Energy Management System for an Integrated Production Site

Energy Management System for an Integrated

Production Site

Case study at “site Tata Steel in IJmuiden”

Jan ten Heuvel University of Groningen Faculty of Economics & Business Master of Science Technology Management Assessor University of Groningen: Stuart Zhu Co-assessor University of Groningen: Michiel Hillen

Energy Efficiency team Tata Steel in IJmuiden Supervisor Energy Efficiency team: Ruben Groen Co-supervisor Energy Efficiency team: Gerard Jägers

Master Thesis

Energy Management System for an Integrated Production Site

Preface

In May 2012, I have started this research to finalise the Master programme Technology Management and to graduate at the University of Groningen. Five months later, I present my research thesis. Doing research and writing my thesis was a challenging “journey”. I have learned a lot and I have developed my professional skills.

The opportunity for an internship in an interesting dynamic organisation was valuable for my research. I would like to thank all the interviewees for their time and help to conduct this research. Without their commitment, this research would be less valuable.

I will thank my supervisor of the University of Groningen, Stuart Zhu, for all his input during the feedback sections. You have challenged me to conduct an academic research study, which was important for the quality and structure of my master thesis. Furthermore, your company visit is highly appreciated.

I will also thank Mr. Michiel Hillen for being my second supervisor. His advice has helped me to write a compact and consistent master thesis. Also, I would like to thank you for all your valuable supervision in the different courses of the Msc. Technology Management curriculum.

Last, but certainly not least, I would like to thank my supervisors at Tata Steel in IJmuiden: Ruben Groen, Jurgen Bakker and Gerard Jägers. Ruben, I thank you for your time, knowledge, daily supervision and participation in the Energy Efficiency team. Jurgen, I thank you for the weekly discussion about the faced problems and issues. Gerard, I thank you for the supervision during our time together in the Energy Efficiency team. Furthermore, I thank you for the possibility to follow valuable trainings for the improvement consultants of the EE-team.

List of Content

1.1 Initial Motive “site Tata Steel in IJmuiden” ... 6

1.2 Relevance for Scientific Literature ... 7

1.3 Research Question ... 7 1.4 Definitions ... 7 1.5 Preview ... 8 2. Literature Review ... 9 2.1 System Thinking ... 9 2.1.1 Synergy... 9 2.1.2 Cybernetics ... 9

2.2 Integrated Production Site ... 10

2.2.1 Characteristics ... 10 2.2.2 Energy ... 10 2.3 Energy Efficiency ... 11 2.3.1 Definition ... 11 2.3.2 Measurement ... 11 2.3.3 Monitoring ... 12 2.3.4 Data Gathering ... 13 2.4 CO2 Emissions ... 14

2.5 Energy Management System ... 15

2.5.1 Introduction ... 15

2.5.2 Design of an Energy Management System ... 16

2.5.3 Continuous Improvement ... 17

2.5.4 Top Management Support ... 18

2.5.5 Integrated Management Systems ... 18

2.6 Conclusions ... 19

3. Methodology ... 20

3.1 Research Approach ... 20

3.2 Case study: “site Tata Steel IJmuiden” ... 20

3.2.1 Tata Steel Group ... 21

3.2.2 Site Tata Steel in IJmuiden ... 21

3.2.3 Integrated Production Site ... 21

3.2.4 Stages in Case Study Research ... 21

4. Results ... 24

4.1 Integrated Production Site ... 24

4.2 Energy Efficiency ... 25

4.2.1 Analysis Tools/Techniques ... 25

4.2.2 Measurement ... 26

4.2.3 Monitoring ... 27

4.3 CO2 emissions ... 29

4.4 Energy Management System ... 30

4.4.1 Design Energy Management System ... 30

4.4.2 Continuous Improvement ... 33

4.4.3 Top Management Support ... 34

4.4.4 Integrated Management System ... 34

5. Discussion & Conclusion ... 35

5.1 Discussion ... 35

5.2 Conclusion ... 37

5.3 Implications for Tata Steel in IJmuiden ... 38

5.4 Implications for Scientific Literature ... 39

List of Abbreviations

BF = Blast Furnace

BFG = Blast Furnace Gas

BOS = Basic Oxygen Steel

BOSG = Basic Oxygen Steel Gas

CO2 = Carbon Dioxide

COG = Cokes Oven Gas

CPR = Coated Products

CSM = Cold Strip Mill

DRT = Diffusion Rate of Technologies

DSP = Direct Sheet Plant

ECC = Energy Control Centre

ED = Energy Department

EE-team = Energy Efficiency team

EE-program = Energy Efficiency program

EnMS = Energy Management System

EPI = Economic Performance Indicator

ERP = Enterprises Resource Planning

ET = Economic Thermodynamic Indicator

EU = European Union

EUETS = European Union Emission Trading Scheme

GJ = Giga Joule

GST = General System Theory

HSM = Hot Strip Mill

IEA = International Energy Agency

ICT = Information and Communication Technology

IMS = Integrated Management System

ISO = International Standardisation Organisation

KPI = Key Performance Indicator

MAS = Management Accounting System

OBS = Ontwerp Bedrijfskundige Systemen (Design Business Systems)

PDCA = Plan Do Check Act

SEC = Specific Energy Consumption

TEE = Thermodynamic Energy Efficiency

TSIJ = site Tata Steel in IJmuiden

TSP = Tata Steel Packaging

WAG = Works Arising Gas

List of Figures

Figure 2.1: Energy cascading in integrated production site/process ... 11

Figure 2.2: Prices for EUETS credits (Venmans, 2012) ... 14

Figure 2.3: Energy Management System Model of the ISO 50.001 standard ... 15

Figure 2.4: Conceptual research framework ... 19

Figure 3.1: Research approach in operations research (Sagasti & Mitroff, 1973) ... 20

Figure 3.2: Five-stage research model for a case study (Stuart et al., 2002) ... 22

Figure 4.1: Natural gas replacement at TSIJ ... 25

Figure 4.2: Energy consumption per product type ... 26

Figure 4.3: Recovery of COG at TSIJ ... 26

Figure 4.4: Stock corrections and miscellaneous ... 32

Figure 5.1: The Ouchi (1979) model ... 35

Figure 5.2: Relevance of “act” stage ... 37

Figure 5.3: Generalised structured framework of “leading” and “lagging” KPIs ... 40

Figure 5.4: Maturity model for energy efficiency of an integrated production site ... 42

