This is an unsustainability unreport unreview

This is not a post. This is not a blog. This is not a review of EMC's latest sustainability report.

Haha. Of course it is all of the above.

However, I wanted to draw attention to Kathrin (Kate) Winkler's brilliant unblog post which totally made me want to read EMC's seventh annual sustainability report.  I recommend you read her post before you carry on reading mine. By telling us everything that she wasn't going to do, or isn't going to do, Kate effectively describes everything she has done. It's not only creative, it's truly insightful about the value of reporting and the process, recognizes key players that made a contribution and totally has the effect of getting you interested. Totally.

Naturally, I had to not take a peek. Which, in Kate's language, means, take a peek.

EMC has take a big (positive) step forward this year by organizing the report around sustainability (material) issues rather than the traditional triumvirate of people, planet and profit. This year, the body of the report is in 12 sections, representing the issues identified as most material and displayed in this infographic.

Oddly, these are listed in alphabetical order. I wouldn't have thought this is particularly helpful when reviewing material issues. Rather, order of size or magnitude of impact might have been more meaningful. Perhaps they are all equal? With corporate governance at the top, I tend to think that makes corporate governance the most important. As a result, since the report content  is ordered in line with this list, you end up with a whole bunch of corporate governance stuff at the start of the report. Now, anyone who reads reports knows that corporate governance is the most boringly tedious mind-melting yucky section of any sustainability report. Fortunately, at EMC, this is only two pages. But it's still boring. So I skipped to what I thought would be the most fascinating section: the role of IT in society.

Indeed. In this section, after some copywritery type generalistic stuff about how the cloud is transforming our lives and Big Data has become Big Everything, EMC provides three truly interesting case studies about the use of technology that makes a difference.

First: How better IT solutions have helped the fire service streamline its operations and make it possible to help save lives in Australia, one of the world’s most susceptible areas for bush fires.

Second: The ShieldMe App, activated  in situations of distress when no immediate help is available, using virtual channels to send out various types of SOS alerts. This was developed in India, in light of the increasing (despicable) situation relating to crimes against women that we have been witnessing for some time.

Third: Providing IT support and interactive data visualizations to bring the reality and impact of climate change to life for an online audience, during the 640-kilometer trek from the Ross Ice Shelf in Antarctica to the South Pole by environmental campaigner Parker Liautaud.

In each of these short summary stories, that indeed give a view of how technology is helping make a difference, EMC provides additional clickable detail in the form of videos or other website content. If you want more stories (I did), you have to download an expanded customers section that is a supplementary piece of the executive summary report, focusing on EMC's customer interface.  (I did). There was one additional story .. and a further half a dozen pages of explanations about EMS's Voice of Customer program and other background.

For EMC, "the role of IT in society refers to the impacts, both positive and negative, of the use of EMC® technologies, products and solutions, with particular focus on the enabling effects of cloud, Big Data, and Trusted IT." No negative examples, mind you.

As for the rest of the material issues, information security and privacy became the next topic of most interest to me. More blurby copy. In order to get the full picture, we are referred to three more sections to download. (I didn't).

Overall, I find EMC's report to have been developed with creativity and for that, I am happy to magnanimously confer a CSR Blog Cone Award.

The report comes in an Executive Summary of 40 pages and a suite of downloadable report sections, that together form the entire report, that can be accessed separately or as a comprehensive suite.  Self-service menu style. It's a bit unwieldy. I prefer a good old one-size-fits-all PDF. But it's creative. The Executive Summary is long and short enough to get an appreciation of a range of positive impacts that EMC is advancing without it putting you to sleep (except for the governance section haha). Each material issue starts with describing EMC's approach and follows with highlights of the year's activities.

The section on Goals and Targets and Progress follows the material disclosures. Multi-year targets for operational emissions and renewables show (good)  progress made to date. One target on ewaste was achieved. A range of other targets (all environment or supply chain related, with the exception of two community involvement targets) appear to be new targets. Most are detailed and measurable, as targets should be. And there is even a is a hidden gem! In the supply chain highlights we can find this short but really powerful update:

"Strategic direct material suppliers are now formally required to publish sustainability reports to the GRI standard."

