areas. Although the scoring of competencies has limitations, it suggests some interesting trends and differences within the sample of SMEs. Some competencies did not appear at all, whilst others were demonstrated by almost all of the SMEs. It is also possible to suggest some differences in terms of size and sector, with the caveat that these are based on a very small sample and do not show clear relationships. Recurring themes in the interviews also suggested additional new competencies, or indicators of competence. These were analysed in the same way as the existing competencies in the framework. The analysis of the interviews is given below. Section 3.3 discusses the findings for the individual competencies, and any significant differences by size or sector are identified. Section 3.5 discusses the broader themes that emerged from the interviews.


26

3.3 Analysis of competencies The draft competency model (Figure 2.2) included four main categories that reflect different aspects of behaviour change. These were organisational norms, commitment to change, action (ability to change) and know how (self-efficacy/capability). Competencies were identified for each behaviour change dimension and arranged by means of a structure that assumed interrelationships and a hierarchy between the competencies. It is important to note that the interrelationships were assumptions used as a means to take the study forward as the conclusions provided evidence to suggest many of the assumptions were ultimately not reflective of reality.

Headline/enabling competencies

These were considered, at the initial development of the competency model, to represent a minimum standard and which it was anticipated would form the basis of a competent SME.

Supporting competencies

These were considered to sit below the headline competency within each category, they were foreseen to act as markers of level of competence but were anticipated more likely to be seen in businesses that demonstrated a headline competency.

Collateral competencies

These were anticipated to be found as a result of having both the headline and the supporting competencies – i.e. a passive competency (passive) rather than active competency.

The extent to which each competency was demonstrated by the SMEs is outlined below.

3.3.1 Organisational norms Table 3.3: Hierarchy of competencies related to organisational norms

Type of competency Competencies related to organisational norms

Headline/Enabling competency Seeks to demonstrate leadership on environmental issues

Supporting competency Recognises the importance of individual action on BRE

Encourages and empowers staff to improve BRE performance

Collateral competency

Has a participatory management structure

Has values and attitudes that consider the environment to be important

Headline competency (organisational norms): seeks to demonstrate leadership on environmental issues There was very little evidence of a desire from businesses to be leaders on environmental issues, across all of the interviewees. This was a consistent finding regardless of size and


27

sector, and overall levels of competency2 for BRE, with the only exception being a retailer specialising in eco-friendly products. Businesses generally have a commitment to using resources well – whether for cost and/or ethical reasons – but that is not usually driven by environmental (ethical) concerns. Therefore the two are often thought of as separate things. The evidence suggests that BRE is often linked to cost saving rather than environmental impact, but even where businesses had an ethical view that saving resources was important, for the majority this did not correspond to pro-environmental values.

Many of the businesses did seek to lead on customer service, quality, and on being an ‘ethical employer’. Businesses’ interpretation of ethical largely referred to how staff are treated, and was used in a vague way to describe an overall culture, or management approach, rather than specific policies or approaches.

We are ethical, we’re all good citizens to each other and we try as hard

as we possibly can to make it as enjoyable a place to work as possible.

Service (commerce), 50-99 staff

Supporting competency 1 (organisational norms): Recognises the importance of individual action on BRE The extent to which SMEs demonstrated this competency varied depending on their overall level of competence. In other words, the SMEs that were more competent overall – non service sectors such as manufacturing, construction, printing, utilities, and larger rather than smaller SMEs – demonstrated higher levels of this competency. Those SMEs with lower overall BRE competence – service sector, and smaller SMEs – showed competence in this competency. The higher levels of competency found in manufacturing and construction SMEs were often demonstrated by the use of written processes and operating procedures, although other behavioural aspects were also included.

It is all in writing… So if a light has been left on all night, you know, it is

in everybody’s job description that they have to turn off lights. You can’t

leave extractors on overnight, the heating, if no one is in the factory you

must turn the heating off.

Manufacturing, 100-149 staff

Although smaller and service-based SMEs generally recognised the importance of managing resources well, they were more likely to see individuals’ actions as common sense and not something that they would control. The types of behaviours that were judged to be demonstrating lower levels of competence were those that engaged staff more passively, or as a general group, for example, signage to remind staff to use resources well. Several businesses had taken actions that used technology to automate light switches or taps, and so removed the burden on staff to take action or become actively engaged.

We have installed special plugs on computers to ensure they turn off

rather than just go on to standby. They also have motion sensitive lights

to save energy when rooms aren't being used.

Hospitality, 100-149 staff

2 The level of competency was judged through subjective evaluation of not only the number and type of competencies demonstrated through the interview process but also the range of competence within each competency


28

We use low voltage lights... we switch it off when it is not needed. We

make sure the computers are not on standby and lots of other things,

because that is all CO2 and it really just saves so much energy. …I know

by doing that, for many years I have saved at least 15% to 20%, that is a

lot of money.

Commerce, 150-199 staff

All the taps have recently been changed, we have got 18 toilets on our

site, which probably means about 30 sinks and we have the hand press

taps now, that are timed, 30 seconds and it is off. Because we would go

in and the taps would be on all the time. We save tens of thousands of

pounds in water bills as well.


Supporting competency (2) (organisational norms): Encourages, empowers or

enforces staff to improve BRE performance

Again, the extent to which SMEs demonstrated this competency varied depending on their overall level of competence. Manufacturing/construction, and larger, SMEs that were more competent overall showed higher levels of this competency than those SMEs with lower overall BRE competence – service sector, and smaller SMEs. There were only two examples of service-sector SMEs displaying this competency (in one case this was a reflection of the interviewee’s personal values related to resource efficiency). An important clarification emerged through the interviews was that SMEs encourage, empowered, but frequently also enforced BRE performance in their staff. As previously, this was often managed through operating procedures or job instructions. SMEs with higher levels of competency used more formal methods to improve BRE performance in their staff, for example, operating procedures or job instructions that included BRE responsibilities. Some SMEs offered incentives, for example a printing firm (50-99) monitor and set weekly targets for waste, and offer a small percentage bonus to shop floor operators if waste can be reduced. SMEs with lower levels of competency relied on less formal, verbal communication.

But you just have to keep drumming it home to people that it is a cost

that we can’t afford to have happen, we don’t want scrap.

Manufacturing, 50 to 99 staff

You have to keep telling people and telling people and it does finally sink

in. So it is good but it could be better and it is getting better. I think in

this day and age so many more people understand waste and hazards

and where you can’t put certain things. I think it is drilled into everybody

these days.


Smaller SMEs were more likely to feel that job descriptions or procedures were onerous or unnecessary, even if they recognised the importance of individual action on BRE. Others felt that it was ‘not their place’ or inappropriate to ask staff to take action.

That is really hard in a business though, you say to somebody, don’t fill

the kettle up all the way, only put what you need.

Commerce, 100 to 149 staff


29

Collateral competency (organisational norms): Has participatory management

structure

This competency was one of the most frequently demonstrated by SMEs. Most of the more competent businesses scored highly, but additionally, many of the less competent businesses also had low levels of competence. Higher levels of competence were limited to larger SMEs and manufacturers/construction. Smaller SMEs and those in service sectors demonstrated low levels of this competency. Most interviewees saw the value in encouraging participation from all levels of staff, to keep staff feeling involved in the business, even if their input was unlikely to affect decision-making.

It is important that everybody feels that they have a valid opinion. So

yes, we are absolutely very receptive to that kind of thing, yes.


Many SMEs also recognised that staff involvement is important in helping businesses to optimise their processes and systems, and also in finding new ideas or identifying new ways of doing things. The level of competency shown by SMEs was hard to assess, as it is not necessarily shown by formal processes, such as presence at meetings or suggestion boxes, but more the way in which staff involvement is regarded and part of a business culture. This might be demonstrated by managers that are closely involved in the day-to-day working of their business:

Because we are small and we are walking around and talking to people

all the time, of course we get input.


3.3.2 Commitment/willingness to change The second strand of the framework covers elements relating to SMEs’ willingness to change, including businesses’ process and strategy, including staff roles and responsibilities.


30

Table 3.4: Hierarchy of competencies related to commitment (willingness to change)

Type of competency Competencies related to commitment

Headline/Enabling competency Has an operational business strategy with defined accountabilities

Integrates BRE into business strategy

Supporting competency Links BRE with business performance


Communicates its aims/objectives on BRE internally and externally


Policy commitment by owner/senior manager that includes elements of

resource efficiency

Staff roles, responsibilities & accountability relating to or influencing BRE

are clearly defined and regularly reviewed

Dedicates time to understand and improve resource efficiency

Headline competency (commitment): Has an operational business strategy with


This headline competency was one of the more commonly found competencies and, by quite a considerable margin, the most commonly found headline competency. Most of the more competent businesses scored highly, but additionally, several of the less competent businesses demonstrated low levels of competence. Higher levels of competence were limited to larger SMEs and manufacturers/construction. Smaller SMEs and especially those in service sectors did not demonstrate this competency. This competency was interpreted as businesses having clear sales or productivity targets for this analysis, as this was largely the way in which this question was interpreted by SMEs; few of the SMEs had a broader interpretation of strategy. This may be an area that WRAP can focus on to stretch SMEs understanding of strategy, as a focus on sales and productivity can lead to a focus on short term thinking. The difficult economic conditions had a strong influence on answers given to this question, with businesses in the manufacturing sectors being particularly likely to state that they were focused on survival, and that it was very difficult for them to plan in the current economic climate.

We may not be around in the next two years, no one knows.


[Do you have any longer term goals or aims for your business?] Survival.

I mean it really is, it is that tough.


Some smaller or older businesses simply wanted to maintain the status quo, they had a sense that they did not want to expand or plan and were happy with what they had already achieved. One retailer (10 to 19) described being happy with the business as it was, and had no ambitions to expand any further, with longer term aims being just to keep everything


31

going. Another small retailer (2 to 9) stated that they had plans and goals when they first started the business, but that these were less relevant and they were more focused on day-to-day activities now.

Headline competency 1 (commitment): integrates BRE into business strategy

Very few SMEs, including even the most competent, demonstrated this. Only a few of the construction and manufacturing businesses demonstrated this competency, and no service-based businesses demonstrated it at all. Two construction companies (200-250) reported standards and targets on aspects of resource efficiency as being crucial to profitability. Only a small number of construction companies were interviewed and so it is difficult to draw generalised conclusions, but the small number interviewed described a more strategic view of BRE, which seemed to go beyond the way that even highly competent manufacturers thought about BRE. There could be a link between the level of support on the environment and resources (sector initiatives) to the construction sector over the past decade however this was not a linkage that was explicitly tested during the qualitative process. Although many other businesses saw managing resources well as of fundamental importance, only one manufacturing business articulated a similar strategic view of resource efficiency as key to productivity and profitability.

We are always looking to be more profitable. We are always looking to

produce less waste because waste is parts that we haven’t used... and the

less we waste the more we will grow, really.


Supporting competency (commitment): links BRE with business performance

This was the most commonly demonstrated competency, across all of the businesses interviewed. For the purposes of this analysis, businesses were judged to be more competent where they explicitly linked BRE to their bottom line, and of lower competence where BRE was recognised as an important – but not necessarily a business critical - issue to be managed. The businesses that were most competent in BRE overall also demonstrated high levels of this competency (manufacturers/construction sectors and larger businesses). Many of the less competent businesses also had low levels of competency, suggesting that this could be an ‘entry point’ for WRAP in terms of working with SMEs to improve BRE.

It’s how I make a living - it's bottom line profit.


[Using resources well] could be the difference between a holiday in

Disneyland Paris or Disneyland Florida.


The concept of wastage was expressed very strongly across the range of businesses, with many describing resource efficiency in terms of avoiding waste, or getting the best use from inputs (including staff):

To me is amazingly important, it is all down to our profit. If the

resources are used well and they are managed well and the waste is to a

minimum, that means I am only buying what I need to use. So it cuts my

cost and keeps the profit up.

Construction, 150 to 199 staff


32

Larger SMEs, and particularly those in non-service sectors, are much more likely to have integrated the idea of BRE as being fundamental to business performance, and it is applied to their businesses both as an overarching approach but also translated into specific actions. Smaller non-service-based SMEs tended to refer to their understanding of the concept in terms of specific actions to manage resources well, rather than as an overarching approach.

[It’s] doing a journey once instead of twice.


Making sure that every ounce of material we buy was turned into

something we can sell.


As a principle important; but in practical terms not because we do keep

costs to absolutely a minimum. The business would succeed even if we

weren’t efficient in that way.

Services, 2 to 9 staff

…Want to save the planet and not waste [resources]. But you also

want to save yourself money. If you're not spending more than you were

a couple of years ago you know you’re doing okay.

Services (retail), 10 to 19 staff

Service-based SMEs also often described managing resources well as being primarily about staffing rather than material resources:

We’ve got 65 employees in our company and each one of them brings

their own level of running costs.

Commerce, 50 to 99 staff

The analysis for this competency may be important for WRAP. It is reassuring that such a broad range of businesses demonstrate some level of competence in this key area, even if this is limited for some sectors and smaller SMEs. The frequency of this behaviour may suggest it as a point of entry for WRAP to engage with SMEs, and particularly those with lower overall competence. The ways that different types of SME conceptualise BRE may also help to tailor messages to different types of SME, and in particular, it may be useful for WRAP to think about the difference between SMEs that see BRE as an overall concept, compared to a series of specific actions, and the more competent organisations that do both. The ‘reducing waste’ message may be a fruitful way of engaging a range of businesses. The question was tested twice during the interviews, at the start and at the end of the questions. The total scores increased very slightly between the start and finish of the interviews but this is very unlikely to be significant given the subjective nature of the scoring.

Supporting competency (commitment): Uses BRE information to support

decision-making

This competency was demonstrated more frequently and at higher levels, amongst the more competent businesses (particularly larger construction and manufacturing). Conversely, it was mostly absent from less competent (smaller) non-service based SMEs, and no service sector businesses demonstrated this competency.


33

Businesses were considered to have higher levels of competence where they made specific reference to BRE in relation to decision-making, usually in terms of purchasing or investment. For example, one manufacturer had made a strategic business decision on purchasing new equipment based on the longer term benefit of having more efficient machinery, and felt that this gave the business a competitive advantage.

And about 20 or 25 years ago we took a decision, for instance, with the

moulding machines, that we would change them every five years,

whereas a lot of companies would run them for 25 years... We could all

have taken a lot more money out of the business over the years, but we

wouldn’t have a business now. It is absolutely crucial.


Several other manufacturers described using information on efficiency savings and pay-back periods to decide whether or not to invest in new machinery, or change processes.

Working with SMEs to gain more benefit from the monitoring of BRE that they carry out, could be an area where there is scope for WRAP to target manufacturers with lower or middling levels of BRE competence.

Supporting competency (commitment): Communicates its aims/objectives on

BRE internally and externally

This competency was rarely demonstrated and even very competent SMEs were not actively doing this. Many SMEs were talking to supply chains about aspects of BRE, but this was not included as this is covered as a specific competency in its own right. This interaction with supply chains included being audited by customers on production processes (for manufacturers) or on waste production (construction reporting to local authority), but these were not included as they were requirements of the supply chain, rather than a proactive decision to share information. The lack of evidence for this behaviour may be due to the size of the organisations, as previous research3 has shown that reputation is a less important driver for small businesses, which is likely to be relevant for voluntary reporting or statements of aims or values. One manufacturing business described how it proactively reported on environmental performance in an annual newsletter – despite the lack of customer demand for this information.

They are not interested in how we do it. We produce an annual

newsletter where we did try and outline what we do environmentally and

everything else, because everybody does now, but I don’t think anybody

takes the slightest bit of notice.


Collateral competency (action): Policy commitment by owner/senior manager

that includes elements of resource efficiency

This did not explicitly feature at all for any businesses, even the most competent. It might be that this is because competent businesses do not see BRE as a separate business activity; rather it is seen as being integrated into the ‘bottom line’. The commitment to BRE certainly

3 A 2009 Sniffer report (‘Better Regulation – Rethinking the Approach for SMEs’) includes a review of evidence that finds that

external stakeholders have little interest in and insufficient power to influence the environmental behaviour of SMEs. The lack

of stakeholder interest and pressure means that SMEs have little to gain from developing their environmental reputations (see

http://www.sniffer.org.uk/Webcontrol/Secure/ClientSpecific/ResourceManagement/UploadedFiles/UKCC19%20Final%20Report

%20web.pdf)


34

exists in competent SMEs but it was not expressed or conceptualised as a policy-level or organisational commitment.

Collateral competency (action): Staff roles, responsibilities & accountability

relating to or influencing BRE are clearly defined and regularly reviewed

Again, this competency was demonstrated more frequently and at higher levels, amongst the more competent businesses (particularly larger construction and manufacturing). It was mostly absent from less competent SMEs (service sector, smaller sizes). None of the less competent businesses demonstrated this competency at all, and none of the competent businesses were considered to have more than low or medium competence. Businesses were judged to be competent where they had either written job descriptions that included BRE, or instructions for particular processes/operating procedures that included BRE. Some of the smaller and service-based SMEs were scored negatively as they actively stated that they would not use job descriptions or saw no use for them.

‘It’s not a complicated role so doesn't really need a full-on job

description. People are adults; you don't need to give them micro

management.

Retail, 10 to 19 staff

They don't have [them] written down, it just gets complicated.


This may also be a behaviour that WRAP could target to improve competence in middling and even higher levels of BRE competence.

Collateral competency: Dedicates time to understand and improve resource

efficiency

This did not explicitly feature at all for any businesses, even the most competent. Although a wide range of businesses used external sources to find information or to get new ideas, it was not a purposeful activity as this competency implies, rather it was an ad hoc behaviour that was rarely described in a systematic way. Support to SMEs to help them think and plan more strategically for a more sustainable longer-term solution as opposed to seeking short term financial gains (the ‘low hanging fruit’ approach), could well be an area that WRAP may wish to assess going forward. 3.3.3 Action/ability to change The third strand of the framework covers elements relating to SMEs willingness to change, including businesses’ process and strategy, including staff roles and responsibilities.


35

Table 3.5: Hierarchy of competencies related to action (ability to change)

Type of competency Competencies related to action

Headline/Enabling competency Applies business strategy to improve BRE performance

Understands requirements to make positive changes

Supporting competency Measures & monitors use of resources

Reviews performance and defines actions to achieve measurable

outcomes

Works with supplychain to identify and implement opportunities for BRE

Evaluates & adopts external best practice on BRE


Sets targets, reports & communicates BRE performance (KPIs)

Actively seeks feedback on performance from supplychain [and non-

supplychain?]

Organisation benchmarks performance on BRE against sector best

practice

BRE and/or env’t considerations integrated into procurement processes

Organisation reviews emerging opportunities for BRE

Headline competency (action): Applies business strategy to improve BRE

performance

This competency did not feature for any of the businesses, including the most competent.

Even competent businesses do not appear to approach resource efficiency in this strategic

fashion.

Headline competency (action): Understands requirements to make positive

changes


Supporting competency: Measures & monitors use of resources

This competency was demonstrated across the range of businesses although this should not

be directly equated to it being more important than others. Measuring and monitoring

resources is a key way to manage business risk (rising costs) and account for business

performance (accounting), which all businesses should be doing as a baseline. The study

findings indicate that the more competent businesses scored most highly for this

(manufacturing/other, larger) but businesses that were less competent overall also had low

scores for this competency (service sector/smaller). Businesses were scored lower where

they simply looked reactively at bills or monitored costs. Higher scores were given where

businesses carried out more active monitoring of resource use and used the information to

influence business performance.


36

The construction and utilities SMEs had the highest levels of competency, with information

routinely collected and monitored, and used to benchmark future projects. One large

construction company (200-249) described how they identify cost savings by learning from

previous jobs, including getting information from contractors on energy use. They also

monitor and calculate their carbon footprint.

Perceptions of high levels of resource use were not necessarily negative, as they were

associated with high productivity or turnover. Many businesses viewed resource inputs as

‘fixed’ per unit of output and high bills were seen by some SMEs as an inevitable, immutable

result of high sales. This is a particularly powerful observation as it is counter to a

‘decoupling’ view that BRE means using less whilst getting more. There may be implications

from this findings on how cost-saving potential is communicated to SMEs, not just in

absolute terms but also seeking to express it as costs per unit of turnover or unit of output.

Larger businesses tended to monitor data at defined periods, for example monthly, but also

on an ongoing, day-to-day basis, and were very aware of fluctuations in productivity or

profit, whereas smaller SMEs tended to look at bills on an ad hoc basis as and when they

received them. The importance of examining bills was highlighted, but generally in terms of

negotiating on price rather than to identify possible efficiencies, showing again the tendency

of businesses to see inputs as ‘fixed’.

[If] we can find a tariff that is one-third of a penny cheaper it is going to

save us thousands, you know. We could literally save £100,000 a year,

just on the energies. We have to get that absolutely spot on.


Service sector SMEs tended to interpret this behaviour as monitoring total turnover or sales,

but without necessarily separating out costs due to resources. Almost every business

reported looking at bills.

We get daily turnover figures. [It’s] all automatic at the end of the day. I

can't track energy use unless I go and read the meter, which I won't

make them do.


[We are] constantly aware of what's going on, every bill… everything

that comes in and out of the business.

Services, 10 to 19 staff

The fact that this behaviour is so widespread is encouraging, but the fact that so many SMEs

see resource use as ‘fixed’ also highlights a potential barrier to improving BRE.

Supporting Competency (action): reviews performance and defines actions to

achieve measurable outcomes

None of the businesses interviewed demonstrated this behaviour, including the most

competent. Although competent businesses did review their performance in terms of BRE,

and they do define actions that could have measurable outcomes, what was not clearly

demonstrated was the linking of these activities – it is not clear that the actions are a direct

consequence of the review. For example, a manager may monitor productivity on the shop


37

floor and look constantly for ways to reduce energy use and materials, but as a general

activity rather than in response to a more strategic or specific review of resource use.

This finding reinforces the evidence that managing resources is still largely tactical rather

than strategic in many SMEs. It means they may not identify the BRE actions that have the

most impact because they are locked into patterns of behaviour fixed around what they are

already doing. The outcome of this may be an inability to identify the ‘true’ costs of waste

(resource use) across the whole business, something that has been identified as a key theme

in the Defra evidence review.

Supporting Competency (action): works with supplychain to identify and

implement opportunities for BRE

Again, this competency was demonstrated more frequently and at higher levels, amongst the

more competent businesses (particularly larger construction and manufacturing). It was

mostly absent from less competent SMEs (service sector, smaller sizes). This appears to be

another important behaviour to distinguish between higher and lower levels of overall

competence. Competent businesses score well, less competent have some low scores.

Again, this may be a behaviour that WRAP could usefully focus on to shift businesses from

low to medium/high competence.

Supporting Competency (action): evaluates & adopts external best practice on

BRE


The SMEs interviewed did not take this strategic approach to BRE. Arguably this may not be

a barrier to improving BRE, as for many SMEs, it is likely to be more important to for them to

understand how to improve their own particular processes and operations. Indeed, it may

be inappropriate for SMEs to adopt best practice if it involves investment that is

disproportionate to their size.

3.3.4 Know-how/self-efficacy and capability The fourth strand of the framework covers elements relating to SMEs know-how and

capability, including access to internal and external expertise, and staff training.

Table 3.6: Hierarchy of competencies related to know-how (self-efficacy/capability)

Type of competency Competencies related to know-how

Headline/Enabling competency Recognises the need for BRE expertise within organisation

Routinely evaluates skills and knowledge

Supporting competency Has in-house expertise on BRE

Uses external networks & expertise to improve BRE


Staff appropriately trained in BRE

Organisation understands how to optimise process and/or equipment

performance


38

Seeks and evaluates benefits of external training on BRE for its staff

Has means of accessing external information, know-how & support

Uses external business networks to import expertise or resources on BRE

Headline competency (capability): Recognises the need for BRE expertise within

organisation

This competency did not feature strongly even for competent businesses. Only two construction companies were scored highly in this area and these were businesses that explicitly recognised and valued BRE expertise as a particular, specialist skill set, rather than, for example providing generic training that included aspects of BRE directly or indirectly. This was demonstrated in larger construction SMEs by the presence of specialist staff.

Whoever runs the site is responsible, they can ask for expertise support...

Legally, you need someone who is on top of the pyramid and responsible

for that site.

Construction, 200-249 staff

Medium-sized and larger manufacturers, who were generally competent, tended to view different aspects of BRE in different ways, providing training in some aspects but not others. Often, the training given is primarily focused on a different area such as health and safety or COSH, but which includes aspects of BRE such as dealing with waste.

[We have] Training in many areas, but training people in saving energy

probably isn’t something that you do.


Headline competency (1) (know-how): Routinely evaluates skills and knowledge4

Few of the SMEs interviewed, including the most competent, demonstrated this behaviour. This was in part due to the way that it was interpreted in analysis; it was assumed to mean that businesses would have a process to assess individuals’ skills and knowledge and identify any gaps. What was found in the SMEs that did provide training, was that this was very often standardised, for example training rolled out to staff at a particular point in time, such as for new starters, or in relation to a defined need such as a new piece of machinery.

Although the SMEs interviewed did evaluate the skills and knowledge within their business, the majority did not demonstrate a reflective approach; a continuous improvement mindset that enables the organisation to adopt a process approach (necessary to improve BRE performance) rather than an action-based one.

[We have] training on new machinery; dealing with hazardous

materials.

Printing, 50-99 staff

Supporting competency (know-how): has in house expertise on BRE

Again, this appears to be a higher-level competency and those SMEs that have higher overall competence have high scores (generally larger SMEs and manufacturers), those that have lower overall competency have lower scores (service sector, smaller SMEs). Only one service sector business (hospitality) scored at all for this competency.

4 This competency includes skills and knowledge generally amongst SMEs not just those directly or indirectly linked to BRE


39

Construction sector SMEs and larger manufacturers showed higher levels of this competency. Two large construction SMEs had specialist members of staff responsible for their environmental management. One manufacturer described the need to have a dedicated member of staff to meet the requirements of their ISO 140001 status, however, this member of staff was considered to be a ‘bean counter’ who was needed due to the large administrative burden of the environment management system, rather than for their specialist knowledge. The same manufacturer stated that the demand for ISO 14001 had come from his customers, but identified this administrative burden as a barrier to passing the requirement on to his own suppliers.

Why put the onus on bureaucracy onto a guy that is trying his hardest to

scrape a living out and then he has to employ someone like I have to

employ.


Supporting competency (know-how): Uses external networks & expertise to

improve BRE

None of the SMEs interviewed demonstrated this competency. This is partly due to the way that this behaviour was interpreted for the purposes of this analysis, as many SMEs used their supply chains to improve BRE but as this is explicitly covered elsewhere, supply chain interactions were not included here. SMEs’ use of businesses networks was very variable and opinions were widely divided on their value. There did not appear to be a link to overall competence, with some highly competent SMEs not using external networks or expertise. There were few examples of external sources being used to improve BRE in a purposeful way. , in other words, few SMEs that identified they had a knowledge or skills gap relating to BRE, who then sought external help. Some businesses did describe getting ideas from external sources, but this tended to be ad hoc and unplanned, rather than a purposeful attempt to improve BRE from external networks or expertise. Many businesses did actively look for new ideas or ways to improve efficiency, but most tend to start with their own staff – which is probably a very good starting point for more competent businesses – so for example drivers are asked for input in terms of the best way to plan deliveries to minimise mileage; and manufacturing staff asked for their input into process design. Supply chains are used to share knowledge and experience, and there are examples of changes of innovations that improve BRE being shared within supply chains, but these interactions do not seem to happen in the wider networks of the SMEs we interviewed.

Collateral competency (know-how): Staff appropriately trained in BRE

The level of this competency again followed patterns for higher and lower levels of overall competency, with businesses that were better at BRE overall scoring more highly than businesses doing less well overall. There was a particularly strong manufacturing/service split, with only one service sector business carrying out specific BRE training. The way that businesses conceptualised BRE was apparent in their approach to staff training. SMEs did not tend to think about BRE issues as a distinct area to be managed, but instead framed them in one or more of the following ways, as either:

Being integrated with health and safety issues, for example waste management being integrated into Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) processes and procedures. This was commonly found in manufacturing, printing, construction and utility sectors.


40

Common sense and part of an overall culture and ‘way of doing things’ rather than business process. This was interpreted by some SMEs as their internal business culture, but by others in terms of wider societal values.

Integrated into process efficiency (for manufacturing and construction sectors), and making best use of resources through efficient work scheduling, processes and product design.

[Staff] are made aware if not by me by the media. There is daily

awareness of how to use resources, carbon footprint etc. They are aware

of what to do, it’s not for me to educate.


Different types of SMEs tended to conceptualise BRE in different ways. Typically, the only way that service sectors tended to frame BRE was as common sense or part of an overall culture. Most SMEs in the non-service sectors also tended to think about aspects of BRE in this way, but also used the other framings outlined above to describe BRE. This changed depending on the specific area of resource efficiency being discussed, and some manufacturers thought about different resources in different ways, for example, energy efficiency was seen as part of the overall culture, but waste management was integrated into health and safety and process efficiency. As such, there is not a strong sense of a particular skill set or even a tangible area that ‘BRE’ would cover; it is a set of distributed skills and practices that are covered by different areas of business management. The possible exception to this is the SMEs in the construction sector, who had a more comprehensive and strategic approach to BRE; they also had more comprehensive staff training. Many of the less competent SMEs felt that staff training in resource management was unnecessary or inappropriate, either due to the experience of their staff, or the simplicity of tasks. Those that did carry out training related to BRE tended to provide this ‘on the job’ and on an ad hoc basis.

We do instil into them don't waste the resources... However much

training that takes - we make them aware of using things properly.


It's just common sense - they're not going to fly to the moon.


It's not really necessary - they know what they need to do. [We] don't

need [training] for a business this size.


One smaller SME also identified training in general as a potential threat, if staff learnt new skills that would help them to find work elsewhere.

[It’s] difficult in small companies as you risk losing staff if you train them

up too much. They become too big for the company.



41

Collateral competency (know how): Organisation understands how to optimise

process and/or equipment performance

This was an important higher-level competency, with a strong manufacturing bias. No service-based businesses demonstrated this behaviour. Competence in this area appears to be very important in determining overall BRE capability, with only the most competent SMEs demonstrating this. It is a behaviour that is also closely linked to some of the other competencies, such as monitoring use of resources, seeing BRE as integral to business performance, and having a participatory management structure, suggesting a group or cluster of higher-level behaviours. It appears to be substantially more important for manufacturing SMEs to understand their own operations, processes and unique circumstances than it is for them to have access to external sources of ideas, knowledge or skills. This finding may also help to explain the trend for older, more established businesses to be more competent than younger businesses. Although newer SMEs may have better access to new technology or external best practice, this must be optimised for particular processes or circumstances.

Collateral competency (know-how): Seeks and evaluates benefits of external

training on BRE for its staff

None of the SMEs interviewed demonstrated this competency. It is likely that some of the larger and more competent businesses do carry out this kind of evaluation to a limited extent, as some reported having specialist staff, but the interviewees were not aware of this happening. The SMEs interviewed did not approach BRE, and training on BRE, in the strategic way implied by this competency and the training given to staff is largely ‘on the job’ and reactive (ref earlier training points).

Collateral competency (know-how): Has means of accessing external

information, know-how & support

Many of the SMEs interviewed showed relatively low to middling levels of competence for this behaviour. There is a less clear relationship with overall BRE capability, with some highly competent businesses scoring less well than businesses that had lower overall capability. Businesses were considered to have higher competence where they demonstrated using a range of external sources of information, such as trade shows, trade publications, the internet, ideas from staff, business networks, and supply chains. Low scores were given where they used a limited number or a single main source of information. Many only fulfilled the ‘external information’ part of this competency, with few businesses actively seeking external support or know how. How SMEs used the information they found was also considered to be an indicator of their competence, with SMEs that applied the information they found to their businesses judged to be more competent than those that simply used the information to keep up to date or for general awareness. SMEs were asked about their use of external sources of information more generally, rather than for BRE specifically (which would have reduced the scores considerably). The impetus for finding information was not limited to specified members of staff. One manufacturer described how their H&S manager approached the Carbon Trust to carry out an audit of their business, which resulted in changes being made to the site, including low energy light bulbs being fitted.

He did that off his own bat.



42

Collateral competency (know-how): Uses external business networks to import

expertise or resources on BRE

This was a less common competency, with no clear relationship to the overall competence of an SME. Although some more competent businesses overall had low or medium scores for this, several did not, suggesting that it is not fundamental to BRE. Again, this supports the earlier finding that for manufacturers, knowledge of internal processes and how to optimise these is more important than importing best practice from outside sources. External networks may be more useful to promote BRE in service-based SMEs, who are more likely to have general BRE impacts to be managed (such as paper use), compared to more individual needs and circumstances of, for example, manufacturers. Views on trade associations were mixed, with some businesses finding them useful sources of information, and others finding them less relevant. Larger SMEs were more likely to be members of trade associations, with smaller SMEs more likely to use local networks such as chambers of commerce, local business networks, or ‘business clubs’ run by banks.

[Trade association gives] very good and helpful information on new

legislation, such as hazardous waste.


I think that the more established businesses are over that initial learning

curve, if you like, so they don’t become as productive to us as they were

when we were starting. That is my opinion.


3.4 New competencies and indicators Several themes emerged during the interviews that suggested additional competencies, or indicators of competence that were not included in the original model, which may be important to BRE. These are described below.

Awareness of gaps in knowledge

Businesses were asked whether they felt they had the knowledge and know-how to manage resources in their businesses, and responses were scored in the same way as the competencies in the initial model. Businesses were given higher scores where they acknowledged a gap in their knowledge or know-how, and were given no score where they simply responded that they did have all the knowledge and know-how that they needed, as it was not possible to determine whether they genuinely had the knowledge they needed, or simply perceived this to be the case. This competency was found across a range of the SMEs interviewed, although there was a less clear relationship to overall BRE capability. Only some of the more competent SMEs demonstrated high levels of ability in this area; we cannot say for those that do not acknowledge gaps in knowledge whether this is because they genuinely do have the knowledge they need, or whether they are unaware of the gaps. Several of the less competent businesses also reported gaps in their knowledge, including both smaller manufacturers and service-sector SMEs.

[Do you have the knowledge and know how that you need to manage

resources?] I would hope so! We have been doing it for 15 years!



