tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post7615597109069122751..comments2024-03-19T12:59:20.494+02:00Comments on csr-reporting: Is reporting waste a waste of time ?elainehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-8506342538514101412011-03-03T23:48:30.919+02:002011-03-03T23:48:30.919+02:00Thanks Frederic, I agree with you that IT solution...Thanks Frederic, I agree with you that IT solutions can play a big part in getting data together in a way that can be more easily reported. Indeed, this is one of the focus areas of the new G4 revision. However, in many cases, I believe this is only a partial answer. I will explore this in another post. I have one or two additional ideas .... having worked with many companies on reporting myself. <br />Thanks for commenting!<br />elaineelainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-69326993498762041162011-03-03T23:09:21.017+02:002011-03-03T23:09:21.017+02:00Very interesting post Elaine & great comments ...Very interesting post Elaine & great comments too. I personnally believe that the GRI guidelines are good enough, I don't think that it's a problem of materiality, and I'm not sure I want to "shoot the reporter", even if totally agree with Mario about the importance (and lack) of communication skills. I find Mario's 3 possible options really interesting, the 3rd one in particular. Now, I'm not sure about those specific companies but I've seen many others that don't have the proper business intelligence and analytics systems to support the production of a coherent report on the GRI indicators. They often don't track in a single system, when they track at all, those indicators. When those data are available, often through spreadsheets or legacy systems, the reporting organization doesn't necessarily have the skills to convert them in meaningful information. Fortunately software vendors have developed specific solutions that allow companies to report on sustainability issues. The problem is that they might not see the ROI and the need for such solutions. Well, until our experts like Elaine start to question the consistency and transparency of the indicators provided.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-9872042264867614642011-03-03T19:55:05.488+02:002011-03-03T19:55:05.488+02:00hiya Mario, i agree with you. The GRI guidelines a...hiya Mario, i agree with you. The GRI guidelines are basically solid and the protocols are very clear in what should be reported and how. Every single term is defined. I believe the fault is with the reporting organizations. Why ? Your three options and possible others. I think thats another post:)<br />elaineelainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-70713762809779635272011-03-03T19:53:03.959+02:002011-03-03T19:53:03.959+02:00hello Judy, thanks for reading and thanks for your...hello Judy, thanks for reading and thanks for your comment. My personal view is that the GRI should take just a little more ownershio and for all those reports that are A B C checked, there must be a thorough check, indicator by indicator. At least then the GRI Checked label would be more meaningful.<br />elaineelainehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07433863039389159395noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-5560741298987243122011-03-03T16:36:27.603+02:002011-03-03T16:36:27.603+02:00It appears that the format, structure, and display...It appears that the format, structure, and display of data enables (or disables) the ability to clearly report, or readers to understand, findings.<br /><br />Data communication gurus like Edward Tufte expound on the importance of arranging your information in a coherent manner in the beginning, along more than two variables, so one can understand it better as one goes along building it. That allows easier comparability as well.<br /><br />If such clarity is not afforded the reader, one can assume 3 things:<br />- Lack of skill in communicating data.<br />- Lack of data to communicate along multiple variables, or visually.<br />- An intent to obfuscate the data through narrative format because of a lack of data and/or potentially reader-perceived weaknesses the reported indicators may expose when showing unknowns in tables or equations.<br /><br />Therefore, I can only blame the reporting organization for any weaknesses and not the GRI reporting guidelines themselves, unless you believe Elaine (as you're more knowledgeable in this regard), that the G3 guidelines do not provide enough guidance on communicating data.Mario Vellandihttp://melodiesinmarketing.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8008724049496903547.post-79204547819089846862011-03-03T15:58:05.963+02:002011-03-03T15:58:05.963+02:00Elaine, this is all absolutely true. I think GRI&#...Elaine, this is all absolutely true. I think GRI's biggest dilemma over the years has been the tension inherent between materiality (or 'flexibility') and comparability: on the one hand, companies want free rein to create a report that tells their 'story' in a way suitable to their reality, and on the other, many readers and stakeholders won't be able to use or value the information without the sort of rigorous, comparable data you describe. Companies interpret the materiality principle to allow them not only to select what issues should or should not be included in the report as a whole, but even which bits of indicators they can keep or lose, which seriously undermines the exercise.<br /><br />But I also think the external checking of these reports is beyond pathetic in many cases - GRI does not have the resources required to perform a truly reliable review of G3 application; and the third party auditors clearly seem to have problems with it as well, judging by the experiences we have all had in reading reports where indicators are described as 'reported in full' when they are just not. <br /><br />Reporters - and also their third-party suppliers - need to be held to account on this. How?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com