Case Studies Work for Good in Ukraine

Following my introductory post about the Value of Case Studies (here), now it is time to share how this works in Ukraine.

I was fortunate to attend the launch of the fourth National Case Study Contest in Kiev, Ukraine on 14th May.

Actually, my story with this contest started a while back, in my capacity as a judge in the third year of the contest. The contest is hosted by the Center for CSR Development in Ukraine, led by the ever-energetic Maryna Saprykina, the dynamo of the CSR scene in Ukraine.

Over the three years of this program, over 110 case studies have been submitted. The contest is generously sponsored by Ernst and Young in Kiev, where the passionate Victor Kovalenko, Climate Change and Sustainability Services practice manager, Ernst and Young, has a strong personal involvement.

 

The case studies that were submitted last year covered a wide spectrum of topics ranging from road safety, employee engagement, educational programs and more, and were all of impressive quality, clearly stating the issue addressed, the activity and the outcomes.

The winning Case Study in 2011 was from System Capital Management (SCM) a professional investor and the managing company of a financial and industrial group of Ukraine, the SCM Group, which comprises over 100 companies in Ukraine and internationally, employing around 200,000 people. The case study showed SCM's significant contribution to education. "Reforming Ukraine's education system has been an increasingly important issue on the national agenda as far as for the country's successful development and its ability to compete in the modern economy depend on the quality of education of its citizens. Starting from 2008, we have been implementing our social programme “Contemporary Education”, based on concrete steps to ensure that the quality of training of Ukrainian university graduates corresponds to the demands of the real economy sector. The programme has 4 key components aimed and driving the education reform agenda. We believe that by investing in education and raising the quality and standards today we are investing in successful development of Ukraine in the future." In this program, 234 universities took part in a Compass Ranking in 2008-2011, creating awareness for educational possibilities and over 2,000 students from different universities attended master classes delivered by SCM executives in 2010-2011.

The second place went to Turbatoam,  one of the world's largest turbine construction enterprise that implements full production cycle: design, manufacture, supply, installation and adjusting, firm maintenance of turbine equipment for all types of power plants. The issue at Turbatoam was a poor image and difficulty in recruiting young appropriately qualified professionals. The company established a comprehensive Human Resources management program to ensure attraction and retention. The program covered salary restructuring, a full social policy, education, training and career development, and results-based incentives. This resulted in a more balanced age profile in the company and more effective attraction and recruitment of young professionals.

The third place went to ViDi Group, a leader in the automotive and logistics market in Ukraine. In 2009 the Company established the first in Ukraine City of Cars "ViDi AutoCity", which includes authorized dealerships of leading international car brands. The ViDi case study also related to people management, inspired by the need to cope with rapid organizational growth, through creating a staff loyalty program, based on employee dialogue and responses to needs. Turnover reduced by 4% and 16% of staff achieved promotion in 2010 and many other benefits were realized. 

Other interesting studies included:

Auchan, a hypermarket retailer, which developed a program to address the spread of AIDS. The speed of AIDS development in Ukraine is one of the highest in the world with up to 148,000 people infected with the AIDS virus and over 8,000 children hospitalized due to this disease.  Auchan developed a fabulous program to raise awareness and support AIDS prevention.

The Lafarge Group developed a program to address road safety.  The Lafarge Group had over 30 road fatalities in 2010 and early 2011. Therefore, in 2011 the topic of road safety was made a priority and several effective programs implemented for employees and the local community.

Obolon, a large brewery, developed a case study to support environmental protection and recycling of plastic bottles, a major issue in Ukraine.

I expect that the fourth contest, which will give preference to Sustainability Reporting, will be just as fascinating! To introduce the theme, I made a presentation on Trends and Best Practices in Sustainability Reporting (which I will cover in another post!) .

Still on the theme of Sustainability Reporting, I enjoyed a most interesting panel moderated by Pavlo Sheremeta, a partner at Inspira  with panelists Viktoria Grib, Sustainability Manager, DTEK, Viktoria Mykhno, Head of PR at Platinum Bank and Victor Kovalenko of Ernst and Young mentioned above. Aside from the fact that the panel was only for people with names beginning with V, one of the most interesting themes of this discussion was the element of fear which stops companies taking that first step toward transparency.

Both DTEK and Platinum Bank overcame all fears and reservations and are pioneers in the Ukraine market. DTEK published their first Sustainability Report covering 2007 and report every two years with a UNGC COP every year. DTEK's most recent Sustainability Report is here. Their journey has been progressive with each successive report more transparent than the previous one. The process of external verification has also been of value, helping management understand the issues that are important for the company to address in the report and its impacts on society. Platinum Bank published a first report in 2010,  a GRI based report at level C,  and as far as I can tell, the first bank in Ukraine to publish a Sustainability Report. Viktoria Mykhno shared her learnings from the process of developing this report, which included a wise piece of advice: "Be concise and meaningful - cut out what's not material - it's like cutting out your heart, but do it anyway!"

But back to case studies and the fabulous program in Ukraine. It's a way to share, learn, engage and build a body of best practice. I am looking forward to seeing the new submissions later this year. And more Ukranian companies reporting on their sustainability impacts.

Photo Credits to the Center for CSR Development. see  more here.

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)

The Case for Sustainability Case Studies

How can you use Case Studies to galvanize markets? I have two fine examples from my personal experience this week in Eastern Europe. The first: Ukraine. The second: Romania.

On Monday 14th May, I was pleased to attend the launch of the Fourth Annual National Case Study Contest in Kiev, Ukraine. On Wednesday 16th May, I was also pleased to attend the second day of the European CSR Lessons Conference in Bucharest, Romania. Both events show how the development of Case Studies are contributing to increasing awareness, recognition and sharing of best practice as a platform for market development in these two fabulous and energetic markets where CSR is emerging with the help of committed and dynamic leaders.

What is the value  of a Sustainability Case Study?

A Case Study helps develop Internal Dialogue and Learning: In order to develop a full Case Study, which offers much more depth than a short paragraph on a website or in a Sustainability Report, a comprehensive dialogue must be held within an organization to establish the background, full story of activities conducted, description of outcomes and aggregation of learnings. This cannot be done by one person alone. A great Case Study is the result of internal collaboration which engenders dialogue and teamwork and expands learning for entire teams and companies.

A Case Study helps Focus on Outcomes: By its very nature, a Case Study is not complete without a description, quantitative as well as qualitative, of the outcomes of activity. By its very nature, a Case Study cannot be written until an activity or a process is complete and has delivered a change in the status quo. Far too often, especially in Sustainabiltiy Reporting, or even in internal decision making processes, the focus is on "doing" rather than "delivering an outcome". A Case Study, well-written, encompasses both, and helps link what is done to what has changed as a result. In terms of sustainability, this is of course key. It is unfathomable that we have thousands of companies "doing" sustainability without being able to explain the noticeable impacts of such activity.

A Case Study is an Organizational Story: Often a Case Study will tell the story of an organization's culture and showcase the way things get done. This becomes an organizational story, which can be told and retold in order to inspire additional sustainability activities in the company and reinforce a culture of sustainability and responsible practices. Moreover, a Case Study is one of the few platforms where company can tell its own story in full. There is little media coverage of individual, successful sustainability interventions. Case Studies can fill that gap.

A Case Study is a Learning Tool: Because a Case Study of necessity contains detail of all the stages of an initiative, the Case Study becomes a learning tool for an organization and for external stakeholders. By developing a Case Study, an organization contributes to the body of knowledge in the field, which is important, given the relatively limited knowledge about what is actually happening in companies today. There are many headlines, Press Releases and  short references to Sustainability practices available via different channels. The depth of a good Case Study creates not only awareness but also knowledge of what can be done, and how and what works best.

A Case  Study is a  Tool to Engage Stakeholders: Beyond the internal learning and dialogue, a Case Study can be used to engage external stakeholders either in the preparation of a Case Study in which they were involved or were impacted, and/or in the discussion of case studies completed. This both enlightens stakeholders about the sustainability activities of the company and also involves them in evaluating the sustainability initiatives. The insights of external stakeholders about possible reapplication, extension or development of a concept could be valuable for a company in determining future goals.

A Case Study is a Platform for Building Reputation: While Case Studies alone cannot build trust, and they are best in combination with existing, transparent, sustainability communications on a broader level, Case Studies can contribute to building reputation by showing how companies identified a risk or an opportunity, addressed either or both, and delivered focused action. This confirms the sustainability capabilities of a company and demonstates their commitment, which has positive reputational value.

