Sustainable development of the company. Sustainable development and the new business model “Shared Value”

Orenburgsky State University

Keywords

information provision, strategy for sustainable development, reporting on sustainable developmen

View article

Abstract to the article

The article presents a refined interpretation of the concept of sustainable development strategy and the recommended content of reporting in the field of sustainable development, the objectivity, completeness and transparency of which significantly increase the credibility of the organization in the business community. The presented key performance indicators, corresponding to the developed reporting sections, serve as important guidelines in identifying business problems and justifying measures aimed at ensuring the sustainable development of the organization.

Text of a scientific article

In 1992, Russia, among 179 states at the Summit of Heads of State and the UN Conference on Environment and Development, signed a number of program documents defining the coordinated policies of the countries of the world to ensure sustainable development. In 1994, the Basic Provisions of the State Strategy of the Russian Federation for environmental protection and sustainable development were adopted. Having political significance, this document did not play a significant role in intensifying the process of transition of the Russian Federation to sustainable development. Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated April 1, 1996 No. 440, which approved the Concept of the Russian Federation's transition to sustainable development, acquired fundamental importance in this regard. Ten years later, the World Summit on Sustainable Development took place, which influenced the development of the Concept of long-term socio-economic development of the Russian Federation for the period until 2020 and, thus, outlined a “course for sustainable development, the goal of which is to meet the needs of the current generation without compromising the opportunities future generations." Organizations of all forms and types have an important role to play in achieving this goal as key forces in creating public goods, which leads them to realize the need to develop a sustainable development strategy based on progressive approaches to assessing and predicting the effectiveness of adopted management decisions. A sustainable development strategy should be understood as a long-term plan of action aimed at constantly updating the structural and functional content of the organization, with the aim of creating an economic state in which its financial and economic activities ensure, in a changing internal and external environment, the overall efficiency of operation and the fulfillment of all obligations, thanks to sufficient income and corresponding expenses, in accordance with the goals set. The benefits of developing and implementing an organization's sustainable development strategy are presented in Figure 1. Figure 1 - Benefits of developing and implementing an organization's sustainable development strategy Sustainable development strategy is defined as a set of economic, social, political and other measures with the help of which an organization can not only withstand changing conditions, but also to make an accurate forecast and reasonably plan your activities, based on internal and external development opportunities. A sustainability strategy is the result of a comprehensive examination of both internal and external opportunities, and therefore there is no single sustainability strategy for all organizations. At the same time, the development of certain types of business and functional strategies of the organization should be a continuation of the general (basic) strategy or at least not contradict it. This “reveals the effect of management synergy, and the sustainable development strategy turns into a powerful factor in strengthening competitiveness.” The growth strategy as a strategy for sustainable development can be implemented by sustainable organizations. The stabilization strategy as a strategy for sustainable development can be used by organizations that have a tendency to transition from unstable functioning to sustainable one. The survival strategy as a strategy for sustainable development should be applied by unsustainably functioning organizations in order to avoid possible bankruptcy. Survival strategy is becoming the main strategy for many mechanical engineering organizations. In times of economic uncertainty, a global decline in production, and a shortage of financial resources, it allows the organization to survive for better times. The problem of sustainable development of an organization cannot be solved without appropriate information support, which allows, on the one hand, to assess the degree of achievement of strategic goals and, on the other, all interested users to evaluate the intentions and success of the business’s efforts to ensure its long-term sustainability. In an environment of growing opportunities with a simultaneous increase in risks and threats to sustainable development, the foundation for successful relationships with stakeholders, attracting investments and other market actions is the organization’s openness to influence the economy, environment and society. Consequently, it becomes relevant to develop reporting indicators in the field of sustainable development based on the “triple bottom line” principle: the economics of the organization, the ecology of production and social politics. Currently, sustainability reporting is carried out by companies all over the world: in Europe, the leaders are the UK, USA, Canada, China, South Africa, Australia, etc. In Russia, non-financial reporting is mainly developed by organizations in the oil, energy and metallurgical industries. In addition, such reports are compiled by the largest banks. As of April 5, 2017, 164 organizations were included in the National Register of Non-Financial Reports, 751 reports were registered, which were issued since 2000. Among them: environmental reports - 68, social reports - 315, reports in the field of sustainable development - 247, integrated reports - 120, industry reports - 25. Formation of reporting in the field of sustainable development gives the organization the following advantages: 1) allows you to identify problem areas and unexpected opportunities in relationships with stakeholders; 2) allows you to identify the environmental and social contribution of the organization, as well as the “value of the company’s products from the point of view of sustainable development,” which is necessary to maintain and strengthen the “ethical image” of its existence; 3) helps reduce instability and uncertainty in the value of shares of public companies, as well as reduce the cost of attracted capital. According to report preparers, “users are most interested in the following information: analysis of financial results and financial condition, the most important risks and their management, future plans and prospects, business structure, key performance indicators (KPIs) of activity.” Based on the basic information needs of users, sustainability reporting should include the following sections: 1 Vision and mission of the organization. 2 Strategic target priorities for the development of the organization. 3 Operating and financial goals organizations. 4 Priority business segments of the organization and their characteristics. 5 Research and development, organization brands. 6 The most significant projects and contracts of the organization. 7 Key competencies of the organization. 8 Key factors for the success of an organization in the industry. 9 Competitive advantages of the organization. 10 Products of the organization and market overview. 11 Prospects for the development of the organization in the industry. 12 Forecast of the organization’s activities in the industry. 13 Own and attracted sources of financing of the organization. 14 Strategic position of the organization, measures to optimize the business. 15 KPIs of the organization's activities. Key performance indicators are characteristics that reflect the effectiveness of an organization’s efforts in ensuring economic, environmental and social sustainability(Table 1). Table 1 - KPIs in the field of sustainable development of the organization Economic KPI Environmental KPI Social KPI Increase net profit Increasing energy efficiency Reducing the level of accidents and injuries at work Increasing EBITDA Reducing emissions of greenhouse gases and/or other pollutants Increasing the level of fire safety Reduced costs Reduced waste levels, incl. wastewater pollution Increasing the proportion of women in management Increased revenue Increased waste recycling Reduced employee turnover Increased shareholder returns Reduced water consumption and increased reuse and reuse of water Increased training hours per employee Increased profitability equity Reducing the area of ​​pollution Increasing the volume of social investments Thus, the main task of creating a report for external users is related to the implementation of an effective information dialogue with stakeholders about the sustainable development strategy, the results of actions taken and comparison of the results obtained with the results of other organizations. An organization's sustainable development strategy can use indicators from one of the three areas of sustainability reporting, most often economic, as a basis for determining indicators in other areas, building a kind of balanced scorecard (BSC) that provides an adequate assessment of the effectiveness of its implementation. It is also fundamental that movement towards sustainable development requires coordinated efforts across the entire system of indicators, and not just improvements in individual characteristics. In conclusion, I would like to note that in conditions when non-financial risks play an increasingly important role, reporting in the field of sustainable development closes the created information gap for stakeholders, showing and proving to them that this organization pays constant attention not only to economic, but also environmental, And social aspects, reducing the risks of conflicts and sanctions. A well-managed sustainability reporting process, built on dialogue with stakeholders, makes the organization more attractive to business partners. Consequently, it can become a tool for corporate management, brand building, risk minimization, and anticipation of new trends, which ultimately helps to improve the efficiency of the business as a whole.

The process of goal setting transforms the strategic vision and direction of development into results to be strived for and guidelines for the development path. Goals express a managerial commitment to achieve specific results within a certain time frame. They indicate how many, what type of actions must be performed and at what time. They direct attention and energy to what needs to be accomplished.

Until the organization's long-term goals and mission are translated into specific, measurable performance goals and leaders are forced to demonstrate progress toward them, all direction and mission statements will remain lip service, window dressing, and pipe dreams. The experience of countless firms and executives has taught us that companies whose leaders set goals for each group of key indicators and then take aggressive action to achieve those goals typically outperform those whose leaders are well-intentioned, work hard, and expect to succeed. .

In order for performance goals to be meaningful as a management tool, they must be quantified or measurable and must have a deadline for achievement. This means eliminating general phrases such as “maximize profits,” “reduce costs,” “increase efficiency,” or “increase sales,” which do not specify how much or when.

Setting goals is a call to action, defining results, deadlines and who is responsible. Expressing organizational goals in measurable terms and assigning responsibilities to managers to achieve goals defined for them within a specified time frame:

• 1) frees you from the need to make important strategic decisions that entail aimless actions, and from doubts about what these actions will lead to;
• 2) establishes criteria for evaluating the organization’s activities.

Goals should be set for each key result that managers believe is important to achieving ultimate success. There are two types of key results: those related to financial activities and related to strategic activities. Achieving acceptable financial results is an urgent need, otherwise the organization will not survive in the risk environment. Achieving acceptable strategic results is important to maintain and improve the company's long-term market position and competitiveness. Specific types of goals in the field of financial and strategic activities are presented in Table 1.

Table 1.

Types of goals in the field of financial and strategic activities of the enterprise

Strategic goals versus financial goals. That both financial and strategic goals have the highest priority. However, sometimes under pressure for short-term improvement financial indicators companies prefer to remove strategic goals or postpone the implementation of such strategic actions that promise long-term strengthening of the business and its competitiveness. The pressure on managers to pursue short-term financial goals at the expense of at least some strategic actions aimed at building stronger competitive positions is particularly strong when:

the company is in a difficult financial situation;

the withdrawal of resources necessary for the implementation of strategically beneficial actions will worsen the company's performance for several years;

The proposed strategic actions are risky and may have unpredictable effects on the company's market position and competitiveness.

Strategic goals should be focused on competitors. They are usually aimed at toppling the competitor who is considered to be the best in the industry in a particular category.

Yet there is a danger associated with the temptation to obtain immediate benefits from profits and returns on invested capital by reducing or abandoning such strategic actions that could strengthen the position of the business. A company that persistently ignores opportunities to strengthen its long-term competitive position due to the desire for short-term financial benefits is in danger of reducing its competitiveness, losing momentum in markets and weakening its ability to withstand the market challenges of aggressive competitors. In business, there are many former leaders who have worked hard not to strengthen their long-term market position, but to increase profits in the next quarter. The danger of trading long-term gains from market position for short-term results on the bottom line is especially great when the profit-conscious market leader has competitors persistently investing in profitable market segments and preparing for the time when they become large and powerful enough to compete openly. with the leader in the market battle.

One only has to look at Japanese companies and their persistent strategic efforts to win market space from more profit-oriented American and European competitors to understand the dangers of the trap of dominance of short-term financial goals. The best way to protect and maintain a company's profitability quarter after quarter and year after year is to take strategic actions that strengthen its competitiveness and market position.

A company's strategic goals are important for another reason - they indicate a strategic intent to highlight a particular business position. The strategic intent of a large company may be national or global leadership. A small company's strategic intent may be to dominate a market niche. The strategic intention of a young and promising enterprise may be to reach the level of market leaders. The strategic intent of a company using advanced technology may be to introduce a promising invention, create a new type of product, and secure a market opportunity.

The time horizon underlying strategic intent is the long term. Companies that have achieved prominence in their markets almost always started with a strategic intent that was inconsistent with their capabilities and market position at the time. They set themselves ambitious long-term strategic goals and persistently, and sometimes obsessively, strived to achieve them over a period of 10 or 20 years. In the 1960s, Komatsu, Japan's largest manufacturer of earth-moving equipment at the time, was more than three times the size of the American company Caterpillar, had a very small market outside Japan, and relied on the sale of small bulldozers for the bulk of its revenue. Komatsu's strategic intent was to "surround Caterpillar" with a broad product range and compete with the American company on a global scale. By the end of the 80s, Komatsu became the second company in the industry with a significant presence in the markets North America, Europe and Asia, and its products included industrial robots and semiconductors along with a wide range of earthmoving equipment.

