Can you name some of the companies from the technology industry that have embraced the concept of social responsibility in their reporting to investors?
Hewlett-Packard has spent a considerable amount of time repositioning itself as a socially responsible company. It has reported its GRI results for the past three or four years. It does one of the most extensive reports and is one of the leaders in its industry. The company, however, has yet to make the claim that its reporting is in accordance with the GRI guidelines.
Intel has used the GRI guidelines three times when producing a social responsibility and environmental report. And for the first time it announced, last year, that it completed its report in accordance with the guidelines and with the highest level of the GRI rating.
Cisco Systems is now exploring using the GRI guidelines in a serious way. In the past, it issued environmental reports based on the GRI guidelines, but it is now moving to broader reporting. Microsoft is also looking at GRI very closely.
What are the differences, if any, between hardware and software companies when it comes to social and environmental reporting issues?
Hardware companies have a number of environmental issues, from the content of the components to the life cycle issues.
How are they going to dispose of old computers, or how do they build their computers with particular components that can be recycled? European companies, for example, have to include the cost of disposing, or recycling, the computer in their initial selling price.
The high-tech industry has other issues, too, like the digital divide and what impact that has on companies. This social concern is seen more with powerful companies -- because with that power, you have a sense of responsibility.
For example, what is the social effect of Web-based services? The poor often do not have a computer or access to the Internet. Companies are now realising that they are not just providers of information. Their investors are taking notice of their social responsibility reporting, because companies that are viewed as exercising due diligence are viewed as a lower investment risk than those who don't -- especially when it comes to Sarbanes-Oxley.
Has this increased concern among investors over social and environmental issues led to any successful shareholder initiatives passing? For example, some companies face such shareholder initiatives as following the 11 principles of human and labour rights standards for China.
Sometimes we see the percentages go up in favour of shareholder initiatives, but it is still rare for shareholder resolutions to pass. But these actions tend to have an effect on a board and management, who are then alerted to the issue. I have seen some companies become more proactive with social responsibility after this happens.
Are there any egregious offenders of the GRI guidelines?
We are not a police force. There are a number of companies that haven't woken up to taking social responsibility seriously. But most of the time, a company gets into trouble over some of these issues, or it's compounded by something like Sarbanes-Oxley, or there is a close competitor in the sector where an edge is needed. Then the companies become proactive and take more substantial measures to offer solutions for environmental or social issues.
