Barriers and Enablers to Adoption of ISO 20121

8/17/2019 Barriers and Enablers to Adoption of ISO 20121

1/66

Barriers and Enablers to the Adoption of the ISO 20121Standard for Event Sustainability Management

Sue Tinnish, PhD

Assistant Professor Glion School of Hospitality Management

Kendall College

Abstract

Standards exist everywhere in the world around us. Standards play a critical role in industry,commerce, technology and the world at large. With the anticipated approval of ISO 20121

vents Sustaina!ility "anagement System, the "I# $"eetings, Incentives, #onferences andvents% industry will have a sector&specific management system to identify critical sustaina!ility

issues li'e venue selection, operating procedures, supply chain management, procurement,communications, and transportation for all types of events. (ll actors $suppliers, planners, tradeassociations% have an opportunity to play a role in the adoption and use of the standards.

)his paper identifies the ena!lers and !arriers to adopting ISO 20121. ight main ena!lers areidentified and ten main !arriers are identified. )he !arriers and ena!lers are drawn from theethnographic experience of the author in the development of ISO 2012. The paper alsocaptures qualitative information gleaned through interviews with industryparticipants involved in the development of ISO 20121. In addition, extant

research the literature including (ctor&*etwor' )heory, innovation, diffusion of innovation( ogers 200!" and standardi+ation development in other industries $i.e., softwaredevelopment, information technology, and communications%, and systems thin'ing informed thedevelopment of the ena!lers and !arriers as well as the underlying constructs.

urther, implications are drawn at the meso&level, macro&level and micro&level of analysis forsupporting adoption through social networ's, institutions, training and education, and !ehaviorof actors. )hese implications may !e of interest to practitioners and scholars.

Introduction

)his research paper, !ased on a case study, see's to identify the !arriers and ena!lers to the

adoption of the ISO 20121 standard in the meetings, incentives, convention and exhi!ition

$"I# % industry. Standards exist everywhere in the world around us. In the "I# industry,


2/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age 2

planners use a standard for determining seating distances, airlines use standards for issuing

!oarding passes, and every supplier and planner who sends an email uses a /W ) 1 'ey!oard

on their computer. Standards play a critical role in industry, commerce, technology and the worldat large. avid and 3reenstein $1440, p. 5 as cited in omin, 6eil 7 8yytinen, 2009, p.90% define

a standard as :a set of technical specifications adhered to !y a set of producers, either tacitly or

as a result of a formal agreement.; Inherent in this definition is the awareness that often

standards will deal with technical details.

ISO 20121 is a standard for creating an vents Sustaina!ility "anagement System. a framewor' to implement a system to manage

an event?s sustaina!le development issues. ather than !eing a chec'list, ISO 20121 re@uires a

systematic approach to addressing sustaina!le development issues in relation to event planning.

It can !e applied to an event organi+er, a single event or a venue; $


3/66


sustaina!ility management system into the "I# industry. )heories pertaining to management

systems exist $i.e., ISO 15001%C however, structural, attitudinal, awareness and !ehavioral issues

are uni@ue to sustaina!ility and, li'ewise, that uni@ueness extends to the event industry.Implementation will !e critical to the success of ISO 20121. )hus, the research see's to identify

the !arriers and ena!lers to adoption. )he research see's to offer practical recommendations to

actors involved in each countries? "irror #ommittee or *ational Standards -oard $*S-%.

Implications are offered concerning how ISO 20121 can !e positioned in the overall industry,

which would, ultimately, lead to progress for sustaina!ility.

he !esearch

-ased upon an ethnographic approach where I was em!edded in the process, interviews withother participants and extant theory and literature, this paper identifies the !arriers and ena!lers

to adoption. I utili+ed an iterative approach of traveling !etween the pertinent literature, data and

theory to develop the list of !arriers and ena!lers. "y interactive&adaptive methodology is

!ounded !y a case study, an appropriate method of in@uiry given the investigation of a

contemporary phenomenon within a real&life context where all !oundaries !etween the

phenomenon and contact are not clearly evident $ in, 2009. p.19%. esigning my research

around one case study affords a relatively holistic understanding of the ISO development process

through detailed contextual analysis of a limited num!er of events or conditions and

their relationship to one another $ in, 2009%.

ata was collected from multiple sources. esources on @ualitative research $#or!in and Strauss,

200DC in, 2009, p.9E% suggest that a triangulation approach helps to ensure the relia!ility of the

findings. )he data consisted of field notesC personal o!servationsC emailsC personal interviews,

which were recordedC and additional documentation $press releases, social media postings, and

pu!lically availa!le information%. )he interviews and supporting documents were transcri!ed and

converted to text documents and coded within (tlas.ti. (xial coding was used to analy+e themes

and patterns. )he analysis and coding were performed in accordance with #or!in and Strauss

$200D%. I wor'ed to insure validity and relia!ility of results !y relying on various validity

procedures $#reswell, 200F, p. 20F&204% including $1% prolonged engagement in the field,


4/66


$2%triangulation of data, $9% peer de!riefing, $5% disconfirming evidence through negative case

analysis, $G% ac'nowledging researcher !ias, $E% mem!er chec'ing, $F% thic', rich description,

and $D% external audits.

In summary, the field o!servations provide a detailed, rich source of data setting a

comprehensive landscape of the standardi+ation effort. )he email correspondence covering more

than a year of correspondence and 19F different actors supplies a vivid $al!eit suffering from

occasional spelling errors and cursory exchanges% view of the daily interactions of participants.

)he interviews allowed me to dig deeper ferreting out insights from the participants. Other

documents $press releases, articles% provided yet another perspective on the process.

"iterature !evie#

)he literature review is a critical part of this research?s methodological strategy. )he role of the

literature review is to inform the analysis of !arriers and ena!lers. )he literature review is

comprised of a review of two types of literature. )he focused !ac'ground information relates to

sustaina!ility, events, standards, and environmental management systems. )he second !ody

of literature conveys scholarly information on (ctor&*etwor' )heory and innovation diffusion.

)his research see's to weave disparate ideas into a coherent, multi&threaded analysis that

considers the adoption process as a social and community&dependent activity. )he research is

framed !y the (ctor *etwor' )heory $(*)%. )he theoretical perspectives of (*) view

innovation as a social process of change that is em!edded in everyday practice. (n innovation,

li'e a standard addressing event sustaina!ility, is part of a structure consisting of a networ' of

actors which dynamically promote or resist changeC react and adaptC and shape the innovation.

$art 1% Bac&ground

)he !ac'ground literature covers an extensive !readth of areas includingH $1% events and event

management, $2% standards, $9% standards organi+ations, $5% International Organi+ation of

Standardi+ation, $G% historical development of environmental standards, $E% nvironmental


5/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age G

"anagement Systems, $F% sustaina!ility, $D% sustaina!ility and events, $4% standards and events,

$10% events and sustaina!ility policy instruments, and $11% ISO 20121.)hese areas are all !asic to

the understanding of the research.

vents and vent "anagement

)he planning, staging and holding of events is a !illion dollar industry. 3et+ defines events as

transitory in nature, infre@uent in occurrence and limited in time $1441%. ( planned event has one

or more purposes over its limited duration. ach event is uni@ue in its conception, management,

setting and participants. vents may !e recurring or held one&off. vents can !e events as

ela!orate as )he Olympic 3ames and World #up Soccer or !e as !asic as summer county fairs.

ntertainment festivals such as #alifornia?s #oachella and the -onnaroo "usic and (rts estival

in "anchester, )ennessee also fit the definition of an event. vents can also !e cultural festivals

held around world, li'e the cherry !lossom viewings in


6/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age E

created standards including efforts to record time using calendars or the introduction of weights

and measurements. Standards ensure desira!le characteristics of products and services such as

@uality, environmental friendliness, safety, relia!ility, efficiency and interchangea!ility. Othersstandards are created in response to the needs of an increasingly complex society. )he use of

standards in products as far ranging as railroad gauge to financial transactions allowed commerce

to flourish $(*SI%. Standards represent an alternative coordinating mechanisms to mar'et

competition or government regulation.

(n agreed upon definition of a standard does not exist in the literature. )he existing definitions

range from the very general, for example :standards are pieces of general advice offered to large

num!er of potential adopters; $-runsson 7


7/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age F

Standards Organi+ations

Standards organi+ations exist on many levelsC standards organi+ations may !e local, national

'nown as *ational Standards -oard $*S-s%, regional or even international organi+ations.#ollectively they develop, coordinate, promulgate, revise, amend, reissue, interpret, and maintain

standards that address the interests of a wide !ase of sta'eholders outside the standard&

developing organi+ation. Organi+ations involved in standards development are 'nown as

standard&developing organi+ations $S Os% and standard&setting organi+ations $SSOs%.

