Materiality Assessments

Transcription

1 Materiality Assessments Update on Industry Practices and Conforming with the GRI Standards Copyright 2017 by ERM Worldwide Group Limited and/or its affiliates ( ERM ). All Rights Reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without prior written permission of ERM.

2 Today s Presenters James Margolis james.margolis@erm.com Philadelphia, PA +1 (484) Jennifer Eastes jennifer.eastes@erm.com Denver, CO +1 (720)

3 Contents Key Concepts Process Overview Benchmarking Examples Takeaways 3

4 Key Concepts

5 Sustainability Strategy Materiality assessments can be part of a larger sustainability strategy process and they can also inform the content of sustainability reports 5

6 Principles on Report Content and Quality Report Content help organizations decide which content to include in the report Report Quality guide choices on ensuring the quality of information in the report Stakeholder Inclusiveness Sustainability Context Materiality Completeness Accuracy Balance Clarity Comparability Reliability Timeliness 6 Each of the Reporting Principles consists of a requirement and guidance on how to apply the principle, including tests.

7 Materiality Principle Material topics consider two dimensions: (1) the significance of the organization s economic, environmental, and social impacts (2) their substantive influence on the assessments and decisions of stakeholders. A topic can be material if it ranks highly for only one dimension. Note: This visual is not required 7

8 Clarified Focus on Impact Impact refers to the effect an organization has on the economy, the environment, and/or society (positive or negative) In general, significant impacts are those that are a subject of established concern for expert communities, or that have been identified using established tools, such as impact assessment methodologies or life cycle assessments. Impacts that are considered important enough to require active management or engagement by the organization are likely to be considered significant. 8

9 Materiality Principle Tests: Have You Considered Reasonably estimable economic, environmental, and/or social impacts (such as climate change, HIV-AIDS, or poverty) identified through sound investigation by people with recognized expertise, or by expert bodies with recognized credentials The interests and expectations of stakeholders specifically invested in the organization, such as employees and shareholders Broader economic, social, and/or environmental interests and topics raised by stakeholders such as workers who are not employees, suppliers, local communities, vulnerable groups, and civil society The main topics and future challenges for a sector Laws, regulations, international or voluntary agreements of strategic significance Key organizational values, policies, strategies, management systems, goals The core competencies of the organization and the manner in which they can contribute to sustainable development Consequences for the organization which are related to its impacts on the economy, the environment, and/or society (for example, risks to its business model or reputation) Material topics are appropriately prioritized in the report 9

10 Depicting the Results Issues list (minimum required by GRI) Matrix Value chain mapping (can address boundary considerations) 10

11 Material Topics vs Risks/Opportunities What issues are most important? How well are we managing the important issues? What should we be doing differently? How should we be communicating about our actions and performance? Material Topics Strategy, programs and goals Reporting 11

12 Process Overview

13 Materiality Process Overview Materiality assessments involve identifying a broad list of relevant topics then screening them against a set of criteria to determine which are most material. IDENTIFY RELEVANT TOPICS Stakeholder Engagement Customer Issues/Inquiries Business Strategy Industry/Competitor Benchmarks GRI/SASB Topics DJSI Application and Investor Inquiries Importance to Stakeholders PRIORITIZE 000 Materiality Filter Material Topics 13 Significance of Impact

14 Scalability Considerations Materiality assessments are scalable the right size depends on a number of factors Work activities to scale up or down: Benchmarking Interviews (internal, external) Online surveys Workshops Stakeholder-specific assessments BU-specific assessments Region-specific assessments How the results will be used and outcomes sought Company s management approach Nature of businesses and regional differences Nature of products and customers Less rigorous More rigorous Other objectives (e.g., engagement) 14

15 Research Sources GRI SASB ISO Investor/analyst & customer surveys Benchmarking General web research Should core business topics like financial performance, 15 product quality and customer satisfaction be considered?

16 Considerations in Screening the Relevant Topics GRI tests Stakeholder feedback and interest employees, investors, customers, NGOs, Do consumers care about this topic? Could the topic affect our financial performance? (sales, costs, etc.)? Could the topic affect our ability to innovate (develop new products or categories, packaging, etc.)? Could the topic be important to our reputation or social/ environmental license to operate? Could this topic impact our ability to attract and retain people? Could the topic present a risk to our supply chain? Does the issue create a significant positive or negative external impact? Is the issue of global importance with regard to pressing societal/ environmental challenges? Peer attention to issue Coverage by GRI/IPIECA/ UNGC/CDP/DJSI/ SASB Industry group/trade association coverage Online/ media conversation/ coverage What is the proximity of the issue to our fenceline? Local/pervasive? Will the topic become more important over the next 3-5 years Does the issue represent a future challenge for our business? 16

17 Example Online Survey Analytics (1:3) Overall Materiality Score (150 responses) # Aspect Total Score 1 Anti-corruption and ethical behavior Product safety and stewardship Process safety 6.54 Physical security and chemical 4 vulnerability Hazardous materials management Product quality Risk management Product compliance Customer satisfaction Cybersecurity 6.27 Emergency preparedness and public 11 safety Organization and portfolio change IP and knowledge management R&D/Innovation Spills and accidental releases Transportation and distribution 6.17 Product impact on customer 17 operations and performance 6.14 Deselection based on product 18 environmental attributes Occupational health and safety Human rights 6.06 Disclosure, marketing and ethical 21 advertising # Aspect Total Score 22 Customer privacy 6.03 Stakeholder engagement and 23 transparency Recruitment and retention Labor practices and relations Board structure and independence Career development and training Global standards and codes Remediation Air quality (NOx, SOx, VOC, etc.) Compensation and benefits Gender equality 5.61 Responsible sourcing and supply chain impacts 34 Wastewater generation and disposal Lobbying and political contribution Waste generation and disposal Diversity and inclusion Exec compensation 5.41 Energy and fuel management 39 (including renewables) Greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions Climate change risk Water use Economic impacts on society Reclamation Biodiversity and land use impacts Community investment 5.03 Importance to Stakeholders (1-5) Significance of Impact (1-5) Total score = hypotenuse. Math: Square root of the sum of (1) the average of the individual importance to stakeholder scores (customers, investors, employees, society) and (2) the significance of impact squared.

18 Example Online Survey Analytics (2:3) Top 12 Results 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% Customer satisfaction Process safety Product safety and stewardship Risk management Recruitment and retention R&D/Innovation Product quality Career development and training Compensation and benefits IP and knowledge management Anti-corruption and ethical behavior Hazardous materials management Organization and portfolio change Emergency preparedness and public safety Product compliance Occupational health and safety Product impact on customer operations and Cybersecurity Spills and accidental releases Transportation and distribution 18

19 Example Online Survey Analytics (3:3) Top 25 Gaps Gap score = Materiality score minus Management Effectiveness score Top 12 materiality score topics highlighted in red italics Aspect Gap Mgt Materiality Effectiveness Recruitment and retention Career development and training R&D/Innovation Organization and portfolio change Compensation and benefits Customer satisfaction Risk management IP and knowledge management Cybersecurity Product quality Deselection based on product environmental attributes Stakeholder engagement and transparency Product impact on customer operations and performance Product compliance Product safety and stewardship Physical security and chemical vulnerability Anti-corruption and ethical behavior Process safety

20 Beyond Materiality When going through a materiality assessment, it may be valuable to not just identify the material topics, but to also assess how well you are managing those topics. What value protecting risks and value-creating opportunities need to be addressed? What issues are most important? How well are we managing the important issues? What should we be doing differently? How should we be communicating about our actions and performance? Material Topics Strategy, programs and goals Reporting 20 If designed appropriately, the process can also lead to improved relationships with the internal and external stakeholders engaged in the process

21 Benchmarking Examples

22 Most Closely Aligned with GRI Standards Johnson & Johnson CBRE General Motors 22

23 Johnson & Johnson Ranking of topics Twelve key stakeholder groups were identified across the value chain - advocacy groups/trade associations, consumers, customers, employees, government/ policymakers, health care providers, investors/ socially responsible investors, local communities, NGOs, quasigovernmental agencies/ academic institutions, and suppliers. 23 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database Over 1,500 stakeholders were invited to respond to a survey, asking them to rank the priority topics by importance to them, and by their potential for social, environmental and economic impact.

24 Johnson & Johnson: Value Chain The value chain map frames the boundaries of our impacts, and helps us better understand and leverage opportunities together with our stakeholders. 24 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

25 CBRE Conscious effort to align materiality matrix with GRI s clarified definition of materiality. Utilized an internal survey to identify the current and future significance of CBRE s impacts. 25 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

26 General Motors Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database 26

27 Some Intentionally Did Not Align with GRI Target: states they tried to find a hybrid method of reporting materiality UPS: states that after careful consideration they retained a definition of the horizontal axis: Influence on Business Success, in order to focus the materiality matrix on their overall sustainability strategy Bloomberg: developed an implementation methodology across different disclosure frameworks 27

28 Target 28 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

29 UPS 29 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

30 UPS Conscious decision not to align with GRI materiality standard 30 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

31 Bloomberg Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database 31

32 Bloomberg 32 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

33 Standards Reports without Obvious Alignment Based on publically available information, it is not obvious whether or not impact was considered in the materiality process. Alcoa Archer Daniels Midland Dow FMC Hershey s Ingersoll Rand Intel International Paper Kimberly-Clark 33

34 Archer Daniels Midland 34 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

35 Archer Daniels Midland 35 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

36 Dow Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database 36

37 Dow 37 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

38 FMC Reporting does not include a materiality matrix 38 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database This assessment identifies sustainability issues that have the greatest impact on our business and our stakeholders.

39 Hershey s 39 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

40 Ingersoll Rand 40 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

41 Intel 41 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

42 International Paper 42 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

43 Kimberly-Clark 43 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

44 Kimberly-Clark 44 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

45 NRG 45 Source: NRG

46 Most G4 Reports Don t Appear to Align Either 46 Source: GRI Sustainability Disclosure Database

47 Key Takeaways

48 Key Takeaways Materiality assessments can be a powerful strategy tool (not just for focusing report content) Materiality is not the same as risk Scale materiality process to fit your needs Leverage process to achieve other objectives (e.g., building stakeholder relationships) GRI does not require the matrix depiction Something can be material for any reason Combining different views/needs of stakeholders can be challenging should your assessment criteria reflect your report audiences? Most people are doing it wrong but you won t be busted Measuring/assessing the impact on the economy, environment and society can be a challenge Some companies are looking to lifecycle assessments, SDGs, natural capital protocol and other resources to help define impact 48

49 49