From Organizational Readiness to Industry 5.0: An EFQM Model Pathway to Net Zero

Abstract

The automotive industry faces urgent pressures to transition to carbon-neutral operations amid evolving policies, shifting consumer demands, and stringent environmental regulations. This study examines how implementing the EFQM Model 2020 can drive sustainability-oriented transformation in a leading European automotive plant. Over a two-year period (November 2021–December 2023), the company reduced CO₂ emissions by 17%, decreased water usage by 9.3%, and elevated recycling rates from 93.3% in FY19 to 98.1% in FY23. Although these improvements demonstrate the EFQM Model’s effectiveness in integrating economic, social, and environmental objectives, further progress toward net zero remains challenging due to diminishing returns on efficiency. Sustaining momentum will require continuous innovation such as passive building designs and on-site renewable energy generation supported by robust stakeholder engagement and compliance with evolving ESG reporting standards. These findings affirm the value of the holistic management framework for operational excellence and environmental stewardship, providing a replicable pathway toward carbon neutrality in resource-intensive industries.

1. Introduction

The automotive industry faces significant challenges in its transition toward hybrid, electric, and alternative fuel vehicles like hydrogen. While initial market growth was buoyed by consumer interest and government subsidies, the surge in electric vehicle (EV) adoption has recently stalled due to consumer hesitancy and shifting subsidy policies. At the same time, the industry’s traditionally stable market dominated by a few large manufacturers is now disrupted by new brands, increasing market competition and reshaping consumer preferences [1,2,3,4,5,6].

In today’s global economy, the pursuit of carbon neutrality, frequently termed “net zero” or “climate neutrality”, has evolved from a voluntary sustainability goal to a critical business imperative. Heightened concerns over climate change, fueled by rising greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, have compelled industries and governments worldwide to adopt aggressive carbon reduction targets. In the European Union, for instance, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), which took effect in January 2023, significantly expands corporate reporting obligations regarding environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues under the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) [7]. Given its considerable contributions to global GHG emissions, the automotive sector finds itself at the forefront of this transformation [8]. As mobility demands continue to escalate, automakers face the dual challenge of increasing production while significantly lowering their carbon footprint [9,10]. This tension is magnified by stricter global emissions regulations, advancements in fuel economy standards, and rising consumer demand for more sustainable products.

In response, leading automotive companies have pledged to align with the global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), adopting comprehensive strategies for achieving carbon neutrality [11]. This transition spans all operational facets, from manufacturing processes and materials management to logistics and after-sales services [12]. Notably, these changes are resource-intensive and require modernizing production facilities, upskilling the workforce, and investing in advanced technologies [13]. Consequently, manufacturers are seeking innovative management frameworks that integrate environmental, social, and economic objectives [14].

One prominent example is the EFQM Model, which provides a holistic strategic perspective, focusing simultaneously on operational improvements and triple-bottom-line outcomes (economic, social, and environmental). Yet several other well-established excellence and quality management models exist, including ISO 9001 [15], the Baldrige Excellence Framework (BEF), and the Shingo Model, each with distinct emphases on continuous improvement, leadership, and stakeholder engagement [16,17,18,19,20]. ISO 9001 is renowned worldwide for its foundational quality management principles based on the Plan–Do–Check–Act cycle, although its most recent significant update in 2015 did not substantially address emerging issues like sustainability or digital transformation [21,22]. The Baldrige Excellence Framework, structured around seven categories (Leadership, Strategy, Customers, Measurement, Workforce, Operations, and Results), underscores innovation and organizational learning but has not been extensively refreshed to encompass Industry 5.0 and advanced technologies [19]. The Shingo Model prioritizes operational excellence through cultural transformation and respect for people but does not explicitly integrate sustainability or the broader ESG considerations that are becoming pivotal in today’s business environment [19]. In comparing the EFQM with ISO 9001, the Baldrige Excellence Framework, and the Shingo Model, the choice of the EFQM emerges as particularly advantageous because it holistically addresses sustainability, digital transformation, and the human-centric thrust of Industry 5.0 within a single, integrated framework [16,17,18,23]. Moreover, the RADAR assessment tool facilitates quantitative benchmarking, offering a tangible pathway for continuous improvement [17,18]. Whereas ISO 9001 focuses on process standardization and compliance, Baldrige excels in innovation and knowledge management, and Shingo emphasizes cultural transformation, the EFQM uniquely foregrounds modern megatrends such as ESG reporting, AI integration, and carbon neutrality across diverse organizational contexts [17,18,19,20,24]. Accordingly, the EFQM’s comprehensive approach aligns with the SDGs, supports a robust transition to carbon neutrality, and fosters enduring organizational resilience, core imperatives for today’s automotive sector and beyond. Its latest iteration, the EFQM Model 2025, was introduced at the EFQM Forum in Istanbul in June 2024 and offers updated guidance to tackle contemporary challenges and leverage emerging opportunities [17,18,23,25]. The EFQM fosters a rigorous yet flexible structure that integrates economic, social, and environmental goals [26].

Originally established in 1991 to enhance quality in European organizations, the EFQM has evolved into a globally relevant framework that adapts to diverse cultural contexts and rapidly shifting business landscapes [27]. The model’s iterative refinements increasingly foreground sustainability, echoing the global emphasis on responsible resource management, climate action, and stakeholder well-being [19]. In particular, the EFQM Model 2020 expanded on sustainable development themes, and the new 2025 iteration sharpens its focus on Industry 5.0 paradigms [28,29,30,31]. While Industry 4.0 primarily concentrated on digitization, automation, and the internet of things (IoT) for productivity gains, Industry 5.0 goes further by underscoring human-centric approaches, resilient value networks, and environmental stewardship [32]. The EFQM closely aligns with this shift by helping organizations strategically integrate emerging technologies, such as artificial intelligence and big data analytics, with socially responsible practices, thereby enhancing competitiveness while reducing carbon footprints [33,34].

In tandem with these technological and societal transformations, regulatory pressures, exemplified by the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), are accelerating the need for transparent and standardized ESG reporting through frameworks like the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) [30]. The EFQM Model can play a pivotal role here, enabling companies to embed carbon reduction strategies into operational processes while documenting these efforts in ways that satisfy or surpass evolving auditing and disclosure mandates [18].