Standard&setting organi+ations are often industry consortia which develop voluntary standards.

SSOs are voluntary institutions that focus on industry compati!ility see' to esta!lish industry&

wide design and process standards.

)he term standard&developing organi+ation refers to thousands of industry& or sector&!ased

standards organi+ations which develop and pu!lish industry specific standards. In the Anited

States, industry relies on standards developed !y hundreds of national and international S Os.

)hese S Os are independent organi+ations that identify mar'et needs and react accordingly,

wor'ing directly with technical experts from around the glo!e to develop appropriate standards.

8arge economies li'e the Anited States and


8/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age D

ISO

The S7O involved in this research study is the International Organi ation for

Standardi ation or the Organi ation Internationale de )ormalisation. ISO wasfounded in 1,%8. ISO9s mem'ers are 4private sector national 'odies6 (&attli

and -Jthe $ 200!$ p. %" such as the :merican )ational Standards Institute

(:)SI"$ the #ritish Standards Institution (#SI"$ and the 7eutsche Institut fur

)ormung (7I)". :s a nongovernmental actor$ ISO facilitates international

commerce 'y developing international standards and codes through its

technical committees comprised of representatives from 'usinesses$

governments$ and other sta+eholders ( ada$ 2000$ p.20". The technical

committees are comprised of 4e;perts$6 ISO9s designation for a participant in

the standardi ation process. To approve a new standard$ ISO requires a two*

thirds ma


9/66


organi+ations and applied in a consistent manner to influence or !enchmar' !ehavior; $6err, et

al., 144D, p. xv%. )ypes of * Is availa!le as environmental measures includeH $1% standards,

$2% codes of practice, $9% environmental la!eling, and $5% negotiated agreements.

nvironmental "anagement Systems

(n environmental management system $ "S% may !e a standard, a regulation or some type of

voluntary framewor'. nvironmental management systems are viewed as a new way to control

environmental impact. (n "S is a management tool which can help an organi+ation increase its

awareness of, and its control over, environmental impacts $ISO 15000 Store%. (s a management

system, it is designed to !e flexi!le enough to !e applica!le to any si+e of company and to any

industry sector $International Institute for Sustaina!le evelopment%. In contrast to traditional

:command and control; measures, "Ss are :concerned with esta!lishing Lhow to? achieve a

goal, not Lwhat? the goal should !e; $International Institute of Sustaina!le evelopment%.

"any times, "S programs are developed in response to industry&specific needs and are

introduced to provide common sets of guidelines to industry mem!ers. xamples of industrial

environmental standards include the #hemical "anufacturer?s (ssociation?s esponsi!le #are

rogram in *orth (merica $International #ouncil of #hemical (ssociations2

$I##(% andorestry Stewardship $ orest Stewardship #ouncil 9 $ S#%. Ander a voluntary framewor',

industries no longer view environmental management as a cost of doing !usiness !ut recogni+e

that proactive measure can reduce the regulatory !urden, lower impacts and the environment and

yield economic !enefits in the long run. Other common "Ss are ISO 15001 and co&

"anagement and (udit Scheme $ "(S%.

Sustaina!ility

Sustaina!ility is often defined !ased on the definition of sustaina!le development put forth !y theWorld #ommission on conomic evelopment $W# % in its report, Our #ommon uture.

2 )he International #ouncil of #hemical (ssociations $I##(% represents chemical manufacturersand producers all over the world.9)he orest Stewardship #ouncil was formed in 1449 to change the dialogue a!out and the practice of sustaina!leforestry worldwide.


10/66


(ccording to the W# , sustaina!le development is defined as :development that meets the

needs of the present without compromising the a!ility of future generations to meet their own

needs; $W# , 14DF%. )he commission further asserted that sustaina!le development re@uiredthe simultaneous adoption of environmental, economic, and e@uity principles. )his assertion

challenged the deep&rooted assumption that environmental integrity and social e@uity were at

odds with economic prosperity. #urrently, the definition is commonly referred to as the

:-rundtland #ommission; definition.

-ansal $200G% further highlights the concepts of environmental, social e@uity, and economic

principles. or sustaina!le development, organi+ations must apply all three principles to their

products, policies, and practices. Sustaina!le events consider environmental issues li'e waste,

energy use, and water usageC social issues li'e air )rade, destruction of an area through new,

under&utili+ed infrastructure, interruption of normal !usiness, creating an environment where

residents leave en mass, antagoni+ation of the community and new securityMcrime threatsC the

economic issues are wealth distri!ution among the community and inflated prices during the

event.

Sustaina!ility and vents

vents have largely !een ignored !y those involved in sustaina!ility. oc'ets of the event

industry focus on the environmental aspects of events with some interest in the more holistic

perspective of sustaina!ility. In this more holistic context, attention is given to environmental,

sociocultural and economic aspects of sustaina!ility. )he information currently availa!le to guide

planners interested in event sustaina!ility are chec'lists and guides, text!oo's featuring case

studies, and the !urgeoning efforts to create standards in the industry. (nd yet the industry is a

maBor source of waste, energy use and water use. vents li'e festivals or maBor sporting events

put strains on a destination?s infrastructure and capacity. )he Olympics permanently change the

social, environmental and economic landscape of a destination and leave a lasting reminder of

the event $Waitt, 2009%.


11/66


In framing the concept of sustaina!le events, Smithhristensen $2004, p. 29% warns a!out

thin'ing a!out the term sustainable as :a process or state that can !e maintained at a certain level

indefinitely; as it suggests events can !e maintained at a certain level indefinitely. )hat iscounter&intuitive to the concept of an event !eing transitory in nature. ather he proposes the

following two definitionsH Sustaina!le eventsH vents managed as an autonomous, cyclic

process through the interaction !etween event management, host community and event goers,

providing human resources, infrastructure and funds $Smithhristensen, 2004, p. 25%.

(lternatively, he defines responsible events as events sensitive to the economic, sociocultural and

environmental needs, within the local host communities, and organi+ers in such a way as to

optimi+e the net holistic $positive% output $Smithhristensen, 2004, p. 2G%.

Standards and vents

It is against this !ac'drop that interested parties in the "I# industry expressed a desire to

create a management system to guide the decision&ma'ing of an organi+ation to produce more

sustaina!le events. )he existing standard related to event sustaina!ility management is a

standard developed !y the -ritish Standards Institute 'nown as -S D401. -S D401 was

developed in 200G specifically for the events industry with the purpose of guiding the industry to

operate in a more sustaina!le manner. )he standard defines the re@uirements for a sustaina!ilityevent management system to ensure an enduring and !alanced approach to economic activity,

environmental responsi!ility and social progress relating to events. In that regard, -S D401

shares many of the common management principles of other management system standards such

as ISO 4001 $/uality "anagement%, ISO 15001 $ nvironmental "anagement% and -S OKS(S

1D001 $Kealth and Safety "anagement% including the lan& ohec'&(ct approach.

vents and Sustaina!ility olicy Instruments

( variety of policy instruments are availa!le worldwide related to sustaina!ility. )he summaryinclude in )a!le 2 focuses on all types of * I?s including $1% standards, $2% codes of practice,

$9% environmental la!eling and $5% negotiated agreements. While )a!le 2 is !y no means an

exhaustive list, it illustrates some of the policy instruments which directly impact the planning of

sustaina!le events.


12/66


Table 2. Examples of Environmental and Sustainable Voluntary uidan!e Tools"mplemented #orld$ide

%ountry/&egion V'&"

(ustralia 1. 3lo!al co 8a!eling2. 3ood nvironmental #hoice

Anited 6ingdom 1. -S 4D01H2004 $Specification for a%Sustaina!ility "anagement System for

vents2. 3reen )ourism9. Industry 3reen $I3% !y


13/66


$S I%1F. AS ( #ertified Organic1 . eri lora

Other 1. ( Sustaina!le vents 3uide2. co 8a!eling N ( 3reener estival (wardsH

200E9. 3lo!al eporting Initiative $3 I% 39

eporting ramewor' vents SectorSupplementH 2011

5. Kanover rinciplesG. IndiaQs comar' SchemeE. ISO 15001H2005 nvironmental "anagement

Systems $ "S%F. ISO 2E000H 2010 3uidance on Social

esponsi!ilityD.


