Improving the design and implementation of environmental training programmes

Eco-Management and AuditingEco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)

IMPROVING THE DESIGN ANDIMPLEMENTATION OFENVIRONMENTAL TRAININGPROGRAMMES

Laurinda Shaw1, Peter Dingle2 and David Annandale2*

1Wesfarmers CSBP, Australia2School of Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Australia

In recent years industry has receivedincreasing attention regarding its impact onthe environment. It continues to facemounting pressure from society and thegovernment to improve environmentalperformance. A survey and interviews ofAustralian organizations revealed thatmethods to improve this performance havetended to focus on operations and processeswith less attention being directed toemployees, the corporate culture andmanagement strategies. Environmentaltraining was in its infancy and lackedessential features that acted to prevent thistool from reaching its full potential. Cultureand management strategies can be modifiedto promote sustainable practices bydeveloping an environmental trainingprogramme that can harness theorganizations’ and employees’ ability to actin an environmentally responsible manner.Through developing beyond a session onlyapproach to support environmentalinitiatives through open communication,employee involvement, incentives and teamsan environmental learning organization candevelop. The opinions and perceptions of

CCC 0968-9427/99/030140–08 $17.50Copyright ? 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

environmental training gained from thoseinterviewed revealed support and interest forenvironmental training with sound ideas ofimportant characteristics, yet this was oftennot translated into action. Copyright ?1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERPEnvironment.

Accepted 17 March 1999

INTRODUCTION

T he movement towards environmental‘self-regulation’, where organizations aretaking a proactive approach to environ-

mental issues rather simply responding to thedemands of regulators, has developed consider-able momentum in recent years (Welford, 1995).There are different definitions of the concept ofenvironmental self-regulation, but most commen-tators would agree that it includes activities suchas the development of company-wide environ-mental policy, corporate environmental reporting,and the introduction of environmental manage-ment systems (EMSs).

In the literature surrounding this new develop-ment, little has been said about the role oftraining. This article attempts to address thisproblem by analysing the training activities of asample of Australian companies, all in the processof implementing EMSs. The paper begins byexamining the supposed benefits of environ-mental training, pointing to its influence on cor-porate culture and organizational learning. It then

*Correspondence to: David Annandale, School of EnvironmentalScience, Murdoch University, South Street, Murdoch, WesternAustralia 6150, Australia.

ENVIRONMENTAL TRAINING PROGRAMMES

presents a simple model for evaluating environ-mental training, and compares the responses of 49interviewed firms against this model. The articleconcludes by making a number of suggestions asto how firms might improve the way they designand implement environmental training activities.

Benefits of Environmental Training

The benefits of environmental training are welldocumented. They include accessing the ideas andknowledge of employees for improved productsand process (Filipczak, 1992; Baldwin, 1992),developing a commitment to concepts such asEMS (Wells, 1997) and encouraging openness anddialogue between management and employees.Other commentators have suggested that en-vironmental training programmes can assist inthe development of an ‘environmental culture’(Vaitilingham, 1993; Bennett et al., 1993;Wehrmeyer and Parker, 1996). This occursthrough the gradual development of environ-mental awareness and skills which, in turn, createsa culture of environmental learning (Barrett andMurphy, 1996). These potential benefits point tothe importance of properly designed environ-

Copyright ? 1999 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

mental training. This conclusion begs the questionof how a ‘good’ training programme might bedesigned.

Evaluating Training Programmes

This research used a simple model to evaluate theenvironmental training programmes of a sampleof Australian firms. Figure 1 presents the idea of a‘training cycle’. This is a simple, ideal – typical,linear model which suggests that training shouldfollow a cycle from needs analysis, through for-mulation of objectives and content, to planning,conducting the training and evaluating it.

Research Design

This research involved the presentation of aquestionnaire to 49 firms in the city of Perth,Australia. Companies were chosen specificallybecause they either had an EMS in place, or werein the process of developing one. The rationalebehind this decision was that these firms weremore likely to be interested in environ-mental initiatives, and possibly some form ofenvironmental training.

Figure 1. A training-cycle evaluative model. (Adapted from Wehrmeyer and Parker, 1996; Laffan and Bromhead, 1996; Buckleyand Caple, 1995.)

