STL workshop presentation 16 11-11 v.2

Welcome

Fire and safetyPhotographs Refreshments

Who’s here – introductionsProgramme

Programme

Keynote address – Heather McInroyDiscussion

Turning values into value – Stephen Potter

Workshop groupsPlenaryQ & A

Support going forward

Keynote address

Heather McInroy

Programme DirectorNational Business Travel Network

Reducing the impacts of work-related travel

The business reasons and benefits

Turning value into values – Workshop, Leicester 16 November 2011 Heather McInroyNational Business Travel Network - Programme Director

www.bitc.org.uk

• National Business Travel Network

• Department for Transport funded

• Hosted by Business in the Community

• Joint ways2work initiative

Introduction

www.bitc.org.uk

Current position – FTSE 100

Raising The Bar - Building sustainable business value through environmental targets, Carbon Trust - June 2011

www.bitc.org.uk

Why reduce work-related travel impacts?

www.bitc.org.uk

• UK – 29% emissions from transport, second to energy at 35%

• 41.4% transport emissions from cars v 4% from public transport

• 24% of car journeys < 2 miles, 57% < 5 miles

• 70% of UK workers drive to work – mainly one person in one car

• 11% walk, 3% cycle, 12 % public transport, 4% other

Environmental Impact

Commuting25%

Business13%

Shopping13%

Visit friends at private home

14%

Visit friends elsewhere

3%

Holiday/ day trip7%

Other leisure6%

Other personal business/ escort

16%Education/ escort

education3%

Estimated CO2 emissions from household car journeys

www.bitc.org.uk

Financial impact - Congestion

*BCC The Congestion Question, December 2008

Cost of congestion to the UK – figures vary from £8 - £23 billion pa

Problem for 4 out of 5 businesses

• Lost business

• Recruitment

• Wasted time

• Increased costs

www.bitc.org.uk

Financial impact: Business Resilience

Remember Eyjafjallajokull?

www.bitc.org.uk

• £400 - £1000 per annum

• £2000 per surface space

• Multideck much more

Financial impact – Car Parking

www.bitc.org.uk

Costs to people and society

www.bitc.org.uk

Active / Sustainable Travel

www.bitc.org.uk

Alternatives To Travel

www.bitc.org.uk

www.bitc.org.uk

Contributing companies

www.bitc.org.uk

• Recognising business travel comprised 30% of company’s total carbon footprint, Capgemini chose a strategy to integrate three themes that are usually tackled in isolation:

• Avoiding and reducing carbon emissions from business travel

• Reducing costs to clients and Capgemini

• Addressing employee ‘lifestyle’ challenges from significant amounts of travel

• Carbon emissions from travel fell by 14.5% (2007 -2009), from 17,524 tonnes to 14,977 tonnes

• The “average” emissions profile of Capgemini’s company car fleet has improved 18% since 2006, from 168 CO2 g/km to 137 CO2 g/km

• Achieved WWF-UK’s “One in Five Challenge”, reducing business flights by 20% in 5 years

• Video Conferencing utilisation rates doubled

Case study –

www.bitc.org.uk

Case study – Forster

• 30 employees

• 30% of staff regularly travel by bike on business journeys - was zero before the purchase of pool bikes and confidence training

• Almost 50% increase in people occasionally cycling or walking to work

• Commuting by bike increased from 13% to 31% and business travel by bike increased from zero to 10% in less than a year

• Pool bikes used daily and taxi bills have been reduced by 10%

• Client engagement – having seen the benefits, two customers introducing similar cycle schemes for their staff

• Named UK’s greenest business by the Sunday Times, who cited the cycling scheme as one of the main reasons

www.bitc.org.uk

• Between 2008/09 and 2009/10 Eversheds set 10% travel related carbon reduction target – exceeded with comparable travel costs falling by 24% saving £1.3 million, 85% reduction in emissions from flights

• car mileage reduced from 1,154,000 miles (2008), 933,552 miles (2009) and 720,000 miles (2010)

• an overall 38% reduction

• a reduction of 141.7 tonnes CO2 (Defra 2009 conversion factor) and a saving of £175,000

• In 2010, 500,000 minutes of webinars. Take up increased from 16,000 minutes/month in January 2010 to 45,000 minutes/month January 2011

