We are immensely excited to report that three schools from the Omaha Public Schools were nominated by the Nebraska Department of Education to be Green Ribbon Schools. They are King Science & Technology Magnet Center, Lothrop Science and Technology Magnet Center, and Miller Park Elementary. All three are now eligible to be among the 50 schools that will be named as Green Ribbon Schools by the U.S. Department of Education on April 22.

This is the pilot year for the Green Ribbon Schools program, which rewards schools that meet criteria in three goals:

1. The school facility (grounds and building) has a “net zero” environmental impact;
2. The school environment has a “net positive” impact on the health and performance of students and staff members; and
3. The school’s graduates are environmentally literate.

We have been working with the Omaha Public Schools on their Green Schools Initiative for almost three years now and couldn’t be more impressed with the great progress the district has made. We’re helping the district with initiatives that run the gamut of sustainability programs: energy efficiency and conservation, waste reduction, water, recycling, and engagement at all levels. A few examples of the district’s achievements:

• energy costs in 2011 were $730,000 below what the district paid in 2010
• the district-wide average ENERGY STAR rating has climbed ten points in the last twelve months
• there are now 20 buildings with ENERGY STAR ratings 75 or higher, up from seven just over a year ago
• over 85% of schools have active green teams
• district progress towards achieving many of its other goals can be seen on the OPS Tracker Tool

We are immensely familiar with each of the three OPS schools and are so proud they’ve been nominated. They have been leaders in the the OPS Green Schools Initiative and deserve every bit of recogntion they are receiving. Quick highlights from their Green Ribbon applications:

King has an excellent focus on science and the environmental through its magnet curriculum.

Lothrop has one of the district’s only cafeteria waste composting programs and is a two-time winner of the Green Omaha Coalition‘s Green Schools Award.

How do you get people to change their behavior so they act in a more environmentally-friendly way? This is a question that we frequently get asked by our clients who are attempting to shift their organizational culture and motivate employees to reduce the amount of energy and resources they use. As with anything behavior related, there is no simple explanation or answer. Behavior is complex and so is changing it. However, one thing is clear based on research in this field—in order to change and sustain behavior, it’s important to move beyond traditional approaches that strictly focus on boosting awareness and fostering a positive attitude about the behavior.

AWARENESS + POSITIVE ATTIDUE ≠ BEHAVIOR CHANGE

It is a common misperception that simply informing people about why a specific pro-environmental behavior is important and fostering a positive attitude about the action will directly lead to engaging in and sustaining the behavior. Research has repeatedly shown that general awareness/knowledge and positive attitudes do not highly correlate with environmental behavior change. For example, employees frequently report that they feel it is important to conserve paper (i.e., have a positive attitude). They also claim that they are aware of the positive benefits of double-sided printing and that it’s an option at their workplace (i.e., are generally aware and knowledgeable). Yet, they still do not duplex print at work. But why is this?

As with any behavioral explanation, it depends on the situation and could entail a myriad of reasons. Assuming double-sided printing is available on all machines, it may be that people don’t know how to actually select duplex, and they want to avoid looking foolish or incompetent if they try and fail. People may also think that no one else in their department is duplexing so why should they do it, or they may perceive that their efforts really don’t make a difference given the total amount of paper used by the organization.

Regardless of the reason or combination of reasons, the aforementioned example demonstrates how many people often fail to adopt a pro-environmental behavior even if they see it is as important and are keenly aware of the benefits. This is not to say that generally educating people and trying to instill positive attitudes about environmentally-friendly behaviors are unimportant—these elements are definitely valuable. However, in conjunction with disseminating benefits information and promoting awareness about the behavior, it is critical to also include details and tactics that address human nature, social influence, and any perceived barriers connected to the targeted action.

TIPS FOR INCREASING THE LIKELIHOOD OF BEHAVIOR CHANGE

There are multiple strategies that can be employed and details to consider when trying to promote and sustain behavior change. Having said this, I’d love to talk about them all (yes, I am a behavior nerd). However, for the sake of this blog post, I will only highlight a few (five to be exact) that research has shown to be particularly effective and that take into consideration human nature and perception, as well as social influence.