Despite the EFQM Model’s strong emphasis on sustainability, empirical evidence of its implementation in real-world industrial contexts, particularly under the 2020 and 2025 iterations, remains scarce. New versions of the EFQM generally outpace the availability of systematic case studies; it often takes years for organizations to fully implement the frameworks and generate measurable results. Hence, most current research still relies on earlier versions of EFQM, creating a temporal gap between theoretical development and validated practice. Real-world industrial contexts are limited, primarily because practical implementation lags theoretical model updates [18,24]. In addition, a significant portion of empirical studies related to EFQM implementation rely primarily on subjective interviews, which, while providing valuable qualitative insights, often lack the robust quantitative data necessary to comprehensively validate the model’s impact on organizational performance and sustainability.

Within this context, the present study investigates whether implementing the EFQM Model 2020 in a high-performing automotive plant can reinforce effective sustainable management by embedding key sustainability principles, such as renewable energy and carbon neutrality, alongside improvements in economic performance. This inquiry is timely amid ongoing geopolitical tensions affecting energy markets, persistent supply chain disruptions, and the residual effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, all of which underscore the importance of agility and resilience. Focusing on an industry-leading automotive plant, we examine carbon-neutral policy initiatives, wastewater and waste reduction efforts, CO₂ emissions tracking, and resource consumption optimization. Applying the EFQM as a structured methodology for self-assessment and continuous improvement, we highlight its adaptability within Industry 5.0 contexts [35], which emphasize the convergence of digital innovation, ethical considerations, and sustainability [36]. Our study provides empirical insights into how EFQM-based frameworks can help companies satisfy stringent environmental targets, comply with fast-evolving ESG reporting requirements, and achieve durable value creation.

By centering on the automotive industry, this study thus connects theoretical models with on-the-ground applications, offering both empirical validation of the EFQM Model and a roadmap for entities seeking to align organizational readiness with Industry 5.0 philosophies [31,37]. Ultimately, our findings aim to contribute to global efforts toward net-zero emissions and sustainable industrial transformation.

2. Materials and Methods

This study was conducted in collaboration with one large enterprise from November 2021 to December 2023. The company’s primary objective was to achieve a net-zero environmental impact, guided by the implementation of the EFQM Model 2020. The participating plant is part of a larger international corporation operating in the automotive sector, with a staff of over 1000 employees.

To facilitate organizational transformation toward net zero goals, the research team adopted the EFQM Model as a comprehensive framework [21,38]. Implementation followed a structured, multi-step procedure to align leadership, strategy, and continuous improvement activities with the company’s economic, social, and environmental objectives. A schematic overview of the study approach is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1 presents the nine stages of research:

1.

Leadership Commitment

Securing top management’s commitment to implement EFQM principles was the first step. The company’s purpose, mission, and values were clearly defined and aligned with strategic objectives, including net zero targets. Long-term sustainability and performance goals were set to integrate economic, social, and environmental dimensions.

2.

Focus Group Formation and Training

Key personnel from diverse functional areas were selected to form the EFQM implementation team. These individuals received in-depth training on EFQM methodology, ensuring a consistent understanding of its framework and criteria. The implementation team consisted of 14 people from different management levels and functional divisions. They included production managers; finance managers; middle managers from procurement, logistics, HR, IT, quality, production, and design; and senior specialists in quality, human resources, CSR, sales, kaizen, logistics. In preparation for the implementation of the EFQM Model, four training courses were held in accordance with EFQM standards:

• Introduction to the EFQM Model (5 h)—intended for the company’s management board and all directors.
• EFQM Foundation Training (2 days)—training for the whole team.
• Self-Assessment and Use of the RADAR tool (1 day)—for the whole team.
• EFQM Certified Assessor (3 days plus 2 days of self-study)—for selected team members indicated by the project manager.

Each training course was preceded and ended with a survey and tests to check the level of knowledge.

3.

Organizational Self-Assessment

A comprehensive self-assessment, based on EFQM criteria, was carried out to identify strengths and gaps in current practices. Benchmarking was performed against internal corporate standards, including established practices, methods, solutions, and productivity parameters. The benchmarking process involved comparing the studied organization’s performance with that of 11 top-performing factories located across Europe for a given criterium. These factories were selected based on their exemplary performance in areas such as productivity, efficiency, and sustainability, as measured by corporate metrics.

The self-assessment and benchmarking revealed critical areas for improvement, which were prioritized based on their alignment with the corporation’s strategic goals and expected KPIs for the coming years. Key areas included energy efficiency, waste reduction, water usage, and CO₂ emissions, reflecting the organization’s commitment to sustainability and operational excellence. This process provided actionable insights to guide the implementation of targeted improvements in line with the EFQM Model’s holistic framework.

4.

Prioritize Areas of Improvement

The organization’s target was net-zero CO₂ per vehicle produced. The improvement areas identified through self-assessment were prioritized according to their relevance for net zero ambitions and EFQM criteria, for example, renewable energy. Specific, measurable objectives were set (for example, energy economies, reduction in waste and recycling, self-generation of energy, green certificates), with resources and responsibilities clearly assigned within kaizens.

5.

Create an Action Plan

A detailed action plan was developed to map out each priority area, associated tasks, deadlines, and roles. Key performance indicators (KPIs) and milestones were established to track progress toward the net zero goal.

6.

Implement the Action Plan

Implementation activities (kaizens) were communicated to relevant stakeholders (internal teams, including production, sustainability, and management; suppliers; and local regulators), and necessary training was provided by corporate sustainability officers and external experts, covering EFQM methodology, carbon accounting, and ISO 14001 compliance [39]. Progress was monitored (also by the implementation of new online sensors—IoT) and evaluated against KPIs; adjustments were made as required.

7.

Regular Performance Review and Adjustment

Periodic performance reviews were conducted to assess the effectiveness of improvement actions. Results were used to refine the action plan, responding dynamically to in-ternal progress and external factors such as policy changes. Reviewed actions encompassed all company activities and kaizen initiatives. In the present analysis, we focus exclusively on sustainability measures, including energy efficiency upgrades, waste segregation protocols, recycling, employee engagement, and heat recovery systems. External factors considered include the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), supply chain disruptions due to COVID-19, and energy price fluctuations, particularly those driven by the war in Ukraine. Organizations aim to gather and monitor data in real time using IoT technologies. Regular meetings are held at intervals tailored to specific subjects, while reviews related to EFQM projects and sustainability are scheduled according to each project’s timeline.

8.

