Electronic Waste Adoption of Cross-Functional

Electronic Waste

Adoption of Cross-Functional Teams in Electrical and Electronic Waste (E-Waste) Management

Creating teams across departmental and functional boundaries of an organization is essential if the most complex, challenging objectives are going to be attained. Cross-functional teams designed to capitalize on the unique strengths of each department often require its participants to hold two or more roles or series of tasks and responsibilities. Experts in engineering, product development, product management or services are often recruited into cross-functional teams due to their levels of expertise. This presents a challenge however in keeping existing initiatives, strategies and programs moving forward because of the dual responsibilities that key members of these functional departments have in cross-functional teams. Managing cross-functional teams takes a unique leadership skill set that can balance the needs of team members who have many responsibilities in their primary roles, in addition to the responsibilities that being a member of a cross-functional team demands. This apparent conflict of roles can be minimized through transformational leadership strategies and techniques that seek to create consistency across both roles (Feng, Jiang, Fan, Fu, 2010).

Due to headcount reductions and massive layoffs, cross-functional organizations that rely on this matrixed structure have become commonplace in global business (Dayan, Basarir, 2010). Compounding the severity of headcount reductions has also been the priority of getting organizations into compliance with sustainability and green initiatives (Boks, Stevels, 2007). A critical area of sustainability and green initiatives continues to be planning product lines and services for compliance to government regulations on how best to manage electrical and electronic waste (Kunert, 2005). Cross-functional teams have emerged as critically important to company's efforts to attain a high degree of compliance to electrical and electronic waste management initiatives globally (Mascle, Zhao, 2008) (Zhu, Sarkis, Lai, Geng, 2008).

The intent of this analysis is to illustrate why it is critical for organizations to rely on cross-functional teams to attain their objectives for managing electrical and electronic waste management. When taken as a lifecycle-based approach that includes Design for Environment (DfE), the use of cross-functional teams successfully can launch, sustain, support and discontinue products that are in compliance to electrical and electronic waste management standards. Making sustainability or environmental compliance a core part of new product development also ensures a higher level of compliance to electrical and electronic waste management standards (Albino, Balice, Dangelico, 2009). For all of these benefits to be attained however, it takes a concerted effort on the part of organizations to integrate Design for Environment (DfE) processes and systems into their Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) systems and into their product management strategies (Boks, Stevels, 2007). Given how diverse the skills sets are that are required to manage the entire product lifecycle management process, cross-functional teams are the only viable alternative for attaining sustainability and green initiatives organization-wide.

Why Collaboration Is Essential for E-Waste Initiatives to Succeed

By their very nature, the processes organizations rely on to attain their e-waste goals and objectives are highly collaborative. The point has been made of how collaborative the Product Lifecycle Management (PLM) process is, which to succeed requires intensive coordination and synchronization across the functional areas of an organization. The catalyst of PLM strategies that ensures they stay in compliance to e-waste compliance goals and objectives is the Design for Environment (DfE) processes defined later in this analysis. For PLM strategies to have a foundation on which to build upon however, it is essential for the supply chain partner and processes be consistent with the sustainability objectives that an organization is trying to reach. This is really the external cross-functional team of an organization. The supply chain is a broader cross-functional team that needs to be managed to specific sustainability and e-waste program objectives as well. The most critical process from an e-waste perspective is the use of the supply chain for reverse logistics. The areas of reverse logistics concentrate on creating a tight integration at the process and system level with a manufacturer to attain e-waste objectives over the long-term. (Dowlatshahi, 2000). Cross-functional teams within an organization are heavily relied on suppliers and the entire supply chain to provide assistance in keeping in compliance to e-waste initiatives and programs. This is a knowledge management issue and the greater the level of it in a cords-functional team, the greater the level of supplier integration and performance (Chae, 2009). For a reverse logistics strategy to be effective, it must take into account the unique and highly specific knowledge of an organization. Only through the use of a cross-functional team can any organization communicate accurately, succinctly and quickly with supply chain partners so they can get into compliance with e-waste goals and objectives. Manufacturers are seeing significant cost and revenue gains from perfecting their reverse logistics processes while also attaining their e-waste strategic plans and objectives (Dowlatshahi, 2000). Studies of the use of cross-functional teams to attain the difficult goals of integrating DfE into PLM strategies also show that the primary catalyst is knowledge, not necessarily cost reduction or just business process management and re-engineering that makes these complex strategies succeed (Mascle, Zhao, 2008).