43

This awareness ranged from a general sense that more could be done, to recognition of specific gaps or actions that could be taken. This question also raised other barriers to BRE, including staff time and costs.

I think we are pretty good but I think we do need a lot more. I think

there is more we can do but I think it is having the time and at the

moment we focus on certain things and then we will move onto

something else.

Utilities, 200-249 staff

Yes I think so - We can always do better. Even driving to work, there are

a couple of people who live pretty close who share on the way to work.

The other thing is paper, we get through a hell of a lot of paper, a hell of

a lot of paper.


This question may be important in revealing how receptive SMEs are likely to be to offers of support on BRE. If SMEs believe they have all of the knowledge and know how that they need, or that other barriers such as lack of time are more significant, then they are very unlikely to take up – or even take notice of – attempts to engage them on BRE.

Recognition of environmental impacts

The SMEs were asked how significant they felt their environmental impacts were, firstly unprompted and then with a list of impacts to consider. The aim of including responses to this question was not to reflect SMEs environmental values, but rather to assess whether businesses recognised that their processes or operations had any impact on the environment. The qualitative data also helped to understand how SMEs think about their environmental impacts, and whether these issues are conceptualised as being linked to BRE, or whether they are thought of separately. This competency did not have a strong overall relationship to BRE capability, and it was demonstrated at low levels across the range of SMEs we interviewed. Very few of the SMEs we interviewed showed high levels of competence, with only one construction SME demonstrating high levels of this competency. Several SMEs, particularly the smaller businesses, stated that they did not have any environmental impacts. Manufacturing SMEs tended to rate their impacts as low where they felt that hazards such as waste or pollution were adequately managed.

Pollution? We make a lot of it but we send it off in the right channels and

the same with waste. They go to where it should go...


SMEs tended to judge their potential environmental impacts as being small in comparison to other larger or more polluting businesses. Some also perceived environmental impacts as inevitable.

I haven't got a massive chimney coming out of the back of my warehouse,

put it that way.



44

On a global scale, very, very minimal. I think if we broke it down I'd

probably have more of an impact on the environment than I actually

think, but you have to.


I suppose it is not good. But it’s what we do.


Several spontaneously mentioned carbon emissions, and several more acknowledged that their business activities produced CO2. A small number of SMEs recognised the embedded CO2 in their materials and supply chain.

[We have a] hell of an impact. It would take a lot to be carbon neutral,

with deliveries and things like that.


Clearly we cause CO2 emissions, we consume electricity, we drive cars

and trucks and even [though] we probably don’t create that many CO2

emissions directly but they are created in making the stuff that we use.


Comparable business systems

A further indicator of BRE competence suggested by the interview analysis, was whether or not the SMEs we interviewed had a business system or process that would be comparable to managing BRE. For example, managing health and safety, quality control or food hygiene. This may be important to BRE for several reasons:

As discussed above, several SMEs integrated BRE with health and safety issues, for example waste management being integrated into Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) processes and procedures. This was commonly found in manufacturing, printing, construction and utility sectors.

Having an existing process or system to manage an issue demonstrates that a SME has the resources, skills and business culture to manage an issue.

This may be useful to WRAP in working with SMEs, both in terms of introducing or developing any BRE elements within existing systems however it is acknowledged that there has already been work done in this area (e.g. Project Acorn, WRAP) in order to link H&S systems with environment as a means to incorporate resource and waste concerns into a well-established organisational management system. There are also potential risks around how effective this measure could be where H&S or Quality Control systems are not directly linked to resource impacts (e.g. service sector). Unsurprisingly, this competency was strongly biased to non-service based SMEs. The more competent (larger) manufacturing, construction, printing and utility sector SMEs demonstrated high levels of this competency. Smaller non-service SMEs generally did not demonstrate this at all, and only one service-based SME did so. 3.5 Entry level and advanced competencies Three main groups of competencies emerged from the analysis of the interviews.

Competencies that were found across the majority of businesses, regardless of their

overall level of competence.

Competencies that were only demonstrated by businesses with higher overall levels of

competence.


45

Competencies were those that were not demonstrated by the SMEs we interviewed, or

were only shown by a very small number of businesses.

The first group (bullet one above) of competencies that were common amongst SMEs may represent entry-level competencies, and suggest ‘entry points’ to WRAP as a starting point to develop SMEs BRE capability, or to progress SMEs from lower to higher competence. But some caution is needed, as the presence of a capability may not be enough to produce competence - how an SME does something may be as important as whether or not it does it at all.

Table 3.7 below uses the competency model to summarise the three clusters or groups of competencies, using the following key:

Bold text - commonly found ‘entry level’ competencies Normal text - ‘advanced level’ competencies found in SMEs with higher BRE capability Greyed text - competencies shown by few or no SMEs


46

Table 3.7: SME resource efficiency competency framework

Behaviour change

dimension


(acceptance of

importance)

Commitment


Action

(ability to change)

Know-how

(self-



Headline

competency

Seeks to demonstrate

leadership on

environmental issues

Has an operational



Integrates BRE into

business strategy

Applies business strategy

to improve BRE

performance

Understands

requirements to make

positive changes

Recognises the need

for BRE expertise

within organisation

Routinely evaluates

skills and knowledge

It could be argued that the first step with respect to small SMEs is to establish whether they do any of these things generally not

specifically for BRE. We know, for example, that formal business planning, written policies and performance monitoring may be scant in

very small SMES.

Supporting

competency

Recognises the

importance of individual

action on BRE

Encourages and

empowers or requires

staff to improve BRE

performance


performance



Communicates its

aims/objectives on BRE

internally and externally


of resources

Reviews performance and

defines actions to achieve

measurable outcomes

Works with supplychain to

identify and implement


Evaluates & adopts

external best practice on

BRE

Has in-house

expertise on BRE

Uses external

networks & expertise

to improve BRE

Collateral

Competency

Has a participatory


Has values and attitudes

that consider the

environment to be

important

Policy commitment by

owner/senior manager

that includes elements of

resource efficiency


& accountability relating

to or influencing BRE are

clearly defined and

regularly reviewed

Dedicates time to

understand and improve

resource efficiency

Sets targets, reports &

communicates BRE

performance (KPIs)

Actively seeks feedback

on performance from

supplychain and

customers

Organisation benchmarks

performance on BRE

against sector best

practice

BRE and/or env’t


into procurement

processes

Organisation reviews

emerging opportunities

for BRE

Staff appropriately

trained in BRE

Organisation

understands how to

optimise process

and/or equipment

performance

Seeks and evaluates

benefits of external

training on BRE for its

staff

Has means of

accessing external

information, know-

how & support

Uses external

business networks to

import expertise or

resources on BRE


47

3.6 Factors that affect BRE competence The results of the qualitative interviews suggest that the size, sector and years in business of a SME may be factors that are likely to affect the overall level of a business’ BRE competence. This finding is supported by literature from the evidence review, and wider knowledge of SMEs environmental behaviours. The general trends found in terms of the effects of size, sector and years in business on the overall BRE competence of SMEs are outlined below. This analysis is based on only the limited sample of SMEs interviewed for this research and are qualitatively derived; these are possible rather than proven relationships and are not necessarily general to all SMEs.

Size of business

There is a notable difference between sectors in terms of the effects of their size (number of staff) on overall competence. For non-service based SMEs in manufacturing, construction, printing and utilities, there appears to be a threshold of approximately 50 staff for higher BRE competence. No businesses with fewer than 50 staff had higher levels of competency, and most that were over 50 generally became increasingly competent. See Figures 3.1 – 3.3, below, for competency scores of business of different sizes plotted for all businesses, and then for manufacturing, construction and ‘other’ sectors (Figure 3.2) and for service sector businesses (Figure 3.3) separately. This pattern was not noticeable for businesses in the service sector, where increasing size did not have a noticeable impact on overall levels of competency. Larger service based SMEs were not more likely to be competent in BRE than smaller service-based SMEs, with one exception. Although based on a limited number of SMEs, this may be useful in suggesting types of SMEs that WRAP could prioritise in terms of providing BRE support. For example, this can be observed when focusing on larger manufacturing and other non-service SMEs of over 50 staff that have lower levels of competence, as these SMEs are the low performers in terms of their size.


48

Figure 3.1: Total competency score against actual size of business (all sectors)

E

The scoring of SMEs against the relevant competencies was completed subjectively using qualitative results

Figure 3.2: Total competency against actual size of business (manufacturing/construction/other)


Size

of

SME

(nu

mb

er

of

staf

f)

Total score for BRE competence

Size

of

SME

(nu

mb

er

of

staf

f)



49

Figure 3.3: Total competency against actual size of business (service)

v


Age of business

The number of years a business has been operating appears to have an influence on overall competency. The trend suggested from our limited number of interviews suggests a threshold of approximately 20 years, with SMEs that have been in operation for less than this time being much more likely to have low BRE capability. Some manufacturing SMEs do not follow this trend. Of note from the findings is that the service-based SMEs interviewed had a much shorter range of years in business than the manufacturing SMEs, only one had been operational for more than 20 years compared to roughly half of the manufacturing SMEs (Figure 3.5). This makes it more difficult to assess whether there is a difference between the sectors in terms of the effect of years in business on overall competence. The fact that most service-based SMEs in our sample are less than 20 years old could in itself contribute to the lower levels of competency, as it can be seen from the manufacturing sector that in general, the younger the business, the lower the levels of competency. Again, these patterns may help WRAP to prioritise their work with SMEs. For example, WRAP may be able to accelerate the natural improvement in BRE in manufacturing and other non-service SMEs by targeting those businesses that are less than 20 years old.

SIze

of

SME

(nu

mb

er

of

staf

f)



50

Figure 3.5: Total competency against years in business (manufacturing/construction/other)


Figure 3.6: Total competency against years in business (service)

Ye

ars

in o

pe

rati

on


Ye

ars

in o

pe

rati

on



51

4.0 Wider results This chapter briefly outlines some of the wider themes and relevant findings that emerged from the interviews.

How SMEs think about the environment and resource efficiency

The analysis of the interviews showed us that SMEs think about environmental issues and impacts separately to resource efficiency. This was clearly demonstrated by the analysis of questions on environmental values, impacts, how businesses used resources, and how important they felt it is to use resources well. Very few of the SMEs saw environmental values as core to their business, or their business as being a ‘leader’ on environmental issues, and there was no link between overall BRE capability and recognition of the environment. Most did not have a clear idea of their impact on the environment, and saw this as unavoidable or relatively insignificant. BRE is often linked to cost saving rather than environmental impact, and even where businesses had an ethical view that saving resources was important, for the majority this did not correspond to pro-environmental values.

Quality

The concept of quality was an important driver and reoccurring theme with manufacturing SMEs, and several manufacturers saw it as an important distinguishing feature or unique characteristic of their businesses. The concept of quality was frequently emphasised when businesses were asked about their values, or things that they thought were unique about their business, and it was often identified as being important to their business. Manufacturers also felt that quality and cost were sometimes opposing drivers.

Customer driver is always better quality but also cheaper.


...We are always looking for cost savings although we want to keep

quality because we have to have a quality product…


[What keeps us going is]...supplying a good quality product when they

want it.


Several manufacturers also had either formal quality management systems (such as ISO 9000), or rigorous internal quality control. This was often driven by customer demands, and in particular, larger manufacturers. Several of the SMEs interviewed had regular quality audits or inspections from the customers they supplied. One SME highlighted producing a good quality product as a potential risk to future business.

It is very very difficult because what somebody would order one year they

will not order the next year because the one that they bought… is still

doing a good job. And we have got a reputation, in the trade, for making

very good products, and that can work against you because you don’t

need spare parts as much, you don’t need the servicing of it. And the

Directors are still of the opinion that they want to keep making a good

product.