Evaluation and Continuous Improvement

A select group of employees received training as EFQM assessors to ensure ongoing internal evaluations. Comprehensive assessments were carried out regularly to compare performance with organizational and EFQM objectives. Insights from these assessments informed updates to improvement practices, fostering an internal culture of continuous improvement. Eight employees were trained as EFQM assessors: a production director, a finance director, middle-level managers (logistics, HR, IT, production), and senior specialists (quality, kaizen). The selection of assessors was intentionally designed to cover the broadest areas of the organization’s activities and its hierarchical structure, ensuring that multiple perspectives and levels of operation were considered. The evaluation aimed to enhance overall organizational performance in line with EFQM guidelines. The EFQM Model offers a universal, quantitative assessment tool applicable to all organizations. The organization’s ambitious goal was attaining five-star EFQM recognition, the highest accolade for EU corporations. The results presented here focus specifically on net zero, energy efficiency, and broader sustainability initiatives.

9.

External Validation and Recognition

In addition to ongoing internal assessments, the organization underwent an external evaluation by independent EFQM assessors. As a result of this evaluation, the organization was awarded a five-star EFQM recognition in 2023, demonstrating alignment with best practices in quality management and sustainability. The recognition by EFQM assessment was conducted by the Foundation for the Development of Wroclaw University of Economics and Business, a Polish partner of the EFQM. Four certified EFQM assessors with many years of international experience in assessing organizations were invited to the assessment. Publicizing this achievement serves not only as a benchmark for performance but also provides additional motivation for all stakeholders to maintain and enhance continual improvement efforts.

A multi-method research design was used to capture both qualitative and quantitative dimensions of EFQM-driven improvements, especially those targeting sustainable development and specific Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Integrating multiple methods allowed for the robust triangulation of data, enhancing the validity of the findings [22]. An overview of this research design is shown in

Table 1. Research methods and approaches used in the study.

Approach	Description
Focus groups	Focus groups comprising organizational stakeholders convened to identify the primary needs and improvement areas. Discussions centered on internal perceptions of sustainability, readiness for EFQM implementation, and alignment with the SDGs [40].
Documentation analysis	Policy papers, annual reports, and key performance parameters were systematically reviewed for the period of 2019–2023. This analysis provided a baseline of historical performance and strategic intent, informing targets and KPIs.
Participatory observations	Researchers observed steering committee meetings to gain real-time insights into decision-making, implementation practices, and stakeholder engagement [41]. Observations provided a contextual understanding of how EFQM principles were operationalized.
Strategy analysis	Both current and planned development strategies were scrutinized to assess the organization’s alignment with EFQM Model principles and SDG-related objectives. The review included mapping corporate goals to relevant EFQM criteria and sustainability metrics.
Workshops	Interactive workshops facilitated collaborative brainstorming and strategy validation. Participants co-developed action plans for sustainability and EFQM alignment, thereby refining the organization’s approach to net zero targets.
In-depth interviews	Seven top-level managers were interviewed to elicit executive-level perspectives on implementing EFQM and sustainability practices [42]. Interviews covered the challenges, opportunities, and strategic rationale behind net zero initiatives.
IoT-based data collection	Quantitative data were captured via sensors and detection systems, integrated into an internet of things (IoT) platform. Real-time measurements of energy, water, and other resource usage were aggregated to facilitate detailed performance evaluation against set EFQM and SDG metrics.

. Publicly available documents can be accessed at toyota-boshoku.com. Focus groups were composed of 14 trained employees and consultants, with participant selection tailored to topics related to the EFQM criteria. The number of sessions was determined by the complexity of each topic. Evaluation was grounded in internal strategic documents, annual reports, and established strategic objectives. Researchers participated in all meetings related to EFQM model implementation spanning several sessions between 2021 and 2023. All 14 EFQM project participants engaged in workshops designed to identify the organization’s strengths and improvement areas, which subsequently formed the basis for defining enhancement projects. In-depth interviews were conducted with the board and directors nominated by the board. Data collection methods were similarly aligned, acknowledging that the specifics are inherently unique to each organization due to variations in machinery, systems, sensors, software, and other technological components. New servers were implemented (increased efficiency lowered energy consumption related to data collection, analysis, and storage). The large IT infrastructure is beyond scope of this study.

Data from the above methods were cross-verified through methodological triangulation. For instance, quantitative metrics on resource efficiency and emissions were compared with qualitative feedback from focus groups, interviews, and steering committee observations. This process ensured that any reported improvements or barriers to EFQM implementation were validated from multiple perspectives. By blending empirical measurements (energy consumption, emissions reduction, etc.) with stakeholder perceptions, the study captured a holistic view of the EFQM-driven transformation toward net zero.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Overview of the EFQM Model’s Role in Sustainable Development

The pursuit of strategic solutions to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) has become a primary mission for many global corporations, particularly those operating in resource-intensive sectors such as the automotive industry. One such holistic framework, the EFQM Model 2020, has gained prominence as a promising approach to integrating economic, social, and environmental objectives into core corporate operations. This study builds on a multi-year, multi-phase collaboration with an international automotive corporation renowned for its innovative and sustainability-focused practices.

Over an extensive observation period (November 2021–December 2023), the research team gathered multifaceted data on how EFQM-driven processes support the adoption of carbon-neutral practices, as well as broader environmental, social, and governance (ESG) targets. The overarching aim was to assess whether EFQM implementation could help align strategic and operational activities with the SDGs while maintaining robust management efficiency.

Within the European Union (EU), organizations are increasingly guided by evolving regulations that mandate transparent reporting on sustainability actions and SDG contributions. The European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), published in 2023 and 2024, comprise two cross-cutting standards (ESRS 1 and ESRS 2) and ten thematic standards addressing environmental (ESRS E1–E5), social (ESRS S1–S4), and governance (ESRS G1) dimensions. These standards share a consistent four-pillar framework—Governance, Strategy, Impact and Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets—designed to facilitate a coherent reporting structure across different industries.

To comply with these directives, organizations must identify the most relevant ESG issues for stakeholders and the most impactful concerns for business performance. This “double materiality” principle obliges companies to consider both financial implications and wider environmental and social factors when reporting sustainability outcomes. Such a reporting landscape underscores the importance of adopting comprehensive management systems capable of gathering, analyzing, and communicating ESG data effectively.

Given the ESRS mandates, the EFQM Model offers an integrated approach that unifies operational excellence with sustainability targets, thus helping organizations both implement and report on their SDG progress. Through its structured criteria and continuous improvement philosophy, the EFQM facilitates the monitoring of economic, social, and environmental metrics, key components of modern sustainability frameworks [43]. An overview of how the EFQM aligns with the ESRS is presented in

Table 2. Alignment of the EFQM Model with the ESRS.

