**Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The** *Wide Symbiosis* **Strategy**

Francesco Fusco Girard *Seconda Università Degli Studi di Napoli Italy*

#### **1. Introduction**

Sustainable Development – 366 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

Thoresen, J. (1999). Environmental Performance Evaluation - Tool for Industrial and

Verfaillie, H.; Bidwell, R. (2000). *Measuring Eco-efficiency: a guide to reporting company* 

ISSN 0959-6526

Improvement. *Journal of Cleaner Production*, Vol.7, No.5, (October 1999), pp. 365-370,

*performance*, World Business Council for Sustainable Development, Retrieved from <http://www.wbcsd.org/web/publications/measuring\_eco\_efficiency.pdf>

> **The main objective** of this paper is proposing a theoretical and innovative approach for companies' sustainable strategy development from the *private* point of view and according to a best-practices approach focused on very new market trends.

> Nowadays the scientific community widely accept that one of the main pillars for sustainable development effective implementation is the "closed loop economy" objective: energy and material processes shifting from linear (open loop) systems - in which resources move through the economic system to become waste - to a closed loop system where wastes are inputs for new processes.

> Starting from the above statement, the key thesis of this paper is that "closed loop economy" approach and concept can be successfully extended from material and energy flows to nonmaterial flows, shifting all the relationships which involve the companies (B2B-Business to Business; B2C-Business to Consumers; B2I-Business to Institution as well as Companies internal relationship) from a type I (linear / hierarchical / one-way relationship) towards a type III - symbioses (cyclic relationships with internal loops and feedbacks). When this symbiosis approach involves simultaneously all the relationships (B2B, B2C, ..) we will name it "wide symbiosis". We will see as this systemic approach can support in sustainable development implementation that is achieving economic, environmental and human/social goals (Fusco Girard, 2009).

> In relation with the above aim, in the **second paragraph** we will briefly describe the most important **business trends expected for next years** focusing on the actual global economic crisis. **Then (par. 3)** we will point out **what sustainable company management is** and **how** it can support companies for next years challenges. After that (par. 4) the **sustainability vision is declined** in some **more concrete sustainability strategic objectives**. The next **paragraphs are focused on describing B2B, B2C, B2I and companies internal relationships** aiming at **analyzing how they can contribute to the loop economy promotion achieving the sustainability strategic objectives** as they have been previously described.

> The final part of the paper is focused on analyzing **decision making processes** and **evaluation tools** to effectively implement loop economy choices. Indeed, conclusions highlight the **primary role of cultural values** to promote the *Wide Symbioses* relationships.

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 369

extension of the efficiency concept to all the above forms of capital, involving (see also

 Economic efficiency, which is the efficiency in economic capital usage. It refers to minimizing the economic resources use while maximizing goods and services production aiming to reach the state where nothing more can be achieved given the

 Natural efficiency (eco-efficiency) that is linked to the use of natural capital. It refers to minimizing the environment impacts (also in terms of waste and pollution) while maximizing goods and services production (Schmidheiny, 1992) aiming to *de-coupling* economy that is economic growth without corresponding increases in environmental

 Social efficiency, which involves the efficiency in social capital usage. It refers to the aiming of achieve economic results maximizing the value of social relations and the role

 Human efficiency, which entails the efficiency in human capital usage aiming to improve stock of competences, knowledge and personality attributes (see also Human

Furthermore, complex efficiency enlarges time and space perspectives in managing

Enlarging spatial perspective means following a **holistic approach** and focusing not just

Enlarging time perspective means considering not just short term, but also **medium and** 

Given the above descriptions, it is clear that complex efficiency requires a multidimensional

available resources (O'Sullivan and Sheffrin, 2003)

pressure (Bleischwitz and Hennicke, 2004)

Development Report, UNDP, 2011)

and systemic approach (Fusco Girard, 2009).

Fig. 1. Sustainable companies management vision

on the single company

of cooperation and confidence (Putnam, 2000)

with the overall aim of maximizing / balancing them.

Goodwin, 2003):

companies:

**long term**

#### **2. The context**

Below are summarized some of the main global business trends as they are expected for next years. Of course the aim is not an in-depth drill down on possible future trends (see also Simon and Zatta, 2011), but just providing some general context evolution tendencies.


#### **3. The vision**

In the above-described context, sustainable company management can be the key approach to really win the competition (Werbach, 2009). So, below we will describe first of all what sustainable company management is and then how it can be implemented.

Following Seralgerdin approach (Seralgerdin, 1999), which recognizes four different kinds of capital (economic capital, natural/environmental capital, social capital and human capital), sustainable development can be seen as aimed to maintain or increase all capital stocks at the same time.

According to this approach, it is also possible to express sustainability under the point of view of comprehensive efficiency or "complex efficiency" (Fusco Girard, 2008), which is the Sustainable Development – 368 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

Below are summarized some of the main global business trends as they are expected for next years. Of course the aim is not an in-depth drill down on possible future trends (see also Simon and Zatta, 2011), but just providing some general context evolution tendencies. **Global economic crisis is expected to continue**, with some relevant exception (eg. developing countries like Brazil, Far East ...): by this time it seems clear that the wished economic recovery at *ante-2008 level* will not take place soon and presumably the global

 **Globalization is expected to increase**: competition is getting more and more global, involving every value-chain phase: world based recruiting; worldwide level sourcing; manufacturing de-localization... This is fostering to increase Asian leadership Vs

 **Interest in environmental issues is expected to continue to grow** over the next years driven by customers and supported also by Governments. Climate change / greenhouse gas reduction and fresh water scarcity are expected to be the main issues

 **Raw materials and energy costs are expected to continue their increasing trends,**  mainly driven by their scarcity and the widening demand to support developing countries growth. Also the recent nuclear giving up at global level (following the

 **Politics and Government influence on business is expected to remain high:** following the first part of current economic crisis (2008-early 2009) many Governments strongly entered into market dynamics for saving companies and the overall global interests

 **Customer's behaviours definitely changed**: customer's expectations Vs new products are by far higher than in the past, furthermore web-based communities fostered customers sharing of products experiences, their opinions about performances, ranking,

 **Growing internet based-connections**: starting from the "home internet" we pass through the internet everywhere (due to PDA / *smartphones* diffusion) to reach the "internet anything", where a number the equipments (eg. TV, cars, washing machines, home anti-theft systems ...) are web-connected (see also Simon and Zatta, 2011 and

In the above-described context, sustainable company management can be the key approach to really win the competition (Werbach, 2009). So, below we will describe first of all what

Following Seralgerdin approach (Seralgerdin, 1999), which recognizes four different kinds of capital (economic capital, natural/environmental capital, social capital and human capital), sustainable development can be seen as aimed to maintain or increase all capital

According to this approach, it is also possible to express sustainability under the point of view of comprehensive efficiency or "complex efficiency" (Fusco Girard, 2008), which is the

sustainable company management is and then how it can be implemented.

GDP will evolve according to a "W trend"(see also Hope, 2011)

Western countries (see also Yeung et at, 2001 and Sunley, 2011)

Fukushima nuclear disaster) will foster to increase the energy prices

(see also Laszlo, 2009 and Makower, 2009)

(see also Simon and Zatta, 2011)

Boaretto et al, 2011).

stocks at the same time.

**3. The vision** 

values etc. (see also Boaretto et al, 2011)

**2. The context** 

extension of the efficiency concept to all the above forms of capital, involving (see also Goodwin, 2003):


with the overall aim of maximizing / balancing them.

Furthermore, complex efficiency enlarges time and space perspectives in managing companies:


Given the above descriptions, it is clear that complex efficiency requires a multidimensional and systemic approach (Fusco Girard, 2009).

