Assurance | FabianPattberg.com

Yesterday I came across the latest CSR/Sustainability Review from Cadbury in the UK. You know, Chocolate, etc…..
They had a history of good reporting so I thought lets take a look and do a report review.
The first thing I noticed was the web address: http://www.DearCadbury.com. Sounds interesting… Sounds very engaging. Good start.

Then it got even better. I saw a totally interactive site instead of a normal website with left hand side navigation, etc. They even have sound effects. Now this is getting better by the minute I thought.
Once you get on the website there different ways to navigate. You can either go and explore if you want to browse, if you know your stuff as they say then you can go take a look at the hard facts or you can you can view the accessible version of the review.
Quick verdict: Very nice website in my opinion. Well worth checking out.

So here we with a more detailed report review on the basis of this rating system. I started this rating system to make reports more comparible.

Detailed Review:

Reporting Period
10/10
Cadbury reports annually. This is best practice. Well done. Full marks.

Topics & Clarity
8/10 points
They have addressed the topics I would expect them to talk about. What I am missing some more corporate information communicated in a different way. Examples would be the demerger information. In this case you only have a disclaimer. It would made more sense to talk about this more proactively on the site. But otherwise well done.

Reporting Of The Material Issues
9/10 points
Very detailed but not too detailed and at the same time well presented. Especially for the different set of stakeholders by acknowledging that there are two main visitor groups. So called “explorers” and “ professionals”.

Reporting On Performance Indicators?
8/10 points
Again. Very good. They differentiate between different audiences. Facts for the professionals and contect for the explores. I particularily like the indicator fact sheet.

Reporting According To The GRI G3?
7/10 points
Yes they are but they are only providing information in the professionals area. This could have been communicated better in the explorer area as well in my opinion.

Reference To Other Parts Of Their Website
5/10 points
Well this is not really happening as this is a stand alone microsite. Only with the link to the corporate website on the top right hand side. And the other navigation is not really useful in my opinion as it only traces back to where you have been on the previous pages. This would need some improvement.

Which Communication Tools Are They Using?
6/10 points
A lot of communication tools are being used but only the ones for interactivity. They play a major part but the tools for navigation for example are no really there. And the sitemap is not linked to the content. But I really like the video integration on the other hand.

CSR Report Contact: An Actual Contact person or Just An Email Address?
5/10 points
Well they are not giving out a name but they are engaging more then many others in the “What do you think?” section. I like the approach but providing real contact details would have been better.

Do They Provide Information What They May Have Omitted?
2/10 points
Not as fair as I can see. But they score 2 points for giving such an extensive overview of their “How we are doing” pages. That is at least a start.

Assurance: Has The CSR Review been Assured By An External Auditor?
4/10 points
Cadbury are not using third party assurance providers this year but therefore have chosen to use stakeholder feedback, a Forum for the Future statement and some feedback form sustainability professionals as their “assurance” process. I think this is not the right approach as it does not really show that the data, etc has been independently been verified. Why I do I think that? Well, data is data and needs to be checked by a third party otherwise data can be manipulated. A third independent party has alwys given reassurance to stakeholders that the data is really correct. I am not saying that the data is incorrect. I am merely saying that the reliability of the data presented should have been backed up by a third party assurance.

Total points for the Cadbury 2007/2008 Sustainability / CR Review:

64/100 points

Overall Opinion:

This report just cries out “STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT” Well done Cadbury. This is state of the art Sustainability and CSR Reporting. But I think there is one big drawback of this report. And that is the context for the professionals. All documents are downloadable but they are not viewable on the screen like a normal website. You always download it and this becomes very annoying when you visist the site more often. I also think that they should had an external assurance provider and a better navigation on the site.

But do not get me wrong. This is a great review with a real Web 2.0 appeal. This is the future of reporting in my opinion.

This is the first review of a CSR report and I will follow a clear format every time. I will have a headline with the key factor that is being reviewed followed by the text and a 1 out 10 points rating. At the moment I have 10 review points in total. This review is not intended to be academic or systematic but rather a good look into the topics and issues that matter for you as the reader and stakeholder. In the end every individual has a different opinion. This is mine.

I am also following one important premise: Keep it short and simple.

So here we go.

The 2007/2008 CSR Report of AllianceBoots – a large is a leading international pharmacy-led health and beauty group in the UK.
CSR Report URL: AllianceBoots CSR Report 2007/2008

Reporting Period
10/10
Alliance Boots reports annually. This is best practice. Well done.

Topics & Clarity
7/10 points
The categorization of the four areas of reporting in: Marketplace, Environment, Workplace and Community is very rigid and really not very innovative. This would need to be changed to provide more stakeholder focused information in my opinion. Best practice shows that this is not the ideal way of structuring a CSR report.
But this is a globally accepted approach to categorize your activities in this manner. Not the best choice in my opinion but still worth 7 out of 10 as they are showing that they approach CSR in a structured fashion.

Reporting Of The Material Issues
5/10 points
They have pretty much included all material issues in their business but the discussion is not extensive enough to give full marks. Addressing all the topics is one thing. Discussing them in an appropriate way is another.

Reporting Of Performance Indicators
4/10 points
Alliance Boots has chosen to report on their performance from last year to this. This is a shame as they should thrive for reporting that includes previous years as well. This would have given the user a better indication how they are doing in the long run. In terms of where the performance is reporting is Alliance Boots okay but not really special. They have a special performance section in the navigation and a 2007/08 in every category. But this is not useful in my opinion. Especially as the seperate performance section is not extensive enough to provide appropriate insides in their performance.

Reporting According To The GRI G3
8/10
Very extensive and well presented. This is best practice. The only thing that is missing are the comments. This would have given us more insights.

Reference To Other Parts Of Their Website
5/10
The important thing here is to provide further links inside the specific CSR sections to other places on the corporate website. This is not the case with this report. 5 points because this is a micro site within the corporate website which is a start to linking it within the website.

Which Communication Tools Are They Using?
2/10
Another weak point in my opinion. They are not using anything in terms of communication tools. Not even a feedback page. 2 points for having a micro site and not just an integration in their corporate website.

CSR Report Contact: An Actual Contact person or Just An Email Address?
0/10
Just a anonymous email. Not a good idea.

Do They Provide Information What They May Have Omitted?
0/10
I have not seen anything stating that they might have omitted something. I think this is a must

Assurance: Has The CSR Report been Assured By An External Auditor?
0/10
No assurance. This is not good. Their stakeholders will ask themselves as a consequence: How credible is this report? Are they telling us the truth?

Total points for the AllianceBoots 2007/2008 CSR Report:

41/100

Overall Opinion: The report is not bad but not good either. Just below average. And when we take a look at the reports of AllianceBoots over the previous years (CSR Report 2006) then we need to ask them what their intention with this latest report is. They are definitely taking a step back with this report in my opinion.

Fabian Pattberg

Tag Archives - Assurance