Introduction
The case of DekaBank Group is an excellent example of a financing company faced with the challenge of integrating the environmental management into its decision-making process. Since it is one of the largest banking systems, the necessity to solve the problems of environmental management was increasingly significant. In light of environmental problems becoming a crucial element of the company’s management agenda, a special approach had to be devised. Environmental matters are complicated to address, as they require a large number of management targets. Janssen (2012) distinguishes several hallmarks of environmental issues, which are the most challenging: the inefficient estimate of expenses, unbalanced distribution, the impression of environmental problems being at a distance, the fact that they arise in poorly understood structures, and the fact that they indicate a profound discrepancy between collective and individual concerns.
Thus, environmental matters constitute a significant challenge for business management. This is why studying DekaBank’s experience is crucial. It provides an example of a valid theoretical standpoint, as well as a successful implementation strategy. DekaBank faced the need to improve its sustainability, as well as its financial viability with a special emphasis on environmental matters. According to Mitchell (2013, p.76), sustainability principles pertaining to the ecological and environmental aspects are the following: preservation of systems crucial for life support, conservation and improvement of biotic diverseness, devising an approach necessary for facing the global environmental changes, taking precautionary and adaptive measures in order to preserve healthy ecosystems, and taking restorative measures regarding ecosystems in a poor state. Incorporating elements of environmental management theory into the company’s decision-making approach was successful enough to produce considerable savings.
Brief Profile
DekaBank was confronted with the inevitability of adjusting their management to meet the environmental demands of the twenty-first century. The need for such an adjustment was made clear by the investors, as well as by the customers. With resources and energy expenditures rising, it was imperative to initiate certain modifications.
Primarily, it was established that DekaBank’s analysis methods were inefficient and questionable. Thus, insufficient data analysis constituted a serious impediment to identifying promptly ineffective business operations. Ensuring the reliability, applicability, and the highest quality of information for the experts to examine is an important factor of the decision-making process (Gregory et al. 2012, p. 31). The aspect of uncertainty might become an issue at any point in the decision-making process regarding environmental matters. Gregory et al. (2012, p. 125) emphasize that environmental decision-making faces uncertainty at many stages of the process, including the evaluation of efficiency of the achieved results, and the process of implementation. Therefore, it is crucial for the management to take into account the factors, which can have a serious impact on development and implementation processes, hindering the assessments and estimates of the decisions undertaken. Socio-political implications should be considered as well since the political and basic human influence on the implementation process often is barely predictable. Estimating alternative outcomes based on different points of reference is necessary in order to diminish the uncertainty factor (Gregory et al. 2012, p. 125).
DekaBank’s environmental experts concluded that the management system pertaining to ecological matters should be developed, implemented, and continuously improved. An explicit system of communication with various stakeholders is to be designed in order to submit the achieved targets consistently. The standards of Corporate Social Responsibility, as well as of valid environmental assessment are to be upheld.
Meeting the aforementioned challenges was a process divided into three stages. Environmental management system (EMS) was set as the main target for the first stage (DekaBank n.d.). The decision to devise and put such a system into operation involved conducting negotiations with the Board regarding a set of objectives, as well as securing their approval for the environmental policy. DekaBank decided to introduce the SoFi Software Solution, which was to improve the company’s sustainability by increasing the efficiency of its data management, as well as providing efficacious measurement tools.
The second stage of the solution program consisted in PE International (DekaBank advisory partner) taking measures to ensure the adequate implementation of the environmental system. In order to determine the means necessary to enhance the implementation of the environmental strategy, thorough examinations of key areas were carried out. Certain benchmarks were established as priorities for selection of the necessary means: implementation expenditures, evaluated cost reduction, and estimated measures of enhancement of the environmental program.
The third stage of the solution program outlined the process of integration. The introduced environmental management system established a fundamental understructure for the DekaBank Group (DekaBank, n.d.). It resulted in the modifications in multiple business operations of the company and provided a sound basis for a consistent environmental management in each department.
Analysis
The steps undertaken by the DekaBank in overcoming encountered challenges can be evaluated by distinguishing strengths and weaknesses of their approach. The first stage, devoted to the system integration, included integration of a software platform, designed to accumulate, process, analyze, and evaluate the necessary data. The implemented system enables acquiring accurate and explicit data for the enterprise. The strength of this approach consists in its centralized system of management, which increases sustainability of business processes (DekaBank, n.d.). Moreover, due to this innovation, it is possible to detect the processes displaying insufficient productivity, and take the necessary measures for improvement, as well as employ cost reduction methods in the respective area. However, due to the lack of an independent review, the strategic environmental data evaluation could be questioned. Except for the internal company inspections, and submitting the accomplished targets to external and internal stakeholders, no public introduction was made in order to obtain independent and objective reviews before introducing the new system into the decision-making process.