Fig. 1. Sustainable companies management vision

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 371

enterprise successes are their own success, and an effective training

car (about 5%) negatively impacts the customer-carmaker relationship

Lifecycle / using phase

Lifecycle end

a loop economy.

well accepted and known statement:

organizations with limited means

**5. How objectives can be implemented: Symbioses** 

 **Consider that employers have no capability limits:** the main key success factors to achieve best employers performances are an adequate management, the trust that

 **Reduce lifecycle costs for maintenance and operation:** nowadays consumers are more aware of lifecycle costs and their increasing can be seen almost as a robbery when not justified. For example paying more than €400 for a rear mirror on a €8.000

 **Follow integrated approach to protect the environment:** considering that real environmental impacts are very-very difficult to be calculated, their global minimization can be very important to protect the environment *leveraging on both new technology opportunities and correct customers behaviors promotion*. For example, new cars CO2 emission are usually reduced VS previous models, but this effort can be invalidated by a more frequent car usage as well as by inappropriate drive style **Satisfy customers:** considering that customers can be sorted in promoters, passives and detractors (Reichheld, 2006), every post-sales effort could be aimed on increasing the number of promoters and strongly avoiding detractors, definitively overcoming a Customers Relationship Management (CRM) approach focused just on IT systems

 **Extend product lifecycle:** as matter of fact, wasting a "still working product" has two key important issues: a) increasing the waste disposal needs (that can be very hard for electronic waste / hazardous materials …. ) b) increasing energy and materials needs for replacing the wasted product. For example, replacement rate of *still working* mobile phones is very high, impacting the needs of waste disposals (that can be hard for some components such as batteries and silicon parts) as well

as the need of new material and energy embedded in the new mobile phone **Facilitate reuse:** as stated for the production phase, also the design efforts could be focused on both conventional reuse - where the product (or its parts) is used again for the same function – as well as new-life reuse where the product (or its parts) is used for a new function. As matter of facts, reuse help save time, money, energy, and resources, opening new opportunities to offer quality products to people and

 **Facilitate recycling** in order to prevent waste of potentially useful materials, cut the consumption of fresh raw materials, cut energy needs, reduce air and waste pollution by reducing the need for "conventional" waste disposal, and lower

greenhouse gas emissions as compared to virgin production.

In the Table 1 every objective is mapped according to its impact on complex efficiency

Implementing sustainable development means shifting a linear economic model to promote

In this context, the paper aims at investigating conditions and consequences of the above

 Extending its focus from material also to non-material flows, partially widen industrial ecology (Ayres and Ayres, 2002) / ecological economics (Costanza, 1991) approaches

#### **4. Vision and strategic objectives**

The above sustainable company management vision can be realized through a **systemic approach** and by the achievement of a number of strategic objectives. Below we have grouped them according to their phase in product lifecycle and summarized, being aware of some significant overlapping.

	- **Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term:** longterm approach is based on customer loyalty. Indeed, companies built on a foundation of customer loyalty can grow over the long term through all types of economic climates, while companies with weak customer loyalty face an unstable future: "Bad prots" undermine customer relationships, and include ill-gotten earnings (Reichheld, 2006). The main condition for companies sustainable management is – for sure- that the company itself must exist and long-term approach is *conditio sine qua non* in order to achieve it. Clearly, companies' risks must be managed coherently (see also Laszlo, 2008)
	- **Promote companies integration with eco-systemic dynamics:** companies as well as their products and their by-products must be always considered as part of larger eco-system, avoiding perturbing it (Ayres and Ayres, 2002)
	- **Promote companies integration with social environment (with major focus on**  *local* **social environment):** encouraging **s**trong relations with local communities can be a leverage also for increasing employees (that usually are local citizens) well-being and productivity. The integration with local social environment can be an important way to improve companies internal and external social capital
	- **Follow a lifecycle approach in product design:** in the design phase all the stages of a product's life from-cradle-to-grave must be considered (i.e., from raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair, maintenance, and disposal or recycling) in order to achieve whished impacts on economic, environmental and social / human capital (see also Costanza, 1991)
	- **Reduce production costs**: production cost cutting (usually achieved leveraging on people/processes/IT improvements) can positively impact economics and also environment, when linked to energy / raw materials savings (see below)
	- **Reduce the quantity of required energy and materials, focusing on renewable: c**onsider dematerialization opportunities, that is " doing more with less", decoupling economy wellness from energy and material consumption, maximizing renewable energy and material consumption Vs non-renewable. (Bleischwitz and Hennicke, 2004)

In many field this trend is gaining room also leveraging on technologies opportunities (eg. in the work environments the use of paper is greatly reduced / eliminated thanks to digital communications) and swapping from product to services. For examples, customers need to illuminate a room (that is the service) while light bulb is just a way (product)

 **Sell every manufactured product**: production waste is usually referred to product not-fulfilling specific "qualitative" requirements, but production waste can be considered also every unsold manufactured product: as matter of facts, unsold products can be seen as waste of money, energy and material impacting both economics and environment


Sustainable Development – 370 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

The above sustainable company management vision can be realized through a **systemic approach** and by the achievement of a number of strategic objectives. Below we have grouped them according to their phase in product lifecycle and summarized, being aware of

 **Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term:** longterm approach is based on customer loyalty. Indeed, companies built on a foundation of customer loyalty can grow over the long term through all types of economic climates, while companies with weak customer loyalty face an unstable future: "Bad prots" undermine customer relationships, and include ill-gotten earnings (Reichheld, 2006). The main condition for companies sustainable management is – for sure- that the company itself must exist and long-term approach is *conditio sine qua non* in order to achieve it. Clearly, companies' risks

 **Promote companies integration with eco-systemic dynamics:** companies as well as their products and their by-products must be always considered as part of larger

 **Promote companies integration with social environment (with major focus on**  *local* **social environment):** encouraging **s**trong relations with local communities can be a leverage also for increasing employees (that usually are local citizens) well-being and productivity. The integration with local social environment can be

an important way to improve companies internal and external social capital

environment, when linked to energy / raw materials savings (see below) **Reduce the quantity of required energy and materials, focusing on renewable: c**onsider dematerialization opportunities, that is " doing more with less", decoupling economy wellness from energy and material consumption, maximizing renewable energy and material consumption Vs non-renewable. (Bleischwitz and

In many field this trend is gaining room also leveraging on technologies opportunities (eg. in the work environments the use of paper is greatly reduced / eliminated thanks to digital communications) and swapping from product to services. For examples, customers need to illuminate a room (that is the service)

 **Sell every manufactured product**: production waste is usually referred to product not-fulfilling specific "qualitative" requirements, but production waste can be considered also every unsold manufactured product: as matter of facts, unsold products can be seen as waste of money, energy and material impacting both

 **Follow a lifecycle approach in product design:** in the design phase all the stages of a product's life from-cradle-to-grave must be considered (i.e., from raw material extraction through materials processing, manufacture, distribution, use, repair, maintenance, and disposal or recycling) in order to achieve whished impacts on economic, environmental and social / human capital (see also Costanza, 1991) **Reduce production costs**: production cost cutting (usually achieved leveraging on people/processes/IT improvements) can positively impact economics and also

must be managed coherently (see also Laszlo, 2008)

eco-system, avoiding perturbing it (Ayres and Ayres, 2002)

**4. Vision and strategic objectives** 

some significant overlapping.

Production phase:

Hennicke, 2004)

while light bulb is just a way (product)

economics and environment

Overall:

	- **Extend product lifecycle:** as matter of fact, wasting a "still working product" has two key important issues: a) increasing the waste disposal needs (that can be very hard for electronic waste / hazardous materials …. ) b) increasing energy and materials needs for replacing the wasted product. For example, replacement rate of *still working* mobile phones is very high, impacting the needs of waste disposals (that can be hard for some components such as batteries and silicon parts) as well as the need of new material and energy embedded in the new mobile phone
	- **Facilitate reuse:** as stated for the production phase, also the design efforts could be focused on both conventional reuse - where the product (or its parts) is used again for the same function – as well as new-life reuse where the product (or its parts) is used for a new function. As matter of facts, reuse help save time, money, energy, and resources, opening new opportunities to offer quality products to people and organizations with limited means
	- **Facilitate recycling** in order to prevent waste of potentially useful materials, cut the consumption of fresh raw materials, cut energy needs, reduce air and waste pollution by reducing the need for "conventional" waste disposal, and lower greenhouse gas emissions as compared to virgin production.

In the Table 1 every objective is mapped according to its impact on complex efficiency

#### **5. How objectives can be implemented: Symbioses**

Implementing sustainable development means shifting a linear economic model to promote a loop economy.