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)

141

L. SHAW ET AL.

A questionnaire was formulated to act as aguide for interviews. The questionnaire had foursections: the first asked for general informationon the company; the second section focused onenvironmental management followed by adetailed section on environmental training andthe final section contained questions related tolearning within the organization. The question-naire consisted of both open-ended and closedquestions.

The questionnaire was pre-tested with a smallsample of business managers and then modified.Interviews usually lasted for approximately onehour followed by a site tour with other infor-mation such as a copy of the environmentalpolicy, newsletter or environmental training out-line being provided. Additional information wasalso gained through follow-up conversations.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Type of Training Conducted by InterviewedFirms

All of the interviewed firms study had some kindof training programme in place with all conduct-ing safety training.

All firms also believed that environmentaltraining was important with 98% agreeing that allstaff should receive some variant of it. However,only 61% of firms actually undertook environ-mental training. Although the need for environ-mental training was recognized and it wasacknowledged as being important, 39% of theinterviewed companies had not yet converted thisconcern into actual training programmes.


142

The two main types of environmental trainingundertaken by firms are awareness and skillstraining. Environmental awareness training aimsto provide participants with the perceptions,attitude and behaviour to act in an environ-mentally responsible manner. Its content can ofteninclude informing people about current environ-mental issues at a global, state, local or workplacelevel. Environmental skills training aims to equipemployees with specific skills to complete theirjobs in an environmentally responsible manner.

This study found that 44.9% of organizationsconducted environmental awareness training(Figure 2).

By contrast, over 85% of organizations con-ducted environmental skills training. This may bedue to the fact that some environmental skills arealso safety skills and may be taught throughsafety training programmes. For example, the useof a spills kit and the proper handling of chemicalscan simultaneously be an important safety as wellas an environmental skill. Skills training may alsobe perceived as being more relevant to theworkers and therefore of more benefit thangeneral awareness training.

Training Needs Analysis

The first step in the training cycle modelintroduced earlier is training needs analysis. In thisstudy 66% of organizations conducted a trainingneeds analysis, and only 27.7% determinedemployees’ knowledge and attitudes on environ-mental issues before conducting training. Atraining needs analysis provides a useful under-standing of the gap between the workforce’s

Figure 2. Type of environmental training in place.

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)


existing awareness, skills and knowledge and thatwhich is required to improve environmental per-formance (Lamond and Watt, 1995). Even whentraining needs appear obvious, it is still necessaryto analyse the specific knowledge and skillsrequired in order to choose the most appropriatemethods that will meet the needs (Bartram andGibson, 1994).

Firms may be reluctant to undertake trainingneeds analysis as they may assume they alreadyknow what is needed, the level of knowledge thatexists and the best way to deliver the training.One of the survey questions asked about currentmethods used to analyse training needs. Table 1indicates that the main methods used werereviewing employees job descriptions and roles,


and analysing the firm’s environmental impactsand aspects.

Of the techniques firms used to analyse train-ing needs, the majority were appropriate foridentifying skill needs, but not awareness trainingrequirements. A survey to test employees’ exist-ing knowledge, attitudes and awareness of theenvironment is the best method to identify a gapand should be undertaken to identify the need forenvironmental awareness training.

Conducting training needs analysis can alsoassist in fulfilling some of the characteristics ofgood environmental training outlined by organiz-ations, including making the sessions relevant andinformative (see Table 2). Organizations in thisstudy also indicated that lack of effective prep-aration and co-ordination, as well as aiming train-ing at the right level, were environmental trainingproblems (Table 3). These problems could also beresolved by conducting a formal and thoroughanalysis of training needs.

Formulating Objectives and Content

The next stage of the training cycle involvesformulating the objectives and content of thetraining. The majority of organizations (79%) hadaims and objectives for their environmental train-ing sessions. Aims and objectives should beconcise and quantifiable. This gives the pro-gramme clear direction and describes the perform-ance desired of participants at the end of the

Table 1. Method used to analyse training needs.

