Supply Base
Environmental Performance Management |
Other themes in
this case study: |
For similar case
studies: |
- Supply base
environmental performance management |
|
- Environmental
requirements at the purchasing phase |
|
THE CHALLENGE
Hewlett Packard (HP) sets high
standards for its suppliers� environmental performance. But it
recognizes the burden that long, detailed environmental questionnaires
place on suppliers. The trend among environment- and risk-conscious
companies to require suppliers to fill out long questionnaires and
provide various forms of documentation has been onerous and expensive
to suppliers, many of whom have had to fill out similar questionnaires
for multiple customers. The inefficiency of this repetitive workload
taxed suppliers, the supplier-customer relationship, and the
common-sense notion of minimizing repetition in work (which is, of
course, a concern when asking a supplier to deliver value.)
The solution to the problem seemed to
be the adoption of common tools�a standardization of supplier
questionnaires that could be used by a number of firms to minimize the
amount of duplicate work a supplier would be required to perform.
Developing this solution is the subject of this case study, in
particular, the standards developed by the Pacific Industry and
Business Association (PIBA) and Computer Industry and Quality
Conference (CIQC), the latter a network of U.S. computer system
producers. Hewlett Packard�s experience, related here, is in
developing the standard and applying it effectively.
The process of developing a standard
questionnaire involves discussion of the use and implementation of the
standard in procurement. A discrepancy, however, can occur between the
objectives of environmental (E) and health and safety (HS) groups,
which may want to ask detailed technical questions related to
environmental performance, and the objectives of procurement groups,
which want to ask a few critical process-related questions regarding
environmental management.
Procurement at HP has worked with both
the procurement and environmental groups that take part in the PIBA
and CIQC fora to shape a supply-base questionnaire that is business
and procurement focused and addresses important environmental issues.
THE SOLUTION
|
PIBA
Supplier Forum Mission Statement |
|
In
an effort to optimize the transfer of environmental, health, and
safety performance expectations and data between purchasers and
their supplier base, model tools and guidelines will be developed
and made available to PIBA to enhance supplier relationships,
reduce business risks and liabilities, and support long-term
business growth. |
A number of companies that were already
a part of the Pacific Industry and Business Association (PIBA),
including HP, came together in 1995 and, in recognition of the problem
of duplicate questionnaires discussed above, established a Supplier
Management Forum. Together, the participants drafted a set of
environmental practice questionnaires to help companies reduce
business risks and enhance supplier relationships. Based on the PIBA
questionnaires, CIQC developed its first environmental practice
standard (CIQC STD 0014) in October 1996 as a common tool for
gathering supplier environmental practice information and for
optimizing the transfer of environmental performance information
between purchasers and suppliers.
|
Computer
Industry and Quality Conference |
|
- CIQC is a computer system
producers� network organized to promote a common focus and
continuous improvement in electronic component quality and the
practices used to purchase and deliver these products.
- Total electronic components and
semiconductor devices purchased by CIQC member companies exceed
$36 billion annually, not including contract manufacturing.
- Member companies include Apple,
Celestica, Compaq, Digital, HP, IBM, Lucent Technologies,
Silicon Graphics/Cray Research, and Sun Microsystems.
|
Discussing the reasons underlying the
standardization movement, Hsia Choong, HP program manager of supply
chain environmental programs for procurement of environmentally
responsible materials, noted that a proliferation of customer queries
on environmental performance has burdened suppliers. "Part of the
reason we are involved in this initiative is for positive supplier
relationships," says Choong, "We are a supplier ourselves, so we
understand the difficulty. Part of our motivation is also to
standardize it in such a way that the process is easier for our
suppliers and for our worldwide procurement organizations for supplier
environmental performance management."
A number of considerations
figured prominently in the CIQC Environmental Committee�s efforts to
draft the standard:
- The group chose to focus on
environmental practices at supplier companies, rather than on
environmental characteristics of suppliers� products. The group�s
members believed that by addressing the suppliers� manufacturing
environmental practices, the questionnaire could be used across a
variety of industrial sectors that might represent the range of
suppliers to electronics companies.