List of Tables

Table 2.1: Lagging KPIs for energy efficiency mentioned in scientific literature ... 12

Table 4.1: Empirical results for hypothesis 1 ... 24

Table 4.2: Applicability existing KPIs to monitor energy efficiency ... 27

Table 4.3: Energy cascading of coke oven gases at TSIJ ... 28

Table 4.4: Match industrial needs and “plan” stage of ISO 50.001 EnMS ... 30

Table 4.5: Match industrial needs and “do” stage of ISO 50.001 EnMS ... 31

Table 4.6: Possibility to integrate EnMS with other management systems ... 34

Abstract

Rising energy prices, global warming and customers’ increasing ecological awareness have pushed energy efficiency to the top of the agenda in production management. Companies strive to improve energy efficiency, to identify KPIs to measure energy efficiency and to implement an energy management system. However, the existing knowledge in scientific literature does not meet these industrial needs. Based on a case study at the “site Tata Steel in IJmuiden”, this paper highlights the needs of an industrial company to integrate energy efficiency management in their integrated production site. The paper formulates and analyses hypotheses with regard to concepts and tools for the measurement, the control, the management of energy efficiency in production management proposed in literature. These hypotheses are tested in this case study for an integrated production site in the process industry that produces the primary material steel. The results contribute to closing the existing gap between the literature and practice. It concludes that a structured framework consisting of “leading” and “lagging” KPIs and a modified energy management system (based on ISO 50.001 standard) contribute to improvement in energy efficiency in production management. The structured framework of KPIs translates strategic goals into actions that are cascaded from strategic, to tactical, to operational level. The ISO 50.001 standard should be modified to ensure the reliability of energy efficiency measurements and the need for change management. The actual energy consumption should be standardised to a baseline period to indicate improvements in energy efficiency. Furthermore, a maturity model is proposed to manage energy efficiency of integrated production sites, which should be validated by future research.

1. Introduction

Rising prices for energy resources, scarce energy resources, customers’ increasing ecological awareness and CO2 emission with associated climate change are factors of increasing importance in production management (Bunse, Vodicka, Schonsleben, Brullhart & Ernst, 2011). Energy resources have become more and more strategic resources, forcing companies to push the management of energy efficiency to the top of their agenda (Gunsekaran & Ngai, 2012). The management of energy efficiency results in a more sustainable future for the company and reduction of production costs (Bunse et al. 2011; Gunsekaran & Ngai, 2012

).

1.1

Initial Motive “site Tata Steel in IJmuiden”

TSIJ is a production site located in IJmuiden (the Netherlands) and is part of the Tata Steel Group. The site dedicates their activities to the production of high quality steel (a primary material) for serving global markets, such as the construction building, mining, automotive and packaging industry. With a production capacity of approximately 7.5 million tonnes of crude steel, TSIJ is an important player in the Dutch economy. The high quality steel is the output of an energy intensive integrated production process at the integrated production site in IJmuiden. Therefore, TSIJ is also a major consumer of scarce energy resources in the Netherlands. TSIJ has faced the following issues with regard to the enormous consumption of energy resources:

- High amount of CO2 emissions that contributes to global warming; - Highly dependent on strategic energy resources;

- Increasing production costs for high quality steel.

Those issues are not only perceived by TSIJ, but also by other companies in similar process industries that produce primary materials, such as the chemical, petrochemical, iron, cement, pulp and paper industry. Those process industries have large scale integrated production processes on their integrated production sites (especially the first three mentioned industries are comparable to TSIJ with regard to size and complexity). Those industries account for 25% of worldwide energy consumption, they are main contributor of total CO2 emissions and important driver for increasing demand of energy resources (IEA, 2008).

The issues motivated the executive management of TSIJ to initiate an energy efficiency program to improve energy efficiency and reduce CO2 emission of their integrated production site. Energy efficiency for TSIJ refers to the consumption of less energy resources to produce the same amount of high quality steel. The following factors can improve energy efficiency for an integrated production site:

- Amount of technical capabilities (Challis & Samson, 1996); - Energy efficient mindset & behaviour (Armor & Taylor, 2007); - Presence of recycled waste streams (Sinnott, 2008);

- Support from top management (Young & Jordan);

- Energy management system (Giacone & Manco, 2012; Gordic et al. 2012).

1.2 Relevance for Scientific Literature

The previous section emphasises the value of managing energy efficiency with an EnMS. However, a low status of energy management is a barrier to energy efficiency in companies (Bunse et al. 2011; Giacone & Manco, 2012; Tanaka, 2008). The reason is that the current knowledge about EnMS is insufficient in existing literature. Standards for energy management are available on country and industry levels and they describe how to measure and improve energy efficiency (Bunse et al., 2011). Bunse et al. (2011) found that those standards do not satisfy the needs of industrial companies, stating that “more comprehensive

evaluations of whether these standards satisfy the needs of industrial companies in the area of energy management in production should be carried out”. Their statement is based on a gap analysis between

industrial needs (retrieved from interviews) and current literature. They found that: “current approaches to

measure, control and improve energy efficiency in manufacturing processes have shortcomings in addressing industrial needs in a comprehensive and suitable manner” (Bunse et al., 2011). The scientific literature can contribute from gaining more knowledge about the industrial needs of an integrated production site for an EnMS, because a better designed EnMS can be generated for companies in process industries with an integrated production site, which covers 25 per cent of world-wide energy consumption.

1.3 Research Question

Integrated production sites in process industries are heavily depending on scarce strategic energy resources. Those energy resources have a large influence on the cost price and CO2 emissions of a company. Therefore, for the sake of competitive advantage and continuity, it is vital for companies with an integrated production site (e.g. TSIJ) to pursue more energy efficient production. An EnMS is a valuable solution to approach a more energy efficient integrated production process for such companies. However, those companies cannot tap the full potential of these advantages because of the current numb state of knowledge about EnMS. Thus, there exists a gap between the scientific literature and industrial needs for an EnMS for (integrated) production sites. Therefore, the following main research question applies: What is the required design for an energy management system to increase the overall energy efficiency of an integrated production site?

The answer will contribute to narrowing the existing gap between scientific literature and practice. Furthermore, an advice is proposed for TSIJ to improve their energy efficiency. Empirical data will be gathered by means of a case study of the integrated production process for steel at TSIJ. The following research directions facilitate the answer on the main research question and are elaborated in chapter 2.