Often a company's strategic intent becomes a slogan for managers and employees, like the demands to "do your best" and "do your job." the best way" Canon's strategic vision for the printing industry was summed up in the words "Defeat Xerox." Komatsu's slogan was "Defeat Caterpillar." The strategic intent of the American government space program Apollo was to put a man on the Moon before the Soviet Union. During the 1980s, Wal-Mart's strategic goal was to "overtake Sears" as the largest retailer in the United States (a goal achieved in 1991). In such cases, strategic intent signals a deep desire to win—to topple the industry leader, to remain the industry leader (and further dominate it), or to close a significant gap and gain a stronger position. A well-managed enterprise whose strategic objectives exceed its current achievements and resources may prove to be a more formidable competitor than a company with modest strategic intentions.

An organization needs both long-term and short-term goals. Long-term goals accomplish two things. First, setting goals for five or more years forces managers to take action now in order to achieve long-term goals later (a company that plans to double its sales within five years cannot expect to achieve its five-year goal in the third or fourth year). strategic plan, sales and consumer base will begin to grow!). Second, having clear long-term goals requires managers to evaluate the impact of their current decisions on long-term performance. Without constant pressure to move forward to achieve long-term goals, human nature will always make decisions based on what makes the most sense in the future. this moment time, and worries about the future will be postponed “for later.” The problem with shortsighted decisions is that they seriously threaten a company's long-term position.

Short-term goals involve achieving immediate or near-term results. They indicate the speed at which management believes the organization should grow and the level of performance that should be achieved over the next two or three periods. Short-term goals can be similar to long-term goals if the organization is already operating at its planned long-term level. For example, if a company with an ongoing goal of 15% annual profit growth has already achieved this goal, then that company's long-term and short-term profit goals will be the same. The most difficult situations associated with misalignment of short-term and long-term goals arise when managers strive to increase the effectiveness of the organization and cannot achieve the long-term goal within one year. Short-term goals in such a situation should serve as stepping stones, or guidelines.

Goals should not reflect a level of achievability that management believes is “excellent.” Wishful thinking should have no place when setting goals. For goals to serve as a tool to mobilize an organization to realize its full potential, they must be challenging but achievable. To satisfy this condition, goals must be set taking into account several important internal and external considerations.

• - What productivity levels do the industry and competitive conditions allow?
• - What results will the successful achievement of goals bring to the organization?
• - What level of productivity can the organization achieve in its development?

To set challenging but achievable goals, managers must evaluate what level performance will achieve, given external conditions, relative to the performance the organization is capable of achieving. The tasks of goal setting and strategy formation often come together at this point. For example, strategic choices cannot be made in a financial vacuum; money is always present when strategic decisions are implemented. Therefore, decisions regarding strategy depend on the organization's financial goals, which must be high enough to:

ensure the implementation of the chosen strategy;

fund other necessary activities;

satisfy investors and the financial community.

Goals and strategy also come into contact when it comes to aligning means (strategy) and results (goals). If a company cannot achieve its stated goals (either because the goals are unrealistic or because the strategy cannot achieve the required performance), then the goals or strategy must be revised to ensure greater suitability.

The need to set goals at all management levels

For strategic thinking and strategic decision-making to become an integral part of organizational behavior, performance goals must be set not only for the organization as a whole, but also for each individual branch, part of the product line, functional services and divisions. Only when every leader - from the managing director to the lower level of management - is accountable for achieving specific results, and when the goals of each department support the achievement of the goals of the entire company, will the setting process be completed so that the entire organization moves along the chosen path and every part of her knew what needed to be achieved.

The process of goal setting is top-down rather than bottom-up. To see why the goals of one management level tend to drive the goals and strategies of the next level, consider an example. Let's assume that the top executive of a diversified corporation has set a goal for the next year: to achieve a total profit of 5 million tenge. Let us also assume that, after discussion between the corporate executives and the managers of each of the five separate business branches, strenuous but achievable goals were set, namely that each of the branches would bring in 1 million tenge by the end of the year (i.e. if five branches will bring 1 million tenge of profit, then the corporation will achieve its overall goal - receiving 5 million tenge of profit). In this way, a specific outcome was agreed upon and translated into measurable commitments at two levels of the management hierarchy. Then suppose that the head of branch X, after analysis and discussion with functional managers, determined that in order to make a profit of 1 million tenge, it is necessary to sell 100 thousand units of products at an average price of 50 tenge. per unit, and produce them with an average cost of 40 tenge per unit (profit of 10 tenge, multiplied by 100 thousand units, will give 1 million tenge). Consequently, the head of the branch and the head of the production set a goal for production: to produce 100 thousand products with a cost of one product of 40 tenge, then the head of the branch and the head of the sales service agreed on the goal of this service: to sell 100 thousand products at a target selling price of 50 tenge. In turn, the sales manager broke down sales of 100 thousand products into goals for each territory, for each type of product in the range and for each employee.

A top-down process for setting goals for strategically important business components, production processes and structural divisions is a completely logical way of dividing general corporate goals into their components, which divisions and lower-level managers will have to achieve. This approach creates the necessary unity and cohesion in the process of goal setting and strategy formation in different parts of the organization.

Organizational goals and strategy should be defined first so that they can guide goal setting and strategy formation at lower levels. Top-down goal-setting and strategy-setting processes guide lower-level managers toward goals and strategies that are consistent with the overall objectives of the organization. If the processes of goal setting and strategy formation begin at the lower levels of the organization and the overall corporate goals and strategy are the sum of what “came from below,” then the resulting plan of strategic action is likely to be contradictory, fragmented and uncoordinated. Setting goals from the bottom up without leadership from the top almost always signals a lack of strategic leadership from senior management.

