Drumroll for the CRRA'13 winners!

Once again, amidst great fanfare, the annual iconic CRRA '13 Awards Winners were announced during a special, one-day, by-invitation-only CR Perspectives conference hosted by CorporateRegister.com and free to participants in the CR Perspectives survey and CRRA '13 winners and other guests. More about this in another post. CorporateRegister.com is home to the world’s most comprehensive directory of corporate non-financial reports with close to 48,000 reports from 9,900 companies across almost all the countries you can think of.

Reports from six countries took the nine first place awards, with the U.S. and Canada picking up five of the top nine places, and the UK, Denmark, Australia and South Korea picking up one each.

 

Ten countries made the top 27 places (first place and two runners up in each category) in this order: U.S. (9 top places), Canada (4 top places), UK and Korea (3 top places), and Switzerland, Romania, Denmark, Korea and Japan picking up one of the top 27 places each.

 

Interestingly, the top eight reports (across nine categories, Nike won twice) all represent different sectors, showing that it doesn't matter what you do, if you report well, you get noticed!

 

Nike was the star of the awards, with two outright first place wins, including Best Overall Report. This coveted award has been won only by three other companies in the history of CRRA - HP, Vodafone plc (three times) and Coca Cola Enterprises, Inc. Nike has not competed in CRRA in previous years, so this win is especially rewarding for the Nike team, I imagine.

Overall, CRRA '13 drew 5,739 valid votes, a slight decrease versus last year, but still a very respectable stakeholder turnout.  European votes led the pack, as did votes from corporate CR Professionals, showing that reporters are interested in reports. Who'da thunk it? However, many other stakeholder types are represented in the voting, ranging from academics to media to investors through to NGOs government agencies and, of course, consultants :). 

 

  

So, without further ado.... drumroll..... here are the winners. (NB. Links are the report profiles on the CorporateRegister.com website, so you need to be registered to view them).

Best Report

Winner: Nike Inc - FY10/11 Sustainable Business Performance Summary (U.S.)

1st Runner-up: Intel Corporation - 2011 Corporate Responsibility Report (UK)

2nd Runner-up: Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc - CR & Sustainability Report  (U.S.)

The Nike report won by a fair margin. It is a GRI-based self-declared B level report, and is meant for online reading. It's a report designed with the reader in mind, and one which is connected to the big issues of the day. If you are going to read any report in the next few months, this is a good pick. I believe I myself gave this report top marks, and was quoted in the CRRA '13 Winners Summary.

Comments on Nike's winning report- the CSR Consultant in Israel is me
(These comments came with Nike's win in the Innovation category -
there are more comments in the Best Report category)

Best First Time Report
Winner: Samsung Engineering Co Ltd - 2011 Sustainability Report (South Korea)

1st Runner-up: RockTenn - 2012 Sustainability Report (U.S.)

2nd Runner-up: GSK Romania - Corporate Responsibility Report 2011 (Romania)

 

Samsung picked up the Asian vote for this 80 page GRI B+ Level report, which, in typical Asian report style, is packed with charts and diagrams and a wealth of information. Congrats too to RockTenn, but my personal preference has to be with the report of a company who I have come to greatly admire - GSK Romania - in second runner up place. I worked on this report with GSK Romania so I know how genuine and transparent an effort this represents. 

Best Integrated Report
Winner: Novo Nordisk A/S - Annual Report 2011 (Denmark)

1st Runner-up: Vancouver City Savings Credit Union - 2011 Annual Report  (Canada)

2nd Runner-up: Takeda Pharmaceutical Co Limited - Annual Report 2012 (Japan)

 

No-one was surprised with the Novo win in this Integrated Report category. Novo have long since made integrated reporting their mark of distinction and this is another in a string of powerful reports. Integrated Reports still remain a small percentage in the sustainability reporting landscape, but on that playing field, Novo plays to win. Novo has taken the Best Integrated Report in every year this competition has been held, with the exception of CRRA '11, when entries prohibited previous winners in order to give a fair chance to other reporters.

 

Best Carbon Disclosure
Winner: Hydro Québec:Sustainability Report 2011 (Canada)

1st Runner-up: Xstrata plc - Sustainability Report 2011 (Switzerland)

2nd Runner-up: Royal Dutch Shell plc - Sustainability Report 2011 (Netherlands)

 

Hydro Quebec scored highly in my analysis of the Best Carbon reporters, so I believe this is a fair win. I was disappointed not to see Alcatel Lucent up there in the top three (they came in at 8th place), as I thought their carbon reporting stood out well above the rest.  