- Priority for managing energy efficiency of an integrated production site; - The role of energy cascading;

- The measurement and monitoring of energy efficiency;

- The relationship between improvement in energy efficiency and CO2 emissions;

- The match between the ISO 50.001 standard (ISO standard for energy management) and industrial needs of an integrated production site;

- The role of top management support;

- The possibility to integrate the ISO 50.001 standard with other ISO standards.

1.4 Definitions

Table 1.1 presents definitions of fundamental concepts of this research, which should be kept in mind. The definitions give a brief and clear overview of fundamental concepts used in this research report and make it easier to understand the research paper.

Table 1.1: Definitions of key concepts

Factor Definition Author

Energy The capacity of a physical system to produce external activity or to perform work.

ISO (2011) Energy

Efficiency

To consume less energy resources to produce the same amount of useful output Giacone & Manco(2012) Integrated Production Site

An integrated network of plants and large-scale processes, with an overall objective to transform materials supplied from outside of the network into products for external demand, whereby intermediate products are produced and consumed by plants in the network.

Terrazas - Morena et al. (2010) Energy Management System

A set of well-planned procedures aimed at improving continuously energy efficiency for a production process

1.5 Preview

2. Literature Review

This literature review provides background knowledge to answer the main research question. Different aspects related to the research question will be explained and introduced. Furthermore, research hypotheses will be formulated that give direction to answer the main research question. The literature review starts with the introduction of system thinking, because this approach contains elements that should be taken into account during the research. Subsequently, the concepts of integrated production site or process and energy efficiency are explained. An EnMS is the final introduced topic of this research, because it is an instrument to continuously improve energy efficiency for an (integrated) production site. Finally, conclusions are drawn that gives direction to answer the research question.

2.1 System Thinking

System thinking is an approach that helps managers and academics to conceptualise and generalise (organisational) systems with associated problems (Sagasti & Mitroff, 1973). System thinking is an effective tool to analyse business and production processes and to generate effective solutions (Veldt, Slatius, & Veldt, 2007). The general system theory (GST) is a well-known system approach to describe and analyse systems as a whole (Seising, 2010). The theory is initiated in the 20’s and popularised in the 50’s and 60’s. Important aspect of the GST is synergy and will be discussed in the next section. Furthermore, the system approach “cybernetics” will be introduced, because the approach contains important elements to optimise systems and to generate effective solutions (Seising, 2010; Duffy 1984). 2.1.1 Synergy

Synergy describes the relationships between the sub-systems of a system and their associated processes. Those relationships could have a serious and underestimated impact on the performance of a system and are important to take into account in the research of (organisational) systems (Veldt, Slatius, & Veldt, 2007). Important aspects related to synergy are aggregation levels and emergent properties. The introduction of those two aspects makes it possible to define synergy.

Systems can be perceived and defined on different hierarchical levels, which is called an aggregation level (Veldt, Slatius, & Veldt, 2007). An aggregation level is a system consisting of interacting sub-systems. A sub-system is as a smaller system on a lower aggregation level (Mesarovic, Macko & Takahara, 1970). The GST states that it is valuable to describe and manage systems/organisations by the use of different aggregation levels, because it gives a clear overview of the total system and associated interactions between the different sub-systems in the system (Veldt, Slatius, & Veldt, 2007).

The presence of emergent properties is well-known in system approaches and very important to study / improve systems. Emergent properties arise at a particular aggregation level of system and are the consequence of interactions among (sub) systems at lower aggregation level(s) (Damper, 2000). Those interactions emerge in unexpected behaviour and phenomena at higher levels of hierarchy and are frequently described in terms of surprise or unpredictability with a serious impact on the “whole” system. Therefore, emergent properties have a fundamental role in studying systems, because it is a key principle to create “synergy” in a (total) system. Synergy can be illustrated with the most mentioned sentence in system approaches, namely: “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” (Seising, 2010). This sentence explains that the sum of separate optimised (sub) systems does not necessarily lead to an optimised system at a higher aggregation level and is essential to optimise (organisational) systems (Jackson, 2003). 2.1.2 Cybernetics

- Goal or purpose: What is the aim of organisational processes?

- Comparing the goal with actual performance: The comparison between actual results and goals will deliver a “difference“.

- Feedback: An information flow that communicates the “difference” to the source. The source can modify the initial act to approach the desired goal in the future.

Negative feedback is the information flow that decreases the “difference” between the goal and actual performance (Seising, 2010). Negative feedback is essential to create a stable equilibrium in systems. Since business or organisational systems constantly change and strive for optimisation, feedback is often used as an instrument for process improvement and stabilisation (Seising, 2010). Therefore, cybernetics has a fundamental role to manage organisational systems, to achieve continuously improvement and adaptation to unexpected situations. The next section illustrates that cybernetics and synergy are important system approaches to manage the energy efficiency of integrated production site.

2.2 Integrated Production Site

An integrated production site is mentioned explicitly in the main research question, because associated energy efficiency should be managed and controlled. This section introduces the concept of integrated production site and associated characteristics. Furthermore, energy cascading will be introduced. 2.2.1 Characteristics

An integrated production site is defined as follows (section 1.4 Definitions): An integrated network of plants

or large-scale processes, with an overall objective to transform materials supplied from outside of the network into products for external demand, whereby intermediate products are produced and consumed by plants in the network (Terrazas-Moreno et al., 2010). The definition makes it clear that an integrated

production site consists of an integrated network of facilities/plants to produce the demanded products of the customer. Therefore, an integrated production site can be approached as an integrated production process with multiple interdependent factories (Duflou et al. 2012), which has the following characteristics: (Wassick, 2009; Terrazas-Moreno, 2012; Duflou et al., 2012; Maes et al., 2011):

- High dependency and integration among the production processes of the different facilities; - The output of a facility is the input for another facility;

- Producing a wide range of products; - Different product and raw materials flows; - Maximum production capacity differs per facility;

- Waste streams could be input for another facility (energy cascading); - Scheduling production and maintenance is complicated;

- Energy flows are complicated to understand and to control.

All those characteristics have effect on the optimal state of an integrated production site (whole system), which consists of different facilities and each facility can be perceived as a sub-system or as a system at a lower aggregation level. Management should focus their activities to achieve synergetic effects and not on the best performance per single facility (Maes et al, 2011; Duflou et al., 2012).

2.2.2 Energy

Integrated production sites consume energy media extracted from conventional and sustainable energy resources to perform “work”, which makes it possible to transform raw materials into end products (Duflou et al., 2012). The consumed energy media are most of the time the following:

- Combustible gases; - Electricity;

- Water; - Steam;

- Compressed air.