14/66


Summary of -ac'ground Information

)he !ac'ground information sets the stage of an industry where standards played a maBor role in

technical automation and internet transactions, !ut !eyond which standardi+ation and standardsare used very sparingly in the "I# industry N particularly in event management. )he creation,

planning and execution of events is portrayed as a creative process where the specific individual

engaged in the planning process $event planner, planner or organi+er% is perceived as directly

affecting the event?s outcome !ecause of the planner?s creativity, ideas, and past experience. )he

ante for !asic 'nowledge for planners is a!out to !e increased as they focus on environmental

issues $waste, diversion rates, air @uality, water conservation% and sociocultural issues $ air

)rade, sustaina!le wages, and legacy issues% and consider economic issues !eyond profit.

$art 2% E'tant "iterature

)he extant literature covers seven different areasH $1% (ctor&*etwor' )heory, $2% development

arena, $9% standardi+ation, $5% innovation and diffusion of innovation, and $G% whole systems.

I !egin with a review of theories that impact my research and then move to the topical areas.

(ctor&*etwor' )heory

(ctor&*etwor' )heory $(*)% informs a variety of areas in social sciences $information

technology, information systems, technology, organi+ational analysis, geography, sociology, and

feminist studies%. (ssociated with scholars li'e 8atour, #allon and 8aw, (*) explores how

relations !etween o!Bects, people, and concepts are formed, rather than why relationships are

formed. (*) emerged from the fields of science and technology research and sought to explain

how scientific theories spread, !ecame em!edded and then later !ecame acculturated. )he actors

in (*) can !e human and non&human thus creating the concept of heterogeneity, where diverse

actors all interact within the networ' $"c-ride, 2009%. ifferences in interactions of human and

non&human actors are not emphasi+ed.

)he (*) literature is relevant to my research for four reasons. irst, the foundational focus on

:how; not :why; offers a similar foundation to my approach of identifying !arriers and ena!lers.

Second, I see corollaries !etween explanations of how technology is diffused and accepted and


15/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age 1G

my own research interests. )hird, (*) conceptuali+es social interactions in terms of networ's.

"eanings are defined !y the actors themselves. #ontextual creation of meaning may provide an

important foundational lin'age. ourth, numerous researchers approach the standardi+ation effortfrom an (*) framewor' setting a precedence and rich literature !ac'drop. or example,

"c-ride $2009% examines how mo!ile communication technologies are adopted within different

countries. (*) supports a social construction paradigmC therefore,

evelopment (rena

)he concept of a development arena fits well with (*).


16/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age 1E

supplier community $users%, the various sta'eholder groups and to evolve in a way that responds

to the changing needs of the sta'eholders and the moving target of sustaina!le event

management.

Standardi+ation

(s standardi+ation is the main focus of this research, this literature review covers a variety of

articles a!out standardi+ation. Standardi+ation has !een explored in industrial sectors li'e

information technology, communications, engineering and &commerce infrastructure. )opics of

study range the gamut from patent technology to creating a !alance !etween competition and

cooperation. Often studies in the information technology and software sector overlapped with my

interest in diffusion of innovation, so much of my research was in this area. or example, oo, et

al. $200G% examined the role of standards and innovation in diffusion of !road!and mo!ile

telephone services in 6orea using (ctor *etwor' )heory. )heir findings suggest standards play

two distinct roles in innovation and diffusion on services li'e !road!and mo!ile services. irst,

standards ena!le different actors to align their interests so they !uild networ's that allow them to

shape the world in which they will compete. Second, standards play a role in shaping networ's

!y mediating the pathways of actions and thoughts $ oo et al., 200G, p.95G%.

ichman and 6emerer studied software innovation documenting the evidence of an assimilation

gap in the diffusion of innovation. (lthough addressing software innovation, the concept has

relevance to the ISO standard. )heir article notes the cumulative ac@uisition $purchase% may not

match the cumulate deployment $use% of an innovation across a population of potential adopters

$ ichman 7 6emerer, 1444, p. G%. )hey refer to this time delay as the assimilation gap. ISO

20121 may share some interesting characteristics with software in this regard. ichman and

6emerer $1444, p. 9% note the wor' of (ttwell who documents that high 'nowledge !arriers

generally slow diffusion which tends to have an especially negative effect on deployment

compared with ac@uisition ( second potential reason for the assimilation gap is created when

some innovations are mar'eted in a way that causes organi+ations to ac@uire the innovation

under one set of expectations only to discover the reality is much less favora!le $ osen!erg,


17/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age 1F

14FE as cited in ichman 7 6emmerer, 1444, p. 9&5%. ichman and 6emerer $1444, p. F% also

document the survivor function where, in their analysis, the earlier technology continues to

survive despite the ac@uisition of new technology. ( final concept they address is the increasingreturns to adoptions. :Some technologies !ecome much more valua!le to a given adopter to the

extent that others also adopt. Such technologies are su!Bected to increasing returns of adoption;

$ ichman 7 6emerer, 1444, p. 4%. Increasing returns arise from the additional contri!ution that

adopters create !y $1% positive networ' externalities among adopters, $2% learning&!y&using

among adopters, $9% economies of scale in production and learning&!y&doing among producers,

$5% general industry 'nowledge a!out the innovation and $G% a more rapidly maturing technology

infrastructure.

)he idea of integrating an environmental program within a government was studied !y 8afferty

and uud $200E, p. 5GF% to explain the adoption of green standards in *orway. In this article,

they examine Kori+ontal nvironmental olicy Integration $K I% and ertical nvironmental

olicy Integration $ I% as two factors that govern policy acceptance within *orway. )hey

point out when different sectors within the *orwegian government pursue alternative

environmental o!Bectives $poor K I%, it undermines overall success. Integration may serve to !e

e@ually important in an industry sector and not restricted to government agendas.

In the arena of information technology, the definition of who is the :user; can !e critical.

"illerand and -a'er $2010% explore the multi&faceted roles of usersC they argue the user concept

is underdeveloped in theory. While the role of the user is less multi&dimensional in the events

sector, the reality of the ISO 20121 standards development is some of the developers will

!ecome usersC some will !e planners who use the standard, others will !e suppliers who use the

standard. (ll developers, however, are li'ely to have vested interests in the implementation of the

standard.


18/66

-arriers and na!lers to (dopting ISO 20121 age 1D

iffusion of Innovation

iffusion theory posits that many @ualities exist in actors causing them to accept $or not% a new

idea or a new product. In addition, many @ualities of innovations emerge that can ma'e actorsaccept them enthusiastically or not. ogers? name is closely associated with this topic. ogers

(200!$ p. >" de5ned di?usion as 4the process in which an innovation is

communicated through certain channels over time among the mem'ers of a

social system. It is a special type of communication$ in that messages are

concerned with new ideas.6 In his !oo', Diffusion of Innovations , he see's to explain

how, why, and at what rate new ideas and technology spread through cultures. ogers? diffusion

model contains four elementsH the innovation, communication channels, time, and a social

system. ogers defines five intrinsic characteristics of innovations that influence an actor?s

decision to adopt or reBect an innovationH $1% relative advantageH how improved an innovation is

over the previous generationC $2% compati!ilityH the level of compati!ility re@uired to assimilate

an innovation into an individual?s lifeC $9% complexity or simplicityH if the innovation is too

difficult to use an individual will not li'ely adopt itC $5% triala!ilityH how easily an innovation

may !e experimented with as it is !eing adoptedC if a user has a hard difficulty using and trying

an innovation this individual will !e less li'ely to adopt itC and $G% o!serva!ilityH the extent that

an innovation is visi!le to others. ( more visi!le innovation will drive communication among the

individual?s peers and personal networ's and will in turn create more positive or negative

reactions. )hus, the relative speed with which actors in a social system adopt an innovation

depends on these factorsC adopters of an innovation do not adopt the innovation independently,

!ut instead influence each othersQ adoption decisions $ ogers, 2009, p. 1G&1F%.

xamining past research on diffusion of innovation shows a specific slant where innovations are

characteri+ed as unpro!lematic, complete and uncontested $ oo, 8yytinen, 7 ang, 200G, p. 92DC)en'asi 7 "ohrman, 144D, p. 122&19G%. "odels such as ogers $2009, p. 1F0% portray

innovation diffusion as a linear se@uence. iewing standards wor' in a more complex world with

partisan interest and alternative choices casts a new light on diffusion of innovation.


