Ranking of Austrian Online CSR Reports
Results 2020: AMAG - Financial Report 2019
|1. STRATEGIC APPROACH
|a. Were the material aspects identified according to the criteria of the GRI standard?
|b. Does the company take responsibility for its impact along the entire value chain?
|c. Does the corporate strategy include a management approach to all material topics?
|d. Are both harm reduction strategies and maximization of benefits pursued?
|e. Have appropriate structures and processes for sustainability management been set up and sufficiently presented in the report?
|2. OPEN INFORMATION
|a. Does the report make clear and complete statements? (Key figures on all material topics, interpretation of development, definition/evaluation of goals)
|b. Is the report balanced? (positive / negative developments, solved / unresolved problems, etc.)
|c. Are internal and external stakeholders appropriately involved and are the relevant structures and processes disclosed?
|3. USER ORIENTATION
|a. Is the report clearly structured according to the material topics?
|b. Is the text clear and precise, easy to understand and read?
|c. Is the visualization appealing and does it support the understanding of the content?
|d. Is the report user-friendly and are online features sufficiently utilized? (Target group specific approach, optional information, links, timeliness, interactivity etc.)
|TOTAL RANK & SCORE
Amag should reconsider their design and structure. I understand that it’s a long report as it is and more graphics would add pages, but it would really pay into the reader’s reading experience and their opinion of the company. Key figures could be highlighted in separate boxes or bubbles and a couple more photos could be included as well to make the report “lighter”.
They did a good job at outlining problems and potential ways to solve them. In a next step they could introduce clear, step by step problem solving strategies with their endgoals. The way it is now, it has to be pieced together from different chapters.
The user navigation could be improved as well. Color coding, cross referencing chapters for easier research and most importantly: Checking all the links and URLs that are being included. It sheds a negative light on Amag when those don’t work and is very frustrating for the reader.
A heavier focus should be set on sustainability moving forward. This is a main topic of interest for many stakeholders and society as a whole. Showing off the sustainability management better could go a long way in creating a good reputation and increasing the company image.
They have a communications and sustainability department, but never explain what exactly it is doing, who works in it, that’s why they should explain their sustainability department
They have good approaches of solving problems, but they should also better communicate already solved problems and show how they have reacted and reflect these methods on future problems and goals
They should use more visualization – it is a way more appealing way to look at a report, when the information is graphically better presented
The senior decisionmaker should make the statement at the beginning of the report. This is important for the readers to see, that the senior decision maker cares about the report and the readers
Visualization from the topics – maybe different colors OR topic names in the header (easier to follow during reading)
Clickable PDF; interactive online version
Summaries after each topic– maybe graphs/tables
More visualization and less texts
KPIs: AMAG makes a good job at setting goals and concrete measurements but they need to integrate KPIs in their report in order to be transparent on how the goals can be measured exactly.
Structure: The report needs more structure and less text. AMAG could incorporate fact boxes and side bars to highlight important topics and use different colors for each section to separate them (visually) from each other.
Risks and harm strategies: AMAG claims that risk management play a huge role at their business but it would be helpful if they would include concrete risks and how they manage them – exact examples from their business cases.
Material Matrix: What I am missing in the AMAG report is a material matrix with their main topics (point of view of their internal and external stakeholders) as well as more key figures for their stakeholder groups.
Should include statement of decision-makers (e.g. CEO) or board-members/project-manager; furthermore values & principles should be stated and at least discussed shortly; code of conduct would state further important aspects
Governance-part could be improved, e.g. expand section with description and discussion of governance-representatives and their coherence
Language and associated understandability could be easier, different stakeholder groups could be reached (customers & business, not only business because of profession-wordings), adapt usability of online-report
Stakeholder management could be more specific, not only general overview, same applies for risk & sustainability management, references to corporate structure in more detail would help understandability of goal & result evaluation