- Because so many electronics
suppliers are international, the questionnaire was constructed to be
useful across international boundaries and relatively easy to
translate. For this reason, the questionnaire did not address
specific legal requirements or laws and regulations that are country
specific.
- A few important environmental issues
were intentionally withheld from the questionnaires, because many
companies already had systems in place to address these
issues�namely ozone-depleting substances and the supplier�s
obligation to comply with applicable legal requirements.
- Information in the questionnaire was
not designed to satisfy international or domestic regulatory
requirements. Rather, the questions chosen reflected the experience
and judgment of participating environmental and purchasing managers
in a selection of items representing current thinking on development
of environmental management systems and processes to ensure legal
compliance.
The questionnaire consists of two main
parts and was designed to be completed in two hours or less by an
environmental manager. A modular approach was taken so that the
questionnaire could serve several purposes and to allow for ease of
use by companies that wished to use only a portion of the
questionnaire. Part I of the questionnaire gauges continual
improvement and compliance assurance. Part II is for risk assessment
contains additional questions used with critical suppliers,
high-volume suppliers, or suppliers whose processes have major
environmental aspects. The documents are recommended as particularly
useful if used in conjunction with supplier reviews.
SUPPLIER ENVIRONMENTAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRE
PART I: Continuous Improvement and
Compliance Assurance
1. Does the company/facility have a
written environmental policy statement?
If "yes," please attach a copy.
Does the policy statement include a
commitment to continuous improvement of environmental performance?
2. Does the facility have written
environmental performance objectives/targets and implementation
plans to reduce cost or risk? Please describe three significant
environmental performance objectives/targets, performance plans,
and measures for the next 12 months.
(Examples of cost-reducing or
risk-reducing environmental performance improvements may include:
waste minimization, pollution prevention, source reduction
including recycling and reuse targets, energy use, water
consumption, packaging programs incorporating targets for
reduction, reuse and recycled content, and enhanced training.
These examples are not meant to exclude other types of programs,
which you may be implementing.)
3. Is a management representative
assigned responsibility for facilitating compliance with
environmental regulations? If "yes," please give name and title.
4. Does the facility have a system
to track environmental laws and regulations that apply to the
operations of the facility? If "yes," is there a system for
communicating this information and training to the appropriate
personnel?
5. Are periodic environmental
regulatory compliance audits of the facility�s operations
conducted?
6. Does the company have documented
processes to implement corrective action plans for nonconformance
to environmental laws and regulations?
7. Does the company have a
documented supplier environmental program that ensures conformance
of its suppliers to legal requirements?
Note: This questionnaire does not
address two important issues, that is, the elimination of
ozone-depleting substances, and the supplier�s obligation to
comply with applicable legal requirements. Most companies already
have systems in place (contracts, standards, bid specifications,
and so on) that address these issues. Users of this supplier
review questionnaire may want to consider incorporating relevant
questions here to address their needs if not otherwise addressed
in their system.
PART II: Risk assessment
1. Environmental permits, chemical
registration and compliance status
1.1 Is the facility required to
have any types of environmental permits or registrations?
Please check those that apply:
- Industrial wastewater
discharge
- Hazardous waste storage
- Hazardous waste treatment
- Hazardous materials
use/storage
- Air emissions
- Storage tanks
- Radioactive materials
- Other (please list)
1.2 Does the facility monitor its
operations, emissions, or discharges to check compliance with
permit requirements? Do regulatory agencies regularly monitor
and/or inspect the facility? Is the facility in compliance?
1.3 Has the company obtained all
necessary chemical registrations and submitted all necessary
notifications for substances imported, exported, or used at the
facility?
(Examples include but are not
limited to the United States Toxic Substances Control Act [TSCA],
European Inventory of Existing Commercial Substances/European
List of Notified Commercial Substances [EINECS/ELINCS], and
Canadian Domestic Substances Lists.)