 

Creativity in Communications
Winner: Dell Inc - 2012 Corporate Responsibility Report (U.S.)

1st Runner-up:Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc - CR & Sustainability Report 2011/2012 (U.S.)

2nd Runner-up: International Flavors & Fragrances Inc - Sustainability Report 2011 (U.S.)

 

A hat-trick for the U.S. reporters in the creativity category. Interesting, no? Is creativity a core American competency? Dell's GRI A+ Report is certainly an impressive 100 pages, and a new approach to reporting apparently paid off. Dell said about their own report: "This year we utilized a fact sheet-based report model. We moved to this new format in order to improve the readability of our report both in report content and report structure for our audience. Through bulleted points our report offers clear, concise examples of what Dell did in FY12 to progress Dell corporate responsibility and what we will do next." Dell has competed most years since the start of the CRRA awards, but this is the first time they have won first place in any category.

 

Innovation in Reporting

Winner: Nike Inc - FY10/11 Sustainable Business Performance Summary (U.S.)

1st Runner-up: Lockheed Martin Corporation - 2011  Corporate Sustainability Report (U.S.)

2nd Runner-up: Korea Railroad Corporation - 2011 Sustainability Report (South Korea) 

 

A new category to the CRRA line up this year (replacing the Best SME category, which took a nose-dive, due to the low number of SME entries (time to take a look at my new book, Sustainability Reporting for SMEs?)) and Nike hits the spot with their worthy report, a fitting re-entry of Nike back into CRRA after an absence of several years (Nike was runner-up in CRRA '07, the first CRRA, in the Best Openness and Honesty category).

 

Relevance & Materiality
Winner: Co-operative Group Limited - Sustainability Report 2011 (UK)

1st Runner-up: SK Telecom Co Ltd - 2011 Sustainability Report (South Korea)

2nd Runner-up: Marks and Spencer plc - How We Do Business Report 2012 (UK)

 

Poor Marks and Spencer. They were glowing (deservedly) at last year's award ceremony, having taken two first place awards (Best Openness and Honesty and Best Materiality) in CRRA '12. However, the Co-Operative Group, which also won the Ethical Corporation X Factor ranking, produced a really interesting report and deserves this win.  

Openness & Honesty
Winner: Pacific Hydro Pty Limited - Annual Review & Sustainability Report 2012 (Australia)

1st Runner-up: Marks and Spencer plc - How We Do Business Report 2012 (UK)

2nd Runner-up: Export Development Canada - CSR Report 2011 (Canada)

 

Pacific Hydro, one of two Australian reports that came out in the top 23 reports (which achieved the 27 top positions, three in each category) is a worthy winner, and is no stranger to CRRA, having won the Best SME report in CRRA '11. This year, Pacific Hydro produced a clean, well-written, direct report which clearly attracted voters, who gave this report a significant win, with a big margin, well ahead of the rest of the pack.

Credibility through Assurance
Winner: Vancouver City Savings Credit Union  - 2011 Annual Report

1st Runner-up: La Trobe University - Sustainability Report 2011

2nd Runner-up: Banco Bradesco SA - Sustainability Report 2011

 

This is Vancity's first win in all the CRRA years that they entered and they succeeded with the help of Ernst & Young Canada who delivered their Assurance Statement which carries out both reasonable assurance on reporting principles and carbon emissions, and limited assurance on performance information and targets. The statement is comprehensive and detailed and includes a recommendation for improvement. A good statement (one of the few we come across) which completes a good report.  

 

The full winners report is now freely available on the CorporateRegister.com website here (login required).

 

If you are looking for inspiration as you move into  your 2013 report development and aspire to make the CRRA '14 leader board, this is a good place to start. Good luck! Congrats to all the winners!

 

 

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, winning (CRRA'12) Sustainability Reporter, HR Professional, Ice Cream Addict. Author of 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 Best CSR Report of 2012?

The voting is now open at CRRA '13, the only annual global online awards for Sustainability Reports. The voting is open until end January, so you still have some time, but why wait? The holiday season is upon us and you will have lots of time to relax and enjoy reading the shortlisted selection of the best of the best of Sustainability Reports that were published in the last year.

