Nokia

Business Analysis Part I – Motorola Mobility MGT/521 University of Phoenix Business Analysis Part I – Motorola Mobility Deciding whether or not to invest in Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. (MMI) requires critical and creative thinking. Research provides a greater understanding of business trending in order for stakeholders to make educated decisions regarding personal and business investments. The following passages present part one of a three-part business plan designed to aid the author, a mutual fund manager, in making a fundamental investment decision.

A SWOT analysis of Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. proposes pertinent details, encompassing internal and external stakeholders’ needs, and further providing a scope of investor needs and how they are met by MMI. SWOT Analysis “SWOT Analysis is a useful technique for understanding your Strengths and Weaknesses, and for identifying both the Opportunities open to you and the Threats you face” (Mind Tools Ltd, 2011, SWOT Analysis, para. 1). The subsequent paragraphs represent a snapshot of Motorola Mobility from an internal and external perspective. Strengths

Operational efficiency. Resourceful manufacturing is an integral component of an efficient operation. Motorola (2011) stated, “From the warehouse floor to product delivery, mobility solutions provide access to information in real time and help automate operations, ultimately creating a seamless, error-proof work environment” (Motorola, 2011, Manufacturing, para. 1). MMI will have no debt at spinoff. According to Brand (2011), the disjointing of Motorola’s corporate business divisions, Motorola Mobility and Motorola Solutions, means zero debt for MMI upon development.

Therefore, the newly defined entity is more easily leveraged and less inclined to accrue disadvantageous debts. A pioneer of cell phones. – Motorola is a leader in the market for cell phone technologies and has forged a direct path to success. “Motorola is one of the pioneers of mobile phones, and along with Nokia and Ericsson it has one of the biggest and most profitable phone patent portfolios in the world. ” (Barak, 2011, Devices, para. 8). Innovative Products. Motorola Mobility has two of the most scientific smartphone products on the market.

A Middle East news portal, Al Bawaba (2011), proposes one leading innovative Motorola product is highly regarded in Middle East and Africa: Motorola ATRIX is the world’s most powerful smartphone with a dual-core processor that is the fastest yet offered in a mobile phone and is designed to essentially become a user’s primary digital hub to create, edit and interact with documents, media and content. (para. 7) Weaknesses Weak profitability. “Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc. , spun off in January from Motorola Inc. declined in New York trading after the Droid smartphone maker forecast profit for this quarter and full year that trailed analysts’ estimates” (Miller, 2011, News, para. 1). While the current financial forecast is stunted, long-term focus on profitability is the key. Poor Customer Service ratings. Customer satisfaction is a dynamic component of any business whether the business is corporate, entrepreneurial, or nonprofit. According to Customer Service Scoreboard (2011), an online review and rating system, Motorola Customer Service rates a disappointing score of 36. 33 out of a possible 200.

Lag in LTE technologies (4G products). Motorola Mobility is slacking in the production of LTE technologies, causing a decrease in the company’s market shares. MMI is currently working toward the manufacturing of patented silicon for the 4G products in the lineup. However, according to Woyke (2011), the competitors are taking the lead in the LTE market. Opportunities Google to acquire Motorola. “The acquisition of Motorola Mobility, a dedicated Android partner, will enable Google to supercharge the Android ecosystem and will enhance competition in mobile computing” (Google, 2011, Investor Relations, para. ). Merging two well-established entities which complement one another will prove to enhance an already-flourishing group of technologies at the core of the mobile industry. Strong demand for Android. “A recent report from Nielsen showed that Android controlled 39% of the domestic smartphone market, with Apple’s iOS controlling 28%” (Meyer, 2011, Devices, para. 4). The statistics are favorable for MMI’s existing innovations and are suspected to increase with the sales of the upcoming lineup. Expanding smartphone lineup.

Atrix, Droid X2, Droid Bionic, Droid 2 Global, and Photon 4G are five Android-based smartphones Motorola has in the lineup with the potential to compliment the Google’s acquisition of Motorola Mobility (International Business Times, 2011, para. 2-8 ). With the current demand for the Android platform and technologies in the mobile arena, the five forthcoming Motorola smartphones are expected to stir up the competitive market. Threats Competitive Pressure. According to a current Yahoo Finance posting of a Dow and Nasdaq report, Motorola Mobility’s primary competitors are Apple, Cisco Systems, and Nokia (Yahoo!

Finance, 2011). As the demand for even more enhanced technologies become greater, Motorola Mobility will also find a need to stay ahead of not only the existing competitors, but competitors in the making. Pending US litigation. Motorola is in a longstanding power struggle against several top companies in the mobile technology and electronics industry. Google acquired three pending US litigations along with the acquisition of MMI. According to United States’ leading patent law blog Patently-O (2011), Google also acquired awaiting lawsuits with TiVo, Microsoft, and Apple regarding patent infringements.

Investment Decision The decision to invest in Motorola Mobility is not an easy assessment to make. However, as a mutual fund manager, the educated decision is based on the information gained from the SWOT analysis conducted. Internally, MMI is strong with above-average manufacturing efficiencies. Additionally, the quality of smartphones made by Motorola significantly compliments Google’s existing Android platforms. Externally, with Google’s acquisition of MMI, the business decision to invest in Motorola Mobility is a secure long-term decision accompanied with only a few risks.

Internal and External Stakeholders and Needs Motorola Mobility is a spinoff company which separated from Motorola and then merged with Google. Internal stakeholders include both Motorola and Google along with the employees, shareholders, manufacturers, customers, suppliers, traveling consumers and home consumers of the innovative mobile technologies. External stakeholders of MMI include device manufacturers, service providers, social media, marketers, advertisers and application developers. Every stakeholder has a need which, ideally, must be met by the coupled organization.

MMI’s internal stakeholders need increased sales, economical supplies, and efficient processes. However, external stakeholders seek efficient and effective platforms and software in order to make use of the mobile technologies supplied. Need Fulfillment and Implications At the present time, Motorola Mobility is deficient in profitability, but is excelling with product manufacturing efficiencies and processes. Profitability can be expected to increase over time as the merge with Google stabilizes and leverages the overall company portfolio.

Furthermore, the sales can be expected to increase with the introduction of Motorola LTE products once the company establishes and patents the unique silicon currently in the works. Finally, the existing Android-based platforms Google has already patented are complimentary to Motorola Mobility’s offered products and also the devices in the lineup to be launched. On the other hand, one of MMI’s chief focal points should include a goal of improving the quality of service provided to the consumers. Increased orientation time and interactive training would provide more involved and knowledgeable employees.

Conclusion Motorola Mobility Holdings is currently struggling with profits, customer service standards, and competition; however, the judgment to invest in the newly-acquired company is sound regardless of the existing risks. As shown in the provided SWOT analysis, MMI has several favorable factors in the immediate mobile technology market. With MMI’s historical cell phone quality, current and future innovations, lack of current debt, recent merge with the prominent Google Company, and ever-growing demand for mobile technology, the decision to invest stands firm. After all, between Motorola nd Google, even the company’s minor flaws and external pressures are presently under control and projected to stay that way. References Al Bawaba. (2011, February 6). Motorola to showcase most powerful innovative mobile devices. Retrieved from http://www. albawaba. com Barak, S. (2011, August 15). Google’s bid for Motorola Mobility – a play for patents only? Retrieved from http://siliconvalley. rcrwireless. com Brand, C. (2011, January 11). Motorola Doubles Down on Cell Phones with Mobility Unit Spin-Off, But Should Investors Tread Carefully? Retrieved from http://www. peridotcapitalist. om Customer Service Scoreboard. (2011, September 5). Motorola Customer Service. Retrieved from http://www. customerservicescoreboard. com Google. (2011, August 15). Google Investor Relations. Retrieved from http://investor. google. com International Business Times. (2011, September 2). Top 5 Android-based Motorola Smartphones That Could Compliment Google-Motorola Deal. Retrieved from http://www. ibtimes. com Meyer, D. (2011, August 15). RCR Wireless. Retrieved from http://siliconvalley. rcrwireless. com Miller, H. (2011, July 29). Motorola Mobility Drops as Profit Forecast Trails Estimates.

Retrieved from http://www. businessweek. com Mind Tools Ltd. (2011). SWOT Analysis. Retrieved from http://www. mindtools. com/pages/article/newTMC_05. htm Motorola. (2011). Manufacturing. Retrieved from http://www. motorola. com Patently-O. (2011, August 15). Google’s Purchase of Motorola Mobility. Retrieved from http://www. patentlyo. com Woyke, E. (2011, July 15). Motorola Seeks To Shore Up Weakness In LTE Devices. Retrieved from http://www. forbes. com Yahoo! Finance. (2011, September 2). Motorola Mobility Holdings, Inc. (MMI). Retrieved from http://finance. yahoo. com

PRESTIGE INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT AND RESEARCH SESSION 2012-2014 Minor Research Project Synopsis “THE IMPACT OF DECLINING NOKIA MARKET ” CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1. 1 Literature Review 1. 2 Objective Of The Study 2. Research Methodology 2. 1 The Study 2. 2 Sample 2. 3 Tools For Data Collection 2. 4 Tools For Data Analysis 2. References 3. Questionnaire Introduction Nokia has come a long way to evolve from a paper mill founded in 1865 to a world renowned mobile phone manufacturer and one of the most powerful brands in the world. In 1992 Nokia appointed Jorma Ollila as the new CEO and concentrated its focus on telecommunications.

Throughout the 1990’s Nokia was known as a relentless innovator and a pioneer that made the world’s first satellite call among many other groundbreaking milestones. In 1998 Nokia became the world’s largest mobile phone manufacturer with a turnover of 31 billion dollars. Nokia is still the most influential company to the Finnish national economy, but Nokia’s effect is far from what it was in the early years of the 21st century when Nokia accounted for almost half of the economic growth in Finland and produced as much as five percent of Finland’s annual Gross Domestic Product.

In 2006, Olli-Pekka Kallasvuo replaced Jorma Ollila as the CEO, but was not able to reverse the decline of Nokia’s market share especially in the high end segment, where competitors like Apple, Blackberry,HTC, Samsung, and phones using Google’s Android operating system captured market share from Nokia at an alarmingly increasing rate. At the end of year 2010 Android was already the most widespread smart phone operating system in the world and Nokia’s market share in the smart phone segment had declined from 38 to 31 percent in one year (Sokala).

Literature Review The purpose of this literature review is to discuss relevant writings on how to improve marketing strategies from the branding perspective. First, important terms such as brand equity and the concept of consumer-based brand equity are discussed. Secondly, the brand management process is discussed from a strategic viewpoint with the help of terms like brand revitalization and integrated marketing activity. The next part of the literature review concentrates on analyzing the marketing environment.

Finally, the last section summarizes important conclusions on how the literature review relates to the company being observed, Nokia During 2012, the telecom infrastructure market saw slight growth in capital expenditures in Euro terms by global mobile operators, mainly attributable to operators in Japan, Asia Pacific and North America but it was off-set by declines in Europe, China and India, it added. Objective Of The Study The thesis has three distinct research objectives. First of all I will try to find out what is the aspired brand identity and brand image Nokia is trying to convey with its smart phone marketing.

To achieve this I will conduct interviews with people who are responsible for Nokia’s brand management and marketing. The second research objective of my thesis is to find out what is the consumers’ brand perception of Nokia at the moment. To answer this question I will conduct a comprehensive smart phone brand perception survey to collect data from Finland and the United States. The last research objective of the thesis is improving Nokia’s current marketing strategies for its smart phones from a branding perspective in the countries subject to research.