19/66


Other attempts to capture the dynamic of innovation diffusion are !ased on @uantitative models.

or example, 6anniainen, " 'inen, ichT and #ha'ra!arti $2011% explore diffusion rates in

technology and engineering. )hey !uild on the -ass "odel5

$-"% which descri!es a cumulative&adoptions curve. (s a stochastic model, the -ass "odel examines !ehavior which is non&

deterministicC stochastic models predict future states !ased on a processQ predicta!le actions and

!y a random element. 6anniainen et al.?s effort extends the conventional -ass model

stochastically !y specifying the error process of sales as log&normal and mean&reverting. )he

model shows analytically and numerically that forecasts derived using sales data can

su!stantially alter conventional -ass forecasts.

"ichailidis, artalidou, *astis, apada'i&6lavdianou and #haratsari $2011% raise the issue of

diffusion !ased on supply versus demand when they study internet diffusion rates in rural

3reece. One of their conclusions is increasing Internet penetration in rural areas can !e !ased on

increasing demand. )hey $2011% conclude, :It seems internet availa!ility will not !e a pro!lem in

the future, since attempts are !eing made and figures show that the ur!anNrural divide and lac'

of infrastructure are dealt !y national initiatives. )he @uestion raised, however, is why

penetration rates remain low despite all infrastructural development in rural 3reece. )he answer

can !e only found when ela!orating into demand side issues, as examined in this research.; )hey point to forums and !logs for farmers, for example, which emerged in many countries and were

run !y farmers or other organi+ations related to agriculture. In 3reece, a farmer could

communicate with other farmers or administrative !odies using ace!oo', )witter, and through

the we!sites of newspapers, ) channels, agricultural suppliers, etc. )he challenge for policy

ma'ers in this case would !e not merely disseminating such forums !ut rather to create the desire

and need $the demand% for the non&users to finally use services provided through the Internet.

#reating demand is an interesting concept for ISO 20121. )he two concepts of searching for

progressive audiences and local support may !e @uite relevant for adoption of ISO 201212C !oth

concepts are em!odied in this @uote $"ichailidis et al., 2011%.H

5 )he -ass "odel was formulated !y mar'eting professor ran' -ass to estimate the rate ofadoption for a new product.


20/66


If farmers reali+e the added value of the Internet and social networ'ing models to

their everyday life, then there is a greater chance that they will !e involved. In any

case, such policies must always place a great importance in finding the most progressive audience, which means wor' in the field with existing networ's in

local communities, as well as finding and using facilitators at a local level.

(s discussed earlier, (ctor&*etwor' )heory $(*)% is often applied to innovation. "iettinen

draws upon the (*) and cultural&historical activity theory $()% to study technical innovation.

"iettinen $2000, p. 1D2% studies attempts to produce wood from Trichoderma , a cellulose&

degrading en+yme. Ke demonstrates three limitations of an innovative activity using this

empirical case studyH $1% the principle of generali+ed symmetry $how to decide what is

important and essentialC $2% silent actorsC and $9% role of human cognition, intentionality and

learning%. Some of these concepts may !e relevant to the study of innovation in ISO 20121.

Innovation is addressed in a neo&classical and $co&%evolutionary way !y ennings $144D%. Ke

notes typically innovation is :neutral concerning the content of change and open in all directions.

In contrast, putting emphasis on innovation toward sustaina!le development is motivated !y

concern and content of progress.; Sustaina!le progress is not mar'ed solely as technological progress. Asing an economic perspective he notes regulatory regimes driven !y technical

standards $either in a command&and&control system or in a regime of voluntary agreements in

which standards are negotiation !etween government and industry% are not cost&efficient and the

incentives for progress in emission reduction vanish after the standards are met. Ke notes the

limits of pure mar'et forces to create changeC concluding that neo&classical models are well&

chosen for :analy+ing marginal or incremental changes, induced !y different 'inds of incentives.

=-ut> they are of limited value for the analysis of more radical changes of technology systems

including the organi+ational and societal context.; or that he turns to evolutionary approaches

which are more interested in the analysis of transition and learning process than in e@uili!rium

states. ennings $144D% concludesH


21/66


*eoclassical methods are most ela!orated to analy+e the efficiency of incentive

systems which seems to !e essential for stimulation innovation... volutionary

approaches are more appropriate for analy+ing long&term, radical technologicalchange including path&dependencies, technological irreversi!ility, transition

process, discontinuous and unpredicta!le events.

"uch research on innovation is done within the context of politics. "introm explores how ideas

for innovation gain prominence on government agendas. -y examining the issue of school

choice, "introm outlines strategies for :policy entrepreneurs,; people who see' to initiate

dynamic policy change, !y developing strategies for presenting their ideas to others. Some

concepts he offers in his wor' on :selling or !ro'ering; their ideas, networ'ing, shaping the

terms of the de!ate and !uilding coalitions are relevant to my research $"introm, 144F%.

(s I explored regulation lin'ed to innovation, I also explored the diffusion of innovation

literature with regard to regulations. Oster and /uigley $14FF% investigate the home!uilding

industry in the Anited States. )hey identify four peculiarities of the home!uilding industry which

may contri!ute to the industry?s relatively low rate of technical progress. )hree of their points are

salient to this research. irst, they note the small scale of firms in the construction may alsoreduce incentives for private research and development. Second, the merits of a particular

innovation may !e hard to evaluate !ecause the use of the innovation depends upon a complex

interaction with other parts. )hird, the fragmentation of the mar'et not only exists in the num!er

of firms operating !ut also in the :!ewildering variations in local regulations; $Oster 7 /uigley,

14FF, p. 9E2&9E9%. )his system complexity com!ined with the industry fragmentation may ma'e

it especially difficult for suppliers to Budge the potential of an innovation.

Whole Systems (pproach

8as+lo $2009% suggests sustaina!ility re@uires a whole&systems approach. One cannot !e

sustaina!le in one part of the system and not sustaina!le in another. )his results in a cohesive


22/66


definition of social, economic and environmental performance. Sustaina!ility must !e measured

!y a set of !enchmar's that includes customers, employees, !usiness partners, communities,

shareholders, and the environment. #onsumers, employees, and investors are demanding !usiness conduct that ta'es into account an organi+ation?s activities for all of its sta'eholders

$8as+lo, 2009%.

Whole systems thin'ing is especially appropriate to a discussion of event sustaina!ility and

management of sustaina!le events !ecause of the in situ nature of events, the nature of

sustaina!ility, the heterogeneous sta'eholders, and the complexity of supply chain management

activities.

!esults

rom research on ISO 1500 and ISO 4000, many scholars identified various !arriers and

ena!lers for those standards. )he nature of a management system, whether assessing @uality or

environmental management, involves similar challenges in adoption and implementation. Survey

data $ arnall, 2009C Keras&Sai+ar!itoria, 8andin 7 "olina&(+orin, 2011% and case study

categories $ oo et al., 200GC asgupta, Kettige 7 Wheeler, 2000% provided valua!le input. I

loo'ed !eyond management system standards and technology standards into areas li'econstruction standards $/uigley 7 Oster, 14FF% or mandated standards $8afferty 7 uud, 200E%

to fully inform my results.

( secondary source for identifying ena!lers and !arriers were the actors themselves. I relied

primarily on interviews !ut participant o!servations were ingrained into my thought process.

"illerand and -a'er $2010% discovered in their standards setting process, some of the standards

developers are also users of the standard. )his was also true in the ISO 20121 process as thedevelopers were not solely standards experts !ut were also planners who intend to use the

standard and planners who have already used the -S D401 standard. )hese multi&faceted roles of

these actors increase my confidence that the !arriers and ena!lers identified through interviews

are grounded in reality.


23/66


)his section reports on the !arriers and ena!lers that might impact adoption of ISO 20121.

-arriers and ena!lers can often !e the flip side of the same coin. -oth sources $literature anddata% were inextrica!ly useful to inform the identification of the list. If an ena!le or !arrier was

found in !oth the data and the literature, it is listed in the literature section.

Enablers to (se of ISO 20121

)his section will analy+e a total of nine ena!lers identified in the data and the literature. Some

ena!lers were com!ined into one ena!ler !ecause of their interrelatedness creating eight main

ena!lers. )he complete list of ena!lers includesH

1. conomic !usiness case exists to Bustify sustaina!ility2. #ustomer mandates9. 8egitimi+ation through associations5. Sym!olic value of standardG. Standard lin'ed to identityE. Idea movement to !uild supportF. Spill&over effectD. "ar@uee eventsMcompanies to serve as endorsers4. Ase of a standard !egets further use

na!lers Identified through ata)he data indicated two main ena!lers to the standards. )hese ena!lers are economic Bustification

and customer mandates.