52

BRE was often linked to quality control, with wastage or pollution being seen as a sign of poor production. The links between quality and BRE may a useful area for WRAP to explore in working with manufacturing SMEs. Providing good quality customer service was also highlighted as important by some of the service-based SMEs.

Everybody would say customer service is the most important.


What SMEs understand by BRE

The terms ‘resource efficiency’ and ‘business resource efficiency’ are understood to some extent by SMEs, and the scope of resources is understood to include electricity, water, materials, and also other elements such as staff and transport, although these components are conceptualised as different types of resources. Many of the SMEs interviewed have a narrower understanding of resource efficiency compared to the use of this term in the competency model. Generally resource efficiency is understood as not wasting the ‘fixed’ inputs that a business uses, such as energy, water, or materials that a business used, rather than a broader view that also attempts to optimise processes to make the best use of resources for each unit of output. Reducing costs was also linked to BRE by many SMEs. Several of the more competent SMEs saw BRE as:

Efficiency, you have to be utilising [resources] to the maximum, haven’t

you.


It is getting the last ounce out of what you buy in, whether it is electricity

or zinc or plastic or whatever. What you don’t use to make products you

can sell is waste in every sense of the word, isn’t it. It is waste of money,

it is pollution, it is everything. So resource efficiency is what everybody

strives for.


One manufacturer described their view of the difference between being resource effective and resource efficient.

We are probably effective not efficient. Effective means we are using

enough to get the job done. Efficient means you are doing it in the most

effective and most efficient way.


Business norms

The interviews found a couple of examples of wider business norms acting as drivers for BRE, or environmental management within businesses. One manufacturer reported taking actions because of a general sense that others were already doing so.

Management looked at a campaign a lot of companies are doing and so

we decided to try and implement it, ... everybody tries to get involved in

that.



53

When this manufacturer was asked further about why they choose to produce a newsletter that includes environmental reporting, despite a lack of customer interest, it was their perception that this is normal practice for business that was cited as the reason.

We have all fallen into that trap, haven’t we? It is what everybody does.


Supply chain influences

The influence of supply chains on SMEs was clear across a wide range of the SMEs interviewed. Supply chains acted in several important ways:

Demanding specific BRE or environmental management standards or management systems, or having other BRE or environmental requirements.

Demanding more general quality assurance standards or systems, which included aspects of BRE (either explicitly or implicitly), or having other requirements that are also likely to impact on BRE.

Providing ideas or information about new products or processes, and a point of challenge to the status quo.

Several businesses – and in particular manufacturers – described increasing scrutiny and expectations from customers, with increasing demand for environmental quality systems in recent years.

It is creeping in.


A couple of customers, they really are pushing at the moment, that we

confirm to environmental standards. And they want to come in and audit

you to ensure that you are following... whichever one that environmental

one is, they want to come in and do an environmental audit to make sure.

Manufacturing, 200-249

Some of them ask about… our environmental policies…


Other SMEs described specific requirements from clients, for example a printer (50-99 staff) described an increased demand for recycled paper, which they use on request despite the belief that it is of lower quality. One manufacturer (100-149 staff) had been asked to provide information about the packaging they use and how they could minimise this. Only one manufacturer (50-99 staff) reported a lack of demand in response to attempts to communicate with their customers.

No, absolutely not. We have tried, we have tried every angle to try and

raise the profile of the business and impress the customer. The only thing

that impresses them is supplying stuff at the right price, when they want

it.


Smaller SMEs were not subject to the same type of demands from their customers, and several found suppliers to be a useful source of new ideas. Some of the larger and more competent SMEs also found suppliers to be a useful source of information.


54

We talk to suppliers about how to cut costs… they are in the front line.

Construction, 150 to 199 staff

The extent to which BRE or other quality requirements were passed down from the SMEs we interviewed to their suppliers varied. Some passed quality standards on to their suppliers, or included stringent criteria in their selection of contractors. Other businesses felt that such demands were unfair or disproportionate to smaller suppliers, and do not currently pass these requirements on to them, although they felt that this may happen in the future.

If we are trying to make a certain product and it has to be conformant

with a certain standard, then they would have to comply as well. So we

actually flow that down to the supplier and they have to conform

otherwise we will go to another one. So we work diligently with them.

Manufacturing 200-249 staff

Part of the contract is about waste and could they measure the amount

of waste they have had and the impact on the environment. We have

found it very hard to get some impact on the environment in this

industry. ...We look at all them techniques and see who has got the best

technique, plus the rate for doing it. ...We look at everything really [such

as] how much fuel they were using in the vans.

Utilities, 200 to 249 staff

Why put the onus on bureaucracy onto a guy that is trying his hardest to

scrape a living out and then he has to employ someone like I have to

employ.


Some of the SMEs interviewed had less formal interactions with their supply chains to improve BRE. One manufacturer (20 to 49 staff) talks to suppliers about how goods are delivered, packaged, and loaded into delivery lorries. This is done with the aim of reducing packaging but also with the expectation that it would save the supplier money. The SMEs interviewed in the commerce sector generally stated that they were very unlikely to speak to their supply chain, because the nature of their work is very secretive. It is interesting to note that the findings of the evidence review were inconclusive about the role of supply chains in improving BRE. The evidence review concluded that opinion on the influence of the supply chain is divided, with some reporting it to be “a catalyst for the widespread recognition of environmental responsibility”, whereas others have found that external pressures are a weak force on SMEs. Mixed results are also seen when looking at the reverse – whether SMEs encourage purchasers and customers to embrace sustainability principles and initiatives. The evidence from the interviews is clear that supply chains are indeed catalysts for BRE, for SMEs in non-service sectors. It is less conclusive for service based SMEs. 4.1 Elements of BRE Different aspects of BRE are conceptualised and managed by SME businesses in different ways, as outlined below.


55

Waste

The storage and disposal of business waste is heavily regulated and controlled, particularly hazardous waste. Unsurprisingly, almost all businesses are very sensitive to waste and the need to try and reduce it. For smaller or service based SMEs, this is largely limited to paper use and packaging. For larger and non-service based SMEs, waste is an important issue that is managed both through health and safety (for hazardous waste) and also through process efficiency systems.

[Waste is a big issue] I think it has been for some time. The cost of it,

different things being reclassified as being contaminated waste and

things that aren’t, that is one hell of a cost for us.


Energy

Almost all of the SMEs are very conscious of their energy use, and are very price sensitive. Although energy is recognised as a major cost, it is also generally viewed as a fixed input per unit of output that varies with production levels. Several of the SMEs believe that the only way that they can control their energy costs is by changing supplier, in other words, changing the price of what they use rather than the amount.

Water

Water is recognised by some of the SMEs, but is much less visible for the majority of businesses than other resources such as energy or waste. Reasons for this include the fact that it is a lower cost compared to electricity; others believe that the water cycle means that it is not possible to waste water (this is a common finding when talking to households about water efficiency); and some smaller or service based SMEs only recognise hand washing or drinking as using water and so see it as a ‘basic human right’. Only a small number of the SMEs interviewed were aware or concerned about their water use.

I would hate to think how much water we use.


We have water meters installed in every single unit... because the bills

were coming double and double... Then they explained to me the taps

where you can stop water coming out and smaller taps, there is a certain

way... that you can flush less water with the same result.


Materials

Again, the use of materials is seen as a necessity or as a fixed cost, with limited potential to be reduced. SMEs were not typically in a position to understand how and where changes could be made to positively effect BRE performance. Specific materials were not examined as part of the scope of this research.

…well materials is high but materials is a cost that is passed on, because

we are buying material which we turn into something and then we sell it

on. So although it is a cost into us, it is a costing out.



56

Paper

Paper usage was frequently mentioned by service-based SMEs in relation to resource use. These SMEs are generally conscious of how much paper they are using, but are not often carrying out actual monitoring of their usage.

In the last five years in particular there’s been a very, very notable

decline in the use of paper and so on and so forth. We don’t use the

printer very much.


[We] are trialling a new system that monitors how much paper [staff]

use and who is printing it and then use that system to cut down their use.



57

5.0 A competency framework for SMEs Assessment of the qualitative research results included evaluation of the frequency at which certain competencies were identified as being present in SMEs demonstrating a high competency ‘score’ (i.e. an assessment based on the level of attainment within a competency present in the business) together with assessment of entry level and advanced level competencies. By mapping this assessment on to the BRE competency model, those competencies that appear to be effective indicators of BRE for SMEs can be identified. These competencies form a BRE Competency Framework for SMEs, i.e. they are core competencies, relevant to SMEs; if businesses perform well or demonstrate high competence in these competencies, the assertion is that they are more likely to experience higher resource efficiency or have the correct competencies in place to facilitate this. Testing of this assertion is required through quantitative research that can establish the degree of competence in these core competencies and the level of resource efficiency in the business. The BRE Competency Framework arrived at is presented below. Figure 5.1: BRE Competency Framework for SMEs

Behaviour change

dimension

Organisational

norms

(acceptance of

importance)

Commitment

(willingness to

change)

Action

(ability to change)

Know-how

(self-



Headline

competency

Recognises

environmental

impacts of business

Has an operational



Has awareness of

gaps in knowledge

regarding BRE Integrates BRE into

business strategy

Supporting

competency

Recognises the

importance of

individual action on

BRE

Links BRE with

business performance

Works with

supplychain to identify

and implement


Has in-house

expertise on BRE Encourages and

empowers staff to

improve BRE

performance

Has a system in place

for managing business

activities (EH&S) Measures & monitors

use of resources Uses BRE information

to support decision-

making

Collateral

competency

Has a participatory

management

structure Staff roles and

responsibilities &

accountability relating

to or influencing BRE

are clearly defined

Actively seeks

feedback on

performance from

supplychain

Has means of

accessing external

information, know-

how & support

Has values and

attitudes that consider

the environment to be

important

BRE and/or env’t

considerations

integrated into

procurement

processes

Organisation

understands how to

optimise process

and/or equipment

performance

Staff appropriately

trained in BRE

Key Primary level competency

Secondary level competency

Tertiary level competency


58

The primary level competencies are likely to be the entry points for most SMEs to BRE – although they may not be the most important behaviours for BRE. The secondary level competencies are the most important for higher levels of BRE capability, but likely to be less important for engaging SMEs with little or no BRE capability, and could be thought of as advanced level competencies. There are nuances to the proposed framework. Assessment of the qualitative research suggests that the following variations to the framework of core competencies may be required for specific sectors – although this is based on a very small number of interviews for specific sectors, especially construction - as follows: Headline competencies:

Integrates BRE into business strategy: this competency is particularly relevant for the

construction industry;

Recognises the need for BRE expertise within organisation: this competency may be an

additional headline competency relevant for the construction industry.

Has awareness of gaps in knowledge regarding BRE

Supporting competencies:

Uses BRE information to support decision-making: this competency did not appear

important to the service sector;

Works with supplychain to identify and implement opportunities for BRE: this competency

is less relevant to the service sector than the construction and manufacturing sectors.

Collateral competencies:

Staff roles, responsibilities & accountability relating to or influencing BRE are clearly

defined and regularly reviewed: this competency is particularly relevant for the

construction and manufacturing sectors;

Staff appropriately trained in BRE: this competency is particularly relevant for the

construction and manufacturing sectors;

Organisation understands how to optimise process and/or equipment performance: this

competency is focussed on the manufacturing sector.

When undertaking quantitative assessment, the basic framework will need adjustment to account for these nuances by including / excluding certain competencies for sectors or perhaps weighting competencies to reflect the relative importance.


