Last issue we reported on SustainAbility’s assessment of the top 50 corporate sustainability reporters. Here John Elkington reviews the findings, and charts the way ahead for companies which want to lead the field.
OK, so it isn’t the result I wanted, but BAA (with 122 points) tops our latest international benchmark survey of corporate sustainability reporting, our fourth for the United Nations. It heads the Top 50 list in our report The Global Reporters , just a single point ahead of Denmark’s Novo Nordisk , a long-standing pioneer in this area.
But then the results of this survey were surprising in many ways. One was that the Top 6 reporting companies, scoring over 100 points out of a maximum possible 196 points, are all European. In addition to the two already mentioned, the other four are The Co-operative Bank and British Telecom (both scoring 116), and BP Amoco (as was) and The Royal Dutch/Shell Group (both scoring 111).
Another striking finding was that many reporting companies have started to use the language of the triple bottom line (of economic, social and environmental value added, or destroyed) as a reference point: a third of the top 50 reports mention sustainability, corporate citizenship or the triple bottom line on their cover.
That said, and although the trend towards greater balance is clear, the quality of reporting across the triple bottom line (TBL) is still significantly skewed towards environmental reporting. Environmental performance tops the scoring, with companies achieving 53% of the possible score. The scores for economic performance (32%) and social and ethical performance (29%) are distinctly lower.
Given the impact of the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) in this field , we decided to look at how well GRI pilot companies did against other Top 50 reporters. With BAA and Novo Nordisk (a pilot company) effectively tied for first place, there is little significant difference in the top scores, but when average scores are considered, the GRI pilot companies open out a useful (but hardly staggering) 5-point lead.
Among the ‘hot topics’ are:
• The language used by CEOs and other top executives (sustainability is on the up, even in the US);
• Standards and guidelines (the GRI is seen to be the market leader);
• The business case for sustainable development (more reporters focus on this);
• The non-OECD world (most companies aren’t yet saying much about it, even when we know they operate there);
• Key performance indicators (a real growth area for research and consultancy);
• Verification and assurance (huge diversity in the forms on offer);
• Lobbying and other forms of influence on public policy (we know they do it, and we know some of what they do behind closed doors runs in rather odd directions, but again silence is the order of the day);
• Use of the internet, intranets and extranets (booming, and likely to continue to do so).
This is the first time we have covered corporate sustainability reporting. Growing numbers of companies reporting in greater depth and sophistication than ever before, and sustainability reporting looks set to become a central feature of the accountability landscape. But there is still a HUGE amount of work to be done before current reporting formats shake down into something that analysts, customers and other stakeholders will use routinely and productively.
John Elkington co-founded SustainAbility in 1987 . He has published 15 books and over 20 reports, including The Green Consumer Guide. His last book was Cannibals with Forks: The Triple Bottom Line of 21st Century Business; his next, due out in May in the UK, is The Chrysalis Economy: How Citizen CEOs and Corporations Fuse Values and Value Creation. (http://www.sustainability.co.uk)
COMMENTS