Economic )usti*cation

conomics still pervades the decision ma'ing and thin'ing a!out sustaina!ility. )wo

interviewees spo'e a!out creating an economic !usiness case to Bustify sustaina!ility. One

interview exchange went as followsH

/ : Why do organizations adopt a sustainability strategy? What do you think

drives them?


24/66


A: oney! money! and! number three! money" #eally" $ow having said that %it& is

the senior management's conception of what money means to them"

In an effort to educate the AS )(3 a!out a management system, I arranged for a guest

spea'er to Boin us and spea' a!out her experience. rom the meeting minutes, I wrote the

following recapH

(ven a company like %deleted te)t& which held sustainability as a core value

learned something from the process %of implementing *+ ,-./&" The company

had improvements in its focus on sustainability! articulation of ob0ectives and

measurement of sustainability"

+ustomer Mandates

( second ena!ler identified !y the data is customer mandates. One participant relates this story

a!out how a supplier fell in line when they perceived the importance of the sustaina!ility issue to

the customer.

1At the start of this process when someone who is 2uite high up and well

recognized as an 34 industry leader event sector came up to me at an industry

event" 5e said! 6This standard won7t go anywhere you know" +ustainability is notimportant" $o one cares about it"71Then I was invited to present at 8ondon 9./9

to tell them an update on the standard" And it was all the 8ondon 9./9 team! all

/. or so of them in the room this guy! and this supplier who said it won7t work"

And the 8ondon 9./9 person had picked up the phone to him and invited him to

this presentation" +o he was feeling very special about being in this room as a

potential supplier" And like ten minutes into the presentation on the standard on

sustainability! he put up his hand and said! 6We are totally behind this" We really

believe in it" We will be going for it"7

(nother interviewee pointed out the power of customers? demandsH


25/66


;or e)ample! this is another route! I think! multinational companies that have like

a rule or whatever within the company that they must meet the standard" And

then! that may flow down" +o! you know! for e)ample! in India! it7s probably notreally going to take hold very much" 5owever! if +aab is launching a new brand

of cars across India in a road show of events! and +aab! internationally! is

re2uiring all of their events to be produced in line with I+< 99./! then that7s a

way that that could be instigated into India" +o I think that is a possible route"

Enablers Identi*ed through the "iterature

)he literature indicated seven ena!lers to the standards. )hese ena!lers areH

1. 8egitimi+ation through associations2. Sym!olic value of standard9. Standard lin'ed to identity5. Idea movement to !uild supportG. Spill&over effect8. "ar@uee events serving as role modelsF. Ase of a standard !egets further use

)he idea of sym!olic value and tying identities together are com!ined into the ena!ler of

:perceived value of standard.; )his com!ination resulted in a total of six main ena!lers which

are discussed !elow.

"egitimi,ation through Associations

"attli and -Jthe $2009, p. 19% reference 8oya and -oli?s concept of a complex we! of mutual

legitimation through individual firms, associations and national standards !odies. ortunately,

the ISO names lends legitimacy and maBor trade associations li'e "eeting rofessionals

International, the #onvention Industry #ouncil, 3reen "eeting Industry #ouncil, rofessional#onvention "anagement (ssociation, 8S( $a trade association for organi+ations supplying

technologies and services to the event, entertainment and installation industries%, and (thletes

for a -etter World can lend legitimacy.


26/66


-alue of Standard

)he users must also perceive sym!olic value in the standard. In the context of considering

environmental management $ "%, 8evy $144F, p. 19G% addresses the importance of consumermar'eting and advertising. Ke discerns the need to create the sym!olism of green as a :valua!le

commodity in itself, with which products $and services% can then !e wrapped and pac'aged.; (

sym!olic commodity in the mar'etplace needs to !e constructed as such !y the actors. 8i'ewise

focusing on sustaina!ility within a management system re@uires constituting new sym!olic value

for the practice and the use of the ISO standard.

-runsson and

propensity to follow a particular standard will depend on their identity N that is, who they are N

and on their situation.; )hus, if planners and suppliers tie their identity with the use of ISO

20121, then other actors will also want to !e affiliated with the standard.

elated to the perceived value of ISO 2012, is the idea of champions or thought leaders who

will, !y their own adoption, !uild the perceived value of the standard $*ic'erson 7 "uehlen,

200E%. Kumans have evolved to instinctively copy and mimic the !ehavior of others N especially

those they admire. )his !ehavior is an adaptive strategy that allows humans to minimi+e the cost

of individual trial and error $3ris'evicius, #antU, 7 van ugt, 2012, p. 121%.

Idea Movement to Build Support

*ic'erson and "uehlen?s $200E% concept of idea movement suggest that ISO 20121 adoption

should have a contagion @uality that allows support to !uild. )hey point out that initially

institutions legitimate standards ideas. )hey show that information flows !etween institutions

and also that individuals convey that information !etween organi+ations thus constituting idea

movement. )he ISO development effort is !eing conducted among a miniscule num!er of people

across a small num!er of countries in a fragmented and decentrali+ed industry. )hus, idea

movement will !e critical to allow support to !uild.


27/66


Spill.over E/ect

vents !y the nature include a variety of people. )his increases the challenges of managingsta'eholder engagement and it also increases the opportunity for the spill&over effect. )he

standard will attract actors interested in sustaina!le events. Kowever, it may also favora!ly

influence many other sta'eholders from suppliers, to exhi!itors to participants. -runsson and


28/66


Barriers to (se of ISO 20121

)his section will analy+e a total of eighteen !arriers identified in the data and the literature. )he

complete list of !arriers includesH

1. Industry fad

2. #omplexity of standard

9. ifficulty persuading target audience

5. ear

G. Scale of events

E. xperienced planners must learn new capa!ilities

F. ducation extends !eyond event managementD. )raditional economic models

4. ifficulty evaluating merits

10. #hoice of criteria to determine effectiveness is su!Bective

11. 3reenwashing may occur

12. #redi!ilityMusefulness

19. Industry structure

15. xperienced professional must learn new capa!ilities

1G. ducation extends !eyond event management

1E. 8egacy interests

1F. 8ocal capa!ilities challenge implementation

1D. )raining and education of temporary staff

Barriers Identi*ed through 3ata

rom the coding and analytic wor', seven main !arriers exist related to adoptionH $1% industryfadsC $2% complexityC $9% difficulty persuading the target audienceC $5% fearC $G% scale of eventsC

$E% experienced planners must learn new capa!ilities and $F% education extends !eyond event

management. )he last two !arriers were com!inedH : xperienced planners must learn new


29/66


capa!ilities; and : ducation extends !eyond event management; into one larger !arrier entitled

:)raining and education are challenging.; ive main !arriers are thus identified through the data.

Industry ads

)he first !arrier is industry fads. )he event industry, li'e other industries is prone to the :flavor

of the day; syndrome. In the past, industry pu!lications saturated the industry?s collective ear

with news a!out one :hot topic.; I am concerned that sustaina!ility will have its day !ut then

lose favor to some newer flavor. ISO 20121 has the potential to !ecome a hot topic li'e OI or

"eeting (rchitecture.

+omple'ity

)he second !arrier is complexity. (ll actors spo'e a!out complexity of the standard in one form

or another. One interview involved in the process statedH

The comple)ity" I was involved in kind of dissecting it and going to the

meetings and contributing my input on it during the meetings and I am

still think%ing&"" I look at my events! and I think! 6


30/66


There was backlash %against *+ ,-./&! an initial backlash" I think it was how it

was presented to them"

(nother interviewee statedH

I think the word standard is an obstacle" I had an e mail from somebody today

who7s the supplier to the e)hibition industry on a large scale! internationally! and

he used the word standardization" 5ow is standardization going to impact our

industry? The way he looked at it was that there was going to be like a norm to

which he had to adhere! and that7s not the case"

ear

)he fourth !arrier is fear. In this interview the interviewee uses a metaphor a!out a 'ey and a

door. )he :'ey; is the standard and the :door; is the path toward a more sustaina!le event.

