How GRI Can Bring the Other 90% of Companies to the CSR Table

I attended today a GRI webinar for Organizational Stakeholders in which Mike Wallace, who heads up the GRI U.S. Focal Point, presented an update of what is happening with GRI U.S. I was very impressed. (Disclosure: I don't impress that easily).

GRI is taking a very strategic approach to advancing sustainability reporting in the U.S. and it sounds as though it will make a difference. With 90 percent of U.S. companies not reporting, clearly there is a big opportunity.

A considered, strategic approach to broadening awareness, providing platforms to help companies get on the reporting map and reinforcing the strong business case for reporting will surely deliver a return for the GRI. And for sustainability.

The chart below shows the country-by-country breakdown of GRI stakeholders. The U.S. actually is the largest country in terms of GRI Organizational Stakeholders with 88 members. (Click the image for a full-sized version) 

Reporting in the U.S. and Canada has been on the increase for the past few years. Using data contained in the GRI Reports List, and analyzing only those reports published through to end July each year, the picture is as follows:

In total, there were 183 reports published in the U.S. and Canada in 2009 and 250 in 2011. Assuming the mid-year trend holds true, we should expect this number to reach over 300 by end 2011. The GRI strategy to ensure this happens, increasing the quantity and the quality of reporting in 2011 and in years to come, includes:

• Establishing a very strong foundation in the U.S. You will probably know that the U.S. Focal Point was established through the assistance of the Big Four Acocunting firms Deloitte, Ernst and Young, KPMG and PWC and is hosted in the facilities of The Conference Board.
• Leveraging the GRI Training Partners program to reach a large number of organizations. The world's largest GRI Training Event was recently held in Cleveland by BrownFlynn.
• Speaking at conferences, webinars and many other venues
• Closely monitoring press coverage -- 844 articles in the U.S. press in the first quarter of 2011.
• Closely monitoring U.S. interest in the GRI website -- 656 G3 Framework downloads in the U.S. in the first quarter of 2011.
• Working closely with Professional, Industry and Sustainability organizations to leverage their memberships. Working from a lean resource base in the U.S., the approach is to get to much larger groups via their existing network mechanisms. Such groups include ASSE (The American Society of Safety Engineers with 80,000 members), USGBC (the U.S. Green Building Council and the LEED certification program) , NAEM (a prominent organization advancing EHS practices), ICMM (The International Council on Mining and Metals) and more.
• Focus on connecting with government authorities who have massive reach and power to convert markets such as the SEC, the GSA (the U.S. General Services Administration, which, according to Wallace has bigger purchasing power than the largest corporations), the U.S. Army, the Postal Service and more.
• Development of a U.S. Sector Leaders program. This is a brilliant approach to which Mosaic and Clorox have already signed up. It means working the market sector by sector and engaging one company in each sector to support familiarization with the sector and help the GRI expand reporting in that sector. The idea is to have 10 - 15 sector leaders by the end of next year.

There can't be many bases left uncovered in this approach and I have no doubt that results will justify the effort. Remember though, that any company starting a first reporting journey may take well over a year to deliver their first report, so there will be a delay factor in the number of reports published.

The GRI approach in the U.S. is to focus squarely on the business case and there is ever more data which suggests that more attention is being paid to reporting by investors, more analysis is being done of sustainability reporting data and companies who advance sustainability practices, including reporting, are outperforming their peers. Mike Wallace shared an excellent presentation with some useful data which you can find on Slideshare: 

Measuring Sustainability Performance June 2011

 

The issue that didn't get much airtime in the discussion (and I wasn't quick enough to ask the question) is about quality of reporting. It's important to increase the quantity of reports but no less important to improve their quality.

The extensive training programs that the GRI is promoting will certainly help, but for reporting to be meaningful, sustainability reports have to meet three criteria: 

1. Be more transparent. Less than 20 percent of reports published in the U.S.A and Canada in the last few years meet Application Level A requirements.
2. Be more closely aligned with the GRI framework. Even checked and verified reports are often lacking in rigor and accuracy in their adherence to the framework.
3. And be more credible. Less than 10 percent of reports are externally verified.

This may be the bigger challenge, though there is no doubt that getting companies on the reporting track is the key.

This article originally appeared on Elaine Cohen's blog, and is reprinted with permission.

_{Photo CC-licensed by striatic.}