Ranking of Austrian Online CSR Reports
Results 2020: OMV - Sustainability Report 2019
|1. STRATEGIC APPROACH||32||18.4||15.8||45.1|
|a. Were the material aspects identified according to the criteria of the GRI standard?||31||3.2||6.0||9.3|
|b. Does the company take responsibility for its impact along the entire value chain?||30||4.3||6.0||9.0|
|c. Does the corporate strategy include a management approach to all material topics?||30||4.4||5.8||9.6|
|d. Are both harm reduction strategies and maximization of benefits pursued?||36||2.8||5.6||8.7|
|e. Have appropriate structures and processes for sustainability management been set up and sufficiently presented in the report?||27||3.7||4.8||9.0|
|2. OPEN INFORMATION||24||12.1||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)||16||5.0||4.8||9.3|
|b. Is the report balanced? (positive / negative developments, solved / unresolved problems, etc.)||27||3.7||4.5||8.7|
|c. Are internal and external stakeholders appropriately involved and are the relevant structures and processes disclosed?||29||3.5||4.9||9.3|
|3. USER ORIENTATION||29||7.2||5.1||19.0|
|a. Is the report clearly structured according to the material topics?||34||0.9||2.2||4.7|
|b. Is the text clear and precise, easy to understand and read?||29||2.0||2.7||4.7|
|c. Is the visualization appealing and does it support the understanding of the content?||11||2.9||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.)||24||1.3||1.8||5.0|
|TOTAL RANK & SCORE||31||37.7||51.6||91.4|
Stakeholder map and materiality chart should be reconsidered. There is no ranking for the stakeholders and the OMV looks like the center of the sun based on the representation. For the material aspects I recommend a matrix similar to Casinos Austria.
The PDF version refers to attachments that can only be found online (e.g. stakeholder engagement). These should also be included in the download version for people who have a printed report. The chart is too important to be "only" in the appendix.
For showing SDGs, a wider time period should be considered. The presentation of the status quo (2019) is good, but a look into the past is missing. In addition, an outlook up to 2020 is too short; OMV should think further ahead (and back) here.
The departments responsible for CSR and sustainability issues should be presented including their number of members and at least with the name of the main responsible persons per section, this would add more credibility to the management approach.
Definition of content and material topics should be more discussed; topics ranked after priority, at least implicit by structure of topic description; should consider plan stakeholder poll more frequent than every 3 years, environment/society = fast-moving
Even if uncomfortable, negative results and developments should be discussed, just talking about positive ones seem hypocritical and dishonest; on top they can state what they will do trying to solve problems; will make it more balanced
Should try to change their mostly inside-out approach to more outside-in; therefore analyzing results more in detail and try to find out how they can change some things for the good of environment/society
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!