Sustainability issues touch almost every area of ​​the company's activities - from customer relationships to supplier reviews, from assessing environmental impact to ensuring a working environment, from developing an ethical business culture to ensuring the transparency of the corporate governance structure. This raises the question: if the spectrum is so broad, is it necessary to create a separate position of sustainability manager?

The answer follows from the very idea of ​​sustainability management: it is to centrally coordinate all the operations of an organization related to its development. And it is the sustainability manager, a kind of general without soldiers, who guides the company along this path.

Now in the majority Russian companies There are no such managers: issues in this area are dealt with part-time by managers from different departments. In most cases, they are competent only in their own area (for example, HR, PR, etc.), and do not have a full understanding of other areas. As a result, the establishment of sustainable development processes is more difficult and painful, this leads to conflicts in relationships within the company and reduces its effectiveness. In world practice, the functions of a manager in the field of sustainable development are defined quite clearly and cover four key areas.

Initiatives in areas not covered by the current organizational structure. These areas include, for example, promoting targeted programs on corporate ethics, preventing corruption, reducing environmental pollution, adapting to climate change, volunteering, developing an investment strategy for local communities, creating jobs that meet environmental requirements, etc.

Coordination of information flows. The manager introducing changes in the organization should be given broad powers to coordinate information flows within the company. This is necessary so that the manager can evaluate progress, effectiveness and achievement of goals in a given direction. The information is used both to prepare periodic reports for management and for dialogue with stakeholders.

Dialogue with stakeholders and communications. The sustainability manager plays a key role in discussing the change management plan. He needs to ensure that employees are aware of changes occurring both within the company and externally. Important aspects on the path to success are formalizing the process of interaction with stakeholders and providing feedback from the company. The sustainability manager's responsibilities include identifying key stakeholders, determining who is responsible for reaching out to them, and developing a program to engage them.

Implementing a sustainable development program within an organization is a serious challenge for the management of the world's largest companies. Success here depends not so much on the creation of a new, still unusual position in the company structure, but on the appointment the right person for this position. A good sustainability manager, working at the level of strategic management of the company, becomes an influential leader who improves mechanisms for dealing with risks in a rapidly changing economic situation, identifies and evaluates new opportunities in a timely manner.

A sustainable development strategy is the advantage of responsible companies that are aware of their impact on the environment and the local population, take into account the requirements and needs of society, and also provide open information about your activities. How to develop and implement an SD strategy? Let's see what the leaders of the Russian market say.

A sustainable development strategy is a mechanism that launches an irreversible process of positive transformation of a company. Incorporating such a strategy into an organization's or company's approach requires:

- a clear idea of ​​sustainable development – the company must set long-term goals in the context of environmental, social and economic trends;

- action plan – the implementation strategy must contain specific actions and programs to achieve these goals in practice;

-communication and reporting – clear, meaningful, and consistent messages that will demonstrate to internal and external stakeholders that the company is transparent about its actions.

Why is the emphasis placed on strategy?

A well-designed sustainability strategy, in addition to the obvious benefits for society and the environment, will help companies attract investors and customers, as well as obtain financial support from financial institutions.

Despite a fairly high level of awareness of the importance of sustainable development, many companies sometimes question the importance of environmental and social factors, convincingly proving the importance of only economic indicators. A key issue in this debate is the ability of sustainable companies to prove that implementing sustainability policies can be an important “lever” for achieving superior market performance.

Many companies have already developed environmental and sustainability programs that work alongside their core business strategy. But in the end, such stand-alone programs do not have a significant impact on the policies in the actual actions of the company and on the decisions it makes.

To build an effective sustainable development strategy, market leaders who practice responsible business practices offer the following basic recommendations:

Step 1: Identify significant issues that pose either strategic threats or new opportunities to the company.

Step 2: Determine the company's ambitions and goals: where do you see your company on the corporate governance maturity scale?

Step 3: Set the right tone: Consumers tend to be skeptical of companies that only make claims about their sustainability intentions. All public statements of the company must be accompanied by real facts and figures.

Step 4: Determine what processes occur within your company's strategy:

- what works?

- what does not work?

- why and how to fix it?

Step 5: Identify key external and internal stakeholders and engage in dialogue with them to highlight significant issues.

Step 6: Develop and implement effective programs to manage identified material issues . Investments in sustainable development have a number of financial benefits, in addition, they are very effective for risk management.

The investor, when choosing investment objects, be it green bonds, or shares or other securities, clearly understands the benefits of investing in sustainable development, which are reflected in:

- Direct influence on investment efficiency- increasing efficiency and reducing costs in some areas.

- Impact on the stock market– effective risk management creates favorable conditions for stability and growth of stock prices.

- Impact on shareholder value assessment– analysis of risk management, carried out by management at the request of investors, increases the value of the company in the eyes of stakeholders.

- Intangible value- represents a significant portion of the company's total value. Intangible value refers to the “soft” issues that do not appear in the classic company report, unlike corporate governance, intellectual capital, human resources, workplace organization and culture. Sustainability plays an important role in intangible values, such as reputation, brand value, trust and relationships with stakeholders.

How to implement a CSR strategy: opinions of professionals

How did your company learn about corporate social responsibility?

Irina Antyushina, Manager of Sustainable Development, Philanthropy and Foundations Programs at Unilever:“At Unilever, we prefer the term sustainability to corporate social responsibility, a strategy that underpins our business operations. It has been in Unilever's DNA since its inception, and in 2010, when Paul Polman presented to the world the Plan for Sustainable Development and Improving the Quality of Life, revealed itself to its fullest. What is today part of our strategy and defines the goals of our employees for the rest of the year - reducing our environmental impact, improving sanitation and hygiene conditions, creating opportunities for women and other areas of the Plan - was started by the founders of Unilever in the 19th century. Back in 1884, one of the founders of our company William Heskett Lever started producing bar soapSunlight- a new and inexpensive product that allowed low-income residents of England of that era to gain access to sanitation services.