Area	Criteria	Criterion Parts	ESG Factor
Direction	1. Purpose, vision, and strategy	1.1 Define purpose and vision	ESRS 1; ESRS 2
		1.2 Identify and understand stakeholders’ needs	ESRS S3
		1.3 Understand the ecosystem, own capabilities, and major challenges	ESRS E1; ESRS E2; ESRS E3; ESRS E4
		1.5 Design and implement a governance and performance management system	ESRS G1; ESRS 1; ESRS 2
	2. Organizational culture and leadership	2.1 Steer the organization’s culture and nurture values	ESRS G1
Execution	3. Engaging stakeholders	3.1 Customers: build sustainable relationships	ESRS S4
		3.2 People: attract, engage, develop, and retain	ESRS S1
		3.4 Society: contribute to development, well-being, and prosperity	ESRS S3
		3.5 Partners and suppliers: build relationships and ensure support for creating sustainable value	ESRS G1; ESRS S2
	4. Creating sustainable value	4.1 Define the value and how it is created	ESRS S4
		4.2 Communicate and sell the value
		4.3 Deliver the value	ESRS S4
		4.4 Define and implement the overall experience
	5. Driving performance and transformation	5.1 Drive performance and manage risk	ESRS G1; ESRS1; ESRS 2
		5.2 Transform the organization for the future	ESRS E1; ESRS E2; ESRS E3; ESRS E4
		5.3 Drive innovation and utilize technology	ESRS E5
		5.4 Leverage data, information, knowledge	ESRS 1; ESRS 2
		5.5 Manage assets and resources	ESRS E1; ESRS E2; ESRS E3; ESRS E4; ESRS E5
Results	6. Stakeholder perceptions		ESRS 1; ESRS 2
	7. Strategic and operational performance		ESRS 1; ESRS 2; ESRS E1; ESRS E2; ESRS E3; ESRS E4; ESRS E5

, illustrating the synergistic relationship between a proven quality management methodology and emerging regulatory standards.

By capturing the dual priorities of performance excellence and environmental responsibility, the EFQM positions organizations to meet increasingly stringent sustainability requirements. This alignment also enhances stakeholder trust, as the transparent reporting of ESG metrics is quickly becoming a competitive imperative. The subsequent sections delve deeper into the implementation of the EFQM Model within an automotive production plant, highlighting specific outcomes in terms of carbon reduction, resource efficiency, and stakeholder engagement.

The EFQM Model aligns well with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) through a structured approach that incorporates both performance management and sustainability reporting criteria across all areas:

Within the direction area, purpose, vision, and strategy (Criterion 1) in the EFQM Model aligns with ESRS 1 and ESRS 2 by guiding organizations to define their long-term mission and strategic vision, integrating sustainability objectives such as those outlined in the SDGs. The stakeholder needs component under Criterion 1.2 aligns with ESRS S3, emphasizing the importance of understanding stakeholder expectations in sustainability and governance. The EFQM Model’s approach to ecosystem understanding (Criterion 1.3) mirrors ESRS E1–E4 by requiring companies to assess environmental challenges and their own sustainability capabilities. Criterion 2 (organizational culture and leadership) in the EFQM Model is directly supported by ESRS G1, which emphasizes governance structures that cultivate a sustainability-oriented culture and reinforce core values across the organization.

Within the execution area, including engaging stakeholders and creating sustainable value (Criterion 3), the EFQM Model’s focus on stakeholder engagement aligns with multiple ESRS standards, where customer relationships are linked to ESRS S4, people management to ESRS S1, societal impact to ESRS S3, and supplier partnerships to ESRS G1 and ESRS S2. Creating sustainable value (Criterion 4), which involves defining, communicating, and delivering value, is directly aligned with ESRS S4 in the ESRS framework. This ensures that organizations communicate sustainability value effectively to stakeholders. Performance and risk management (Criterion 5.1) aligns with ESRS G1, ESRS 1, and ESRS 2, focusing on robust governance and risk management in sustainability initiatives. Transformation initiatives (Criterion 5.2) and innovation (Criterion 5.3) align with ESRS E1–E5, requiring organizations to innovate in environmentally responsible ways and leverage technology (particularly ESRS E5). Resource and asset management (Criterion 5.5) further emphasizes sustainable operations, aligning with ESRS E1–E5 to promote effective resource use and mitigate environmental impacts.

Within the results area, stakeholder perceptions (Criterion 6) in the EFQM Model ties into ESRS 1 and ESRS 2, highlighting the importance of transparent stakeholder feedback in sustainability performance. Strategic and operational performance (Criterion 7) is aligned with a broad range of ESRS (ESRS E1–E5), reinforcing comprehensive performance tracking and reporting on environmental impact and sustainability outcomes. Analysis of the documentation [28,44] showed the compatibility of the adopted SDGs with the EFQM Model 2020 and the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) in the environmental area (

Table 3. Alignment of the EFQM Model with SDGs implemented within the organization and related ESRS standards.

SDG	ESRS	Model EFQM
		Direction	Execution	Results
Goal 6—Clean water and sanitation: ensure access to water and sanitation for all through sustainable water resource management	ESRS E3—Water and marine resources	1.3 Understand the ecosystem, own capabilities, and major challenges	5.2 Transform the organization for the future 5.5 Manage assets and resources 5.3 Drive innovation and utilize technology	7. Strategic and operational performance
Goal 7—Clean and accessible energy: ensure affordable access to stable, sustainable, and modern energy for all	ESRS E2—Pollution
Goal 9—Innovation, industry, infrastructure: build resilient infrastructure, promote sustainable industrialization, and foster innovation	ESRS E2—Pollution
Goal 12—Responsible consumption and production: ensure sustainable consumption and production patterns	ESRS E5—Resource utilization and the circular economy
Goal 13—Climate action: take urgent action to combat climate change and its impacts	ESRS E1—Climate change

).

3.2. Driving Sustainable Development with the EFQM Model

This study focused on a leading international automotive factory that began implementing the EFQM Model 2020 between November 2021 and December 2023. Situated in Poland within the European Union (EU), the plant employs over 1000 staff and manufactures components both for its own brand and for external automotive partners. Against a backdrop of increasingly stringent environmental legislation and rising stakeholder expectations, the company sought to leverage EFQM principles to accelerate progress toward carbon neutrality and other environmental targets.

The primary research objective was to determine whether the EFQM Model could effectively guide the factory in aligning management and operational practices with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Drawing on the established EFQM assessment criteria, the project aimed to achieve the following:

1.

Evaluate how the factory’s existing culture, leadership commitment, and resources measured up against EFQM guidelines.

2.

