1.1 – A subject rarely examined in the literature

8Since the 1990s, an increasing number of studies have focused on management controllers (Bollecker 2007) without, however, examining these actors’ roles in the environmental domain. This subject is also neglected in the environmental management control literature which focuses primarily on EMC tools (Marquet-Pondeville 2003, Janicot 2007, Caron et al. 2007, Henri and Journeault 2010, Schaltegger 2011, Antheaume 2013 etc.). This literature in fact presents EMC as a process that appears to take place without the controller, “Environmental management control is often outside the scope of the management control function, taking place instead at the environmental department level” (Marquet-Pondeville 2003, p. 21).

9If the controllers are not part of this process, it is because they remain confined to the accounting and finance domain (Capron and Quairel 1998, Wilmshurst and Frost 2001, Quairel 2006, Rivière-Giordano 2007, Berland 2007, Caron and Fortin 2010). “They have been sidestepped by other support staff pursuing, closer to the operating teams, the same goals” (Bouquin 2010, p. 143). Environmental specialists and support staff have thus taken over the advisory and verification projects normally entrusted to the controller (Moquet 2008). The controller’s new competitors monitor the implementation of the green strategy throughout the organization and help the directors to pursue strategic environmental opportunities (Renaud 2013a).

10In addition, as the architects and facilitators of this new process, environmental specialists design and implement EMC tools “dissociated” (Quairel 2006) and even at times “opposed” (Moquet 2008) to financial management control tools. Moquet (2008), for example, highlights internal power struggles at Lafarge between the environment manager, who follows a “green” approach, and the controller, who is rooted to a purely financial approach, detached from ecological concerns. For Quairel (2006), this separation of performance indicators enables the various support-function heads (management controller, environment manager, HR director etc.) to maintain, in their respective fields, their power over managers’ behavior. In other words, “This dissociation reflects the territorial approach of the various managers and their resistance to change” (Capron and Quairel 2007, p. 89). Thus, to borrow Bouquin and Fiol’s (2007, p. 12) phrase, which is also a good description of EMC, “It depicts a type of management control without a controller, a pure and simple management process that merely needs to be organized.”

11Contrary to the standard literature, a very small number of authors argue (but do not show empirically) that financiers, in the general sense, may have a full role to play in exercising environmental responsibility (Quairel 2004), notably in terms of enhancing the credibility of environmental reporting and strengthening investor confidence (Rivière-Giordano 2007). For Sobczack (2011), they may even become a vital support to managers as well as to sustainable development heads by developing the management tools necessary for addressing environmental issues and communicating them to stakeholders. In line with these latter studies, we will explore the roles that management controllers can play in EMC. Firstly, however, we define the concept of “role” and use an analysis framework to examine the roles of the environmental management controller.

1.2 – An analysis framework based on management control role theory

12Situated at the intersection between sociology and psychology, the role is the missing link between social structure and the individual (Rocheblave-Spenlé 1969). This concept was introduced into organization theory by the American social psychologists Katz and Kahn (1966), who described the organization as a system of interdependent roles in which each individual can be located. For these authors, a role designates the set of activities or behaviors expected from an individual in the exercise of a certain social position. Their work provides the theoretical foundations for HRM studies of the phenomenon of role conflict and its consequences for employees and businesses.

13In the management control field, role theory is used to analyze the management controller’s role within organizations. Referring to the work of Katz and Kahn (1966), Lambert and Sponem (2009, p. 118) explain that an individual’s role cannot be directly observed without creating confusion, in the observations or in the minds of the individuals studied, between what is expected and what actually occurs. To understand this concept we therefore need to study the individual’s activities and his or her interactions within a social group.