In this context, the paper aims at investigating conditions and consequences of the above well accepted and known statement:

 Extending its focus from material also to non-material flows, partially widen industrial ecology (Ayres and Ayres, 2002) / ecological economics (Costanza, 1991) approaches

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 373

**Type I:** Before the "revolution of quality", the **relationship** among different companies **was one-way and hierarchical:** main assembler companies provisioned from lot of little suppliers. Assemblers lead auction among suppliers to buy components previously designed by the assemblers and to be manufactured by suppliers. The competition was fully price-based: best is cheaper with very limited care of product quality. Since only assemblers are in charge of the design process, no product innovation could be implemented by

**Type II:** One of the main "revolution of quality" innovation is the recognizing that **knowledge, know-how, technology and a real understanding of process and production can be allocated also in suppliers**. This recognising is the first step in establishing a new relationship with **suppliers**, **which became partners**: supply agreements have been lasting longer and different companies have been working in partnership sharing knowledge,

**Type III:** New and useful relationships (symbioses) among different companies are established when collaboration involves not only business goals, but also environmental and social goals, such as the implementation of a common Environmental Management

Top symbiosis level is **industrial symbiosis,** which is based on resource exchanges: although there is not a general accepted industrial symbiosis definition, in general three

1. By-product reuse—the exchange of firm-specific materials between two or more parties

2. Utility/ infrastructure sharing—the pooled use and management of commonly used

3. Joint provision of services—meeting common needs across firms for ancillary activities

In such a way partnership relationship do not involve only products, but also by-products, waste, emissions and whatever is no more functional for a company but could be useful for

Below the industrial symbiosis is described by one of the main example: Kalundborg

The most well-known example of industrial symbiosis is Kalundborg (Denmark), where cooperation has developed spontaneously over a number of decades and currently involves

about 20 different projects. By products exchanges are schematized in figure 2.

System or the extension of LCA (Life Cycle Analysis) also to partner process.

primary opportunities for resource exchange are considered (Chertow, 2007):

for use as substitutes for commercial products or raw materials

such as fire suppression, transportation, and food provision.

resources such as energy, water, and wastewater

**6.2 Kalundborg: An industrial Symbiosis example** 

Main participants in the Kalundborg Industrial Symbiosis are:

another one (Rutten and Boekema, 2004).

DONG Energy Asnæs Power Station,

 Gyproc plasterboard factory, Novo Nordisk pharmaceutical plant Novozymes enzyme producer A/S,

(Danmark).

**6.1 The relationship evolution and symbioses description**

suppliers, which were **frequently replaced in order to save money**.

technology, and – occasionally - also management strategies.

 Approaching the issues from the private/enterprise point of view, filling an important gap, since most of studies are mainly focused on a public point of view.


Table 1. Objectives impacts on complex efficiency

For the above aim, we will follow a 3 steps path:


#### **6. B2B symbioses**

Hereby we investigate the development of the relationships among different companies (Business to Business), pointing out the system evolution from one-way relationship toward symbioses.

#### **6.1 The relationship evolution and symbioses description**

Sustainable Development – 372 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

Approaching the issues from the private/enterprise point of view, filling an important

**a.** Recognizing of the existing elements and relationships in every node involving the companies (B2B-Business to Business; B2C-Business to Consumers; B2I-Business to

**b.** Investigate the *wide symbioses* approach opportunities, that is demonstrating how making every recognized relationships "symbioses" (that are cyclic relationships with internal loops and feedbacks) can help to promote sustainable company management

**c.** Recognizing the role of specific tools and of cultural factors in order to effectively

Hereby we investigate the development of the relationships among different companies (Business to Business), pointing out the system evolution from one-way relationship toward

gap, since most of studies are mainly focused on a public point of view.

Table 1. Objectives impacts on complex efficiency For the above aim, we will follow a 3 steps path:

matching the above strategic objectives

implement symbioses.

**6. B2B symbioses**

symbioses.

Institution as well as Companies internal relationships)

**Type I:** Before the "revolution of quality", the **relationship** among different companies **was one-way and hierarchical:** main assembler companies provisioned from lot of little suppliers. Assemblers lead auction among suppliers to buy components previously designed by the assemblers and to be manufactured by suppliers. The competition was fully price-based: best is cheaper with very limited care of product quality. Since only assemblers are in charge of the design process, no product innovation could be implemented by suppliers, which were **frequently replaced in order to save money**.

**Type II:** One of the main "revolution of quality" innovation is the recognizing that **knowledge, know-how, technology and a real understanding of process and production can be allocated also in suppliers**. This recognising is the first step in establishing a new relationship with **suppliers**, **which became partners**: supply agreements have been lasting longer and different companies have been working in partnership sharing knowledge, technology, and – occasionally - also management strategies.

**Type III:** New and useful relationships (symbioses) among different companies are established when collaboration involves not only business goals, but also environmental and social goals, such as the implementation of a common Environmental Management System or the extension of LCA (Life Cycle Analysis) also to partner process.

Top symbiosis level is **industrial symbiosis,** which is based on resource exchanges: although there is not a general accepted industrial symbiosis definition, in general three primary opportunities for resource exchange are considered (Chertow, 2007):


In such a way partnership relationship do not involve only products, but also by-products, waste, emissions and whatever is no more functional for a company but could be useful for another one (Rutten and Boekema, 2004).

Below the industrial symbiosis is described by one of the main example: Kalundborg (Danmark).

#### **6.2 Kalundborg: An industrial Symbiosis example**

The most well-known example of industrial symbiosis is Kalundborg (Denmark), where cooperation has developed spontaneously over a number of decades and currently involves about 20 different projects. By products exchanges are schematized in figure 2.

Main participants in the Kalundborg Industrial Symbiosis are:


Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 375

**a.** Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term: symbioses are usually shaped by market hand, driven by economical reason and usually require stable business partnerships, which is very consistent with the long-term business

**b. Promote companies integration with eco-systemic dynamics:** as matter if fact, industrial symbioses follow the nature approach (see also Hawken, Lovins et al, 1999),

**c. Promote companies integration with social environment (with major focus on** *local* **social environment):** despite the appearances, industrial symbiosis is strictly linked with (mainly local) social capital. In literature many scholars point out that some industrial symbioses fail to grow despite economic profitability of material exchanges. The reason is that cultural background is a key factor to implement symbiosis. It seems – from practical experiences - that realizing material exchanges require, on its turn, the

**d. Reduce production costs:** as Kalundborg experience points out, many symbiosis projects have been stimulated just by economic saving opportunities. Indeed in some cases the industrial symbiosis was not "discovered" by outsiders / scholars just because the exchanges have been shaped by the invisible hand of the market rather than from

**e. Reduce the quantity of required energy and materials, focusing on renewable opportunities:** a positive impact on the environment due to symbiosis is based on natural resources improved management, since energy, by-product exchange and common waste management increase the efficiency in resources using (Fusco Girard,

**f. Facilitate reuse / recycling:** these are, by definition, the industrial symbioses key

Over the past decade, the **relationship between customer and companies** has been substantially developing. The following analysis shows this **evolution from mass** 

**Type I:** During the so-called *mass-production* period, companies produce as much as they can in order to profit from scale economy according to a push model. Of course models are always **standard** with no (or very limited) customization opportunities, quoting Henry Ford

This "**push**" approach is completely **linear** and implicitly implies that companies know how

**Type II:** The spread of the so-called **Toyota spirit** radically changed the relationship between customers and companies. The push approach is gradually replaced by the pull one: *just in time* and *lean production* make possible the achievement of scale economy, although products are customized, so customers began to contribute to product features. Due to this customization opportunities the **B2C relationship** is no **more only one-way: customer** 

**production toward co-creation**, focusing on material and immaterial loop closing.

where one company's products waste is an input for an other company

existence of non material exchanges (Fusco Girard, 2009)

conscious direct involvement

approach

2008)

characteristics

**7. B2C symbioses**

**7.1 The relationship evolution** 

to fully satisfy customers.

"We produce any colour cars - so long as it's black".


#### **Examples of Symbiosis Projects: Energy savings**

The Asnæs Power Plant is a coal power plant (one of the main electricity plant in Denmark, producing about 10% of the electricity consumption in the Country); its excess heat is utilised as process steam and central heating. More in detail, Statoil Refinery, Novo Nordisk and Novozymes A/S receives annually about 1,5 mio. GJ (equivalent to more than 75.000 family houses yearly electricity consumption and to around 240.000 tons CO2).

