Achieving,
or working towards accreditation to an environmental standard, is a big task which takes both time and money. The time aspect depends on the several factors, which include the availability and
aptitude of the staff assigned to put an EMS in place, the urgency of implementing the EMS and the availability of funds.
The possibilities are as follows:
Method of Implementation
|
Advantage |
Disadvantage
|
Using “in-house” resource.
(appointed member of staff as
“environmental officer”)
|
Increased expenditure
No extra cost will
The EMS
|
The duration of the
Resource may be
As
a consequence,
Some tasks may be
There is a large
Money will be
spent in training the appointed person |
Using an environmental
adviser with minimal input from the
organisation*
|
The adviser will provide a quicker, more thorough production of the EMS.
There will be fewer mistakes or omissions.
All staff will continue to work on core-business
Much of the cost of outside expertise can be off-set by not having to appoint staff to be involved in all of the creation of the EMS.
An expert will be aware of the way accrediting bodies examine an organisation’s activities, products and services for standard compliance.
|
Extra cost appears on the accounts.
Some environmental organisations may provide a
somewhat impersonal service, |
Using an environmental adviser
with an appointed environmental
officer.
|
The organisation benefits from the efficiency of the
The adviser can give direction, while the
The advidser's visits ensure that the set work is completed at planned periods by the organisation and avoids procrastination of the task.
The ratio of input from the adviser can be adjusted
The environmental officer gets trained “on
|
Some resource taken up in EMS implementation.
|