The second phase involved inspections and data assessment for the purposes of devising a suitable environmental program. The strength of this particular step undertaken by DekaBank lies in the thorough research of the matter regarding the degree of environmental involvement of the company prior to SoFi Software implementation. The explicit prioritization of means of environmental performance enhancement is a salient asset of the approach as well. Estimating cost reduction, evaluating implementation expenditures, while assessing the improvement potential of certain measures is an efficacious approach. As a result of the employed methods, DekaBank managed to save over five hundred thousand Euro in two years.
As for the third phase of the solution program, introducing the determined environmental strategies proved to be successful. The accomplished targets include significant savings, substantial cost reduction, and improvement of environmental performance of the company. Over several months, DekaBank managed to save three hundred thousand Euro. Developing the Environmental Management System was beneficial in many respects. This measure helped establish a serious basis for the consistent system of environmental enhancement in many departments of the company. Moreover, costs are predicted to decrease even more over the next few years, due to the ongoing development of the environmental program. Introducing the SoFi platform for the purposes of sustainability of the company was a decisive step, requiring quite a lot of research and preliminary deliberation, as well as a receptive approach in dealing with the DekaBank’s advisory partner, PE International. The latter helped DekaBank prepare its first environmental statement.
Although global environmental problems are yet to be resolved, measures undertaken by DekaBank have improved the situation. Energy expenditures decreased significantly due to the implemented modernization methods. The company managed to save one hundred eleven thousand Euro each year. As for the commercial campaign articles, paper production was reduced substantially. Internet distribution was chosen as a primary means for the distribution of advertising materials. DekaBank managed to save one hundred seventy thousand Euro each year.
DekaBank’s approach to creating the environmental management program proved to be highly efficient and yielded significant results. Their success could be partially explained by the coherent structure of the program, divided into three phases, each based on the data provided by the previous phase. According to Bennear and Dickinson (n.d., p. 5), the process of learning is the foundation of a system of performance, including environmental performance. In this context, learning comprises three stages: collecting the data necessary for the program, assessment, and integration of acquired data, and devising the framework, i.e. identifying the means necessary to accomplish each target in the program. DekaBank’s strategy comprised all the mentioned elements, which is why the program displayed a high level of efficiency.
Solutions and recommendations
Sustainability management system introduced in DekaBank provided all the tools needed to enhance the environmental performance of the company through employing a centralized system of data collection, analysis, and evaluation. However, as indicated in the preceding paragraph, no independent review was done. We will proceed by suggesting a simple solution to that particular problem.
According to Jones et al. (2013, p. 36), strategic environmental assessment is a process which should be objective. However, it is not always possible to guarantee the impartiality of evaluation. The chosen strategy could be questioned regarding the field of research, precision of data, and the overall credibility of the gathered information. It is also difficult to assess whether the consultancy service was sufficiently reasonable in respect of the project’s purposes. Jones et al. (2013, p. 36) claim that one of the possible solutions to this problem could be conducting an independent public review. It is suggested that a public presentation might reveal certain aspects of the project, which were not accounted for before. Thus, the developed strategy should be publicly evaluated in order to verify its potential efficaciousness. After the independent review, the project can be submitted to further revision, and applied in decision-making process. Therefore, it is possible to increase the productivity of the research by means of public presentation.
Conclusion
The successful development of the environmental program by the DekaBank Group stems from its adaptive attitude and overall receptiveness regarding innovative management solutions. Its investment in sustainability improvement is an excellent example of a coherent, reasonable strategy. Analysis of the current environmental situation, as well as due assessment of the company’s management capacities, helped provide a better understanding of what is yet to be done. Introducing new software solutions, as well as new management strategies, proved to be largely successful in terms of environmental performance and produced considerable savings.
References
Bennear, LS and Dickinson, L n.d., The role of program evaluation in environmental policy: a critical evaluation of incentives created by GPRA and PART, Duke University, Web.
DekaBank. n.d., The business case for environmental management and sustainability, PE International, Web.
Gregory, R, Failing, L, Harstone, M, Long, G, McDaniels, T & Ohlson, D 2012, Structured decision making: a practical guide to environmental management choices, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
Janssen, R 2012, Multiobjective decision support for environmental management (Vol. 2), Springer Science & Business Media, Dordrecht.
Jones, C, Baker, M, Carter, J, Jay, S, Short, M and Wood, C 2013 ‘Evaluating the SEA of land use plans’, in C Jones, M Baker, J Carter, S Jay, M Short and C Wood (eds), Strategic environmental assessment and land use planning: an international evaluation, Routledge, New York, pp. 28-44.
Mitchell, B 2013, Resource & environmental management. Routledge, New York.