 And the 2020 target is:

  

That deserves a load of cones:

I have maintained for years that the way to get more companies to advance sustainability practice in their business and report on sustainability is to have their customers require them to do so. More than regulation, more than consumer pressure, the need to do business will leave many companies with no choice other than to act and report. I am pleased to see that EMC is making the commitment to drive this forward. I'd love to see a list of EMC suppliers that have already published sustainability reports (especially the ones that wouldn't otherwise have done so). 

All in all, I am glad that Kate Winkler didn't write her blog post and that I didn't take the time out of my busy ice cream schedule to take an unlook at the report. 

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, winning (CRRA'12) 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 www.twitter.com/elainecohen   or via my business website www.b-yond.biz   (Beyond Business Ltd, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm

The Co-operative Group: Warts and All?

One company I have found particularly inspiring in the CSR landscape today is the UK's Co-operative Group, and not only because they are headquartered in my home town of Manchester. (They are currently in New Century House, a venue which remains embedded in my memory as New Century Hall because of a teen-idol Bay City Rollers concert I attended there at a very young age, amidst a massive crowd of swooning girls). Another reason to check out the Coop is that 2012 is the United Nations International Year of Cooperatives! Betcha didn't know that, right? There is even a Year of Cooperatives Blog. This initiative is "intended to raise public awareness of the invaluable contributions of cooperative enterprises to poverty reduction, employment generation and social integration. The Year will also highlight the strengths of the cooperative business model as an alternative means of doing business and furthering socioeconomic development." Who knew there was a Year devoted to a business model? I wonder if there will be an International Year of CSR Bloggers one day? Or even better, an International Year of Ice Cream! Anyhow, in the Year of the Co-op, it's fitting that we review the Co-op's report.

The Co-op recently released its latest in 15 years of Sustainability Reports, the 2011 Report, entitled "Inspiring Through Co-operation". Having admired the Co-op over the years for its thorough and award-winning sustainability practices, and robust, transparent and award-winning reporting , I thought it's about time to examine the latest report, and see how many cones the Co-op deserves.

The Co-op describes its report as "warts and all". The origin of this phrase is said to derive from Oliver Cromwell's instructions to the painter Sir Peter Lely, when commissioning a portrait - "Paint me as I am", he nobly demanded of the artist. The Co-op's reporting - warts and all - is therefore an invitation to scrutinize just how many warts the report actually contains. Oliver Cromwell did have quite a few warts -  check out that whopper under his lower lip. 

Oliver Cromwell by Sir Peter Ely, from spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk

The Co-operative Report, as a GRI A+ 116 page report, offers plenty of wart-scope.

The interests of this corporation, once known mainly for its corner-shop-style good value supermarkets, have sprawled into a diversified set of activities, making it the UK’s fifth biggest food retailer, the leading convenience store operator and a major financial services provider, operating The Co-operative Bank, Britannia and The Co-operative Insurance, with other specialist businesses including funeral services and Britain’s largest farming operation. This is interesting diversification for a business which operates only in one country.

The Group operates 4,800 retail trading outlets, employs more than 106,000 people and has an annual turnover of more than £13bn. The fascinating thing about the Co-op, of course, is its business model and governance structure: it is owned by its members - over 7 million individuals and 80 or so Independent Co-operative Societies. It's a sort of business democracy, founded on values of equality and community solidarity which align well with the themes of socially responsible business. Transparency, as a way of doing business, is also something which this type of business model demands, so perhaps it is not surprising that the Co-operative should be getting pretty good at that. The report has a three-part structure: Social Responsibility, Ecological Sustainability and Delivering Value. But first, I started with the end.

79%  Achievement against Targets

Page 113 of the report contains a 2011 Target Overview of the 104 long-term targets set in the Cooperative Group 2012-2014 Ethical Plan. Of these 104 targets, 62 have been achieved and 20 are on track. That's a 79% success rate. The rest are either close to target, behind target, not achieved or dropped. 79% is certainly an achievement and generally, 70%+ scores in most education systems are pretty good, and in some cases, represent the highest ranking available. So the Co-op should get a cone for achieving 79% against a very ambitious program. Clearly much is being done.