Knowledge is the catalyst of successful e-waste program performance. It is also best captured, managed and applied to complex problems and strategies including e-waste compliance and cost reduction through cross-functional teams. Attempts to use knowledge management systems and platforms have failed due to lack of adoption and resistance to change they push on the experts whose participation in them is crucial (Chang, Chen, Lin, Tien, Sheu, 2006). Supply chain planning, coordination, management and optimization all are foundational areas of how suppliers make the attainment of e-waste initiatives succeed. The catalyst for all these coordination points outside of an organization is knowledge, and that is precisely why cross-functional teams are critical to companies attaining their e-waste strategic plans and objectives.

In analyzing just how critical the knowledge from cross-functional teams are to the attainment of e-waste objectives, consider the complexity of the reverse logistics process as shown in Figure 1, Reverse Logistics process Workflows.

Figure 1: Reverse Logistics Process Workflow

Source: (Dowlatshahi 2000, et.al.)

Manufacturers rely on reverse logistics to reduce long-term operating and production costs, attain higher levels of e-waste compliance including recycling a progressively higher level of their products, and the use of sustainability programs for packaging re-use. As a result of these three objectives being successfully attained in many high tech manufacturers specifically (Lau, Wang, 2009), reverse logistics is now the most important supply chain process that manufacturers concentrate on to attain e-waste initiatives.

As can be seen from Figure 1, Reverse Logistics Process Workflow, this process is heavily dependent on the level of knowledge and intelligence within an organization. The use of cost/benefit analysis tools and databases of results, transportation and warehouse management systems and strategies which are among the most complex in any organization, and supply management all require intensive expertise to be integrated into reverse logistics processes. The use of cross-functional teams to bring the critical insight and expertise to these areas literally makes them achievable or not. Without cross-functional teams and the expertise inherent in them, reverse logistics -- a core aspect of any e-waste program -- would not be accomplishable. Adding in the two remaining functional areas of remanufacturing/recycling and packaging completes process areas of reverse logistics. Each of these areas of a reverse logistics strategy also has a corresponding series of steps to make e-waste processes successfully replicated over an entire manufacturing organizations' supply chain.

To the extent any organization can infuse a high degree of knowledge and insight into these processes and share that intelligence with suppliers is the extent to which they will be trusted or not (Cheng, Yeh, Tu, 2008). While critics and detractors of cross-functional teams often criticize them for not being more equitable in the distribution of work across matrix-based organization, the heard reality is that the expertise they deliver can make the difference between an organization being seen as credible or not. In this context, insight and intelligence leads to not only greater supply chain flexibility and agility between suppliers and buyers (Chang, Chen, Lin, Tien, Sheu, 2006) but also accelerates transactions through greater trust (Cheng, Yeh, Tu, 2008).

Do cross-functional teams matter to e-waste initiatives and programs' success? Without question, they are an essential catalyst to their success given how critical the role of the company- and industry-specific knowledge they possess. There is literally no other organizational strategy or approach to managing resources apart from cross-functional teams for bringing together the diverse, in-depth and extensive intelligence necessary for companies to attain their e-waste goals and objectives. It is not just the cross-functional team that ensures the success of e-waste programs however; it is the knowledge, insight, expertise and experiences they have that can transform an entire supply chain and PLM strategy to attain e-waste initiatives.

Put Cross-Functional Intelligence to Work in PLM Strategies

Supply chains encompass the most complex relationships manufacturers have a direct impact on attaining compliance to WEEE and RoHS Standards (Kunert, 2005) while also accelerating the new product development process through effective PLM strategies (Green Whitten, Inman, 2007). Cross-functional team dynamics require leaders who can be transformational in their ability to communicate compelling missions, goals and objectives for the teams, not just managing by action item lists and project plans (Santa, Ferrer, Bretherton, Hyland, 2010).

The best cross-functional teams then have a level of passionate intensity about them; they see the much greater result they are attempting to accomplish as worth the sacrifices they need to attain them (Feng, Jiang, Fan, Fu, 2010). Nowhere is this more prevalent than in the area of new product development and introduction (NPDI), especially in high tech manufacturing where product lifecycles are so rapid (Boks, Stevels, 2007). In the leading high tech companies including Cisco, Hewlett-Packard, IBM and others, sustainability engineering, product development engineering, packaging, repackaging and remanufacturing all have their experts on cross-functional teams to share their expertise and insight to make sustainability initiatives accomplishable through better use of internal knowledge (Albino, Balice, Dangelico, 2009). Cross-functional teams are the foundation that makes the NPDI process attainable (Boks, Stevels, 2007). It would literally not be possible to launch a new product, complete a given product or service strategy, create and sustain new distribution channels, or attain a level of performance on DfE product designs without cross-functional teams. Insights and intelligence, expertise and experience, when applied with an intensity of focus on a given goal, are what make manufacturers successful with their new product development cycles. Table 1 provides an overview of the DfE Benefits and Impact Analysis including the anticipated environmental impact and corresponding cost reduction opportunities are as well.