Pinpoint specific areas needing improvement to meet regulatory and societal expectations for low-emission, resource-efficient operations.

3.

Use the EFQM’s structured approach to devise, implement, and track systematic sustainability measures at both the strategic and shop-floor levels.

4.

Translate the EFQM framework into measurable outcomes in energy savings, waste reduction, and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions abatement.

The quantitative evaluation of the criteria was performed through structured self-assessment workshops and surveys, where employees provided quantitative ratings based on the EFQM’s RADAR logic. These scores facilitated a measurable understanding of strengths and areas for improvement within the analyzed criteria.

Resource allocation was examined through both tangible and intangible assets (e.g., technology, human capital, and financial support for sustainability initiatives) using internal performance metrics aligned with the EFQM criteria.

This iterative self-assessment process, similar to the PDCA cycle, supports continuous improvement and is further validated by external EFQM assessors when the organization opts for official recognition.

Evolving EU directives, particularly the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), demand greater transparency and accountability in ESG performance. In conjunction with these requirements, the EFQM Model serves as a complementary system for organizations to embed sustainable practices, track progress, and report on outcomes. The following points highlight the synergy between the EFQM and ESRS mandates:

• The EFQM prompts leaders to integrate sustainability considerations into their organizational vision, mission, and strategic plans, which aligns with ESRS pillars on governance and strategy.
• The EFQM’s continuous improvement cycle encourages ongoing risk assessments and stakeholder engagement, mirroring the ESRS emphasis on identifying and managing material, environmental, and social impacts.
• The EFQM’s results-oriented criteria facilitate structured data collection critical for meeting ESRS metrics and targets, particularly around energy use, carbon footprint, and water management.

Building on recent research [45,46], this study hypothesized that EFQM implementation enables systematic sustainable development while preserving robust management performance. Automotive manufacturing, characterized by high energy consumption and substantial global supply chains, presents a stringent test case for EFQM-driven improvements. Moreover, the mandatory shift toward lower-emission operations, exacerbated by regulatory frameworks such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD), offers fertile ground to assess the EFQM’s suitability for navigating complex environmental targets.

A pivotal element of contemporary sustainability efforts is the concept of double materiality, which compels organizations to evaluate both financially material factors (implications for profitability, risk exposure, etc.) and environmental–social materiality (broader impacts on ecosystems and communities). The EFQM’s stakeholder-focused structure facilitated the plant’s capacity to achieve the following:

• Map relevant stakeholders (internal teams, suppliers, local communities, customers), assessing how each group perceives or is affected by the firm’s operations.
• Prioritize environmental and social issues in a way that resonates with stakeholder concerns, thus channeling finite resources toward the most pressing sustainability challenges.
• Integrate continuous feedback through regular reviews and surveys, ensuring that the firm remains responsive to shifting stakeholder priorities and market conditions.

The EFQM Model provided a robust framework within which the automotive factory could synchronize its strategic goals, operational activities, and ESG reporting obligations.

3.3. Implementation of the Net Zero Strategy in the Automotive Factory

In tandem with the EFQM-based improvements, the organization enacted a comprehensive strategy to achieve net-zero environmental impact. The initiative centered on five UN SDGs, Goals 6, 7, 9, 12, and 13, deemed critical for addressing water usage, clean energy, responsible consumption, industrial innovation, and urgent climate action (Table 3). By targeting these SDGs, the company sought to translate high-level sustainability commitments into operational realities on the production floor.

Figure 2 illustrates the four interlocking pillars that constitute the company’s net zero roadmap: (1) team awareness, (2) data collection and analysis, (3) kaizen-driven process improvements, and (4) on-site green energy generation. Each pillar is grounded in EFQM Model principles, ensuring that every step toward decarbonization aligns with broader organizational excellence and stakeholder engagement.

1.

Team Awareness

Intensive training programs and workshops increased employees’ understanding of the net zero vision. Cross-functional teams were empowered to design improvement projects, linking the EFQM focus on leadership and culture (Criteria 1 and 2) with practical sustainability actions [8].

2.

Data Collection and Analysis

Advanced metering devices and IoT platforms were installed to capture real-time energy consumption and emissions data. Regular performance reviews and analytics provided an evidence-based foundation for decision-making, fulfilling EFQM’s emphasis on data-driven management (Criterion 5).

3.

Kaizens for Continuous Improvement

A series of iterative, small-scale improvements targeted reductions in energy usage, water consumption, and waste. Quality control circles (QCCs) and Kaizen activities helped operationalize the EFQM’s “improvement” ethos, fostering employee ownership of sustainability initiatives.

4.

Green Energy Self-Generation

Initially, the company prioritized reducing consumption through efficiency gains. Subsequent plans called for solar photovoltaics and other renewable technologies to cover remaining energy needs. This sequential approach, with efficiency first and renewables second, aligns with the EFQM’s lifecycle thinking, minimizing both resource use and the carbon footprint of new infrastructure.

Table 4. Actions taken as part of the implementation of the EFQM Model 2020 across the area of direction.

Direction
Criteria	Guidelines	Description	Company Actions/Kaizen
1. Purpose, vision, and strategy	1.3 Understand the ecosystem, own capabilities, and major challenges	Explores and understands the ecosystem, including megatrends and the implications of the UN Sustainable Development Goals	The company’s strategy up to 2030 includes 10 UN goals, of which 5 are environmental. The company using the strategy decided to achieve following environmental goals:
			1. Net-zero GHG emissions by 2035
			2. Net-zero GHG emissions by 2050
			3. Minimizing natural resource usage
			5. Minimizing waste production
			6. Participating in the whole-group goal: planting 1.32 million trees by 2050
		Assesses and values knowledge, data, and information collected from across the ecosystem to understand the main current and future challenges	Expands the data collection and monitoring system, the analysis of which enables the implementation of key actions, such as within kaizens
2. Organizational culture and leadership	2.1 Steer the organization’s culture and nurture values	Expresses and promotes concern for the natural environment and the scarcity of resources, raising awareness of the importance of a responsible approach to the environment	Builds employee engagement in quality control circles (QCCs) by monitoring satisfaction levels and involvement in kaizen activities

,

Table 5. Actions taken as part of the implementation of the EFQM Model 2020 across the area of execution.