14To understand the role of management controller, we therefore analyze the controller’s functions within the organization. As noted by Bouquin (2010), it is, however, difficult to define “the” role of a management controller, as the literature assigns the controller diverse and varying functions. In fact, the review performed by Bollecker (2007) highlights four key activities to describe this ambiguous occupation: monitoring, advising, coordinating, and changing. Transmitting information to managers and/or directors is the common factor underpinning these activities. While the first two roles are somewhat opposed in North America (Caron et al. 2011), they are far from contradictory in France, where they are seen as complementary, and can be performed at the same time by the same individual (Lambert and Sponem 2009).

15As verifier, or “auditor”, the controller is responsible for financial reporting and internal control (Sathe 1983). He or she is seen by managers as a “watchdog” “in the pay of” senior management. In his or her role as advisor, the controller gives “strategic advice” to the directors and “operational advice” to managers in relation to preparing budgets and monitoring performance (Fornerino and Godener 2006). In this decision-making support role, the controller also provides practical assistance relating to the use of control tools (Bollecker 2002). In addition, this role may give the controller the status of business partner or manager, in other words the controller is an internal consultant or preferred partner who intervenes as a decision-making copilot.

16And yet, in reality, this partnership function appears to be illusory (Morales 2009) or at least “not as frequent as we are led to believe” (Lambert et Sponem 2009, p. 139). Certain authors warn against the risks of such a role, “Either the controller imposes his or her authority and inhibits the creativity of operational staff who then focus exclusively on their profit and loss accounts, or the controller is subsumed by the operational teams and may be encouraged to manipulate the results” (Ibid.). For Ardoin and Jordan (1979), the controller should not act as decision maker or manager for operational staff, because “A controller who takes the place of a decision maker may partly remove the latter’s responsibility and provide him or her with an alibi” (Bouquin 2010, p. 210).

17Other tasks are assigned to the controller in addition the roles of monitor and advisor. The controller may, in fact, play the role of moderator/coordinator between senior management and middle management (vertical coordination), or between managers themselves (horizontal coordination), particularly during performance monitoring meetings (Bollecker 2007, p. 90). Finally, the controller is seen as an agent of change (Bessire 1995), particularly when he or she encourages managers’ professional development through the introduction of new management tools (Vaivio 2004).

18Beyond these specific tasks, the controller’s role may also be understood through the image that he or she conveys within the organization. The literature suggests that we need to study the way in which other actors, in particular managers, perceive the controller in order to better define his or her role in the organization (Deglaine et al. 2003, Lambert and Sponem 2009). According to Fornerino and Godener (2006), the controller has a dual image (monitor versus advisor), with this image naturally varying depending on the nature of the controller’s activities in the business. While the role of advisor is seen to be worthwhile (particularly by management control professionals), the role of monitor, on the other hand, gives the controller a negative, or even confrontational, image (Hopper 1980). In fact, the controller is feared and disliked when he or she aims to assist and to advise (Danziger 2000, cited by Bollecker 2007). Even with the profile of advisor, controllers consider that they are still perceived by operational managers as “watchdogs” (Fornerino and Godener 2006). For Caron et al. (2011), we need to move beyond this stereotype, because controllers can, to differing degrees, be both “bean counters” and “business partners.”

19In addition, the power of influence may represent another criterion with which to measure the controller’s role in an organization. It appears that the different tasks assigned to the controller lead to a certain power of influence, although the controller should have only limited power because he or she occupies a support-function position within the organizational hierarchy. The controller acquires more power through his or her influence on business analyses and the choices made by decision makers (Bouquin 2010, p. 207). Although the controller’s power is indirect, it is, however, real (Bessire 1995). For Bollecker (2007, p. 98), the controller’s influence is legitimate, as the controller is only able to intervene objectively because of his or her active roles as educator, agent of change, and actor in the planning and control processes. Furthermore, according to Deglaine et al. (2003, pp. 20-21), the controller more effectively influences managers’ attitudes and behaviors via open communication techniques (testifying to his or her willingness to understand), than by force (for example, by hierarchical pressure) in order to impose his or her wishes on managers.

