25 February 2011, the Global Compact United Nations launched the program Differentiation, through which companies should be classified in their reports to the Global Compact into two categories:
· Active PM . must report the commitment of management of the institution, reporting on policies and activities in the 10 principles and results of the achievement of its goals.
· Advanced PM. They must also report progress in 24 advanced criteria (governance, value chain, reports, etc.), To include an affidavit that the report includes information on these criteria and include a self-assessment on how the criteria are covered in the reports.
Companies that do not meet the minimum requirements information (note that there is talk of action), will be placed on probation, in category learning for a period of 12 months, to achieve the asset class.
differentiation This program will allow state enterprises that meet higher demand levels. follows the same idea that self GRI statements, which declare the level of compliance with the GRI reporting requirements that the company believes it complies. Sn But it is noteworthy that the GRI not only has three levels of compliance (A, B, C), it allows information to be secured by external bodies (by which you add a plus "+") and then also be checked by the GRI itself (and thus added to the label "verified GRI).
The proposal of the Global Compact has only two categories, and is not verified or by outsiders or by the same UN Global Compact.
is noteworthy that the requirements for the level of "Advanced" are aimed primarily at the company to take responsibility for what they provide, because neither the information nor action will be verified by anyone although placed in the Global Compact website. In other words, "reports, Assure that you report is what you report and swear that you report is correct." Obviously there is a high degree of confidence in what the company reports.
This is a reflection of that participation is the Global Compact is taken with little seriousness by many companies and the Global Compact has the same doubts about the honesty of the companies.
The problem is that the Global Compact wants to be massive and thus sacrifice quality. not have the capacity to verify. Just check every three years submit a report. Anyone can become a member and you only have to report every three years. No checks and not required to have action. can report that there is very little and thus meets the requirements. levels do not ask for action, but it is hoped that with the 'advanced' level, companies that choose to do so will take it more seriously and not just a commitment to voluntary action, but to do so.
In fact, it launched a program of differentiation is a clear indication that they consider that the mass has not produced progress and we must establish a category for which differentiate If they do something, of doing little or nothing. It is a recognition that overcrowding has not worked.
In our article Global Compact: Is that all?, July 2008, we said . But Global Compact to add value, you must become a more exclusive club, one that involves a "membership fee", ie one that requires responsible behavior on all its members. " www.globalcompactcritics .blogspot.com / search? q = live and www.cumpetere.com )
Companies try to differentiate themselves from competitors. The Global Compact is to differentiate itself. Would not it be better to have only the group "good"?
As is known, companies may join the Global Compact by sending a letter expressing the desire and commitment to honor the 10 principles, allowing them to announce that they are "members." return have an obligation to present, at least once every three years, about what they do in meeting the Compact's principles. The penalty for not reporting is the expulsion of the Covenant. checks only thing is that they have delivered the report.
To appreciate the lightness with which many companies take their membership, have been expelled 2,048 (Member 6066 to January 2011) for not even reporting ( and in 2010 gave a moratorium on expulsions). No information on levels of compliance with the principles of those who remain members.
Spain has the highest number of members to 877, reporting the highest number with 510, the largest number of "no report" with 208 and the third number of expelled 159 (for statistics in other countries see www.globalcompactcritics.blogspot.com )
The reports are published on the site of the Covenant. Presumably civil society organizations and other companies may verify the information and reporting, but this does not happen. There is not much interest in the serious analysis of compliance of companies with the Global Compact principles. The Covenant is only worried about the frequency of reporting.
Fortunately there is now some progress, at least some companies will take it more seriously to differentiate of mass safe and serve as an example.
repeat the recommendation made in the article mentioned nearly three years " Although it is politically difficult for a multilateral organization make value judgments about the conduct of an enterprise can not avoid this step if you want the Global Compact continues to maintain its credibility. Someone has to do it. At a minimum, should encourage civil society organizations to monitor, on their own, members of the Global Compact, and that these practices report on responsible companies. As outlined today, the Global Compact is at risk of becoming irrelevant to ensure responsible practices "
A New Global Compact? Not yet, but at least there is progress. 's something.
0 comments:
Post a Comment