2. Hazardous waste management
2.1 Does the facility generate
hazardous waste? If "no," go to question 3.
2.2 Are hazardous wastes that are
stored, treated, or disposed of on site managed in properly
designed facilities that will prevent future environmental
impacts?
2.3 Are off-site transporters and
treatment, storage, or disposal facilities properly licensed?
3. Industrial wastewater and air
emissions management
3.1 Does the facility treat its
industrial wastewater prior to discharge? Please describe.
3.2 Is the facility required to
control its industrial emissions? If "yes," does the facility
have air emission control equipment installed? Please describe.
4. Environmental release potential
4.1 Does the facility use
chemicals that, if released accidentally, could create a
business interruption?
(Examples include but are not
limited to high volume chemicals, either pressurized gases or
liquids that are flammable, highly toxic, or radioactive.)
4.2 Does the facility have
written emergency response plans in case of a release to the
environment?
(Examples include but are not
limited to training, drills, chemical hazard communication,
hazard identification, audits of high-risk areas, mutual aid
relations, emergency response, and disaster recovery equipment.)
5. Company environmental standards
5.1 Does the company have minimum
company environmental standards that apply to the facility�s
operations regardless of the country in which the facility is
located? If "yes," please describe.
6. Business interruption potential
6.1 Is the company/facility aware
of any chemicals used in the facility�s manufacturing processes
whose availability is currently restricted or scheduled to be
restricted in the future due to environmental requirements
(e.g., CFCs)? Please list chemicals that apply. If yes, does the
company/facility have written plans to eliminate these chemicals
or otherwise accommodate their reduced availability?
|
Once the standard is written,
the core question for the members of the group is how it is used and
how it is integrated into existing SCEM programs. This is primarily an
issue for individuals to deal with at their own firms, however. At
Hewlett-Packard, the company has a particularly well-defined set of
supplier environmental expectations (see box) and the CIQC standard
has been integrated as one of a number of expectations. Product
environmental specifications, for example, are not addressed in the
standard, but HP has a separate procedure and requirement for ensuring
that its expectations for product environmental expectations are met.
By already adopting CIQC 0014 as a
companywide standard, HP has demonstrated leadership within CIQC. Many
of the other member companies are still working on the question of how
the standard will be applied internally or else have implemented the
standard in certain departments but not all.
|
HP
Statement of Expectations for Suppliers |
|
We want our
product material suppliers to act as responsible corporate
citizens and take a positive, proactive stance regarding
environmental issues. We ask that they pursue a policy of
continuous improvement in this area and be forthright about
sharing relevant information with us. At a minimum, we ask that
they do the following:
- Develop and adhere to an
environmental improvement policy.
- Create an environmental policy
implementation plan with defined metrics.
- Eliminate ozone-depleting
substances from their manufacturing processes.
- Complete the HP Supplier
Environmental Performance Review Questionnaire (CIQC STD 0014).
- Ensure that all parts,
components, materials, and products supplied to HP comply with
HP�s General Specification for Environment Dwg. No
A-5951-1745-1.
|
HP�s statement to suppliers
indicates the level of expectations that it sets for its suppliers�
environmental management.
Important as statements of expectations
are, ultimately the adoption of standards and statements of
expectations are meaningless unless they can be used effectively by
procurement. Purchasing is the critical juncture between suppliers and
the environmental expectations established by the company. For
environmental priorities to be effectively implemented, procurement
needs good tools, and strong communication needs to exist among
departments. At HP, the company has been working to bring together
purchasing process realities and environmental ideals.
The first way this happened was the
official addition in 1993 of environmental concerns to the list of
criteria on which suppliers would be judged in the procurement
process. Carl Snyder, executive director of procurement at HP,
describes this transition in the company�s environmental procurement
brochure. "For many years HP Procurement evaluated and favored those
suppliers that best met our needs in the areas of technology, quality,
responsiveness, delivery, and cost (TQRDC). In 1993 we added an "E"
for environmental performance. As we look forward, we hope that each
HP supplier will join with us in working toward protecting the
environmental quality of our communities and our world." The
procurement process involves TQREDC-E reviews, which are opportunities
to talk to suppliers about standard 0014 and their responses,
particularly to part one, the seven questions on environmental
management.
