ISO 50001 standard-based energy management maturity model – proposal and validation in industry

Highlights

• ISO 50001-based energy management maturity model was proposed.

• EMMM50001 links the CMMI maturity criteria, PDCA cycle and ISO 50001 processes.

• EMMM50001 was validated in industry.

Abstract

Different standards drive organizations to use energy more efficiently. ISO 50001 provides a basis for energy management improvement. The energy management standards represent a good practice, but they are not the best energy performance models. Energy maturity models help achieve superior performance. The paper proposes a new ISO 50001-based energy management maturity model which links ISO 50001 processes and Capability Maturity Model Integration criteria. The paper presents organizations that surpass ISO 50001 certification requirements, reaching higher maturity levels. A knowledge base that has been founded on the ISO 50001 processes, Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle and Capability Maturity Model Integration criteria, represents a novelty and a real contribution of the paper. This knowledge base contributes to better understanding and implementing energy management system, since it shows the relationship between the ISO 50001, which is an example of good practice in the energy management system implementation; the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle, which underpins all the standards for systems management; and Capability Maturity Model Integration criteria, which can be associated with certain phases of the energy management systems development as shown in literature. The model for assessing the maturity of the energy management system utilizes a combination of different management concepts, which has not been displayed in the literature so far. The model was validated through its application in ISO 50001 certified and non-certified organizations and its validation shows that all maturity levels exist in practice. The model is universal and can be applied in manufacturing, as well as in service sectors. For ISO 50001 non-certified organizations there is a wide spread of results, while ISO 50001 certified organizations' results reveal consistency. The obtained results can be used as the reference for benchmarking studies in different industries and different countries. The proposed model can serve as a basis for national awards for energy excellence, applicable in Serbia and other countries.

Introduction

Energy is a critical resource for industry and, as Laitner (2013) notes in study about energy efficiency, one of the basic production factors. In the paper about integrated energy and environmental management, Amundsen (2000) states that in addition to the energy costs, energy inefficiency generates excessive environmental costs. As stated in the Morfeldt and Silveira's (2014) research about energy efficiency in European iron and steel production, the European industry is working towards increased energy efficiency, because “the adoption of energy-efficiency measures can significantly reduce industrial energy use” (as Kermeli et al., 2014 added in research of energy efficiency improvement potentials in the global industrial sector).

In his study on environmental perspectives, Bowonder (1987) cites three types of responses to environment problems: (i) personal, (ii) technical, and (iii) organizational. In this paper, we will focus on organizational responses to energy issues. If industrial processes are disorganized, it is very difficult to achieve improvements, which calls for the application of widely accepted energy management models, often embodied in the form of standards.

Energy management is defined in different ways in the literature. In a study about energy efficiency gap, Backlund et al. (2012b) note that energy management is focused on the implementation of energy-efficient technologies, displacement of inefficient equipment and maintenance of technology, while Lee et al. (2011) claim that energy management is tied to optimization of energy use, according to their research about energy management system in IT industries of Taiwan. According to CarbonTrust's (2011) guide to controlling energy use, energy management includes systematic use of organizational methods and technology. As stated by the Energy Office (2013), energy management is a set of measures to achieve the minimal energy use, while levels of comfort and production remain the same. In a case study on energy saving in Japan, Mizuta (2003) claims that all the employees participate in energy-saving activities and that all levels of energy use need to be known and monitored.

Bunse et al. (2011), in their gap analysis between industrial needs and literature, state that energy management includes directing, monitoring and improving of energy efficiency, while Abdelaziz et al. (2011) in a review on energy saving strategies in industrial sector present that it has three components: review, trainings, and maintenance. ISO 50001 (ISO, 2011), standard for energy management system, which was developed to help improve energy efficiency of organizations, defines energy management system (EnMS) as “set of interrelated or interacting elements to establish energy policy and energy objectives, and processes and procedures to achieve those objectives”.

Maturity models are used in different contexts and industries. Literature reports application of maturity models in different areas such as: information technology (for example, as tool in software development, e.g., in a study on maturity model of open source software community by Kuwata et al., 2014), healthcare (framework for maturity and improvements in clinical efficiency by Brooks et al., 2015), mining (framework for risk management and continual improvements by Unger et al., 2015), manufacturing (framework for service systems in enterprises by Neff et al., 2014), engineering and construction (project management maturity models for estimating project effectiveness and efficiency by Backlund et al., 2014), ecodesign (management framework to support ecodesign implementation into manufacturing by Pigosso et al., 2013) and utility and work management (model proposed by Strategydriven, 2014). Energy management maturity models are used as a tool for energy efficiency improvements (for example, energy maturity models proposed by Introna et al., 2014 or O'Sullivan, 2012).

In their study about energy efficiency gap, Backlund et al. (2012b) state that potential for energy-efficiency improvements through the adoption of energy management practices primarily depends on the size of a company, type of production and energy intensity. In discussion about ISO 50001 for industrial energy management, Piñero (2009) conclude that the adoption of standards, such as ISO 50001, contributes to an increase of energy efficiency of more than 20% in different manufacturing industries. Similarly, energy management programs can facilitate reduction of energy costs of up to 20%, as CarbonTrust (2011) notes in the guide to controlling energy use.

In a study on energy efficiency in manufacturing industry in Sweden, Backlund et al. (2012a) confirm that the energy efficiency improvement potential through recognized management practice is higher than that of technology. In evaluation of an energy programme for SMEs, Thollander et al. (2007) have shown that implementation of energy-efficiency programs could improve energy performance 16%–40%. These high percentages signify the importance of organizational measures in achieving the improvement in energy efficiency. However, the true value of sound energy management has not been recognized, as Molla et al. (2012) conclude in their study on information system based energy management practices. This claim is corroborated by Gonzalez et al. (2012), in a study on energy efficiency improvement in cement industry.

Although being useful frameworks, energy management standards are just models of good practice, but not excellence models. On the other hand, maturity models facilitate achieving the best energy performance. To create a maturity model with knowledge base, we blended the advantages of three management tools: the ISO 50001 process model, the PDCA cycle and the energy management maturity criteria based on CMMI. This hybrid model can be used for self-assessment and improvements of organizations, following ISO 50001 certification. This paper is concerned with the energy management practice, while the energy technology aspects remain beyond its scope.