Integrating Environmental Policies into Business Strategy: The Problem Structuring Stage in a Framework for Decision Support

  • Maria de Fátima TelesEmail author
  • Jorge Freire de Sousa
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing book series (LNBIP, volume 184)


Companies are increasingly including their corporate social responsibility into their business strategy. The environmental issues assume here a priority role. In order to get a balance in economic, social and environmental trade-offs, companies need to consider multiple objectives, namely related to the allocation of resources and investments, which can cause contradictory opinions among diverse stakeholders. Companies should incorporate into the decision-making process tangible and intangible elements, identifying and structuring objectives in a consistent way, in order to choose sustainable options for the company and create compromises between stakeholders. The main motivation of this paper is to present a methodology or framework to support decision-making and appraisal of corporate environmental strategies and subsequent management approaches. In order to gain a closer view over the proposed approach, we will present the preliminary results illustrated with examples from an ongoing case study within a public passenger transport company.


Business strategy Decision-making Problem structuring Stakeholders Corporate sustainability 


  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Kotler, P.: Marketing Management: Analysis, Planning Implementation and Control. Prentice Hall International Editions, New Jersey (1995)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    French, S., Geldermann, J.: The varied contexts of environmental decision problems and their implications for decision support. Environ. Sci. Policy 8(4), 378–391 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Azapagic, A., Perdan, S.: An integrated sustainability decision-support framework - Part I: Problem structuring. Int. J. Sust. Dev. World 12, 98–111 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luyet, V., Schlaepfer, R., Parlange, M.B., Buttler, A.: A framework to implement stakeholder participation in environmental projects. J. Environ. Manage. 111, 213–219 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Merad, M., Dechy, N., Marcel, F.: Adapting participative governance framework for the implementation of a sustainable development plan within an organization. In: Karl, H., Scarlett, L., Vargas-Moreno, J.C., Flaxam, M. (eds.) Restoring Lands - Coordinating Science Politics and Action. Springer, Dordrecht, Heilderberg, London, New York (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Neves, L.P., Dias, L.C., Antunes, C.H., Martins, A.G.: Structuring an MCDA model using SSM: a case study in energy efficiency. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 199(3), 834–845 (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Coelho, D., Antunes, C.H., Martins, A.G.: Using SSM for structuring decision support in urban energy planning. Technol. Econ. Dev. Eco. 16(4), 641–653 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    International Finance Corporation World Bank Group. Accessed 6 June 2013
  10. 10.
    Bryson, J.M.: What to do when stakeholders matter: stakeholder identification and analysis techniques. Public Manag. Rev. 6(1), 21–53 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bryson, J.M., Patton, M.Q., Bowman, R.A.: Working with evaluation stakeholders: a rationale, step-wise approach and toolkit. Eval. Program. Plann. 34(1), 1–12 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Johnson, G., Scholes, K.: Exploring Corporate Strategy. Prentice Hall, England (1999)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Checkland, P., Scholes, J.: Soft Systems Methodology in Action. Wiley, Chichester (2000)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mingers, J., Rosenhead, J.: Problem structuring methods in action. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 152(3), 530–554 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Franco, L.A.: Facilitating collaboration with problem structuring methods: a case study of an inter-organisational construction partnership. Group Decis. Negot. 17(4), 267–286 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Keeney, R.: Value-Focused Thinking. Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Huang, Y.-S., Chang, W.-C., Li, W.-H., Lin, Z.-L.: Aggregation of utility-based individual. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 229(2), 462–469 (2013)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Slowinski, R., Roy, B., Greco, S., Figueira, J.: An overview of ELECTRE methods and their recent extensions. J. Multi-Crit. Decis. Anal. 20, 61–85 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rowley, H.V., Peters, G.M., Lundie, S., Moore, S.J.: Aggregating sustainability indicators: beyond the weighted sum. J. Environ. Manage. 111, 24–33 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Commission of the European Communities: Green paper: promoting a european framework for corporate social responsibility. COM (2001) 366 FINAL, Brussels (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neves, L.P., Martins, A.G., Antunes, C.H., Dias, L.C.: Using SSM to rethink the analysis of energy efficiency initiatives. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 55(9), 968–975 (2004)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rodrigue, M., Magnan, M., Boulianne, E.: Stakeholders’ influence on environmental strategy and performance indicators: a managerial perspective. Manage. Acc. Res. 24, 301–316 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kaplan, R.S., Norton, D.P.: Having trouble with your strategy? then map it. Harv. Bus. Rev. 78(5), 167–176 (2000)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Philips, J.K.: An application of the balanced scorecard to public transit system performance assessment. Transp. J. 43(1), 26–55 (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Esty, D., Winston, A.: Green to Gold: How Smart Companies Use Environmental Strategy to Innovate, Create Value, and Build Competitive Advantage. Wiley, Hoboken (2009)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Keeney, R.L., Clemen, R., Miles Jr., R., Samuelson, W.: Decision and modeling methods (Chapter 9). In: Dorf, R.C. (ed.) Technology Management Handbook. CRC Press LLC, Boca Raton (2000)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Keeney, R.L.: Framing public policy decisions. Int. J. Technol. Policy Manage. 4(2), 95–115 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Huang, I.B., Keisler, J., Linkov, I.: Multi-criteria decision analysis in environmental sciences: ten years of applications and trends. Sci. Total Environ. 409, 3578–3594 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Midgley, G., Cavana, R., Brocklesby, J., Foote, J., Wood, D., Ahuriri-Driscoll, A.: Towards a new framework for evaluating systemic problem structuring methods. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 229(1), 143–154 (2013)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Marttunen, M., Hämäläinen, R.P.: Decision analysis interviews in environmental impact assessment. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 87, 551–563 (1995)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria de Fátima Teles
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jorge Freire de Sousa
    • 2
  1. 1.CP-Comboios de Portugal, EPEPortoPortugal
  2. 2.FEUP, UGEI – INESC TECPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations