Search

Nothing is more American than the Thanksgiving holiday. As a cherished time when families gather for good food and connection, many stores have traditionally remained closed to encourage employees to spend the day with their own families.  However, in the past couple of years more and more store chains have opened earlier and earlier on Thanksgiving. Macy’s announced that it would open for Black Friday sales at 6 p.m. on Thanksgiving. Last year the department store chain opened at 8 p.m. Kohl’s and Sears are also opening at 6 p.m. this year, and JCPenney is opening at 5 p.m.

However, not all store chains are opening on Thanksgiving. There are about two dozen stores that will stay closed. The Facebook page Boycott Black Thursday compiled a list of stores, as did Mental Floss. Some of the stores refusing to open on Thanksgiving include Costco, Nordstrom, Patagonia, Dillard's, TJ Maxx and Marshall’s.

Some stores have respect for the Thanksgiving holiday

Why are these store chains going against the trend to open earlier and earlier on Thanksgiving? Some of them spoke to ThinkProgress, and it appears the stores have respect for their employees’ time off. Patagonia is one of them, and the store chain simply said, “It’s a holiday – we’re closed!”

Department store chains Nordstrom and Dillard’s also spoke to ThinkProgress. Dillard’s told the publication that it decided to stay closed on Thanksgiving “in longstanding tradition of honoring of our customers’ and associates’ time with family.” Nordstrom said that it is the company’s tradition to stay closed on Thanksgiving. “Over the years, our tradition has been to be closed on Thanksgiving and to unveil our holiday trim the following morning.”

TJX owns T.J. Maxx, Marshalls, HomeGoods and Sierra Trading Post. All of its stores will be closed on Thanksgiving Day. A spokesperson for TJX told ThinkProgress, “We consider ourselves an associate-friendly company, and, we are pleased to give our associates the time to enjoy the Thanksgiving holiday with family and friends.”

A mixed review from American consumers

Do the American people really want to shop on Thanksgiving? Polls show that while some do, some do not. A survey by Accenture found that 45 percent of those polled plan to shop on Thanksgiving, up from 38 percent in 2013. Almost half of those who said they plan to shop on Thanksgiving plan to visit a physical store between 6 p.m. on Thanksgiving and 5 a.m. on Black Friday.

A RichRelevance survey found that 6 in 10 polled said they “hate” or “dislike” stores opening on Thanksgiving. Only 12 percent said they “like” or “love” the retail practice.

Image credit: tsheln

McDonald’s Japan expects a 2014 loss of US$157m owing to a scandal at a Chinese chicken supplier. The company says that, this year, it will lose money for the first time in 11 years due to lost sales and higher expenses after the supplier was found to be using expired chicken meat.

The company now expects a net loss of ¥17 bn for the current fiscal year ending in December. In 2013, McDonald’s Japan made a net profit of ¥5.14bn. It had previously forecast a net profit of ¥6bn for the current year.

The company withdrew its financial guidance for 2014 in late July, citing uncertainty about the cost of responding to food-safety issues related to the supplier. The fast-food company booked a one-off loss of ¥9.3bn, which includes an impairment charge and a write-off for unsold food.

“We take this forecast and this result very seriously,” said Sarah Casanova, McDonald’s Japan chief executive, at a press conference, adding that the Chinese supplier problem had an “immediate and significant impact” on McDonald’s business.

McDonald’s Japan said the meat supplier scandal is expected to cause a ¥45bn decline in sales, slicing ¥11.6bn from its current profit.

The problems also increased costs, including financial support to franchise owners and measures to reinforce quality management and improve information disclosure, subtracting a total of ¥10.4bn from the profit figure.

Despite the poor earnings outlook, McDonald’s Japan plans to keep its dividend and shareholder incentives unchanged. It previously said it expects a year-end dividend of ¥30.

The company halted sales of all chicken products made in China shortly after its supplier, Shanghai Husi Food Co., part of US-based OSI Group Inc, was accused in Chinese media of intentionally selling expired meat to restaurant companies.