Energy costs are a serious cost factor for integrated production sites. However, the financial performance of integrated production site depends heavily on the following factors: product quality and production rate (Siitonen, Tuomaala & Ahtila, 2010). Those mentioned factors determine the sales price of a product and determine the annual production capacity. However, energy efficiency is also important, because products produced in large scale process industries have low profit margins, but energy cost/CO2 emissions are a main cost factor for primary material process industries (Terrazas-Morena et al., 2010; IEA, 2008). It seems like that the management of an integrated production site gives a higher priority to product and production related factors instead of energy or CO2 emissions related factors. Therefore, the following research hypothesis applies:

Duflou et al. (2012) state that energy cascading (Figure 2.1) is a widespread characteristic of energy efficiency for an integrated production site. Energy cascading is the recycling of physical flows with consumable energy content in the process chain. For example, natural gas is a physical input flow with relative high energy content. A waste stream (for example hot water) of a process that consumes natural gas has lower energy content and can be recycled in

another process steps (Hui & Li, 2007). The result of energy cascading is a “downfall” of energy content during the utilisation time and results in a reduction of needed energy media. It has a positive influence on creating synergetic effects for energy efficiency (Duflou et al., 2012). However, energy cascading requires specific installations and technologies, which could be expensive and are associated with high investments (Sinnott, 2008). Those financial issues could have a limiting influence on tapping the full potential of energy cascading. Therefore, the following research hypothesis is interesting:

Hypothesis 2: The investments in energy cascading are limited by financial feasibility.

2.3 Energy Efficiency

The main goal and motive of this research is to gain knowledge to improve energy efficiency and to reduce CO2 emissions for an integrated production site by the use of an EnMS. This section aims to clarify what energy efficiency exactly is, how to measure energy efficiency, how to monitor energy efficiency, and how to gather data to determine the degree of energy efficiency.

2.3.1 Definition

Energy efficiency is often mentioned in the scientific literature and has different definitions. The definition given by Bunse et al. (2011) is as follows: “getting the most out of every energy unit you buy”. However, the definition of Patterson (1996) is often cited in recently published articles as follows: “Using less energy

for producing the same amount of useful output” (Formula 1).

The definition for energy efficiency seems very simplistic, but the measurement and management of energy efficiency is complicated for integrated production sites and processes (Siitonen, Tuomaala & Ahtila, 2010). Energy efficiency is hard to compare over time, because of the following factors:

- Fluctuating production capacity (Giacone & Manco, 2012); - Difference in the quality of raw materials (Patterson, 1996); - State of the art production processes (Chai & Yeo, 2012);

- Interdependency between processes of an integrated production site (Wassick, 2009).

Analysis of energy efficiency is possible in production management by mathematical methods/standards and ICT tools (Bunse et al. 2011; Giacone & Manco, 2012). But integrated production sites are more complex than “general” production processes. It is questionable if the current methods/standards and ICT tools are good enough to determine energy efficiency of an integrated production site. Therefore, hypothesis 3 applies as research direction for this research.

Hypothesis 3: ICT tools, analysis techniques/methods and energy efficiency standards make it possible to determine energy efficiency/ CO2 emissions of an integrated production site.

The measurement of energy efficiency will be discussed in the next section, because it seems difficult and valuable for managers of (integrated) production sites to measure energy efficiency. It gives them insights in their current energy efficiency performance to control energy efficiency (Gordic et al., 2010).

2.3.2 Measurement

The measurement of energy efficiency for an integrated production site provides insights about current energy efficiency performance and potential for improvement (Bunse et al. 2011). Giacone & Manco (2012) state that a unique quantitative measure has to reflect energy efficiency of a production process. However, formula (1) is a ratio and does not represent a practical unique quantitative measurement to

measure energy efficiency. Therefore, Giacone & Manco (2012) suggest in order to determine the energy efficiency of an integrated production site, due to the different characteristics of associated integrated production process, it is necessary to adopt one or more key performance indicators (KPIs) as a unique quantitative measurement. Those KPIs form together a structured framework that reflects the energy efficiency performance of an integrated production site and indicates where improvements can be made. Research in the field of maintenance performance indicates that a KPI framework related to production factors should consist of leading and lagging KPIs (Muchiri, Pintelon, Gelders & Martin, 2011). This is in line with the research of Ittner & Larcker (1998), which state that leading and lagging KPIs are needed to manage production related factors. Leading and lagging can be defined as followed:

- Leading: Indicators that monitor whether tasks are being performed that will “predict” performance. - Lagging: Indicators that monitor whether the results or desired outcomes have been achieved. In the reviewed literature is not indicated a structured framework consisting of leading and lagging KPIs to manage the production factor energy efficiency. Giacone & Manco (2012) suggest using a structured framework to manage energy efficiency. Hypothesis 4 aims to confirm the previously mentioned statement.

Hypothesis 4a: A structured framework consisting of leading and lagging KPIs is required to manage energy efficiency for an integrated production site.

The definitions of leading and lagging KPIs state that it is essential to monitor energy efficiency. The monitoring of energy efficiency is discussed in the next section.

2.3.3 Monitoring

A structured KPI framework monitors energy efficiency for an integrated production site. It represents information of potential improvements that can be used as feedback to the source for improvement (role of cybernetics). The structured framework provides an important link between the energy strategies and management actions; because it assesses the contribution of energy efficiency related activities to production and overall strategic business objectives (Muchiri et al., 2011). Furthermore, monitoring supports the implementation and execution of improvement initiatives (Kaplan, 1983) and control of energy efficiency, learning from the past, coordination and process planning (Davilla, Foster & Lu, 2009). The reviewed literature mentioned different categories of KPIs to monitor energy efficiency performance and are related to thermodynamic, physical and economical features, which are shown in Table 2.1.

