ISO 26000 Guidance on ISO 26000 Guidance on Social ResponsibilitySocial Responsibility

Development Status, June 2009Development Status, June 2009An Industry ViewAn Industry View

ISO 26000 Contents and Players

David Felinski, Vice-President IFAN (International Federation of Standards Users) and IFAN Expert to ISO/TMB WG SR, and Guido Guertler, ICC Observer to ISO/TMB WG SR

Available Slide SeriesAvailable Slide Series

1.The Project2.ISO 26000 Contents and

Players3.Applicability Aspects 4.ISO 26000 CD Vote by March 20095.Success Criteria6.Risk of Failure7.Tool: Check of Effectiveness

The present subset is the one marked in bold

OutlineOutline ContentsContents Working stages and commentsWorking stages and comments An estimation of main usersAn estimation of main users Who is drafting what for whomWho is drafting what for whom Players and AgendasPlayers and Agendas

About the StandardAbout the Standard ISO 26000 “Guidance on Social Responsibility”ISO 26000 “Guidance on Social Responsibility” Target: To be applied by Target: To be applied by allall types of organizations types of organizations

Type of standard: Type of standard: International standard providing guidance; International standard providing guidance; NOT for third-party certification; NOT for third-party certification; NOT a Management System StandardNOT a Management System Standard

ISO 26000 – Contents (1/8)0 Introduction

1 Scope2 Terms and definitions3 Understanding SR of organizations4 Principles of SR5 Recognizing SR and engaging stakeholders6 Guidance on SR subjects7 Guidance on integrating SR throughout an organization

Annex A: Voluntary initiatives and tools for SRAnnex B: AbbreviationsBibliography

ISO 26000 (2/8)0 Introduction

Information on the content of the guidance standard including an overview, an outline, and a table of core subjects and issues of social responsibility.

1 ScopeDefines the content covered by the guidance standard and identifies any limitations and exclusions.

2 Terms and definitionsIdentifies and provides the meaning of key terms that are of fundamental importance for understanding social responsibility and using the Standard.

ISO 26000 (3/8)3 Understanding social responsibility The social responsibility of

organizations Recent trends in social responsibility Characteristics of social responsibility The state of social responsibility

ISO 26000 (4/8)4 Principles of social responsibility Identifies a set of SR principles drawn from a

variety of sources Principle of accountability Principle of transparency Principle of ethical behavior Principle of respect for stakeholder interests Principle of respect for the rule of law Principle of human rights Principle of respect for international norms

of behavior

ISO 26000 (5/8)5 Recognizing SR and engaging

stakeholders

General concepts and discussion Recognizing social responsibility Stakeholder identification and

engagement

ISO 26000 (6/8)6 Guidance on SR core subjects

Provides separate guidance on a range of core subjects/issues and relates them to organizations.

Organizational Governance Labor Practices Human Rights The Environment Fair Operating Practices Consumer Issues Community Involvement & Development

ISO 26000 (7/8)7 Guidance on integrating SR throughout an

organizationProvides practical guidance on implementing and integrating SR in the organization, including policies, practices, approaches, issue identification, performance assessment, reporting and communication. Relationship of an organization’s characteristics to SR Understanding the SR of an organization Practices for integrating SR throughout the

organization Communication on SR Enhancing credibility regarding SR Reviewing & improving the organization’s actions and

practices related to SR Voluntary initiatives on SR

ISO 26000 (8/8)Annexes Annex A: Voluntary initiatives of social

responsibility Annex B: Abbreviations

BibliographyCurrently lists 125 documents! (13 ISO documents and 112 “Authoritative International Instruments”)

ISO 26000 VolumeISO 26000 Volume

It has become an educational

document of 100+ pages!

…..Warnings on too big a size exist since Working Draft 2, late 2006…..

Working Stages and Working Stages and CommentsComments

Working Drafts 1, 2 and 3 caused some Working Drafts 1, 2 and 3 caused some 2.5002.500 to to 3.0003.000 comments each comments each

WD 4.1 received WD 4.1 received 5.000+ 5.000+ commentscomments WD 4.2 got WD 4.2 got 5.000+ 5.000+ commentscomments

(see also next slide)(see also next slide)

Committee Draft got Committee Draft got 3.400+ 3.400+ commentscomments

Comments on Drafts Comments on Drafts - Actual Numbers -- Actual Numbers -

1200 before any initial draft1200 before any initial draft 2140 on WD12140 on WD1 5176 on WD25176 on WD2 7225 on WD37225 on WD3 4971 on WD4.14971 on WD4.1 5200 on WD4.25200 on WD4.2 3411 on CD13411 on CD1

Most frequent comment:Most frequent comment:““What happened to my comment?What happened to my comment?””

Distribution of 5.000+ Distribution of 5.000+ Comments on WD4.2Comments on WD4.2

In view of the large number of comments, theyIn view of the large number of comments, they Were grouped into Were grouped into „key topics“„key topics“ In meetings, solutions were sought for new In meetings, solutions were sought for new

language on these key topicslanguage on these key topics

Comment “Resolution”Comment “Resolution”

ThisThis process used was a way forward to process used was a way forward to manage the large quantity of comments, and manage the large quantity of comments, and designed to show progress, but it also lost a designed to show progress, but it also lost a lot of substance offered in the details.lot of substance offered in the details.Consequently many comments had to be Consequently many comments had to be repeated, many of them several times.repeated, many of them several times.

An Estimation of Main UsersAn Estimation of Main UsersIndustry and service organizations

stand for 96% of all users.

Stakeholder %Government  1,5Labor  1Consumers  0,5NGO  1Services 36Industry  60

36%60%

Who is drafting what for Who is drafting what for whom?whom?

60 % are not Industry & Services

4 % are not Industry & Services

60% of WG SR experts represent 4% of users, but have a say on what 96% should follow

Players and Agendas (1/2)ISO member bodies’ strong support

EU nations (strongest from Nordic states, but many others too)

Canada, the special case Developing countries (mostly Africa

and South/Central America + some Oceana)

D-Liaison orgs (for 75-80% of them, leaning/approach & agenda [CSR] is the same as that of Consumers & NGOs)

Players and Agendas (2/2)Stakeholder Groups

Consumers and NGOs, the project originators: generally aligned, and bellicose; using ISO to try and effect social policy that governments have failed to do

SSRO (Services): less strident, but often aligned philosophically with above; most diverse but often aligned

Government: often aligned with SSRO but prone to vacillate depending on the issue; next to Industry, least cohesive

Labor: smallest group and spread too thinly to be more effective; usually a relatively reasonable/moderate approach and often aligns with Industry positions

Industry: by industry’s nature the most diverse stakeholder group; difficult to attain consensus; often competing interests; many consultants that have been nominated as “industry experts”