Is your report long and boring?

One of the numerous tests I use when I am reading and reviewing sustainability reports is how far into the report I can get before it becomes tedious, boring or generally rather meaningless. Some reports are so full of verbiage before they tell you anything substantive that it rather turns you off and makes the rest of the report hard to digest. This is the problem with looooong reports. No-one has the patience these days to read long waffly explanations of every thought process about every bowel movement of the reporting team. 

Reports today need to be concise: they need to state clearly and quickly the most material impacts of the business and efficiently update us on what has changed over the past year. Companies that maintain an online "policy bank" -  a list of policies and positions on core aspects of sustainability -  save themselves time and space in the annual sustainability report. They also gain reader attention, as we don't exhaust our patience on long diatribes and lose energy before we get to the main course. Let's face it, when you go out for a meal, if the first course is massive, you don't have room to eat the main course, let alone dessert. It's the same way sustainability reports. Your material content is your main course. A light starter provides context and background, and a healthy dessert provides the GRI content index and other references. The main course, your materiality process, topics and performance, is where companies should focus their reporting efforts. You can offer a menu of snacks - sustainability stories, anecdotes and case studies - on your website.

Here's an example of a report I came across while doing some research on the consumer goods sector. Ontex Group is a Belgian-based company listed on Euronext Brussels, employing more than 11,000 people and enjoying sales of almost Euro 2 billion. Ontex is a supplier of disposable personal hygiene products including diapers and pants, pads, tampons and panty liners in more than 110 countries. The Ontex 2016 Sustainability Report is a credible report that focuses on its defined most material impacts of the business.

It's a GRI Standards core report, crafted around SDG priorities, and does its stuff in 44 pages (including 5 pages of GRI Content Index) in an attractive, pleasant and clean design. Ontex provides contextual background on trends that have influenced the selection of material impacts and sustainability strategy.

And presents a materiality matrix

While aligning the report with Sustainable Development Goals

And on the Ontex website, the company discloses specific strategy and policy documents to complement and complete the sustainability picture.

But beware: Concise does not mean skeletal. 

Reports that are 2-page infographics are not reports. Four-page summaries are not reports. If they are not infographics of a concise report, or summaries of a longer report, they are not useful in lieu of a sustainability report. While it is possible to reference a host of other documents where disclosures may be located (and the GRI framework allows this), in practice, the beauty of a sustainability report is that key information is on one place and we don't have to go searching for all the individual elements separately. We want the essence of everything that's material without having to trawl the web, download multiple other documents and search forever for references that all too often are not there anyway. So, up to around 45 pages, for me, is concise enough to deliver a complete story with enough detail and context for me to understand the company's impacts and accountability. If I want supplementary information for interest or deeper understanding of quantitative data, I am happy to get this online, via a policy bank or other downloadable appendix.

I know that many people will consider even 40 pages too long....and there are many reports that are much shorter than that and do a good job. While the quality of reporting should not really be measured in terms of the number of pages, my rule of thumb for something that fits in the space between feeling stuffed and still feeling hungry - sort of nicely satiated - is around 40 pages.

Here's another nice example: Ramboll's 2016 Corporate Repsonsibility Report.

Ramboll is an engineering, design and consultancy company founded in Denmark in 1945. Ramboll employs 13,000 people across the world. This is a 40-page GRI G4 almost-core report that packs a ton of information in a well-structured concise framework, pleasingly designed and easy to read, with no distracting glossies and frills. The GRI Content Index and key KPI tables take up 4 pages.

One of the positive things about this report is that the material impacts are right there up front on page 5, immediately after the CEO statement, making it very clear what we are going to learn about Ramboll in the remaining pages. I like reports that state materiality up front - not only does this help clarify the report context, it also drives credibility. If it's one of the first things a company reports, it must be one of the first things a company thinks. And that's what materiality means. It should never be an afterthought or a summary of what you are doing. Materiality is a guide to what you should be doing.

The remainder of the report is split into two main sections, a format that I particularly favor. The first section is called "Shaping sustainable societies" and it addresses what are broadly the indirect impacts of the company's business - through the projects it advances and the role it takes in shaping the sector and public policy. The second section covers direct impacts, called "Demonstrating our progress", and includes sections on employer of choice, environment, safety and integrity - linking these also to UN Global Compact and SDG priorities.

Ramboll also uses its website to supplement information with policy statements and commitments - here's an example from one of the sections:

While this report could be even more reporting-year focused, with fewer perennial policy statements that could be policy-banked on the website, this report offers comprehensive coverage of material impacts in a concise way.