Method of training needs analysis Total %

Review job descriptions & role 9 22.5Review environmental impacts & aspects 7 17.5Review employee performance reviews 5 12.5Observation, talking to employees 4 10.0Review environmental incidents & accidents 3 7.5Review past training 3 7.5Analyse training evaluation sheets 3 7.5Review annual employee survey 2 5.0Future business activities and needs 2 5.0Other 1 2.5Annual internal audit 1 2.5

Table 2. Characteristics of good environmental training.

Characteristics of good environmental training Total %

Increases awareness of the environment & employees role & responsibilities 18 22.5Employees made aware of their environmental impacts 10 12.5Involves participants during the session 8 10Leads to behaviour change 7 8.8Training is relevant for the audience 7 8.8Training is informative 6 7.5Motivates participants 6 7.5Provides knowledge to act environmentally responsibly 6 7.5Prevents accidents 4 5Form of regular information & communication 3 3.8Spreads company’s environmental message 3 3.8Develops understanding of the company’s global environmental interactions 1 1.2Gains feedback from participants 1 1.2

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)

143

L. SHAW ET AL.

session. The aims and objectives also act as aguide for accurate evaluation. This allows foroutcomes from training to be observed and moni-tored, and it can then be determined whethercourse objectives have been met. Nearly 90% ofinterviewed firms had a vision statement thatprovided an indication of the organization’s futureaims and direction.

Planning Training

Determining logistical matters such as venue,costs, training provider and method of training isconsidered in the planning stage. This may


144

involve a review of company resources and theresults of the training needs analysis. Some ofthe problems identified by organizations in thisstudy, such as limited training budget, availabilityof staff and timing difficulties, can be reduced oreliminated through effective planning (see Table3). These problems may be indicative of lack ofupper management support for environmentaltraining.

Organizations in this study also describedtraining as being too ad hoc. This problem can bereduced via consideration of the structure oftraining at this planning stage. Modules havebeen described as one of the best ways tostructure an environmental training programme(Cook and Seith, 1992; Crognale, 1997; Brown,1997). This approach can reduce the problem ofoverlapping training and can give the trainingprogramme direction.

Numerous methods exist to communicate mes-sages for environmental training including videos,computers, games and tours. Firms in this studytended to rely on the classroom method oftraining (Figure 3), which may be explained byits simplicity and cost effectiveness. (Sizemore-House, 1996). Yet to meet some of the character-istics of good environmental training described bythe companies, such as involving and motivatingparticipants and sustaining interest, companiesmay have to become more creative with methodof training delivery.

Planning the Integration of Training

To assist in developing training beyond a‘session-only’ approach, planning needs to take

Figure 3. Training formats used.

Table 3. Problems with environmental training.

Problems with environmental training Total %

Availability of staff, timing difficulties 12 17.4Sustaining interest of participants 7 10.1Budget 6 8.7Training too ad hoc 4 5.8Training contractors 4 5.8Apathy of upper management 4 5.8Presenting the training 4 5.8None really 4 5.8Effective preparation 3 4.3Justifying the need for it to staff 3 4.3Feedback and evaluation 3 4.3Availability of up to date material 3 4.3Industry specific/knowledgeable presenters 3 4.3Finding the resources to do the training 2 2.9Training and information overload 2 2.9Maintaining effective training records 2 2.9Training for staff that don’t speak English 1 1.4

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)


place to ensure that the environment becomesintegrated into the firm’s culture and that thefeatures of a learning organization are developed.An environmental training programme must haveelements that act to maintain impetus after thesession and continue to involve employees. Theseinclude

(i) performance charts in the workplace,(ii) action and praise by management,(iii) refresher courses,(iv) posters,(v) incentives and(vi) newsletters to keep employees informed of

achievements, progress and problems

(Commonwealth of Australia, 1994; Laffan andBromhead, 1996).

Including such features can assist in developingan effective environmental training programmewith the characteristics outlined by organizationsin Table 2.

Refresher courses can act to provide anopportunity to communicate new knowledgeand prove to the workforce that the company isserious about environmental training. Advan-tages of conducting environmental trainingrefresher courses include sustaining motivationand maintaining a high level of environmentalawareness.

Incentives and rewards can involve linking payto environmental performance and accounting forthis in performance appraisals (Milliman and Clair,1996). Whilst it is recognized that other factorsmay affect motivation, rewards and incentives areoften seen as critical factors (Gouillart and Kelly,1995).

