Ranking of Austrian Online CSR Reports
Results 2020: Andritz - Financial Report 2019
|1. STRATEGIC APPROACH||38||11.7||15.8||45.1|
|a. Were the material aspects identified according to the criteria of the GRI standard?||33||3.0||6.0||9.3|
|b. Does the company take responsibility for its impact along the entire value chain?||37||3.0||6.0||9.0|
|c. Does the corporate strategy include a management approach to all material topics?||38||1.6||5.8||9.6|
|d. Are both harm reduction strategies and maximization of benefits pursued?||38||2.1||5.6||8.7|
|e. Have appropriate structures and processes for sustainability management been set up and sufficiently presented in the report?||32||2.0||4.8||9.0|
|2. OPEN INFORMATION||38||5.2||7.9||27.3|
|a. Does the report make clear and complete statements? (Key figures on all material topics, interpretation of development, definition/evaluation of goals)||36||2.5||4.8||9.3|
|b. Is the report balanced? (positive / negative developments, solved / unresolved problems, etc.)||37||1.8||4.5||8.7|
|c. Are internal and external stakeholders appropriately involved and are the relevant structures and processes disclosed?||38||1.0||4.9||9.3|
|3. USER ORIENTATION||38||3.2||5.1||19.0|
|a. Is the report clearly structured according to the material topics?||37||0.7||2.2||4.7|
|b. Is the text clear and precise, easy to understand and read?||34||1.8||2.7||4.7|
|c. Is the visualization appealing and does it support the understanding of the content?||38||0.3||2.4||4.7|
|d. Is the report user-friendly and are online features sufficiently utilized? (Target group specific approach, optional information, links, timeliness, interactivity etc.)||38||0.3||1.8||5.0|
|TOTAL RANK & SCORE||38||20.1||51.6||91.4|
The report has hardly any graphic or visual elements. This makes the report look monotonous and text-heavy. Interactive elements such as further links or videos, but also pictures, tables and graphics would upgrade the report.
There is a lack of a management approach along the previously identified material topics. This is where Andritz should start and make sustainability a management issue. A new Department for Sustainability would send a first signal in this direction.
The integration of sustainability in Andritz's financial report is the first indication that the company is disregarding this issue. A first step would be to produce a separate and independent report on sustainability.
Andritz develops and analyzes the topics from an inside-out perspective. They need to be committed to environmental and social aspects. They need to implement these aspects strategically from an outside-in perspective while being credible and transparent.
I would definitely change the design. The different font sizes and types are very hard to read. I couldn’t follow the table of content and was often confused, where I should start reading. I recommend a simple, clean and professional design, more graphics and less font changes.
I would recommend getting into detail about their sustainability strategies regarding the effect of their power plants, products and factories concerning climate change. The topic is hardly mentioned but extremely important for costumers and investors nowadays.
In their sustainability part are hardly any figures, no timeline or anything to compare with the previous years. It seems as if they only included it because they “have to” not because it is important for them. They should clearly increase that part and put more thought into it.
Positive / negative developments on their surrounding areas (of power plants or factories) and the environment are hardly mentioned. Only in one interview there are questions about it. I would recommend communicating a clear strategies, measurable goals and a timeline to compare.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!