By comparing the results of the customer surveys with the company interviews, I can detect where the aspired brand identity of Nokia does not meet the brand perceptions of the consumers. By utilizing the existing knowledge and literature on the topic, I should be able to come up with ways to improve Nokia’s smart phone marketing in the two distinct geographical regions. Research Methodology The Study This Bachelor’s Thesis is a case study with a conceptual research design since it consists of a defined research problem, clear research objectives, and exact research questions that lead to conclusions on a real-life phenomenon.

The thesis includes empirical as well as descriptive elements. There are several contexts to the research, because the aim is to improve Nokia’s existing marketing strategies in different regions based on potentially differing brand perceptions prevalent in these areas. Data Collection Methods Interview Qualitative research and analysis methods were used to assess the depth interview (Appendix 1) conducted on the fourth of February, 2011, with Mr. Pekka Somerto, the Vice President of Nokia’s Brand and Marketing Portfolio Management. The interview was conducted at Nokia’s headquarters in Keilaniemi and it lasted for approximately an hour.

The interview consisted of thirteen questions and the purpose was to find out about the brand identity Nokia tries to create with their marketing. The questions asked were chosen based on the literature discussed in the literature review, and with the overall goal of improving Nokia’s marketing strategies for smart phones from the branding perspective. The results of the interview not only helped in reaching the research objective, but they also provided useful ideas and additional questions for the consumer survey. Survey To find out consumers’ brand perceptions of Nokia, quantitative research and analysis methods were utilized.

An online consumer survey (Appendix 2) was created with the Qualtrics-software and distributed to approximately 400 people in Finland and the United States through e-mail and social media networks. Data Analysis The data analysis of the survey results started with a general analysis of the averages and apparent trends. It was followed by the identification of significant regional differences between the responses with the help of cross tabulations. QUESTIONNAIRE Smart Phone Brand Perception Survey REFERENCES Arnould, Eric, Linda Price, and George Zinkhan. Consumers. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin,2004.

Print. Barrett, Larry. “Palm, Nokia Smartphone Users Most Likely to Switch: Survey. ” Enterprise Mobile Today. Internet. com, 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 24 Apr. 2011. . Best Global Brands Ranking for 2010. Interbrand, n. d. Web. 24 Apr. 2011. . Business Source Complete. Web. 14 Apr. 2011. . Christodoulides, George, and Leslie De Chernatony. “Consumer-based brand equity conceptualization and measurement. ” International Journal of Market Research 52. 1 (2010): 43-66. EBSCO Business Source Complete. Web. 13 Apr. 2011. . Drobis, David R. “Integrated Marketing Communications Redefined. ” Journal of Integrated

Strategic Management Case Analysis Firm Analysis Roy L. Simerly Department of Management 3106 Bate East Carolina University Greenville, NC 27858-4353 (252) 328-6632 (Work) (252) 328-4094 (Fax) simerlyr@mail. ecu. edu Strategic Management Case Analysis Firm Analysis Abstract This is the second part of a two part series dealing with the complexities of case analysis in Strategic Management courses. One of the primary function of Strategic Management is to serve as a cap-stone course integrating the material students have accumulated throughout their course of study within a business school.

There is a need for instruments that will provide the necessary integration and opportunity for application of acquired knowledge. There is also the reality that students do not remember all that they should from previous courses. Equally important is the necessity to impart the basics of Strategic Management as a discipline in its own right. It is the theoretical foundation of Strategic Management that provides the rational for the integration. The purpose of this article is to provide an outline for analysis of a firm. I use this method at both the undergraduate and graduate levels.

The only difference is that graduate students are expected to show more sophistication in their presentations. Strategic Management Case Analysis Firm Analysis This is the second of a two part series dealing with one approach to case analysis in Strategic Management classes. This paper takes the view that Strategic Management is a cap-stone course intended to integrate the material students have accumulated throughout their course of study within a business school. Strategic Management is, in fact, the only course that has as its stated purpose the integration and application of key management concepts.

Normally, students are expected to have a working knowledge of the primary business management disciplines of accounting, economics, finance, marketing, and operations, when entering the course. When instructors present case analysis, it is usually as a three-step process progressing from economic, to industry, and finally, to company analysis. In doing so they face the challenge of creating a classroom experience that enables students to conceptualize the framework as an integrated whole. The challenges for the instructor are interesting to say the least.

First, there is the need for the instructor to understand the intent of each of the primary business management disciplines, as well as what the student can be expected to accomplish. Second, there is the need for instruments that will provide the necessary integration and opportunity for application of acquired knowledge. Third, there is the reality that students do not always remember all that they should. This leaves a great deal to be accomplished within one semester. An equally important challenge is the necessity to impart the basics of Strategic Management as a discipline in its own right.

It is the theoretical foundation of Strategic Management that provides the rational for the integration. More importantly, the students needs an understanding of ‘when’ to use ‘what’ techniques in the business world. Given these challenges, I use – among other classroom techniques – case analysis. Students are required to provide analysis and discussion for a number of short cases throughout the semester. All are taken from current publications such as, Business Week, Fortune, Forbes and The Economist. I find that text book cases do not provide the currency necessary.

These cases are used to demonstrate the text theory under discussion, and to show the relevance of specific elements of the major written cases. I require two major written cases. The first is an analysis of an industry, and the second is an analysis of a firm within that industry. Both are essential to achieve the learning objectives for the course. The learning objective for the course is: to understand how the top manager (CEO) is responsible for ensuring the long term survival of the firm within its competitive environment.

The learning objective for the written case analyses is: to arrive at a point where they can develop a sound business plan to ensure the survival of their chosen firm within its competitive environment. Also, to appreciate the complexities of collecting and understanding the relevance of the vast amount of information available. The learning objective for the industry analysis is: to determine the opportunities and threats that exist for firms within a competitive environment. They should be able to appreciate how the various forces operating in an industry create or limit the chances for survival.

The learning objective for the firm analysis is: to determine the strengths and weaknesses of a firm; and, to determine the core competence that can be built on to establish a competitive advantage. The final step is to develop a business plan that will align the capabilities of the firm with the requirements of the competitive environment. Students are required to work in teams to complete the two major case write-ups. They will later make a presentation of their findings. I require teams because the most difficult part of management is the management of human resources.

By setting specific guidelines for students I make their grade contingent on their management abilities as well as their ability to complete the projects. Team size is limited to 3 or 4 members. They are free to choose their firm and its industry. I strongly suggest that they select a firm that has a production function. This makes it easier to see the four organizational functions being integrated. I also encourage them to select an industry that would be suitable for employment based on their particular interests, and primary area of concentration.

For example, accounting majors are encouraged to examine an accounting firm. Finance majors are pointed toward the banking industry. In the end, the students make choices based on group consensus and personal interests. However, a mixture of majors can be an advantage when working on the papers. The possible collaboration and integration of different perspectives is one advantage; another is the opportunity to work on a part of the papers that is relevant to their discipline. How firm’s performance is defined is left to the student. I must approve all choices prior to the student beginning work.

In this way, I am sure that the projects are do-able. No two groups are allowed to do the same firm within the same class, but they can do different firms within the same industry. There are no ‘easy’ industries or firms. Each has its own challenges. A significant amount of time is spent covering analysis techniques, and the resources available, prior to the students starting on the projects. They are also encouraged to divide the work up into specific areas. For example, for the firm paper: do the four functional areas first, then do the introduction and conclusion.

This gives a reasonable balance to the work load. One common complaint about this approach to case writing is that a student working on one section of the paper will not learn about the other sections of the paper. Every approach to case writing has a limitation, but I think that this one is manageable. First, the intent is not to teach students about one particular industry. It is to teach them the relevance, and the techniques, of industry and firm analysis. Stressing this point early on is very important. It is important to note that I do not give the students too many specific directions.

I want them to do their own research and make discoveries along the way. There is no one right answer. Correctness – if such exists – is a product of the logic used in the analysis. For example, two measures of economies of scale are required. It does not matter which measures are used, what matters is that the student reasons through the problem and finds a means of justifying a position. If I give too much detail it limits the imagination of the student and prevents discoveries that could be significant. To help get the students oriented, I do provide complete ‘sample’ papers from a previous class.

I am careful to ensure that the sample papers are on an industry and firm not currently being done. I do not have to worry about copying, or other forms of cheating. The papers must be up-to-date, which means significant recent citations in the bibliography. Additionally, I do provide the students with the opportunity of sending in parts of the project as they write. I then provide feedback to prevent them going off on tangents and wasting valuable time. Most students find this method beneficial as they work. I find the quality of the papers improves dramatically over the course of the semester.

It is critical to stress that this is a business report, and not an English paper. Each paper will take on significant proportions (30 to 50 pages) if just the required work is done. If focus is not maintained, the size becomes unmanageable. Assumptions and common knowledge are not accepted. Everything has to be proven in some manner, if just by an interview with a business person. Quantitative and qualitative analysis are required. I give a number of examples in class of how wrong ‘common knowledge’ can be. The firm paper analysis that follows has been adapted from the work of Wheelen & Hunger (2000)[1].

Their model for the evaluation of firms has been evolving for over a decade, and represents one of the more concise approaches to firm analysis. This approach is compatible with a number of Strategic Management text and can easily be adapted to most situations. In addition, my own experiences in the business world have been incorporated. In what follows, I cover in some detail the outline for the firm paper. This outline is given to the students in its entirety. FIRM PAPER OUTLINE This outline is only a guide. Each firm is unique, and you are responsible for adapting your paper to fit the circumstance.

Form is important, but must not replace reason. Learning Objective: to determine the strengths and weaknesses of a firm; and, to determine the core competence that can be built on to establish a competitive advantage. Method: Firm analysis and the development of an abbreviated business plan to ensure long term survival within the competitive environment. Compare your firm to a better performing firm within the same industry, or to the industry trends that you created in the industry paper. Maintain your focus on the questions being asked. Provide conclusions for each section and sub-section.

A decision matrix should be provided at the end of each section, and an overall matrix provided in the conclusion section. Where quantitative analysis is required, provide numbers expressed as ratios. Use five years of data to establish trends. Where qualitative analysis is required, provide citations to support your arguments. Assumptions and common knowledge are not accepted. Continuity: I do read these papers! Be sure that if you make a declarative statement in one section, you do not contradict yourself in another. While it is a team project, I read it as the work of one person. Integrate the paper.

Please number pages, and use section headings and sub-headings. Help is just a mouse-click away! I strongly encourage you to show me your work as you progress. I can, and will, save you hours of frustration if you will show me what you are doing. I. Current Situation A. Brief firm history. What industries and industry segments is your firm involved in, and what will be the focus of the paper? You can not do all of the industries or segments in one semester. Make a rational choice that aligns the firm paper with the industry paper. Provide a statement of the current position or situation of your firm within the industry (i. e. how goes it). How diversified is this firm? Related or unrelated (you may discuss this wherever you think most appropriate)? B. Strategic Posture. 1. What is the current mission? Did you have to deduce it, or was it stated. Is there a clear point B (an objective that we can quantify)? You should be concerned with both the quality of the mission statement, and its appropriateness for the competitive environment. You will be able to address this issue after you complete the firm analysis. 2. What is the current (Porter’s generic) strategy? Since you are only doing one segment, you are concerned with business-level strategy only.

