In any case, the "scale of involvement" is a scale that was developed by one Dova Wilson, a member of my class group at GWU.
It was designed as a way to evaluate a company's commitment to corporate social responsibility through its policies, programs and key performance indicators (KPIs). Since much of the information available on a company's CSR activities is qualitative in nature (meaning that it can't really be measured easily), the "Dova Scale" (as we like to call it) attempts to quantify (with numbers) mostly qualitative data. The scale is used along with a template (which I will share in the next entry). I have adapted the template we developed in class to be more relevant to the branded apparel companies I will be profiling.
Definitions (we will use child labor as an example to make it easier to understand):
1- No Visible Involvement: This rating can be applied when a company shows no mention of a particular issue. (For instance, has no official policy on child labor.)
2 - Lip Action: The company may have a statement on child labor, but no specifics. It could be something like, "X company cares deeply about child labor", but with no specifics on anything else. This could also be the rating when a company says that it does something, but a third party (NGO, government, labor group) shows proof that this is not true.
3 - Compliance: The company may make a blanket statement that they "comply with all necessary regulations" relating to child labor in the countries where they operate, but with no information on how they track this or what the regulations are.
4 - Policy & Procedures: The company has a public policy on child labor that talks about how it would handle a situation of child labor (for example, the company would immediately terminate a contract with a supplier or factory that was found to have child labor). This rating is given when the company, although having a policy and procedure, does not actively investigate and monitor the issue.
5 - Internal Audit and Measurement: The company investigates, monitors and reports on issues of child labor. This could mean that the company has hired a third-party verifier to investigate its factories or has its own compliance officers who work with their suppliers. The company may or may not report on its findings, but states that it has a way of doing so.
6 - Active Steps: This rating would be given to a company when it is apparent that the company is proactive about child labor. For instance, one company that I have looked at partners with NGOs to provide education opportunities for children near the factories where the company manufactures its clothes, so the children have other options besides working.
7 - Creativity: This rating is given to a company that definitely meets the 6th rating, but also tries to solve issues creatively or using its market position, partners with unique organizations, or, otherwise, takes active steps in ways that are different than the industry norm.
8 - Continual Improvement: The company strives, year after year, to do better than it did the year before to address challenges, solve problems and be proactive about issues that affect its business and industry. Many companies that receive this rating have social responsibility as part of their mission statements. Their senior officers are vocal about the company's actions. The companies participate in external evaluations of their activities for research purposes. There is a high level of transparency, involvement of internal and outside stakeholders, development of new approaches, etc.
Bonus Point - Leader: The company is a clear leader in the industry based on what others are doing. In some industries, the leader may actually be rated low (like a 5 or 6), but because the industry as a whole is not doing much, they benefit in the scale by doing more. (This is not actually a whole point, but, more like an asterisk that will be taken into account.)
How The Scale Is Used: For every category on the template (which you will see next), the researcher (that would be me) looks at information available from the company and other resources and tries to get an overall opinion on what the company says its doing, what it is trying to do and what others say it is doing.
That is definitely one of the drawbacks of this process: that I decide what the rating should be based on my opinion. However, because of the type of information that is evaluated (mostly quantitative), and that there are no standards for what companies do on these types of issues, subjective decision-making is part of the process. It would be much easier if there was some standard that all companies had to subscribe to and report on. This is often the case with pollution information (although we all know that a company, if it really wanted to, can find a way to get around that. Erin Borkovich, anyone?)
Anyway, an important part of making the rating decision is also understanding what other companies in the same industry are doing. This is important for several reasons. First, it might be difficult to get a full picture of the trade-offs that a company must make to implement a particular policy unless you have a lot of internal information on the issue. However, if you see many companies in the same industry implementing a particular policy, then you can assume that is it possible for the company in question to do so as well. For instance, if many companies in the same industry decide that they want to be open about what countries most of their clothing is manufactured in and one company is not sharing that information, then that will stand out. Also, looking at many companies in the same industry is helpful for getting a baseline on what can be done across the board. For the brand-name apparel sector, it is amazing to see that some companies are doing a lot, some are starting to do a little and others do very little or don't do anything at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment