I am a stubborn advocate of “Higher Quality Costs Less”.

Two decades ago, many business leaders were under the impression that to improve quality, they had to significantly add to their costs. They now know that improving quality reduces overall costs. A step further, they now also know that the low-cost producer always has the best quality.

The same applies to pollution. When the focus is on costs, pollution indicates operational inefficiency. In a shifted paradigm, it provides an opportunity to save money! Or “Lower Pollution Costs Less”!

Unfortunately, most companies that wish to save money end up shifting their manufacturing operations from their resident country where environmental standards are usually high, to third world countries where standards are generally low. This approach is myopic because it simply does not take into account the root problem of pollution.

As an explanation, you cannot waste raw materials that may be cheap without wasting other resources that are perhaps expensive. It is now a universal truth that wasteful practices impact the bottom-line of the profit and loss statement. They also point to an inefficient organization living on borrowed time.

Should we adopt a mantra of “Zero Emissions”?