59

6.0 Conclusions and recommendations 6.1 Summary of deliverables WRAP’s objectives for this work were to:

1. Consider the types of resource efficient behaviours WRAP should seek to influence. 2. Develop a competency framework for resource efficiency for SMEs in the UK. 3. Better understand motivations and barriers for SMEs to act in a resource efficient

way, and their levels of competence in resource efficient behaviours. 4. Develop a repeatable method of measuring behaviour change in SMEs (related to

BRE) that includes, where possible, understanding of the links between behaviours and outcomes.

This research broadly met the first three objectives, by identifying a set of characteristics and competencies that are likely to influence SMEs level of resource efficiency, and testing these to develop a competency framework. The research also provided valuable insight into the ways in which SMEs conceptualise resource efficiency, and components of the framework, and suggested some of the motivations and barriers for SMEs. This research stopped short of developing a repeatable, quantifiable method of measuring behaviour change in SMEs, or to demonstrate links between behaviours and outcomes. There are several ways in which this research could now be progressed and applied by WRAP:

As a business-planning tool to help prioritise and steer work with SMEs;

To inform communications and engagement with SMEs, including as a starting point for identifying which groups to target and which behaviours to focus on; and

As the basis for further quantitative research: To segment SMEs. As an indicator or to benchmark BRE performance.

These conclusions and recommendations focus on what the research tells us about engaging and communicating with SMEs, and possible priorities for future work, rather than developing options for further quantitative work.


60

6.2 Conclusions The main conclusions from the research are outlined below. Key implications for WRAP in terms of engaging SMEs are given in summary boxes at the end of each section. 6.2.1 Insights into how SMEs think about BRE There isn’t a tangible area that ‘BRE’ covers; rather it is a set of distributed skills and practices that are covered by different areas of business management. SMEs did not tend to think about BRE issues as a distinct area to be managed, but instead framed them in one or more of the following ways, as either:

Being integrated with health and safety issues.

Common sense and part of an overall internal or wider societal culture and ‘way of doing things’ rather than business practice.

Integrated into process efficiency, and making best use of resources through efficient work scheduling, processes and product design.

Different types of SMEs tended to conceptualise BRE in different ways.

Service sectors tended to only think about BRE as common sense or part of an overall culture.

Larger SMEs in the non-service sectors tended to think of BRE as both an overall culture, but also as being integrated into other issues. The framings they used changed depending on the specific area of resource efficiency being discussed, and some manufacturers thought about different types of resources in different ways.

Smaller SMEs in the non-service sectors tended to see BRE as common sense, or part of a wider societal culture.

The ways that different types of SME conceptualise BRE may also help to tailor messages to different types of SME, and in particular, it may be useful for WRAP to think about the difference between SMEs that see BRE as an overall concept, compared to a series of specific actions, and the more competent manufacturers that do both. SMEs don’t see effective resource management as an environmental issue – they’re ‘waste watchers’ not ‘positive greens’. Most of the SMEs we interviewed did not think of resource management as an environmental concept and in most cases are unlikely to link what they do on a day-to-day ‘operational’ basis with BRE. Cost is a common language amongst SMEs and one that incorporates material, waste, energy, water and other resource costs. The qualitative research showed that language and terminology is a key factor to get right in engaging SMEs on BRE. Whilst most participants neither used nor fully understood the concept and terminology of BRE, most if not all understood and actively managed business costs. Linking BRE with business performance (at least on a cost level) opens up the opportunity for SMEs to drive continual improvement as they seek to increase turnover and profit through expansion, cost control or increased sales. Linking BRE with business performance could therefore lead to a situation where, at least to some degree, BRE improvements track the financial profitability of SMEs5.

5 See also Defra (2011, forthcoming) WR1403: Business Waste Prevention Evidence Review, L4-m4-5– Communication, for a review of recent evidence on the role of communications in influencing business waste and resources behaviour.


61

Customer service and quality are important business drivers. The concept of quality was seen to be an important driver and value by many of the manufacturing SMEs that were interviewed. BRE was often linked to quality control, with wastage or pollution being seen as a sign of poor production. Service-based SMEs emphasised the importance of customer service, rather than quality, and this was equally seen as an important driver and feature of a business.


62

Box 6.1: Implication for engaging SMEs

Implications for engaging SMEs:

SMEs frame BRE in different ways, either an overall concept, or a series of specific actions.

Being aware of these framings may help WRAP to engage with different groups of SMEs

more successfully:

o Smaller (less than 50 staff), non-service based SMEs (such as manufacturing,

printing, construction) tend to think about BRE as specific actions, which are

not necessarily linked by an overall business concept. Improving the BRE

capability of this group may include helping these SMEs to mentally ‘join up’

any specific actions as part of a wider business concept (which – by taking a

wider view across all activities - would also help to prevent SMEs from

becoming ‘locked-in’ to specific actions that may not have the biggest BRE

benefit). WRAP could also work with these SMEs to look at existing business

processes, for example, quality control or health and safety, identify the

current scope of these systems and consider how they could be extended to

include aspects of BRE.

o Smaller (less than 50 staff), service based SMEs (such as retail, commerce) are

more likely to think of BRE as a wider societal issue, rather than either specific

actions or a concept that applies to their business, which could make this

group more difficult to engage. Messages that link business BRE to wider

societal issues could be one way to approach this group, with for example

messages that emphasise that ‘you wouldn’t leave your lights on at home’.

This group may also be more influenced by external information and contacts,

or by messages that focus on social norms and the general sense that

managing BRE is ‘just what you do’. There may also be a role for third parties,

such as professional bodies, to influence these SMEs in addition to engaging

with them directly.

SMEs put BRE and environmental issues in different mental boxes. Using environmental

messages to communicate or engage with them are unlikely to ‘hook’ SMEs interest, as

most will not see these messages as being relevant to them and their profitability. Those

SMEs that have high environmental values may not have high BRE capability; those with

high BRE capability may not have pro-environmental values.

Cost and reducing wastage are top priorities for SMEs, but simple messages about saving

money may not be enough to engage SMEs. Many SMEs see costs as fixed for a given

level of output, and so generic messages about the potential to reduce costs may be

ignored, either due to the belief that ‘I’m already doing everything I can’, or for more

competent SMEs, reflecting the fact that they are already doing a lot to optimise processes

and would need very specialist input or capital investment to make further efficiency

savings. In other words, SMEs will be very keen to reduce costs but may need more

proactive engagement to be convinced that this can actually be done.

o Programmes that use cost as a hook can be met with scepticism by SMEs who


63

6.2.2 Insights into what SMEs are doing on BRE Even though they might manage wastage, BRE is not well embedded in many SMEs; it is often ad hoc rather than built into processes. Most SMEs, apart from the most competent, took only reactive measures in terms of BRE, for example, in renegotiating energy prices with suppliers. The more competent manufacturers and construction sector SMEs did demonstrate a more integrated approach to BRE. BRE behaviour is tactical rather than strategic. Even SMEs who are concerned about managing resources may not be focusing on the BRE actions that have the most impact if they are locked in to what they are already doing. This type of behaviour creates an inability to identify the ‘true’ costs of wastage (resource use) across the whole of a business. Inclusive learning cultures are important. SMEs, and especially non-service based SMEs, were better at BRE where they reflected on previous jobs or processes, and involved staff in identifying improvements to processes or systems. Almost all SMEs recognised the value of staff involvement as a way to motivate employees, but the less BRE-competent businesses (smaller SMEs of less than 50 staff, and service based SMEs such as retail or commerce), had little recognition of the value of staff knowledge. The smaller or less competent SMEs in non-service based sectors such as manufacturing or construction, did use the specialist knowledge that staff had, for example involving drivers in planning deliveries to minimise travel; or using staff input to ‘design out’ wastage from manufacturing processes. The most BRE-competent SMEs (non-service based SMEs with more than 50 staff) also used the specialist knowledge of staff, and in addition they reviewed learning from previous jobs or processes in a more systematic way. It is vital for manufacturers to be able to optimise their own systems and processes. Competency in this area was strongly linked to overall BRE competency for manufacturers and other non-service based SMEs, and is only found in the most capable SMEs. This may reflect the fact that SMEs need to be competent in several other areas to be able to optimise their processes, including monitoring resource use, having an inclusive learning culture that encourages staff participation, and the view that BRE is important to business performance. A better understanding of internal processes and systems may be more important for non-service sector SMEs than access to external good practise. Having a good understanding of their own operations may be more important – or a more important starting point - for manufacturing SMEs than having access to external ideas or best practice. Engagement that focuses on how SMEs can adapt rather than adopt good practice, together with a better understanding of their own processes is likely to be more successful in supporting BRE. Indeed, it may be inappropriate for SMEs to adopt best practice if it bears costs that are disproportionate to their size. The research also found a trend for older SMEs to be more BRE competent than newer SMEs (with a threshold of around 20 years), which could suggest that being able to optimise a particular system of technology and staff is more important for BRE than access to the most current technology or best practice. This competency was not found to be important for service-based SMEs, and there was some limited evidence to suggest that external ideas and knowledge may be more important for these SMEs. Recognising and managing the combined impact of all staff on BRE is key. The more BRE-competent SMEs recognised the need to manage the BRE impacts of all staff. This included both the direct impacts of staff roles, such as waste produced during a manufacturing process, and also the indirect impacts of staff such as water used for


64

sanitation, and energy for lighting and heating. SMEs used different strategies to manage staff BRE impacts, by encouraging and empowering staff, enforcing action, or alternatively, modifying the work environment or systems to ‘design out’ staff impacts. Direct and indirect BRE impacts tended to be managed differently:

The more competent SMEs (larger, non-service based) used more formal methods such as written procedures to manage the direct BRE impacts of staff roles; other methods included incentives for good performance or penalties for poor performance.

More competent SMEs tended to manage indirect staff BRE impacts by different methods, either modifying the environment to ‘design out’ impacts, for example installing motion sensitive lights, or by general information or awareness raising, such as signage to encourage staff to turn off taps.

Less competent SMEs (smaller, service based) were less likely to have direct BRE impacts of staff roles to manage – with the exception of paper use – and were mostly concerned with managing indirect impacts. These SMEs tended to rely on less formal verbal reminders, and signage in some cases. Some SMEs were unaware of their impacts, and so informing or encouraging staff was not something they would consider doing.

Box 6.2: Implications for engaging SMEs


Messages or communications that present BRE in a strategic way are unlikely to chime with

SMEs. Engagement needs to start from where SMEs are at, for example, by using behaviours

such as the ad hoc review of bills as an entry point that can lead to more strategic actions.

Therefore, some degree of segregation of SMEs, identifying the points at which SMEs are

starting from, would be of value to WRAP to target engagement at the optimum point of entry

for the best outcomes.

SMEs are unlikely to think about the whole range of BRE actions they can take, or to evaluate

which are likely to have the most benefit to their business. As discussed above, SMEs

conceptualise BRE in different ways: some groups of SMEs – larger (more than 50 staff), non-

service based (e.g. manufacturing) are more likely to think about BRE as a wider business

concept, and so be more responsive to thinking strategically about the benefits of different

actions that could be taken. Objective or independent advice from WRAP could be influential,

in particular, using existing case study information or further developing data on the relative

savings of different BRE actions for different businesses (or reviewing existing information in

light of a competency approach). This may be particularly important in drawing attention to

aspects of BRE that SMEs are less aware of, such as water use and the potential for savings

through greater water efficiency.

o SMEs may not be able to identify the true costs of waste (wastage) in their

processes because they tend to focus on disposal costs when they think about

‘waste’ and within the confines of current processes, rather than how they could

change processes to reduce waste.