20Finally, it appears that there is strong competition for the controller’s power, highlighting territorial issues. In fact, the question of the controller’s territory is raised because numerous competitors have emerged within organizations (internal auditors, operational managers, financial directors, quality and environmental specialists, risk managers etc.) with legitimate claims to certain of the controller’s tasks (Danziger 2009, Bouquin 2010). Under these conditions, what territory is left for the controller? What value does the controller add if management control has become an extension of managers’ functions, for example, and if managers can prepare their own budgets and manage their own scorecards? Is there a risk that this function will disappear? (Bollecker 2007, Danziger 2009). The literature provides a limited response to these questions, which are nevertheless significant for the future of the role of controller. Consequently, in this study, we will analyze the roles assigned to the controller’s competitors in order to define the controller’s territory and to highlight the value added by the controller.

21Following on from the studies cited above on the traditional profession of management controller, the question of the role of environmental management controller will be studied here from the point of view of the tasks performed by the controller, the image that the controller conveys, his or her power of influence, and his or her scope of activity (or territory) in the organization. These four dimensions therefore form the categories of our analysis framework (see Table 1).

Table 1

Analysis framework for the roles of the environmental management controller

Concept Dimensions Items sourced from the literature Roles • Tasks • Monitoring • Strategic advice • Operational advice • Methodological assistance • Moderating/coordinating • Assisting in change • Image • Negative image (bean counter, watchdog) • Positive image (business partner, copilot) • Power • Level of power of influence varies as a function of the controller’s position in the organizational hierarchy and his/her assigned tasks • Territory • Responsibilities of the controller’s competitors • Internal power struggles

Analysis framework for the roles of the environmental management controller

2.1 – Rationale for choosing a longitudinal case study

23We have chosen to perform a longitudinal case study (Yin 2003) because, in accordance with the literature, this research strategy “allows us to analyze, on both a spatial and temporal level” the controller’s functions within an organization. By contextualizing the data, this strategy encourages the in-depth analysis of the controller’s professional situation (Bollecker 2007, p. 101). In order to perform our longitudinal study, we employed qualitative methods (interviews, non-participative observations etc.) because quantitative methods, in particular questionnaire-based surveys, are not suited to understanding the role of the controller. “In fact, it is hard to collect information on individuals’ roles within organizations, especially when these roles are considered to be low-status, [because] the respondents tend, especially in questionnaire-based surveys, to embellish, simplify, or to be more ambitious than realistic regarding their future” (Lambert and Sponem 2009, p. 121). Conversely, qualitative methods, in particular interviews, can facilitate information gathering for confidential or sensitive issues (Gavard-Perret et al. 2008).

24In addition, our longitudinal study is based on a “textbook example” highlighting an unusual and innovative situation (David 2004). We have, in fact, examined the “groundbreaking” case of BIO, one of the first, and very few, French companies to have created a specific EMC role. We have chosen a single case, as this encourages in-depth analysis and a better understanding of the research topic (Hlady-Rispal 2002). Moreover, as stated by Yin (2003), a longitudinal study based on a single case is particularly relevant when following the development of a phenomenon over time. In the present study, we follow the evolution of the position of environmental management controller over a six-year period, from its creation in 2007 until the present day.

2.2 – Data-collection procedure

25Our research is based on a rich and varied body of information, constructed by combining various methods of data collection throughout the course of the case study (see Table 2).

Table 2

Empirical data used in the BIO case study

Data-collection methods Primary data (unpublished data prepared by the researcher or by the company) Secondary data (published by the company or by a third party) Semi-directive interviews Six interviews performed with five actors: • Chief executive officer • Two store managers • Head of sustainable development (two meetings) • Head of environmental accounting Four video and audio interviews prepared by news media (television, radio): • Founding president • Vice president, suppliers, and independent external auditors • Head of environmental accounting • Business seminar Email correspondence Emails from the actors interviewed Passive (non-participative) observation Field notes from the three store visits Collection of written, audio, and video documents The company’s EMC tools: carbon footprint, carbon budget, green scorecards, carbon expenses, wood eco-calculator etc. Documents prepared by the company: • Seven 350-page sustainable development reports for the period from 2006 to 2012 • Web pages setting out the company’s sustainable development policies • Two video documentaries on its activities, customers, and environmental commitments Documents prepared by the external press: • Six written articles based on interviews with the marketing director, the human resources director, and the head of environmental accounting etc. • Readers’ online comments from a newspaper e-discussion forum Documents available on social networks: interviewees’ CVs