Is this strategy consistent with the mission, appropriate for the environmental context, being followed by management? Again, this is best answered after the analysis is complete. II. External Environment (Opportunities and Threats. ) This section is a restatement of some of your industry paper work. You restate your findings with respect to this specific firm. A. Socio-cultural. What general environmental factors among the socio-cultural, economic, political-legal, and technological forces are currently affecting both the firm and the industry in which it competes?

Which present, current, or future threats or opportunities are important to your firm? B. Task Environment. Which of the five forces (Porter’s) in the immediate environment are currently affecting the level of competitive intensity within the industry? Which present current or future threats or opportunities important to your firm? III. Internal Environment (Strengths and Weaknesses) The only way to know if your firm is doing well is through comparison. Therefore, almost all of the elements that follow require the analysis of your firm and then a comparison to a better performing firm, or to industry standards.

A. Management. The objective of the management function is to ensure the long-term survival of the firm within its competitive environment. Begin with your assessment of how management has addressed this objective. 1. Board of Directors. The objective of the board is to provide oversight of the firm. Based on your observations is this board appropriate for the competitive environment of this organization? a. What is the board size and composition (averages for all firms is 74% external, with 14 members total). b. What are their skills? Do you have the four functional areas covered? c.

Do they own a significant percentage of stock? Here you are testing elements of agency theory. d. What is their level of involvement in the oversight of the corporation? That is, what committees are they on? How often do they meet? 2. Top Management (usually only the CEO). The objective of management is to ensure the survival of the organization within its environment. Is management achieving that objective? a. What are top management’s chief characteristics in terms of knowledge, skills, background, and management style? Is top management sufficiently skilled to cope with likely future challenges?

Has it established a systematic approach to the formulation, implementation, evaluation and control of strategic management? Is there a vision, clearly articulated, guiding corporate activities (i. e. , does this manager know where the organization is headed)? What is the degree of stock ownership, and is it appropriate? b. Organizational Structure. What is the present structure? Discuss decision making authority, degree of autonomy, team building, empowerment, etc. Is the structure appropriate for the competitive environment and consistent with the current strategy and mission? c. Culture.

Is there a well defined or emerging culture composed of shared beliefs, expectations, and values? Is the culture a source of support or hindrance to achieving the mission/strategy of the corporation? B. Marketing The objective of the marketing function is to maximize market share. Are they achieving this objective? You should be able to provide a graph of market share change over time compared to another firm or the industry. What is the market share change of the firm in relation to market growth? Remember to use ratios, not raw numbers. How well is the corporation performing in terms of market position and marketing mix?

You answer this by comparing the 4 P’s to a better performing firm. 1. How well does your firm’s product offering (product mix) compare to a better performing firm? 2. Is the firm’s pricing appropriate? 3. Compare the place (distribution system) of the product offering. 4. Evaluate the promotional efforts of the firm. What is the payoff for the money spend on advertising? Is there a relationship between advertising and market share change? Provide a conclusion to this section. What trends do you see from analysis of their past performance? I suggest using a decision matrix.

From your analysis, what are the strengths and weaknesses of this function? C. Operations/Production. This section will be revised for those teams doing a service firm. While the basic arguments are the same, the methods will be different. Consult with your instructor before beginning this section if you are doing a service organization. The objective of the operations function is to increase productivity. Are they achieving this objective? This is also the functional area where you can best evaluate whether your firm is following the logic of re-investing in itself (the logic of the managerial enterprise)? 1.

In order to achieve improvements in productivity, the firm must be re-investing in itself. What is the trend in capital spending? What is the trend in productivity improvement? 2. In combination with the marketing section, has this firms emphasized product development, or diversification, for growth (the Chandler argument)? No longer required. 3. Operating leverage. How has the mix of people to capital changed over time – are fixed costs rising? What are the trends in costs per unit of labor, inventory control, etc.? 4. Research & Development. What return is the corporation receiving from its R&D investment?

Is the firm technologically competent? How well does the firm’s investment compare with similar corporations? What is the bang for the buck! Provide a conclusion to this section. I suggest using a decision matrix. From your analysis, what are the strengths and weaknesses of this function? D. Finance The objective of the finance function is to maximize shareholder wealth. Are they achieving this objective? I would prefer total returns to investors over time as the measure here. The data are available. 1. Remember to use at least five years of data for the most important factors. What trends do you see emerging from this analysis?

Suggested ratios are contained in the text. 2. How well is the corporation performing compared to competition? 3. Capital Asset Pricing Model. (Class lecture notes) What is the cost of capital for this firm? What impact does this have on competitiveness? What does your analysis tell you about the probability that management will reinvest in the firm? 4. Debt to Equity policy and susceptibility to external forces, such as debt covenants, take-over attempts, etc. As lecture material points out, the capital structure decision is very important to the survival of the firm. Crunching of numbers is not the objective here.

You are looking for significant trends that can impact the survivability of the firm. As you find negative trends that could effect other organizational functions, tell your team mates. What have they discovered? This section can not stand on its own, it has to be integrated into the overall paper. Provide a conclusion to this section. I suggest using a decision matrix. From your analysis, what are the strengths and weaknesses of this function? E. Human Resource Management. If applicable – i. e. , are unions involved? If so, you are concerned with the HRM function of the organization. F. Management Information Systems.

If applicable. Is you firm having problems with its MIS system? Readings from articles should give a clue. If no problem is noted, you do not have to include this section. IV. Critical Success Factors. From your industry paper, discuss how your firm is addressing these factors. Most of these factors (2 of 3) will lend themselves to quantitative analysis and comparison. V. Strategic Problem. From your analysis, what is THE strategic problem of this firm. This is only one paragraph and not a laundry list. Clue – your paragraph will begin: Management has failed to ensure the long-term survival of this firm because….. VI.

Strategic Alternatives. Provide appropriate strategic alternatives stated as strategies, not as elements of a strategy. Discuss the pro’s and con’s of each. The current strategy, if appropriate, could be one of the alternatives if the firm simply needs to improve the implementation of that strategy. VII. Recommendation. From your alternatives, what ONE strategy do you recommend, and why? This is only one or two paragraphs. VIII. Implementation. This is the section where most teams lose it. Remember that strategy is a pattern of actions and activities. A. Give SPECIFIC recommendations on how you would implement your strategic choice.

Provide details addressing each of the four functional areas. B. Show how you are solving the weaknesses and building on the strengths of each functional area. C. What is the core competence of this organization? Can we build a sustainable competitive advantage within this industry? D. Include a basic pro forma for at least 5 years out to see the impact of your changes. Use your best guess on the numbers, indicating your assumptions. E. Conclude the paper with your prognosis for the firm. This is the grade sheet for the firm paper Case Name_________________________ Bibliography:

Appendices, graphs, tables: Firm Business Segments: Strategy: Mission: Corporate ownership: Board of Directors: R: Type and Degree of Diversification: Capital investment related to performance: Social/Environmental programs: Growth rate of firm: Cost of Capital (CAPM): Take over target: Asset base compared to competitors: Historical financial data: S. W. O. T. : C. S. F. ‘s: Analysis of the functional areas: Management: Marketing: Operations: Finance: ———————– [1] Wheelen, T. L. & Hunger, J. D. 2000. Strategic Management. Upper Saddle River, N. J. U. S. A: Prentice Hall

Social Sustainability Process Industry Social Sustainability Social Indicators for Sustainable Project and Technology Life Cycle Management in the Process Industry Carin Labuschagne1 and Alan C. Brent1* 1 Chair of Life Cycle Engineering, Department of Engineering & Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa * Corresponding author (alan. brent@up. ac. za) DOI: http://dx. doi. org/10. 1065/lca2006. 01. 233 Abstract Goal, Scope and Background.

The importance of the social dimension of sustainable development increased significantly during the last decade of the twentieth century. Industry has subsequently experienced a shift in stakeholder pressures from environmental to social-related concerns, where new developments in the form of projects and technologies are undertaken. However, the measurement of social impacts and the calculation of suitable indicators are less well developed compared to environmental indicators in order to assess the potential liabilities associated with undertaken projects and technologies.

The aim of this paper is to propose a Social Impact Indicator (SII) calculation procedure based on a previously introduced Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA) calculation procedure for environmental Resource Impact Indicators (RIIs), and to demonstrate the practicability of the SII procedure in the context of the process industry in South Africa. Methods. A framework of social sustainability criteria has been introduced for the South African process industry.

The social sub-criteria of the framework are further analyzed, based on project and technology management expertise in the South African process industry, to determine whether the criteria should be addressed at project or technology management level or whether they should rather form part of an overall corporate governance policy for new projects and technologies. Furthermore, the proposed indicators for criteria that are considered appropriate for project or technology evaluation purposes are constrained by the type of information that is available, i. e. he calculation methodology relies on the availability of regional or national social information where the project will be implemented, as well as the availability of project- or technology-specific social information during the various phases of the project or technology development life cycle. Case studies in the process industry and statistical information for South Africa are subsequently used to establish information availability for the SII calculation procedure, demonstrate the SII method together with the RII method, and determine the practical use of the SII method.

Results and Conclusion. The case studies establish that social footprint information as well as project- and technology social data are not readily available in the South African process industry. Consequently, the number of mid-point categories that can be evaluated are minimal, which results in an impaired social picture when compared to the environmental dimension. It is concluded that a quantitative social impact assessment method cannot be applied for project and technology life cycle management purposes in industry at present.

Recommendation and Perspective. Following the outcomes of the case studies in the South African process industry, it is recommended that checklists and guidelines be used during project and technology life cycle management practices. Similar to the environmental dimension, it is envisaged that such checklists and guidelines would improve the availability of quantitative data in time, and would therefore make the SII procedure more practical in the future.

Keywords: Life Cycle Impact Assessment (LCIA); Life Cycle Management (LCM); process industry; Resource Impact Indicator (RII); Social Impact Indicator (SII); social sustainability Introduction The last decade of the twentieth century marked significant steps to draw the social dimension of sustainable development into the open [1]. The inclusion of social aspects in the sustainability debate and practice has nevertheless been marginal compared to the attention given to the other two dimensions, especially from a business perspective [1,2,3].

However, stakeholders are forcing companies to address the inclusion of social sustainability by shifting pressure from environmental to social related concerns [4,5]. The social dimension is commonly recognised as the ‘weakest’ pillar of sustainable development due to a lack of analytical and theoretical underpinnings [5] and it is believed that the state of development of indicators or measurements for social business sustainability parallels that of environmental performances about 20 years ago [6].

Nevertheless, there is a definite need for practical tools to introduce social sustainability into business evaluation processes [1,7,8]. This paper proposes a methodology to assess the social sustainability of projects and technologies in the process industry by calculating social impact indicators, and addresses the following two questions: 1) What social criteria must such an assessment methodology consider and measure? 2) How must these criteria be addressed and measured?

To address the first question, a framework of social business sustainability criteria is defined, which is relevant for operational initiatives in the process industry. Social sustainable development indicators are then introduced, demonstrated and discussed, based on the defined framework. Int J LCA 11 (1) 3 – 15 (2006) © 2006 ecomed publishers (Verlagsgruppe Huthig Jehle Rehm GmbH), D-86899 Landsberg and Tokyo • Mumbai • Seoul • Melbourne • Paris 3 Process Industry Social Sustainability Responsibility (CSR) literature and guidelines, and other international guidelines were undertaken (Table 1) [9].

The analysis showed that a comprehensive social sustainability framework should define appropriate criteria to address the company’s impacts on the social systems in which it operates, as well as the company’s relationship with its various stakeholders. A sustainable development framework for operational initiatives was subsequently developed and proposed, the social dimension of which is shown in Fig. 1. Table 2 provides the definitions of the criteria at the different levels of the framework, which are described in detail elsewhere [9]. 1 1. 1 Social Sustainability Criteria Framework

Development of a framework for business management purposes in the process industry The current indicator frameworks that are available to measure overall business sustainability do not effectively address social aspects of sustainability at operational level in the process industry, especially in developing countries such as South Africa [9]. The question arises what the exact scope of social sustainability should entail from a business management perspective. An analysis of current available frameworks, Social Impact Assessment (SIA) guidelines, Corporate Social

Table 1: Analysis of the social criteria addressed by current frameworks and guidelines [9] Name and type of literature Health Education Environment Housing / Living conditions ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Criteria Society Security / Crime Facilities & Services Population characteristics Community characteristics Economic welfare / Employment ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Indicator frameworks United Nations 1 ? ? 3 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Global Reporting Intitiative2 IchemE Sustainability Metrics Wuppertal Indicators 4 European Conceptual Framework for Social Ind. SIA literature Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles6 Socioeconomic impacts for Energy Efficiency Project for Climate Change Mitigation7 South Sydney Council SIA 8 checklist SIA categories for development 9 projects in South Africa South African social criteria for CDM project evaluation10 Classification of social impacts 11 according to Vanclay Classification of social impacts 11 according to Juslen Classification of social impacts according to Gramling and 11 Freudenburg SIA Series’ Guide to Social Assessment12 Government actions European Greenpaper on CSR World Bank’s Social Analysis 14 Sourcebook SRI Indexes Dow Jones Sustainability Index FTSE 4 GOOD16 JSE SRI Index 17 18 15 13 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Pressures from international financing organisations ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Dominini 400 Index Global Compact19 International standards and guidelines Global Sullivan Principles20 Caux Round Table OECD Guidelines SA 8000 23 21 22 AA 100024 Investors in People CSR standards Ethos Indicators 27 25 26 Ethical Trading Initiative ? 29 ? ? ? ? ? Standards of CSR28 Danish Social Index 4 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability Process Industry

Table 1: Analysis of the social criteria addressed by current frameworks and guidelines [9] (cont’d) Name and type of literature Society Community cohesion Indicator frameworks 1 United Nations 2 Global Reporting Intitiative ? 3 IchemE Sustainability Metrics 4 Wuppertal Indicators European Conceptual Framework ? 5 for Social Ind. SIA literature Interorganizational Committee on ? 6 Guidelines and Principles Socioeconomic impacts for ? Energy Efficiency Project for 7 Climate Change Mitigation 8 South Sydney Council SIA checklist ? SIA categories for development ? 9 projects in South Africa South African social criteria for CDM project evaluation10 Classification of social impacts ? 11 according to Vanclay Classification of social impacts ? 1 according to Juslen Classification of social impacts ? according to Gramling and 11 Freudenburg SIA Series’ Guide to Social ? Assessment12 Government actions 13 European Greenpaper on CSR ? Pressures from international financing organisations World Bank’s Social Analysis ? 14 Sourcebook SRI Indexes 15 Dow Jones Sustainability Index FTSE 4 GOOD16 17 JSE SRI Index 18 Dominini 400 Index International standards and guidelines 19 Global Compact 20 Global Sullivan Principles Caux Round Table21 22 OECD Guidelines 23 SA 8000 ? AA 100024 ? 25 Investors in People ? 26 Ethical Trading Initiative ? CSR standards 27 Ethos Indicators 28 Standards of CSR Danish Social Index29 1

Criteria Society and company (interlinkage) Product Community Stakeholder Training, responsibility involvement participation / education of of company Engagement staff Equity Company internal Fair Human labour rights practices Employee health and safety ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 United Nations Commission on Sustainable Development (2001): Indicators of sustainable development: guidelines and methodologies. United Nations. Available from ;http://www. un. rg/esa/sustdev/ natlinfo/indicators/indisd/indisd-mg2001. pdf;, visited on 19 November 2003 Global Reporting Initiative (2002): Sustainability Reporting Guidelines 2002. Global Reporting Initiative, Boston Institution of Chemical Engineers, (2002): The Sustainability Metrics: Sustainable Development Progress Metrics recommend for use in the Process Industries. Institution of Chemical Engineers. Rugby Spangenberg JH, Bonniot O (1998): Sustainability Indicators – A Compass on the Road Towards Sustainability. Wuppertal Paper 81 Centre for Survey Research and Methodology (ZUMA) (2000): Conceptual Framework and Structure of a European System of Social Indicators.

EuReporting Working Paper no 9, Mannheim Interorganizational Committee on Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment (1995): Guidelines and Principles for Social Impact Assessment. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 15 (1) 11–43 Vine E, Sathaye J (1999): Guidelines for the Monitoring, Evaluation, Reporting, Verification and Certification of Energy-Efficiency Projects for Climate Change Mitigation. US Environmental Protection Agency through the U. S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC03-76SF00098 South Sydney Council (2004): The South Sydney Plan: Social Impact Assessment Checklist. ;http://www. sscc. nsw. gov. au/router? model=c=1704;, visited on 21 January 2004. Khosa M (2000): Social Impact Assessment of Development Projects. In: Khosa M (ed), Infrastructure Mandate for Change 1994–1999.

Human Sciences Research Council (HSRC) Publishers, Pretoria Brent AC, Heuberger R, Manzini D (2005): Evaluating projects that are potentially eligible for Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) funding in the South African context: A case study to establish weighting values for sustainable development criteria. Environment and Development Economics 10 (5) 631–649 Vanclay F (2002): Conceptualising social impacts. Environmental Impact Assessment Review 22 (3) 183–211 Branch K, Hooper DA, Thompson J, Creighton J (1984): Guide to Social Assessment: A framework for assessing social change. Westview Press, London European Commission: Employment and Social Affairs (2001): Promoting a European framework for corporate social responsibility. European Communities, Luxembourg Social Analysis and Policy Team (2003): Social Analysis Sourcebook: Incorporating Social Dimensions into Bank-supported projects.

Washington DC, The World Bank: Social Development Department SAM Indexes (2003): Dow Jones Sustainability World Indexes Guide, Version 5. 0. SAM Indexes GmbH, Zollikon-Zurich FTSE (2003): FTSE4Good Index Series: Inclusion Criteria. FTSE The Independent Global Index Company, London Johannesburg Stock Exchange (2004): JSE SRI Index: Background and Selection Criteria. ;http://www. jse. co. za/sri/docs/;, visited on 9 January 2004 Domini Social Investments (2003): The Domini 400 Social IndexSM. Available from ;http://www. domini. com/Social-screening/creation_maintenance. doc_cvt. htm;, visited on 31 December 2003 Kell G (2003): The global compact: origins, operations, progress and challenges.

The Journal of Corporate Citizenship, Autumn, 35–49 Global Sullivan Principles (2003): The Global Sullivan Principles of Social Responsibility. Available from ;http://www. globalsullivanprinciples. org;, visited on 27 December 2003 Caux Round Table (2003): Caux Round Table Principles for Business, English Translation. Available from: ;http://www. cauxroundtable. org/ENGLISH. htm;, visited on 20 January 2003 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development (2000): The OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises 2000 Revision. OECD Publication, Paris Social Accountability International (2003): Overview of SA8000. Available from ;http://www. cepaa. org/SA8000/SA8000. tm;, visited on 4 March 2003 AccountAbility (1999): Overview of the AA1000 framework. AccountAbility Publication, London, available from ;http://www. accountability. org. uk/uploadstore/cms/docs/AA1000%20Overview. pdf;, visited on 29 December 2003 Investors in People UK (2003): The Standard. Available from ;http://iipuk. co. uk/IIP/Internet/InvestorsinPeople/TheStandard/default. htm;, visited on 29 December 2003 Ethical Trading Initiative (2003): Ethical Trading Initiative Homepage. Available from ;http://www. ethicaltrade. org;, visited on 29 December 2003 Ethos Institute for Business and Social Responsibility (2001): ETHOS Corporate Social Responsibility INDICATORS.

Instituto Ethos de Empresas e Responsabillidade Social, Sao Paulo Goodell E (ed) (1999): Social Venture Networks: Standards of Corporate Social Responsibility, Social Venture Networks, San Fransisco Danish Ministry of Social Affairs, KPMG, Socialforskningsinstituttet (2000): Social Index: Measuring a Company’s social responsibility, Danish Ministry of Social Affairs, Copenhagen Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 5 Process Industry Social Sustainability Social Sustainability Internal Human Resources External Population Macro Social Performance Stakeholder Participation Employment Stability Human Capital Socio- Economic Performance Information Provision Employment Opportunities Employment Renumeration Employment Practices Health Economic Welfare Trading Opportunities Socio- Environmental Performance Collective Audience Selected Audience Stakeholder Influence Education Productive Capital Disciplinary & Security Practices Employee Contracts Equity Housing Monitoring

Decision Influence Potential Stakeholder Empowerment Service Infrastructure Mobility Infrastructure Regulatory & Public Services Community Capital Legislation Enforcement Labour Sources Health & Safety Health & Safety Practices Health & Safety Incidents Capacity Development Sensory Stimuli Cultural Properties Social Pathologies Security Economic Welfare Social Cohesion Research & Development Career Development Fig. 1: Framework to assess the social sustainability of engineering projects and technologies [9] Table 2: Definitions of Social Criteria [9] Internal Human Resources focuses on the social responsibility of the company towards its workforce and includes all aspects of employment.

The criterion addresses a business initiative’s impact on work opportunities within the company, the stability thereof as well as Employment Stability evaluating the fairness of compensation. Disciplinary and secrecy practices as well as employee contracts are addressed under this criterion. These are evaluated to Employment Practices ensure that it complies with the laws of the country, international human rights declarations as well as other human rights and fair employment practice standards. The criterion focuses on the health and safety of the workforce and evaluates preventive measures as well as the occurrence Health & Safety and handling of health and/or safety incidents. Capacity Development The criterion addresses two different, aspects namely research and development, and career development.

External Population focuses on the external impacts of the company’s operational initiatives on a society, e. g. impacts External Population on the availability of services, community cohesion, economic welfare, etc. Human Capital refers to an individual’s ability to work in order to generate an income and encompasses aspects such as health, Human Capital psychological wellbeing, education, training and skills levels. The criterion addresses Health and Education separately. Productive capital entails the assets and infrastructure an individual needs in order to maintain a productive life. The criterion Productive Capital measures the strain placed on these assets and infrastructure availability by the business initiative.

This criterion takes into account the effect of an operational initiative on the social and institutional relationships and networks of Community Capital trust, reciprocity and support as well as the typical characteristics of the community. Macro Social Performance focuses on the contribution of an organisation to the environmental and financial Macro Social Performance performance of a region or nation, e. g. contribution to exports. Socio-Economic Performance This criterion addresses the external economic impact of the company’s business initiatives. Economic welfare (contribution to GDP, taxes, etc. ) as well as trading opportunities (contribution to foreign currency savings, etc. ) are addressed separately.

Socio-Environmental This criterion considers the contributions of an operational initiative to the improvement of the environment for society on a Performance community, regional and national level. The extension of the environmental monitoring abilities of society, as well as the enhancement of legislation and the enforcement thereof, are included in this criterion. Stakeholder Participation focuses on the relationships between the company and ALL its stakeholders (internally and Stakeholder Participation externally) by assessing the standard of information sharing and the degree of stakeholder influence on decision-making. The quantity and quality of information shared with stakeholders are measured.