1. Provide Clear Procedural Instructions: Lack of “how-to” knowledge tends to be one of the most significant barriers for people who are generally willing to engage in a specific pro-environmental activity. Regardless of how motivated people are to perform a given behavior, they typically will refrain from trying it out if the process to complete the action is not clear. In light of this, it’s important to always provide clear procedural steps about how to complete the behavior even if the action appears to be relatively simple.  For example, with the double-sided printing situation discussed earlier, it would be beneficial to post step-by-step instructions on how to select duplex copying near all of the applicable copiers.

2. Model the Behavior: In addition to providing static “how-to” instructions, it can also be beneficial to have someone demonstrate the actual behavior. People are typically more willing to try something when they observe someone else do it first and can subsequently test out the behavior at their own pace and in a “safe” environment where they won’t feel publicly embarrassed if they fumble in their attempts. Video recording someone going through the steps of completing the behavior and making the file accessible online for people to independently view at their leisure is often an effective approach. Referencing the duplex example again, an IT person could video record someone going through the on-screen motions of selecting double-sided printing on their computer. Following promotional efforts that note the availability of the video online, an employee could then access and view the video via his or her own work computer, rewinding as necessary to catch each step.

3. Communicate the Norm: Even though individuals are generally unaware of it, they are strongly influenced by what the majority of people around them are doing or what is perceived to be common behavior. Considering this, if a survey or structured observation indicates that a targeted behavior is generally supported or exhibited by a majority of people in an organization, it is highly beneficial to incorporate this fact into all educational efforts. Communicating this “norm” will strongly influence people who are not engaging in the behavior; the more these individuals perceive themselves as not being a part of the majority, the greater the probability that they will adopt the behavior. Granted, there is a caveat with this behavioral tip. If less than half of the group supports or demonstrates the target behavior, do not advertise this since it will often have a counterproductive effect. This strategy is more about capturing the remaining few that are still not engaging in a targeted behavior versus trying to promote a behavior that is only exhibited by a small minority.

We recently worked with The Nebraska Medical Center (TNMC) to incorporate this strategy into the organization’s Lights Off campaign, which was focused on motivating people to shut off the lights when leaving unoccupied rooms and workspaces. Based on an initial survey of the organization, we found that an overwhelming majority of employee respondents agreed that it was important to save energy at work by shutting off the lights. This “normative fact” was then incorporated into TNMC’s promotional efforts. Mixed with other strategies, such as placing reminder stickers above light switch plates, this approach of communicating the norm helped significantly increase the percentage of employees who regularly shut off the lights.

4. Leverage the Consistency Principle: Generally speaking, people like to act in a consistent manner. Keeping this in mind, it can be very beneficial to ask people to sign some type of informal pledge form indicating that they will engage in the targeted behavior. By signing a pledge and demonstrating an initial level of commitment, there is a good chance people will actually follow through with the behavior due to a general tendency to be consistent with what they have previously promised to do. To further increase accountability and the likelihood of follow through, it’s also advantageous to publicize the names of pledgees in some fashion (assuming you receive their permission). Periodically thanking them for agreeing to engage in the behavior can also help serve as reminder of their commitment, increasing the likelihood that they will follow through and continue engaging in the behavior.

We leverage this consistency principle by creating an online pledge tool for our clients. This tool allows people to select and commit to a few simple pro-environmental behaviors. The name of each pledgee is then placed on a digital wall of honor and grouped with other departmental colleagues who completed the pledge. Automated emails are also periodically sent out to pledgees thanking them for their participation and tactfully reminding them of their commitment to engage in their selected behaviors. An example of this online pledge tool and the wall of honor can be viewed on the University of Nebraska Medical Center’s green team website, entitled UNMC LiveGreen.

5. Provide Feedback: People inherently like to know how well they are doing at something and feel successful. Consequently, providing consistent feedback about progress and advertising the collective impact of people’s efforts can be incredibly beneficial in motivating and sustaining behavior change. In fact, providing individual and/or group feedback is often more effective at sustaining pro-environmental behavior change than providing incentives—a topic I plan to discuss in more depth in my next blog post (in a nutshell, incentives can be great at inciting behavior change, but they often stink at maintaining it).

