I mentioned on Friday that I spoke briefly with SAS VP Mikael Hagström about global sustainability regulations. He recently blogged about the topic on his internal SAS blog, saying that sustainability conversations and measurements need to be simpler. "Companies, regulatory agencies and other organizations need to have a way to quantify, measure, define and standardize what green is and how to reduce CO2 emissions, wrote Mikael in his blog. "It needs to be as simple and clear as the nutrition labels on food – just think carbon instead of calories."
His solution for simplicity in sustainability: Follow the cost, and you will find the carbon.
This simple method counteracts the "wait and see" mentality that many companies have about sustainability, and it addresses both sides of the sustainability ROI equation. Namely, cost reductions and carbon reductions. "We're marrying the two worlds," says Mikael: "The need to account for cost and the need to account for the planet and the geo-political challenges we are faced with, based on our dependency on prime energies."
Alyssa Farrell, another green expert here at SAS tells me that a lot of customers are asking basic questions, like, "How do we measure sustainability progress? Is it in absolute tons of CO2 equivalents? Or is it relative to another measure, such as the number of products we sell or the revenue we generate or our headcount?"
While SAS can help track performance against any absolute or relative reduction goals you might choose, Farrell points customers to this article from the Harvard Business Review, Building Better Sustainability Metrics, which provides guidance on the pros and cons - and alternatives - to standard green measurements. The article draws heavily on Cisco's recent experience in tackling environmental issues and concludes by saying:
... in the debate between absolute and intensity metrics, the right answer is context-dependent. Absolute metrics are essential to ensure that your company is tracking to the goals laid out by IPCC scientists for the year 2050. Intensity metrics are best for internal management analysis and allow managers to account for major acquisitions or spin-offs without constantly tweaking the baseline.
That excerpt alone kind of makes you realize why Mikael's efforts to simplify the measurements are important - but it's also good to know that the experts understand the complexity of the issues.
One undeniable reason SAS is seen as a credible expert when it comes to sustainability is because we're filled to the brim with employees like Jerry Williams who get excited about this stuff. Internal efforts - both large and small - are adopted and promoted by co-workers with an eagerness you can't fake.
Our intranet has an ideagora application where employees can submit ideas for greening the business, our on-site cafeterias offer incentive-based programs for eating on site and not using disposable containers. On the large end of the spectrum, our corporate services team is leading the charge with a solar farm and a new building project that incorporates green standards into almost every system of the facility.
Another reason the SAS sustainability solution is taking off, according to Rune Riktor, a Sales Manager in SAS Norway, is because it lets organizations model, account for, budget and plan - and CREATE CHANGE at the local level, using local data and comparisons - not just using averages and assumptions based on global or regional data and standards.
That's exciting for people who really do want to make a difference. Whether you're embarking on a sustainability initiative to save costs, meet regulations or satisfy constituents - or for completely altruistic reasons, take pride in the fact that you are making a difference.