Information can either be shared openly with all Information Provisioning stakeholders (Collective Audience) or shared with targeted, specific groups of stakeholders (Selected Audience). The degree to which the company actually listens to the stakeholders’ opinion should also be evaluated. Two separate subStakeholder Influence criteria are included: Decision Influence Potential and Stakeholder Empowerment. Internal Human Resources 6 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability Process Industry The conclusion was reached that no social aspect of the ten projects could be found that could not be classified into the criteria framework. In addition, all of the social criteria did not manifest in each asset life cycle phase. However, there may be social aspects that did not manifest in either the case studies or the framework.

Nevertheless, the basis on which the individual case studies were chosen makes these cases adequately representative of the current social environment in which construction, operation, and decommissioning occurs in the process industry. It is subsequently concluded that the framework is complete enough to be used as an initial basis to develop a social assessment methodology, which can incorporate social sustainability into project and technology management practices. The social sustainability framework was further validated by means of a Delphi Technique survey [12]. The survey focused on the relevance of the proposed social criteria for the evaluation of projects or technologies and attempted to answer whether the project team, a functional unit within an organisation, or an organisation’s corporate governance framework should address the different social aspects.

A total of 23 project management experts in a process industry company in South Africa participated in the survey, which established the suitability of the social criteria, as well as the relevance of the criteria in terms of sustainable business practices. The outcomes of the survey support the conclusion reached by the case studies, but also suggest, according to the opinion of project management experts, that all the criteria are not relevant to project and technology management, but should rather manifest as part of corporate policy (Table 3) [11]. 1. 2 Verification and validation of the completeness and relevance of the social criteria of the framework The social sustainability framework was verified by means of case studies testing the completeness and relevance of its criteria.

Since the aim of the framework is to assess the social sustainability of projects and technologies in the process industry, ten case studies were chosen that represent the three phases of the asset, or technology, life cycle with the greatest potential to cause social impacts, i. e. the Construction Phase, the Operation Phase, and the Decommissioning Phase. The rationale for focussing on the three asset life cycle phases, as well as the interaction between asset and project life cycles, can be found in literature [10]. The case studies aimed to describe the significant social impacts that may occur during the life cycle phases in relation to the proposed framework, and to identify any social impacts that cannot be classified into the framework [11]: • The construction of three process industry facilities: an incinerator, a mine, and a gas pipeline. The operation of four chemical manufacturing facilities, one in Germany, one in the USA, and two in different provinces in South Africa. • The decommissioning of three process industry facilities: a cyanide manufacturing plant, an acrylic fibre manufacturing plant, and a mine. Project related documentation, pertaining to each of the case studies, was evaluated and personal interviews were held with project responsible individuals [11]. It must be noted that in case study research it is not easy to generalise results, since statistical analysis cannot necessarily be applied. Cases are not sampling units and cannot be treated as such. Table 3: Delphi Technique survey results [11]

Criterion Employment Opportunities Employment Remuneration Disciplinary & Security Practices Employee Contracts Equity & Diversity Labour Sources Health & Safety Practices Health & Safety Incidents Research Development Career Development Health Education Housing Service Infrastructure Mobility Infrastructure Regulatory & Public Services/ Institutional Services Sensory Stimuli Security Cultural Properties Economic Welfare Social Pathologies Social Cohesion Economic Welfare Trading Opportunities Monitoring Legislation Enforcement Information Provisioning Stakeholder Influence Project x The criterion should be addressed by… Business Strategy x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Functional Department x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 7 Process Industry Social Sustainability CC = Characterisation factor for an impact category (of intervention X) within the pathway. As a first approximation no characterisation factors are assumed and social LCI constituents are considered separately.

NC = Normalisation factor for the impact category based on the social objectives in the region of assessment, i. e. the inverse of the target state of the impact category. The information is obtained from social footprint data in the region of the assessment. And, Significance (or relative importance) of the impact category in a social group based on the distance-to-target method, i. e. current social state divided by the target social state (see section 1. 2). 2 Social Impact Indicator (SII) Calculation Procedure The main focus of this paper is the development and testing of a quantitative social sustainable development indicator calculation method.

A life cycle impact assessment (LCIA) approach has been proposed before for the evaluation of the social impacts of life cycle systems from compiled LCIs [13,14]. An introduced LCIA methodology developed specifically for the South African context, termed the Resource Impact Indicator (RII) approach [15], is thereby used as basis for the development of social indicators. The environmental RII approach considers the current and target ambient state or ecological footprint through a conventional distance-to-target normalisation and weighting calculation procedure [15]. A similar calculation procedure is proposed for Social Impact Indicators (SII), using the four main social criteria (shown in Fig. 1) as Areas of Protection (AoP).

Three of these criteria represent the main groups of social resources on which the company can have an impact, while the fourth criterion represents all relationships between the company and stakeholders. The general SII calculation procedure is described through Eq. 1. (1) Where: SIIG = Social Impact Indicator calculated for a main social resource group through the summation of all impact pathways of all categorised social interventions of an evaluated life cycle system. QX = Quantifiable social intervention (X) of a life cycle system in a midpoint impact category C, i. e. project or technology specific information with regards to social impacts. Table 4: Midpoint categories and evaluation methods [17] Social Impact Indicators (SIIs) Internal Human Resources Midpoint category SC = CS = TS

To develop the calculation method, the same case studies used for the verification of the social criteria (see section 1. 2) were used to compile a list of possible social interventions, i. e. a social Life Cycle Inventory (LCI) of assessed operational initiatives in the process industry. However, the RII method makes use of mid-point categories. To define midpoint categories, the list of social interventions was mapped against the social criteria at various levels within the proposed social sustainability framework. A causal relationship diagram was consequently established for each of the four main social criteria, which define the midpoint categories. These causal diagrams are shown in the Appendix [16].

Three measurement methods are proposed to express the defined midpoint categories in equivalence units (Table 4) [17]: • Established risk assessment approaches, which require a subjective evaluation of the probability of occurrence, the projected frequency of the occurrence, and the potential intensity thereof; Measurement methods to establish equivalence units Quantitative Risk Quantitative Quantitative Risk Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Quantitative Qualitative Quantitative Qualitative/Quantitative Quantitative External Population Stakeholder Participation Macro-Social Performance

Permanent internal employment positions Internal Health and Safety situation Knowledge level / Career development Internal Research and Development capacity Comfort level / Nuisances Perceived aesthetics Local employment Local population migration Access to health facilities Access to education Availability of acceptable housing Availability of water services Availability of energy services Availability of waste services Pressure on public transport services Pressure on the transport network / People and goods movement Access to regulatory and public services Change in relationships with stakeholders External value of purchases / supply chain value/Nature of Purchases Migration of clients / Changes in the product value chain/Nature of Sales Improvement of socio-environmental services 8 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability Process Industry

Table 5: Proposed Midpoint Categories for the four main social criteria together with proposed units of equivalence Social AoP Internal Human Resources Midpoint Category Permanent Internal Employment Positions Possible Health and Safety Incidents Internal Research & Development Capacity External Population Comfort Level/Nuisances Units of equivalence Number of employment opportunities equivalent to a specific position Fatality or Disability Injury Rate Cost spend on R capacity Risk of uncomfort/ Kilo tons of pollutants emitted per annum Intervention Information, i. e. project Social Footprint Information needed or technology information Number and type of employment Employment by type, i. e. osition and opportunities created or destroyed full-time/part-time, for municipality Risk of health and safety incidents with prediction of number based on similar previous undertakings Investment by project in R as part of project budget Predicted emissions that can smell or risk of emissions Industry fatal accident or disability injury rate Municipality budget on R or industry budget Emissions and noise level of municipality as well as acceptable levels by standards, e. g. SABS standards Predicted noise levels or risk of noise Aesthetics Level of perceived acceptability Risk of structure and location having a negative impact on aesthetics of community Perceived level of aesthetic acceptability by community Local Employment Fraction of employable community hours Number of permanent job type equivalents Calculation: permanent positions multiplied by conversion factor Employment by type for community or municipality Local Population Migration Access to health facilities Level of short-term demographic changes People per qualified doctor

Predicted change in local population Predicted increase or decrease in ratio, focus only on public health sector Predicted impact on the number of literate adults The predicted need for houses which must be build multiplied by the average size Quantity of water used or supplied Quantity of electricity used or supplied Quantity of waste generated and/or quantity of waste removed from municipal area Number of additional public transport seats required Tons of good transported on roads and or kilometre of road infrastructure provided Percentage of turnover or expenses spend locally Monetary amount spend on services, resources or information that will improve macro environmental performance Predicted Percentage improvement or deterioration in perceived stakeholder trust Demographic profile of community or municipal area National ratio of people per qualified doctor or international ratio Literate adults in municipality area or region Size of municipality area Access to Education Availability of acceptable houses Availability of water services Availability of energy services Availability of waste services Pressure on public transport services Pressure on transport network/ People and goods movement Macro Social Performance Literate adults Zoned residential area per capita Water of drinking quality per capita kWh of electricity per capita Capita per G:h landfill site

Water of drinking quality used by municipality Electricity usage by municipality Landfill sites (type and size) used by municipality Public Transport seats available in municipal area Ton kilometres per capita (in region or nationally) Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per region and/or per industry. Monetary amount spent on Environmental Services by the region, i. e. provincial government or municipal council Perceived stakeholder trust based on community questionnaires or surveys Seat kilometres per capita Ton kilometres per capita External value of purchases Fraction of purchased locallymanufactures goods Improvement of SocioEnvironmental Services Cost spent on SE services per capita Stakeholder Participation Change in relationships with stakeholders Level of stakeholder trust Quantitative evaluation approaches, including, but not limited to, costs and direct measurements in society; and • Qualitative evaluation approaches, which require appropriate subjective scales and associated guidelines, and have been proposed for the industrial ecology and streamlined LCA disciplines (see section 1. 2). The defined midpoint categories, which, from the validation survey (see section 1. 2), are considered appropriate at project or technology management level, together with pro- posed units of equivalence for evaluation purposes are shown in Table 5. The units of equivalence were determined from the characteristics of the social interventions identified from the ten case studies.

The definitions of the midpoint categories make it evident that the normalisation and significance steps will be constrained by what is practicably measurable within a society where an operational initiative, i. e. project or technology (from an industry perspective), will typically occur. The availability of information is likely to differ be- Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 9 Process Industry tween developed and developing countries. Furthermore, the projection of the social interventions of a project or technology may be problematic or at least differ from case to case. Separate studies may be required for some of the social sustainability criteria, e. g. stakeholder participation, even at project-specific level, which may be problematic. Case Studies to Demonstrate and Test the SII Calculation Method Social Sustainability 3. 1 Construction of an open cast mine 3. 1. 1 Background The SII calculation method was applied to three case studies to determine the current feasibility thereof in terms of data availability. In the third case study, environmental Resource Impact Indicators were also calculated using the RII method [15]. All case studies are set in South Africa and project information was obtained from Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) studies as well as interviews with members of the respective project teams. Due to the hindsight application of the SII method no additional data could be collected from a project perspective.