As I usually do, over the next few weeks, I will be publishing more posts about the reports that are in the competition this year, but in this first post, we cut straight to the chase. Which will be The Best Report of 2012? That question will be decided by your votes and announced in Spring 2013. In the meantime, why not take a look at the Best Report category and place your vote? Register to vote or log-in HERE

 

This category contains 10 reports and 934 pages. Just about right for a relaxing holiday afternoon.

 

The line up includes:

 

10 reports that are GRI based, of which 5 are at Level A, 4 at Level B, and 1 undeclared.

4 reports from the USA, 3 from the UK and 1 each from the Netherlands, Spain and Australia.

All these reports are from different sectors.

 

The candidates are:

NH Hoteles SA; Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc;  Intel Corporation; Nike Inc; International Flavors & Fragrances Inc; ING Groep NV; British American Tobacco plc; Co-operative Group Limited; La Trobe University; and Marks and Spencer plc

 

Only 3 companies have won the Best Report category since the inception of CRRA - Vodafone Group plc - who hat-tricked in three consecutive years, HP won in CRRA '11 and Coca Cola Enterprises Inc won in CRRA '12 after having been runner-up twice before.

 

Of the ten contenders, one company, IFF, is competing for the very first time ever in CRRA and is trying its luck in three categories in total (also Best Creativity and Best Materiality).

As you have a little time on your hands during the holiday break, here's a little CSR Reporting Blog challenge: See  if you can match these report shots to the 10 contenders listed above.

Shot 1

Shot 2

Shot 3

Shot 4

Shot 5

Shot 6

Shot 7

Shot 8

Shot 9

Shot 10

Easy, right?

Here are the answers: (hope you didn't peek!)
Shot 1: British American Tobacco plc (page 52, the science of developing reduced-risk products)
Shot 2: Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc (page 20, CCE volunteers cleaning up a river in Britain)
Shot 3: Co-operative Group Limited (page 68, carbon offsets to help reduce deforestation in Kenya)
Shot 4: International Flavors & Fragrances Inc (cover page)
Shot 5: ING Groep NV (cover page)
Shot 6: Intel Corporation (page 26, governance, ethics and public policy)
Shot 7: La Trobe University (page 32, professor and students in the library)
Shot 8: Marks and Spencer plc (page 27, the fabulous Joanna Lumley going shwopping for Oxfam)
Shot 9: NH Hoteles SA (page 49, Donnafugata Golf Resort in Italy)
Shot 10: Nike Inc (page 14, optimizing to deliver positive impact)

Happy Holidays ... and watch this space for more to come on the CRRA'13 entries ......


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)

Measuring socio-economic impacts : new report

Social and Economic Impact : Measuring Evaluation and Reporting. A must-have guide for companies operating in vulnerable communities. This is the title of the fascinating new research paper written by Peter Davis and published this month by Ethical Corporation, and which I promised to blog about when released. Now it the time to deliver on that promise :)

Ethical Corp sent me a free review copy but they didn't tell me (or ask me) what to write.

"Corporate interest in socio-economic impact is increasingly driven by much more important drivers than simply external reporting. Certainly reporting remains important, but more and more companies are realising that understanding socie-economic impact - the interrelationships beteen the company and the societies in which they operate - is also a vital tool for strategic and operational management and decision making."

This quotation from the introduction to this study of socio-economic impact proves that it's not just about numbers for numbers sake. It's about deriving value from measurement and reporting. This is quite heartening, despite the fact, as is also mentioned in the report, that at present, there is only a very small pool of (primarily large) companies who even get close to the level of measurement and reporting that actually delivers value. However, the authors of this report point to a fundamental redefinition of the role of business in society and the engagement of business in what otherwise might be known as "development projects" (as the NGO community tends to refer to them) such as poverty reduction, healthcare and human rights.

The report was developed using data from a wide range of sources including a literature review, 2 anonymous surveys of CSR professinals and practitioners (116  and 50 respondents), a round table discussion atended by 100 experts, review of 60 MNE's CSR communications and reporting and around 30 telephone interviews with key CSR practitioners. Enough to get a good overview of the key issues, I would have thought.