In 2010, after joining the company Paul Polman, Unilever has adopted a global strategy to achieve a sustainable future and grow its business. As part of the Plan, we have three goals to achieve: help more than 1 billion people take action to improve their health and well-being; halve the environmental impact of our products; purchase 100% of agricultural raw materials from companies certified under the Responsible Supplier CodeUnilever.

Underpinning these three broad goals are approximately 50 specific targets, defined by clear time frames, that help measure our performance against a range of social, economic and environmental criteria throughout the entire life cycle of our products - from production and procurement of raw materials to the disposal of our products by consumers after use." .

Vice President of Marketing MAYKOR:“The concept of corporate social responsibility has existed for more than half a century, and in Russia it is no longer an innovation. MAYKOR is a young company, its formation and active development occurred at a time when social responsibility of business was and continues to be talked about a lot and mostly to the point, both at the Russian and international levels. Therefore, the concept of CSR was laid down at the planning stage of the company’s business strategy.”

Why did you decide to make CSR part of your company's business strategy?

“The plan for sustainable development and improvement of quality of life is the basis for the sustainable growth of our business around the world. As a business that meets the daily needs of 2 billion consumers, we cannot expect to thrive in a world where there are so many unresolved problems, where water and food supplies are scarce, where there is still (in many parts of the world) no access to basic sanitation and hygiene conditions, and where day by day we see more and more devastating consequences climate change.

In addition, sustainability truly fuels the growth of our brands and allows them to continually grow. Over the past four years, 11 of our leading brands have reinvigorated their social mission and began offering products that support sustainability and a good quality of life for all. According to the results of a study by our business analysts in 2014, almost half of our total growth last year was provided by brands that we classify as so-called “sustainable development brands” (in Russia this figure is still at about 35 percent); sustainability brands grew at twice the rate of all other businesses last year; Sustainable brands' profitability levels are 2 percentage points higher (by gross margin) than standard products. This may not be a significant difference in profit, but at least it refutes the view of critics who argue that sustainability is purely a cost for a company.

Today, consumers are becoming more and more interested in the products of companies that build their business with the environment and the well-being of society in mind. According to a study by Synovate Comcon (2014), 72% Russian consumers Before purchasing products, they pay attention to where the raw materials come from and how environmentally friendly the production of a particular brand is. To ensure the long-term impact of the strategy, we strive to combine income with mission, economic performance with help to society. We see no contradiction between sustainable development and profitable growth: these concepts are mutually reinforcing.”

“In the outsourcing industry, corporate social responsibility is not just a global dialogue, it is the basis of development. According to a study by the International Association of Outsourcing Professionals (IAOP), more than 40% of companies pay attention to their CSR policies when choosing outsourcing service providers. The reason is that outsourcing is not one-time services, and long-term cooperation and sustainable development of the service provider is a guarantee of its reliability. In addition, our commitment to CSR practices is determined by the very specifics of our activities. Outsourcing is an area where the main resource is people, company employees. And we are ready to invest in their professional development and in creating favorable social conditions for them. The success of the company’s business depends on how successfully we cope with this task.

Another important prerequisite for developing a CSR strategyMAYKOROur company has become a federal scale, covering all regions of our multinational and multi-religious country. Our branches are located from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok, in each region, in accordance with territorial division countries, including the entire North Caucasus, which is traditionally considered a rather closed and difficult region to work from the center. In our principles corporate culture We considered it important to document the fulfillment of all constitutional rights when working in our company, and the absence of any forms of discrimination. Our company has created equal and decent working conditions for both women and men, representatives of all ethnic and religious groups, any political views. The company plays the role of a socio-economic guarantor for its employees, protecting in accordance with labor code RF their rights to paid leave, maternity, education, medical care, health and labor protection, ethical treatment and other equally important human rights and freedoms. Overall, we strive to improve the quality of life for our staff, the region and the community.

We have built and continue to improve our corporate governance in such a way as to implement and monitor the execution of our CSR strategy. The management company MAYKOR is responsible for strategic management, monitoring operational activities, as well as for coordinating and evaluating the activities of departments. For effective management throughout the country, the MAYKOR branch network
distributed across macroregions. Directors of macro-regions are responsible for monitoring and execution of local work, budgeting and resource planning. Within their federal district, branch directors report to them, who, in turn, manage the final executors of our contractual obligations - full-time service engineers. In a large distributed structure such as ours, effective implementation of CSR principles is achieved by a two-way exchange of information “top-down” and “bottom-up”. Leaders at the top explain the meaning of current regulatory documents and regulations in the field of CSR, monitor their implementation, and the performers “at the bottom” help to “ground” the fixed rules and strengthen their penetration on the ground. Depending on the level of hierarchy and job responsibilities, employees of our organization interact with the external environment: clients, partners, government agencies authorities, representatives of public organizations, means mass media, bringing social responsibility into these relationships. MAYKOR also has an HSE department, a personnel development department, and there are positions of environmental and social risk manager, social project manager, etc., specifically responsible for the implementation of certain aspects of CSR.”

Press service of AFK Sistema: « The business of a socially responsible company that follows the norms of business behavior and correlates its goals with the needs of stakeholders is, of course, more resistant to possible risks and crisis events, however, you need to understand that CSR is a long-term investment in reputation, which is not always amenable to material assessment. For a public company, its perception by shareholders, investors, and analysts, who are increasingly paying more and more attention not only to the financial results of operations, but also to the company’s non-financial reporting, is no less important. The world has already developed a responsible investment sector; there are stock market indices and independent ratings that take into account ESG factors (environmental, social, corporate governance) when assessing companies. And here, especially if we talk about international capital markets, a competitive advantage goes to those who consistently manage their social, environmental impact, improves corporate governance, regularly and transparently reports on results.