Table 1: DfE Benefits and Impact Analysis

DfE Engineering & Product Development Goal

Anticipated Environment Impact

Reduction in Costs Possible

Reduction in overall footprint of the printer (at HP) or device including product weight

Reduces lifetime energy consumption; less end-of-life waste

Significant reduction in sourcing and quality management costs; lower logistics costs; potential for higher production yields

Energy STAR compliance

Significant reduction in energy use; less greenhouse gases, reduction in carbon dioxide generation

Significant cost reductions in end-user product lifecycle operating expenses

Engineer in greater product reliability and quality

Less material costs, less waste for landfills due to better reverse logistics of product components

Lower Total Cost of Ownership; lower lifetime product costs

Packaging design biodegradability and reverse logistics

Reduce the impact of high tech products have on landfills

Using reverse logistics processes rely on outbound packaging materials as part of delivered product; also return of consumables using packaging

Optimizing Bulk Pack Configurations

Minimize carbon-based impact of transportation

Significant reduction in materials and logistics costs

Design for Recycling (DfR)

Reduction of per unit costs due to reuse of components

Lower compliance costs through designed-in use of materials; lower overall manufacturing costs

Design for Disassembly (DfD)

Higher recycle rates due to more intuitive disassembly and recycle designs

Reduce recycling costs; design supports reverse logistics process of re-using packaging

Sources: (Mascle, Zhao, 2008) (Boks, Stevels, 2007)

High tech manufacturers clearly have much to gain from adopting DfE-based criteria in the development, production, service and recycling of their products. The reduction in costs possible impact each area of a company's supply chain, from initial sourcing and supplier coordination to lowering production costs by being able to attain higher levels of product quality. DfE's many benefits are so compelling that Hewlett-Packard today invests an average of $60M in supply chain planning for new products to attain these goals (Chang, Chen, Lin, Tien, Sheu, 2006). The returns on that investments are so significant for Hewlett-Packard that they also lead the high tech industry with the largest percentage reduction in their carbon footprint as well (Boks, Stevels, 2007). High tech manufacturers have organizational cultures that are highly focused on metrics of performance, especially in the areas of innovation, new product development, and compliance to environmental requirements (Markley, Davis, 2007). As a result of the HP culture being one that concentrates on measuring performance, the impact of cross-functional teams on their compliance to WEE, RoHS and other global environmental compliance requirements is considered among the best in the world (Varmazis, 2006). HP also evaluates each supplier as to their level of contributions to compliance to the sustainability and e-waste initiative goals and objectives the company sets every year (Varmazis, 2006). These scorecards are used for evaluating the level of compliance to supplier quality levels that HP's cross-functional teams set to ensure the highest levels of quality are attained in HP products and services. HP relies on cross-functional teams to create, evaluate, enforce and help suppliers attain the levels of performance necessary to keep quality levels as high as possible. HP, like many high tech manufacturers, have found that to the extent to which DfE design goals are achieved in their product designs is the extent to which they can reap the financial benefits of being in compliance. As Table 1 shows, the ability of any manufacturer to attain the benefits reduction in costs requires intensive reliance on all the knowledge and intelligence in an organization -- in short how effective they are in using cross-functional teams to make the DfE process as engrained into their PLM and new product development processes.

Conclusions

The role of cross-functional teams as a knowledge catalyst is unassailable and proven when the results of reverse logistics and DfE programs are assessed in manufacturing industries, the most significant results achieved in high tech manufacturing. Cross-functional teams are the catalysts of expertise, experience, insights and intelligence that companies need to make their new product development, supply chain and services strategies pay. Compliance to WEEE, RoHS and other global compliance standards (Kunert, 2005) is often seen as a cost, yet forward-thinking companies including HP see these standards as a way to increase their competitive strength in product design, services and supply chain performance. HP is making compliance pay with cross-functional teams that deliver the needed knowledge to make them successful. Without cross-function team's contributions, the benefits of reverse logistics and DfE would not be attainable. Managing cross-functional teams to results in sustainability and e-waste strategies requires transformational leadership and the ability to manage and resolve the conflicts that arise from the role conflict inherent in this approach (Dayan, Basarir, 2010). Yet for all the conflict of having experts on a cross-functional team with two different and often conflicting roles and sets of responsibilities, the results attained are worth it (Markley, Davis, 2007) as shown by the result achieved in reverse logistics and DfE results attained (Mascle, Zhao, 2008).