Case Studies build Transparency Muscles: Many companies which are not ready to deliver a full, transparent Sustainability Report can develop their transparency muscles through publishing Case Studies. Often, this carries little risk because Case Studies tend to focus on successful examples of practice. The publication of a Case Study is a way to create awareness for corporate sustainability activities without the necessary rigor of producing a GRI-based or UNCG or other form of report, which demands much higher resources and much greater transparency. In the absence of broader sustainability communications, a Case Study becomes a pilot for transparency, and starts getting those muscles into shape.

Case Studies build Discipline: Finally, the development of a Case Study requires discipline and rigor. Used as a leadership exercise, this can help build management and communication skills, and teamworking, within an organization.

Events framed around the development of Case Studies are attractive propositions. The development of a single Case Study is usually not a massive organizational resource burden. Participation in such events often accessible to companies where more extensive disclosure requirements might exclude many from participating. In Ukraine and Romania, this is well understood and both are using the Case Study concept as a way to drive sustainability and awareness  in their nascent markets.

To read more about the Ukraine Case Study experience, go to this post:

To read more about the European CSR Lessons Case Study conference, go to this post.

For ice cream, go to your local ice cream parlor or get yourself one of these (a kind gift from my friend, Paul Scott, MD of CorporateRegister.com)

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/en  (BeyondBusiness, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Transparency is an asset

Transparency is an asset. That's what we believe here at Beyond Business and at the CSR-Reporting Blog. That's why, back in 2009, we developed the Transparency Index of leading publicly traded companies, analyzing the quality of sustainability transparency on their corporate websites. In 2009, 2010 and 2011, we analyzed the top 100 companies in our home market, Israel. However, the Transparency Index is a globally applicable index, which is equally valid for all companies in all sectors, providing complete comparability on what matters equally as much as what companies are doing to advance their own sustainability and that of the planet: how effectively their corporate websites make this information available and accessible to their local and global stakeholders. Therefore, in 2011, we formed a partnership with the Center for CSR Development in Ukraine, and, after updating the methodology to include some modifications reflecting our experience of performing the analyses over several years, we have started to analyze the leading companies in several additional countries around the globe. We are on our way to developing the first truly Global Transparency Index.

In 2011, we published The Transparency Index for the largest publicly traded companies in South Africa and in the UK. This year, 2012, after slightly modifying the methodology to reflect an improved balance of the Transparency Index four dimensions (reporting, content, navigation, accessibility), we have published a Transparency Index for the largest publicly traded companies in two countries: Denmark and the U.S.

In Denmark, Novo Nordisk takes the trophy with a leading 92% transparency, reflecting top level reporting on sustainability issues and great performance in the other three transparency dimensions on the Novo Nordisk website.  A Twitter stream, with a clearly explained policy, video content and even sustainability games in business ethics, climate change and economics and health. Novo Nordisk is way ahead of the average transparency of the top 25 companies in Denmark which ranks at 57.3%.

Here is how the top ten in Denmark looks:

The full report of the Transparency Index in Denmark can be downloaded here.

In the U.S. our findings are that companies are a little more transparent. Average transparency for the top 25 in the U.S. is 69% . Intel takes the trophy here with 91.5% transparency, reflecting sustainability reporting, a highly informative sustainability website, video content, a great  CSR at Intel blog , a report builder and an online feedback form.

Here is the top ten in the U.S.:

The full Transparency Index Report for the U.S. can be downloaded here.

The full methodology is transparently (!) described in each report.

While it is true that transparency is only half the picture - it's an important half of the picture. Transparency does not substitute for good performance, but it is necessary as a tool to inform about performance. Transparency is a public statement of commitment to sustainability, encapsulating both a declaration and a promise, a demonstration of serious intent and most importantly, an invitation to stakeholders to read, review and react. As the world embraces digital formats and interactions,  web-based sustainability transparency has an important place in the shaping of sustainability practices.

Watch this space for more countries  to follow in the Global Transparency Index  (and for news of the launch of our new GTI website) and for further analyses as the more countries are added to the mix.