So, if your report is long, it is almost certainly also boring (at least in parts). It's totally worth reconsidering how you can deploy other ways of getting your content out there and delivering on your transparency obligations without crowding your report with content that causes us to doze off instead of inspiring us to buy in.  Incentivize yourselves. For every page you save, treat yourself a scoop of salted caramel ice cream.

(NB: I have previously written about Liberty Global's last Corporate Responsibility Report - a masterpiece in concise, precision reporting).



elaine cohen, CSR Consultant, Sustainability Reporter, former HR Professional, Trust Across America 2017 Lifetime Achievement Award honoree, Ice Cream Addict, Author of three totally groundbreaking books on sustainability (see About Me page). Contact me via Twitter (@elainecohen) or via my business website www.b-yond.biz (Beyond Business Ltd, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm). Need help writing your first / next Sustainability Report? Contact elaine: info@b-yond.biz 

Elaine will be chairing  the edie Conference on Smarter Sustainability Reporting  in London on 27th February 2018

7 short CSR reports - the better and the less better

I was asked by @jenniferwoofter on Twitter if  I can recommend any short reports - under or around 20 pages - that are effective in communicating sustainability. I always have a problem remembering where I found good reporting practice. I ought to develop a system. (Note to self: that to-do list just keeps getting longer). So, in order to respond to Jennifer, and refresh my thinking, I did a little research using the GRI Global Reporting Sustainability Database. It's very hard to find reports that are under or around 20 pages (excluding executive summaries of longer reports) (and, of course, I only look at reports in English (or sort-of English)). It's almost impossible to find short reports in Asia or Latin America and most of Europe. Shorter reports tend to be from U.S. companies. Also, short reporting does not correlate absolutely to company size. It's not just SMEs and local companies that keep reports compact. My list below includes some large global companies with tens of thousands of employees.

Here's what I came up with - the better and less better. I will say that even the less better reports are evidence of some level of commitment and action and while my, as usual, fairly direct criticisms reflect my honest professional opinion in the hope of helping reporters get better value from reporting, I continue to commend and be grateful to companies who report. Reporting is always a challenge and always an achievement. Even short reports can be powerful. Some more than others.

The better

Datwyler Cabling Solutions AG 2013 Sustainability Report, Switzerland

GRI Application Level C, GRI checked, 12 pages excluding GRI Index

Datwyler Cabling Solutions is a supplier of system solutions and services for electrical and ICT infrastructures in public and commercial buildings and in data centers and networks.This is a report for a medium-sized business (less than 1,000 people) that really does the job. It's short, no frills, no stories and no case studies, but it covers the ground and credibly represents a sustainable approach with just about enough data to make it meaningful. Don't look for more sophisticated reporting content, such as a materiality matrix or impact assessments, but for the size of the organization, the report is a simple, concise and clear communication of the organization, its values and its approach in practice. As short reports go, I like this one. 

Sanoma CSR Report 2013, Finland
GRI Application Level C report, 22 pages including GRI index.

Sanoma is a media and learning company based in Finland with operations in several countries and almost 11,000 employees. Sanoma is publicly listed in Finland. This report is delightfully colorful - as we might expect from a media company - and the social mission is clear. "We help people access and understand the world" and the passion "actively shaping the world around us" is well projected. The report is structured with people first (how many reports put people last?), then responsible business activities, then community, then environment. It's an interesting read, although a bit too general in places. The attractive design helps the flow. One thing that is missing, though, despite a tick of the box in the GRI Content Index, is a statement from the leadership. No CEO or General Manager. Maybe this is because Sanoma is just one big team, but without a leadership statement, this report lacks a bit of punch for me. However, it's a good report certainly one of the better shorter ones.

Downer 2013 Corporate Responsibility Report, Australia
GRI Application Level B+, 21 pages, excluding GRI Content index but including Assurance Statement.

Downer is a mining, infrastructure and rail company, listed on the Australian Stock Exchange. Downer employs more than 20,000 people and operates primarily in Australia and New Zealand. This report packs a punch for its 21 pages. It's compactly designed and I love the photography of what appear to be real people that work at Downer and not stock photos of anonymous citizens of the world. The CEO statement is short and to the point and actually evidences some element of strategic thinking. Disappointingly, although Downer attests to following a materiality process, material issues are not listed explicitly, but are said to be the basis for the report content. Data is nicely presented and a few short case studies add to the credibility and interest in this report. Some stakeholder voices are included (internal). The report is well-written and easy to read. This is probably one of the best short reports I have come across.


The less better

A&E 2013-2014 Sustainability Report, USA

Non GRI report, 16 pages

A&E is a provider of threads and yarns for the global fashion industry. It employs more than 10,000 people, a fairly large organization, something you wouldn't guess from the format of this report. This is a home-made report in word format that is rather difficult to read due to the awkward formatting, errors and inconsistent language style. The CEO statement is rather platitudy and weak, although the company does provide evidence in a short 16 pages of sustainable practice. A&E presents Ten Threads of Sustainability and shows a long history of data on environmental impact reduction. However, while the delivery of a report is always a good thing, and far better than not reporting, this report lacks balance, structure and relevance. I am sure that a stronger investment in the reporting process and output would deliver greater value for A&E.

Williams-Sonoma Inc. Corporate Responsibility Report 2013, USA 
Non-GRI report, 22 pages

This is a approach and story-based report that projects a strong commitment and a community orientation for this specialty home-products retailer and e-commerce company, with brands including Pottery Barn and west elm and around 600 retail stores. Williams-Sonoma employs around 28,000 people of whom 7,800 are full time. However, it is almost completely devoid of data. Just to find how many people the company employs, I had to search for the most recent Form 10-K. There are a few numbers around sustainable sourcing of wood and expenditure with artisan workers, but not much else. Despite "forging new relationships to advance our energy goals", we are not treated to a peek at what these energy goals are, not any data about energy consumption, or any other aspect of this company's supply chain. In this case, this short report is too short. It's a nice sustainability-oriented brochure but doesn't pass the litmus-test for a CR Report. 

The Carlyle Group Corporate Citizenship Report 2014, USA
Not GRI Report, 18 pages

The Carlyle Group is an American-based global asset management firm, specializing in private equity, based in Washington D.C employing around 1,700 people. In 2013, Carlyle appointed a first Chief Sustainability Officer. This report is about how Carlyle practices responsible investment and through its investment policies, drives increased awareness and advancement of sustainability practices, as well as helping change practices at portfolio companies. Indeed, there are some very positive initiatives in place.  There is  a section on environmental initiatives in portfolio companies, and a couple of pages on community involvement and work culture. Nice stories and snapshots of responsible investment, but not enough quantified sustainability impacts. A sustainability report that presents almost no data is always rather a disappointment. Disclosing approaches, policies and individual initiatives is always better than no disclosure at all, but credibility increases when we read reports that actually describe performance rather than treat us to story snapshots.

Thermo Fisher Scientific 2013 Corporate Responsibility Report, USA
GRI-based report, undeclared level, 12 pages including GRI Content Index

Thermo Fisher Scientific is an American multinational, biotechnology product development company with 50,000 employees in 50 countries and revenues of $17 billion. The report is organized around the three sustainability priorities of the company - business sustainability (process improvement and efficiencies), employee engagement and philanthropic giving. As such, it's what I call a "shopping-list" report - what we did, where we went, how much we donated. All this is very fine, and although a GRI Content Index is included, there are very few performance indicators of substance. For a company this size and of such breadth, with such an important role to play in the world, we might expect a little more depth to the CR approach and disclosure. The report is pleasant, representing early CSR thinking but lacking the maturity of today's sustainability orientation.  

Writing short reports is not a substitute for acting short on sustainability. Where there is little action of substance, a short report will not fill the gap and show the company up as a sustainability leader just because there are some nice stories and policies. On the other hand, short reports can reflect extensive performance almost as well as long reports, if done well. Interestingly, I realize that the reports I found to be more credible and useful were GRI-based. I hadn't specifically tried to demonstrate that GRI reports are better, but perhaps there is something about working to a framework that helps structure the content and flow of a sustainability report. 

Thanks to Jennifer Woofter for asking me about short reports. I love reports of any length  and this was an interesting analysis. You can guess what I am going to do now.... mmm, maybe banana pecan flavor....

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Ice Cream Addict. Author of Understanding G4: the Concise guide to Next Generation Sustainability Reporting  AND  Sustainability Reporting for SMEs: Competitive Advantage Through Transparency AND CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices . Contact me via Twitter (@elainecohen)  or via my business website www.b-yond.biz   (Beyond Business Ltd, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm).  Check out our G4 Report Expert Analysis Service - for published G4 reports or pre-publication - write to Elaine at info@b-yond.biz to help make your G4 reporting  even better.