That move, however, did not stop sales from falling. Same-store sales sank 25.1%in August, the largest year-over-year decline since the company went public in July 2001. Sales in September fell 16.6 %.

To help restore customer trust, McDonald’s Japan now discloses on its website a list of countries where its foods are processed, as well as countries that supply the main ingredients.

McDonald’s Japan currently depends on chicken from Thailand but plans to diversify sources. The quality of meat from Brazil has been tested and this will be imported next year.

There are no plans to resume using meat from China. 

The compensation fund for victims’ families and survivors of the Rana Plaza disaster in Bangladesh is still about $20m (£12.4m, €15.7m) short 18 months after the event.

The fund, known as the Rana Plaza Arrangement, has reached nearly $20m, with a $1.5m commitment from the French brand Auchan, but it requires $40m.

Contributions are coming from companies that sourced textiles and garments from factories occupying Rana Plaza, which collapsed in April 2013 killing 1,138 workers and injuring more than 2,000.

However, the Amsterdam-based Clean Clothes Campaign, which works for better conditions in the garment industry, was “dismayed that the industry has failed to pay up sufficiently”.

Ineke Zeldenrust, the campaign’s international co-ordinator, said: “What are brands waiting for? They all say they support the Rana Plaza Arrangement and that the calculations, overseen by the International Labour Organisation, are fair and just.

“But unless all brands up the amounts they’ve paid in so far, the arrangement can’t pay the claims in full.”
To date the Italian fashion brand Benetton and the French supermarket chain Carrefour have contributed nothing.

Zeldenrust commented: “It is unacceptable that a brand the size of Carrefour have not paid a single cent … They say the evidence linking them to the site is insufficient.”

The campaign is also highlighting the fact that survivors are also finding it hard to find jobs.

“Factory owners are turning people who worked in Rana Plaza away as they are deemed too ‘damaged’ and too much of a risk,” says Samantha Maher, of Clean Clothes Campaign, who returned to Bangladesh last month,

The fact that the Rana Plaza Donor Trust Fund has only been able to provide 40% of the compensation payments due to survivors means that being able to make long term plans are impossible.

“In many cases the fact that full compensation cannot be made is having a serious impact on the usefulness of these partial payments,” added Maher.

“Receiving money in small amounts means that for people already living in dire financial straits they have no choice but to use it for daily life, instead of saving it or investing in a new business or land to ensure they will manage in the long run.”

Further information here.

 

Picture credit: &copy  Bayazidakter&nbsp | Dreamstime com&nbsp - Aftermath Rana Plaza In Bangladesh (File Photo) Photo

 

When I heard about Facebook and Apple’s practice of offering female employees the opportunity to freeze their eggs (in order to retain and attract more female talent), my first thoughts were extremely negative. It smacked of a paternalistic and patronizing attitude, which the whole gender balance argument stands against – and yet this initiative was all about ensuring a more fair gender balance!

When it comes to industry, the tech sector suffers particularly badly from this imbalance. In the US only 26% of tech industry professionals are women, so it’s not surprising that the most innovative firms looks for innovative ways to attract talented women.

But here’s the thing. Why not just pay them the same? As Professor James Hayton of the Warwick Business School points out: “Broader pay equity might be an even stronger signal of the importance of women in the workforce.”

Hear! Hear! And why should employers get involved in their employees’ reproductive choices in the first place? “We want to empower women at Apple to do the best work of their lives as they care for loved ones and raise their families,” Apple’s statement read.

OK, so why not focus on offering more flexibility and support for parents? Are the days of the company crèche long gone? And, anyhow, freezing eggs doesn’t necessarily guarantee fertility. You can’t equate physical fitness with egg fitness… And by offering such an option, isn’t a company promoting the idea that women need to postpone having children in order to succeed?

That’s when I knew I couldn’t be reading Facebook and Apple’s policy in context. Ah, context. That most valuable and overlooked factor! And voila. Here it comes. The clarity of context! It turns out that, according to Facebook, egg freezing was an employee benefit that had been requested. The offer is also egalitarian, men are offered the same benefit by covering the cost of freezing sperm.