• Absence figures, whilst already low, have further reduced from 2.3% in January 2010 to 1.9% in January 2011

Case study –

www.bitc.org.uk

• Business drivers - to reduce emissions and costs• Committed to 30% reduction in CO2 emissions (2008-13)• 30% of MFRS emissions from business travel • Commuter emission estimates 15-25% of the organisation’s direct emissions• ‘Alternatives to travel’ making an increasing and significant contribution to

reducing these emissions• MFRS aims to reduce single occupancy car travel – both business and

commuting - through encouraging active/sustainable travel and reduced travel through the use of technology

Case study – Merseyside Fire and Rescue Service

What we achieved in 2010...

06 September 2011, E.ON, Page 10

Telepresence saved £593,181 after costs and reduced our CO2 emissions by 300 tonnes.

Telemeet rooms were installed in October saving us £231,496 and 99.68 tonnes of CO2!

ISDN video conferencing saved us £34,093 and 17 tonnes of CO2.

We also use;

•Live meeting and WebEx•Office communicator• Teleconferencing

www.bitc.org.uk

• Cost benefit ratio = 16:1

• Reduction in average sick days pa from 5.9 days in 2004 to 3.8 days in 2008

• 10.2 tonnes of CO2 saved pa by bus journeys

• 127.7 tonnes of CO2 saved by VC meetings from 2007-2009

• £85,750 saved by VC on business travel

• Use of VC in Scotland up from 943 hours in 2007 to 2049 hours in 2009

Case study –

www.bitc.org.uk

Case study – Laundry Ladies

• 6 employees

• Birmingham, Sandwell, Dudley, Wolverhampton and Stourbridge

• Laundry Ladies understand their contribution to the carbon emissions being released into the environment

• Limit their travel and the travel of their customers, staff and suppliers

• Staff work from home and do deliveries local to them

• Avoid rush hour traffic

• ways2work award winner

www.bitc.org.uk

Final thoughts and Conclusion

• UK Businesses are benefiting from reducing work-related travel – there are clearly evidenced triple bottom line benefits

• Committed CSR and change managers are building the business case and leading the change

• There are barriers – organisational, cultural, structural and social

• This is all about people – huge behavioural / psychological issues

• Propensity of organisations to change

• ways2work Mentoring programme

• There is a huge market out there – some great examples, but a long way to go

www.bitc.org.uk

www.nbtn.org.uk www.nbtn.org.uk/ways2work

heather.mcinroy@bitc.org.uk 07912 274169

Discussion

Does my organisation see the value in travel planning?

Does it understand the business benefits that can be derived?

Turning values in value

Stephen Potter

Professor of Transport StrategyOpen University

Turning values into value for travel plans

Stephen PotterProfessor of Transport Strategywith inputs from Helen Roby

Scope Will draw on:• OU travel plan research with

employers • Experience of OU’s own travel

plan (running since 1996)• Feedback from students on OU

CPD Travel Plan courses

Identifying value• The very first ‘travel plans’

made a strong link between values and value

• A ‘regulatory’ view tends to prioritise the value to the regulator and not that to the regulated

• In our CPD travel plan courses we ask learners to view the situation from the implementing organisation’s perspective rather than the regulator

Possible Value• Planning condition

(most obvious but not lasting)

• Carbon reporting • Cost savings on parking

(but hard to realise)

• Developing a constrained site• ISO 14001/EMAS• Image and CSR

(Public/Community relations)

• Customer access (for shops, commerce)

• Customer relations(including green procurement)

• Business resilience (fuel price shocks etc)

• Safety (a third of road casualties are on business trips)

• Recruitment and Retention

• In practice, which do travel plans link into?• Which are most powerful drivers?

– Ones that affect core values or are imposed!

Changing drivers Main original and current motivations of Employer Travel Plans (2007)

Original motivations % Current

motivations %

Section 106 17 71% 3 12%

Congestion /access 4 17% 2 8%

Environmental 2 8% 7 28%

Government Directive 1 4% - -

Recruitment and retention - - 2 8%

Business growth - - 2 8%

Car parking capacity - - 4 16%

Others - - 5 28%Sample: 18 private and 6 public sector employers Source: Helen Roby, Open University http://design.open.ac.uk/roby/index.htmSee: Roby, H (2008): Viewpoint: ‘Policymakers may see travel plans as a 'green' tool, but do employers see them the same way?’ Local Transport Today, No 498, 11-24 July, p.18

2011 Allinx Poll

A similar response to: What is the most important reason for an employer to take mobility management measures?