Execution
Criteria	Guidelines	Description	Company Actions/Kaizen
3. Stakeholder engagement	3.4 Society: contribute to development, well-being, and prosperity	People or groups outside the organization who represent the immediate community or wider society, including, for example, interest groups focusing on issues such as the environment	Planting 1.32 million trees: As part of reforestation efforts, the company engages in protecting habitats of endemic species in various regions and countries, conserving forests and restoring abundant habitats.
4. Creating sustainable value	4.1 Design the value and how it is created	Designs value and value creation approaches to reflect the lifecycle of products, services, and solutions in a responsible manner, considering the impact on public health, safety, and the environment	Using recyclable or biodegradable materials in production
	4.3 Deliver the value	Provides its products, services and solutions in a way that minimizes the negative impact on society and the natural environment	Automatic management of lighting and ventilation
5. Driving performance and transformation	5.2 Transform the organization for the future	Transforms the value creation process and other organizational processes to adapt them to future needs	Cooling system energy reduction during non-production periods; solar farm installation; heat recovery from cutting process; A/C in transformer station instead of ventilation
	5.5 Manage assets and resources	Identifies assets and resources that are no longer needed and disposes of them responsibly based on the principles of the circular economy	External lighting management
			Recycling

and

Table 6. Actions taken as part of the implementation of the EFQM Model 2020 across the area of results.

Results
Criteria	Guidelines	Description	Company Actions/Kaizen
6. Stakeholder perceptions	6.1 Customer perception results	The brand and reputation of the organization, including its impact on society and the environment	Production of low-carbon-intensity vehicles
	6.3 Business and governing stakeholder perception results	Perception of the organization’s social and environmental responsibility	Good relations with local authorities
	6.4 Society perception results	Sustainability of the effects of the organization’s activities on the community in economic, social, and environmental terms	Restoring natural forest environments
7. Strategic and operational performance	Considers the current and future needs and expectations of key stakeholders when selecting the most appropriate performance indicators aligned with strategic and operational goals		Recycling

link each EFQM criterion to specific environmental initiatives. This integrated framework facilitated a seamless progression from strategic intent (direction) to execution (execution) and outcome measurement (results).

The table is divided into three areas of the EFQM Model: direction, execution, and results. The columns include, from the left, model criteria within the area, guidelines, a description, and, in the last column, examples of implementation by the company.

The initiatives included the following:

• Resource monitoring: deploying an extensive sensor network to measure electricity, water, and natural gas consumption in real time.
• Exceeding a 98% recycling rate by FY23 (

  Table 7. Improvement of the recycling ratio over five last fiscal years.

  Fiscal Year	Recycling Ratio
  FY19	93.3%
  FY20	96.9%
  FY21	97.2%
  FY22	98.0%
  FY23	98.1%

  ), reflecting a circular economy focus and the EFQM’s results-driven perspective.
• Replacing traditional lighting systems with automated, energy-saving solutions, alongside improved insulation and heat recovery measures to curtail fixed energy consumption.

These efforts collectively reduced CO₂ emissions by 17% over the study period, underscoring the pragmatic benefits of EFQM-based continuous improvement.

To evaluate the net zero trajectory, the company tracked CO₂ emissions per vehicle produced (Figure 3 and Figure 4). Figure 3 illustrates the roadmap toward net-zero emissions for the EU region, showing the percentage reduction in CO₂ emissions per vehicle relative to the FY19 baseline. In this figure, upward arrows denote periods where significant improvements were achieved, reflecting the effective implementation of energy efficiency measures and operational optimizations. In contrast, downward arrows indicate intervals during which progress plateaued or experienced minor regressions, likely due to external challenges or transitional phases in the implementation process. This visual representation provides readers with a clear understanding of the dynamic trajectory of emissions reduction over time. Over a four-year span (FY19–FY23), total CO₂ output per vehicle decreased to 65.19% of the initial baseline in the broader EU region, whereas the specific plant achieved a reduction to 54.43% of its baseline, indicating a more pronounced improvement at the plant. It is important to note that these percentages are relative and depend on each facility’s baseline and operational characteristics, such as energy intensity and the degree of baseline optimization. While these figures highlight significant progress, further gains are anticipated through additional Kaizen projects and the planned expansion of on-site renewables [47].

Approximately half of total energy use remains fixed, underscoring ongoing challenges in scaling down baseline consumption. To close the gap in on-site generation capacity, the company supplemented its carbon reduction goals by purchasing green energy certificates, reflecting the EFQM’s risk management approach to achieving environmental targets.

By systematically mapping its actions to the five targeted SDGs and adhering to emerging ESRS guidelines, the factory demonstrated a robust alignment between operational excellence and regulatory compliance. This alignment extends beyond internal efficiency gains to broader ESG reporting. The EFQM’s stakeholder-centric structure enabled the company to address both financial materiality (e.g., cost savings from energy efficiency) and environmental–social materiality (e.g., local community benefits, greenhouse gas reduction). The enterprise documented its progress in annual sustainability reports, showcasing verified metrics that support ESRS obligations. By reinforcing EFQM principles, particularly Criterion 5 (driving performance and transformation), the company built adaptability into its net zero strategy, anticipating evolving regulations and stakeholder expectations.

These outcomes highlight that EFQM Model implementation can serve as a powerful catalyst for achieving ambitious sustainability objectives in the automotive sector. The synergy of structured management practices, employee-driven improvement, and technology-enabled monitoring underscores the feasibility of transitioning to carbon-neutral operations while maintaining high standards of product quality and commercial viability.

3.4. Strengthening Organizational Engagement: Kaizens, Team Awareness, and Data-Driven Insights

A core principle of the EFQM Model is fostering a shared vision and culture of continuous improvement, which this automotive factory operationalized through employee awareness initiatives, kaizen activities, and rigorous data monitoring. This integrated approach not only supported carbon reduction targets but also enhanced staff commitment and operational resilience.

From the outset, leadership placed significant emphasis on team awareness of sustainability goals. The organization’s central aim to achieve net-zero emissions was reinforced at every level through training sessions, workshops, and regular communications. Figure 5 illustrates an upward trend in quality control circle (QCC) participation from 2019 to 2022, climbing from approximately 20% to nearly 60%. Although this still fell short of the 70% benchmark, it indicates substantial progress in both engagement and collective problem-solving. The 70% benchmark referenced in our study is derived from an internal corporate target, which is based on the average participation rate of 67% observed across the corporate group. This benchmark reflects the level of employee engagement in continuous improvement activities, a key indicator of the organizational culture and the values embraced by our workforce. Each idea approved by the review committee contributes to enhancing operational efficiency [8]. Achieving or approaching this 70% participation rate is indicative of effective collective problem-solving and is linked to optimal quality improvements. It is worth noting that kaizen personal engagement tripled over the same period, demonstrating the positive impact of EFQM-driven leadership and culture criteria (Criteria 1 and 2).