You’ve also got to remember that these benefits are about American employees who live in a country where health insurance is a necessity and fertility treatments are not always covered. It’s all beginning to look and sound a little more rational now isn’t it?

Indeed, on closer examination, in answer to critics that the move may actually dissuade women from having famiies at all, Facebook currently offers four months of paid maternity leave for parents – exceeding the usual six-week offer for most mothers in the US – and also offers $4000 to help with newborn expenses.

Apple also offers an adoption assistance programme.

And just as I was coming to terms with all that. Microsoft boss Satya Nadella went and advised women not to ask for a pay rise and karma-gate ensued. He has since apologized for his comments, describing them as ‘inarticulate’ and ‘completely wrong’. He also redeemed himself – and Microsoft – by revealing that one of his main goals at the tech giant is “to continue to focus on equal pay for equal work and equal opportunity for equal work”. Currently, although it fluctuates a little each year, the overall difference in base pay among genders and races – when considered at level and job title – is consistently within 0.5%. Last year, women in the US at the same title and level earned 99.7% of what men earned at the same title and level.

liz.jones@ethicalperformance.com
 

Sustainability is undoubtedly a buzzword at the moment, writes Paul Raleigh. Whether business leader or consumer, we cannot escape from being told to consider the long-term implications of our actions or spending decisions. When they are rational and focused, I welcome these arguments. Evidence shows that exhausting scarce resources now will reduce the opportunities available for future generations.

But what of the role of businesses – often unfairly typecast as faceless, profit-grabbing corporations who would do anything to sell more stuff today, with no concern for the consequences tomorrow? As Barack Obama recently said: “The business community (has) broader responsibilities to the system as a whole… (although) the general view today is that the only responsibility that a corporate CEO has is to his shareholders.”

In reality, businesses across the world are engaged in a whole host of environmentally and socially responsible activities. We know this through our work with our clients but it also shines through in Corporate Social Responsibility: Beyond Financials, the latest publication from our International Business Report. More than two-thirds of the 2,500 mid-sized businesses we interviewed told us they gave either time or money to a local cause over the last 12 months. Two in three said they improved waste management or energy efficiency. More than half gave away products or services to charity, while the overwhelming majority said they are involved in CSR activity of one type or another.

That said, businesses do of course have a responsibility to investors, shareholders and also indirectly to the people they employ to turn a profit. Strong social and environmental credentials can also create customer loyalty and enhance reputations, something which has become increasingly important with the rise of social media. But increasingly business leaders are realising that commercial drivers and CSR drivers are becoming ever more aligned. Two thirds of those we surveyed cite cost management as a key driver in implementing socially and ethically responsible measures, up from just over half when we last surveyed this topic in 2011.

Improving energy efficiency is a great example of a cost-saving action with wider environmental and potentially social benefits. Take Ben and Jerry’s. The ice-cream giants recently converted one of their European factories so that the electricity it uses is generated by the by-products of the ice-cream making process. Not only will it cut down on their energy bills, it’s a great story through which they can demonstrate their green credentials. It’s compelling evidence that businesses now understand the commercial benefits of being sustainable.

At the same time, however, nearly two in three businesses also said they are operating more sustainably because it’s the ‘right thing to do’. This may seem a fairly nebulous concept in the world of business, but it highlights what is at the heart of any corporation: people. At Grant Thornton, our own CSR programme focuses on how we can get the skills of our people out into local communities, both for their own development and for the wider positive impact.

As with many ubiquitous phrases, Corporate Social Responsibility invariably means different things to different people. But for me as a business leader, good CSR is so much more than simply writing a cheque. In an ever more crowded and competitive marketplace, it means differentiating yourself to unlock the potential for growth in your people and in your communities. It means developing and evolving, but not at the expense of the natural environment or society. It means growth that considers longer-term implications. It means acting as responsible global citizens.

The good news coming out of our research is that the vast majority of mid-sized businesses feel exactly the same.