The symbiosis will optimise the process steam cooperation and return up to 150.000 m3 steam condensate to the Asnæs Power Plant.

Currently a DONG Energy technology company is setting up a bio-ethanol plant next to the power plant operating on straw - a by-product in the agricultural sector. The use of steam and delivery of biomass as fuel in the power plant improves the overall CO2 account with more than 25.000 tons CO2 – not including the CO2 reduction from the replacement of bioethanol in gasoline and diesel. (http://www.symbiosis.dk/industrial-symbiosis.aspx)

#### **6.3 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation**

Below we will analyse the most important symbiosis impacts on complex efficiency in achieving vision's objectives; furthermore there are many other impacts which are more in depth analysed in industrial symbiosis and industrial ecology literature. (Ayres, 2002)


#### **7. B2C symbioses**

Sustainable Development – 374 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

The Asnæs Power Plant is a coal power plant (one of the main electricity plant in Denmark, producing about 10% of the electricity consumption in the Country); its excess heat is utilised as process steam and central heating. More in detail, Statoil Refinery, Novo Nordisk and Novozymes A/S receives annually about 1,5 mio. GJ (equivalent to more than 75.000

The symbiosis will optimise the process steam cooperation and return up to 150.000 m3

Currently a DONG Energy technology company is setting up a bio-ethanol plant next to the power plant operating on straw - a by-product in the agricultural sector. The use of steam and delivery of biomass as fuel in the power plant improves the overall CO2 account with more than 25.000 tons CO2 – not including the CO2 reduction from the replacement of bioethanol in gasoline and diesel. (http://www.symbiosis.dk/industrial-symbiosis.aspx)

Below we will analyse the most important symbiosis impacts on complex efficiency in achieving vision's objectives; furthermore there are many other impacts which are more in depth analysed in industrial symbiosis and industrial ecology literature. (Ayres, 2002)

family houses yearly electricity consumption and to around 240.000 tons CO2).

Statoil oil refinery

 Kara/Noveren waste company Kalundborg Municipality

Fig. 2. Kalundborg by-products exchanges

steam condensate to the Asnæs Power Plant.

**6.3 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation** 

**Examples of Symbiosis Projects: Energy savings** 

Over the past decade, the **relationship between customer and companies** has been substantially developing. The following analysis shows this **evolution from mass production toward co-creation**, focusing on material and immaterial loop closing.

#### **7.1 The relationship evolution**

**Type I:** During the so-called *mass-production* period, companies produce as much as they can in order to profit from scale economy according to a push model. Of course models are always **standard** with no (or very limited) customization opportunities, quoting Henry Ford "We produce any colour cars - so long as it's black".

This "**push**" approach is completely **linear** and implicitly implies that companies know how to fully satisfy customers.

**Type II:** The spread of the so-called **Toyota spirit** radically changed the relationship between customers and companies. The push approach is gradually replaced by the pull one: *just in time* and *lean production* make possible the achievement of scale economy, although products are customized, so customers began to contribute to product features. Due to this customization opportunities the **B2C relationship** is no **more only one-way: customer** 

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 377

other business entities. The difference however is that instead of an organized business body brought into being specifically for only one function, mass collaboration **relies on free individual agents to come together and cooperate to improve a given operation or solve a** 

 **Research and development:** for example**,** P&G (Procter and Gamble, Fortune 500 American multinational corporation manufacturing a wide range of consumer goods) leverages on external networks (NineSigma and InnoCentive), where consumers develop and put forward suggestions for technical / scientific issues submitted by P&G. This allows an overall R&D investments reduction, while innovation success rate significantly increased. So P&G is planning to source 50% of their new product and service ideas from outside the company, where 90,000 scientists around the world can

help solve tough R&D problems for a cash reward (Tapscott and Williams, 2006) **Purchasing:** Goldcorp (a Canadian gold producer), published geological data about an area of 200 km2 on the Internet and offered awards for the best potential sources of gold. Scientists and researchers from all over the world used that data for identifying 110 locations out of which half were new for Goldcorp. At over 80% of the listed sources, Goldcorp discovered a total of 227 tons of gold (Tapscott and Williams, 2006) **Design:** Companies can allow customers to design their own individualized product, such Sumerset, a US houseboats manufacturer that aims to leverage on "emotional bonding with... the company" and "a greater degree of self-esteem". (Prahalad and Ramaswamy, 2004). Other interesting practice is NikeID where, according to the slogan "you design it. We build it", customers can customize shoes in terms of both look (materials, colours and personal id adding …) and performance (wide and narrow

 **Marketing/Communications:** here many companies are focusing their efforts frequently leveraging also on new trends like Facebook. One of the main example can be Danone (a French food-products multinational corporation): Consumers vote for the targeted flavour of a new pudding by SMS or on a website or by facebook: more than 1 million consumers

 **Sales/Distribution:** here frequently online companies are the most involved. For example, eBay set up an online community which is free of charge, optional offer with discussion forums, news, tips for all eBay members. Users of the eBay community bid twice as much in auctions, pay up to 24% higher prices, and spend 54% more than eBay

 **Post-sales / CRM** (Customer Relationship Management): this broad term covers all the concepts which are used by companies to manage their relationships with customers,

Since getting new customer costs about 5 times more than keeping current ones (Farinet and Ploncher, 2004), CRM is a key tool to really understand customers' requirements in order to design new products and to adjust current products in this perspective. Once again, this points out that the best company key factor is the best possible relationship with customers, rather than the best possible products. One of the main example of post sales B2C symbiosis can be H3g (UMTS-based mobile phone company) which provides on-line free customer assistance fully leveraging on other customers knowledge (see

voted and were already familiar with the product before it went to market.

including collecting, storing and analyzing customer information.

The new B2C Symbioses examples can be seen along all the value chain

sizing, independent left and right sizes, outsoles picking ...)

members who are not part of the community.

www.lesaitutte.it)

**problem** (A.T. Kearney, 2009).

**requiring a tailored products** (Customer to Business input) **to be provided by companies (Business to Customer feedback).** The new customer-focused approach implies also that, according to Kano quality model (Watson, 2001), companies put into practice a new proactive attitude, trying to anticipate, and not just to follow, customers requirements. (Ohno, 2004)

#### **7.2 Symbiosis description**

**Type III:** Implementing symbioses with customers means **recognising customer relationship as the most important factor in company development, promoting continuous flows and feedbacks with customers, potential customers and non-customers.** 

#### **B2C relationship as key success factor**

The importance of this relationship is pointed out by many scholars, highlighting as in nowadays markets the key **success factor is not a requirement but is the relationship with customers.** Reichheld (Reichheld, 2006) stated that the relationship allows tracking promoters and detractors distinguishing good from bad profits. . The discriminator between good and bad profits is "the ultimate question": "treat the customers as if you were a customer yourself". As matter of facts, bad profits boost short-term earnings but alienate customers. They undermine growth by creating legions of detractors-customers who complain loudly about the company and switch to competitors at the earliest opportunity. On the contrary, company makes good profits through enthusiastic customer participation which can be achieved joining material requirements (as they are Kano's model) to notmaterial requirements, such as environmental compatibility, health care, respect of human rights etc (which can be also important drivers for product and process innovations).

#### **B2C relationship for the Co-Creation symbiosis**

For a long time, the market was the place of *value exchange*, while companies' premises were the place of *value creation*.

According to Prahalad and Ramaswamy (Prahalad and Ramaswany, 2004) some new trends (currently costumers are informed, aware, and networked and the product value is not linked just with provided services or products) are important drivers to radically change the relationship with customers **enabling co-creation, a new form of value creation.**

Times companies simply sell their products and services are over. Successful companies allow their customers to take part in the designing process, to keep track of production tasks, to participate in customers community: **customers take part in value creation, which that is not** *out***, but** *in* **the market**.

Under current trends, consumers "seek to exercise their influence in every part of the business system," and companies have to accommodate, by designing "experience environments" for creating new value creation spaces.