Encouraging SMEs to review previous jobs or processes is likely to be very beneficial,

particularly for smaller (less than 50 staff), newer (less than 20 years old) SMEs in non-service

based sectors, to help them to develop the type of learning culture that more competent SMEs

display. This could also be a useful area to focus on for larger, older non-service based SMEs

that have lower BRE capability, in other words, those SMEs that are performing below average.


65

6.2.3 Insights into barriers and motivations SMEs tend to see resources as ‘fixed’ inputs, rather than inputs that can be optimised for each unit of output. Many SMEs measure and monitor their resource use to some degree, which is encouraging, but many also believe that there is nothing they can do to optimise their use of resources, and WRAP may find this perception to be a barrier to engaging them. Perceptions of high resource use were not necessarily negative as they are associated with high productivity or turnover. Some SMEs are not aware of gaps in their knowledge of BRE. If SMEs believe they have all of the knowledge and know how that they need, or that other barriers such as lack of time are more significant, then they are very unlikely to take up – or even take notice of – attempts to engage them on BRE. Information is unlikely to be useful to these SMEs, without first demonstrating to them what the gap is and why it should matter to them. SMEs don’t need to be environmental leaders – or even very interested in the environment – to do BRE. As noted above, businesses generally have a commitment to using resources well, but that is not usually driven by environmental concerns and the two are often thought of separately. Resource management is often linked to cost saving rather than environmental impact, but even where businesses had an ethical view that saving resources was important, for the majority this did not correspond to pro-environmental values. Supply chains can be a driver and source of knowledge for BRE. Supply chains are a strong driver of BRE for larger, non-service based SMEs, with some of these SMEs adopting management systems or quality standards as a result of customer demands. Interestingly, these same SMEs were often protective of their own suppliers, as they recognised the administrative burden that such standards imposed on businesses. This suggests that there is limited scope in using larger or more competent SMEs to drive formal or prescriptive systems and standards within their own supply chains. For smaller non-service based SMEs, supply chains can be a useful source of ideas and information, with interactions in both directions with customers and their own suppliers. Payback periods may prevent SMEs from investing in BRE. SMEs may not have the access to capital that would help them invest in new kit to reduce wastage and costs over the medium term (2-5 years).


66

Box 6.4: Implications for engaging SMEs

6.3 Next steps and applying the research

Feasibility of a competency framework The research has demonstrated that it is feasible to develop a BRE competency model for SMEs, and the BRE competency framework that has been developed would allow segmentation of SMEs in terms of their overall level of BRE, provided that the competencies can be mapped to actual quantified performance on BRE. The model still needs to be verified against resource use data. Certain behaviours and characteristics defined in the competency model were demonstrated and others were not in the businesses involved in the qualitative testing. The competency model, tested through the qualitative work, provided a broad base from which competencies relevant to BRE have been established to define the competency framework. Furthermore, it has been possible to identify those competencies that have greater or less relevance to sectors (i.e. construction, manufacturing and service sectors) to enable some initial sectoral nuances of the competency framework to be established.

Competencies relevant to SMEs From the initial BRE competency model, a larger proportion of the ‘supporting competencies’ (over half) were taken forward into the competency framework compared with a third of ‘collateral competencies’ and a smaller proportion of ‘enabling competencies’. This reflected the nature of competencies relevant to SMEs. The higher representation of supporting competencies that focus on practical action and delivery rather than systems and strategy (as do most enabling competencies) is perhaps typical of SME behaviour, i.e. SMEs do not necessarily require or instil the policies and structures required by larger organisations; rather they move directly to practical action.

Early indications of competence It is not possible to draw firm conclusions from the qualitative research regarding the level of competence of business. The qualitative stage was not designed for this purpose, rather to inform the development of the competency framework. However, early indications suggest that the size and age of business does influence levels of competence (larger and older businesses suggesting greater competence). This is suggested in manufacturing and construction sectors to a greater degree. Robust conclusions regarding this relationship require proper quantitative study however as the sample size examined here was small.

Competencies for WRAP to focus on The research indicates that there are clearly some competencies that are more important for SMEs in terms of behaving in a resource efficient manner and unlocking latent potential to


SMEs may be more engaged by information on cost-saving potential where this is presented in terms of costs per unit of output or turnover, rather than in absolute terms. However, as noted above, high cost is often linked with high turnover and/or high quality, and so messages about cost-saving need to address concerns that measures could reduce these.

Information or awareness raising methods may not be enough to engage those SMEs who are not aware of the gaps in their knowledge of BRE, and WRAP may need to use more proactive methods to communicate with them.


67

improve the level of BRE. These are what have been termed the primary competencies, of which this study has identified nine, which are set out below. Table 6.1: Primary competencies

Has awareness of gaps in knowledge regarding BRE

Has means of accessing external information and know-how

Has a participatory management structure

Has an operational business strategy with defined accountabilities

Links BRE with business performance

Has a system in place for managing business activities (EH&S)

Works with supply chain to identify and implement opportunities for BRE

Actively seeks feedback on performance from supply chain

BRE and/or environmental considerations integrated into procurement processes

These primary competencies appear to fall into those focused around the set-up and management of an SME, and those that are more people and systems-driven around working methods, knowledge and how the business interacts with its customers and suppliers. Taken together, these competencies (which ultimately may form the heart of a Competency Framework) could be likened to a minimum standard for demonstrating competence in BRE. Should WRAP decide to progress with further segmentation or to tailor its support to maximise the potential to improve BRE performance amongst SMEs, the study indicates the following areas (linked to the eight competencies) are highly relevant:

The SME operates within a strategy within which key roles and accountabilities are defined and has a participatory management structure; one that engages employees across the hierarchy on key issues to do with operational, resource and organisational management.

The SME has a structured system of managing risks associated with business activities (e.g. Health & Safety management system), which arms it with a framework within which BRE measures can be implemented.

The SME links BRE with business performance; in effect perceiving resources not as fixed costs but elements of the business that can be managed in the same way as other issues.

The SME integrates BRE into how, what and why it procures goods and services from its supply chain and engages those suppliers in a dialogue – this provides a forum upon which incremental step changes in procurement lead to wider efficiency gains within the business.

Possibly most important of all;

The SME is aware of gaps in its knowledge regarding BRE and has a means of accessing further information, support and know-how on BRE, either from external or internal sources (such as staff involvement). To maximise the effectiveness of any measures taken to improve BRE performance within an SME typically requires that organisation to have understood the interactions within its own organisation such that it becomes aware of what it does not know as well as what it does.

6.3.1 Suggested interventions for SMEs in non-service based sectors The research suggests several groups of related competencies that could be used to prioritise or shape WRAP’s engagement with SMEs. The research found that for


68

manufacturers (and other non-service based sectors, such as printers, utilities and construction SMEs), the ability to optimise their own processes and systems is key to BRE. This capability is supported by competence in several other areas, which were also found to be important by the research. Having optimised processes and systems could be seen as an outcome of BRE, and as such, the competences that support this can be used to suggest different interventions for WRAP to focus on in working with this group: Figure 6.1: Competencies identified for higher levels of BRE capability

This diagram shows one way of organising the competencies that were found to be important for higher levels of BRE capability, and represents one way that WRAP and other users of the framework might think about applying it. It highlights the importance of capability and action in three different parts of a business: Figure 6.2: Optimum systems for BRE

Optimises processes

and systems for BRE

Works with supply chain to

identify/implement BRE

Encourages/empowers /enforces staff action



performance

Uses BRE information to support decision-making Operational strategy with


Measures and monitors use of

resources

Information

Strategy Participation

Optimum systems for

BRE


69

Other competencies that were found to be important by the research (and shown by SMEs with low overall levels of BRE capability) can be seen as the tools or delivery methods (business processes, systems and cultures) that are needed to deliver these three aspects. For example, clearly defined staff roles, and a participatory management system could be seen as tools for delivering staff action. Arranging the competencies in this way may also be helpful in showing why the competences found in SMEs with lower overall BRE capability are not having a bigger overall impact, as these primary or entry level competences largely represent tools or delivery mechanisms, such as participatory management systems. In other words, SMEs with low BRE capability have some of the tools or delivery mechanisms needed for BRE in place, but aren’t using them in a purposeful or strategic manner, or necessarily with BRE in mind. Some competencies are necessary for BRE, and may provide an initial hook, but aren’t enough to lead to BRE on their own. This supports the research finding that BRE activities are largely ad hoc and reactive. This also suggest ways that WRAP could engage with SMEs, by helping to identify the tools or delivery mechanisms that SMEs already have in place and showing how they can contribute to a more strategic approach to BRE. The simplified triangle model could be a useful communication tool for businesses that already have some level of BRE capability. The trends identified in this research suggest that engaging younger manufacturers, i.e. those that have been in operation for less than 20 years, could have high potential for improving BRE. Certain requirements for business activities that are likely to have BRE benefits could also be linked to start-up finance or development loans. 6.3.2 Suggested interventions for smaller SMEs and SMEs in service based sectors The model outlined above is unlikely to work for SMEs in service sectors, largely as there is less scope for processes and systems to be optimised for BRE. Systems may well be optimised for profitability, but there is a less direct correlation with BRE as resource costs are a smaller proportion of total costs, whereas labour costs are a high share – optimisation will naturally focus on staff costs and labour productivity. There may be a barrier to improving BRE if there is a perception that thinking about or acting on BRE will waste staff time and so be sub-optimal. Focusing on how things are done as well as what is done, in other words, better staff management more generally, may help to overcome this. This then means there is less need for the competences that lead to optimised processes and systems for BRE, and this framing may explain why many of the competencies studied in this research were not found in service based sectors. Limited evidence from this research suggests that external information, ideas and know-how may be more important in influencing SMEs. This may be because the BRE actions that service sectors can take are simpler, and so it is easier for these SMEs to implement an idea that they find from an external source, without needing more complex tools or delivery methods. For this group, ‘optimising processes and systems’ may be limited to basic actions that are simple green-accounting measures or procurement processes. The model can then be modified to include this competence:


70

Figure 6.3: Competencies for higher levels of BRE among smaller and service sector SMEs

6.3.3 Next steps There are some additional areas of work that would be useful to WRAP in developing or applying this work. It has not been peer reviewed as the research presented here was exploratory work which had only reached an early stage of development:

WRAP may want to consider whether further refinement or checking of the competency framework is necessary before it is applied. This could include:

Peer review from business associations and organisations.

Input from third parties including the project steering group to evaluate and ‘sense check’ the findings and conclusions of the study.

WRAP may also want to consider which sectors, BRE behaviours or business sizes are of particular interest, and whether the model in its current format works across these categories, or whether some further development is needed.

If individual elements of the competency framework are taken forward and used to guide or steer engagement with SMEs, it will be possible for WRAP to start to build up information on links to particular outcomes (providing that the outcomes of SME engagement are measured and monitored).

Some wider questions that WRAP, and any other stakeholders, may want to consider are as follows:

How should different levels of competence be defined? This research used the subjective judgement of the research team to assess competence, but WRAP and others may want to develop a more rigorous definition of competence. This could be generic

Optimises processes and systems for BRE

Works with supply chain to identify/implement BRE

Encourages/empowers/ enforces staff action


Links BRE with business performance


Operational strategy with defined accountabilities

Measures and monitors use of resources

External information, know-how, support


71

and applicable across all of the elements of the framework, or more practically focused and specific for each competency.

Should competences be weighted, and if so, how? It was not possible within the scope of this research to assess the relative importance of different competencies within the framework. WRAP and stakeholders may be able to use their expert knowledge and experience of working with SMEs to assign a weighting to the competencies in the framework.