Table 2.1: lagging KPIs for energy efficiency mentioned in scientific literature

Indicator Numerator Denominator Unit Author

Thermodynamic Energy Efficiency

TEE Total amount of consumed energy (J)

Energy required for an “ideal” production process (J) None Patterson (1996) Specific Energy Consumption

SEC Total amount of consumed energy (J)

Total amount of prod- uced physical units

J/unit Siitonen et al.(2010) Economic Therm-

odynamic

ETI Total amount of consumed energy (J) monetary value of produced output (€) J/€ Patterson (1996) Economic Perfor- mance indicator

EPI Market value of consumed energy (€)

monetary value of produced output (€)

None Patterson (1996) Heat Value HV Absolute amount of

consumed energy (J)

None J Tanaka,

(2008) The TEE is an indicator that relies on measurements derived from the science of thermodynamics and compares actual energy consumption with the required theoretical energy consumption for an “ideal” process without any waste. The indicator SEC is a hybrid KPI consisting of two components: a thermodynamic (consumed energy) and a physical (per unit). It indicates the total amount of consumed energy for a produced product. The ETI is a KPI that consists of an economical and a thermodynamic component. It indicates how much energy is consumed for the total value of the produced output of a production process. The indicator EPI contains also economic components and is a ratio that indicates changes in energy efficiency in terms of monetary values. The four mentioned KPIs are ratios, but the heath value is an absolute number and unrelated to production volume. It is important to set boundaries for this indicator to monitor the supposed phenomena, which makes comparison over time possible.

integrated production site (Bunse et al. 2011; Tanaka, 2008). Therefore, the following hypothesis is interesting for this research:

Hypothesis 4b: The existing types of KPIs for monitoring energy efficiency are applicable to an integrated production site.

Muchiri et al. (2011) and Ittner & Larcker (1998) state that leading indicators are required to manage production related factors in production processes, because those indicators predict the desired performance and can be influenced by managers. The presence of leading indicators is limited for energy efficiency. In the literature, Formula 3 (DRT) is indicated as a leading indicator for energy efficiency (Tanaka, 2008).

Abertney and Utterback (1978) argue that the rate of technological advance is dependent on the amount of effort put into the development of the technology. According to Trott (2008), the reason for his argument is that technological progress starts of slowly then increases rapidly and finally diminishes as the physical limits of the technology are approached. This refers diagrammatically to an S-curve and is also applicable to energy efficiency and formula 2. When the theoretical limit of an energy efficient technology is approached, improvement in energy efficiency is only possible by the deployment of new energy efficient technologies. Formula 2 indicates whether an organisation invests in the deployment of new energy efficient technologies and is a useful leading indicator for energy efficiency performance.

Formula 2 is the only indicated leading KPI for energy efficiency. The research of Muchiri et al. (2011) suggests interesting leading KPIs that could enhance continuous improvement in energy efficiency for a production process, which are the following:

- Man hours spent for improvement work / total amount of available man hours; - Time needed to implement improvement proposals;

- Quality of improvement proposals; - Total number of improvement proposals.

The previously mentioned leading KPIs are not identified for energy efficiency and not related to the diffusion of new energy efficient technologies (formula 2). It seems like that leading indicators are absent to manage and improve continuously energy efficiency performance. Hypothesis 4c will be tested to confirm the previously mentioned argument for integrated production sites

Hypothesis 4c: Leading indicators are absent to manage and improve continuously energy efficiency performance for an integrated production site.

Muchiri et al. (2011) state that KPIs are required for each aggregation level in an organisation. The KPIs have to be cascaded from strategic, to tactical, to operational level. The cascading of KPIs contributes to link management action with overall business objectives. A hierarchical framework of KPIs should be taken into consideration to monitor overall energy efficiency of an integrated production site, because it makes possible that systems on a lower aggregation level support the targets of systems at a higher aggregation level. Emergent properties will be managed, which supports the creation of positive synergetic effects (Schenk, Moll & Schoot Uiterkamp, 2007). Thus, it seems like that KPIs should be cascaded to different organisational levels to improve the overall energy efficiency of an integrated production site.

Hypothesis 4d: KPIs for energy efficiency of an integrated production site should be cascaded into the organisation from strategic, to tactical, to operational level.

2.3.4 Data Gathering

A management accounting system (MAS) is an instrument that gathers and processes data extracted from a production process and can be perceived as an information control-oriented discipline. A MAS generates data to determine if the company achieves their desired performance (Birnberg, Turopolec & Young, 1983). An ideal designed MAS can be characterized in two ways:

1. Using appropriate accounting techniques for the existing task environment to gather the required data.

Those two characteristics are important to measure and to analyse energy efficiency performance. It is a prerequisite for the control of energy efficiency for an integrated production site (Tanaka, 2008) and is in line with the theory of “cybernetics”. The following three aspects should be taken into account to gather the required data to determine the value of KPIs (Tanaka, 2008):

- Reliability; - Feasibility; - Verifiability.

The aspect reliability refers to the correctness of the gathered data, which should reflect the supposed measured phenomena. Furthermore, reliability is concerned with the availability of data, because desired measurements are sometimes not measured due to unsecured measurement tools. The aspect feasibility is concerned with the total costs of executing the required measurements. Measurement methods could be more expensive in comparison with the associated gains. Furthermore, top management should give priority/allowance to measure certain aspects in production, because competitors can get access to classified data and top management wants to avoid that. Verifiability is the last aspect and is concerned with the question if improvement in energy efficiency performance can be measured in a dynamic production environment with different production capacities and quality differences.

Bunse et al. (2011) state that ICT tools enable energy efficient production. In most cases, A MAS is an ICT tool, because a large amount of data has to be processed quickly. Furthermore, ICT tools give the possibility to visualise real time data to evaluate immediately KPIs at operational level. Furthermore, it helps managers and operators to form a better understanding of the role of energy resources in the production processes. In conclusion, an appropriate ICT tool for energy efficiency is important to achieve a more energy efficient integrated production site.

2.4 CO2 Emissions

In 1997, the Kyoto conference called for substantial reduction of carbon emissions from the world’s energy systems, since CO2 emissions are the main contributor of climate change in the world. However, the Kyoto protocol does not clarify how to achieve reduction of CO2 emissions (IEA, 2007). The reason for this is that countries have different energy consumption patterns, different mixtures of energy resources and other concerns (Nakata, 2004). The best strategy to reduce CO2 emission is per country different. Nakata (2004) concludes that the government has a critical role in initiating, improving and controlling reduction of CO2 emission. A well-known instrument for governments to force manufacturing companies to reduce their CO2 emissions are so called “carbon taxes”. These taxes raise the price of fossil fuels and lead to greater reliance on non-fossil fuels (Nakata, 2004).