**Wikinomics** can be seen as the peak of the above new B2C relationship. Indeed, according to Tapscott and Williams (2006), the word *Wikinomics* identifies how some companies are using **mass collaboration** (also called *peer production*) and open-source technology to be successful.

The use of mass collaboration in a business environment, in recent history, can be seen as an extension of the trend to outsource: i.e. externalizing formerly internal business functions to Sustainable Development – 376 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

**requiring a tailored products** (Customer to Business input) **to be provided by companies (Business to Customer feedback).** The new customer-focused approach implies also that, according to Kano quality model (Watson, 2001), companies put into practice a new proactive attitude, trying to anticipate, and not just to follow, customers requirements. (Ohno, 2004)

**Type III:** Implementing symbioses with customers means **recognising customer relationship as the most important factor in company development, promoting continuous flows and feedbacks with customers, potential customers and non-customers.** 

The importance of this relationship is pointed out by many scholars, highlighting as in nowadays markets the key **success factor is not a requirement but is the relationship with customers.** Reichheld (Reichheld, 2006) stated that the relationship allows tracking promoters and detractors distinguishing good from bad profits. . The discriminator between good and bad profits is "the ultimate question": "treat the customers as if you were a customer yourself". As matter of facts, bad profits boost short-term earnings but alienate customers. They undermine growth by creating legions of detractors-customers who complain loudly about the company and switch to competitors at the earliest opportunity. On the contrary, company makes good profits through enthusiastic customer participation which can be achieved joining material requirements (as they are Kano's model) to notmaterial requirements, such as environmental compatibility, health care, respect of human

rights etc (which can be also important drivers for product and process innovations).

relationship with customers **enabling co-creation, a new form of value creation.**

For a long time, the market was the place of *value exchange*, while companies' premises were

According to Prahalad and Ramaswamy (Prahalad and Ramaswany, 2004) some new trends (currently costumers are informed, aware, and networked and the product value is not linked just with provided services or products) are important drivers to radically change the

Times companies simply sell their products and services are over. Successful companies allow their customers to take part in the designing process, to keep track of production tasks, to participate in customers community: **customers take part in value creation, which** 

Under current trends, consumers "seek to exercise their influence in every part of the business system," and companies have to accommodate, by designing "experience

**Wikinomics** can be seen as the peak of the above new B2C relationship. Indeed, according to Tapscott and Williams (2006), the word *Wikinomics* identifies how some companies are using **mass collaboration** (also called *peer production*) and open-source technology to be

The use of mass collaboration in a business environment, in recent history, can be seen as an extension of the trend to outsource: i.e. externalizing formerly internal business functions to

**7.2 Symbiosis description**

the place of *value creation*.

**that is not** *out***, but** *in* **the market**.

successful.

**B2C relationship as key success factor** 

**B2C relationship for the Co-Creation symbiosis** 

environments" for creating new value creation spaces.

other business entities. The difference however is that instead of an organized business body brought into being specifically for only one function, mass collaboration **relies on free individual agents to come together and cooperate to improve a given operation or solve a problem** (A.T. Kearney, 2009).

The new B2C Symbioses examples can be seen along all the value chain


Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 379

reflected a one-way relationship between Public Institutions and companies so that, in many cases, companies do not appreciate them seeing mostly their additional management costs

**Type II and III:** below we will analyse the type II and III relationship between Companies and Public / Private Institutions. We will analyse both types in the same time because both are based on considering sustainability as a development opportunity, through active involvement instead of passive laws acknowledge (Fusco Girard, 2009) and hereby the

 **Economic instruments, in order to internalize external costs**. This goal is usually achieved through **emission trade system set up**. Here, a central authority sets a limit or cap on the amount of a pollutant that can be emitted. Companies are required to hold an equivalent number of credits or allowances which represent the right to emit a specific amount. The total amount of credits cannot exceed the cap, limiting total emissions to that level. Companies that need to increase their emissions must buy credits from those who pollute less. The transfer of allowances is referred to as a trade. Therefore, at least in theory, those who can most cheaply reduce emissions most cheaply will do so, achieving the pollution reduction at the overall lowest possible cost. **Green / Sustainable Procurement**: integrating also environmental and social criteria into procurement decisions in addition to the conventional criteria of price and quality. **Education**: education is a fundamental instrument to spread the sustainability concept, in order to increase the demand for sustainable product/services as well as a coherent use. **Voluntary agreement** is a contract between the public administration and a company in which the firm agrees to achieve a certain environmental or social objective and receives a subsidy to change its technology through R&D and innovation. The agreement is bilateral, between firm and administration, and requires a voluntary element on both

It is very important to consider that best results can be achieved only by well combining the

Command and control instruments are necessary to guarantee minimal requirements

 Education is finalised to promote sustainable behaviour also through best practices. Voluntary agreement can be implemented only where there is a social background that

Symbioses promote sustainable organization of companies with positive impacts in

**a.** Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term**:**  Sustainability is the key strategy that European Union Institutions identified in order to

Economic instruments are very useful to change implant behaviour

above instruments, in particular: (Carminio et al., 2002)

promotes sustainability concepts.

**8.2 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation** 

achieving the sustainable objectives

difference is not in the instruments, but in the level of involvement.

In this perspective, command and control instruments have been integrated by:

(Fusco Girard, 2009).

sides.

**8.1 Symbiosis description**

#### **7.3 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation**

The B2C symbioses impacts on complex efficiency can be summarized as below:


Recognising that important values are shared also with a company could be a main factor also in purchasing process: in a 2004 survey over an half of customers declare to know fair trade and 6,6% declare to buy only from fair trade


#### **8. B2I symbioses**

Below we investigate the evolution of the relationship among companies and Institutions, starting from command and control approach/ policies, which is a one-way and hierarchical relationship, towards voluntary agreement that needs feedbacks and reactions (symbiosis).

#### **The relationship evolution**

**Type I** Command and Control was the first step towards modern sustainability policies. At the beginning these laws were focused on safety in the working environment, and then have been widened also to environmental emission and waste management. These kinds of laws reflected a one-way relationship between Public Institutions and companies so that, in many cases, companies do not appreciate them seeing mostly their additional management costs (Fusco Girard, 2009).

#### **8.1 Symbiosis description**

Sustainable Development – 378 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

**a. Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term:**  establishing and maintaining a strong customer relationship through B2C symbioses is a good way for generating long-term "good profits"; According to Reichheld, good profit implies high level of success: for example, every Dell not satisfied customer costs about 57 USD, whereas satisfied customer breeds about 328 USD (Reichheld, 2006) **b. Promote companies integration with eco-systemic dynamics:** Recognising that customers personal values are appreciated also by the companies could be an important key factor in the B2C symbiosis perspective. For example, ISPO survey points out that 77% customers state to avoid to buy products made by company which are not

c. **Promote companies integration with social environment:** Active and proactive customer participation foster to improve human and social capital. Looking for and reaching information is useful to improve skills, but also to establish new networks,

Recognising that important values are shared also with a company could be a main factor also in purchasing process: in a 2004 survey over an half of customers declare to

**d. Reduce production costs**: B2C symbiosis allows many interesting savings in production

**e. Sell every manufactured product**: the B2C symbiosis approach implies that only sold

**f. Reduce lifecycle costs for maintenance and operation:** co-design experience by

**g. Satisfy customers:** co-design and value co-creation can strongly help companies in making customers satisfied. Furthermore, likewise CRM surveys point out that (Farinet and Ploncher, 2004) 76% of satisfied customers buy again the same product, 33% buy again a not fully satisfying product, but 89% of customers buy again a not fully satisfying product if customer service is excellent. Once again, this points out that the best company key factor is the best possible relationship with customers, rather than the

h. **Extend product lifecycle:** through co-creation, it is possible to establish an emotional relationship with the product that can foster to prolong product life cycle, encouraging

Below we investigate the evolution of the relationship among companies and Institutions, starting from command and control approach/ policies, which is a one-way and hierarchical relationship, towards voluntary agreement that needs feedbacks and reactions (symbiosis).