@ou've got to share the key! number one! to many people or invite them! and

you've got to give the key away and show them how to use the key"

If you show them the key! a new door! and people will hesitate and say! why do you want me to get into! the door?"""The concept of going through a new door or

opening up a new window to the people who don't know the other side of the door!

they will want to try to peek into it first! and they try to understand before they go

in" *ecause! oftentimes! the concept of going through a door is that %you& may not

" " " not like it and maybe the door going to close behind you"

Scale of Event

( fifth !arrier is the event?s scale. )his o!stacle denotes the a!ility or ina!ility to use the

standard for all types and si+es of events. One interviewee commentedH


31/66


It 0ust seems like a really complicated process to take on if you are a 0ust a small

event" I saw from previous meeting that this issue came up several times and it

was1It was discounted and I think it is a very valid point"

"alm!org 7 "ar'&Ker!ert $2010% investigated the use of ISO 15001 in small and medium&si+ed

enterprises $S" s%, and especially those in the developing parts of the world. Smaller events,

li'e smaller enterprises outnum!er the large events. et it may !e difficult to engage the planners

with those smaller events.

raining and Education

)he sixth !arrier is the perception that training and education is challenging. )raining needs are

extensive and !road. )raining must occur around the standard, around the su!Bect matter and also

around implementation. (s this interviewee points out having the :recipe; or the standard does

not ensure that you can :coo'.;

eople need to be trained! not only in implementing the standard! but in content!

sub0ect matter! in order to be able to do it" Bust because you7ve got process 0ust

because you7ve got a recipe! someone doesn7t even know what flour is or how to

heat something up doesn7t mean that they7re going to be able to do it" They need

to be shown what the ingredients are and how to put them together"

lanners and suppliers will need to adopt a new set of 'nowledge, organi+ational routines

and processes to implement ISO 20121. )his information is not currently in their domain

of 'nowledge. "any who first implement the standard will not possess sufficient s'ills to

negotiate with suppliers. One interview in descri!ing the recycling of aluminum cansstatedH

+o there7s two levels of performance"


32/66


those things" Did you have %a& staff employee who understands that! for e)ample!

you can arrange for special transportation for certain items to be recycled?

)his interviewee epitomi+ed the challenges asH

We7re talking teaching old dogs new tricks"

)his story, rich in detail underscores three 'ey points. irst, professionally experienced planners

$old dogs% will need to learn new information $new tric's%. Second, see'ing to create a more

sustaina!le event is applying 'nowledge to specific pro!lems. inally, new 'nowledge N !y

experienced and less&experienced planners N is necessary.

(n interviewee underscored the importance of educationH

+o I think my point is! education is so important" @ou7ve got a standard! that7s

all fine! but it7s only a framework" @ou still have to get that detailed

knowledge into the person that7s enacting this ,-./ or I+


33/66


)hese ten !arriers were com!ined into five main !arriers related to adoptionH

1. )raditional economic models prevail

2. System complexity9. Sta'eholder engagement is complex

5. )ransitory nature of events

G. ata collection challenges

raditional Economic Models $revail

)raditional measures of financial performance divert attention away from what organi+ations

re@uire to !e sustaina!le. )his is the first !arrier identified in the research. elying on such

traditional principles prevents organi+ations from responding to the demands for change and

from meeting economic, social and environmental performance $Worley 7 8awler, 2010%.

espite the prominence of sustaina!ility in the press, sustaina!ility may only represent a veneer

under which organi+ations still remain focused on financial performance as their main driver.

System +omple'ity

)he second !arrier, system complexity, represents a !undled !arrier representing three individual

!arriersH

1. ifficulty evaluating merits

2. #hoice of criteria to determine effectiveness is su!Bective

9. 3reenwashing may occur

System complexity may discourage planners and suppliers. Sustaina!ility displays great

complexity. )he merits of ISO 20121 may !e difficult for planners and suppliers to assess as its

use is dependent upon the complex interaction of the attendees, the destination, the venue and

other suppliers. )his very dynamic was displayed in the construction industry where :)he merits

of a particular idea or potential innovation in housing may !e especially hard to evaluate !ecause

the performance of any particular innovation in materials, design, or construction method


34/66


deepens upon a complex interaction with other parts of the structure $/uigley 7 Oster, 14FF, p.

9E2%.

#riteria selection is critical in ISO 20121. ( reoccurring thought of many actors was a concern

a!out the credita!ility and usefulness of the output of the standard. eople voiced the @uestions,

:Will the final product N the event N !e sustaina!le eventV Will the standard !e perceived as

useful at creating a sustaina!le eventV; )his sentiment is captured in the following excerpts from

two emailsH

y final comment here is where is there any demonstrable connection with the

environment? I think my largest ob0ection to this product is the use of the term

CsustainableC! and the inaccurateE inference that this is what you have to do to

achieve that"

*ut what %$ame deleted te)t& noted is very! very important" 5e spoke about the

danger of having the wrong kind of thing accredited as an international standard!

and the implications of that"

)his issue of credi!ility is addressed in the literature a!out other normative standards $(hmad et

al., 2004, p. 1D, 6err et al., 144D%. 6err et al. $144D, p. 2D% ela!orate, :ISO re@uires continuous

improvement !ut does not specify particular environmental performance. In the eyes of many

environmentalists and regulators, the lac' of externally imposed performance standards, !esides

compliance with domestic laws, limits the credita!ility of ISO 15001.;

)he re@uirement of ISO 20121 to set scope and goals as part of the management system does not

negate that greenwashing is a possi!ility. (ctors saw added complexity !ecause of the potential

to greenwash through inappropriate goal setting. or example, users can decide upon the scope

of the standard. )he scope is a decision negotiated internally in adopting the standard and if not

done correctly, the planner and organi+ation could !e greenwashed into thin'ing that they created


35/66


some value in their activity. )he suggestion is event planners can !e greenwashed into thin'ing

they are doing all they can simply !ecause of a lac' of 'nowledge. 8evy $144F% noted how

:values; influence results around sustaina!ility.

Sta&eholder Engagement is +hallenging

Sta'eholder engagement is challenging for a myriad of reasons. Sta'eholder engagement is a

!undle of individual attri!utesH

1. Structural nature of industry

2. 8egacy interests

9. erceptions of vested interests

Structural issues in the "I# industry N hori+ontal and vertical integration N will challenge

adoption $8afferty 7 uud, 200E, p. 5GF%. While some large corporate interests exist within the

events sector $i.e., hotels%, !y far, most of the organi+ations represented on the planning side

represent small enterprises which lac' hori+ontal or vertical integration. )he supplier networ's

represent some large institutional interests $i.e., (ramar'%. Other large corporate interests may

have a niche interest in events $i.e., ed xM6in'os has an events division, some companies focus

on supplying to trade shows and expositions%. ven the hotel industry is comprised of corporate&

owned properties, franchise properties and properties flagged under a certain !rand !ut owned !y

an outside interest, and properties managed through management companies. )he net impact is

an industry lac'ing maBor players across vertical or hori+ontal integration.

It is important to recogni+e the impact of legacy interests. *o matter how desira!le the standard

is, undou!tedly, there will !e sta'eholders who protect existing interests. I experienced thisfirsthand in the development of the (S)" standards. In the process of achieving consensus on

environmentally sustaina!le events, companies with manufacturing interests in carpeting, #

plastics, chemical, etc. all raised their hands when it came time to voice opinions and vote. )he

ultimate standards product was shaped !y their legacy interests. While ISO 20121 does not face


36/66


such development challenges, it would !e na ve to ignore the influence of other sta'eholders.

/uigley and Oster $14FF, p. 9EE% discussed this challenge in the construction industryH

)he development of a new product or process in construction, even if itunam!iguously reduces costs without affecting @uality, will not invaria!le !e

welcomed !y all interested parties...)he response !y organi+ed la!or, presuma!le

interested in local Bo!s rather than profits, may !e less than enthusiastic if the

innovation reduces la!or input re@uires, reduces re@uired s'ill levels or replaces

local la!or with other la!or.

erceptions of economic gain or power struggles may undermine acceptance of the standard.8evy $144F% warns a!out existing power structures affecting environmental standards. In his

case, in his article written in the early 40s, he warns a!out the concentration of power resting

with large capitalistic corporations. While the world has evolved since 144F, the presence of

hegemony or perceived vested interests should not !e completely dismissed.

ransitory 5ature of Events

)he transitory nature of events, an inherent characteristic of many events, is also a !arrier. )his

!arrier consists of two su!&!arriersH

1. 8ocal capa!ilities challenge implementation

2. )raining and education of temporary staff

( part of system complexity and a challenge in sta'eholder management, an ongoing challenge

is that events are dependent upon local capa!ilitiesC this is an inherent attri!ute a!out events. In

the construction industry, /uigley and Oster noted :)he !ewildering variation in local

regulations may very well mean that potentially profita!le innovations are also illegal in many

geographic areas. )his reduces !oth the scale at which an innovation can !e mar'eted and its profita!ility, and may further discourage 7 investment; $/uigley 7 Oster, 14FF, p. 9E9%.