Empirical data used in the BIO case study

Note: We use the following abbreviations when citing the sources in the text below: President (Founding President), CEO (Chief Executive Officer), SM (Store Manager), MD (Marketing Director), HRD (Human Resources Director), SD Head (Head of Sustainable Development), EA Head (Head of Environmental Accounting), SD Report (Sustainable Development Report).

26We began by using the life story technique, which involves performing biographical interviews during which the interviewee is invited to communicate all or part of their past experience (Bertaux 2005). Over the period of our study, we carried out six semi-directive interviews, lasting an average of an hour and a half each, with the various actors involved in the research question: the chief executive officer, store managers, the head of sustainable development, and the head of environmental accounting (i.e. the management controller responsible for environmental accounting). Various topics were addressed in these interviews: the interviewee’s career path, professional experience, and current functions; general information regarding the company studied (business activities, governance, organization chart, key financial figures etc.); the history and development of the environmental management controller’s role; EMC tools used in the company; and relations with stakeholders. Additional exchanges tool place by e-mail in order to obtain more precise details or to confirm the statements collected.

27In order to extend the research beyond the actors’ accounts, we also visited three of the company’s ISO-14001-certified stores located across various regions in France. This passive, or non-participative, observation gave us access to actual practices and enabled us to confirm interviewees’ statements. To complete our primary data, we collected various written documents: sustainable development reports, web pages, press articles published online etc. We also collected six video and audio documents prepared by external media or by the company itself. We transcribed and analyzed all of these documents, which varied in length from between five and 30 minutes.

28Triangulating the methods, types, and sources of data in our study enabled us to limit data collection bias and to thus strengthen the internal validity of our research (Miles and Huberman 2003, Ayerbe and Missonnier 2007).

2.3 – Analysis and interpretation of data

29After collecting the data, it was broken down and examined using thematic content analysis (Bardin 2007). This technique involves identifying themes when analyzing the data (interviews, documents, field notes etc.) and grouping all elements of the text treating the same theme into a given code. The text was firstly broken down using the themes from the analysis framework shown above, with the themes identified in the literature enabling us to perform an initial coding. Other themes then came to light in the course of our analysis, allowing us to complete our coding grid. This additional coding led to a more detailed analysis of the data; for example, the “methodological assistance” theme was split into sub-themes: “helping to prepare carbon budgets”, “helping to draw up action plans”, “creating green scorecards, and “creating carbon expenses”. In the end, we obtained 54 codes classified into four main categories: tasks, image, power, and territory.

30Given the size of the body of data, the data processing was automated in order to manipulate the significant quantity of heterogeneous information quickly and easily. Using NVivo 10 software, we were able to work on text, audio, and video documents. We used the NCapture functionality to import web pages, social network information, and emails. The nodes function was used to construct the analysis coding grid and to classify the selected extracts into the coding (called nodes in the software). The matrix query function allowed us to compare the coded extracts by linking to the sources or nodes. We used the memo function to record our ideas during the data-interpretation phase. By using the various functionalities of the software (nodes, requests, memos etc.), we were therefore able to code, classify, compress, compare, and interpret the data collected. [2]

31Finally, we performed a detailed comparison of the empirical and theoretical factors in order to identify the similarities or differences in relation to the literature and to obtain our research results: the four roles of the environmental management controller. This comparison (pattern matching per Yin 2003) was essential in order to improve the external validity of our research (Musca 2006).