Paul Raleigh is global leader – strategic development and growth at Grant Thornton
 

A London restaurant that serves up fine dining to the likes of David Cameron, Boris Johnson and Prince Andrew is also cooking up a storm in the homeless community with its award winning chef-training programme.

Beyond Food Foundation and partners, the Brigade Bar & Bistro, has recently won the Community Partners Award at this year’s Lord Mayor’s Dragon Awards, for their work with people who have been at risk of or experienced homelessness. The chef-training programme motivates those on the scheme to not only gain fully certified apprenticeships and real work experience within the restaurant’s kitchens, but to gain a chance of employment within the hospitality sector.

Since it opened in 2011 Brigade Bar & Bistro has employed 61 kitchen apprentices, who have progressed into industry work placements to complete the NVQ Level 2 in Professional Cookery before forging careers as chefs at top eateries such as the Savoy, Swan at the Globe, Plateau and five star hotels across London.

Owned by PwC and managed by De Vere Venues, the restaurant’s cook school facility has provided a training space for 240 people, aimed at promoting core employability skills such as team work, communication, professionalism and the fundamentals of nutrition, health and wellbeing. Over 130 trainees at the cook school progressed to work placements within the Brigade’s training kitchen and over 100 of these trainees have received accredited learning awards for the hospitality sector.

Simon Boyle, chef and founder of the Beyond Food Foundation (BFF), told Ethical Performance that receiving the Dragon award was an acknowledgement from the City that “we are doing the right thing”.

“It’s good for our profile – after all the restaurant is a business and we need to make money,” he said. “But going forward it also opens the way to new partnerships.”

Boyle pointed out that BFF also runs a Fresh Life programme which is about helping homeless people get a new start at life. This includes two weeks’ work experience in a restaurant. “It’s not just about food and cooking, but about commercial skills too,” he explained.

BFF works in combination with the Princes Trust’s Get Started programme, in order to find people to participate in the scheme. “The aim is to promote sustainable, meaningful employment,” he emphasized.

Boyle said that the Foundation was currently looking at creating a blueprint of “what we do and how we do it” but said he would not want to replicate Brigade. “We’ve a very special relationship with PwC and DeVere. What we’re doing now is looking at launching a new business which is aimed at providing good food in hostels. You would be flabbergasted by the current standard of food on offer,” he said. And the good news is that the Foundation has just received seed funding for this new strand to the business from the Andrews Charitable Trust.

Established 27 years ago, the Lord Mayor’s Dragon Awards are the longest running awards that recognise excellence in corporate community engagement programmes. From small and medium enterprises (SMEs) including restaurants and furniture businesses, to international financial and legal firms– companies across London are demonstrating their commitment to CSR that has a positive and lasting impact on individual lives.

Overall, this year’s Dragon Award applicants supported more than 200,000 individuals across London, with 166,242 hours ploughed into projects – equating to £1.2m worth of investment.

Lord Mayor Fiona Woolf said: “Since the launch of the Lord Mayor’s Dragon Awards nearly three decades ago, there has been a marked change in business approach to CSR. It is no longer a ‘nice to have’, it is a ‘must have’. We all recognize that human investment is a vital precursor to good commercial investment. So we celebrate the growing ambition of business to create long term value for their workforce, and for wider society. This is an exceptional example of how a scheme has successfully engaged with unemployed people to give them skills that will empower them to change their future.”
  

We, in the OECD countries, spend about 90% of our lives inside buildings so it should be pretty clear that healthy and comfortable indoor environments contribute significantly to overall health and happiness.

It also makes economic sense since in the US alone the annual cost of building related sickness is estimated at some $58bn.

Whereas “green” building, or sustainable construction, used to focus specifically on energy efficiency and conserving natural resources, now it takes a more holistic approach to provide healthier living and working environments as well as minimising environmental impact.

Yet, despite a growing body of research proving the contrary, the myth persists that “green building” is expensive. In fact, sustainable construction practices, rather than focusing on short term economic gains, emphasize long-term affordability, efficiency and economic sustainability offering investors lower operating costs, longer useful lifespans and improved marketabililty as well as higher occupant productivity.