How do WRAP define BRE? This study has used a broad interpretation of BRE, reflecting the exploratory nature of the research, and also the wide range of resources identified by businesses that we interviewed. It would be useful to have a tighter definition of BRE, if the framework is developed further or used as a tool to work with SMEs. WRAP may want to consider which aspects of BRE can be measured (or are already measured) so that BRE outcomes can be linked back to competencies.

6.3.4 Implications for quantitative work This research could be used as the basis for further quantitative research, to further test the framework and either to segment SMEs, or to develop indicators or benchmark BRE performance. Brook Lyndhurst provided WRAP with options and recommendations for survey sampling at the end of the phase one in depth interviews. These recommendations are still valid, although further work would be needed before a large-scale quantitative survey could be conducted. It would be useful for WRAP to explore ways to obtain objective data on SMEs actual BRE performance, if any further quantitative research were conducted. This would allow more rigorous testing of the framework.

WRAP could also explore the possibility of adding a small number of questions to existing surveys to obtain further data on BRE competencies.

WRAP could also explore the re-analysis of past data that they already hold, or re-surveying companies for whom WRAP have collected BRE data, to explore links between competencies and BRE behaviours.


72

Appendix A - Coded Competency model

Behaviour change

dimension

(parallel with

individuals)

Organisational

norms

(acceptance of

importance)

Commitment

(willingness to

change)

Action

(ability to change)

Know-how

(self-



Headline/Enabling

competence

A Seeks to

demonstrate

leadership on

environmental

issues

B Has an

operational

business strategy

with defined

accountabilities (1)

B1 Integrates BRE

into business

strategy (38) (16)

C Applies business

strategy to improve

BRE performance

C1 Understands

requirements to

make positive

changes

D Recognises the

need for BRE

expertise within

organisation (18)

D1 Routinely

evaluates skills and

knowledge (34)

It could be argued that the first step with respect to small SMEs is to establish whether they do any of these

things generally not specifically for BRE. We know, for example, that formal business planning, written policies

and performance monitoring may be scant in very small SMES.

Supporting

competence

AS Recognises the

importance of

individual action on

BRE (25)

AS1 Encourages

and empowers

OR ENFORCES

staff to

improve BRE

performance

(25), (32)

BS Links BRE with

business

performance (22)

BS1 Uses BRE

information to

support decision-

making (30)

BS2 Communicates

its aims/objectives

on BRE internally

and externally (9)

CS Measures &

monitors use of

resources (23),

CS1 reviews

performance (36)

and defines actions

(35) to achieve

measurable

outcomes (13)

CS2 Works with

supply chain to

identify and

implement

opportunities for

BRE (14)

CS3 Evaluates &

adopts external best

practice on BRE (11)

DS Has in-house

expertise on BRE

(19)

DS1 Uses external

networks &

expertise to

improve BRE (21)

Collateral

Competence

(i.e. what could be

reasonably

expected if

organisation/indivi

AC Has a

participatory

management

structure (17)

AC1 Has values and

BC Policy

commitment by

owner/senior

manager that

includes elements

of resource

CC Sets targets,

reports &

communicates BRE

performance (KPIs)

(26)

DC Staff

appropriately

trained in BRE (31)

DC1 Organisation

understands how


73

dual has the core

and supporting

competencies)

attitudes that

consider the

environment to be

important (20)

efficiency (4) (18)

BC1 Staff roles,

responsibilities &

accountability

relating to or

influencing BRE are

clearly defined and

regularly reviewed

(1) (33)

BC2 Dedicates time

to understand and

improve resource

efficiency (8) (10)

CC1 Actively seeks

feedback on

performance from

supply chain [and

non-supply chain?]

(6)

CC2 Organisation

benchmarks

performance on BRE

against sector best

practice (2)

CC3 BRE and/or

env’t considerations

integrated into

procurement

processes (37)

CC4 Organisation

reviews emerging


(27)

to optimise

process and/or

equipment

performance (28)

DC2 Seeks and

evaluates benefits

of external training

on BRE for its staff

(7) (12)

DC3 Has means of

accessing external

information, know-

how & support

DC4 Uses external

business networks

to import expertise

or resources on

BRE (29)


Appendix B - Mapping of topic guide questions against competencies

Map of interviews conducted against competencies

Competency

code

Competency Question from topic guide

A

Seeks to demonstrate leadership on environmental

issues

What values are important to your business?

What would you say is unique about your business?

How important to your business is it to use resources well, in your personal

opinion?

Do you think it is [very/fairly/quite/not very/not at all] important? Why?

AS Recognises the importance of individual action on BRE

Do you and your staff have written or other formal agreement of day-to-day

roles and duties?

o Are these written down a contract?

o Written down somewhere else (e.g. separate job profile)

o Agreed verbally

o [Ask specifically about processes for other areas – health and safety;

environmental management]

Do you have written notes or other systems that set out how your business

activities should be carried out on a day-to-day basis?



o Agreed verbally

AS1

Encourages and empowers OR ENFORCES staff to improve

BRE performance

Do you and your staff have written or other formal agreement of day-to-day

roles and duties?




o Agreed verbally

o [Ask specifically about processes for other areas – health and safety;

environmental management]





o Agreed verbally





o Agreed verbally

Do you have notes or systems include how resources are used or managed on

a day-to-day basis?

o [Ask if they have an environmental management system]

AC Has a participatory management structure

Thinking about how you make decisions in your business, how much do you

tend to make decisions on your own?

o If resources are mentioned then follow up with questions to probe

which specific resources.

Do other members of staff that aren’t managers get involved?

Do you look for new ways of doing things in your business?

How important do you think it is to look for new ways of doing things?

Where do you get new ideas from: o Staff o Trade shows o Competitors o General media o Review what we are already doing o other

AC1 Has values and attitudes that consider the environment to What values are important to your business?


be important How important to your business is it to use resources well, in your personal

opinion?


B Has an operational business strategy with


And do you keep track of how your business is running?

o (not at all) o Daily o Weekly o Monthly o Yearly

What do you use to see how your business is running? o Previous sales/turnover o Accounts o Bills/costs o Compare it against targets o Compare it against longer term goals

Do you have goals or aims for your business beyond what you do day-to-day?

Do you have goals or aims for: o Profit/turnover o Reducing costs o Staff performance o Expanding the business o Other

Are these goals and aims written down or are they in your head?

Do you tell your staff what these are? And are any of these goals or aims about how you use resources in your

business?

B1 Integrates BRE into business strategy

What does ‘using resources well’ mean to you?

And do you keep track of how your business is running? o (not at all) o Daily o Weekly


o Monthly o Yearly





Do you tell your staff what these are?

And are any of these goals or aims about how you use resources in your business?

BS Links BRE with business performance

What does ‘using resources well’ mean to you?

How do you know that you are not wasting resources?

And do you keep track of how your business is running? o (not at all) o Daily o Weekly o Monthly o Yearly

What do you use to see how your business is running? o Previous sales/turnover o Accounts o Bills/costs o Compare it against targets


o Compare it against longer term goals






How important to your business is it to use resources well, in your

personal opinion?


BS1 Uses BRE information to support decision-making




Do you have goals or aims for: o Profit/turnover


o Reducing costs o Staff performance o Expanding the business o Other




BS2

Communicates its aims/objectives on BRE internally and

externally



Do you and your staff have written or other formal agreement of day-to-

day roles and duties?



o Agreed verbally

o [Ask specifically about processes for other areas – health and

safety; environmental management]

Do you have written notes or other systems that set out how your

business activities should be carried out on a day-to-day basis?




o Agreed verbally

Do you talk to your suppliers about how you run your business? o What do you talk to them about? o Do you share information or ‘know how’ with them? o [If yes] What kinds of things do you share knowledge or ‘know

how’ about?

Do you talk to your clients/customers about how you run your business? o What do you talk to them about? o Do you share information or ‘know how’ with them? o [If yes] What kinds of things do you share knowledge or ‘know

how’ about?

BC

Policy commitment by owner/senior manager that includes

elements of resource efficiency




BC1

Staff roles, responsibilities & accountability relating to or

influencing BRE are clearly defined and regularly reviewed





o Agreed verbally







o Agreed verbally


BC2

Dedicates time to understand and improve resource

efficiency





o Agreed verbally

C Applies business strategy to improve BRE performance






Do you tell your staff what these are? And are any of these goals or aims about how you use resources in your

business?

C1 Understands requirements to make positive changes What does ‘using resources well’ mean to you?



CS Measures & monitors use of resources How do you know that you are not wasting resources?

CS1

reviews performance (36) and defines actions (35) to

achieve measurable outcomes How do you know that you are not wasting resources?

CS2

Works with supply chain to identify and implement



how’ about?


how’ about?

CS3 Evaluates & adopts external best practice on BRE



Where do you get new ideas from: o Staff o Trade shows o Competitors o General media o Review what we are already doing o Other

CC Sets targets, reports & communicates BRE performance


Do you set targets for your business? o What kinds of things do you have targets for? o Are these targets written down or are they in your head? o How important is having targets to the running of your business? o How do you set these targets ?

Do you set targets that are about how your business uses resources? o If yes, how important is having these targets to the running of

your business? o Targets for different resources


o How do you set these targets

CC1

Actively seeks feedback on performance from supply chain

[and non-supply chain?]



Where do you get new ideas from: o Staff o Trade shows o Competitors o General media o Review what we are already doing o Other

CC2

Organisation benchmarks performance on BRE against

sector best practice





how’ about?


how’ about?

CC3

BRE and/or env’t considerations integrated into

procurement processes

CC4 Organisation reviews emerging opportunities for BRE Do you talk to your suppliers about how you run your business?


o What do you talk to them about? o Do you share information or ‘know how’ with them? o [If yes] What kinds of things do you share knowledge or ‘know

how’ about?


how’ about?

D Recognises the need for BRE expertise within organisation

Do you carry out any staff training?

o What training do you carry out?

o How do you identify what is needed?



Do you carry out any staff training related to how your business uses

resources?

D1 Routinely evaluates skills and knowledge







resources?

DS Has in-house expertise on BRE

Thinking about how you make decisions in your business, how much do

you tend to make decisions on your own?

o If resources are mentioned then follow up with questions to probe

which specific resources.

Do other members of staff that aren’t managers get involved?






o Agreed verbally







o Agreed verbally







resources?

DS1 Uses external networks & expertise to improve BRE


how’ about?


how’ about?

Are you part of any business networks or groups?

o What do you talk to them about?

o Do you share information or ‘know how’ with them?

o [If yes] What kinds of things do you share knowledge or ‘know


how’ about?

Do you use any business support services?

o Which ones have you used?

o What have you used them for, and were they helpful?

DC Staff appropriately trained in BRE







resources?

DC1

Organisation understands how to optimise process and/or

equipment performance









o Agreed verbally

DC2

Seeks and evaluates benefits of external training on BRE for

its staff


resources?

DC3

Has means of accessing external information, know-how &

support Are you part of any business networks or groups?





how’ about?




DC4

Uses external business networks to import expertise or

resources on BRE


how’ about?


how’ about?

Are you part of any business networks or groups?




how’ about?




New1 Awareness of gaps in knowledge

Do you feel that you or your staff have the knowledge and know-how you

need to manage how you use resources in your business?

o What do you do if you don’t have all of the knowledge you feel

you need?

o Where else do you/would you look for information or support?


o Do you find that support from outside of your business is

affordable?

New2 Comparable business system





o Agreed verbally

New3 Recognition of environmental impacts

What kind of environmental impacts do you think your business has?

o Do you have any systems or processes for reducing your

environmental impact?



Appendix C - Initial scoring of businesses

www.wrap.org.uk/bre

Date post:	09-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	buithuan
View:	215 times
Download:	2 times

Development of a Competency Framework for … Framework...Development of a Competency Framework for...

Documents