8ocal infrastructure is an issue as planners will confront a da++ling array of differences in

capa!ilities around recycling, composting and other sustaina!le practices. or example, in the

Anited States, plastics recycling capa!ilities vary widely !y Burisdiction. "any plastic containers


37/66


display a resin identification code on the !ottom to indicate what type of plastic the container is

made from. )his code does not mean the container is made from recycled plastic, nor does it

mean the plastic is recycla!le. It only indicates the type of plastic resin used, to help in thesorting of items to !e recycled. arious Burisdictions accept a range of plastics with different

resin codes. ach event will interact with its larger system to define what is possi!le.

"any events are transitory in nature which mandates flexi!le staffing structures. (shford notes,

:especially during the live events the team may suddenly swell and training of systems in place

cannot realistically !e underta'en as these personnel are only part&time volunteers. Often these

volunteers have !een crewing or wor'ing closely with several different festivals over many years

X!ut simply put organi+ing and managing staff in these num!ers for such short instances in time

$four days to several wee's% is challenging; $(shford, 2011%.

3ata +ollection +hallenges

Once goals and metrics are specified, data collection challenges human resource management. In

order to capture data through an event management system, event planners must gain

organi+ational support for time and resources. (shdown who studied the applica!ility of ISO

20121 for music festivals notes, :Kowever, the practicalities of incorporating such an extensivenew system into music festivals are lost due to the unusual human resources situation. "usic

festivals operate with a relatively small core team during the year, which expands dramatically

over the live event with volunteers, and often there is neither the manpower nor the !udget to

implement and maintain an ISO management system. In this sense ISO 20121 is not very well

suited to the sustaina!le production of music festivals regardless of the festival si+e; $(shdown,

2010, p. iv%.

3iscussion

Kumans resist change. #hanging can !e challenging. (n innovation li'e ISO 20121 re@uires a

rethin'ing of current practices. (s such it represents an innovation. (doption of such an


38/66


innovation can !e affected !y various ena!ler and !arriers with these :forces; coming into play

at different times in different situations.

)he identification of !arriers and ena!les allows one to distinguish !etween macro&level, meso&level and micro&level influences . "acro&level influences focus on the institution and systemic

change initiatives. Innovation typically involves !road change and might encompass a wide

range of technologies and practices. "eso&level analysis focuses on social institutions, patterns

of social !ehavior, and aggregated !ehavior of actors. "icro&level theories, on the other hand,

focus on the individual adopters and a specific innovation or product rather than on large&scale

change.

-y considering these influences, the "I# industry has the opportunity to proactively respond to

ensure successful adoption of ISO 20121. )a!le 9 ties the !arrierMena!ler as macro&, meso&, or

micro&level influence. )his ta!le indicates that any adoption strategy must wor' on multiple

levels.

Table (. Enablers and )arriers *in+ed

Enabler/)arrier "nfluen!e *evel1. conomic !usiness case exists to Bustify sustaina!ility "acro&level

2. #ustomer mandates "eso&level

9. 8egitimi+ation through associations "acro&level

5. Sym!olic value of standard "eso&level

G. Standard lin'ed to identity "icro&level

E. Idea movement to !uild support "eso&level

F. Spill&over effect "eso&level

D. "ar@uee eventsMcompanies to serve as endorsers "eso&level

4. Ase of a standard !egets further use "eso&level

10. Industry fad &acro *level

11. #omplexity of standard &eso *level


39/66


12. ifficulty persuading target audience &eso *level

19. ear &icro *level

15. Scale of events &eso *level

1G. xperienced planners must learn new capa!ilities &icro *level

1E. ducation extends !eyond event management &icro *level

1F. )raditional economic models &acro *level

1D. ifficulty evaluating merits &eso *level

14. #hoice of criteria to determine effectiveness is su!Bective &eso *level

20. 3reenwashing may occur &eso *level

21. #redi!ilityMusefulness &eso *level

22. Industry structure &eso *level

29. xperienced professionals must learn new capa!ilities &icro *level25. ducation extends !eyond event management &icro *level

2G. 8egacy interests &icro *level

2E. 8ocal capa!ilities challenge implementation &icro *level

2F. )raining and education of temporary staff &icro *level

Kaving assem!led this list of !arriers and ena!lers, I created larger constructs to view them more

systematically. )he ena!lers and !arriers fall under larger constructs as indicated in )a!le 5.

Some overlap exists !etween a specific ena!lerM!arrier and the larger construct. or example, it

was challenging to classify : ducation extends !eyond event management; as part of Systems thin'ing

or part of :8ac' of s'ills and 'nowledge.; Altimately, I classified it as :system thin'ing; !ecause the

!arrier represents a !roader view of s'ills and competencies. )o some extent the need for education on

issues of supply chain management could !e covered under the !arrier of : xperienced planners must

learn new capa!ilities.;

Table ,. -er!eived Enablers and )arriers as *arger %onstru!ts


40/66


ll -er!eived Enablers*arger %onstru!t Enabler

Sustaina!ility as a norm 1. conomic !usiness case exists to Bustify

sustaina!ility2. Idea movement to !uild support9. Sym!olic value of standard5. 8egitimi+ation through associationsG. #ustomer mandatesE. Ase of a standard !egets additional use

Strong modeling F. Standard lin'ed to identityD. Spill&over effect4. "ar@uee events serve as endorsers

ll -er!eived )arriers*arger %onstru!t )arrier

Systems )hin'ing 1. #omplexity of standard2. #redi!ilityMusefulness9. 8ocal capa!ilities challenge implementation5. ducation extends !eyond event management

#hange "anagement G. Industry fadE. ifficulty persuading target audienceF. ear D. erceptions of vested interested4. Industry Structure10. 8egacy interests

8ac' of s'ills and

'nowledge

11. xperienced planners must learn new capa!ilities

12. )raining and education of temporary staff#ontextual alue 19. Scale of events

15. ifficulty evaluating merits1G. 3reenwashing may occur 1E. #hoice of criteria to determine effectiveness is

su!Bectiveerceived -enefits 1F. )raditional economic !usiness models

1D. ata collection is time consuming and expensive

inally, I theori+ed a!out three contextual influences affecting adoption. )hese three factors are

whole&systems thin'ing, heterogeneous actors, and values. )hese contextual factors influence

and interrelate with the process similar to the precipitating, sensiti+ing factors introduced !y

8angley and )raux $1444%. )hese contextual factors interrelate to each !arrier and ena!ler as

shown !elow in )a!le G.


41/66


Table . %ontextual 0e!tors%ontextual 0a!tors Tied to )arrier/Enables

Whole&Systems )hin'ing

• Systems )hin'ing

• #hange "anagement

• #ontextual alue

• erceived -enefits

Keterogeneous (ctors• Strong modeling

• 8ac' of s'ills and 'nowledge

alues• Sustaina!ility as a norm

• Strong modeling

• #hange "anagement

• #ontextual alue

• erceived -enefits

)hese contextual factors can influence the process either negatively or positively depending on

how they manifest themselves. or example, an organi+ation with a strong culture and strong

values oriented toward sustaina!ility is more li'ely to adopt sustaina!ility as a norm. (n

organi+ation with values supporting change will !e a!le to underta'e the implementation of ISO

20121 in an easier fashion than a different organi+ation without those same values.

rofessionals must adopt whole systems thin'ing when adapting ISO 20121. In doing so, they

will view the event as a dynamic and complex piece situated within a larger environment.

lanners must sort through a myriad of complex issues to arrive at the decision to adopt ISO

2012. )hey will assess whether the event they are considering is appropriate, what are the

switching costs, what resources are necessary, and within the context of all these decisions what

are the incentives $tangi!le and intangi!le% to use the standard. )he tangi!le incentives may


42/66


include expected savings. )he intangi!le !enefits may include peer support and reputation value.

8i'ewise, suppliers who will use ISO 20121 must also assess the :pay!ac'; for their investment.