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/en  (Beyond Business, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Transparency is the key to Sustainability

You can't underrate transparency. It is the catalyst for driving sustainability performance. This is why sustainability reporting is so critical. Once a company makes a commitment to transparency, the rest must follow. The commitment to publish carbon emissions, employee turnover, community impacts and more leads a company to ask itself searching questions about its performance. This is why I have made made it my mission to drive awareness of the importance of corporate transparency and spend most of my time involved in activities which are connected with advancing transparency in one way or another. One of these activities is our investment in the development and publication of the Transparency Index which is now becoming a truly global comparative ranking.

We developed the Transparency Index methodology three years ago as a way of assessing the sustainability transparency level of publicly traded corporations via their corporate websites. We tested the methodology for three years in my home-base market, Israel, and have now broadened our scope to include additional countries.

The Transparency Index follows a rigorous methodology which, once determined, leaves almost no scope for judgment - the methodology defines what should sustainability information should be present on a corporation's website, following, broadly, the Global Reporting Initiative reporting framework. This includes information relating to all the sustainability dimensions that would normally be included in sustainability performance reporting. If the information or website feature is present, the company gains points. If it is not, it doesn't. That means that we can be sure of delivering a neutral, unbiased view of corporate transparency as we perform our analyses.  

Transparency Index Scoring Table

Our analysis covers four dimensions: Reporting, Content, Navigation and Accessibility. The Reporting dimension provides half the total points available. An Application Level A report, for example, earns 100 out of a total 200 points. The web-site analysis can then deliver up to an additional 100 points. The final score is an overall transparency percentage. Clearly, we make no judgment about the quality of an organization's sustainability performance - we focus on the quality of its transparency. This is because we believe that transparency is the key to improving sustainability performance. Oops, did I say that already?

Of course, you may take issue with the methodology and believe that points should be allocated with different weightings. You may even believe that the reporting element is overstated. If a company has all of  its sustainability performance on its website, why should it only get half the points? Well, we believe that the process and discipline of working towards a Sustainability Report way outweighs the publication of performance data on a website. A Sustainability Report (of good quality) ensures a comprehensive view of the entire sustainability impacts of a company, reported for one period, in one place, in a structured way. A company which produces a sustainability report and ensures that all sustainability information is easily accessible and navigable on the corporate website (without having to download the sustainability report) achieves optimum transparency in our view. As it stands, I believe The Transparency Index is the only ranking of corporate sustainability-performance website transparency in the world which is completely applicable across sectors, industries and geographies, enabling a true comparison of corporate commitment to transparency.

After having published the Transparency Index for three consecutive years in Israel (2009-2011), covering the top 100 publicly traded companies on the Tel Aviv Stock exchange, we have become expert in analyzing corporate websites and have amassed quite some data about transparency performance. In Israel, leading companies now approach us for details of our analysis of their websites and ask for advice on where to focus in order to improve transparency,  as well as publishing their transparency ranking in their own Sustainability Reports.

You can  download all the three year Israel reports from our website here.

South Africa sets a benchmark

This month we published the Transparency Index of the largest publicly traded companies in South Africa. See the full report here and the Press Release here. 

These large South African companies set a new benchmark in transparency, achieving an average of 78% (versus an average of 48% for the top 25 companies in Israel). The highest ranking was AngloGold Ashanti Ltd with 95% (though the highest ranking in Israel was Bank Hapoalim with 99%).

Ukraine joins the Transparency Index

We have been delighted to welcome the initiative of the dynamic Center for CSR Development in Ukraine to apply the Transparency Index methodology and measure the transparency level of the largest companies in Ukraine.  See the Press Release here. (a full report will follow).

The average level of transparency of the top 106 companies in Ukraine was 21% (35% for the top 100 in Israel), demonstrating that there is much work to do in both countries. DTEK, a large Ukraine energy company, achieved the highest ranking in Ukraine at 80% sustainability transparency.

Transparency Index Global Comparison

In addition to our work in Israel and South Africa, our friends in Ukraine performed a comparative analysis of thirty additional companies - ten from Russia and twenty leading global corporations.

Using the Ukraine analysis and our own analyses, we can come up with a semi-global league table which presents the top 20 companies out of the 260 + company sites analyzed:

In this top 20 so far, we have 9 South African companies, 5 global companies, 4 from Israel and one from Russia and one from Ukraine. The overall average of these leading companies for Sustainability Transparency is 88%, a very respectable benchmark for other companies to aspire to.