To view an example of a feedback mechanism that we use with our clients, check out the Omaha Public Schools’ (OPS) tracker tool on the OPS Green Schools Initiative website.  This feedback tool helps OPS visually demonstrate the district’s progress toward its sustainability goals, such as increasing the district-wide ENERGY STAR rating and reducing the total amount of waste produced. Feedback is also provided at the individual school level via quarterly snapshot sheets that are provided to each school, highlighting the progress they’ve each made toward OPS’ overall sustainability goals. As a result of integrating school-specific and district-wide feedback mechanisms with other behavioral strategies, OPS has been able to significantly reduce the amount of energy and resources that the district consumes.

HARNESSING BEHAVIORAL INERTIA & MIXING STRATEGIES

As noted previously, changing behavior is hard. Sometimes really hard. However, this can be viewed as a positive (I realize you may think I’m crazy at this point). If we can get people to change, they will often maintain that change simply due to behavioral inertia—their innate tendency to keep on acting in the same way. In essence, once they make the change, their natural inclination to remain consistent can set in. To promote this initial change and set the stage for maintaining the behavior (i.e., behavioral inertia), it is important to keep in mind that basic information and awareness campaigns are often insufficient at provoking and sustaining behavior change. People typically will not change simply because they are aware of the benefits of the behavior and generally have a positive attitude about it.  In light of this, promotional and educational efforts should incorporate research-supported strategies that take into account social influence and human nature and perception. However, even with some of the more effective strategies that I’ve mentioned, incorporating just one additional strategy is often not enough. Integrating several of these strategies tends to produce the best results and increase the likelihood that people will not only make the change, but also sustain it—the true goal of any campaign focused on promoting environmentally-friendly behaviors.

Electrons are difficult to see, so talking about electricity can sometimes be confusing for people whose everyday job does not involve measuring kilowatts (kilo-whats?) and kilowatt-hours (did you fall asleep just reading that sentence?). But just about everyone uses electricity everyday. If you are a commercial or industrial customer, then it is really important to understand electricity demand.

Understanding that you pay for the electricity you use in a given period of time is pretty straightforward. Understanding demand is a little trickier. Demand charges are based on the fact that electricity generators and transmitters must match electricity production and delivery to the instantaneous demand for electricity. Thus, they need to have the capacity to deliver all of the electricity needed at the point in time when the total demand for electricity is highest (typically in the summer months due to air conditioner use). Utilities must maintain this capacity even at times when demand is not at its highest. The demand charge helps to pay for the infrastructure that isn’t being used all the time so it is available when needed during the peaks. Customers that have a greater contribution to that peak end up paying a higher demand. Typically, only commercial and industrial customers are large enough to individually affect the peak, which is why residential customers do not see demand charges.

Pretend for a minute that you bake pies and I buy and eat only your pies. Your oven can only bake one pie at a time, but you also have to have a pie ready for me whenever I want to eat one. As long as I eat pies at the same or slower rate than you can bake them, you don’t need another oven or any more pie-making equipment (e.g., pans, mixers, or ladles (are ladles used when making pies?)).

Anyway, if I start to eat pies faster than you can make them in your single oven, you will have to invest in a second oven and more pans and equipment because you must have a second pie ready when I finish the first one. I will eat pies faster for a while, but eventually I will slow down again and one oven is all you need to keep up. But now you have a second oven and extra equipment you aren’t using anymore. As your only pie consumer, you could start making me pay more for my pies now. After all, I caused you to need a second oven even though it is just sitting there. I was the reason you had to buy it, so it is reasonable for me to help pay for it.

The electric demand charge is like the extra cost of that second oven, except that electric utilities spread that cost among many customers. Utilities also figure out who is eating the most pies and causing most of the the need for extra ovens. Utilities charge those pie eaters even more than the rest of pie eaters.

Depending on how your company uses electricity, it might save as much energy from demand reduction as it could from energy efficiency improvements (energy efficiency is like eating fewer total pies, regardless of how fast you eat them). Although it is clear that the energy efficiency market has been attracting smart money, and that efficiency improvements can reduce demand, many companies fail to consider how strategic demand reductions can save money.