JSFC Sistema aims to consistently implement the general principles of sustainable development in its portfolio assets, strengthening the synergy and integration of subsidiaries in the field of CSR through participation in corporate-wide social programs and joint projects to increase the efficiency of the Group’s social investments.

Sistema's general approach to corporate social responsibility is based on the principles of synergy and the creation of shared values ​​(Shared Value) - the inclusion of the maximum number of subsidiaries in projects that are simultaneously aimed at solving important social problems and contributing to business development. Among the most striking examples are the “Telkom Idea” projects launched several years ago by MTS to find and support innovative startups and “Networks for all ages” (increasing Internet literacy of the older generation)».

Who developed the strategy?

“All functions of the company took part in the development of the sustainable development strategy, because each of them, within the framework of the Plan for Sustainable Development and Improving the Quality of Life, has certain tasks that must be accomplished. Our strategy is backed by clear timelines and key performance indicators that have been chosen to reflect not only our capabilities but, more importantly, the needs of society. For example, the 17 fundamental goals of sustainable development, which were adopted by the UN General Assembly on September 25, 2015, largely overlap with the areas of activity of our Plan. In doing so, we focus on the areas where we have the opportunity to make the greatest impact: for example, reducing our environmental impact (Goal #13), providing decent jobs (Goal #8), providing more opportunities for women (Goal #5) and much more.

An important element in a sustainable development strategy is the ability to track results in each area. It is the analysis of our achievements for each past year that allows us to correctly set priorities for the next one. We evaluate the results not only within the company, but also with the help of external consulting organizations. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC), as an expert in planning and reporting, provides Unilever with an independent assessment of the readiness and effectiveness of its sustainability systems and processes.

By the way, this yearUnilever became the first company to implement the UN Guiding Principles Reporting Framework. This document helps to effectively review progress in implementing the key principles entrepreneurial activity in terms of human rights. The independent analysis helped us identify key areas for our future activities - respecting human rights at Unilever's key suppliers, improving working conditions for migrant workers and long-term collaboration with other organizations to achieve systemic change."

“We developed the strategy on our own, all of our divisions were involved in this to one degree or another, including management company, 83 branches in all regions of Russia and our subsidiaries. The total number of employees of the company is over 5,000, and in all, even remote, corners of Russia, it was important to take into account our responsibility to them in full, and at the same time respect the interests of business.

In developing the strategy, we also relied on the global experience of outsourcing professionals, in particular, on recommendations and approachesIAOP(International Association of Outsourcing Professionals), of which we are members. Key issues in the field of CSR, whichIAOPfocuses on involvement in community development, respect for human rights, transparent and fair business practices, environmental impact, customer satisfaction and positive interaction with them, and management of the organization in accordance with the principles of CSR.

It is these principles and approaches, as well as recommendationsISO26,000, were the basis of the company’s CSR strategyMAYKOR».

What was the first stage of implementing the strategy? Where did you start?

“Sustainability is now at the core of our business strategy. We have set clear and understandable goals and deadlines for achieving results. Since 2010, our brand and functional teams have assessed their performance using a special scorecard. This statement is submitted quarterly to Unilever's global headquarters in London.

We have directly linked our employee bonus system to the company's progress in the field of sustainable development. Reward everything more employees, including the Chief Executive Officer, are dependent on the implementation of a number of sustainability goals.

We have also integrated sustainability into our innovation process and developed a set of tools to assess the environmental impact of our new products. In addition, we have launched awareness campaigns to both engage our employees in achieving our sustainability goals and promote the sustainability agenda to external audiences.”

“The goal of the company’s CSR initiatives is to improve the quality of life professionally active population in the company’s field of activity, as well as the popularization of socially responsible business in the country.

We took CSR into account at the very beginning of MAYKOR business planning. One of MAYKOR's key values ​​as a completely service-oriented company is human potential. In this regard, the leading direction of charitable and social programs is the development and maintenance of the core of our business - personnel.

The Code of Corporate Ethics was one of the company's first internal documents. The strategy received a comprehensive design only last year. We analyzed all CSR initiatives, formed key priorities and structured them according to the following programs: “Profession ENGINEER”, “Corporate Volunteering”, “Healthy Back”, “Charity Instead of Souvenirs”, “Honest Business”. A group of departments is responsible for the implementation of each program. Overall coordination of CSR policy lies with the corporate communications department. The goals, objectives and tactics for implementing CSR programs are enshrined in the company’s Social and Environmental Policy. The environmental section in the Policy appeared this year: we introduced a mandatory assessment of environmental and social risks of outsourcing projects. This is supported by mandatory training and certification of the company’s full-time service engineers for each type of work using its own Competence Center with the involvement of vendors, as well as obtaining licenses for hazardous work, for example, from the Russian Ministry of Emergency Situations for working with fire extinguishing equipment. Thus, we have implemented the 3P concept in full - profit, people, planet. Based on the results of 2013 and 2014, MAYKOR released social reports, and we plan to further strengthen the results of our CSR activities.”

How has CSR affected the company's results?

“Evidence to date suggests that our sustainability strategy is having a positive impact on our performance. As an example, let me give you our Shakti program, aimed at expanding opportunities for women in India. By attracting women from low-income villages to distribute our products, we not only discovered new market sales, but also gave 45,000 women entrepreneurs the opportunity to earn money and improve their social status.

Working closely with packaging experts Mucell and Alpla, we pioneered technology that allows air to be introduced during blowing plastic bottles, which forms bubbles in the walls of the package. This reduces the amount of plastic used by 15% and, at the same time, ensures full functionality of the packaging for the consumer. The bottles remain 100% recyclable. This one is absolutely new technology used in the production of bottles for our Dove shower gels. By fully implementing the technology across all of our brands, we estimate that we could reduce the amount of plastic required for packaging by 27,000 tonnes. In the future, this could result in cost savings of up to 50 million euros. I would like to note that we have opened access to this technology to everyone so that all manufacturers can use our innovation».