**Type I** Command and Control was the first step towards modern sustainability policies. At the beginning these laws were focused on safety in the working environment, and then have been widened also to environmental emission and waste management. These kinds of laws

The B2C symbioses impacts on complex efficiency can be summarized as below:

**7.3 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation** 

involved in social or environment campaign

through internet or customers associations.

products have been manufactured

best possible products (Ronchi, 2003)

**8. B2I symbioses**

**The relationship evolution** 

also a correct maintenance Vs thruway approach.

know fair trade and 6,6% declare to buy only from fair trade

costs as above pointed out in many examples along the value chain

definition foster lifecycle costs reduction according to customers needs

**Type II and III:** below we will analyse the type II and III relationship between Companies and Public / Private Institutions. We will analyse both types in the same time because both are based on considering sustainability as a development opportunity, through active involvement instead of passive laws acknowledge (Fusco Girard, 2009) and hereby the difference is not in the instruments, but in the level of involvement.

In this perspective, command and control instruments have been integrated by:


It is very important to consider that best results can be achieved only by well combining the above instruments, in particular: (Carminio et al., 2002)


#### **8.2 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation**

Symbioses promote sustainable organization of companies with positive impacts in achieving the sustainable objectives

**a.** Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term**:**  Sustainability is the key strategy that European Union Institutions identified in order to

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 381

Type III: since the goals of companies are complex and do not involve only the economic sphere in the short term, **top management know-how, skills and knowledge cannot be** 

So, top management have to foster vertical collaboration - among different company hierarchical levels - and horizontal collaboration - among different company departments -. The aim should be to improve knowledge sharing through formal and informal networks and feedbacks (Galgano, 2004). This approach is becoming more and more common across

For example, Toyota – the car world leading manufacturer - implemented a program to stimulate employees to submit new ideas to management. The results is that in 2008 management approved nearly 100% of the 400 new ideas coming from the employee, achieving

For implementing so high a collaboration level it is necessary to deeply understand that human capital has no limits capability if it is well run, if it trusts that enterprise success is its

Another instrument to implement symbioses in **internal relationship is the workers participation in company capital.** In such a way it is possible to extend the internal symbiosis to strategic aspects as company owners. In the USA, for example, institutional investors are increasing their stock participation in raising number of firms. (Caselli, 2006)

Companies internal symbioses contributions to promote sustainable objectives achievements

**a. Achieve good financial/ economic performances also in medium-long term**: Revenues are the main driver in fostering company towards internal symbioses. First of all, the sharing of goals and strategies all around the firm is the only way to really implement them. Besides, it is universally recognised that the essential requirement for continuous improvement is the full involvement of every employee. Furthermore, workers

**b. Promote companies integration with social environment:** internal symbioses promote human development through the implementation of social networks, strengthening internal links. Indeed workers trust that, apart from their formal links with the company, their future is strictly linked with company future, which contributes to foster collaborative and constructive company internal climate. Trust is stimulated by

Multi criteria evaluation approaches and tools (Shi and Zeleny, 2000; Saaty and Vargas, 2006; Bogetoft and Pruzan, 1999) must have a primary supporting role for symbioses design

**enough**. *Top management* **leadership must be integrated with** *workers* **leadership**.

benefits in terms of quality of the final products, total costs and in employee satisfaction.

both small and larger companies (Foray, 2006).

own success, and if it is conveniently trained.

**9.2 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation** 

can be summarized in the following way. (Fusco Girard, 2009)

participation in company capital allows to achieve:

cooperation and, in its turn, it promotes cooperation

and strategy implementation:

**10. Multi criteria evaluation approach for symbioses design**

 keeping tacit knowledge within the firm trust and collaborative company atmosphere

workers stability within the firm (minimizing turn-over)

improve European companies competitiveness. Furthermore, it is important to notice that also "do nothing" option has its own costs: Munich Re (2009) pointed out that economic loses due to climate change related extreme events glowed up from less than 5 Millions USD in 1950 till to current over 70 Millions USD

	- Offering-side policy could be achieved to spread new skills and knowledge in strategic fields. Similarly this kind of intervention can foster the cooperation among different firms to promote also knowledge spread through the creation of new network.
	- Demand-side policies are fundamental to educate customers to choose sustainable products. In this kind of intervention it is very important also the communication: for this reason these policies must be completed by a labelling system laws

#### **9. Company internal symbioses**

Below we will analyse the evolution of the internal organization of the firm, focusing on the employees relationships and on the relationship among company structures to analyse how the setting out of symbioses relationships could be useful in fostering towards sustainable development.

#### **9.1 The relationship evolution and symbioses description**

Type Ia: before **Scientific Management** internal relationships were **one-way and hierarchical**. Procedures and methods were not explicit, so companies management/white collars did not have to coordinate workers activities, but mainly to convince them to make available to the company their own knowledge (which usually remained tacit).

Type Ib: When the Scientific Management (also called *Taylorism*) spread, companies internal relationships have **usually been still one-way**, with no feedbacks between management and workers. Tacit knowledge was partially coded in procedure and methods, so that management duties were mainly focused on requiring and checking that workers effectively implemented them.

Type II: quality revolution led to enhanced productivity through improving workers role; the best way to assure that **a job gets done right is not to increase worker supervision, but to educate, empower, and trust the person assigned to the job.** Concurrent opinions and feedbacks finished the passive-workers era to foster a new one in which **every worker can contribute to the company** by defining his own duties and organization improvement.

Internal relationships developed similarly to customer-supplier relationship: if the quality is in the process, end process inspection is useless.

Type III: since the goals of companies are complex and do not involve only the economic sphere in the short term, **top management know-how, skills and knowledge cannot be enough**. *Top management* **leadership must be integrated with** *workers* **leadership**.

So, top management have to foster vertical collaboration - among different company hierarchical levels - and horizontal collaboration - among different company departments -. The aim should be to improve knowledge sharing through formal and informal networks and feedbacks (Galgano, 2004). This approach is becoming more and more common across both small and larger companies (Foray, 2006).

For example, Toyota – the car world leading manufacturer - implemented a program to stimulate employees to submit new ideas to management. The results is that in 2008 management approved nearly 100% of the 400 new ideas coming from the employee, achieving benefits in terms of quality of the final products, total costs and in employee satisfaction.

For implementing so high a collaboration level it is necessary to deeply understand that human capital has no limits capability if it is well run, if it trusts that enterprise success is its own success, and if it is conveniently trained.

Another instrument to implement symbioses in **internal relationship is the workers participation in company capital.** In such a way it is possible to extend the internal symbiosis to strategic aspects as company owners. In the USA, for example, institutional investors are increasing their stock participation in raising number of firms. (Caselli, 2006)

#### **9.2 Symbiosis sustainability evaluation**

Sustainable Development – 380 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

**b. Promote companies integration with eco-systemic dynamics; Follow a lifecycle approach in product design; Reduce the quantity of required energy and materials, focusing on renewable; facilitate reuse / recycling:** The reduction of the impacts on natural capital is frequently the aim of such instruments, so we can assume that this goal is always - at least partially - achieved. Here it is also important to consider that these kinds of impacts are typically extra-national, so involving as many countries as

**c. Promote companies integration with social environment; Consider that employers have no capability limits**: Beyond the impacts on safety in the working environment, the impacts

firms to promote also knowledge spread through the creation of new network. Demand-side policies are fundamental to educate customers to choose sustainable products. In this kind of intervention it is very important also the communication:

for this reason these policies must be completed by a labelling system laws

Below we will analyse the evolution of the internal organization of the firm, focusing on the employees relationships and on the relationship among company structures to analyse how the setting out of symbioses relationships could be useful in fostering towards sustainable

Type Ia: before **Scientific Management** internal relationships were **one-way and hierarchical**. Procedures and methods were not explicit, so companies management/white collars did not have to coordinate workers activities, but mainly to convince them to make

Type Ib: When the Scientific Management (also called *Taylorism*) spread, companies internal relationships have **usually been still one-way**, with no feedbacks between management and workers. Tacit knowledge was partially coded in procedure and methods, so that management duties were mainly focused on requiring and checking that workers effectively

Type II: quality revolution led to enhanced productivity through improving workers role; the best way to assure that **a job gets done right is not to increase worker supervision, but to educate, empower, and trust the person assigned to the job.** Concurrent opinions and feedbacks finished the passive-workers era to foster a new one in which **every worker can contribute to the company** by defining his own duties and organization improvement.