The latest report to debunk the sustainability-is-expensive myth comes from the research team at the Sweett Group and BRE, the independent Building Research Establishment.

Delivering sustainable buildings: Savings and payback (brebookshop.com) examines both capital construction costs and operational costs applying cost data from real construction projects to three case study buildings – an office, a secondary school and a community healthcare centre.

The researchers concluded that minimum BREEAM (BRE Environmental Assessment Method) ratings can be achieved at little or no extra cost while targeting higher BREEAM ratings – more challenging sustainability levels – typically incur extra costs of less than 2% which, moreover, can be recovered within 2–5 years thanks to operational savings.

“This study proves that, as long as good planning is involved at an early stage, a sustainable approach need not add significantly to building costs,” says BRE’s Yetunde Abdul, one of the report’s authors. “And, where there are additional capital costs, these can be repaid relatively quickly through the reduced costs of operating the building.”

Indeed, Abdul goes on to say, payback through reduced operational costs can actually make green buildings work out cheaper in the long run.

So with the financial disincentive being replaced by a likely financial incentive, could we soon see green buildings added to corporate must-have tick boxes alongside sustainable supply chains and enhanced transparency?

Abdul believes we will, citing the ever increasing numbers voluntarily approaching BRE for advice on updating their standards. Even where a new build is not happening, she points out, there are adjustments that can be made using the Breeam In-Use initiative for existing buildings such as maintenance improvements which can cut costs, ensuring desks are spaced in a way that offers computer users a distance view which can reduce headaches, or adjusting acoustic levels so work spaces are neither too loud or too quiet - both of which can be stressful.

When it comes to construction and full-scale refurbishment, however, one company raising the bar on sustainability in the built environment is Marks & Spencer which, currently increasing its retail space by 20% and refurbishing all its stores, has approached BRE to help the company fulfill its goal of becoming the world’s most sustainable major retailer.

“Our customers don’t want just an ethical range in the corner of the store. They expect a simple brand promise from us that we will strive in everything we do...to offer the most sustainable option possible,” says Mike Barry, Director of Plan A.

Launched in 2007, Plan A is the company’s 100 commitment eco and ethical programme and has helped M&S send no waste to landfill and become carbon neutral. Now the company has joined forces with BRE in a unique retail partnership which involves BRE developing a Sustainable Construction Manual for the company with guidelines covering analysis of initial store designs and the selection of construction materials to auditing and working with key suppliers to deliver sustainable construction methods.

The key to no-cost or low-cost sustainable construction lies in forward planning, stresses BRE’s Yetunde Abdul. This is a holistic approach, involving both stakeholders and designers working collaboratively from the early planning stages through to occupation.

With this in mind, experts from Birmingham University have criticised the government’s recent proposal to drop the zero carbon homes standard for thousands of new homes on brownfield sites as ‘“short sighted”.

“Ignoring climate change and easing regulations to reduce construction costs in the short term is a false economy for planners when planning to build new homes on this scale,” says Professor Keith Osman, Director of Research. “The use of analytic tools demonstrates clearly that reductions in energy usage, which reduces both CO2 emissions and energy costs for the occupants, can always be achieved and should a compulsory requirement for all new build housing.”

Currently, the built environment is responsible for around 25-40% of total energy use, 30% of raw material use, 30-40% of global greenhouse gas emissions and 30 to 40% of solid waste generation.

Osman urges the government to look longer term and use a more integrated strategy in future planning, an approach currently being pioneered by a pan-European consortium led by the University.

The KIC-Transitions (KIC-T) project brings together data, modelling and visualisation tools to provide a comprehensive simulation framework that will assist strategic planning. This integrated platform enables “plug-in” to a wide range of information sets for analysis of key environmental impacts, including energy needs, noise pollution or carbon emissions.
“This highlights just how important our project will be in helping planners to better assess the impact such ambitious proposals will have when built without due enforcement of regulations that minimise environmental impact,” he says.