In the coming months, we will be adding UK, USA, Canada, India and other countries. As we grow our global transparency database, we will perform industry and sector analyses, as well as analyses relating to the sustainability content which is most widely published on websites and that which is not. At present, this information is only provided in country level reports.

Transparency is key to sustainability. Watch as the Transparency Index grows in scope and use it to influence companies toward greater transparency.

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/en  (BeyondBusiness, an inspired CSR consulting and Sustainability Reporting firm)

Интервью с экспертом по отчетам по устойчивому развитию Элейн Кохен

I was recently interviewed by the Center for CSR Development in Kyiv, Ukraine, following my visit there to speak at a conference on CSR for HR.

For those of you who speak Russian, here goes:

Элейн Кохен, международный эксперт по отчетности по устойчивому развитию и комментатор по отчетам по устойчивому развитию для CSR Wire предоставила Центру «Развитие КСО» эксклюзивное интервью по нефинансовой отчетности и отчетности по устойчивому развитию.

CSR Review: По-Вашему, какая ситуация сложилась с нефинансовой отчетностью в мире?

Э.К.: Я считаю, что сегодня нефинансовая отчетность находится в состоянии постоянного изменения. Хотя отчеты об устойчивом развитии стали привычной практикой среди компаний-лидеров и все большее количество отчетов ежегодно публикуется по всему миру, всего их делают только около 6 тыс. компаний. Впереди еще долгий путь к тому моменту, когда нефинансовая отчетность приобретет поистине массовый характер. Существуют некоторые факторы для увеличения количества нефинансовых отчетов: повышенное внимание законодательной власти или фондовых бирж к разглашению компаниями нефинансовой деятельности, инициатива «Сделай отчет или объясни» (Report or Explain) и движение по направлению к Интегрированной Отчетности (Integrated Reporting), которую многие компании ошибочно рассматривают как сокращенный вариант полноценных отчетов по устойчивому развитию.............. and as for the rest .... click here

Want the English version ? Click here or read on.

Here it is:

CSR Review: In your opinion, what is the global situation with non-financial reporting?

E.C.: I believe that non-financial reporting is in an interesting state of flux today. While sustainability reporting has become common practice among leading companies, and increasing numbers of reports are published globally each year, there are still only around 6,000 companies who report despite over hundreds of thousands which are prime potential for reporting. There is still a long way to go before non-financial reporting is truly mainstream. There are some drivers for increasing non-financial reporting which are gaining ground today – the heightened focus by legislative or stock exchange authorities to see more non-financial disclosures with “Report or Explain” initiatives now gaining ground, and the move towards Integrated Reporting which many companies might, mistakenly, see as a short-cut to full sustainability reporting. Overall, these elements will create more pressure for more companies to report.

Around the globe we are seeing different levels of non-financial reporting uptake with the UK, US and Japan leading in terms of numbers of reports, though emerging economies such as China and India are starting to gain ground. Eastern Europe, Middle East and many African countries are still lagging.

CSR Review: What are the perspectives of sustainability reporting in 5 years?

E.C.: Five years is not a long time, but as mentioned, the move towards greater integrated reporting will be tangible, I believe, though the results will not yet be entirely satisfactory. There will continue to be incremental increases in the number of companies disclosing non-financial data, with companies in countries where legislation is adopted gaining a significant lead. The format of reporting will change from paper-based to web-based, as it has been doing now for some time, and the leading companies will probably use their websites to host social and environmental data which is updated more frequently than once per year, thereby reducing the need to rush to produce an annual publication by a certain deadline. My hope would be to see more local country reporting by multinational companies, more sustainability reporting of events and more reporting by brands, as well as a much larger pool of companies of all sizes deciding to embrace sustainability reporting as a core element of their business communications. In terms of the quality of reporting, we should expect to see more focus on stakeholder engagement which is starting to be understood as a critical basis for sustainable performance, as well as more emphasis on impacts and outcomes rather than inputs. The Global Reporting Initiative upgrade to G4 should help to drive these changes.

CSR Review: In your opinion, isn’t the GRI Reporting Framework too complex for companies and readers?

E.C.: No, I believe the GRI Framework is accessible and workable for all companies. At the lowest level of transparency, the C reporting level, a company is required to disclose mainly policies and processes, without too much detailed information about actual performance, so that is a viable start-point for companies which have not yet embedded practices for more comprehensive reporting. Use of the framework at the highest transparency level, Level A, certainly requires much more detailed work, but if the company is good at sustainability performance, the reporting framework will be an advantage and not a hindrance.