The CEO Statement

Some CEO statements are boring, some are insightful. Some contain meaningful previews of report content, some are just full of cliches. Some use the same old language to say the same old things. Often reporters approach the CEO statement as one of those irritable but necessary pieces of content which the GRI mandates that every report worth its salt should contain. They string together a list of waffly air-bubbles in last year's language and hope it flies. Others take the CEO message as a more serious affair altogether, using it to introduce the real news in the report, highlight areas of both achievement and sensitivity and, perhaps, warts, and create a more convincing representation of the highest level commitment in the company to sustainability. In the Co-op report, CEO Peter Marks's message is one of the better kinds. It's relevant, upbeat, proud without being smug, and picks out just enough highlights to give you the impression that the CEO really does know what sustainability and reporting is all about. Peter Marks says: "This Report charts how we have managed to achieve ... growth with a sustainability performance that I would contest is second to none." Sounds like a guy who doesn't mince words. I give Mr Marks a cone for his opening message. It's inspiring and makes you want to read the report.

The Executive Summary

The Co-op report contains a two-page summary of the rest of the 114 pages. If you have 5 minutes and this is all you have time to read, you end up with a good summary of the report highlights - without any warts, though. It's mainly about inputs rather than impacts, but I don't want to nitpick. I'll give the Co-op a cone for this summary. It's a useful inclusion for busy people (who isn't?) and makes the key messages more accessible.

Performance Benchmarks

Throughout the report, the Co-op provides benchmarks which help to put their performance data into perspective. For example, "In 2011, the Group’s absence rates remained stable at 4% for both the Trading Group and Banking Group (2010: 4%). The 2011 average UK absence rate was 3% and the industry average absence rate in the finance, insurance and real estate sector was 4%." Another example is : "At The Co-operative Bank and Insurance, 91% and 95% of customer complaints respectively were resolved within eight weeks, compared to an average of 86% across the financial

services industry." These benchmarks are rather selective, reflecting, I expect, only those benchmarks which create a positive score for the Co-op, but nonetheless, providing benchmarks and context is a cone-worthy reporting practice.

The War on Waste

A particularly interesting section of the Co-op report relates to waste, where incredible progress has been made. Food retailers are  major players in the food value chain and have considerable influence over upstream and downstream waste in the system. Considering that in the UK alone, it is estimated that 15 million tonnes of food gets thrown away every year, this is something the Co-op, and other retailers, have to take seriously. The Co-op reports continuing reductions in waste generated and waste disposed as well as reductions in primary packaging and increase in recycling. This includes making consumers aware of best food storage methods as well as maintaining the drive against single-use carrier bags. They are making tangible progress.

I couldn't help laughing when I read that the Co-op's own brand toilet tissue is made from waste paper from the Co-op head office. Just think how many people are wiping their bums with what were once important memos from the CEO or financial documents with profit calculations and forecasts. I have to give a cone for the Co-op own-brand recycled-office-docs toilet tissue. I just hope they remember to bleach it in the recycling process, so that the numbers don't stick to our private parts :)

Where Are the Warts?

As mentioned above, the Co-operative Group Report includes intensive detail about everything the Co-op is doing within the vast scope of their diverse business units in the vast range of their business. But, try as hard as I could, I really couldn't find all that many warts. There were seven missed targets out of a total of 104, which, arguably, is not so disastrous, but you have to work hard to find these in this report. There is no detailed summary (only a topline overview) of all the targets and their status,   which would make it easier to assess the actual status of performance at a glance. Instead, the target summaries are located in the various sections throughout the report. This is a de-cone.

What's more,  detailed explanations for missing targets are not always provided, and future plans to revive performance do not include what actions the Co-op will take to drive a change. For example, one target relates to finalizing a new strategy for Public Policy Engagement: This target was not progressed in 2011. Why not?  Don't know. The Co-op says: "Our Political Strategy Working Group met in November 2010 to consider the purpose and define goals, transparency of process and ownership of a strategic political engagement policy. No further progress was made in 2011." Failure to achieve a Trading Group Return on Capital Employed (ROCE) of 12.6% (10.5% achieved) is explained by "difficult economic conditions". Err. What's new? Similarly, a target to Achieve FSC certification for The Co-operative Food’s greaseproof paper by 2011 was not achieved, "despite work with suppliers", and this is rolled into 2012. I think a de-cone is in order for lack of accountable explanations for missed and behind-plan targets.