The report identifies four models of socio-economic impact monitoring:

Meeting global standards - selecting which performance indicators to measure, eg. the GRI

As we all know, there is a plethora of external standards and indicators used by companies ranging from the loosely structured UN Global Compact, through various specific initiatives and indexes such as DJSI, CRD Global 1000 and more, and culminating in the  "ubiquitous" Global Reporting Initiative which claims that over 1,500 companies use its framework. Most companies use some sort of framework in deciding how to measure and report their social performance and economic impacts. There are upsides and downsides to this approach, described in the report.

Managing supply chains - standards which govern labor and procurement such as Sedex

This tends to be prevalent in apparel, coffee, tea, timber, chocolate and footwear industries, to name but a few, with a focus on human rights rather than wider economic impacts. There are well known frameworks including the ILO Labor Conventions and others which address these issues, with auditing being one of the most widely spread tools. Sedex offers a plaform for inputting audit data so that customers can evaluate the manufacturer's performance in this area.  A case study from Nike described in the report helps understand the implementation and issues surrounding such auditing processes. Another case in point is the recent hullabaloo around the Hershey's cocoa sourcing supply chain, which you can read in my blop here, and the supply chain sourcing standards established in this industry sector.

Assessing integration into the local community -  such as the Anglo American SEAT toolbox

This type of assessment tends to be used by companies which have a strong socio-economic footprint in a particular geographic area and is particularly relevant for the extractive sector. The report cites the Anglo American Socio-Economic Assessment Toolbox as one of the best-known tools to help companies understand their local impacts. In addition, a number of multi-stakeholder partnerships operate in specific sectors or industries to ensure consistent development of standards, management of expectations and a sort of level playing field for all. The report assigns primarily a commercial interest to the development of this type of assessment becuase the proximity to local communities creates a kind of interdependency which is critical to the success of the project or venture.

Contributing to social and economic development -Unilever in Indonesia or Heineken in Rwanda 

This type of assessment is rare, and adopted by companies who have a sustained long-term interest in coutries or territories in which they operate. Unilever, Procter and Gamble, Vodafone  and Heineken are cited as examples in this area. Heineken for example employs 1,000 people directly in Rwanda but estimates that its activities in that country provide employment for over 35,000 people. This is a significant level of influence and Heineken has developed a tool to help them understand their impacts in more detail which is discussed in this report. You can also read about this in Heineken's Sustainability Report.

One of the things that surprised me in this report is the assertion that, whilst there are various states of play in measurement and evaluation of socio-economic impact by the corporate players, as mentioned above, there is much greater discipline and advancement in this area by the NGO community, including the DCED Standard for Results Measurement in Private Sector Development programmes, which focuses on the scale  of initiatives, the increase in income by the targeted enterprises and the net additional jobs created. This seems to be a very interesting tool, though the extent to which  it is effectively used is not quite clear to me. Other frameworks such as the WBCSD model which was published in 2008 are also discussed in some detail. The use of these tools in the corporate sector is extremely fledgling, though there may indeed be some relevance to the argument  that there is learning to be gained from NGO's in this area.

Some of the key findings which are quoted in the Summary Report which can be downloaded free from the Ethical Corpporation website include:

67% of 116 corporate sustainability professionals who responded to an Ethical Corporation survey said their company “measures social and/or economic impact of their business on the communities where they operate”

 

73% of respondents indicated that communication of their business impacts is one of the main reasons for conducting the studies. 71% of survey respondents said that the results of impact studies directly affect their

business strategy.

What are the things most companies are measuring ?

The summary report also covers some practical information which gives some benchmarking value to practitioners as they decide to embark on their own impact study. 30% of those who have performed such studies confirm they are not a five  minute job, but take longer than 20 days to develop. (This surprised me, I would have thought that any serious study would take significantly longer than 20 days!) . 28% pay $10,000 or less for such a study, and 18% pay between $30,000 and $100,000 (40% didn't spill the beans).

