University of Vaasa - Vaasan yliopisto

Small SMEs: Interpretation and Sense of Behaviour
793
With the ideas and comments of Merritt (1998) regarding the SME-environment
‘problem’ in mind (i.e. one of management practices rather then actual performance?)
some of the practices of small SMEs can be observed above. For example, over half
small SMEs have an environmental policy and manager of some sort (mostly a
shared responsibility). However, few undertake environmental reviews, although
most can identify their environmental impacts (mainly related to energy and waste)
and few undertake audits and produce reports. Few have committees, undertake
training or have an EMS. It is also noted, however, that most suggest that managers
have positive attitudes towards the environment and nearly all undertake activity
related to health and safety and quality.
From the above, there appears a mix of management practice(s) in small SMEs in
this supply-chain. In some instances their practices look good, for example, most
have overall environmental policies and sub-policies and targets (i.e. related to waste,
energy and water) and managers (and this correlates well with performance
assessments by this group) but it is recalled that few undertake reviews or audits. As
such, the overall and specific policies appear not to have been developed as a result
of reviews and are not apparently audited to ensure, therefore, that they are being
implemented, they are relevant and they are, where necessary, being updated.
This situation appears to support, and is supported by, the performance assessment of
most in the grouping (i.e. they have policies and plans but awareness and
commitment within can vary). Most appear ‘somewhat satisfied’ with this level of
performance. When looking a little more at this headline detail, and attempting to
make sense of it and the performance assessment, it is noted that small SMEs in the
chain do appear to be doing something to address the environment. In this regard, it
can be seen that they are broadly internal/operational in their focus and appear to
concentrate on issues of efficiency (i.e. waste and energy management) rather than,
for example, the performance of their products. The group as a whole do suggest
that they are also motivated by external factors and issues of ‘compliance’ and this
includes adherence to both legal controls and also the requirements of customers
(most suggesting that they monitor such requirements).
Related to the latter, it is noted that most of the group only have one customer, the
case organisation, and the supply-chain is not subject to a lot of churn (i.e. suppliers
are not regularly replaced). The customer also has not, to date, placed any specific
environment related requirements on its suppliers and this may fuel current
assessments of effort and benefit by the group. The customer does focus heavily on
price (particularly for own brand label products and suppliers) and this may also
contribute, alongside the reported management commitment to the environment, to
the focus on issues of efficiency. As such actions can address costs and can possibly
increased the margins and/or competitiveness of those suppliers who take action.
The focus on issues of quality and health and safety are also not surprising given the
customer interest in the former (and the nature of the food industry) and legal
controls (and the immediacy of impact) related to the latter.