Fast food or fast service at McDonalds ?

So why do you go to McDonalds. For food or fast service ?

McDonalds have released their new interactive digital virtual on-line hyperlinked fourth CSR report. The last was in 2006. Took them 9.5 months, they said, in an article in PR Week.

Now by now, you know that I am not a fan of digital formats. Give me a searchable, off-lineable, unhyperlinked PDF any day. So I was pleased to discover that there is a downloadable minireport which I immediately downloaded.

The first thing I liked about the McDonald's mini is the key performance indicators from 2004 – 2007. This gives PERSPECTIVE and shows progress over a 4-year period. That, after all, is what sustainability is all about, right? The long haul. The 24 page minireport is well-written and targeted at the consumer – descriptive, plain language, not much data but exactly the sort of thing I expect people will be interested to read. It does contain interesting insights, the "did you know" section in each chapter offers 4 or 5 core pieces of information ,like the fact that McDonalds have a chef! ("Most people are surprised to find that McDonalds have a chef!), the first green restaurant in Sweden was opened in 2000, Nutrition Information Initiative for informing the consumer of all nutritional data of foods, Rainforest Protection Policy etc. Producing a readable summary in this way I suspect will encourage lay readership. And in so doing, will assist in broadening overall awareness for sustainability issues. But, as a professional, my thirst for data was not quenched by a mini 24 pager.

So I went to the cr report site: I soon began to tire of the long scroll-downs and I don’t have time to watch the videos so imagine my joy when I discovered you can download the FULL report – 92 pages.

I like the McDonalds report. Their treatment of the Greenpeace onslaught where McDonalds admit they were "taken by surprise" and entered into dialogue with Greenpeace to develop sustainable solutions shows responsiveness and honesty in reporting. The section on employment experience is comprenehsive and shows good progress in development of the employment value proposition, something McDonalds has been criticized heavily for in the past.

The report was produced with guidance from CERES, it's GRI indexed but not assured. There is no declared reporting level, though this looks to me like a high B or an A.

McDonalds also takes care to note where the Company reports around the world which I believe is an important element for global businesses. Global reporting for local stakeholders doesn’t work. A global framework is fine, but multinationals must recognize that their impacts are different each national location around the globe, so McDonalds 9 local reporting locations is good news.

Actually, I am appalled to find that I haven’t found anything terribly critical to say about this report yet. So here is the thing. When I take my kids to McDonalds, it's because it’s a FAST option. Fast food, right ? I can't find anything in this report about customer service and the way McDonalds manages to ensure both food quality, variety and the safety of Happy Meals as well as doing it all fast, so that we don’t have to wait in line for eons. Nothing about the customer in-restaurant satisfaction. The report is heavily slanted to supply chain issues. But I guess, and probably agree, that these are the most material.

So all in all, well done to McDonalds for a great report, well formatted, readable, material, specific on goals and targets and actually, fairly optimistic. Wow, now I am sooo hungry!

Cradle to market in 6 months

Interesting piece that caught my eye this week in environmentalleader.com "McDonald’s USA recently recognized Smithfield Foods, a pork supplier for the McDonald’s system, with the company’s first-ever Sustainability Award. The award, which will become an annual honor, recognizes the supplier that best exemplifies the McDonald’s vision, principles and values for sustainable supply. "

Smithfield has been reporting since 2001, starting out as many companies did with environmental reporitng and then moving by 2005 to full blown corporate social responsibility.
Smithfield employes 57,000 people in the supply of 50 different types of pork, beef and turkey products, and other gourmet foods. Apologies if this offends vegetarians. I am not much of a pork fan myself, actually. My first taste of a pork pie was a surreptitious bite at an after-ballroom-dancing-class party when i was a kid. Being Jewish,that's a bit like eating two Magnums after a Diet Club weigh-in. I was so consumed with guilt that I swallowed so quickly I didnt even taste it.

Anyhow, Smithfield has a pretty good sustainability record and declares a core value to be "advance animal welfare". I took a quick peek at their latest CSR report to see how they are doing on this score. page 44. Fascinating. Did you know that the life-cycle of a pig is 6.5 months from birth to market! Except for 243 pigs who didnt make it to market due to transportation accidents along the way . Their life cycle was 6.5 months minus about 2 days, i reckon. But .. from birth to market! A pig's natural life-cycle appears to be from birth to market, not from birth to grave. (I can't help but feel a twinge of sadness here, because in Chinese Astrology i am, yes, you guessed, a PIG!) .

Smithfields say "We are the world’s largest producer of pork, with 445 hog production farms and
approximately 1,700 contract hog growers in the U.S. alone." Growing hogs - the language surprises me a teeny little ... it would soften the blow if they said raising hogs. you know, a little respect.

My favourite sentence is:
"Ensuring the health of the pigs we produce is one of our top priorities. Our staff geneticists identify animals with superior characteristics to develop breeding programs that minimize deleterious physical characteristics." I had to Webster deleterious. It means
harmful. Guess breeding harmless pigs does ensure their good health, until it is time to market, right ? However, being a feminist, i was pleased to read that Smithfield has moved to group housing of pregnant sows by phasing out individual gestation stalls at an investment of, wait for it, hundreds of millions of dollars over the next 10 years. I guess pig-gender issues are safe with Smithfield. And feminists everywhere can now enjoy porkburgers at Mcdonalds knowing that they are in good hands.

Flippancy aside, Smithfields open and transparent reporting is commendable. The long descriptions of all the measures taken at each stage of Porky's life-cycle appear to reflect genuine best practice and first class reporting. After all, Miss Piggy is a key stakeholder, right ? Oops, i said flippancy aside.

I find Smithfield to be no less impressive in their approach on other issues. Their GRI checked B report is clear, comprehensive and marred only by a lack of assurance. I would have liked to see a clearer analysis of stakeholder dialogue and material issues, but the report does relate to what i would expect to be core for a business such as Smithfield - food safety, animal welfare, food insecurity, use of antibiotics in animal treatment, health etc. I like this report.

So back to McDonalds. And their Supplier sustainability Award. Understandable that Smithfield was selected.

This all caused me to wonder how many multinationals make sustainability awards to their suppliers . And whether reporting is part of the sustainability criteria. I am aware that many globals now rate and rank suppliers in terms of value offered, service etc.. but how many rank them for sustainability ? I think i will check that out - would welcome feedback if anyone knows who does what.

Oh, and next time you're tucking into a pork sausage triple decker , please remember that if Smithfield grew it, it probably died smiling.