Such an improvement in employee involvement proved instrumental in reducing turnover rates, which had been a significant concern given tight labor markets and low unemployment rates (2.9%) at the end of January 2023 [48]. Externally, the company’s commitment to continuous improvement and sustainability has been validated through prestigious awards. Notably, the plant was recognized in the Global QCC Competition, and in 2022, it was the only plant in Europe that received the Gold Award at an international competition held in Japan. These accolades underscore the effectiveness of stakeholder-driven initiatives and further enhance the company’s reputation among local communities and business partners, in alignment with ESRS requirements for transparent ESG reporting. By cultivating a sense of shared ownership over sustainability outcomes, the factory not only minimized recruitment and training costs but also bolstered morale and retained valuable expertise.

Kaizen initiatives formed the operational backbone of the company’s sustainability strategy. These small-scale, iterative improvements aligned with the EFQM’s execution dimension (Criteria 3–5) and directly targeted reductions in energy consumption and resource waste. Examples of kaizen-driven results include the following:

1.

Installing inverters for pumps and advanced sensors for lighting and air circulation systems, thereby allowing for on-demand rather than continuous operation.

2.

Capturing excess heat from certain production processes (e.g., cutting, press operations) to warm adjacent areas of the plant, ultimately lowering total energy demand.

3.

Segmenting production lines and auxiliary systems (e.g., compressed air, ventilation) so that individual sections could be shut down during downtime, tackling previously “fixed” energy loads.

Collectively, these kaizen activities accounted for a measurable portion of the 17% carbon dioxide emissions reduction observed during the study period (Figure 6). Incremental gains in each micro-process, when scaled across the facility, resulted in significant energy savings and cost reductions.

Data collection and analysis form the second pillar of the organization’s net zero strategy, providing an objective basis for identifying high-impact kaizen initiatives. Advanced monitoring tools, such as metering devices and IoT platforms, continuously capture real-time data on electricity, water, and natural gas consumption (Criterion 5.5 in the EFQM Model). These data are then aggregated and reviewed during weekly steering committee meetings, informing both immediate operational improvements and long-term sustainability planning. For example, analysis revealed that approximately 50% of the plant’s energy consumption was fixed (Figure 7), prompting targeted initiatives such as improved insulation and reduced equipment idling. Likewise, a review of documentation showed an increase in the recycling rate from 93.3% in FY19 to 98.1% in FY23 (Table 5), illustrating the continuous improvement ethos in waste management and material recovery. By linking specific Kaizen projects to key performance indicators (KPIs), such as energy use per unit of production, managers can benchmark progress and effectively communicate improvements to both internal stakeholders and external audiences.

This robust, data-driven approach not only facilitates the rapid iteration of environmental solutions but also underpins the organization’s annual sustainability disclosures. Although these annual reports summarize retrospectively aggregated data, the underlying continuous monitoring ensures that the most accurate and timely information informs these reports, thereby enhancing transparency and credibility in ESG reporting. This integration of real-time operational data with periodic reporting strengthens internal stakeholder engagement and bolsters the company’s reputation among local communities and suppliers. These efforts, aligned with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), demonstrate the synergy between EFQM-facilitated operational excellence and a proactive, stakeholder-centric sustainability strategy.

3.5. Green Energy Self-Generation and the Path to Net Zero

While the factory’s incremental improvements in energy efficiency and resource optimization significantly contributed to its carbon reduction targets, the final stages of achieving net zero depend on the self-generation of green energy. This approach is driven by the EFQM Model’s emphasis on long-term strategic outcomes (Criterion 7—strategic and operational performance) and the need for both environmental and economic sustainability.

Initially, the organization focused on reducing overall energy consumption to maximize the eventual impact of new renewable energy installations. By identifying and eliminating inefficiencies first, the factory minimized the capacity requirements for solar photovoltaics (PV) or other renewable infrastructure, thus reducing both cost and embodied emissions. Early pilot installations of PV arrays tested the feasibility of larger-scale deployment. However, the main production facility occupies a relatively confined area due to its specific location and building design, which limits the total capacity for rooftop or ground-mounted solar installations. To address these space constraints, the organization purchased additional land and developed a dedicated photovoltaic farm, thereby supplementing on-site generation and overcoming limitations imposed by the factory’s physical footprint. Planners also evaluated alternate sites or partnerships (e.g., community solar) as supplementary measures.

This strategy, combined with staggered photovoltaic adoption that benefits from ongoing improvements in solar panel efficiency and battery storage, aligns with the EFQM’s continual transformation perspective (Criterion 5.2). Although on-site generation improvements are significant, purchasing green certificates remains a key bridging strategy (Figure 4 and Figure 5), representing the external renewable energy required to offset any shortfall in internal production.

Although certificates do not directly reduce on-site emissions, they signal a market demand for greener power sources. From an EFQM standpoint, this practice reflects a pragmatic approach to risk management (Criterion 5.1) and resource acquisition (Criterion 5.5) while the company scales its renewable capabilities.

As the factory continued lowering its carbon footprint, each percentage increment of reduction became more difficult to achieve (Figure 6 and Figure 7). This phenomenon underscores the concept of diminishing returns, wherein easily attainable efficiency improvements have already been captured, and further emissions cuts require more advanced or more expensive technological interventions. To overcome these hurdles, the plant has explored the following:

• Passive building approaches, high-efficiency HVAC systems, and integrated energy storage solutions that reduce reliance on external power grids.
• Collaborations with local utilities to synchronize on-site generation with broader network demands, potentially offering load-balancing services for additional revenue or credits.

Throughout this phase, alignment with the EFQM Model continued to guide strategic decisions. The organization systematically assessed whether each new technology or pilot project advanced its long-term sustainability goals (Criterion 1.3—understanding major challenges; Criterion 2.1—steering culture), while maintaining economic viability (Criterion 7—strategic and operational results). Furthermore, these renewable energy initiatives directly supported multiple SDGs, particularly Goal 7 (affordable and clean energy) and Goal 13 (climate action).

From a reporting and compliance perspective, the systematic documentation of renewable energy installations and certificate purchases contributed to meeting the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS), ensuring that both direct and indirect emissions reductions were transparently communicated to stakeholders and regulators.

3.6. Challenges, Lessons Learned, and Future Outlook

Despite marked successes in reducing resource consumption and laying the groundwork for net-zero emissions, the transition guided by the EFQM Model was not without its obstacles. This section synthesizes the key lessons learned during its implementation, highlighting both the benefits of an EFQM-driven approach and the areas requiring sustained effort and innovation.