2.4 – BIO case study: presentation of the company and evolution of the position of environmental management controller

32Founded in 1990, BIO is a French company specializing in the sale of natural products. It employs more than 1,000 staff and owns 80 stores across France and abroad. Its annual turnover is around 150 million euros. This family-run, limited liability company is managed by a Supervisory Board and a Management Board, which are respectively headed up by the father (founding president) and by one of his children (vice president). The company is not listed on a French regulated market.

33Since its inception, the company has endeavored to be a forerunner in environmental management. This ambition first took root in the values of the founding president, “I created BIO for my children, to protect the environment, and to encourage people living in towns to discover nature. We needed a business activity, but we decided to operate in such a way as to have the smallest possible impact on the environment” (President, video). [3] This commitment was translated into action in the 1990s when the company created a sustainable development division that introduced, and obtained the certification for, an environmental management system (EMS). BIO therefore became the first French company in its sector to be ISO 14001 certified. During this period, the company also adopted an eco-design policy for its buildings, in accordance with the French “high environmental quality” approach (the haute qualité environnementale or “HQE”). It also published a yearly sustainable development report, “In 1993, we became the first company in France to prepare a sustainable development report, a practice that our president brought back from the United States” (CEO, interview).

34In 2007, the company created an environmental management control position referred to as the “head of environmental accounting.” According to media reports, this was a first for France. The role of this new controller was to implement the company’s strategy for reducing its greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. Prior to the Grenelle II Act (2010), this strategy was pursued voluntarily, because the company is not required to comply with either the French New Economic Regulations (NRE, 2001) or with the regulation of GHG emissions allowances. [4] Beyond ecological considerations, this strategy brought a triple advantage: a competitive advantage over its competitors (by selling “green” products, it positioned itself in a promising niche market as consumers are increasingly responsive to ecological ideas), credibility in the eyes of its stakeholders (it obtained the support of the general public by committing to preserve the environment), and an economic advantage (by reducing its costs through its environmental actions).

35The controller (33 years old, with a Finance PhD) began his career as an information systems consultant for multinational companies. He then took up the post of management controller at a BIO subsidiary before being hired by the parent company. “They were looking to create an environmental accounting position. So I met the president, then the CEO, who told me, ‘I don’t have any sustainable development indicators, and I don’t understand anything about it. … We need to show that we can reduce CO₂ at the same time as increasing turnover’” (EA Head, interview). For the head of sustainable development, the objective of this new post was to “embody the idea that we can reconcile business and the environment, management control and our carbon footprint” (SD Head, press article).

36The evolution of the role of environmental management controller at BIO can be broken down into three key phases: the period before the controller was hired, the period when he carried out the role, and the period after his departure. Although the post officially commenced in 2007, it can be traced back to 2005 when the founding president decided to measure his company’s carbon emissions. This role was first assigned to the head of sustainable development, “I worked on it 12 hours a day, including weekends, and after three weeks I managed to produce BIO’s first carbon footprint report. … But the president wanted to see more details, to get the whole firm involved in the issue, to perform a quarterly review. … In a nutshell, it was a full-time position, and I already had my own job to do. That’s when the controller came into play” (SD Head, interview).

37Recruited in 2007, the controller put carbon accounting and environmental reporting in place to monitor the company’s results. He took on the role of monitor, “I prepared an extremely detailed quarterly income statement. I calculated the carbon results per store. It took me one year to put carbon accounting in place” (EA Head, interview). From 2008, the controller attempted to measure the return on investment by showing the savings made as a result of the carbon footprint reporting. He prepared management tools for the managers and his advisory activities developed at all levels within the organization. During this period, the company stepped up its responsible purchasing policy, and the controller also became an agent of change by encouraging suppliers to improve the environmental quality of their products, “We worked on analyzing the life cycle of the products that we sell, and we tried to see how we could ask our suppliers to improve their processes” (CEO, interview).