The writing of a sustainability report does not need to be rigidly aligned to the GRI framework and it can be as creative or original as a company would like, as long as the performance data is in there somewhere, in line with the selected report transparency level. I use the GRI Framework for almost all GRI reports I write for clients, even small SME businesses, and the challenge is never the GRI framework, it is the company’s ability to define a strategy, measure progress and disclose data.

Reading a GRI based report is almost always much easier for the reader than a non-GRI report as there is a logical flow to the narrative defined through the progression of disclosures that the GRI Framework requires.

CSR Review: What is your perception of the beginning of the G4 process development?

E.C.: I believe the G4 is getting off to a promising start and has the right objectives. The GRI Framework, excellent as it is, is not perfect and there are several elements which should be addressed to improve the scope and usefulness of the Framework and align it to new directions in the field of sustainability. I hope the process will be successful in delivering its objectives.

CSR Review: What country, according to your experience, is the leader in the non-financial reporting?

E.C.: It depends what you mean by leader. Objectively, statistics show that the UK and the USA lead in numbers of reports, but when comparing numbers of reports to country GDP, the picture is a little different. South Africa, Finland, Chile and Portugal feature highly on this list (2009 analysis). If you look at legislation, then Denmark has to be out in front with their “Report or Explain” legislation which “encouraged” most of the top 1,100 Danish companies to practice sustainability reporting. If you look at report assurance, then the USA and South Africa appear to have the highest rate of external verification. In terms of report quality, then it is hard to make a generalization. There are many cultural factors which influence local country reports and it is hard to compare.

CSR Review: Should the NGOs and universities make non-financial reports?

E.C.: Yes, of course. In fact, any organization which has stakeholders should use sustainability reporting as a platform for dialog and engagement. Sustainability reporting is a highly useful tool for all organizations, not just those which are traded on the stock exchange. There is a growing pool of NGOs, academic institutions and also Trade Associations and local government authorities which are now reporting on sustainability and I believe this will grow.

CSR Review: In your opinion, what company has done the best non-financial report ever?

E.C.: There are several companies who report outstandingly well and it is hard to single one report as “the best ever!”. However, if I am pressed, I always come back to Vodafone and their “we said, we have, we will” reporting theme which was introduced, I think, in 2004, and which set a new kind of standard in accountability in sustainability reporting and communication. Vodafone has produced consistently good reports over the years, both at global level and at individual country level.

CSR Review: How can companies be stimulated to prepare non-financial reports?

E.C.: The CEO needs to get it. The CEO needs to understand that reporting is a business process which contributes to delivering improved business performance. However, sustainability reporting is the outcome of sustainability strategy and first, CEO’s need to embrace sustainability as a new way of doing business. If they do, reporting becomes a necessary part of this. External “stimulation” for enlightening CEOs is becoming more pronounced these days with increasing regulation, shareholder pressure, competitive pressure and customer demands, but there are still many CEO’s who resist. Sooner or later, however, they will realize that they will have no viable alternative than to be transparent about their sustainability practices.

CSR Review: What are the ways to popularize the non-financial reporting as now not many people read them?

E.C.: Someone said that sustainability reports deliver value the day they are printed, whether or not anyone actually reads them! This is because the process of developing the report is just as valuable as the report itself. We shouldn’t expect people to read reports as they read bestseller novels. More realistically, we should expect people to “use” reports rather than read them end-to-end, in order to understand more about a company’s specific performance so as to make informed decisions as stakeholders of that company. As an investor, a potential employee, a customer or even a competitor, I can use the sustainability report to check out a company’s position on issues which I feel strongly about. As far as “popularizing” reports is concerned, I feel this is the wrong objective. What companies should be doing is “popularizing” the dialog and the interaction with stakeholders. Companies should use the information contained in sustainability reports to provide different opportunities to engage with different stakeholder groups on matters of relevance to them. The report serves as the platform and a successful dialog may take place without actually “forcing” stakeholders to read the entire report. But it is important to remember that meaningful dialog cannot begin unless the company has first committed to a process of collating, measuring, analyzing and publicly communicating its sustainability performance.

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