University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

(Revell and Rutherfoord, 2003). They have, again though, demonstrated a lack of
‘joined-up’ thinking (ECOTEC, 1998) which results in problems for SMEs.
740
A success factor for SME programmes is the channel used (Friedman and Miles
2002). Information channels that SME OMs know and trust are the most effective
(Clark, 2000) and SMEs are more likely to contact known intermediaries such as
Business Links and Chambers of Commerce for information and training on
environmental matters (Smith et al., 2000). However establishing a level of interest
through these intermediaries is one thing: prompting SMEs to action is another, so
the degree of support from these intermediaries is critical (Friedman and Miles,
2002).
The Netregs (2002:12) survey found that 40% of SMEs would welcome more
assistance and guidance from Government and its agencies. Interestingly they cited
the ‘internet’ and ‘printed materials’ as the most favoured ways to receive
information, with ‘face-to-face visits’ and ‘training’ only being the preferred option
of 15%. This last method however is the preferred option for the service providers –
particularly funded organisations who, from the Author’s experience, are judged on
this form of intervention. A subsequent survey (Netregs, 2003) asked respondents
where they would go for environmental information: the results were that 60% had
contacted their local authority, 35% the regulator (e.g. the Environment Agency), 35%
a waste company, 14% a trade/professional organisation and 10% a Consultant.
UK trade associations appear to have the potential to address environmental issues
and engage with SMEs (Hunt, 2000), as they are able to offer sector specific
solutions and advice. However, some writers (Revell and Rutherfoord, 2003; Clarke,
2004) point out that though they have the potential, their low levels of membership
make them a weak intermediary. Most SMEs are very limited in their time and this
makes the OMs particularly discerning regarding which ones they join –
environmental networks have to be more appealing to the OM than other networks
that might be joined if they are to be of any use (Martinuzzi et al, 2000).
The importance of networking amongst SMEs cannot be underestimated (Martinuzzi
et al, 2000; Hill, 2001a; Hill, 2001b), so it is important to consider not only the
‘official’ support available from the Government, but also the SME’s more
‘unofficial’ ones. SME OMs use networks so freely that all manner of decisionmaking
is characterised by the use of networks (Hill, 2001b). This will be just as
true for decisions made regarding the Environment as in any other business area.
Friedman and Miles (2002:336) identified networking as a key aspect of helping
SME OMs implement environmental change in their organisation. In their research,
they quote one SME respondent as saying:
“SMEs need to have contact with other people who are doing the
same…There are myriad hiccups and practical difficulties in
implementing good intentions, which are…much easier to fix if you can
speak to someone who is doing exactly the same thing”