38The head of sustainable development has occupied the post on an interim basis since 2012, after the controller left the company. [5] An environmental engineer-lawyer by training, the sustainable development head acknowledges the difficulties of this post, “I don’t deny that it was difficult to begin with, because the controller had done a fantastic job on our ERP and databases. … It took me one month to prepare my first quarterly carbon footprint report! The role of environmental accountant didn’t just disappear; it carried on after the departure of the controller” (SD Head, interview).

39In the next section of this article, we analyze the tasks performed by the controller when he was BIO’s “head of environmental accounting.”

3.1 – Carbon auditor reporting to senior management

41The first task assigned to the controller was to monitor activity. In order to verify the company’s GHG emissions, the controller put in place a carbon footprint report by drawing on the ADEME method (Agence de l’Environnement et de la Maîtrise de l’Energie, the French Environment and Energy Management Agency). [6] This tool enabled him to measure GHG emissions by business activity (transport of goods, employee business travel, packaging, publications, energy, waste management etc.) in tons of carbon dioxide equivalent (CO_2e). He then prepared a carbon budget to limit GHG emissions, “I created the BIO carbon footprint report when I arrived in 2007. … I then persuaded the CEO to prepare a carbon budget, a real budget just like our budget in euros, and then we said, ‘The executives are at such and such an amount, so we are going to do 3% less’” (EA Head, interview). For example, “The marketing director can’t exceed his budget: when choosing his suppliers, packaging etc. he has to take into account their GHG emissions” (EA Head, press).

42The controller prepared an environmental report every quarter to monitor GHG emissions and to ensure that the carbon objectives set for the company’s various managers had been achieved. This approach was explained by a store manager, “We prepare our carbon statement. … Someone in head office is responsible for it [i.e. the EA Head]. We send him the CO₂ consumption for our business travel: seminars, training courses, site visits etc. and it’s compiled quarterly” (SM, interview). Additionally, this reporting enables senior management to assess managers’ performance and to reward or penalize them in function of the results obtained. “This year, the HRD’s objective is to reduce CO₂ emissions by 10% compared to last year’s emissions, while maintaining the number and quality of training courses. … If the directors don’t achieve their objectives, they won’t receive a bonus” (SD Head, interview).

43By limiting its environmental impact, the company has also reduced costs relating to goods transport, waste disposal, raw materials, and energy consumption etc. The CEO gave us an example of an ecological action that had allowed the company to reduce its transport costs, “At the beginning, we delivered goods to our stores by road, but we realized that it was more interesting from a CO₂ point of view to deliver by rail, and that rail-road transport was cheaper than road transport” (CEO, interview). The CEO employed the same reasoning for investments; for example, constructing a new store should be profitable as well as being less harmful for the environment. Economic motivations therefore also hid behind the ecological rhetoric, “The idea was to determine the return on investment in euros and in carbon. In fact, my boss wanted to see whether his operating decisions were consistent both in terms of financial profitability and in terms of sustainable development” (EA Head, interview).

44The controller’s role as carbon auditor gave him a negative image within the organization, “I was a bit like a cop”, “the department pain in the neck”. The terms “carbon chaser”, or “Inspector ‘Sustainable Development’” (EA Head, interview) attributed to the controller sum up the mindset fairly accurately. He was perceived as the “strong arm” of senior management, “For example, the head of marketing took a return flight from Paris to Nice in business class. The rating came in at 894kg of CO₂. We just had to rap him on the knuckles. If he had taken the train, it would have only cost the planet and the company 19kg of CO₂” (Press report). Finally, the bean counter image has proved hard to shake off, except that in the environmental field, the controller has become a “carbon counter”!

45In summary, as carbon auditor, the controller performed the classic tasks of budget forecasting, reporting, and variance analysis. He also performed a financial monitoring role for senior management, although his image as monitor was seen as somewhat negative by managers.