One of the most prominent issues was staff fatigue, fueled by the breadth of improvement projects and new tasks introduced alongside regular operational responsibilities. While kaizens and quality control circles significantly enhanced employee engagement and skill development, the rapid pace of change risked overwhelming frontline workers and middle managers. This phenomenon underscores the importance of the following:

• Staggering major projects and kaizen rollouts to avoid overwhelming personnel.
• Providing regular updates, success stories, and peer-to-peer learning sessions to maintain morale and a sense of shared purpose.

By acknowledging these human factors, the company strategically leveraged the EFQM’s focus on culture and leadership (Criteria 1–2) to foster resilience and maintain overall organizational cohesion.

As the factory’s resource use and emissions approached lower thresholds, further improvements became increasingly challenging. Much of the “low-hanging fruit” had been addressed by the following:

1.

Upgrading lighting and insulation systems.

2.

Optimizing fixed loads through advanced monitoring.

3.

Implementing continuous improvement cycles.

Additional reductions, particularly in water usage and Scope 2 emissions, now necessitate technological breakthroughs (e.g., advanced building envelopes, new production methods) or significant capital expenditure (e.g., large-scale photovoltaic arrays, battery storage). This plateau effect aligns with other industrial decarbonization experiences and reinforces the EFQM Model’s guidance on proactively transforming for the future (Criterion 5.2).

While the EFQM Model provides a robust framework for aligning strategy and operations, regulatory requirements such as the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS) add a layer of complexity. Organizations must address multiple stakeholder demands, each having different reporting expectations. At the same time, they must maintain high-quality, real-time data capture, ensuring the accurate monitoring of all relevant ESG indicators, a demanding practice that can strain existing IT and administrative systems.

Nevertheless, the plant’s structured EFQM approach with clear KPIs and regular self-assessment proved advantageous in fulfilling ESRS obligations. Documenting and communicating improvements validated the company’s progress and built trust among internal and external stakeholders (Criterion 6—stakeholder perceptions; Criterion 7—results).

Ultimately, achieving net zero will require a continued commitment to process innovation and advanced technologies, complementing incremental kaizen efforts. Potential avenues under exploration include leveraging naturally regulated indoor climates, reducing HVAC loads, and integrating construction materials that help lower embodied emissions. Very promising to achieve Sustainable Development Goals such as reducing carbon emissions are new digital technologies such as IoT, especially online sensors such as temperature and vibroacoustic sensors, energy consumption, digital twins, new efficient databases, big data, AI-driven predictive maintenance, and process optimization, critical for detecting inefficiencies that are no longer visible to conventional monitoring systems. Digital innovations align directly with the Industry 5.0 paradigm, where human-centric, data-driven approaches converge to meet ambitious environmental targets without compromising economic viability.

The enterprise’s five-star EFQM recognition demonstrates that its experience can serve as a benchmark for other automotive and manufacturing facilities. Critical success factors include the following:

• Holistic strategy.
• Incremental, data-driven improvements.
• Balancing near-term efficiency measures with strategic investments in future-ready technologies.

By exemplifying these best practices, the company sets a precedent for others pursuing carbon neutrality in a manner consistent with both corporate objectives and evolving global standards.

4. Conclusions

The automotive industry stands at the forefront of a global transition toward sustainability, driven by tightening environmental regulations, evolving market expectations, and heightened awareness of climate change. This study examined the application of the EFQM Model 2020 in a large automotive production plant, with a particular focus on achieving a net-zero environmental impact and contributing to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Across an extended implementation window (November 2021 to December 2023), the following key conclusions were drawn:

1.

EFQM as a Catalyst for Sustainability

The EFQM Model’s holistic criteria provided an effective roadmap for embedding sustainability objectives into both strategic and operational levels. Compared to other quality and excellence frameworks such as ISO 9001, the Baldrige Excellence Framework, and the Shingo Model, the EFQM uniquely integrates continuous improvement with sustainability, particularly through its alignment with emerging regulatory frameworks like the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). This integration enabled the organization to systematically address carbon reduction, water conservation, waste minimization, and energy efficiency.

2.

Measurable Progress Toward Net Zero

Through iterative kaizen projects, advanced data analytics, and strategic investments in green energy, the plant achieved a 17% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions, significant improvements in water usage efficiency, and a recycling rate exceeding 98%. The staged approach prioritizing cost-effective efficiency gains before scaling on-site renewable installations ensured the optimal use of resources and capital, highlighting how a data-driven and structured application of EFQM principles can yield tangible environmental benefits.

3.

Enhancing Employee Engagement and Organizational Culture

Sustained leadership commitment and widespread employee involvement were pivotal to the success of the initiative. Quality control circles (QCCs) and Kaizen activities not only increased staff participation and reduced turnover but also fostered a strong culture of continuous improvement. This internal engagement, reinforced by a shared sustainability mission, illustrates how effective change management can support operational excellence in energy-intensive industries.

4.

Challenges and Limitations

As efficiency levels improved, the plant encountered diminishing returns, with incremental gains requiring more advanced or capital-intensive interventions. Concurrent project rollouts posed risks of overwhelming employees, underscoring the need for phased implementation and robust change management. Additionally, while on-site renewable installations were constrained by the plant’s limited physical footprint, a challenge mitigated by purchasing green certificates and developing additional photovoltaic capacity, the experience underscores the importance of contextual factors such as location and facility design in shaping sustainability strategies.

5.

Future Directions

To bridge the gap between current performance and genuine net zero status, the plant must continue to adopt advanced technologies (e.g., AI-driven predictive maintenance, passive building designs) and expand collaborations (e.g., microgrids, waste-to-energy consortia). Future research should explore the EFQM Model 2025 and its added value in achieving sustainability goals, with particular attention to practical applications in Industry 5.0. Moreover, differentiated application suggestions tailored to automotive companies of varying sizes and developmental stages are essential. Given the automotive sector’s strategic importance and its influence on broader manufacturing industries, our study provides a replicable blueprint for sustainable transformation that can serve as a starting point for wider industry adoption.

Overall, our study confirms that the EFQM Model is a powerful enabler of sustainability-driven transformation. By combining data-driven decision-making, robust leadership engagement, and a culture of continuous improvement, automotive companies can not only meet regulatory and societal expectations but also set new benchmarks for environmental performance. This work contributes both to management practice and academic discourse, illustrating how holistic quality management frameworks can be effectively adapted to address emergent climate and resource challenges.