Coming back to the warts, here's one: Pesticides. While the Co-op has been named as one of the two UK Retailers doing the most to address pesticide use and contamination of food, the fact is that the Co-op allowed the use of prohibited pesticides in 173 cases, more than in 2010. This is explained in the report and action is underway to continue to resolve issues but this sounds like a really important wart to me. I'll give a cone for this.

While there is clear and honest reporting about the status of performance against plan, I couldn't find any other significant warts. This, I suppose, is a good thing. The Co-op is doing everything right. Right ? Or is it a bad thing because they just forgot to add the warts? Overall, the performance of this democratic collective is impressive and their report is certainly a model of transparent performance reporting for many.  But it's generally about positive performance and performance in a positive light. No whopper-wart like Oliver Cromwell's. Perhaps the Co-op should play down the warts thing in the next report. If ya ain't go no warts, why brag about them?

Outcomes are Worth More than Warts
More important than warts, are outcomes. The Co-operative Report is an action summary. It's about what the Group has done, is doing and plans to do. What's wrong with that ? It's not enough. Sustainability is not only about doing things. It's about achieving outcomes. Sustainability is the outcome, not the action. All the Co-op targets are expressed in terms of inputs. Intuitively, we know that many of these inputs lead to desired outcomes, but the Co-op neither articulates desired outcomes nor describes actual outcomes. For example, community investment reporting shows achievement of targets with 10,000 community initiatives supported, profits deployed to address UK poverty and over GBP 7 million  raised for charities Mencap and ENABLE Scotland Partnership. Over 13,000 employees volunteered in the community to a value of over 27,000 days. In total, the Co-op invested GBP 18.9 million in the community. What difference did it make? To whom? What changes in society did this massive investment (benchmarked as almost 7 times higher than other large businesses) achieve or is on track to achieve? I am not suggesting that the Co-op adopt a sophisticated Community SROI measure - these are unsatisfactory in most cases - but some examples of the outcomes of programs which, for example, "help school children improve their numeracy, financial literacy and employability skills" would be worthwhile noting. At some point, the Co-op members should be demanding to know whether the millions invested in the community are effective and not just available. I won't take away a cone for this, as very few companies understand this concept. Investing in the community, for a business, may not be evaluated using the same tools as a financial investment (where ROCE is clearly monitored and reported), but the Co-op and its stakeholders should have some indication of whether this money is being used effectively and how.   

Materializing Materiality

This is another aspect of the Co-op's reporting which would be worthwhile to reconsider in the future. The Co-op report does not contain a materiality analysis or matrix. The Ethical Plan does not explain the process for defining the impressive set of targets that the Co-op is currently advancing. While the Assurance Statement confirms that "nothing came to our attention to suggest that the Report does not properly describe The Co-operative’s adherence to the Principles or its performance" (which include Materiality), material issues that reflect stakeholder concerns are not defined and the report does not differentiate between the more important issues and the less important issues. Instead, each chapter is headed by a section called "Materiality and Strategy" which gives some general background context, but does not define specific Co-op relevant material issues. If the GRI G4 kicks in in 2013 as it is proposed in the current Exposure Draft, the Co-op is going to have to make a comprehensive reassessment of the way it reports, if it wants to remain GRI compliant, by engaging in greater process for defining and reporting on material issues.

No Stories

I might also mention that the Co-op's reporting contains no stories, no case studies and no people. No stakeholder voices, as I call them. Except for a complimentary "expert commentary" from Jonathon Porritt, who, obviously, doesn't focus on warts, only on what the Co-op is doing well. I do believe reporting comes alive with stories and people. It would be nice to see the more personal side of the Co-operative organization and the way people are empowered and energized by this sustainable model  as well as some more balanced stakeholder input. This could lend a little more credibility to this informative (but not entertaining) report.  