3.2 – A business partner for directors and managers

46After carbon accounting had been implemented, the role of the management controller evolved towards that of business partner. In addition to his auditing role, the controller carried out a decision-making advisory role for two types of internal client: senior management and managers (store managers, support-function managers etc.). An environmental information system needed to be created and operated for this role.

3.3 – The company’s euro-carbon translator

53The management controller played the role of translator in a context where carbon had become a new language, “When everyone else was still speaking in euros, we decided to speak in carbon” (website). There are three essential stages in the translation process: calculating “CO₂ equivalents” for GHG-emitting accounts, determining emission-reduction goals and action plans, and measuring the effectiveness of the actions put in place by calculating the reductions achieved in euros.

3.4 – An agent of change for stakeholders

62The management controller filled the role of agent of change for both internal and external stakeholders. [10] Although this role was initially of secondary importance in the company, it became dominant in relation to the three previous roles in terms of the company’s interaction with its suppliers.

4.1 – The controller’s position in the organization chart and his power of influence

73At BIO, the controller reported to senior management while also being close to the operational and support function managers. As he occupied a support function, the controller should have had no formal power within the company; however, his hierarchical proximity to senior management increased his influence over environmental decision making. In fact, as advisor to the CEO, the controller acquired significant power as his function enabled him to intervene in strategic decisions. “The carbon manager prepares a kind of mini-report each time we open a store or warehouse. For example, before building a warehouse, we ask ‘How much it will cost?’, as well as ‘What is the CO₂ impact?’” (CEO, interview). “It seemed completely natural to me to put carbon everywhere, even in our investments, and to look at euros and carbon. … I performed investment analyses and return on investment, or rather, return on carbon” (EA Head, interview).

74Even though he lacked hierarchical authority within the company, the controller influenced environmental objective setting, managers’ performance appraisals, and their bonuses. “The directors are given environmental objectives every year, set by senior management and the environmental head. This forms a scorecard that we use to roll out all of these actions across the divisions. … Directors’ individual bonuses are based on this scorecard. As they are heavily “incentivized” it really hurts, and so in general they meet their objectives” (SD Head, interview). On a local level, we also note the controller’s influence over managers’ operational choices, for example in terms of transport, energy, or packaging etc. In fact, as we saw above (Section 3), it was through his roles as translator, business partner, and agent of change that the controller steered managerial decisions to reduce GHG emissions.

75In addition, the controller’s reporting line to senior management offered him greater autonomy than other functions within the organization (financial and sustainable development, in particular). In fact, the lack of a hierarchical relationship with the finance director guaranteed the controller independence and autonomy when undertaking his role, helping to ensure reliable environmental reporting. “I participated on the same basis as the finance director during business committee meetings. He presented the euros and I presented the carbon” (EA Head, interview). In addition, his relationship with the administration and finance division (AFD) facilitated his access to the internal physical and accounting data necessary to perform his various tasks. “I was part of the accounts department, so the accountants gave me the data because they have all the figures” (EA Head, interview). The controller also maintained a working relationship with the sustainable development division, “I had strong links to the head of sustainable development. For a certain time, I had a desk in their office, as I had asked to be closer to them” (EA Head, interview). This operational proximity made it easier for him to access external environmental data, as the sustainable development division is responsible for legal and technological monitoring at BIO.

76To summarize, the controller enjoyed a power of influence over decision making because of his strategic position within the organization. He worked in partnership with decision makers and was independent from the finance and sustainable development teams, with whom he maintained operational links.

4.2 – The controller’s competitors and his territory

77The controller had various contacts within the company. As we have seen above, the CEO and the managers were his “privileged” internal clients, in other words, those whose needs he addressed first; although, he also maintained operational relations with the AFD and the sustainable development division, whose activities sometimes overlapped with his own, generating territorial issues. In this context, in order to clearly define the scope of the controller’s activities, we need to identify his competitors’ roles and their collaboration with the controller.