Social footprint information was obtained from: • Statistics South Africa [18]; • South African Department of Transport [19]; • South African Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) [20]; • South African Department of Health [21]; • South African Department of Labour [22]; • NOSA International [23]; and • Municipal Demarcation Board South Africa [24] and individual municipalities, e. g. some municipalities have undertaken Strategic Environmental Assessments (SEAs) in certain regions of South Africa. In the case studies, mid-point categories were evaluated in respect of whether both project and social footprint information are available, and if the respective information is comparable. It is noted that whereas LCA normally considers a product’s life cycle, these case studies focus on the asset, or technology, life cycle (as described in section 1. 2) with the functional unit being one operational year of the asset.

However, since the asset life cycle and the associate product life cycle interact through the asset’s operational phase [10], the indicators could be translated to a typical product-manufactured functional unit. In 1996 a petrochemical company in South Africa announced its intention to develop an Open Cast Strip Mine on the banks of the Vaal River between the Gauteng and Free State Provinces. The project was motivated on the basis that the reserves of the company’s main mine in the area had reached the end of its economic life and that this posed a threat to the future of a large chemical manufacturer in a nearby town, which was supplied by the mine from 1952.

Ultimately, a threat to the existence of the chemical manufacturer is a direct threat to the existence of the town and in a sense the province since the manufacturer contributes 12% to the geographical economy of the region. The project was met with a lot of resistance from the public, especially owners of riverside properties. The project was stopped after a non-governmental organisation took the company to court and won a legal battle, which changed the mining legislation of South Africa. 3. 1. 2 Available project and social footprint information Tables 6 and 7 summarise the available project information and social footprint information that have been obtained from the Environmental Management Programme Report [25] and the specialist study on the macro social economic impacts [26]. 3. 1. 3 SIIs for the project

The information presented in Tables 6 and 7 highlights the mismatch between available project and social footprint information. SIIs were calculated as far as possible where both appropriate project and social footprint information was available for midpoint categories (Table 8) using Eq. 1. The project will have an overall positive social impact, although job creation could not outweigh the negative impact on the comfort level on the neighbourhoods in a close vicinity to the plant. The overall positive impact is mainly due to the large contribution the project will make to the Gross Geographic Product (GGP) of a relative small area, which relies strongly on mining.

Table 6: Available project social intervention information for the proposed mine Construction Employment Opportunities created Employment Opportunities destroyed Indirect Employment Opportunities Contribution to GDP (added or lost) Reduction in property values Increases in Ambient Noise levels (dBa) on Average Dust (mg/day/m2) 450 people [24:138] Operation 300a employment opportunities over a 20 year life p [24:121] Multiplier effect of 2. 8: 840a a 20 employment opportunities on farmsa [24: 267] Multiplier effect of 2. 8: 1260 R52 million per annum (in 1999/2000) [25:32] 9-19% (year 1–10) [24: 258] ;2 [24: 195] Between ;50–250 [24: 187] 2–6% (after year 10 till mine closure) [24:258] ; 2 [24: 238–239] ;100a [24: 231] a a These values are used as quantifiable social interventions (Qx) in the SII calculation procedure. The South African Rand is equal to approximately 0. 12 Euros (as at the end of October 2005). 10 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability Process Industry

Table 7: Available social footprint information for the region of the proposed mine Labour Force: Potentially Economically Active [25: 55] Total 736,721 100% Estimated ambient noise level (dBA) [24: 97] Time of day Morning Midday Evening Night Over 24 hours Sasolburg GDP (1991) due to kind of activity [25: 59] Mining & Quarrying Dust Pattern [25] March–July August–December January–February Dust Figures [25] September October (2 x sites) November (1 site) a b c Employed 308,826 41. 9% a Unemployed 149,335 20. 3% a Not-economically active 278,560 37. 8% Typical weekday 50. 9 46. 9 41. 4 34. 7 44. 6 b Typical weekend 49. 2 48. 0 46. 9 42. 3 46. 8 b R 259 677 000 per annumc Low Higher Lower 251–500 mg/day/m2 501–1200 mg/day/m 501–1200 mg/day/m 2 2 Moderate Heavy Heavy The sum of these values are the target state for the region. The current tate refers to only the value 308,826. The average of these two values are used as the target state for the region. The current state is assumed equal to the target state. Value used for target and current state for the region. The South African Rand is equal to approximately 0. 12 Euros (as at the end of October 2005) 3. 2 Operation of a chemical facility 3. 2. 1 Background The chemical facility is located on a 6,798 ha industrial site in South Africa. The construction of the site started in the early 1970s and was finished in 1980. It employs approximately 7000 permanent employees. The facility contributes 13% to the economy of the geographic region. 3. 2. Available operation and social footprint information • A Strategic Environmental Assessment of the area; • South African Census Information; and • South Africa’s Compensation Fund Statistics. References of these sources are withheld to protect the company’s identity. Table 9 summarises the available plant information and social footprint information that were obtained. 3. 2. 3 SIIs for the operation The following sources of information were used to calculate SIIs: • The company’s Sustainable Development Report; Table 10 shows the calculated SIIs using Eq. 1. Table 10 shows that the operation of the plant has in total a negative social impact. The positive contribution to GDP

Table 8: Calculated Social Impact Indicators for the proposed open cast mine from the available case study information Area of Protection Internal Human Resources External Population Intervent. Employment Creation Permanent Positions b Noise & Dust 1 Generated 2 Nature of Sales Midpoint Category Permanent Positions Local Employment Comfort Level Intervent. Value 300 in total 2195200 hrs a Normalisation Value (Ts–1) –06 2. 183 x 10 1. 11 x 10 –09 Significance Value (Cs/Ts) 0. 674 0. 674 1 1 1 Midpoint Indicator Value 4. 41 x 10 –04 SII Value 4. 4 x10 –04 1. 65 x 10 –03 –7. 5 x10 –02 –01 External Value of 2. 0 x 10 Macro Social Purchases Performance No information available Stakeholder Participation –01 Final Social Impact Value 1. 5 x10 a Total of 1140 permanent positions at 40 hours per week assumed for 49 weeks (three weeks vacation, etc. ). b A target (and current) state is taken as the weighted average for the region, i. e. 916 mg/day/m2. 1 Since no characterisation factors for noise to dust or dust to noise is available, the midpoint. category was calculated as a weighted average with equal weights to each constituent. 2 The units of equivalence have been changed to contribution to GDP due to the information available. 2 dBA 2 100 mg/d/m R 52 mil. 2. 19 x 10 –03 1. 09 x 10 –03 3. 85 x10 –02 –4. 38 x 10 –01 –1. 09 x 10 –01 2. 0 x 10 –02 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 11 Process Industry Social Sustainability

Table 9: Available operational and social footprint information for the region of the chemical facility Interventiona Employees Plant Informationb ± 7,000 Social Footprint Information Target: To have everyone employed excluding people who prefer to be not economically active. Govan Mbeki Municipality: Employed: 60,681 Unemployed: 40,189; Total Labour Force: 100,870. Employable Community Work hours – assuming all full-time employees – 40 hours – 49 weeks (3 weeks leave). 13 019 (target and current state assumed equal). Not available Not available Not available 197 kilo ton 138. 8 kilo ton 394 kilo ton 90 kilo ton (Permit: 101) 44,109. 2 kilo ton Atmospheric Emissions (concentration information from SEA) NOx 1 Hour Maximum NO2 concentration Average of 5 3 receptor points: 539. µg/m Acceptable Target (WHO guideline): 200 µg/m3 (1-hour NOx average) Current State: 1 Hour Maximum NO2 concentration based on maximum predicted concentration: 801 µg/m3 Acceptable Target (WHO guideline): 125 µg/m3 Current State: 24 Hour Maximum SO2 Concentration based on based on maximum 3 predicted concentration: 152 µg/m Target: (1:200 year firm yield) 150 million m per annum Current (predicted 1998/2000 average) 183. 6 million m3 per annum R 49,707 million Not available Not available 3 Indirect Employment Creation ± 21,000 (applying the rule of 3 used in SIAs) Total Injuries Disabling Injury Rate (no/200,000 hours) Health & Safety Incidents (Spillages) Atmospheric Emissions: SO2 NOx VOC H2S CO2 541 0. 59 70 Not available Not available Not available Not available Not available SO2 24 Hour Maximum SO2 Concentration based on average of 5 receptor points: 127. 4 µg/m3 Water Usage – River Water 89,963 m 3 Financial Turnoverc Transportation Incidents Complaints a b R 7835 million 12 36 c

Only those quantifiable social interventions for which plant and social footprint information is available, are used in the SII calculation procedure. All plant information has been obtained from the Sustainable Development Report where the average of data available has been used unless otherwise stated. The South African Rand is equal to approximately 0. 12 Euros (as at the end of October 2005). Table 10: Calculated Social Impact Indicators for the chemical facility from the available case study information Area of Protection Internal Human Resources Intervent. Midpoint Category Permanent Positions Possible Health and Safety Incidents Local Employment Comfort Level Availability of water services External Value of Purchases Intervent.

Value 7,000 541 Normalisation Value (Ts–1) 9. 91 x 10–06 7. 68 x 10 –05 Significance Value (Cs/Ts) 0. 602 1 Midpoint Indicator Value 4. 17 x 10–02 –4. 16 x 10 –02 SII Value Employment Creation Health & Safety Incidents 1. 9 x10–04 External Population Permanent Positions Atmospheric Emissions (SO2) Water Usage 41,167,000 hrs 127. 4 µg/m 89. 963 m 3 3 5. 06 x 10 0. 008 0. 007 –09 0. 602 1. 216 1. 224 0. 125 –1. 239 –0. 734 0. 158 –1. 85 Macro Social Performance Stakeholder Participation Nature of Sales R 7835 mil. 2. 01 x 10 –05 1 0. 158 No information available –1. 69 x10 –01 Final Social Impact Value 12 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability nd employment cannot outweigh the negative impacts on comfort level, people (in the form of health and safety accidents), and the water usage. The biggest social impact is the impact on comfort level due to atmospheric emissions, i. e. secondary environmental impacts. 3. 3 Decommissioning of a fibre manufacturing plant Process Industry In addition, environmental RIIs were calculated using standard RII values, which were calculated for selected process parameters [27]. Table 11 shows the available project and social footprint information. 3. 3. 3 Environmental and social impact indicators 3. 3. 1 Background Tables 12 and 13 show the calculated Social and Environmental Impact Indicators.

The values in Tables 12 and 13 show that although a similar methodology was followed to calculate SIIs compared to RIIs, the indicator outcomes are vastly different. This highlights that the interpretation of indicators remains challenging. Assessing the overall sustainability performance of a project or technology by allowing trade-offs between the contributions and damages should be seriously considered before it is applied. Ultimately, the trade-offs between the different dimensions would be the responsibility of the specific decision-makers, and therefore reflect the preferences of the decision-makers. 3. 4 Conclusions from the case studies In the early 1990s a second-hand acrylic fibre plant from a manufacturing facility in France was dismantled and relocated in the KwaZulu Province of South Africa.

However, the decreasing acrylic fibre market in South Africa, combined with a lack of import protection, led to the decision to decommission the plant in March 2002. The plant manufactured its last products in May 2002, which were sold in August 2002. The plant was dismantled and the site rehabilitated by March 2003. 3. 3. 2 Available project and social footprint information Using the company’s sustainable development report, the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of the region, as well as the sustainable development indicator data of the municipal area in which the plant operated, the SII calculation procedure was applied to calculate the social impacts. As stated before it is not easy to generalise from case study research.