In 2005, The European Union Emission Trading Scheme (EUETS) was established and considered as the cornerstone of the European Union (EU) climate policy. The EUETS scope includes 11.500 energy intensive industrial companies that account for 40% of the total CO2 emissions in the EU (Venmans 2012). The EUETS has introduced carbon credits for the maximum CO2 emissions of a company in a certain time period. During this period, the amount of credits decreases in order to force companies to reduce their CO2 emission. Industrial companies should own an amount of credits equal to their absolute CO2 emission. The price of such a credit is given in Figure 2.2. The Trias Energetica is a model that illustrates three principles to reduce CO2 emissions (Entrop & Brouwers, 2010).

1. Reduce the demand for CO2 intensive energy resources and raw materials by saving measures; 2. Use sustainable resources, such as renewable energy resources and recycled products;

3. Use fossil fuels and CO2 intensive energy resources and raw materials as efficient as possible. According to Siitonen et al. (2010), improvement of CO2 emissions can be measured with Formula (3) in tonnes CO2 per tonne produced product. This measured ratio can be compared with each other over time.

The comparison indicates whether improvements are made. However, the applicability of formula 3 is questionable, due to the characteristics of an integrated production site; a different product mix could have an influence on the total CO2 emission of an integrated production site (Giacone & Manco, 2012). Therefore, the following research hypothesis is interesting for this research:

H5a: The current indicator for CO2 emissions is not useful for integrated production site.

Scientific literature states that CO2 emission and energy efficiency are related with each other (Bunse et al., 2011; Siitonen et al., 2010). Improvement in energy efficiency results in reduction of CO2 emission (Tanaka, 2008). However, the second principle of the Trias Energetica can also be applied to reduce CO2 emissions, but not for energy efficiency improvement (Entrop & Brouwers, 2010). Furthermore, more efficient use of consumed raw materials with high carbon emission can contribute to the reduction of CO2 emission. However, the reviewed literature does not take this into account.

H5b: CO2 emissions reduction and energy efficiency improvements are not perfectly related to each other

for an integrated production site.

2.5 Energy Management System

This section introduces an energy management system (EnMS) as an instrument to approach a more energy efficient integrated production site. Bunse et al. (2011) and Gordic et al. (2010) state that an EnMS has a positive relationship with achieving energy efficient production. This section will elaborate what an EnMS is, the design of such a system, the link to continuous improvement, and the role of top management. In the end, the possibility will be discussed to integrate an EnMS with other management systems.

2.5.1 Introduction

An EnMS enables production companies to establish the necessary procedures and management processes to improve their energy efficiency performance. Gordic et al. (2010) define an EnMS as follows:

a set of well-planned procedures aimed at reducing a company’s energy costs and increasing energy efficiency. Such a system

aims at facilitating processes and protocols to improve continuously with regard to energy efficiency. The ISO 50.001 standard is a relatively new international developed EnMS and shown graphically in Figure 2.3. The standard defines an EnMS more explicitly than Gordic et al. (2010) and as follows: a set

of interrelated or interacting elements to establish an energy policy and energy objectives, and processes and procedures to achieve those objectives (ISO, 2011).

The EnMS of Gordic et al. (2010) is developed by a Serbian car manufacture with as goal to reduce energy consumption in their production process. The ISO 50.001 standard is developed by the International Standards Organisation. Both EnMS(s) contain similar elements, but the ISO 50.001 standard is more comprehensive. Furthermore, the ISO 50.001 standard is based on the PDCA cycle, which is an instrument in continuous improvement and lean manufacturing (Rother, 2009). The PDCA cycle is derived from Deming’s improvement cycle and stands for: plan, do, check and act. The cycle facilitates the incorporation of energy management into everyday organisational practice. It is important to take into account that an EnMS is an instrument to achieve energy efficiency. A danger is that companies will implement an EnMS to show that they take actions to improve energy efficiency, but will not use the EnMS on the right way (Jorgensen et al., 2006). Criticasters argue that an EnMS does not ensure improvement in energy efficiency performance (Bunse et al. 2011), because energy management systems are not developed and used in the right way in production management. However, Gordic et al. (2010) state that implementing and using an EnMS can result in 25% reduction of energy consumption, because it gives priority to manage energy efficiency in production management and it facilitates the maintaining of the Figure 2.3 Energy Management System Model of the

achieved performance. In the end of 2011, The ISO 50.001 standard is introduced and only a few companies in the Netherlands are certified. However more companies are willing to implement an EnMS. The critics, advantages and willingness of companies to implement an EnMS (assumption: based on the ISO 50.001 standard) makes hypothesis 6 interesting for companies with an integrated production site.

Hypothesis 6: An energy management system (ISO 50.001) has a positive correlation with improving energy efficiency performance of an integrated production site.

2.5.2 Design of an Energy Management System

The EnMS of the ISO 50.001 standard is based on the PDCA improvement cycle and has some similarities with the EnMS of Gordic et al. (2010). Those two EnMS are the only indicated EnMS in the reviewed literature, which is not weird, because the management of energy efficiency is a new trend in production management (Gunsekaran & Ngai, 2012). Furthermore, it is questionable if the ISO 50.001 standard meets the industrial needs, because a gap exists between the current literature and industry about EnMS (Bunse et al., 2011). Hypotheses related to the PDCA improvement cycle will be formulated to test whether the ISO 50.001 standard meets the industrial needs of an integrated production site. Plan

The “plan” stage is concerned with the blocks “energy policy” and “energy planning” of Figure 2.3. The energy policy states the commitment of the organisation to achieve energy performance improvement. Top management has to define the energy policy and should contain the following seven elements (1,2,5 and 6 are also included in the EnMS of Gordic et al. (2010)):

1. Appropriate to the nature and scale of organisation’s energy consumption; 2. Commitment to continuous improvement in energy performance;

3. Commitment to ensure the availability of required information and resources;

4. Defines a framework for an energy review (framework to indicate improvement possibilities); 5. Defines a system (scope and boundaries) to improve in energy efficiency performance; 6. The energy policy should be regularly reviewed and updated;

7. The energy policy is documented and communicated to all management levels of the organisations. The next step in the plan “stage” is the development of an energy planning process, which should be consistent with the energy policy. The energy planning process should facilitate activities to improve continuously energy efficiency performance. The following four elements are included in the energy planning process (1 and 3 in the research of Gordic et al., 2010)

1. Energy review: An energy review reviews systematically the energy consumption and efficiency of the defined system. It analyses current energy consumption and efficiency, it indicates significant energy users, identifies improvement possibilities and prioritises those possibilities.

2. Energy baseline: An energy baseline is a reference period to compare changes in current energy consumption and efficiency, which has to be appropriate for the current way of working in an organisation.

