Although the sustainability movement has been advocated predominately in response to the irresponsible expansion of inefficient infrastructure by industrialized nations, with the United States and Japan now making significant efforts to embrace "green" growth practices, a growing movement has emerged that promoting sustainability throughout developing nations presents the most productive path. Even as the most modernized nations continue to update their consumption patterns to better suit the technological age, seeking efficiency and effectiveness that is sustainable for the foreseeable future, rising powers like China, India, and Brazil are expanding their spheres of influence at the expense of the natural environment. To address the threats posed by developing nations repeating the mistakes of prior generations, mistakes which run the gamut from China's reckless damming of its nation's natural waterways to India's inability to address its skyrocketing population through medical means, the United Nations (UN) has adopted a policy position known as Whole Life Cycle Thinking. The fundamental premise of Whole Life Cycle Thinking revolves around the concept that consuming a particular good or engaging in certain activities exerts a multitude of effects on the environment throughout the duration of its global supply chain (Mozur, 2012).
Project Management, Sustainability and Whole Lifecycle Thinking
ITT Project Management - Sustainability and Whole Lifecycle Thinking
Although the sustainability movement has been advocated predominately in response to the irresponsible expansion of inefficient infrastructure by industrialized nations, with the United States and Japan now making significant efforts to embrace "green" growth practices, a growing movement has emerged that promoting sustainability throughout developing nations presents the most productive path. Even as the most modernized nations continue to update their consumption patterns to better suit the technological age, seeking efficiency and effectiveness that is sustainable for the foreseeable future, rising powers like China, India, and Brazil are expanding their spheres of influence at the expense of the natural environment. To address the threats posed by developing nations repeating the mistakes of prior generations, mistakes which run the gamut from China's reckless damming of its nation's natural waterways to India's inability to address its skyrocketing population through medical means, the United Nations (UN) has adopted a policy position known as Whole Life Cycle Thinking. The fundamental premise of Whole Life Cycle Thinking revolves around the concept that consuming a particular good or engaging in certain activities exerts a multitude of effects on the environment throughout the duration of its global supply chain (Mozur, 2012). Through the collaborative efforts of the United Nations Environment Progamme (UNEP) and the Society for Environmental Toxicology and Chemistry (SETAC), the UN has spearheaded a global movement known as the Life Cycle Initiative to provide incentives for companies serving developing nations to fully integrate sustainable practices throughout their production and distribution networks, while also encouraging consumers to consider the full impact of their consumption choices on local and global environmental health.
Life Cycle Initiative as an Exercise in Project Management
The project management demands of an enterprise as ambitious and open-ended as the UNEP/SETAC Life Cycle Initiative require an enormous organizational effort to control the scope of an ostensibly global campaign, while also assuring that key objectives are pursued in the most pragmatic possible fashion. For an entity notorious for its history of bureaucratic waste and institutional incompetency, the UN must actively apply the theoretical foundations of modern project management to the Life Cycle Initiative in order to allocate its prodigious resources in the most efficient and effective manner. It is reasonable to expect UNEP to include a rigorous life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA) (Mozur, 2012), in addition to the more traditional methods of project risk management, to the complex web of charitable contributions, published research, and other activities directly and indirectly associated with the work of its Life Cycle Initiative. By subjecting their own processes to the standards of Whole Life Cycle Thinking, defined by the Life Cycle Initiative as a genuine desire to adhere to the most sustainable practices currently feasible, UNEP can assure maximum transparency, demonstrate a true commitment to its championed cause, and maintain strict control over the project's continued management.
Scope Definition and Scope Control
The concept of scope definition is an integral component of project management theory, with noted expert in the field Kathy Schwalbe observing in her Information Technology Project Management that successfully defining the scope of a complex project such as the Life Cycle Initiative is integral to achieving predetermined goals, improving product delivery, and streamlining essential processes (2011). By successfully defining the appropriate scope for an expansive project, managers are far better equipped to anticipate risks and develop viable contingencies, and their ability to achieve a working level of scope control is greatly enhanced. According to literature published by UNEP and the Life Cycle Initiative, one of the fundamental elements of the life cycle sustainability assessment (LCSA), which they assert is now the most effective means of assessing a product's potential to adversely affect the environment, is based on defining the goal and scope of any study designed to assess a product's functional units and system boundaries (Remmen, Jensen & Frydendal, 2007). The theoretical basis of scope definition is also closely related to the goals of Whole Life Cycle Thinking, because when corporations are encouraged, or when necessary compelled, to take the entire product life cycle of their manufactured goods into account, the willingness of executives to streamline their operations will be almost entirely dependent on economic incentive. The directives published by UNEP in its 2007 report Life Cycle Management: A Business Guide to Sustainability make it clear that scope control is crucial, both to the spread of Whole Life Cycle Thinking practices throughout the realm of international industry, and to its own organizational structure. By stating unequivocally that UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices, both on a global level and its own practices, and demonstrating this commitment by reminding readers that the paper on which the report is printed is 100% recycled, uses vegetable-based inks, and is distributed in the most ecologically responsible manner possible, the program provides a tangible reminder that scope control can be achieved when producers make a concerted effort.