“If we talk about business profits, then, firstly, we increased general level customer satisfaction to 4.8. This is a high assessment, which was influenced, among other things, by the “Profession ENGINEER” and “Honest Business” programs. As part of the first program, we are training highly qualified personnel for the company; within the second, we are introducing new technologies that allow clients to always be aware of the work being carried out by the company and the stages of project implementation, and for us to quickly respond to incidents and complaints from customers.

Secondly, our CSR policy has had a positive impact on the investment attractiveness of the business. MAYKOR became the first company in the Russian IT services market to attract investments from a consortium of funds led by RDIF.

And thirdly, and in our opinion the most important thing, MAYKOR’s CSR initiatives contribute to the formation of a positive perception of the company both by the professional community and employees, and by society as a whole. And without this, the above achievements would not have been possible.”

Press service of AFK Sistema: « Short-term social impact is not always possible and correct to measure when CSR projects are focused on investing in the future - the development of the intellectual potential of young people, innovation and the development of entire industries. But we are already seeing the impact. Thanks to the “Lift to the Future” and “Telecom Idea” projects, the corporation attracts the best young personnel and promising business ideas into its orbit. The Volunteer Center also provides a tangible economic effect. In total, in 2014, volunteers from 14 subsidiaries of Sistema JSFC provided assistance and completed work worth almost 8 million rubles. in monetary terms for more than 4 thousand beneficiaries: orphanages and boarding schools, medical and educational institutions, veteran organizations. The total number of corporation employees involved in volunteer activities over the year increased almost 2.5 times from 3.3 to 8 thousand people. At the same time, the conditional savings on involving volunteer employees amounted to about 750 million, based on the fact that in business structures, according to statistics, the cost of involving one employee per year reaches up to 10 thousand dollars».

Continuing the fashionable theme of Sustainabulity, which is being discussed today in Paris by the leaders of all world powers and corporations, we bring to your attention the original publication Be in Trend, which is based on an interview with Unilever expert Hannah Hislop about the new opportunities that the sustainable development model offers business.

One of the latest issues of Fortune magazine is devoted entirely to the issue of sustainable development - which was first raised at the highest international level in the 1970s, and since then has received increasing attention from government and corporate leaders. The 46 companies were selected by Fortune analysts and the team of Professor Michael Porter (Harvard Business School) to highlight sustainability practices in business today.

IN last years We are seeing the capitalist system in general, and large corporations in particular, come under more and more critical attack for its enormous environmental damage, contribution to social inequality and economic problems. Governments and international organizations are forced to choose: support economic growth or engage in conservation. natural resources. But according to Michael Porter, the author of the “shared value” concept, part of this contradiction can be resolved if businesses stop concentrating on short-term goals and a narrow understanding of the concept of value creation - which is clearly evident today. How else can we explain that huge opportunities for innovation and the creation of new products that the population needs go unnoticed, and the depletion of resources necessary for the same business to produce and maintain its operations, and crisis economic and social processes in societies representing significant markets , are simply ignored?

Michael Porter believes that business in the 21st century will be based on the concept of “shared value”, where companies can only be effective and profitable if their business is sensitive to the challenges of modern society, social and environmental. Business success is directly related to social progress. And the Fortune list, representing 46 of the largest companies included in the game under the new rules, including such giants as GE, Wal-Mart, Nestlé, Johnson & Johnson, Unilever, is proof of this.

It is this approach to sustainable development that is the focus of the SKOLKOVO Institute for Emerging Markets Research, and was presented at the IEMS seminar in August. The school's guest was Hannah Hyslop, an Unilever expert in disseminating sustainable development practices. Especially for Skolkovo Be in trend, Hannah shared her experience of building a culture of sustainability in the company and told us about the victories that the company is seeing today.

« Sustainable development for me is a way of looking at the world systematically, in which everything is interconnected: problems of environmental protection and tasks of economic development, the success of technological progress of mankind and ensuring a high quality of life for all 7 billion inhabitants of the planet (which will soon become 9 billion), while preserving the necessary resources for future generations.

Before joining Unilever, I worked at an environmental research agency, where I became interested in the role of business in environmental issues. Our organization's work has focused on environmental government regulation, and we have seen how business, as one of the key stakeholders in government, certainly influences decisions - especially when everyone is as focused on economic growth as they have been in recent decades. This results in governments tending to pursue policies that benefit large business players - and often until the business has expressed its desire to grow sustainably in terms of environmental and value chain risks, because this may be important to the business leaders themselves, employees , consumers and investors - should not expect governments to system solutions in this matter. Therefore, the role of business in building a sustainable future, I believe, cannot be overestimated.

And when, after creation at Unilever new strategy development (Unilever Sustainable Living Plan), which aims to double its business while reducing its environmental impact and increasing its positive impact on social processes, I had the opportunity to join the company - I was extremely glad to have the opportunity to continue working on the business side.”

What is the most challenging part of your corporate job when you are trying to implement new behaviors and new approaches?

“It’s not easy... Even when people are aware of the need for change, when they are aware of the risks that we talk about, such as climate change, resource overruns or the poverty that still exists in many regions, they often leave this awareness to intellectual level, at the level of concepts and opinions. It's quite another thing to actually start acting differently, working differently - and this leap requires enormous effort. Change is always difficult, and especially so in the business of sustainable business development, because we continue to receive signals from society and each other about the opposite: we think short-term, in reporting periods and results that need to be shown. You can come up with long-term planning programs, but if quarterly growth is all that interests your shareholders, and they are not interested in long-term strategies, within which, of course, something needs to be changed, invest in new approaches that will not pay off immediately - then all good intentions will very quickly come to naught.

Also, of course, the area of ​​sustainability seems completely intangible to most people: you can talk at length about values ​​​​like trust and reputation, but it often happens that until your business is hit by a strong non-governmental organization, or until you lose market share young innovative company, few really take these values ​​seriously and truly see the opportunities inherent in sustainable business models.