These discussions are also good
opportunities for discourse on environmental management, but effective
implementation of environmental criteria in purchasing is still
difficult. The tools need to be usable for procurement staff, which is
why Hsia Choong has had an ongoing role in the PIBA and CIQC groups
trying to introduce the procurement perspective into the drafting of
the standard. Without procurement involvement at the drafting stage,
she notes, groups of environmental staff have a tendency to write
standards that are too technically dense, too long, or too complex for
individuals with purchasing backgrounds to use effectively. She has
been part of a movement to make the standards relatively short and
simple, without neglecting the most important aspects of environmental
management and risk assessment.
The standard that has been developed
does adequately meet the needs of procurement departments, Choong
believes. HP deals with the complications of enforcing environmental
expectations largely by giving the responsibility for progress to the
supplier. In their meetings with suppliers, HP asks suppliers to
identify and outline their own opportunities and goals for improvement
in environmental performance. At the next meeting, HP then reviews the
progress made against the mutually agreed goals and what is left to be
done. But the purchasing groups do not adopt responsibility for
overseeing the changes. Noting the complications involved in the
supply chain in today�s global marketplace, Choong says, "The
procurement chain is getting very complex and is worldwide. It�s
impossible for us to know everything about our suppliers or about
their environmental practices. We can�t constantly be in charge of
making sure that they comply; however, we do want to be sure that the
processes are in place at the suppliers� facilities, and the suppliers
are accepting responsibility for their own environmental practices."
THE RESULTS
HP has achieved several notable
successes with regard to SCEM. The first is that they have eased the
burden on suppliers by cooperating with other companies in PIBA and
CIQC. By using the CIQC standard throughout the company, they have
established a level of uniformity that is uncommon and indicates a
trend toward standardization of supplier questionnaires. In the long
run, as more companies adopt supplier questionnaires, these standards
will be an important means of alleviating suppliers� workloads,
building awareness, and focusing on compliance and continuous
improvement.
It is not easy to meet the needs of
everyone involved in the purchasing function. HP has established
environmental expectations and determined that responsibility for
compliance lies with the supplier in an effort to deal with these
challenges. At the point of purchasing, the interests of suppliers,
procurement and environmental organizations come together, and each
group has different objectives, knowledge areas, and process systems.
Achieving a clear outcome with these differences can be difficult; for
one group to be successful, the needs of all three groups must be met.
To moderate the issues of environmentally responsible procurement
effectively, HP has established procedures that are mindful of
differing needs and abilities. They have worked with others to see
that the CIQC standard considers the needs of procurement staff as
well as be helpful for suppliers. And they have established
environmental expectations, while making it the responsibility of
suppliers to meet them. By doing these things, HP provides one model
of how the complex issue of environmentally responsible procurement
can be addressed.
COMPANY INFORMATION
Founded in 1939, HP manufactures a
variety of computer and imaging products, test and measurement
products, and electronic, chemical, and medical products. Revenues in
1998 were $47 billion. Ranked forty-seventh in the Global 500, the
company employs 124,600 people worldwide and has sales and support
offices and distributorships in 120 countries.
CONTACT INFORMATION
Hewlett-Packard�s web site can
be accessed at http://www.hp.com
The CIQX web site can be
accessed at
http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Foothills/3719/CIQC.html
Hewlett-Packard Company |
CIQX:
|
3000 Hanover Street |
Pacific Industry and
Business Association |
Palo Alto, CA 94304
USA |
Kathleen Podrowsky
|
|
3921 E. Bayshore Rd.
|
Hsia Choong |
Palo Alto, CA 94303
USA |
Program Manager |
(650) 965-2436 |
Supply Chain
Environmental Programs |
piba@ix.netcom.com |
HP Procurement |
|
http://www.hp.com/go/supplierE |
|
|
|
|