David Lawrence, European Director for Construction and Development at AIG/Lincoln which built the BREEAM Excellent rated Campus M Business Park in Munich agrees on the need for forward planning. “A high priority was given to bringing all parties involved in the sustainability brief together early – the earlier everyone understands the process, the more cost and time effective green construction is,” he says. “We are particularly pleased with our BREEAM rating and Campus M proves that achieving Excellent does not mean additional cost.”

CASE STUDIES

Campus M Business Park in Munich - a BREEAM Excellent at no extra cost

Campus M Business Park in Munich, built by the AIG/Lincoln Group, is a 18,500m2 office and technology park 4km from Munich city centre with four buildings and multi-storey parking.
Scoring particularly well in Management, Health and Wellbeing and Energy and Transport, it was awarded a BREEAM excellent.
The park re-used an existing site which involved the specialist disposal of contaminated material. 
The buildings are entirely naturally ventilated and offer high levels of natural daylight, with workstations at most 7 metres from a window. There are storage areas for recyclable waste in the basements and highly efficient gas condensing boilers heat the interior. 
Energy use is low and complies with German energy saving regulations.
The Park also has excellent public transport links as well extensive cyclist facilities and showers in order to reduced CO2 emissions linked to the Park.
Director of Sustainability at BRE Global Paul Gibbon, says:”Campus M delivers an important message to investors, developers and the industry as a whole that with good design, achieving a BREEAM Excellent rating does not cost extra.”

Marks & Spencer’s Cheshire Oaks store

Marks and Spencer, along with the Murphy Group, has joined CIRIA’s (the construction industry research and information association) BIG Challenge which seeks to reward biodiversity enhancements that go beyond normal business practice. 
M&S became the first UK retailer to receive The Wildlife Trusts’ Biodiversity Benchmark after creating a wildlife haven at its award winning Cheshire Oaks store by introducing green living walls, a pond and wetland area, trees, hedgerows and wildflowers at the store near Ellesmere Port. 
Now, the company wants to expand its biodiversity initiatives. “We believe that our buildings can be important hosts for biodiversity and promote flora and fauna in urban locations,’”says Property Plan A Project Manager Roseline Holt. “CIRIA’s BIG Challenge is a great vehicle to help share best practice in the industry and encourage collective action to help prevent the decline of biodiversity in order for us to achieve a sustainable future.”

 

The sixth biennial Sustainable and Responsible Investment Study from the European Sustainable Investment Forum (EUROSIF), the leading pan-European Sustainable and Responsible Investment (SRI) membership organisation spanning institutional investors, asset managers, index providers and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) research firms, has for the time provided detailed insights on Exclusions, European Impact investing and ESG integration practices across thirteen countries from Austria to the UK.

The 72-page SRI study, first conducted in 2003 and sponsored by Edmond de Rothschild Asset Management, Generali Investments Europe, Inrate AG and Nordea Asset Management, noted that Exclusions (or negative screening) - a strategy involving removing companies or sectors from the investible universe of a portfolio - are going “mainstream”.

François Passant, EUROSIF’s Executive Director in Brussels, commenting said: “The continuous growth of SRI practices in Europe signals a positive change in attitudes toward stewardship and the materiality of ESG matters.”

He added: “Discussions are shifting from whether SRI makes sense or not from a financial return standpoint, to how its tangible impacts can be measured. Increasingly, investors and other industry stakeholders will push the market in this direction, bringing it to a new level of maturity.”

That said, the latest study notes that “no single harmonised and operational European defi­nition of SRI” currently exists and therefore does not impose a specific definition of SRI. As such it continues to cover “any type of investment process that combines investors’ financial objectives with con­cerns about ESG issues.” Nevertheless it points to several initiatives in France, Italy and Germany that have been set in motion (or are still in the process) to define what SRI is more specifically.

Assets subject to exclusion criteria grew according to the findings by a stellar 91% between 2011 and 2013 and cover an estimated 41% (€6.9 trillion (trn) of European professionally managed assets. Exclusions cover more assets than any other SRI strategy and have the most consistent usage across Europe.