All in all, this 55 page report provides a very interesting overview of most of the key points in this vastly complex area of CSR and Sustainability practice, which is growing in importance. To quote the report, "Where the leaders lead, others follow", and there is no doubt that some of the advanced practices by the more forward-thinking companies are catching on. The report offers suggestions as to the directions this enitre field of  activity is taking and some recommendations for those thinking of developing their own practices. It's a good piece, informative, thought-provoking and educational. I personally gained important new insights from this report. I hope many companies will do also.  

elaine cohen, CSR consultant, Sustainabilty Reporter, HR Professional, 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/en  (BeyondBusiness, an  CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Buzz No 2: Complicity aka the Ostrich Defense

Buzz number 2 from the Global Compact meetings in Istanbul : Complicity.
Websters definition: com·plic·i·ty
1 : association or participation in or as if in a wrongful act 2 : an instance of complicity

So here you will understand that complicity always has an association with something negative or wrong. Like, its bad, ok ? And in the context of sustainabilty, and human rights in particular, complicity is an important concept. And one which came up several times in the course of discussions on labor standards and human rights at the Global Compact Human Rights Working Group Meetings last week in Istanbul. This reminds me of a fashion show with the theme of sustainability that my client comme il faut staged last year. All the models in the fashion show walked the walk with their hands over their ears, eyes and mouth, denouncing corporate and even consumer attitudes. Hear not, speak not, see not. As though what we ignore doesn’t exist.

.

This has been pretty much the attitude of corporations over the years in relation to human rights in their operations and their supply chains, and the way the products they produce are used. The assumption was that if you outsourced it, it was no longer your responsibility. If you sold it, it was the buyer's responsibility. If you passed on the responsibility, then you were left with none. Well, the concept of complicity blows this notion right off the validity radar.

Let's take a first look at what is expected of corporations with respect to human rights. The mother document for human rights is of course the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of the United Nations. This was approved in 1948. Ever read it? Did you know that you had ALL THOSE rights, just be virtue of being you? I would be a little interested, if I were you. (I proposed that the UN add the right to a daily serving of Chunky Monkey, but the High Commissioner has yet to pronounce on that one). I had to smile at the recent Marks and Spencer plc CR Report 2009 which states on page 38: "Our employment policies meet the requirements of the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights." Sorry, M&S. The UDHR is not an Employee Handbook. For a start, it doesn’t contain dates of all the office parties for the next 5 years. Wonder how many of the M&S Human Resources team actually read the UDHR . Still, full marks for good intentions, eh ? (oops, bad pun, get it ?)

What M&S should have referred to is the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work. Adopted in 1998, this " is an expression of commitment by governments, employers' and workers' organizations to uphold basic human values - values that are vital to our social and economic lives." The ILO declaration is based on 8 conventions "that should be considered as fundamental because they protect basic workers rights".
These are:

• Freedom of association and the effective recognition of the right to collective bargaining
• The elimination of all forms of forced or compulsory labor
• The effective abolition of child labor
• The elimination of discrimination in respect of employment and occupation

The Labor Principles of the Global Compact ( principles 3 – 6) are the expression of these principles with regard to the responsibility of businesses. But then, you all knew that, right ?

So what does this mean for corporations and where does complicity come in to the picture?
Well, this post by Christine Arena, author of the High Purpose Company, one of the best books around and worth a read, makes reference to the $15.5million settlement by Royal Dutch Shell who was accused of complicity in the execution of Ken Saro-Wiwa and others in Nigeria. Shell didn’t actually order the executions nor is there any evidence to suggest they were directly involved. But there is plenty of evidence, including letters of thanks to those who made ole Ken's life a little difficult, to suggest that Shell not only knew what was going on but privately encouraged the oppression of the Ogoni tribe's opposition to Shell's activities in Ogoniland.

Another example: Nike's Indonesia Manager, then John Woodman, is quoted as saying back in 1994, when asked about problems at the company's subcontracted plants. "I don't know that I need to know," he explained. "It's not within our scope to investigate.". This was termed "The Ostrich Defense". Wonder why?! Nike's tune is a somewhat different now of course. And there are many more examples and many more quotes. But I gotta end this long post sometime before the end of this century, and I think I have made my point.

There are clear frameworks for upholding human and labor rights in all parts of a business's operations. Corporations must make it their business to know, and be responsible for, and account for, what goes on in their supply chains. And I have just skimmed the surface of this complex subject.

But back to complicity. This is a good piece by Amnesty International. If you are really keen. When you think that there are STILL 12.3 million people in forced labor, and STILL 218 million, yes, 218 million kids, in child labor, then you kinda get that complicity still plays a role in our supply chains around the world.

Next post. Chunky Monkey. Oops, sorry, not. Something else from Istanbul. Betcha can't wait to find out, right ?

elaine cohen is the joint CEO of BeyondBusiness, a leading reporting and social-environmental consulting firm based in Israel. Visit our website at: www.b-yond.biz/en