Ranking of Austrian Online CSR Reports
Results 2020: Tiwag - Nachhaltigkeitsbericht 2018/19
|1. STRATEGIC APPROACH||29||19.7||15.8||45.1|
|a. Were the material aspects identified according to the criteria of the GRI standard?||30||4.7||6.0||9.3|
|b. Does the company take responsibility for its impact along the entire value chain?||31||4.2||6.0||9.0|
|c. Does the corporate strategy include a management approach to all material topics?||24||5.1||5.8||9.6|
|d. Are both harm reduction strategies and maximization of benefits pursued?||31||4.3||5.6||8.7|
|e. Have appropriate structures and processes for sustainability management been set up and sufficiently presented in the report?||36||1.5||4.8||9.0|
|2. OPEN INFORMATION||36||8.1||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)||23||4.0||4.8||9.3|
|b. Is the report balanced? (positive / negative developments, solved / unresolved problems, etc.)||38||1.5||4.5||8.7|
|c. Are internal and external stakeholders appropriately involved and are the relevant structures and processes disclosed?||35||2.6||4.9||9.3|
|3. USER ORIENTATION||30||6.8||5.1||19.0|
|a. Is the report clearly structured according to the material topics?||28||1.6||2.2||4.7|
|b. Is the text clear and precise, easy to understand and read?||26||2.1||2.7||4.7|
|c. Is the visualization appealing and does it support the understanding of the content?||29||1.4||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.)||21||1.6||1.8||5.0|
|TOTAL RANK & SCORE||34||34.6||51.6||91.4|
When determining material topics, stakeholders should be directly involved, e.g. survey. An internal analysis by the company is not enough. A reassessment should take place every year and not simply adopt topics. The identification process should be transparent.
Not only the status of material topics should be displayed- also the development. A presentation of negative developments or unresolved problems is important for transparency reasons and improvement. It is important to define measurable objectives, otherwise the status cannot be clearly determined.
Material topics should not only be listed, but also prioritized. The most important topics should be dealt with first and on a larger scale. Material topics should be managed systematically based on the Corporate Strategy and should be linked to each other.
Sustainability should not only be anchored in corporate values and strategy, but there must also be clear responsibilities to make strategic management possible. This includes sustainability responsible persons in all entities, regular meetings etc.
Structures: Develop and/or include clear processes and structures for evaluating goals and KPIs.
Use images, tables, visuals that support the report in an informative way and not only to make it look more nicely. Also, videos or other online tools could help to make the report more exciting / interactive.
Include management structures and person in charge in the report. Management structure (board) is already there. Why not include in the sustainability report as well. There should be a separate spokesperson for sustainability issues than the person in charge for press.
Include (more) negative developments and unresolved issues. A positive-only report looks almost suspicious. Acknowledging negative developments will make a company look more authentic and trustworthy.
Stakeholder overview; maybe mapping & detailed process+ list of importance/relevance
Clear structure along importance of topics
More attractive design; big pictures are nice, but not necessary; nice tables & explanations
Less promotional folder and structure.
Report should be available in English too.
Leave a ReplyWant to join the discussion?
Feel free to contribute!