Post by account_disabled on Feb 22, 2024 6:48:12 GMT
The materiality analysis aims to answer the question “What is important to our stakeholders?” But it is not the right question, what matters is “What is important to the world ? ” Is this actually the right question? How many can afford to disperse their efforts trying to solve the world's problems? For which companies are their stakeholders the “whole world”? If there are some, you can count them on the fingers of two hands. Quite the contrary, for the vast majority the question is not even “What is important to our stakeholders ?”, but rather “What is important to my most relevant stakeholders , most critical to my operations?” The vast majority of companies have limited financial and managerial resources that must be focused on what has the most impact, both on the company and on “its society”, the part that is critical for it, which is not all, and a lot.
It has an unnecessarily short time Finland Mobile Number List horizon of, at most, 3 to 5 years. This leads to underestimating or ignoring aspects of long-term impact (and they give the example of climate change, which they consider the aspect of highest priority). Again, this can usually be considered by a very select group of companies. For the vast majority of companies, considering 5-year horizons for their materiality analysis already represents a great effort. The impact on climate change is of relatively minor critical importance. Let us remember that only 100 companies are responsible for 71% of greenhouse gas emissions (and is it critical for the otheof companies?). They consult with fewer than 30-50 stakeholders, which does not allow sufficient perspective to be developed and can bring surprises . In order not to be repetitive, we will leave it to the reader to make their judgment about the possibility and effectiveness of consulting a greater number of stakeholders for the vast majority of companies.
The most relevant thing is not the number, it is what is critical and pertinent for the company of the stakeholders consulted and involved . They completely overlook “sunk value”,….other benefits such as consumer recommendations, employee mits them? And this does apply to all types of companies. They ignore the dependencies, the effects that some material aspects ample the relationship between donations from a pharmaceutical company and gether words, their philanthropy is not strategic? That they do not identify the potential contribution of their activities to society? If so, it is a big hole. And they ignore the lags in stocks. Some aspects have consequences that take years to be fe because they don't ask the obvious question “How quickly will we achieve results with our project?” In other words, companies do not take into account the distribution over time of actions and their results, of costs and benefits, the most basic thing in project analysis, that they embark on the project without knowing when they will be obtained and which ones. will be the results .
It has an unnecessarily short time Finland Mobile Number List horizon of, at most, 3 to 5 years. This leads to underestimating or ignoring aspects of long-term impact (and they give the example of climate change, which they consider the aspect of highest priority). Again, this can usually be considered by a very select group of companies. For the vast majority of companies, considering 5-year horizons for their materiality analysis already represents a great effort. The impact on climate change is of relatively minor critical importance. Let us remember that only 100 companies are responsible for 71% of greenhouse gas emissions (and is it critical for the otheof companies?). They consult with fewer than 30-50 stakeholders, which does not allow sufficient perspective to be developed and can bring surprises . In order not to be repetitive, we will leave it to the reader to make their judgment about the possibility and effectiveness of consulting a greater number of stakeholders for the vast majority of companies.
The most relevant thing is not the number, it is what is critical and pertinent for the company of the stakeholders consulted and involved . They completely overlook “sunk value”,….other benefits such as consumer recommendations, employee mits them? And this does apply to all types of companies. They ignore the dependencies, the effects that some material aspects ample the relationship between donations from a pharmaceutical company and gether words, their philanthropy is not strategic? That they do not identify the potential contribution of their activities to society? If so, it is a big hole. And they ignore the lags in stocks. Some aspects have consequences that take years to be fe because they don't ask the obvious question “How quickly will we achieve results with our project?” In other words, companies do not take into account the distribution over time of actions and their results, of costs and benefits, the most basic thing in project analysis, that they embark on the project without knowing when they will be obtained and which ones. will be the results .