• 54% say employers want to save costs • 20% think employers want to improve accessibility • 13% believe employers want to reduce CO2 emissions • 13% say employers want to satisfy employees

Making the links to value• Transport issues are recognised more

clearly in some employer departments than others….

• Facilities ‘do’ and pay for travel plan measures; they also need to interact with Councils

• Facilities have learned how to do process as well as projects

• Estate cost savings often emphasised, but can be elusive– e.g. Car parking cost savings rarely

realisable

OU Dr Bike day and Car share permits

OU Bike shed

Upcoming drivers• In a recession, influence of

planning controls will decline and pressure will be off car parking/congestion issues

• But Carbon Disclosure/Reportingis emerging fast

• Carbon reporting has usually been in Facilities, but transport is low on agenda – Scope 2 and 3 (and largely outside Facilities control – company cars, expenses policies etc.)

• Much easier to work on production (energy – Scope 1) and buildings (Scope 2), which are entirely in Facilities control

CSR

• Rather than Facilities, CSR departments are increasingly involved in the Carbon Disclosure

• They take a more operations-wide viewpoint• CSR have a culture that is open to the idea of travel

planning• Is into process, programmes and working with staff and

departments• BUT they see business travel as a priority• Travel planning needs to focus less on commuting and

more on business travel

Breaking into HR!• In other departments there is no culture of considering

transport• HR does not ‘get it’; travel rarely features in employee

exit surveys but is big issue • CBI 2005 Business of Transport survey: 40% staff often

late; 48% stressed by travel• Replacement costs £3,000- £8,000 per post• Cost savings through new practices get a lot of

attention– not interested in incremental change (9 day fortnight of travel

plans) but big change/big benefit reviews

• Find common ground and then add on other TP aspects

Changing drivers – changing management?

• As a Travel Plan matures it needs to move from being externally imposed to building up an internal rationale

• This has become more important as development slows in the recession

• Are failing Travel Plans ones that don’t make this transition?

• If the drivers for a Travel Plan are moving out of a facilities function, then should the Travel Plan management be relocated or become cross-departmental function?

Changing drivers – changing regulators

• If the focus of travel planning shifts, should travel planning in Councils move from a regulatory/planning function to Economic Development function?

• In transport departments, travel planning is a weak, low-status activity, prone to cuts from the highway engineering culture

• Economic development may be the more natural home • Travel Plans become part of the sustainable

development agenda• TfL is moving this way – focus on business travel and

sustainable economic development

• OU CPD Travel Planning Courses: http://www8.open.ac.uk/employers/sector-solutions/transport-and-logistics

• Roby H, 2010, Can travel plans escape the planning ghetto?, Town and Country Planning, January

• Roby, H (2008): Viewpoint: ‘Policymakers may see travel plans as a 'green' tool, but do employers see them the same way?’ Local Transport Today, No 498, 11-24 July, p.18

• Roby H, 2010, Workplace Travel Plans: Past, Present and Future, Journal of Transport Geography, Volume 1, Issue 18, pages 23-30,

Information

Workshop GroupsTravel plan challenges

Car sharing – how do you make great idea work?Car clubs and pools – how can you make them

viable?Internal decision making – how do you ensure it

happens?

….other challenges

Workshop GroupsTop tips

Incentivise managers and individualsUse short and direct questions

Build a brand around your travel planIdentify employers with shared interest

Strategic and operational buy-in

…. other top tips

Question & answer

Help!

Smarter Travel LeicesterNational Travel Business Network

Local Sustainable Transport Fund – Fit 4 Business Go Travel Solutions

…..each other

Bye bye

Thank you to Highcross, Heather and Stephen

Help to spread the word

Future workshops: new car technology, salary sacrifice,

Smarter Travel Leicester guidance, ICT and travel avoidance, fleet car reviews, Fit 4 Business…

Next one Tues 24th Jan – 10:30

Feedback – e-mail in the next day