The majority (88%) of organizations in thisstudy agreed that they encourage employees toextend their learning and 94% had individualdevelopment plans to address employees’ trainingneeds and future career path. By promoting indi-vidual learning, the organization shows that itrecognizes an individual’s responsibility for his/her own personal and professional development(Gouillart and Kelly, 1995).

The majority of organizations reviewed anemployee’s job description in determining theirtraining and learning needs. Hence, employeeswere trained within the confines of their jobresponsibilities and roles. Some organizations alsoreviewed an employee’s past training and per-


formance reviews, which are usually conductedannually.

Just over 40% of organizations had a teamstructure, communicated the environmental policyand achievements and problems, had a visionstatement and encouraged employees to learn.These characteristics are essential for creating asupportive training programme and the inte-gration of the environment into the corporateculture.

Training Evaluation

Evaluation of training is one of the mostneglected areas of the training cycle. Of thosecompanies with environmental training, 63.2% ofcompanies conducted some sort of evaluation.From this group, companies indicated that theywere more likely to evaluate environmental skillstraining than environmental awareness training.This difference may be explained by the fact thatit is technically easier to evaluate a skill that canbe demonstrated and observed, such as the use ofa spills kit, than to evaluate a change or improve-ment in attitude towards the environment. How-ever, both types of training should and can beevaluated. The neglect of evaluation is evident inother studies. A survey of evaluation techniquesin 1970 that was repeated in 1980 showedlittle difference, both finding that evaluation wasinadequate (Hussey, 1988). Similarly, the journalTraining’s industry report for 1994 showed thatthe majority of organizations evaluate trainingthrough the post-questionnaire method whichmost often simply assesses whether the partici-pants enjoyed the session (Gerber, 1995). Thisstudy also found that companies relied on thismethod to determine training’s effectiveness with80% using the post-questionnaire.

Despite the low levels of effective trainingevaluation, especially for awareness training,organizations did not note this as a problem andonly a small number of companies described it asbeing an important characteristic of good training(see Table 2). Organizations may not recognizethe need for and benefits of training or simplyassume that the training being conducted is effec-tive. Just over 60% of organizations in this studydescribed environmental training at their organiz-ation as effective. However, of those organiz-ations that described their environmental training

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)

145

L. SHAW ET AL.

as effective, the majority (66%) only used apost-questionnaire as the evaluation method todetermine this. Over 10% (13.8%) of organiz-ations agreed that the environmental training waseffective yet conducted no evaluation.

Nearly 80% of companies believed thatenvironmental training would increase in thefuture. Similarly, research involving interviewswith industry in England found that companiesfrequently stated that they believed environ-mental training would increase in the future(Mathrani, 1987).

Conclusion

The results of this research showed that thecharacteristics of a systematic training cycle werelacking in many organizations, with low levels oftraining evaluation and training needs analysis,and a reliance on one method of training.

Existing environmental training tended tofocus on skills improvement and was not sup-ported by necessary structural, communicationand motivational features. However, therewas recognition of environmental training’simportance and it was expected to increase in thefuture.

To be successful environmental training mustcontain certain features to develop beyond a‘one-off’ approach. It needs to include aims andobjectives, incentives and rewards, opportunitiesfor learning, team structures, creative deliveryand evaluation. Environmental training whichincludes these important features can signifi-cantly assist in improving a firm’s environmentalperformance.

REFERENCES

Baldwin, D.A. (1992) Safety and Environmental Training:Using Compliance to Improve Your Company, Van NostrandReinhold, New York.

Barrett, S. and Murphy, D. (1996) Managing corporateenvironmental policy: a process of complex change, in:Wehrmeyer, W (ed.), Greening People: Human Resourcesand Environmental Management, Greenleaf, Sheffield,pp 75–98.

Bartram, S. and Gibson, B. (1994) Training Needs Analysis: aResource for Analysing Training Needs, Selecting TrainingStrategies and Developing Plans, Gower, Aldershot,England.


146

Bennett, S., Freierman, R. and George, S. (1993) CorporateRealities and Environmental Truths, Wiley, New York.