However, the case studies showed that it is not possible to calculate all social midpoint category indicators, Table 11: Available project and social footprint information for the region of the fibres plant Interventiona Nature of Jobs Project Information 250 employment opportunities lost (5% relocated = 12 ) Social Footprint Information eThekwini unemployment: 591,024 eThekwini employment: 782,933 Target: To have everyone employed excluding people who prefer to be not economically active. Employable Community Work hours – assuming all full-time employees – 40 hours – 49 weeks (3 weeks leave). Indirect Employment Destruction ± 750 (applying the rule of 3 used in SIAs) Work-hours lost due to injuries Disabling Injuries 475. 25 hours 6. Although social footprint information is available the definition of disabling injuries is not given and therefore information is not comparable. Not available Not available eThekwini Emissions 0. 488 kilo ton per annum 0. 111 kilo ton per annum 0. 005 kilo ton per annum 1,429,200 kilo litre per annum 54. 50 kilo ton per annum 54. 50 kilo ton per annum No information available eThekwini – with water loss: 168,090 ML – without water loss: 280,149 ML eThekwini: 9098 GWh per annum Not available Durban South Basin: 45,000 ton per annum Not available GDP of Kwa Zulu Natal: R 113,047 million Disabling Injury Rate (no per 200 000 hours) Health & Safety Incidents (Spillages) Atmospheric Emissions: SO2 NOx VOC Water Usage 2. 375 0. 75 per annum

Energy Usage Solid Waste: General/Domestic Non-Hazardous Industrial Nature of Sales c 48. 384 GWh per annum 5. 25 x 10 m per annum 2. 575 x 10 m per annum b 1,545 tons per annum 2. 675 x 10 m per annum Annual turnover of R 500 million 0. 5 per annum 3 3 3 3 3 3 Stakeholder Complaints a b c Only those quantifiable social interventions for which plant and social footprint information is available, are used in the SII calculation procedure. The South African Department of Water Affairs and Forestry’s minimum requirements for waste density was used for the conversion. The South African Rand is equal to approximately 0. 12 Euros (as at the end of October 2005). Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 13 Process Industry Social Sustainability

Table 12: Calculated Social Impact Indicators for the decommissioning of the fibres plant from the available case study information Area of Protection Internal Human Resources Intervent. Employment Creation Permanent Positions Energy Usage External Population Water Usage Waste a Generated Atmospheric Emissions (SO2 & NOx)b Macro Social Performance Stakeholder Participation Final Social Impact Value a b c Midpoint Category Permanent Positions Local Employment Availability of energy services Availability of water services Availability of waste services Comfort Level External Value of Purchases Intervent. Value 262 1,983,520 hrs 48. 384 GWh 1,429,200 kl 1 545 t 0. 65 kt SO2 eq. R 500 mil. Normalisation Value (Ts–1) 7. 28 x 10–07 3. 71 x 10 –10 Significance Value (Cs/Ts) 0. 570 0. 570 1 1 1 Midpoint Indicator Value –1. 09 x 10–04 –4. 20 x 10 –04 SII Value –1. 1 x10–04 1. 1 x 10–04 3. 57 x 10 –09 5. 32 x 10–03 5. 10 x 10 –03 5. 47 x10–04 2. 22 x 10–05 2. 84 x 10–02 7. 98 x 10–06 3. 43 x 10–02 1. 04 x 10–02 –3. 99 x 10–03 –4. 0 x10–03 a Nature of Salesc 1 No information available 5. 06 x10 –02 Based on information available the units of equivalence have been changed to domestic waste generated in tons. Comfort level is measured quantitatively in kilo tons SO2 per annum using CML characterisation factors.

The units of equivalence have been changed to contribution to GDP due to the information available. The South African Rand is equal to approximately 0. 12 Euros (as at the end of October 2005). Table 13: Calculated environmental Resource Impact Indicators for the decommissioning of the fibres plant from the available case study information Process Parameter (annual quantities) Waste Electricity used Coal Used Steam used Water used 1,545,000 kg 174,182,400 MJ 46,368,000 kg 354,960,000 kg 1,429,200,000 kg Resource Impact Indicator Water 7. 29 x 10–02 7. 88 x 10 0 2. 60 x 10 7. 00 x 10 8. 84 x 10 4 4 5 Air 2. 33 x 10–06 1. 79 x 10 0 2. 51 x 10 0 1. 81 x10 +04 2 4 Land 4. 2 x 10–02 1. 68 x 10 0 4. 41 0 1. 72 x 10 +02 2 Mined 0 8. 81 x 10 1 1. 67 x 102 1. 52 x 10 0 4. 07 x 10 +02 2 +05 either because of a lack of project information, or because of a lack of social footprint information. In addition, the units of equivalence cannot be fixed since they depend on the available information. This complicates indicator comparisons between various projects. The limitation of available social footprint information results in the fact that only some midpoint category indicators are possible, i. e. permanent positions, water usage, energy usage, nature of sales, and comfort level, which leads to an impaired social picture.

In addition, the midpoint category indicators for water usage, energy usage and comfort level are much higher than permanent positions, thus resulting in a net negative social impact for any proposed development, which may not be a representation of the true social influence of the project or technology. 4 Conclusions and Recommendations sions of sustainable development [29]. The research therefore concludes that a quantitative social impact assessment method cannot be applied for project and technology life cycle management purposes in industry at present. It is emphasised that these conclusions were reached from a process LCA perspective, which is industry sector-wide.

Research with a product LCA focus may lead to different outcomes. Although a comprehensive top-down approach was followed, a bottom-up approach may be more appropriate for product LCAs [30], as the selection of suitable criteria would be constrained to the specific scope of a LCA study. 4. 1 Further steps to quantify social impact indicators A case study independent analysis of available social footprint information in South Africa confirmed the main finding of this paper that social footprint information is not available for all midpoint categories [28]. It is regarded as an international problem that current available statistics are incapable of providing an integrated view of various dimen-

It is proposed that social sustainability should be incorporated into project and technology life cycle management by means of guidelines and checklists. Similar to the environmental dimension, it is envisaged that such checklists and guidelines would improve the availability of quantitative data in time, and would therefore make the SII procedure more practical in the future. Although such guidelines and checklists have been developed from a theoretical perspective [28], practical guidelines and checklists from a project or technology life cycle management perspective are yet to be dem- 14 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 Social Sustainability onstrated. Further cases are subsequently required for demonstration and analysis purposes.

While the guidelines and checklists may lead to a paradigm shift in industry towards obtaining and evaluating social impact-related information, it is also suggested that a lesscomprehensive list of social criteria is used as a starting point to develop social LCA-specific methodologies, possibly using those midpoint category indicators that were quantifiable in the case studies of this research, i. e. permanent positions, water usage, energy usage, nature of sales, and comfort level, or other midpoint categories that are currently proposed [30]. However, social issues are highly influenced by cultural perceptions, and it would be best to undertake such a task at national level.

National indicator sets can then be compared and combined on an international level. In addition, it is suggested that the development of data quality standards are required for social criteria, similar to the efforts of SETAC and ISO for the environmental criteria used in LCA today. Such standards would greatly improve the transparency of calculated indicators. References [1] Zadek S (1999): Stalking Sustainability. Greener Management International 26, 21–31 [2] Roberts S, Keeble J, Brown D (2002): The Business Case for Corporate Citizenship, Arthur D. Little, Cambridge [3] Visser W, Sunter C (2002): Beyond Reasonable Greed: Why Sustainable Business is a Much Better Idea! Human & Rousseau, & Tafelberg, Cape Town [4] Holliday CO, Schmidheiny S, Watts P (2002): Walking the Talk: The Business Case for Sustainable Development, Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield [5] Lehtonen M (2004): The environmental-social interface of sustainable development: Capabilities, social capital, institutions, Ecological Economics 49, 199–214 [6] Ranganathan J (1998): Sustainability Rulers: Measuring Corporate Environmental and Social Performances, Sustainable Enterprise Perspectives, World Resources Institute Publication [7] Hedstrom G, Poltorzycki S, Stroh P (1998): Sustainable Development: The Next Generation of Business Opportunity, Arthur D. Little: Prism-Sustainable Development: How Real, How Soon and Who’s doing what? 4, 5–19 [8] Gladwin TN, Kennelly JJ, Krause T-S (1995): Shifting Paradigms for Sustainable Development: Implications for Management Theory and Research. Academy of Management Review 20, 874–907 [9] Labuschagne C, Brent AC, Van Erck RPG, (2005): Assessing the sustainability performance of industries.

Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (4) 373–385 [10] Labuschagne C, Brent AC (2005): Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: the need to integrate life cycles in the manufacturing sector. Int J Project Management 23 (2) 159–168 [11] Labuschagne C, Brent AC (2005): Verification and validation of the introduced framework to assess the sustainability performances of industries. Working Paper 2005/01, Department of Engineering and Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria [12] Labuschagne C, Brent AC (2004): Sustainable Project Life Cycle Management: Aligning project management methodologies with the principles of sustainable development. Proceedings of Process Industry he 2004 PMSA International Conference: Global Knowledge for Project Management Professionals, pp 104–115 [13] Klopfer W (2003): Life-Cycle Based Methods for Sustainable Product Development. Int J LCA 8, 157–159 [14] Brent AC, Labuschagne C (2004): Sustainable Life Cycle Management: Indicators to assess the sustainability of engineering projects and technologies. InLCA/LCM On-line Conference [15] Brent AC (2004): A Life Cycle Impact Assessment procedure with resource groups as Areas of Protection. Int J LCA 9 (3) 172–179 [16] Brent AC, Labuschagne C (2005): Sustainable Life Cycle Management: A case study in the process industry to develop a calculation procedure for social indicators following conventional LCA methods.

Fourth Australian Conference on Life Cycle Assessment, Sydney [17] Brent AC, Labuschagne C (2004): Sustainable Life Cycle Management: Indicators to assess the sustainability of engineering projects and technologies. Proceedings of the IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, Singapore, pp 99–103 [18] Statistics South Africa, Stats Online: The Digital face of Stats SA. Available at: <http://www. statssa. gov. za/> (visited on 18 April 2005) [19] Department of Transport, Department of Transport: Library. Available at: <http://www. transport. gov. za/library/index. html> (visited on 19 April 2005) [20] Council for Scientific and Industrial Research, Council for Scientific and Industrial Research. Available at: <http://www. csir. co. a/> (visited on 19 April 2005) [21] Department of Health, Department of Health: Documents. Available at: <http://www. doh. gov. za/docs/reports-f. html> (visited on 19 April 2005) [22] Department of Labour, Department of Labour: All about accidents. Available at: <http://www. labour. gov. za/subjects/subject_ display. jsp? parCat_id=7833&subject_id=7890> (visited on 19 April 2005) [23] NOSA International, NOSA International: Occupational Safety, Health and Environmental Risk Management. Available at <http://www. nosa-int. com/default1. asp> (visited on 19 April 2005) [24] Municipal Demarcation Board, Municipal Profiles. Available at: <http://www. demarcation. org. a/municprofiles2003/index. asp> (visited on 19 April 2005) [25] Walmsley Environmental Consultants (1997): Environmental Management Programme Report for the Sigma Colliery: North West Strip Operations, Volume II Main Report, Walmsley Environmental Consultants, Report no W220/3, Johannesburg [26] Development Planning and Research cc (1996): Specialist Study 16: Macro Social Economic Impact Assessment of Sigma Colliery’s Proposed North West Strip Operation. Walmsley Environmental Consultants (Pty) LTD, Johannesburg [27] Brent AC, Visser JK (2005): An environmental performance resource impact indicator for life cycle management in the manufacturing industry.