Internal relationships developed similarly to customer-supplier relationship: if the quality is

available to the company their own knowledge (which usually remained tacit).

 Offering-side policy could be achieved to spread new skills and knowledge in strategic fields. Similarly this kind of intervention can foster the cooperation among different

on human and social capital involve both offering and demand (Fusco Girard, 2009)

5 Millions USD in 1950 till to current over 70 Millions USD

possible is the key strategy for increasing effectiveness

**9.1 The relationship evolution and symbioses description**

in the process, end process inspection is useless.

**9. Company internal symbioses**

development.

implemented them.

improve European companies competitiveness. Furthermore, it is important to notice that also "do nothing" option has its own costs: Munich Re (2009) pointed out that economic loses due to climate change related extreme events glowed up from less than

> Companies internal symbioses contributions to promote sustainable objectives achievements can be summarized in the following way. (Fusco Girard, 2009)

	- workers stability within the firm (minimizing turn-over)
	- keeping tacit knowledge within the firm
	- trust and collaborative company atmosphere

#### **10. Multi criteria evaluation approach for symbioses design**

Multi criteria evaluation approaches and tools (Shi and Zeleny, 2000; Saaty and Vargas, 2006; Bogetoft and Pruzan, 1999) must have a primary supporting role for symbioses design and strategy implementation:

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 383

recognise, understanding the connections among different form of capital and the following

But which are, practically, the values that promote the subject re-introduction, that means to

Even though in a different context, F. Capra points out that there is a link among ethics, values and thought (see table below), so we need to **promote integrative thought instead of self assertive one,** (Capra, 2005) **that implies to promote integrative values for indirectly** 

Thought Values

In the new global context - characterized by a growing complexity and uncertainty, increasing scarcity of natural resources and energy, climate destabilization, in which public institutions, consumers and NGO are demanding a better environment quality - business sector is charged by new responsibilities, c**ompanies play a central role in the strategies for sustainable development effective implementation**. (World Business Council for

In the above context, we pointed out, in order to achieve sustainable company management, the importance of closing both material and not material flows, that is the wide symbioses

**All the nodes of the network which the company is part of could promote the wide symbiosis model**: innovative relationships with other companies, with customers, with public institutions as well as company internal relationships. This should be the master way

To the above aim, cultural aspects play a great role: we need to promote integrative thought

A.T. Kearney (2009) *"A.T. Kearney Customer Energy:* The empowered consumer is revolutionizing customer relationships". Obtained through the Internet http://www.atkearney.com/index.php/Publications/harnessing-customer-

instead of self assertive one that implies to promote integrative values.

energy.html [accessed 13/01/2011].

Self-assertive Integrative Self-assertive Integrative *Rational Intuitive Expansion Conservation Analytical Synthetic Competition Co operation Fragmented Holistic Quantity Quality Linear Not linear Domination Association* 

impossibility to long term maximize economic capital giving up other forms of capital.

**supporting the symbioses implementation** (see also Fusco Girard, 2009).

promote the symbioses implementation?

Table 2. Values and Thought

Sustainable Development, 2009)

to real implement sustainability.

generating/promoting.

**13. References**

**12. Conclusions**


An important issue about the above evaluation is related to the indicators: as matter of fact, a consistent set of both quantitative and qualitative indicators is required to compare multidimensional aspects, defining targets and monitor project outcomes.

#### **11. The role of culture to promote the wide symbioses**

As we have seen above, in some case symbioses relationships are increasing and growing up, fostered mainly by economic drivers (Estes, 2009; Makower, 2009). According to that, can we assume that global economy is running toward sustainability? Can only market rules promote sustainability?

Unfortunately the most likely answer is negative.

What is needed is a **strong intentionality and a systemic approach** (Meadows, 2008): it is necessary to recognise that lot of aspects which seems to be like chalk and cheese, are just different aspects of the same issue.

So, what could be done in order to promote the **wide symbioses** and the **systemic approach**?

Symbioses are – by definition- constituted by two main elements: nodes, which are deputy of exchanges, and connections which are the mean to let the exchange be.

Currently we are living the "communication age": internet, mobile phones, PDAs, as well as "old media" such as radio and TV make available billions of information to the public, so it can be assumed that what is needed are not new connections.

**The need is to improve the nodes of the current network, making them really able to exchange information**. Symbioses, in facts, can happen only among active *subject nodes* and never among *passive objects nodes*: **closing both material and immaterial loops through feedbacks and immaterial exchanges have sense only among subjects**.

Thus, there is not an issue related to infrastructures, but related to **culture**. So, in other words**, the first step in implementing symbioses is to "reintroduce the subject"** (Scola, 2006).

The subject reintroduction does not involve only the firms, but all the system of values they are part of. **Reintroducing the subject** means focusing on "why do?" and on "what to do?" instead of "how to do something" (Zeleny, 2005). In other words, it means to **promote critical thinking and wisdom**. The real challenge is recognizing links that others are not able to recognise, understanding the connections among different form of capital and the following impossibility to long term maximize economic capital giving up other forms of capital.

But which are, practically, the values that promote the subject re-introduction, that means to promote the symbioses implementation?

Even though in a different context, F. Capra points out that there is a link among ethics, values and thought (see table below), so we need to **promote integrative thought instead of self assertive one,** (Capra, 2005) **that implies to promote integrative values for indirectly supporting the symbioses implementation** (see also Fusco Girard, 2009).


Table 2. Values and Thought

#### **12. Conclusions**

Sustainable Development – 382 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

 *Ex ante* multi criteria evaluation should have a central role since symbioses require the involvement of a number of different stakeholders (eg. private companies, public institutions...) with different (and in some cases even conflicting) interests to be adequately evaluated and prioritized through multi criteria approach. The same approach can successfully support also coordination of actions of all partners/stakeholders to create synergies and positive interdependences in innovative

*On-going* multi criteria evaluation to monitor different steps effective achievements of

 *Ex post* multi criteria evaluation of pilots / experimental projects have a significant role to highlight costs and benefits and identify best practices as well as lesson learned providing benchmarks and strategies (Nijkamp and Rietveld, 1990), in order to support

An important issue about the above evaluation is related to the indicators: as matter of fact, a consistent set of both quantitative and qualitative indicators is required to compare

As we have seen above, in some case symbioses relationships are increasing and growing up, fostered mainly by economic drivers (Estes, 2009; Makower, 2009). According to that, can we assume that global economy is running toward sustainability? Can only market rules

What is needed is a **strong intentionality and a systemic approach** (Meadows, 2008): it is necessary to recognise that lot of aspects which seems to be like chalk and cheese, are just

So, what could be done in order to promote the **wide symbioses** and the **systemic approach**? Symbioses are – by definition- constituted by two main elements: nodes, which are deputy

Currently we are living the "communication age": internet, mobile phones, PDAs, as well as "old media" such as radio and TV make available billions of information to the public, so it

**The need is to improve the nodes of the current network, making them really able to exchange information**. Symbioses, in facts, can happen only among active *subject nodes* and never among *passive objects nodes*: **closing both material and immaterial loops** 

Thus, there is not an issue related to infrastructures, but related to **culture**. So, in other words**, the first step in implementing symbioses is to "reintroduce the subject"** (Scola, 2006).

The subject reintroduction does not involve only the firms, but all the system of values they are part of. **Reintroducing the subject** means focusing on "why do?" and on "what to do?" instead of "how to do something" (Zeleny, 2005). In other words, it means to **promote critical thinking and wisdom**. The real challenge is recognizing links that others are not able to

**through feedbacks and immaterial exchanges have sense only among subjects**.

the definition of a path from "one shot" experiences towards ordinary practice

management toward symbioses (see also Freedman, 2007)

goals and strategy redefinition, when need (Saaty and Vargas, 2006)

multidimensional aspects, defining targets and monitor project outcomes.

of exchanges, and connections which are the mean to let the exchange be.

can be assumed that what is needed are not new connections.

**11. The role of culture to promote the wide symbioses**

Unfortunately the most likely answer is negative.

promote sustainability?

different aspects of the same issue.