It is the transition from understanding the importance of sustainable development at an intellectual level to concrete actions that is the most difficult thing in business. People by nature tend to reinforce patterns of behavior that have brought them success in the past - and they are quite difficult to change. In a huge organization like Unilever, this is completely impossible without pressure from above, from top management. We are very fortunate that our CEO, Paul Polman, truly takes sustainability challenges to heart.

And if we look at the history of the company’s creation, a social mission is already laid at its very root. Created in 1929 by the merger of the British soap company Lever Brothers and the Dutch margarine business, Unilever has been committed to social responsibility since its inception, with a particular focus then current problem hygiene in the Liverpool slums, the solution to which was the company's products. Therefore, we can say that today this high social responsibility of the company and focus on sustainable development is an organic continuation of the deep social meaning that the Liver brothers laid in their business. But it was since Paul Polman took over the company in 2009 that the theme of sustainable development was articulated as a company strategy.”

How is the company’s sustainable strategy in a global sense related to the work of individual regions, divisions, and product lines? What tools do you use to ensure this strategy is followed at all levels of the business?

“The sustainable development strategy is equally relevant for us at the global level, at the level of individual regions, and at the level of individual brands and products. 50% of business growth today comes from brands with a social mission (“Sustainable Living Brands”).

We see this business model becoming “mainstream” very quickly around the world. You can look, for example, at the Domestos cleaning product brand, which is actively involved in an international campaign to improve sanitation in remote areas, primarily in Africa and Asia. This problem is not so acute in Russia, but it is important for us to preserve the brand’s mission, so here we had to find another significant and relevant problem for our consumers, and we are participating in a project to improve sanitary conditions in children’s hospitals. This is how the strategy of any brand is built - by combining its global mission and local realities relevant to a particular region.

In order to create a common understanding of this strategy and truly embed sustainability values ​​into the fabric of the business at all levels of the company, a centralized communications management function was created and all senior and middle management were given specific KPIs related to the Sustainable Living Plan strategy. In his communications with company employees, Paul Polman very skillfully paints a picture of the future to which we are heading, and in which it will be impossible to conduct business without regard to the social and environmental context (not only due to the worsening environmental situation, but also due to the emergence new habits and values ​​among consumers, the development of the Internet and social networks). Therefore, sustainability issues are not considered by the company as an additional burden on resources, but, on the contrary, as a source of competitive advantage, growth points and cost reduction. And it was this approach that was the key to restructuring the consciousness of employees and managers - this cannot be done with formal KPIs alone.”

What do you in the company consider to be the key results of the new strategy? What indicators tell you that you are on the right track?

“The market for “responsible consumption” is estimated today at $400 billion and is constantly growing (in the USA, for example, by 9% annually). More than half of consumers are willing to pay higher prices for products produced to high ethical and environmental standards, and this figure is even higher for the under 30 group. And we see that it is thanks to the implementation of sustainable development practices that the company today wins in terms of key business indicators, which we include growth, cost reduction, risk prevention and building trust in the business through meaningful actions (trust through purpose):

• In addition to the growth in sales of individual brands, which are growing twice as fast for brands with a clear social image (including Dove, Lifebouy, Ben & Jerry's), we note that these same brands allow us to build relationships with retailers better than other market players - because large retail chains just like us, today they are building their development strategy and image around the topic of sustainable development. And, as you know, sales indicators directly depend on the quality of relationships with retailers in our business.
• By disclosing information about activities that ensure sustainable development and getting to the top positions in serious ratings (UN, Dow Jones Sustainability Index, etc.), the company certainly strengthens its reputation in the market, and this has a positive effect, including on access to capital and debt servicing costs. It turns out that our partners and investors, just like our consumers, highly value the social significance of business, not to mention the fact that the degree of trust in a business whose leaders take all kinds of risks seriously and manage them effectively, of course, increases .
• We were surprised to find ourselves in the top five most attractive employers for young professionals (according to Linkedin ratings) - in the company of such modern giants as Apple, Facebook, Google and Microsoft. For a company that produces soap and margarine, you must agree that this is not trivial. And we see no other reasons for this other than our clear and consistent position on issues of sustainable development. The feeling of involvement in a big and important matter, according to our observations, is critical for employee satisfaction - and, accordingly, for the effectiveness of their work. And this motivation factor, by the way, is especially pronounced in difficult times, when the company cannot afford to raise salaries and pay bonuses. It is investments in sustainable development that often help survive crises.
• A separate big topic for us is working with potential environmental risks. Our experts estimate that climate change results in real additional costs for companies of several million euros annually (this includes costs associated with environmental disasters, floods and droughts, air pollution, etc.), and we are doing a lot of work to reduce the impact of such risks - in particular, with our suppliers - farmers, together with whom we are introducing gentle and more organic methods of cultivating the land. In addition, we recognize that sooner or later (and most likely sooner, as early as December of this year after the Paris summit) carbon fuels will be subject to an additional tax, and we are preparing for this by gradually expanding the use of renewable energy resources and working to improve energy efficiency.
• In total, we estimate cost savings through the use of green technologies at our plants at $400 million over seven years. The “zero waste to landfill” program is now being implemented at all of our enterprises: it has led to savings of $200 million on waste removal and contributed to the creation of several thousand new jobs. In light of how legislation in the field of recycling waste, including industrial waste, is now changing in Russia and other developing countries, we foresee that very soon garbage removal and fines for non-recycling of waste will become many times more expensive than now - so here there is still huge potential for savings.

The example of Unilever shows that the concept of “shared value” really works for the benefit of business, which means that more and more players will switch to new sustainable development strategies in search of new products, markets, innovative ideas and solutions. Already today we see that companies professing the principles of sustainable development show top scores, compared to those who use traditional approaches. Perhaps this aspect will determine the success of the business in the future.