Journal of Cleaner Production 13 (6) 557–565 [28] Labuschagne C (2005): Sustainable project life cycle management: Development of social criteria for decision-making. PhD Thesis, Department of Engineering and Technology Management, University of Pretoria, Pretoria [29] OECD (2004): Measuring Sustainable Development: Integrated Economic, Environmental and Social Frameworks. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris [30] Dreyer LC, Hauschild MZ, Schierbeck J (2005): A Framework for Social Life Cycle Impact Assessment. Int J LCA, OnlineFirst <DOI: <http://dx. doi. org/10. 1065/lca2005. 08. 223> Received: June 3rd, 2005 Accepted: December 1st, 2005 OnlineFirst: December 2nd, 2005 Int J LCA 11 (1) 2006 15

Social Sustainability Process Industry Appendix The causal relationship maps are broken down into 7 diagrams. Four diagrams are used t

Acknowledgement

An old Chinese proverb says;
When eating your bamboo sprouts, remember the man who planted them. Now that our sprouts are ready to eat, it is time for us to express our deepest gratitude to all those to have made this possible. We wish to express our sincere gratitude to our professor who guided and helped us from time to time to successfully conduct this research. We think her directions were the best thing that could happen to us and our project. We also would like to thank each other of our group members and hope you enjoy reading the report as much as we enjoyed making it.

Contents
Problem Solving Process & Steps
Techniques used by various companies to solve their problems.
1) Nokia
2) Cadbury Dairy Milk
3) Tata Nano
4) Bisleri
5) Coca Cola
6) Allwyn photo copiers

Problem Solving Process & Steps

As the owner of your own business you deal with problems on an almost daily basis. Being familiar with effective Problem Solving Techniques can dramatically affect the growth of your business. Although you find solutions to your problems, many businessmen and women are not really skilled in the methods of problem solving, and when solutions fail, they fault themselves for misjudgment. 1. Define the problem

Diagnose the situation so that your focus is on the problem, not just its symptoms. Helpful techniques at this stage include using flowcharts to identify the expected steps of a process and cause-and-effect diagrams to define and analyze root causes. 2. Generate alternative solutions

Postpone the selection of one solution until several alternatives have been proposed. Having a standard with which to compare the characteristics of the final solution is not the same as defining the desired result. A standard allows us to evaluate the different intended results offered by alternatives. When you try to build toward desired results, it’s very difficult to collect good information about the process. Considering multiple alternatives can significantly enhance the value of your final solution.

Once the team or individual has decided the “what should be” model, this target standard becomes the basis for developing a road map for investigating alternatives. Brainstorming and team problem-solving techniques are both useful tools in this stage of problem solving. Many alternative solutions should be generated before evaluating any of them. A common mistake in problem solving is that alternatives are evaluated as they are proposed, so the first acceptable solution is chosen, even if it’s not the best fit. If we focus on trying to get the results we want, we miss the potential for learning something new that will allow for real improvement. 3. Evaluate and select an alternative

Skilled problem solvers use a series of considerations when selecting the best alternative. They consider the extent to which: A particular alternative will solve the problem without causing other unanticipated problems. All the individuals involved will accept the alternative.

Implementation of the alternative is likely.
The alternative fits within the organizational constraints.
4. Implement and follow up on the solution

Leaders may be called upon to order the solution to be implemented by others, “sell” the solution to others or facilitate the implementation by involving the efforts of others. The most effective approach, by far, has been to involve others in the implementation as a way of minimizing resistance to subsequent changes. Feedback channels must be built into the implementation of the solution, to produce continuous monitoring and testing of actual events against expectations. Problem solving, and the techniques used to derive elucidation, can only be effective in an organization if the solution remains in place and is updated to respond to future changes.

Techniques used by various companies to solve their problems.

1) Nokia

As we all know, Nokia had for so many years used the symbian operating system in their phones. It was working fine and Nokia had captured the Indian phone market very well. There was no competition to it from left right or centre. But in 2008 came a breathtaking technology by Google. They invented the Android OS. It became a benchmark for the mobile phone companies. Each and every phone started making their phones with the latest android technology, as android was fast, modern and the most important, user friendly. While Nokia still stuck to its old symbian os, and did not use the android technology. Slowly and gradually, Samsung took over the Indian market by storm.

They had captured the Indian market which for long belonged to just Nokia. Nokia had a problem here. They did not use the android os because of some internal matters of their organization. So after a good amount of research and development later, nokia came out with a solution that would bring the brand nokia back in the market and try to regain its lost glory. They upgraded their technology and started making phones with the Windows phone 8 OS. These phones gradually caught the eye of the Indian customers, as it was something different than android. People started purchasing the Nokia Lumia series of phones and the sales of Nokia phones again where on a rise.

2) Cadbury Dairy Milk

In eight outlets across Maharashtra, worms were found in some bars of Cadbury Dairy Milk, Cadbury’s bread-and-butter brand selling 1 million bars a day and an icon of ‘chocolate’ in India. Inquiry was instituted by the Food and Drug Administration and negative media publicity spread like wildfire. The extensively graphic media coverage led people to believe that every bar could be contaminated. Consequently, sales volume plummeted, retailer cooperation lessened and employee morale dwindled. All in all, the company’s credibility suffered extensive damage. Reason behind this crisis..After a thorough investigation of the entire supply chain, it was found that the problem originated at the distribution end.

Apparently, at the retail outlets the infested bars were placed next to open unpacked items susceptible to worms. However, although the problem was not of its own making, Cadbury did take responsibility for the lack in educating retailers on storage and hygiene. The company launched a new double packaging that wrapped even the smallest 13 gm chocolate in an aluminium foil, heat-sealed for complete protection from all sides and further encased in a polyflow pack. The over-engineered pack, the first of its kind in India, cost the company a fortune, but fulfilled the company’s promise to media and consumers. The new packaging was launched amidst much fanfare in a media conference.

Amongst the material distributed in the conference were a comparison kit allowing evaluation of old and new packs and a video new release with packaging and factory shots for television coverage. To reinstate confidence among sales people and to motivate them, another audio-visual with a message from the ambassador Amitabh Bachchan was shown in a string of sales conferences.

3) Tata Nano

Until the afternoon of 21 March when he took delivery of his Lunar Silver coloured Nano, 36-year-old Satish Sawant was your average citizen leading a normal life. On the Sunday of 21 March, accompanying him to collect the car was his wife, five-year-old son and a temporary driver. It was close to 3 pm that day and they were nearing his residence. His wife pointed out that something was burning. Sawant looked out. Nothing was burning. She insisted and forced him to park. He got out—there was smoke coming out of the car’s rear. He hurriedly got his wife and son out. The smoke turned billowing black. He took the car’s papers out.

The little vehicle now began to burn like you see in the movies. Tata Motors attributed the first couple of cases to the melting of localised parts caused by faulty combination switches. That is somewhat similar to sparks and smoke in your house’s wiring caused by an electric short-circuit. There was no quality control deployed at the Tata motors production facility. So in order to bring the situation under control and solve this problem, Tata motors changed the vendors who supplied the combination switches and employed a proper quality control in their plant, by which each and every car would go through proper checks before being granted the ok status.

4) Bisleri

In the early 1990s, Parle Bisleri Ltd’s (Parle Bisleri’s) Bisleri1 had become synonymous with branded water and had a market share of 70%. In the late 1990s, Bisleri’s market share began to erode with new players entering the market. The Cola majors, Pepsi and Coca-Cola and the confectionery giant, Nestle, also entered the branded water market in India. Pepsi and Coca-Cola had an established distribution network. Bisleri realized that with the new players also clambering on to the purity plank, it had to reposition itself to arrest its declining market share. In September 2000, Parle Bisleri launched its Play Safe ad campaign.

The company tried to add a fun element to Bisleri to rejuvenate the brand. The ultimate aim was to increase Bisleri’s turnover from Rs 4 billion2 in 2000 to Rs 10 billion by 2003. In 2001, both Kinley and Aquafina were making huge investments in bottling plants and distribution. By 2002, Coca-Cola India planned to double the number of water bottling plants to 16 and Pepsi announced that it would add seven more plants to the existing five. In contrast, Bisleri had only 15 bottling plants and three franchisees. Kinley had 500,000 outlets compared to Bisleri’s 350,000.

Analysts felt that Kinley and Aquafina had an edge over Bisleri because of their strong distribution network. In 2000, in the face of competition from the new entrants, Bisleri decided to penetrate every possible segment of the market by introducing more pack sizes and to establish the brand strongly with trendy packaging. In 2000, Bisleri launched the 1.2 litre pack. This added to the five pack sizes that Bisleri had (500 ml, one, two, five and 20 litres). The new pack was priced at Rs 12. In 2000, Bisleri also launched smaller packs like the 300 ml cup. This 300 ml cup was targeted at large gatherings like marriages and conventions. A study conducted by Bisleri showed that its one litre pack was not considered trendy enough.

5) Coca Cola

In 2003, the Centre for Science and Environment (CSE), a non-governmental organisation in New Delhi, said aerated waters produced by soft drinks manufacturers in India, including multinational giants PepsiCo and Coca-Cola, contained toxins including lindane, DDT, malathion and chlorpyrifos — pesticides that can contribute to cancer and a breakdown of the immune system. Tested products included Coke, Pepsi, and several other soft drinks (7Up, Mirinda, Fanta, Thums Up, Limca, Sprite), many produced by The Coca-Cola Company.

This affected the sales of cocacola to a great extent, they went crashing down. Later on after a detailed study, the company found out that the water they used for the manufacturing was safe and free from pesticides, but the problem was in the packaging department. The bottles in which the coke is to be filled is processed and cleaned with certain chemicals so that it becomes safe and all the impurities are removed, and later on the bottle is washed with water. It was seen that after cleaning the bottles with the chemicals, they were not being washed properly, which resulted in the chemicals staying in the bottle before the coke was filled in it. The company identified this problem and resolved this by keeping a proper quality control on the bottling plant and make sure that the bottles are washed properly after being treated with chemicals.

6) Allwyn photo copiers

This is a shop which is situated in Mumbai. It undertakes the work of photo copying, printing, etc. For years they have been using the old Xerox machines. The name Xerox is synonym with photo copy in India. But as the time changes, there is a need to adopt new technologies to keep up with the competition in the market. So the company purchased new equipments and new printers which had the latest technologies like laser beam printing, etc. But after purchasing and using the new equipments, instead of their sales going up, they started declining. This was a matter of concern for the management as the sales were declining even after they were using the new technologies.

They did a proper research on this and found out that the problem was not in the machinery, but the people handling the machines were not aware of the new machines properly and thus they were not able to use it efficiently. To overcome this problem, the management decided to train the employees who handle the machines. They were trained on various aspects as to how to make full use of machiniery with minimum efforts. Training the workmen is an important part of the production process. Thus when the handlers were trained properly, they knew how to use the machines properly and this in turn increased their efficieny. This resulted in more sales and more productivity.

Conclusion

Thus we saw the case studies of various organizations and companies and how they overcome their problems. We can take a few inputs from these cases and implement it whenever we are stuck in any problem similar to these. Quality control and problem solving techniques are extremely important for an organization , as each and every organization faces some kind of the problem. What is important is that how they overcome it.