Overall, then, The Co-operative gets 6 cones and 2 de-cones, leaving a balance of 4 net cones. That's pretty good in the emerging Cone Award League Table. Next time I go shopping in a Co-op, I will be sure to buy their own brand toilet-tissue. Maybe I will get the batch that was made from all the discarded drafts of the 2011 Sustainability Report :) 

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, winning (CRRA'12) Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Ice Cream Addict. Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen   on Twitter or via my business website www.b-yond.biz  (Beyond Business Ltd, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Consistent creative reporting - a cone-worthy example

Every so often, you come across a company whose Sustainability Reporting is inspiring because of the creativity with which they get the message through, and the consistent delivery of high quality information. It's not so often you see an engineering and construction company deliver cutting-edge reports, but in this case, I have to award Cone Trio to Larsen and Toubro.

 

 

Larsen & Toubro Limited (L&T) is a technology, engineering, construction and manufacturing company. It is one of the largest companies in India, founded in Bombay (Mumbai) in 1938 by two Danish engineers, Henning Holck-Larsen and Soren Kristian Toubro. Both of them were strongly committed to developing India's engineering capabilities to meet the demands of industry. L&T is traded on the Indian Stock Exchange and employs over 50,000 full-time employees and over 300,000 contract workers, boasting a turnover of around $13 billion.

  

This was the first report in 2008

 

 

Leading with the theme of L&T's role in building Indian society, this GRI A+ Application Level Report is one of the best first reports you can find. Peppered with charmingly written short case studies, this Report shows the human face of engineering and construction.

This was the second report in 2009

The idea here, is, you guessed it, there are some conditions to our inhabitation of the planet and use of its resources. This is how they put it at L&T:

"This planet we call home is like no other in the galaxy. No other body in orbit has the cocoon of atmosphere that sustains life; nowhere else do waters flow from summit to sea, nourishing civilisations along the way. This unique, beautiful and bountiful world of ours has helped mankind flourish across time. It can certainly provide for us far into the future, but… conditions apply."

Each one of the company directors has their own space to make their own sustainability commitment and add perspective (this was also a feature of the first report). This is very good practice - it shows that all the leadership is committed, not just the CEO, and it makes their commitment public for both their employees and external stakeholders to see.

This report introduces a set of sustainability targets for a three year 2009-2012 period. Some are quantitative, others are more general, but the path is clear.

This was the third report in 2010

 

A more creative report, bolder in its messaging, bringing out the core elements of L&T's approach in the context of global changes and local challenges. Directors' messages, sustainability targets and clear, comprehensive  disclosures continue to characterize L&T's reporting, showing consistency in approach and in presentation of metrics.  

This is the latest report covering 2011.

 

This report blends continuity with another creative twist in the messaging, while remaining true to the core aspects of L&T's role in society and performance on improving impacts. Also, there is a certain maturity developing with this report, with use of case studies and visuals which are less stock and more about presenting company people and initiatives, all of which include a statement of outcome (though many of the outcomes presented are generally results - e.g. "Outcome: 200 women were provided with vocational training." This is not an outcome, this is an output, or result. The outcome is what happened to these women as a result of their having been vocationally trained.)

 

 

What's interesting is that L&T manages to achieve this performance with only 13% of female employees in 2011 - a rate which has more than doubled from the 6% in 2008, which shows progress albeit continuing underrepresentation of women. None of the executive team members are women. Think of what this company could do if it were to develop greater gender diversity :)

There are thoughts I would share with L&T for future reporting:

• It would be helpful to have a clearer picture of the "delta" - what has changed from one year to the next,  new initiatives, key areas of progress. It would be nice to see this quickly, upfront, without having to read the whole report, section by section.
• I would suggest tightening up the Sustainability Targets matrix. The targets have remained the same for the 2009 - 2012 plan, but the actual progress since 2009 in each area is not clear, as in each year, only partial responses are given. For example, progress against several targets is simply "ongoing".  Some of the targets themselves could be tightened up for the next 3 year period - for example, "conduct carbon footprint mapping" could be converted to a target which expresses an intent to improve footprint, not just count it. "Promote employee volunteering" could be more specific. 
• Supply chain impacts are under-reported by L&T. As a massive business with probably thousands of suppliers, many in the company's home country, it would be nice to see how L&T is expanding its influence right through the supply chain and encouraging its supply base to engage in sustainability initiatives and find their own form of accountability.
• I would suggest some inclusion of external and internal stakeholder commentaries. I think this always livens up reporting and adds credibility.
• I would love to know more about what L&T are doing to encourage the advancement of women in their business. Construction and engineering may not be the most obvious choice for most women, and there are only 940 females for every 1,000 males in India,  but with almost 600 million women to choose from, I am sure there must be some executive potential there somewhere which would be good for L&T's business and society in general. L&T glosses over this in their reporting, while declaring a commitment to diversity. If there's no commitment, why say there is ?
• Convert outputs to outcomes and report both. This is not as easy as it sounds, but it is a better measure of community investment effectiveness. Outputs tell you that the ladder is in place, outcomes tell you that it's standing against the right wall.

It is important for large companies to show leadership in sustainability performance and transparency. I think L&T do a good job... with some opportunity to sharpen up the impact of their reporting in future publications  :)

 

 elaine cohen, CSR consultant, winning (CRRA'12) Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Ice Cream Addict. Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen   on Twitter or via my business website www.b-yond.biz  (Beyond Business Ltd, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Elevating CSR: A Cone Award for KONE

I couldn't resist this. Today I came across the Kone Company, a Finland-based global corporation which makes elevators and escalators, which is "Dedicated to People Flow".  Making elevators sounds like a fun profession. I immediately thought of "20 fun things to do in an elevator", and a whole section of the fashion industry which has built up just around elevators. 

One of a wide selection of elevator T-Shirts from the cafepress.com shop

It even crossed my mind whether the people at Kone were the original inventors of the elevator pitch which has been so crucial in improving our business communications over the years. You know what an elevator pitch is: a short, succinct message you can deliver between floors of an elevator ride to impress someone important. If Kone were writing their CSR Report in Elevator Pitch style, it might go something like this:

What goes up must come down, and we help that happen.

Our elevators make a contribution to global sustainability by helping people flow.

Imagine urganization without its ups and downs.  

Think how many people would get respiratory failure when visiting the 93rd floor of the  International Finance Center in Shanghai without an elevator.    

Imagine a life without Sim Tower.  

Imagine an elevator pitch without an elevator.

Our CSR Report describes how we support the people flow experience, for a better world and a a sustainable planet.   

Go with the flow and read our CSR Report. 

But no, I found none of this in Kone's 2011 Corporate Responsibility Report.  I didn't even find a cone, which as you may have gathered, is a much tastier version of Kone. Having, therefore, been reminded of my craving for a cone by Kone, I couldn't stop myself checking out if Kone is worth a Cone Award.

Here are the results, the fourth in my Cone Award series:

About the Company:

Global elevator and escalator maker headquartered in Finland

Annual net sales of EURO 5.2 Billion

35,000 employees

8 global production units and 1,000 offices around the world

NASDAQ OMX Helsinki listed

"People Flow" means people moving smoothly, safely, comfortably, and without waiting in and between buildings.

About the Report:

GRI Application Level B+ self-declared and third party checked

PDF 50 pages

Fourth annual corporate responsibility report

Online GRI Index

Externally assured CO2 emissions

Covers 2011 calendar year.

Ice Cream Cones Awarded:

This report gets the message across. Kone is not just an elevator-maker. Their mission is about People Flow. Helping people to move around. Enabling human development through urbanization. Providing essential services for indispensable buildings such as hospitals, airports, educational institutions, offices and other important places without which our lives would be so much more restricted. Contributing to environmental efficiency by reducing the environmental burden of buildings (which consume 40% of the world's energy, of which up to 10% can come from elevators and escalators). Making buildings safer to navigate (doesn't everyone fear getting stuck in an elevator?). Helping old people stay mobile. The report gets this across well. Kone's contribution and role is society is more than just shipping machinery off a production line.

