{ "docId": "019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-25361bfb23b0", "docSlug": "4ffed4af8eb01612", "documentTitle": "SDG reporting 2018", "authorId": "PwC", "authorName": "PwC", "documentKindSlug": "consulting-deck", "documentKindLabel": "Consulting deck", "sourceTypeSlug": "strategy_consulting", "sourceTypeLabel": "Strategy consulting", "presentationDate": null, "orientation": "landscape", "aspectRatio": 1.414, "pageNumber": 15, "pageCount": 40, "prevPage": 14, "nextPage": 16, "slideType": "diagnosis", "function": "diagnose", "density": "dense", "nDataPoints": 0, "notes": "The slide identifies two main reasons for superficial SDG engagement: lack of measurement guidance and lack of clarity on reporting frameworks.", "elementsJson": [ "photo", "numbered_list", "paragraph" ], "metadataConfidence": 0.9, "imagePath": null, "slideHref": "/slides/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-25361bfb23b0/15", "deckHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-25361bfb23b0", "deckJsonHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-25361bfb23b0.json", "deckAnchorHref": "/decks/019dd923-5ca1-7489-b63a-25361bfb23b0#slide-15", "components": [ { "bbox": null, "kind": "callout", "text": "In some cases it appears that companies simply are selecting SDGs that correspond to existing activities and metrics they are already capturing.", "attrs": null, "subkind": null, "toolName": "Visual emphasis", "toolSlug": "visual-emphasis", "confidence": null, "componentId": "019dd951-d9f4-73c3-b037-089dc34c8b40", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.64, "w": 0.429, "x": 0, "y": 0.228 }, "kind": "image", "text": null, "attrs": null, "subkind": "photo", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "cfa0d770-20d8-46dc-ac53-3575874850a7", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.28, "w": 0.438, "x": 0.512, "y": 0.59 }, "kind": "list", "text": "1. Measurement. Companies need more guidance on how to measure positive and negative impacts in key areas, and how these link to the SDGs and their underlying targets. Even before companies can get to measurement, they have to establish those issues that are more or less material for the future of the business, in terms of significant risks and opportunities. These can then be used to identify which SDGs need to be the focus of attention. The importance of this is often well understood, but it can be challenging to achieve in practice.\n\n2. Reporting frameworks. Companies also need more clarity on how to make the link between SDGs and established reporting frameworks and standards. This would also help to drive comparability of data between companies. Extensive work has already been undertaken by the United Nations Global Compact (UNGC) and the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) to identify the key actions and relevant business disclosures for each of the 169 SDG targets, which provides a foundation for this approach. (See Business Reporting on the SDGs: An Analysis of the Goals and Targets on page 17).", "attrs": null, "subkind": "numbered", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "cc05dc2e-7bdb-4720-81f5-e459ebaabec2", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.02, "w": 0.438, "x": 0.512, "y": 0.555 }, "kind": "paragraph", "text": "There may be several reasons for this superficial engagement:", "attrs": null, "subkind": "paragraph", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "8cca1459-e70d-46ff-8266-2e452ca403c3", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.07, "w": 0.438, "x": 0.512, "y": 0.465 }, "kind": "paragraph", "text": "One other flaw that we have noticed is that, while many companies are referring to having priority SDGs, they fail to look more deeply at each Goal and investigate the underlying targets. Very few go into more detail in terms of concrete KPIs to measure their performance over time. (See Case study: Danone on page 17).", "attrs": null, "subkind": "paragraph", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "a6c36b03-a13d-402f-b3cf-5affba91a2d3", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.25, "w": 0.438, "x": 0.512, "y": 0.228 }, "kind": "paragraph", "text": "In some cases it appears that companies simply are selecting SDGs that correspond to existing activities and metrics they are already capturing. As a first step this makes sense but it also suggests that the organisations are viewing the SDGs as another reporting lens rather than an opportunity and responsibility for the entire business. While it is important to disclose existing efforts that are demonstrably driving positive change, more needs to be done in terms of identifying new actions that could contribute to the SDGs, what that means in terms of opportunities within the business and any instances where negative impacts need to be addressed. Simply relabeling existing efforts in SDG terms will be insufficient to create the scale of change that is necessary to achieve the SDGs. And it is imperative that companies account for operations that may cause negative impacts on the SDGs, so they can then strategise how to halt those activities.", "attrs": null, "subkind": "paragraph", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "e25d1172-6d61-4890-b22e-0fea09a02a08", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null }, { "bbox": { "h": 0.02, "w": 0.25, "x": 0.095, "y": 0.06 }, "kind": "title", "text": "PwC | SDG Reporting Challenge 2018", "attrs": null, "subkind": "headline", "toolName": null, "toolSlug": null, "confidence": null, "componentId": "28f00066-7bde-4f2a-a6b8-74448de864e4", "frameworkName": null, "frameworkSlug": null } ], "metrics": [], "tools": [ { "name": "Tension Management", "slug": "tension-management", "agent": "Storyteller", "layer": "loop", "matchId": "019de96c-19c5-772a-8134-88aff6997d42", "evidence": "Loop pivots from good-news charts to a diagnostic but", "confidence": 60 }, { "name": "Contrast Principle", "slug": "contrast-principle", "agent": "Designer", "layer": "slide", "matchId": "019de96c-199d-7389-91b3-9a5720264030", "evidence": "Contrasts visible engagement with hidden measurement gap", "confidence": 65 }, { "name": "So What? Test", "slug": "so-what-test", "agent": "Architect", "layer": "slide", "matchId": "019de96c-1976-7120-9c3e-4d71e852e0f6", "evidence": "Body diagnoses why mention rate is misleading", "confidence": 80 } ], "frameworks": [ { "name": "gri-standards", "slug": null, "matchId": "62ec775c-3939-4f05-b712-8b6cd506c222", "evidence": "Mentions Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) as a framework for SDG reporting.", "confidence": 0.9 } ], "arcBeats": [ { "to": 19, "from": 7, "beatId": "019de96c-115c-760c-8750-336d56b644ac", "arcName": "The Consultant's Gambit", "arcSlug": "consultants-gambit", "beatName": "Problem & Complication", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Findings, 72% mention vs 27% integrate gap, diagnosis of superficial engagement", "position": 2, "confidence": 85, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null }, { "to": 25, "from": 15, "beatId": "019de96c-124e-736b-a48d-24a2211b35a4", "arcName": "The Triple Take", "arcSlug": "triple-take", "beatName": "The Implications (So What)", "beatSlug": null, "evidence": "Integration gap, framework alignment, reporting quality scores", "position": 2, "confidence": 60, "parentBeatName": null, "parentBeatSlug": null } ], "loops": [ { "to": 18, "from": 15, "name": "Iceberg", "slug": "10-iceberg", "bestFor": "Consulting, complex problem solving, organizational change", "matchId": "019de96c-12ed-701f-9db2-c91e02c3c470", "evidence": "Diagnosis on p15 (selecting SDGs that fit existing metrics) + frameworks chart + Danone/Cefic/French case studies.", "position": 3, "objective": "Reveal the hidden root cause: superficial mention vs missing measurement frameworks", "structure": "The Symptom (Visible) -> The System (Hidden) -> The Root Cause", "confidence": 70, "description": "Reveal that the visible problem is merely a symptom of a deeper root cause" } ], "imagePathAlt": null, "thumbSrc": null, "thumbSrcAlt": null, "locked": true }