Ranking of Austrian Online CSR Reports
Results 2020: BAWAG - Corporate Social Responsibility Report 2019
|1. STRATEGIC APPROACH||28||21.5||15.8||45.1|
|a. Were the material aspects identified according to the criteria of the GRI standard?||37||2.5||6.0||9.3|
|b. Does the company take responsibility for its impact along the entire value chain?||23||5.6||6.0||9.0|
|c. Does the corporate strategy include a management approach to all material topics?||29||4.4||5.8||9.6|
|d. Are both harm reduction strategies and maximization of benefits pursued?||30||4.4||5.6||8.7|
|e. Have appropriate structures and processes for sustainability management been set up and sufficiently presented in the report?||20||4.5||4.8||9.0|
|2. OPEN INFORMATION||32||10.3||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)||21||4.2||4.8||9.3|
|b. Is the report balanced? (positive / negative developments, solved / unresolved problems, etc.)||30||3.3||4.5||8.7|
|c. Are internal and external stakeholders appropriately involved and are the relevant structures and processes disclosed?||34||2.7||4.9||9.3|
|3. USER ORIENTATION||35||5.5||5.1||19.0|
|a. Is the report clearly structured according to the material topics?||21||2.1||2.2||4.7|
|b. Is the text clear and precise, easy to understand and read?||36||1.7||2.7||4.7|
|c. Is the visualization appealing and does it support the understanding of the content?||36||1.1||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.)||35||0.7||1.8||5.0|
|TOTAL RANK & SCORE||32||37.2||51.6||91.4|
Improving user-friendliness: Visualization by contributing photos & tables, as well as the ability for all stakeholder groups to understand the content by interpreting and explaining certain outcomes.
Internal and external stakeholder groups should be graphed in a stakeholder engagement matrix for a better prioritization as well as defining KPIs for certain material topics that appeal to one certain stakeholder group.
Sustainability management process and structure should be transparently described with an explanation of the role of the stated “CSR unit” to make a CSR decision more comprehensible for stakeholders.
Bawag should try to put the economic component in the CSR report second and really focus on defining clear material topics, worked out with different internal and external stakeholder groups.
The report should be way more structured; layout and design are not good or appealing; Report is lacking in user-friendliness; they should put more focus on that in the following report
Most of the points are just covered on the surface but no in-depth information is given. And from those topics covered on the surface, there are way too many in the report unstructured
Show the management processes and structures within the company regarding CSR management
Stakeholder analysis and management are not explained elaborately; should do this more in-depth
GRI Index: Be more accurate in showing were to find certain information (esp. 103-1/2/3): inaccuracy makes report hard to read and does not give high amount of transparency (as demanded from GRI).
Stakeholder engagement: Barely mentioned in GRI Index, only focus on last year’s report, but there are also only basic infos. In text further info available, but hard to find and not according to precise GRI standards.
Materiality: Be more precise how you come to your findings and statements. Without matrix and clearly defined process that is described it seems random, even if it might not be true. Include info about CSR committee and its members.
Topics & subtopics: In list of material topics it is stated what that topic means for BAWAG Group, but no indication about number and details of subtopics would be relevant. Also: most important topic should take up the most space.
Make a materiality analysis and present this as a graphic, describe the process and indicate which stakeholders are involved.
Give more details on goals whether they have been achieved or if there was a negative development and explain what was going wrong and what will be done to improve.
Use more graphic elements to present the information, e.g. graphs to show figures or even percentages for changes in figures compared to the previous year to catch the information at a glance.