Brown, G. (1997) Environmental Management SystemsGuidebook, Centre for Professional Development,Victoria.

Buckley, R. and Caple, J. (1995) The Theory and Practice ofTraining, Kogan Page, London.

Commonwealth of Australia. (1994) Energy ManagementAdvisory Booklet: Involving Employees in Energy ManagementPrograms, Australian Government Publishing Service,Canberra.

Cook, J. and Seith, B. (1992) Designing an effective environ-mental training program, Journal of EnvironmentalRegulation, 2, (1), 53–62.

Crognale, G. (1997) Training – preparations for maintain-ing effective environmental management systems, in:Sheldon, C. (ed.), ISO14000 and Beyond EnvironmentalManagement Systems in the Real World, Greenleaf,Sheffield, pp 196–215.

Filipczac, B. (1992) Toxic training, Training, 29, 53–56.Gerber, B. (1995) Does training make a difference? Prove it!,

Training, March, 27–34.Gouillart, F. and Kelly, J. (1995) Transforming the Organ-

isation: Reframing Corporate Direction, Restructuring theCompany Revitalizing the Enterprise Renewing the People,McGraw-Hill, New York.

Hussey, D. (1988) Management Training and CorporateStrategy: How to Improve Competitive Performance,Pergamon, Oxford.

Laffan, J. and Bromhead, A. (1996) The Definitive Guide toEnvironmental Training, Thorpe Publishers Ltd, London.

Lamond, T. and Watt, R. (1995) Environmental Managementand Audit Manual, CCH Australia and AustralianChamber of Commerce and Industry.

Mathrani, S. (1987) Environmental Education and Training inIndustry, Council for Environmental Education.

Milliman, J. and Clair, J. (1996) Best practice HRM practicesin the US, in: Wehrmeyer, W (ed.), Greening People HumanResources and Environmental Management, Greenleaf,Sheffield, pp 49–74.

Palmroth, B. 1992. Refresher programs pay off. AmericanSalesman, 37, (10), pp 3-5.

Ramsey, J., Hungerford, H. and Volk, T. (1992) Environ-mental education in the K-12 Curriculum: finding a niche,Journal of Environmental Education, 23, (2), 35–45.

Reimann, C. and Sharratt, P. (1995) Survey of industrialexperiences with environmental management, in:Sharratt, P. (ed.), Environmental Management Systems,Institute of Chemical Engineers, pp 67–81.

Sizemore-House, R. (1996) Classroom instruction, in: Craig,R.L. (ed.), The ASTD Training & Development Handbook: aGuide to Human Resource Development, McGraw-Hill, NewYork, pp 437–452.

Vaitilingham, R. (1993) Introduction, in: Vaitilingham, R.(ed.), Industrial Initiatives for Environmental Management,Financial Times Pitman, pp 1–13.

Wehrmeyer, W. and Parker, K. (1996) Identification andrelevance of environmental corporate cultures as part of acoherent environmental policy, in: Wehrmeyer, W. (ed.),Greening People: Human Resources and EnvironmentalManagement, Greenleaf, Sheffield, pp 163–184.

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)


Welford, R. (1995) Environmental Strategy and SustainableDevelopment: the Corporate Challenge for the 21st Century,Routledge, London.

Wells, A. (1997) Training and Environmental ManagementSystems, in: Sheldon, C. (ed.), ISO14000 and Beyond:Environmental Management Systems in the Real World,Greenleaf Publishing, Sheffield, England.

BIOGRAPHYLaurinda ShawEnvironmental Officer, Wesfarmers CSBP, POBox 345, Kwinana, Western Australia 6167,Australia.Tel.: +61 8 94118821.Fax: +61 8 94118233.


Peter DingleSchool of Environmental Science, Murdoch Uni-versity, South Street, Perth, Western Australia6150, Australia.Tel.: +61 8 93602569.Fax: +61 8 93104997.

David AnnandaleSchool of Environmental Science, Murdoch Uni-versity, South Street, Perth, Western Australia6150, Australia.Tel.: +61 8 93606081.Fax: +61 8 93606787.

Eco-Mgmt. Aud. 6, 140–147 (1999)

147

Documents

Improving the design and implementation of environmental training programmes