 Kone provides context for the positioning of the elevator industry and their role in its growth. "Urbanization is the single most important megatrend within the global elevator and escalator industry. It is expected to drive demand for years to come." In addition to environmental focus and safety levels of elevators, Kone also highlights the changing global demographic structure. "The growing number of older people raises the importance of accessibility in buildings and urban infrastructure. There is an ever-growing need for convenience and accessibility. An elevator can help elderly residents live in their homes longer, facilitate the lives of all residents in the building, as well as add value to an existing property."

This cone is for People Flow Day. This is a day when Kone employee teams "act as researchers, talking to customers, interviewing the public, making on-site observations, and completing questionnaires." This enables Kone to get to know how people flow. The 2011 day took place in over 30 countries. (Hmmm, I obviously wasn't on an elevator somewhere that day!) Particular attention was paid to the "accessibility challenges faced by different user groups, such as wheelchair users, those with visual impairments, senior citizens, people in a hurry, and families with young children." "People in a hurry" must be quite challenging. Who is not in a hurry in an urban environment?

Kone has made big strides in energy efficiency of elevators. Today, Kone’s "European volume elevators consume 60 percent less energy, Asian volume elevators 50 percent less, and US volume elevators 40 percent less energy than in 2008". Wonder what went wrong in the US? An explanation of the differences here might have been a good idea. But, overall, this is great eco-progress in just a few years.

Another cone for Kone's lifecycle analysis. Between 56% and 85% of an elevator's life cycle (on the two models examined) are in the use of the elevator. More environmentally friendly materials in making or modernizing elevators can substantially affect the energy consumption during use. A cone for Kone for performing LCAs - not enough companies are doing this today.

A sixth cone for Kone's data presentation. Throughout this report, data is presented clearly and in a well-ordered way, and in a good level of detail. Environmental data, Human Resources data, Safety data etc. In most cases, the data also shows performance improvement. Certainly worthy of a cone.

Finally, a rare seventh cone for the Kohn design. It's neat, easy on the eye, bright, good font, and the graphics are clever but not overfacing. A few hyperlinks within the PDF wouldn't have gone amiss, but in general, it's a pleasant report to peruse.



  

Ice Cream Cones Dewarded:

Kone's report is a little too much like ice cream. It's all good news. There are no challenges that Kone is facing, other than the continued aspiration to grow the business. There are no performance failures whatsoever. For example, one of the key material issues for Kone is safety and reliable performance (flow) of the equipment. Kohn services 850,000 elevators around the world and I am not sure how many new installations the company completes each year. They have 12,000 service technicians.  I might have expected, in this report, to read something about the safety and reliability record of Kohn products. Reading this report, everything seems truly... well... flowing. I suspect the reality may not be quite so rosy, and maybe I am wrong, but Kohn doesn't actually give us any data on how many problems occurred with their equipment that caused a safety risk or what the reliability of Kohn products has been. I think this report would be more credible if it included just one or two of the things Kone might prefer not to report, if any exist.

This Cone Deward is for the Plus. Kone's External Assurance Statement covers limited assurance on CO2 emissions only, Scope 1 and 2. As you all know by now, the GRI system enables reporting companies to claim a "+" with the Application Level if the report is externally assured. Well, counting and checking CO2 emissions is not report assurance, in my view. It's a good thing, of course, but not enough to earn Kone a "+". For that, I take a cone back. 

The Kone report is a little repetitive. The company labors the point a little about how much effort they put in to understanding people flow and finding the right, efficient, modern, high-performance solutions. I am sure this is the root of success, but even so, we don't need to read it quite so often.

Overall Net Ice Cream Cone Status:

And it's a Net Four Cones for Kohn bringing Kohn to the top of  the Cone League Table. Is it really that good? Or am I getting overgenerous with my cones these days? Judge for yourself. And dont forget to send feedback :)

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Ice Cream Addict. Author of CSR for HR: A necessary partnership for advancing responsible business practices   Contact me via www.twitter.com/elainecohen   on Twitter or via my business website www.b-yond.biz (Beyond Business, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)