Recognizing the Impact of a Product's Life Cycle
One of the essential ideas to emerge from the study of Whole Life Cycle Thinking is the notion that all manufactured goods which are produced and distributed create dynamic supply chains capable of creating serious social and environmental effects. A single product, be it a laptop computer, diamond necklace, or a pad of paper, involves hundreds of individual people, dozens of production and assembly plants, and a variety of processes which pose potential threats to surrounding environments and ecosystems. The metals needed for wiring and circuitry must be mined from the earth, plastic covering must be refined from its petroleum base, and assembly lines require continual operation, with constant emissions of harmful greenhouse gases resulting from the consumption of fossil fuels. The dilemma of achieving sustainability without sacrificing growth lies at the heart of UNEP's efforts to foster a global marketplace which is conducive to creating environmentally sustainable products despite the marginal reduction in profit-margin which may occur as a result (Finkbeiner, 2009).
Major Businesses Committing to Life Cycle Management
One well-known company that has publically embraced the use of Whole Life Cycle Thinking to guide its global manufacturing and distribution network is Staples, Inc. In over two decades of operation, Staples has established a positive public image defined by delivering superior customer service and practicing exemplary corporate citizenship in accordance with the policy of Staples Soul. According to the 2005 Staples Corporate Responsibility Report, the philosophy of Staples Soul reflects the company's renewed commitment to corporate responsibility, with an emphasis on adopting production practices to better sustain the environment, and by linking these environmentally-conscious values with an overall global business strategy, with streamlined operations contributing to financial success (Sargent, 2005). Examples of Staples Soul initiatives in action include the company's longtime commitment to offering store credit to customers who recycle their depleted printer ink cartridges, charity-based community outreach programs, and a sterling record of environmental responsibility. The management of Staples is also cognizant of the impact of Whole Life Cycle Thinking as it pertains to its product lines, which consist mainly of disposable plastic devices and poisonous printer ink. As such, the company makes several references to the improvement of its sourcing practices in ecologically valuable regions, construction methods that ensure products remain recyclable throughout the span of their life cycle, and advertising campaigns designed to encourage consumers to recycle or return most items in its inventory. By virtue of Staples' public statements confirming a companywide pledge to adopt sustainable practices and Whole Life Cycle Thinking, and the verifiable data confirming that this pledge is being actively pursued while increased profit margins are attained, it is clear that the efforts of UNEP's Life Cycle Initiative merit continuance and expansion. With this in mind, further examination of the project management requirements is necessary to determine if the Life Cycle Initiative has achieved its project goals with economic efficiency, while adhering to a predefined and strictly controlled project scope.
Examples of the Life Cycle Initiative's Successful Use of Project Management
Clearly Defined and Strictly Controlled Project Scope
One testament to the conscious strides made by UNEP to achieve scope control over its Life Cycle Initiative project is the 10-Year Framework of Programmes for Sustainable Development, a binding document created during the Rio+20 United Nations Conference in Sustainable Development. By unambiguously defining a decade-long project parameter, UNEP provides key stakeholders with a clearly established timeframe around which plans can be devised and implemented. Although the 10-year framework does not constitute an actual end to the work of encouraging global industries to integrate Whole Life Cycle Thinking into their operations, as it is highly likely that UNEP will renew the Life Cycle Initiative when this term expires, the establishment of significant dates and deadlines is a key component of scope definition and scope control (Carroll, 2009). The specific structure of 10-Year Framework of Programmes for Sustainable Development allows UN officials to conduct annual reviews of progress reports generated by the secretariat on programmes, in this case UNEP itself, as well as the submission of annual reports to the Commission on Sustainable Development. This level of clearly defined accountability is crucial to maintaining scope control throughout the duration of a project which may span multiple decades, because it allows stakeholders and participants to effectively measure progress across a wide range of project parameters.
Targeted Use of Project Metrics to Measure Success and/or Failure
One of the most reliable ways to ensure that the boundaries of project scope are adhered to is the development and implementation of precise project metrics through which relative success/failure ratios can be accurately assessed. Proper project management practices involve the establishment of a series of increasingly difficult goals to guide the project to its most efficient form of completion, and a number of distinct metrics are used to gauge the extent to which these goals are met as a project progresses (Cleland, Bursic, Puerzer & Vlasak, 1998). In the case of UNEP's globally implemented Life Cycle Initiative, the use of project metrics to measure the impact of the organization's efforts is subtle yet effective. By publishing a set of Life Cycle Initiative Long-Term Deliverables, which are broad benchmarks that the project hopes to reach in terms of facilitating the broader incorporation of Whole Life Cycle Thinking (Life Cycle Initiative, 2013), the project managers at UNEP have provided the hundreds of activists, bureaucrats, and business executives associated with the project tangible goals that either will or will not be met. This leadership strategy is integral to the theory of project of management, because by providing key stakeholders with a series of Deliverables that may or may not be delivered, the UN's project management apparatus has essentially incentivizing the pursuit of progress. By applying a broad series of project metrics to a concept that could very well be subsumed by the abstractions of lofty idealism, UNEP has contributed to the legitimacy of the Life Cycle Initiative by assuring transparency in the appraisal of its efficacy.