In Verdis’ own work OPS has made significant progress with energy efficiency improvements (lighting retrofit, building system improvements, behavior change). Thus, Verdis is starting to explore whether and how targeted demand reduction can help OPS save additional dollars. Although the main driver for demand reduction in many organizations is cost savings, there is an environmental benefit as well. The longer we can help keep that usage peak low, the longer we can delay construction of the next big utility plant. And until every next utility plant will be something other than coal- or natural gas-fired, we have an extra incentive to keep demand low.

This big, ugly recession that refuses to go away is absolutely demolishing public school budgets, which is certainly no surprise. State funding for education is diminishing, many federal grant dollars have come and gone, and other sources of revenue aren’t exactly growing. The result: cuts across the board for many schools and school districts. As we heard in this story from NPR recently (yes, I listen to a lot of NPR), Texas schools are cutting teachers, teachers’ aides, sports, security, transportation, etc, etc. The list goes on and is not unique to our friends in Texas.

When the situation is this dire, justifying sustainability initiatives is difficult, and many schools are turning away from conservation and efficiency initiatives due to a lack of resources (both time and money). But the right strategy is to do the exact opposite. The longer schools disregard and ignore their use of energy and other resources, the more often they will find themselves fighting the budget battle…and losing.

Taking Advantage of the Opportunity
Fortunately not every school district is ignoring the sustainability opportunity. Our work with the Omaha Public Schools is a perfect example of how a commitment to energy efficiency can save jobs, programs and other essential components of the education system. OPS is saving over $500,000 per year in energy costs. Yes, you read that right. It’s not small potatoes. That’s a lot of books…or teachers…or meals.

What sets OPS apart? The answer boils down to leadership. I vividly recall an important and insightful comment an OPS board member made two years ago: “We build 100-year buildings”. What a perfect perspective for a school district. While many companies are fighting to keep the doors open from one quarter to the next, we know with near perfect certainty that our schools will be here in ten, twenty, fifty and likely one-hundred years. When your horizon is that long, small investments, and in some cases large investments are well worth it even during tight budget times. They often pay for themselves in less than a few years, and in some cases, immediately recoup minimal upfront costs.

Omaha’s schools are not alone in their efforts. In August of this year, the New York Times reported on many of the energy efficiency and conservation measures schools are taking to decrease their energy use. Activities run the gamut and include simple things like post-it note reminders and checklists, and not-so-simple energy audits and boiler replacements.

Not every strategy listed in the Times article is a good one, unfortunately. Namely, the “energy cop” from Mount Sinai is a temporary solution that doesn’t result in long-lasting, sustainable behavior change. Fortunately, the cop noted as much when he admitted, “as soon as you take me away, people will start their bad habits again”. Right on, officer. Right on. Not a sustainable solution. Acknowledging and recognizing good behavior is a far better long-term solution than leaving nasty notes when people don’t comply.

Static + Dynamic Strategies
Our focus with OPS has been twofold: 1) identifying and implementing one-time gains in efficiency (static strategies such as lighting retrofits), and 2) engaging people in a meaningful and rewarding way so that sustainability becomes part of the organizational culture (dynamic strategies such as point-of-use prompts or a Green Challenge Series).  The latter is, quite honestly, more difficult work. It’s infinitely more challenging to change a person’s behavior than it is to change a light bulb.

Point-of-Use Prompts help Remind Folks to Conserve

Where Schools Should Start
One of the most important things every single school district can easily and inexpensively do is to benchmark each school’s energy use with ENERGY STAR. In most cases it’s so easy that a class can easily pull the information together and establish the benchmark within a few days. In the end, each school has a number that indicates how energy efficient your building is compared to schools from around the country.

Ratings range from 1 to 100 (the higher the better). If you’re scoring low, there might be some low-hanging fruit that can save big dollars in a hurry. If you’re scoring high, congrats…top-performing ENERGY STAR labeled schools cost 40 cents/SF less to operate than an average school. Either way, once the benchmark is in place, it’s easy to maintain and is an absolutely invaluable mechanism to track progress.

Sustainability and Education
It was John F. Kennedy who said, “Our progress as a nation can be no swifter than our progress in education. The human mind is our fundamental resource.” It’s a quote I ponder often. Educational leaders are under pressure to produce results, and it’s important for them to remember that sustainability is both an end and a means to an end in the educational system.