3. Energy performance indicators: Appropriate performance indicators should be defined to monitor and measure energy performance. Those KPIs should be compared to the energy baseline and should be reviewed regularly to the appropriateness of the current way of working.

4. Energy objectives and targets: The organisation should determine targets and objectives with regard to improvement in energy consumption and energy efficiency for their production processes. Furthermore, an energy management action plan should be defined that describes how to achieve those targets.

Hypothesis 7: The elements in the “Plan” stage of the ISO 50.001 standard meet the industrial needs of an integrated production site to manage energy efficiency performance.

Do

The “do” stage is concerned with the implementation and operation of the previously defined energy planning process by a representative. The following elements are part of the “do” stage and have to be facilitated by top management (elements 1,2 and 5 are also mentioned by Gordic et al., 2010):

1. To facilitate that employees possesses the required competences to improve energy efficiency (for example by training);

2. Create awareness for the relevance of energy efficiency, the responsibility of employees and the statements in the energy policy;

3. Communication of current energy performance;

6. Maintaining the implemented activities;

7. Ensuring that energy efficiency is incorporated in the design of new processes and equipment; 8. Ensuring the procurement of energy efficient goods and services.

Hypothesis 8: The elements in the “Do” stage of the ISO 50.001 standard meet the industrial needs of an integrated production site to manage energy efficiency performance.

Check

The “check” stage is concerned with the cycle in the bottom of the EnMS model (Figure 2.3). This cycle aims to track and check achieved improvements in energy efficiency and consists of the following three elements (element 1 and 2 are included in EnMS Gordic et al., 2010):

1. Monitoring, measurement and analysis: At planned intervals, this element must ensure the monitoring, measurement and analysis of key characteristics of operations with regard to energy efficiency. It includes the measurement and monitoring of the defined energy performance indicators, analysis of significant energy users with associated variables and the evaluation of the effectiveness of implemented energy management action plans.

2. Nonconformities, correction, corrective and preventive action: When the previous stage indicates that energy consumption/efficiency has not improved, or not so much improved as planned, non-conformities should be determined as cause. Feedback should be given about the non-conformities to determine corrective actions. Furthermore, preventive actions can be executed to avoid non-conformities in the future.

3. Internal audit of the energy management system: The final step in the “check” stage is the internal audit of the EnMS. Internal audits will be executed at planned intervals and reported to top management. The internal audit consists of the following aspects: check if the EnMS is in line with the planned arrangements for energy management, to evaluate defined energy targets and objectives. Most important part of the internal audit is to determine whether the EnMS supports in implementing, maintaining and improving energy efficiency performance.

Hypothesis 9: The elements in the “Check” stage of the ISO 50.001 standard meet the industrial needs of an integrated production site to manage energy efficiency performance.

Act

The main topic of the “act” stage is the management review that aims to determine the required actions to support continuous improvement in energy efficiency performance and to improve the EnMS. It reviews the achieved improvements in energy performance, the suitability of the current energy performance indicators and in what extent the energy objectives/targets are achieved. This could be a motive for changes in the energy policy and planning process. Furthermore, an indication should be given for the required resources to improve the EnMS or energy efficiency performance.

Hypothesis 10: The management review in the “Act” stage of the ISO 50.001 standard meets the industrial needs of an integrated production site to manage energy efficiency performance.

2.5.3 Continuous Improvement

An EnMS aims to increase energy efficiency by the use of continuous improvement. Bhasin & Burcher (2005) define continuous improvement in a production environment as “the continuous pursuit of improvements in quality, cost, delivery and design”. It is based on realising continuously small improvements in the production process to approach an ultimate goal, namely a production system without any waste (Rother, 2009). Deming (1986) adopted the concept of continuous improvement as foundation for his PDCA improvement cycle and the PDCA cycle is a fundamental concept in an EnMS. Continuous improvement focuses on achieving constantly incremental improvements by eliminating waste. The sum of incremental improvements will have a large cumulative effect on the performance of a production process, (Choi, 1995).

culture is valuable, because it facilitates small improvements that are associated with low risks and low investments. It is important to take into account that continuous improvement is process-oriented and not totally focused on results, because a result-driven approach focuses on controlling and restricting the activities of employees, which is counter-effective (Choi, 1995).

The form of continuous improvement of the ISO 50.001 standard can be perceived as incremental innovation, because the improvements provide and maintain the new features and benefits to the existing technology of a production process with regard to energy efficiency (Garcia & Calantone, 2002). Those improvements are small steps to approach the theoretical physical limit of an energy efficient technology. However, the theoretical physical limit of energy efficiency can be reduced with the introduction of a total new energy efficient technology (Trott, 2008), which is called radical innovation (Garcia & Calantone, 2002). The radical innovation results in progression and total new technologies in a production process, which facilitate serious improvement in energy efficiency performance. It seems like that the ISO 50.001 facilitates continuous improvement by incremental innovation, because the ISO 50.001 standard does not has as aim to develop and diffuse new energy efficient technology (radical innovation). Therefore, the following hypothesis is interesting for integrated production sites:

H11: The implementation of the ISO 50.001 standard does not support the development of radical innovation with regard to energy efficiency of an integrated production site.

2.5.4 Top Management Support

Gordic et al. (2010) argue that commitment of top management is the most important factor for successful implementation and operations of an EnMS. Furthermore, the ISO 50.001 standard emphasises the importance of top management support. In general, focusing on energy efficiency and energy management is relatively new for companies. Therefore, organisational change with associated top management support is important to take into account (Young & Jordan, 2008). Preconditions for top management support are not well developed. Some employees demand requirements of top management on how to deal with resources and to set expectations. Other preconditions are related to enthusiasm, communication, involvement and participation of top management. Young & Jordan (2008) state that top management should encourage employees to identify and focus on managing strategic resources (such as energy resources). Other statement of them is that top management has to ensure that operational managers take responsibility to deliver the anticipated benefits. Gordic et al. (2010) identify that an energy manager should be assigned to manage energy efficiency. The position of the energy manager should be as high as possible in the organisational hierarchy, because this person has easy access to top management and information of current developments within the company.

Hypothesis 12: Support of top management is needed to encourage the required organisational change to implement an energy management system.

2.5.5 Integrated Management Systems

An EnMS is not the only management system that is based on the PDCA improvement cycle. The well-known standards for quality (ISO 9001) and environment (ISO 14.001) are similar to the introduced EnMS. Those standards can be integrated into an integrated management system (IMS) (Bernardo, Casadeus, Karapetrovic & Heras, 2010). An IMS is defined as follows: “a set of interconnected processes that share a

pool of human, information, material, infrastructure, and financial resources in order to achieve a composite of goals related to the satisfaction of a variety of stakeholders”. The advantages are as follows:

- Confusion will be reduced about the management infrastructures of the different available management systems;

- Clear structure of responsibility;

- Synergetic effects between the standards;

- Administrative benefits related to the maintenance of the management systems;

An IMS has different integration levels, which can be categorised as follows (Jorgensen et al., 2006): - Corresponding: increased compatibility between management systems by the parallelisation of the

management systems standards. Similarities of the standards are structured on the same way. For example, the way of documentation or the frequency (at planned intervals) of management reviews. - Coordination and coherent: Understanding of the generic processes and tasks in the different

management cycles, which will enhance the internal coordination and trade-offs between elements of the different management systems.

It can be concluded that the larger degree of IMS, the better corporate wide decisions can be made. However, the reviewed literature does not present empirical data about the possibility to integrate an EnMS with other management systems. Therefore, the hypothesis 12 is interesting for this research:

Hypothesis 13: An energy management system can be integrated with other management systems.

2.6 Conclusions

This literature review presents the current knowledge about energy efficiency, CO2 emissions and EnMS for an integrated production site. It can be concluded that energy efficiency is a new trend in operations management, due to the need for CO2 emissions reduction and increasing prices of energy resources (Gunsekaran & Ngai, 2012). The first stream of scientific articles related to energy efficiency and EnMS are recently published and progress can be made with regard to the quality and amount of current knowledge in the literature, because a gap exists between the knowledge in the literature and industrial needs (Bunse et al. 2011). The current knowledge is applicable at higher aggregation levels, such as national or industrial level, but it is not proven that it is applicable to an integrated production site.

The expectation is that the existing knowledge does not perfectly satisfy the industrial needs. Companies with an integrated production site need a more structured framework to track improved energy efficiency and CO2 emissions improvement. Knowledge about leading and lagging indicators can most probably contribute to close the existing gap. Furthermore, the design of an EnMS based on the PDCA improvement cycle seems to match industrial needs, because it is comparable with the management systems for quality and environment. The expectation is that new elements can be identified for an EnMS by testing the proposed research hypotheses, because the ISO 50.001 standard for energy management is relatively new.

It is valuable to close the existing gap between literature and industrial needs, because it helps companies and academics to find new solutions for the problems that the world will face with regard to the scarce energy sources and enormous CO2 emissions. Therefore, the following research directions are valuable:

- Priority of managing energy efficiency improvement for an integrated production site; - Appropriateness of current analysis techniques;

- The role of leading and lagging KPIs to control energy efficiency; - Types of KPIs to measure/monitor energy efficiency;

- The contribution of an EnMS to energy efficiency and CO2 emissions; - The match between literature and industrial needs with regard to an EnMS;

- The role of top management and organisational change to enhance energy efficiency; - Integration of an EnMS with other management systems.

During the literature review, research directions are formulated in research hypotheses, which are shown graphically in a conceptual model (Figure 2.4)

Overall Energy Efficiency of Integrated Production Process

Energy Management System

Industrial Needs: Plan Stage Industrial Needs: Do Stage Industrial Needs: Check Stage Industrial Needs: Act Stage Appropriateness of Current Analyses Methods Priority for Energy

Efficiency Appropriateness of Existing KPI’s Cascading of KPI’s in Organization Use of Leading KPI’s Support of Top Management Integration with other Management Systems Structured Framework of KPI’s H4b H4d H4c H1 H3 H5a H12 H13 H7 H8 H9 H10 H6 Feasibility of Energy Cascading H2 H4a Appropriateness of Current CO2 Indicator Relationship CO2 Emissions and Energy Efficiency H5b H11: Facilitator of Radical Innovation H11

3. Methodology

This chapter is divided in two sections and concerned with the used scientific methodologies to answer the main research question. The first section describes the academic scientifically research approach of this research paper and the second section introduces TSIJ as a real-life setting to conduct the case study. Furthermore, the different stages of the case study research will be introduced.

3.1 Research Approach

This research is conducted with an academic perspective and science has a critical role. Knowledge, theories and methods extracted from the science (academic journals, universities) are used to answer the main research question. The science provides useful insights and systematic tools to conduct the research. Furthermore, this research contributes to the science by closing the existing gap between scientific literature and industrial needs with regard to the management of energy efficiency.

Figure 3.1 represents graphically the approach of this research based on Sagasti & Mitroff (1973). The approach is intended for operations research and based on system approaches. The approach consists of five interrelated parts, which will be introduced in this section. Science is the central part of the approach and provides the general background for this operations research. The operations research process starts with identifying a problem situation, which is called reality. The reality will be conceptualised into a conceptual model, which describes potential explanatory variables/factors to understand the reality. The conceptual model provides the required knowledge to model a formalised representation of the reality, which is called a scientific model. The scientific model contains the relevant variables, factors or parameters to improve the reality. Based on the scientific model, solutions are generated to improve the faced problems by TSIJ. The solutions will be validated by the conceptual model and implemented to solve the problem situation. Furthermore, the solution can also provide the science of new insights, which can contribute for closing the existing gap between the current knowledge and the industrial needs, which is the main target of this research. This case study made use of a real life setting to gather empirical data, because TSIJ faces problems with regard to energy efficiency and CO2 emissions.

3.2 Case study: “site Tata Steel IJmuiden”

A study at TSIJ obtains empirical data for this research to answer the main research question. TSIJ has an integrated production site and faces problems with regard to the management of energy efficiency and CO2 emissions. Many characteristics of a case study can be applied to this research, because the research is conducted in a real life setting. The characteristics should be taken into account to conduct the case study and are as follows (Yin, 1989):

- The type of research question: typically to answer questions like “how”, “what” or “why”;

- Extent of control over behavioural events: investigator has little/no possibility to control the events; - General circumstances of the phenomenon to be studied: contemporary phenomenon in a real-life

context.

It is important to understand TSIJ and associated integrated production site to conduct a successful case study. Therefore, a brief introduction is given about the organisation Tata Steel Group, the “site Tata Steel in IJmuiden” (TSIJ) and the integrated production site. The chapter ends with a description of the different stages of the conducted case study research.