In the new global context - characterized by a growing complexity and uncertainty, increasing scarcity of natural resources and energy, climate destabilization, in which public institutions, consumers and NGO are demanding a better environment quality - business sector is charged by new responsibilities, c**ompanies play a central role in the strategies for sustainable development effective implementation**. (World Business Council for Sustainable Development, 2009)

In the above context, we pointed out, in order to achieve sustainable company management, the importance of closing both material and not material flows, that is the wide symbioses generating/promoting.

**All the nodes of the network which the company is part of could promote the wide symbiosis model**: innovative relationships with other companies, with customers, with public institutions as well as company internal relationships. This should be the master way to real implement sustainability.

To the above aim, cultural aspects play a great role: we need to promote integrative thought instead of self assertive one that implies to promote integrative values.

#### **13. References**

A.T. Kearney (2009) *"A.T. Kearney Customer Energy:* The empowered consumer is revolutionizing customer relationships". Obtained through the Internet http://www.atkearney.com/index.php/Publications/harnessing-customerenergy.html [accessed 13/01/2011].

Innovative Sustainable Companies Management: The *Wide Symbiosis* Strategy 385

Laszlo, C. (2008) *Sustainable Value: How the World's Leading Companies Are Doing Well by* 

Michelini L. (2005), 'L'approccio consumer-ethic driver nell'innovazione di prodotto*' Paper* 

Munchener Ruck *(2009*) *Topics Geo Annual review: Natural catastrophes 2008*, Munich

Nijkamp P., Rietveld P. (1999) Multicriteria Evaluation in Physical Planning, North-Holland

O'Sullivan, A., Sheffrin, S.M. (2003). *Economics: Principles in action,* Upper Saddle River New

Pine J.B. and Gilmore J.H. (1999) *The experience Economy*, Harvard Business School Press,

Prahalad, C.K. and V.Ramaswany (2004), *The future of competition*, Harvard Business School

Pruzan, P. and Pruzan Mikkelsen K. (2008), *Leading with Wisdom: Spiritual-Based Leaders in* 

Putnam, R. (2000) *Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community*, Simon and

Reichheld F. (2006), *The ultimate question. Driving good profits and true growth*, Harvard

Rutten R.,F.Boekema(2004), 'A knowledge Based View on Innovation in Regional

*and Regional Economic Development*, Edward Elgar Publishing, Cheltenham Saaty T.L.,Vargas L.G.(2006), *Decision Making with Analytic Network Process*, Springer Science,

Schmidheiny S. (1992), *Changing Course: A Global Business Perspective on Development and the* 

Scola, A. (2006) '*Antropologia, etica ed affari'* in: Rusconi, G., Dorigatti, M., *Impresa e* 

Sunley, P. (2011) The consequences of economic globalization, In: *The SAGE handbook of* 

Tapscott, D. and Williams A.D*.* (2006) *Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes* 

Watson, G.H. (2001), *La visione strategica dei clienti: il modello di Kano*" in Conti, T., De Risi P.,

Serageldin I. (1999) *Social Capital. A Multifaceted perspective,* The World Bank, Washington Shi y., M.Zeleny(2000), *New Frontiers of Decision Making for the Information Technology Era*,

Schumper J.(1954), *Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy*, Allen and Unwin, London

*Responsabilità Sociale*, Franco Angeli, Milano

Simon H.,Zatta D. (2011) *I trend economici del futuro,* Il sole 24 ore

*economic geography ,* Leyshon A., Lee R., McDowell L.

World Scientific Publishing, Singapore

*Everything*, Portfolio Hardcover, USA

*Manuale della qualità*, ed. Il Sole 24 Ore

Networks', in De Groot H.L.F.,P. Nijkamp and R. Stough (editors), *Enterpreneurship* 

*Environment,* World Business Council for Sustainable Development (WBCSD),

*presented at "Le tendenze del marketing", Ecole Supérieure de Commerce de Paris – EAP,* 

Makower, J. (2009), *Strategies for the Green Economy*, McGraw-Hill, New York

*Doing Good*, Stanford Business Books

*January 2005*

Jersey

Boston

Schuster

New York

Geneve (CH)

Press, Boston

ReGroup, Munich

Ohno T. (2004) *Lo spirito Toyota*, Einaudi, Torino

Business School Press, Boston Ronchi, M. (2003) *CRM per tutti*, Franco Angeli, Milano

Marchesini G.C. (2003), *L'impresa etica e le sue sfide*, Egea, Roma Meadows D.H. (2008), *Thinking in Systems*, Chelsea Green Publishing

*Business,* Greenleaf Publishing Limted, Sheffield


Sustainable Development – 384 Policy and Urban Development – Tourism, Life Science, Management and Environment

Ayres, R. U. and Ayres, L.W. (2002), *A Handbook of Industrial Ecology,* Edward Elgar

Bleischwitz R. and Hennicke P. (2004), *Eco-efficiency, regulation and sustainable business*,

Begg K., F.Van der Woerd, D.Levy (2005),*The Business of Climate Change*, Greenleaf

Carminieo G., Frey M. and Araldo C. (2002), *Gestione del prodotto e sostenibilità*, Franco

Caselli, L. (2006), *Democrazia economica ed azionariato dei lavoratori* in Rusconi, G., Dorigatti,

Chertow, M.R. (2007), *Uncovering Industrial Symbiosis* in Journal of Industrial Ecology,

Costanza, R. (1991), *Ecological economics: the science and management of sustainability*. Columbia

Estes J., (2009) *Smart Green: How to Implement Sustainable Business Practices in Any Industry -* 

Fusco Girard, F. (2009) 'Symbioses strategies for sustainable company management', *International Journal of Sustainable Development, Volume 12, Number 2-4 / 2009* Fusco Girard, F. (2009) Extending industrial ecology principles to nonmaterial flows: the

Fusco Girard, F. (2009), 'L'approccio della ecologia industriale per l'efficienza energetica nei

Fusco Girard, F. (2008) 'Impresa e sviluppo sostenibile: strategie innovative per la

Freedman R.E., Rusconi G. and Dorigatti M. (2007),*Teoria degli stakeholder*, Franco Angeli,

Goodwin, N.R. (2003) *Five Kinds of Capital: Useful Concepts for Sustainable Developmen,* Global

Green, K. and Randles, K. (2006), *Industrial Ecology and Spaces of Innovations*, Edward Elgar

Hawken, P., Lovins, A., and Lovins, L.H. (1999), *Natural Capitalism*, Rocky Mountain

UNDP, *Human Development Report 2011Sustainability and Equity: A Better Future for All*,

Hope, W. (2011) Crisis of temporalities: Global capitalism after the 2007–08 financial

Kronenberg, J. (2007), *Ecological economics and Industrial* Ecology, Routledge, Abington Laszlo, C. (2009) *WorldShift 2012: making green business, new politics, and higher consciousness* 

Galgano, A. (2004), *I Sette Strumenti della qualità totale*, Il Sole 24 ore Edizioni, Milano

Development and Environment Institute Tufts University

"Widen Symbiosis"' *Book of Abstracts 2009 International Society for Industrial Ecology* 

Farinet A. and Ploncher E. (2004), *Customer Relationship Management*, ETAS ,Milano

Bogetoft P., Pruzan, P. (1991), *Planning with Multiple Criteria*, North Holland, New York

Publishing Inc., Northampton, MA

Publishing Limited, Sheffield

Capra F. (2005), *La rete della* vita, BUR, Milano

Angeli, Milano

Volume 11, Number 1

*and Make Money*, Wiley

*Conference*

Milano

University Press, New York.

Foray D. (2006), *L'economia della conoscenza*, il Mulino, Bologna

processi produttivi', *Rivista AEIT num.1, 2009* 

Publishing Inc., Northampton, MA

collapse. *Time & Society* March 2011 20: 94-118

*working together*, Inner Traditions, USA

Institute, Snowmass, CO

(2011) UNDP Press

sostenibilità dei prodotti', *Rassegna ANIAI ,10, 2008* 

Edward Elgar Publishing Inc., Northampton, MA

Boaretto A., Noci G., Pini F. M. (2011) Marketing reloaded, Il Sole 24 Ore Libri

M., *Impresa e Responsabilità Sociale*, Franco Angeli, Milano


**Part 5** 

**Sustainable Environment** 

Werbach A. (2009), *Strategy for Sustainability: A Business Manifesto*, Harvard Business Press

