In order to give this message, it’s proper due, I think it best to break it into smaller parts so that I can more efficiently communicate the whole. This decision allows me to walk the reader through the underlying building blocks that defines the broader message. It is an important message that I am witnessing more and more in my travels, too complex to address in one blog. It is for this reason we will tell this story in three parts.

Part I: It is a little like an old Kenny Rogers Song

I recently teased on LinkedIn about spending time with a compliance partner where the concept of Innovation vs Transformation was the underlying theme to our meeting. I have collected my thoughts, reflected on the discussions and have drawn conclusions based off this important, teachable, message. The meeting itself was a formative experience reinforcing some past beliefs that I had no label for and has grown into my latest mantra. Once you hear this out, I hope you see the wisdom in this comparison as I believe it will serve you well when determining how best to deploy your environmental resources in the future. If all else fails, put on the Gambler and listen to advice of Mr. Kenny Rogers and “know when to hold em – know when to fold em” if you want to know where I am going with this message.

For business strategies to maintain a high degree of success they must be flexible enough to adapt to the times and be inward looking enough to support a culture of continuous improvement.  This isn’t change for change sake, but the development of a systematic program designed to continually focus on capturing all that is good about your process while learning to shed the bits that fail to perform to expectations.  It is about evolution and adapting to achieve the best outcome possible. Change how to do things to produce a net sum gain that maximizes productivity, resource efficiencies and accuracy of results. 

A strategic approach to improvement, requires periodic process analyses bringing the management team to critical path decision points. At each crossroad, you must determine if you are better served through innovation or if transformation is the best investment of time, materials and resources needed to get the desired result.  In order to help choose we must start by understanding the meaning behind the words and the context in which they are applied. Their definitions and the concepts we attached to them are often considered one and the same. Certainly, one could make the case that they are close enough to be interchangeable but my view of this has been changed through my recent experience and I now see them as being very different. Innovation means using in-house resources to create a better tool to meet the demands of the job and Transformation (for the purposes of this article) means adjustments to how things are done. Similar – yes. The same – I would argue not.

In plant production, operational processes and general business scenarios the lines between these concepts are often very clear.  You need a widget to improve production so you either build/modify something to fit the need or you buy a known widget, change your production routine to accommodate it and  gain the advantages you were looking for by integrating it into your normal workflow.  A simple build (innovate) vs buy (transform) decision. The team evaluates both approaches, selects the one that is the most cost effective and looks to ensure the best outcome.  Decisions of this type occur on a regular basis and often falls into a comfortable rhythm for the stakeholder decision makers.

Emissions monitoring choices can offer some equally clear paths but there are other aspects that make it significantly more challenging to decide.  For example, in the case of adding a CO monitor in response to a new air permit condition, you will clearly make a buying decision followed by a change in your maintenance model to support it.  In this sense you are transforming how you do your monitoring in support of a buying decision. It is unlikely that you would address this through innovation and build a CO monitor to get a better result.  Where it becomes a little muddy is in the area of data collection, data validation and report generation needed to complete compliance obligations.

An innovate vs transform decision when it comes to emissions data is the sticky wicket in this conversation and a real challenge for facilities to easily navigate, as time goes on. We think – “we know how to use plant data systems to run the operation so what is the big deal supporting environmental monitoring with the software we have in place?” “It is all just some math supporting the equations already defined by the EPA – how hard can this be?” “Just another variation of a historian system – right?” All good questions to ponder while we wait for Part II of this story – The Wind and the Willows & Building a DAS System to reveal the next layer of this issue…coming soon.