Voluntary exclusions related to Cluster Munitions and Anti-Personnel Landmines (CM&APL) were found to be the most common covering about 30% (€5.0 trn) of the European investment market. Other Exclusion assets, not related to CM&APL, account for about 23% (€4.0trn) of the market.

For the first time, the study provides a growth figure for Impact investing, which was found to be the fastest growing strategy in Europe (+132% since 2011) and now estimated to be a €20 billion market. Key markets for this strategy are the Netherlands and Switzerland, accounting for an estimated two thirds of European assets, followed by Italy, the UK and Germany. Separately, almost 40% of ESG integration assets now follow structured investment processes and incorporate non-financial criteria.

Against the backdrop of this growth, the study describes a number of “market failures or challenges”, for example “wide variations in adoption of SRI practices across countries, the weakness of the retail SRI market and the under-utilised potential of Sustainability themed in­vestments given their potential to closely align with certain public policy objectives.” As such legislation will continue to “play a key role” in addressing such market failures, EuroSIF said.

EuroSIF’s latest study, which can be downloaded via www.eurosif.org, contains three case studies (on Norms-based Screening at Etica SGR, The Social Stock Exchange and the Threadneedle Social Impact Bond Fund) as well as thirteen focuses including Fostering Greater Transparency of the European SRI industry and New SRI Definition and Label.

The £404.55m AXA Framlington Health R Inc fund top ranked amongst UK Registered funds over the past year to 30 September 2014 with a cumulative return of +24.41% - with double-first rankings over the last three years (+85.42%) and past five years (+123.46%), respectively. Sarasin Sustainable Equity USA P USD Acc, a £31.35m fund, has performed consistently over the past one- and three-year time periods ranking second over the past 12 months (+22.62%) and third (+80.13%) over the last three years.

Pictet Timber-HR EUR, a £342.05m fund, bottom ranked in the sector out of 207 funds on past one-year horizon on -9.62% - versus +34.26%/127th rank over the past three years. SUNARES came second bottom over the last 12 months with a performance of -6.91% and was even worse over the past three years (-44.13%/196th rank)

In the US Mutual funds sector, which exhibited the best peer group average over both three and five years at +54.77% and +68.55% respectively, Wells Fargo Advantage Lg Cp Core A, a $307.68m fund, came top over the past 12 months with +22.24% versus +100.37%/7th rank over the last three years and +105.95%/28th rank over past five. The
$664.73m VALIC Company II Socially Responsible fund was runner up over the last year on +21.09% against +89.49%/15th rank and an impressive +112.18%/16th rank over five years. Ariel Discovery Investor, a $46.24m fund, came bottom out of 192 funds in this sector on -5.80% over the last 12 months (+52.36%/96th rank over past three years).

FL/AXA Framlington Health AP Pension fund again top ranked in the UK Individual pensions sector for the past one, three and five years on cumulative returns of +26.45%, +93.69% and +139.23%, respectively. As a whole this sector posted the best peer group average return over the past year out of the five sectors in Morningstar’s analysis with +27.37%.

FL/Framlington Health AP Inet Pension fund was runner up over the past year on +24.17% versus +83.25%/8th rank over past three years and +118.39%/7th rank over last five. Bottom ranked out of 122 funds in the sector on a past one-year view was OMW/Allianz Gl Eco Trends on -1.17% versus +30.26%/96th rank over the past three years and +1.74%/97th rank over past five.

It was a similar picture amongst UK Insurance funds with FL/AXA Framlington Health AL Life fund top over the past year, second over past three years and top over five.  

Having been inspired by a former KPMG partner who lectured on corporate responsibility while doing his MBA, Mark Parker, CSR Programme Manager at Whitbread, tells Ethical Performance how he drives sustainability in the UK’s ever-growing hotel and restaurant group. Whitbread’s brand include Premier Inn, Table Table, Brewers Fayre, Beefeater Grill, Taybarns and Costa.

 

What do you consider to be Whitbread’s key CSR achievements so far?
Whitbread’s CR efforts are focused on its Good Together initiative, launched in 2009, which is based on three pillars: Team and Community, Customer Wellbeing and Environmental Management. They’re all given equal status and my role cuts across all three pillars.
Our key achievements in my view so far are, in Team and Community, our WISE programme which is investing in young people. It’s an apprenticeship scheme where participants can progress and earn qualifications. It’s part of our ethos that ‘anybody can be successful in Whitbread’. It’s about creating employment opportunities for those who don’t think they are capable of such.
Our charity partnerships are very important. We asked our team members who they wanted to support and Great Ormond Street was a clear winner, polling 7:1. The goal is to raise £7.5m by 2017 and we’re well on course for that. The money raised will result in the opening of the Premier Inn Clinical Building (at Great Ormond Street) which will be part of the Mittal Children’s Medical Centre, where parents will be able to stay at the side of their sick children.

Tell us about developments in Whitbread’s sustainable supply chain.
It’s a very exciting time. Under the Customer Wellbeing umbrella, we are launching this soon. Working with suppliers we’ve been assessing where the risks are and where the opportunities lie. And through that identification process, we then tackle those risks through policy creation. It’s been my baby for the last two years.
We could have built a very stringent policy but this wouldn’t effect real change and, in all likelihood, frustrate suppliers.
For example, take cotton (used in laundry and bedding products throughout Premier and the restaurant groups). The risks are pretty obvious, such as human rights and working conditions. The opportunities are strong: R&D is one route. We’re asking what’s the next step in cotton (and using bamboo may be a way, though currently it is too expensive an option).
So the strategy is database driven. Suppliers self assess and upload evidence. The system then implements a traffic light system that will flag any potential risks. This will be backed up by audit and we’re building that process right now. It’ll launch officially in February 2015.

Where does the environment figure for the company?
It’s a significant pillar for Whitbread, as it has been reporting on this particular aspect since 2004. Traditionally it’s been the starting point for many an organisation’s CSR strategy and Whitbread benchmarks and excels on this front. For example in 2011 we set a water management strategy of a 15% reduction by 2017. We’ve actually achieved that a lot earlier - leak detection is a key part of the strategy and we’ve now fitted 40,000 low flow showers - and so have revised the target now to 25% by 2017. It wouldn’t be right to set targets that are easy to achieve. Where would be the challenge in that?

What’s next?
The challenge now is to communicate our sustainable strategy to our customers. We need to explain, for example, why energy efficient hand dryers are a good thing. We currently take a softly, softly approach but we’re asking ourselves what else can we do? How do we make it relevant? Can we be a bit more bullish? After all, our message needs to flex with the brand be it Premier, Beefeater or Table Table. We have some upcoming plans where we’re really going to talk to customers.

How do you involve employees?
Engaging team members [Whitbread employees] is paramount and key to environmental changes. Our Switch It Off campaign is a good example which encourages change for saving energy. It’s promoted by Whitbread’s online platform, Avenue, which also incorporates interactive video games such as Waste PacMan and Carbon Space Invaders.
CSR at Whitbread benefits from top down involvement. Andy Harrison, the ceo, is very engaged. His belief in our ‘Customer’s Heartbeat’ model means strong and robust teams deliver a strong customer heartbeat which in turn drives profitable growth. The Good Together initiative underpins this whole strategy. Driven like this from the top, it galvanizes the CSR side and pushes it out to the whole company. It means that different people take ownership and it just doesn’t boil down to the CSR team.

What should we look out for?
In November, we are launching a new hotel concept called Premier Inn Hub. The first one is in Covent Garden in London and it’s the most technological hotel in the UK. You can control everything in your room from an app.

If you could influence one major thing in sustainable business practice, what would it be?
It would be to change the short-term outlook some organizations have. Since the recession there has been huge growth in quarterly earnings reporting. If we could change those horizons, to a more long-term outlook, we could make fundamental changes.