(s the planning industry is highly fragmented $many small firms%, it may !e especially hard forsuppliers to Budge the potential of an innovation $/uigley 7 Oster, 14FF, p. 9E2%. Suppliers must

also Budge whether they feel their customer !ase will re@uest or demand products and services

supportive of sustaina!ility. Suppliers must also ascertain how they will receive and filter

demand. Whole&systems thin'ers perceive !oundaries as semi&permea!le allowing 'nowledge

and resources to flow easily. 3iven the complexity of sustaina!ility and the fluidity of supporting

products and services, users of ISO 20121 must not see' static solutions.

)hese !arriers and ena!lers, larger constructs and contextual factors ta'en together suggest thatadoption will !e furthered !y institutional changes, changes in norms and individual changes.

Implications

rom the research and results, several important implications can !e drawn to !enefit the

industry, relevant associations, volunteer leadership and !usinesses. I will descri!e eleven

implications in this section. )hese implications areH

1. -uild sustaina!ility as a norm2. 8egitimi+e ISO 201219. rovide tools to identify cost savings5. ortray ISO 20121 as approacha!leG. See' volunteers with appropriate s'ill setE. rovide educationF. Woo suppliersD. romote transparency and easy access4. Invite discussion, discourse and de!ate

10. 8everage social media11. etermine where demand can function as a driver


43/66


Build sustainability as a norm

"c-ride identifies that cultural effects are also of significant importance, :#ulture will influence

resistance to technology, while in other cultures, the spread of mo!ile usage may !e promoted !ya senses of community of community ownership of the technology; $"c-ride, 2009%.

Sustaina!ility must !ecome em!edded into the industry and into the culture of individual

companies in order to ensure adoption of ISO 20121.Sustaina!le event planning will need to

!ecome em!edded in the industry. )ying a users? professional identity to the standard may help

accomplish the first wave of adoption. Kowever, sustained adoption will re@uire commonplace

use of the standard Bust as common as people desiring to earn their #ertified "eeting

rofessional designation. )his is an exemplar of a non&human actor in the system structurali+ed

into a norm.

Suppliers and planners must !ecome adept at using their power !ase to create organi+ation

change. -uilding an organi+ational culture of sustaina!ility re@uires an understanding of the

needs and wants of the organi+ation?s sta'eholders. #reating this awareness re@uires

identification of and interaction with these sta'eholders. )o attempt to create a sustaina!ility

culture in a vacuum will li'ely not succeed. Such awareness must also !e maintained over time

in order to increase the li'elihood of an enduring culture. Kowever, !ecause of the !road array of

sta'eholders, the organi+ation should allocate sufficient resources, including time, to the process

of creating this awareness.

"egitimi,e ISO 20121

eali+ing legitimacy through the industry organi+ations and outside originations will enhance the

adoption of IOS 20121. industry associations will serve as a foundation for legitimi+ation and

endorsement $-runsson 7


44/66


utili+e the standard upon release $"eeting rofessionals International%. "irror committees

should leverage #at ( 8iaisons and other association relationships to help create legitimacy.

xternal to the "I# industry, the ISO organi+ation is perceived !y many sta'eholders to !e an

institution serving as a source of legitimacy and carrying weight $-runsson 7 isitors to events are e)pecting it"

The 9./9


45/66


complex !ecause implementation mandates change management procedures. Kowever, the

philosophy around a management system is simple. urthermore, the language of standards can

!e off&putting. )he voca!ulary and structure of a standard is speciali+ed. fforts to simplify theidea of standards, the idea of adoption, and the reading and use of the standard will enhance

adopta!ility.

See& volunteers #ith appropriate s&ill set

active participation of actors is important to guide the ongoing discussion and create value for

the standard. )he role of the actors will !e multi&faceted N as standards developers, potential

users and promoters of the standards. One of the interviewees saw their role as an am!assador

!ut then amended it to faith promoter.

Q: What do you envision your role will be related to gaining industry acceptance

of the standards?

A: Ambassador" I don't want to be ambassador" $o" I see my role of being the! a

faith promoter as opposed to devil's advocate" I believe in it1"I'm not going to

preach" $obody likes to preach or listen to a preacher talking to you! you know!

unless you feel that you have a sin" +o I see my role being a faith promoter"

olicy entrepreneurs are actors who see' to initiate dynamic policy change through pro!lem

identification, networ'ing in policy circles shaping the terms of policy de!ates and !uilding

coalitions $"introm, 144F, p. F94%. "introm?s focus is on the understudied area of how ideas for

innovation gain prominence on government agendas. While he focuses on the nature of the

policy&ma'ing process, his ideas contain relevance for standard developers who upon completion

of the standard must turn their attention to developing strategies for presenting ISO 20121 to

others. Ke defines policy innovation as :a policy that is new to the state adopting it; $"introm,

144F, p. F51%. )he idea of the "irror #ommittees turning into champions or entrepreneurs of a

new policy is very appropriate to the next stage of our roles.


46/66


Ongoing, fresh talent will prove important in the adoption. In an effort mar'ed !y volunteer

involvement, it is unrealistic to expect the same people will continue to expend time and energy

toward the adoption of ISO 20121. One of the interviewees who is active in hisMher countryefforts statedH

Well at the moment! I will carry on chairing until it comes to pass it along to

someone else"

(nother interviewee mentioned the importance of rotating people in for a new perspective. )his

interviewee statedH

*ut I think in reality any chair of an I+< should not have every chaired an I+<

before"


47/66


It was a huge task to generate interest" eople did not understand the topic and

then it was difficult to engage them"

ducation to educe erceived #omplexity

(s complexity was surfaced from many sources, education must focus on reduce the perceived

complexity. )hese materials are not geared toward helping the users implement the standard, !ut

instead are positioned to allow them to see how easily the standard can !e implemented. )hese

tools will engage them in sensema'ing so they can realistically assess their switching costs,

assess the appropriateness of their event and allow them to identify incentives or savings to

participate. Sensema'ing involves the ongoing rationali+ation of what people are doing. xplicit

efforts at sensema'ing tend to occur when the current state of the world is perceived to !e

different from the expected state of the world, or when there is no o!vious way to engage the

world $Weic', Sutcliffe, 7 O!stfeld, 200G%. ducation must also create the aura of support from

the supplier community. One of the interviewees argued for clear and simple education and

materialsH

+mall booklets lifted from the standard that states step one! step two! step three"

ducation to -uild a -usiness #aseducational materials to support adoption will includeH $a% organi+ationalM eventMsupplier !enefit

statements, $!% integration of sustaina!le planning into existing processes and $c% identification

of resources.

ducation on "etrics and ata #ollection

ducation must also focus on metrics. ISO 20121 does not directly address data collectionC the

nature of a management system directs planners to esta!lish goals and collect data, yet is not

specific a!out what is re@uired. )his is a dou!le&edge sword for !uilding a!sorptive capacity.

rom one perspective the organi+ation can self&determine the :correct; metric and methodology.

On the other hand, the standard lac's guidance a!out what are appropriate measures.

"easurement seems li'e a simple su!Bect, on the surface at leastC indeed, all measurements can

!e reduced to Bust two componentsH num!er and unit. et, what goals are appropriateV What 6ey


48/66


erformance Indicators $6 Is% are relevantV Sustaina!ility reflects aspects of e@uafinalityC many

paths might lead to a more sustaina!le event. "easurement paradigms while prescriptive are

!eneficial to the !uilding a!sorptive capacity. )hese measurement paradigms provide directionand !aseline information to create certain standards for performance measurement specified in

the management system. or example, when #alifornia State Aniversity in #hico implemented

-S D401, :the students used "eet3reen chec'listsX)he students used these chec'list to

communicate with each sta'eholder in order to identity their level of sustaina!ility, to determine

if they met the re@uirements for sustaina!le practices related to waste, energy, community

involvement, economic impact and car!on emissions related to accommodations, venue, food

and !everage, transportation, mar'eting and communication, exhi!ition, the destination and on&

site office procedures; $Oviedo, 2004%. )hey did this !ecause :implementation does not

guarantee a 100Y sustaina!le event, the chec'lists esta!lish !aselines and framewor' to wor'

toward a higher level of sustaina!ility in the future, as -S D401 standard re@uires a lan, o, (ct

and #hec' management cycle for continue improvement; $Oviedo, 2004%. (shdown recogni+es

this missing ingred

Documents

Barriers and Enablers to Adoption of ISO 20121