78Although the scope of the finance director’s role may appear to be clearly defined, the controller sometimes took over certain of his responsibilities, “My scorecard mainly contained carbon, because I wasn’t there to replace the finance director, but I put some financial data into it anyway” (EA Head, interview). Furthermore, the controller tried to separate himself from the finance team and to legitimize his role in the organization by means of his specific competencies. For example, he believed that he added value compared to the finance team, “This type of position adds value, it allows you check that you aren’t off course on the environmental plan, and also to make savings, given that carbon = euros. … The carbon footprint shows certain economic drivers, such as an energy dependence, which we don’t see in the financial reporting” (EA Head, interview).

79In addition, the scope of the controller’s activities is narrower than that of the head of sustainable development. Firstly, his role as advisor is limited to environmental issues, while the head of sustainable development’s advisory role extends to other aspects of CSR (healthcare, security, societal etc.). The head of sustainable development gave us an example of his proposals for improving working conditions for warehouse staff, “I thought about the pallets; they had to be just as strong, but much lighter, and most importantly without splinters, because if a worker gets a splinter in his finger, he makes a sudden movement, and that can cause lumbago or sciatica. So we started using plastic pallets that are lighter, stackable one inside another, and sourced from a local recycling plant (the supplier is around 170km away from our warehouses). And, hey presto, they were cheaper than the wooden pallets and we made a saving of 50,000 euros” (SD Head, interview).

80The controller’s role of local facilitator was small, “I organized breakfast meetings in our stores to present the carbon results, but I didn’t run the network” (EA Head, interview). The head of sustainable development steered and ran the company’s green network, i.e. the function regrouping the environmental contacts spread across the various divisions, stores, and warehouses. “This year, I spent 50 to 70% of my time on internal communication, supporting and managing projects with the teams” (SD Head, interview). To do this, he used the carbon-related data provided by the controller, “He was pleased that I gave him the figures because it enabled him to manage his network. … He didn’t do the calculations, although he was an engineer. But he couldn’t do everything, he was running the network and he mainly focused on putting in place the EMS ISO 14001” (EA Head, interview). In addition, the EMS audits performed as part of the ISO 14001 certification were the preserve of the head of sustainable development and the external auditors. These audits were not limited to GHG emissions but extended to all of the company’s environmental impacts.

81Finally, in contrast to the controller, the role of sustainable development communicator is very significant in terms of the external stakeholders, with this latter being responsible for promoting CSR activities to strengthen the company’s social legitimacy. “He spread the message of BIO’s sustainable development policy to external parties. … There was a lot of publicity about environmental accounting and huge positive effects in terms of image” (EA Head, interview). Apart from suppliers, the controller had very little contact with other external stakeholders. Nevertheless, he contributed to the sustainable development report by supplying data relating to environmental accounting, “The carbon footprint was also used for preparing the sustainable development report and for putting lots of CO₂ data in it. It was useful both for the report and for showing the outside world that we were doing innovative stuff” (EA Head, interview). As we have just seen, the boundaries between the activities of these two actors were sometimes blurred, but analyzing the role of the head of sustainable development indicates that this latter appears more focused on internal facilitation and external communication. This analysis enables us to better understand the controller’s “environmental territory” and to highlight the head of sustainable development’s power of influence within the company.

82To conclude, it appears that the hierarchical position of the environmental management controller and the autonomy that he possessed in his work gave him a power of influence over decision makers. In addition, this study highlights territorial problems between the controller and his internal competitors. Although the finance director can also be seen as a supplier of information, the head of sustainable development may be considered a more significant competitor given that he had the authority to interfere in the controller’s investigative scope. He made use of the controller’s carbon data to run the green network, prepare the sustainable development report, and communicate with external parties. Even if territories exist to guarantee the power and legitimacy of each actor, this study nevertheless underlines the willingness of the controller to collaborate with his competitors (with the AFD being his main information supplier, and the head of sustainable development a new internal client, in addition to senior management and managers).