Environmental Objectives - Do they need to be linked into with Routine Indicators?

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
I'll try to explain my situation as clearly as possible, but if you require further details, please ask.

In the past, my company put all of our indicators on one page/file for each department. This included Environment. The problem (although it wasn't a problem until recently) was that this mashed all of our Routine and Improvement Indicators into one file with no clear or distinct separation between the two.

Improvement Projects were another file and showed which indicators were impacted (hopefully for the better) by these Improvement Projects.

Our Indicator file showed our goals (for the current year and for 2 additional years). The Environmental Indicators showed how each Indicator (be it Routine or Improvement) was associated with an Environmental Objective (ex. Conserve natural resources and energy).

Now that we are part of a bigger family, we have a corporate-mandated software to use for our Indicators and Projects. In this software, Objectives can only be linked to Improvement Projects (and the linked in Improvement Indicators). Routine Indicators (there is no such thing as a Routine Project) are not linked to such Objectives.

Is this a big deal with regard to the requirements of ISO 14001? Or did my momentary panic attack occur for no reason whatsoever?

Thanks!
 
I

IEGeek - 2006

I am confused. :eek:

Now on to your question. I do not think it will make a huge impact in reference to your ISO14001. You may need to revise some of your SOPs as they relate to Environ. to coincide with your new software and the elimination of Routine Projects. I would think that the software would have a general improvement project section but maybe not. My thought is that the software utilizes the MBO approach, where everything is measurable, hence the reason for no Routine Project.

It's Friday, it's late in the day. Panic attacks can wait until after coffee on Monday. Have a wonderful weekend.
 

Randy

Super Moderator
Doesn't matter diddly what you do or what you call them as long as you can show where your objectives are documented and you work to achieve them.

The stiving to achieve objectives is the #1 indicator of improvement, so be sure that they each have a specific person charged with thier accomplishment and that a documented plan exists to achieve them. Of course folks need to know about them, relevant functions and levels need to have them , blah, blah, blah. You know what to do.
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
Randy said:
Doesn't matter diddly what you do or what you call them as long as you can show where your objectives are documented and you work to achieve them.

The stiving to achieve objectives is the #1 indicator of improvement, so be sure that they each have a specific person charged with thier accomplishment and that a documented plan exists to achieve them. Of course folks need to know about them, relevant functions and levels need to have them , blah, blah, blah. You know what to do.

The new software is great for communicating accountability and responsibility...the problem is for communicating the objectives in a clear manner. The software (developed without really consulting with the users) does not allow for a clear and easy way to view objectives. Worse yet, to help keep the users' screens as uncluttered as possible, I have to set access-rights to every process/department and because the Environment could contain sensitive information, I have been asked to keep the read-only to a minimum. Sounds like we may need to create a document or do a lot of articles in the computer newsletter. :)

IEGeek said:
and the elimination of Routine Projects. I would think that the software would have a general improvement project section but maybe not. My thought is that the software utilizes the MBO approach, where everything is measurable, hence the reason for no Routine Project.

Not quite. Firstly, our management technology believes that there is no such thing as a Routine Project. Routine is routine...it is under control...why have a project to maintain control?

Improvement is the only aspect where a Project may exist. You wish to improve. For that, you need a plan...and you need to know why you are improving and how the project will contribute to the objectives.

But this kind of discussion is :topic: . :)
 
G

Gundars

May be try to rename INDICATORS to figures or parameters, such as you are using these your INDICATORS only for surveilance of existing situation of processes - are these figures into controlled parameters or not.
These figures are necessary for you to analyze the situation, but your management is not interested to see any figures means nothing for them. Management is interested to recieve analysis of figures from you and your sugestions for improvement.
IN which way you are collecting these dates - it is your bussiness.
 

Wes Bucey

Prophet of Profit
RCBeyette said:
The new software is great for communicating accountability and responsibility...the problem is for communicating the objectives in a clear manner. The software (developed without really consulting with the users) does not allow for a clear and easy way to view objectives. Worse yet, to help keep the users' screens as uncluttered as possible, I have to set access-rights to every process/department and because the Environment could contain sensitive information, I have been asked to keep the read-only to a minimum. Sounds like we may need to create a document or do a lot of articles in the computer newsletter. :)



Not quite. Firstly, our management technology believes that there is no such thing as a Routine Project. Routine is routine...it is under control...why have a project to maintain control?

Improvement is the only aspect where a Project may exist. You wish to improve. For that, you need a plan...and you need to know why you are improving and how the project will contribute to the objectives.

But this kind of discussion is :topic: . :)
Now I'm confused:confused:

What does the organization do in terms of tracking to KNOW whether a system is in control and therefore doesn't need to be included in the software?

Guys like Steve Prevette track HUNDREDS of subsystems to confirm Control. Does the management expect you to "intuit" whether a system is in control?
 

RoxaneB

Change Agent and Data Storyteller
Super Moderator
Wes Bucey said:
Now I'm confused:confused:

What does the organization do in terms of tracking to KNOW whether a system is in control and therefore doesn't need to be included in the software?

Guys like Steve Prevette track HUNDREDS of subsystems to confirm Control. Does the management expect you to "intuit" whether a system is in control?

It's okay, Wes...for those that are new to our Management Technology, it can be very confusing. I've had to remind myself of that fact several times today while dealing with a new employee. Several deep breaths and some decaf green tea have been my main features this morning. :)

Routine items are in the system. It's that there are no projects for them, thus making them routine. These are indicators that contain meaningful data to our organization/site/process as means of verifying that all is still under control (and if not, action is taken), but with no plans to improve them, they are routine. SDCA - Standardize - Do - Check - Act. It is a routine. This is how we do things. These are our known control limits. Outside of the limits (or laws of trending) imply a lack of control and appropriate action is to be taken to get things back under control.

If we are committed to reaching a target/goal/objective, we ascertain the resources required (and promised) and develop our PLAN (as part of the PDCA cycle) to improve. Indicators, now Improvement Indicators, will be our tools to verify that the actions we are taking are having a positive impact towards successful achievement of our target/goal/objective.

An Indicator must be either Routine or Improvement - it can not be both. We may wish to better ourselves by improving upon a Routine Indicator, so we develop a plan and re-classify the Indicator as Improvement. If the plan works and we get the results expected, we change our Standard and the Indicator becomes Routine once again.
 
Top Bottom