Distribution Network
Content
Puma has taken the unusual step of asking a journalist to join some of its ethical supply chain inspections and then write about them in its annual sustainability report.
The sports clothing manufacturer invited Bernhard Bartsch, Beijing correspondent with the German newspaper Berliner Zeitung, to accompany auditors from the in-house team when they called on one factory in each of its most important sourcing regions of China, Turkey and Vietnam.
Bartsch wrote three two-page accounts in the company’s latest non-financial report outlining what he and the auditors found. He also spoke directly to workers, reproducing three of his interviews in the document.
Stefan Seidel, Puma’s social and environmental affairs manager for Europe, said the intention was ‘to aim for maximum transparency, to give an authentic inside view of our auditing operations from a neutral standpoint, and to make the report more interesting to read for non-experts’.
Bartsch told EP that he was paid a fee, including expenses, for the text. Content was not edited by Puma in any way.
The journalist, who was chosen because he had once written a critical item about Puma’s supply chain for Berliner Zeitung, added: ‘Everything worked exactly as we had agreed. During the audits I had full access to all the meetings and could read all documents. The experience was a very positive one.’
Seidel also felt the process went without hitch, and that he would recommend it to other companies. ‘The critical point is to ensure there’s no influence from the company side – in other words, that you don’t try to use it as a tool for greenwashing,’ he told EP.
The German-based multinational, which had a €2.75billion ($4bn, £1.96bn) turnover in 2006, may repeat the exercise next year ‘or at least do something in the same direction for the next report’.
Puma’s 86-page hard copy report already features copious comment from stakeholders, including a two-page interview with Klaus Leisinger, president of the Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development, who gives opinions on the company’s ethical performance, and ten ‘stakeholder statements’ from figures such as Bank Sarasin analyst Eckhard Plinke and Franziska Humbert of Oxfam Germany. There is also a verification statement from the assurer TUV Rheinland.
‘Our whole strategy is based on open and authentic stakeholder dialogue and we wanted to include as many relevant views in the report as possible,’ said Seidel.
Future reports may go even further by including material from Puma’s annual stakeholder dialogue meetings.
Bartsch’s findings were generally favourable, though mixed. He witnessed only minor technical infringements in the Turkish factory, one slightly more serious problem at the Chinese unit, and a host of difficulties in Vietnam, including a half-empty first aid box, poor practice on follow-up of health and safety incidents, lack of privacy in the medical centre, and hygiene shortcomings in the canteen.
The sports clothing manufacturer invited Bernhard Bartsch, Beijing correspondent with the German newspaper Berliner Zeitung, to accompany auditors from the in-house team when they called on one factory in each of its most important sourcing regions of China, Turkey and Vietnam.
Bartsch wrote three two-page accounts in the company’s latest non-financial report outlining what he and the auditors found. He also spoke directly to workers, reproducing three of his interviews in the document.
Stefan Seidel, Puma’s social and environmental affairs manager for Europe, said the intention was ‘to aim for maximum transparency, to give an authentic inside view of our auditing operations from a neutral standpoint, and to make the report more interesting to read for non-experts’.
Bartsch told EP that he was paid a fee, including expenses, for the text. Content was not edited by Puma in any way.
The journalist, who was chosen because he had once written a critical item about Puma’s supply chain for Berliner Zeitung, added: ‘Everything worked exactly as we had agreed. During the audits I had full access to all the meetings and could read all documents. The experience was a very positive one.’
Seidel also felt the process went without hitch, and that he would recommend it to other companies. ‘The critical point is to ensure there’s no influence from the company side – in other words, that you don’t try to use it as a tool for greenwashing,’ he told EP.
The German-based multinational, which had a €2.75billion ($4bn, £1.96bn) turnover in 2006, may repeat the exercise next year ‘or at least do something in the same direction for the next report’.
Puma’s 86-page hard copy report already features copious comment from stakeholders, including a two-page interview with Klaus Leisinger, president of the Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development, who gives opinions on the company’s ethical performance, and ten ‘stakeholder statements’ from figures such as Bank Sarasin analyst Eckhard Plinke and Franziska Humbert of Oxfam Germany. There is also a verification statement from the assurer TUV Rheinland.
‘Our whole strategy is based on open and authentic stakeholder dialogue and we wanted to include as many relevant views in the report as possible,’ said Seidel.
Future reports may go even further by including material from Puma’s annual stakeholder dialogue meetings.
Bartsch’s findings were generally favourable, though mixed. He witnessed only minor technical infringements in the Turkish factory, one slightly more serious problem at the Chinese unit, and a host of difficulties in Vietnam, including a half-empty first aid box, poor practice on follow-up of health and safety incidents, lack of privacy in the medical centre, and hygiene shortcomings in the canteen.
Super Featured
No
Featured
No