Effective Management of a Dynamic Project Environment
As renowned project management researcher Simon Collyer, of the University of Brisbane Business School, reported in his study Project Management Approaches for Dynamic Environments in 2009, the unpredictable nature of projects carried out in complex, quickly changing settings presents project managers with a unique set of organizational dilemmas. (Collyer, 2009). With the stated goal of achieving a global transformation in the world of industry, convincing multinational conglomerates to voluntarily shift from the self-serving production practices of old to progressive and sustainable Whole Life Cycle Thinking methodologies, UNEP's Life Cycle Initiative epitomizes the idea of a dynamic project environment. In order to meet project goals, officials working under the auspices of the UN are charged with the unenviable task of detangling the web of domestic regulations, geopolitical tensions, and economic ramifications which are inextricably linked to the worldwide adoption of Whole Life Cycle Thinking manufacturing and production practices. By participating actively in the Marrakech Process on Sustainable Consumption and Production (SCP), a globalized multi-stakeholder platform allowing for the advocacy of SCP and Whole Life Cycle Thinking throughout many of the world's emerging economic powers, as well as in developing nations which are prioritizing their struggle to develop basic infrastructure over the pursuit of sustainability.
Connections Between Whole Life Cycle Thinking and Project Management
Recognition of Project Management Principles to Aid Message Delivery
One of the great ironies of a global organization like the UN, long known for its project management failures, attempting to promote an agenda based on transforming Whole Life Cycle Thinking from a promising theory to the industry standard in sustainable production, is that the very process of considering product life cycles shares many similarities to proper project management techniques. The planning phase which is so crucial for experienced project managers involves several of the same principles as the materials sourcing department of many major industries, because when major manufacturers decide to pursue a particular production method there must be an abundance of evidence indicating that this path presents the most cost-effective option. The Life Cycle Initiative encourages businesses and industry leaders to make carefully targeted adjustments to their sourcing methodologies, with an understanding that slight increases in costs can be offset by the increased sustainability which comes from only using responsibly mined ore, legally felled trees, and biodegradable materials. This recommendation may appear to be a simple proposition: sacrifice a small level of profit margin in exchange for the assurance of sustainability across a company's supply chain. To industrial supply chain managers, however, this proposition represents nothing more than an external risk factor which must be mitigated, because the parameters of sourcing projects have always been focused on obtaining the highest quality materials at the lowest possible cost. As part of the Life Cycle Initiative's Phase III, spanning 2012 through 2016, UNEP has developed a series of environmental life cycle impact assessment indicators (Finkbeiner, 2009) to assist industries in developing reliable measurement tools to assess the sustainability of their product life cycles, as well as the resources and knowledge needed to make improvements while retaining profitability. By respecting the fact that the fundamentals of proper project management involve an objective analysis of risk factors, UNEP and the Life Cycle Initiative have increased the viability of their message in terms of its wider acceptance by the financial analysts driving sourcing policy at major manufacturing firms.
Clear Use of Project Management Theory Guides UNEP and the Life Cycle Initiative
Having celebrated a 10th anniversary in June of 2012, at the Rio+20 United Nations Conference in Sustainable Development, the Life Cycle Initiative has clearly met the project parameters set out by its organizers upon its original conception and implementation. By structuring the Life Cycle Initiative project's overall progress into a series of three Phases, UNEP established a clearly defined set of metrics through which participants could gauge progress (Williams, 2008). This use of project management theory paid immediate dividends by allowing Phase I (2002-2007) to accomplish its primary objective of providing Work Programmes to facilitate the adoption of life cycle management, life cycle inventory, and life cycle impact assessment into major industries around the world (Life Cycle Initiative, 2013). The relatively smooth and successful progression from Phase I to Phase II (2007-2012), and now to Phase III, indicates that the attention paid to integrating project management theory, and specifically project planning and project metrics, throughout the Life Cycle Initiative's network of worldwide ventures has created a productive project environment in which key stakeholders are active participants. Another clear example of project metrics being used to ensure that the Life Cycle Initiative prevents scope creep and adheres closely to predetermined project parameters is the organization's willing participation in the 10-Year Framework of Programmes for Sustainable Development, because this pledge binds UNEP to prearranged amount of time in which key project objectives must be completed. A definable deadline allows organizers and planners within the Life Cycle Initiative to allocate resources appropriately, anticipate external risk factors, and adapt to inevitable contingencies.
You’re 84% through this paper. Sign up to read the full paper.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.