Iso 26000 (8) Dis Observations & Perspectives, By October 2009

ISO/DIS 26000 Guidance on Social Responsibility Observations by October 2009

Start of the DIS commenting and voting period (ending 14 February 2010) Guido Gürtler, ICC Observer to ISO/TMB WG SR, Member of the WG SR Industry Stakeholder Group [email protected]

Outline (1/2)        

Origination Key project data The Standard and its content Estimation of main users Who is drafting what for whom Working stages and comments Positive and critical points About ISO and societal standards

Outline (2/2)        

Meeting the Design Specification? Who will vote on the DIS? CD voting results The voting process Voting options Possible D-Liaisons’ action Sovereignty in taking decisions Perspectives ABC

Summary ISO/DIS 26000 is a major achievement and not a bad document… …but for its purpose and the expectations raised it is not good enough, yet.

Origination (1/2)  



 

Gestation began early 90’s (primarily from the Nordic part of EU) 4/01 ISO COPOLCO asked by ISO Council to consider viability of a CSR Standard 6/02 ISO/COPLOCO Workshop in Trinidad meeting – obvious strong agreement that ISO should proceed 9/02 ISO Council accepts report and establishes SAG ISO SR Advisory Group (SAG) late 2002 worked for 18 months on comprehensive report to ISO TMB including an overview of worldwide initiatives. Concluded ISO should go forward with the work

There was an overwhelmin g demand from developing countries

Origination (2/2) It‘s a Consumer Initiative 





COPOLCO is the ISO Consumer Policy Committee The COPOLCO Workshop in Trinidad, June 2002, had some 90 attendees, with only 2 from industry, none from the banking sector ISO Council decided about the COPOLCO proposal as requested by ISO procedures

Key Project Data  Working since early 2005  400+ members (experts and observers)  Many of them first time working in an ISO project  Majority from developing countries

About the Standard 

ISO 26000 “Guidance on Social Responsibility” Target: To be applied by all types of organizations



Type of standard:



International standard providing guidance;  NOT for third-party certification;  NOT a Management System Standard 

ISO 26000 – Contents (1/3) 0 Introduction 1 Scope 2 Terms and definitions 3 Understanding SR of organizations 4 Principles of SR 5 Recognizing SR and engaging stakeholders 6 Guidance on SR subjects 7 Guidance on integrating SR throughout an organization Annex A: Voluntary initiatives and tools for SR Annex B: Abbreviations Bibliography

ISO 26000 (2/3) 4 Principles of social responsibility Identifies a  Principle  Principle  Principle  Principle  Principle  Principle  Principle

set of SR principles: of accountability of transparency of ethical behavior of respect for stakeholder interests of respect for the rule of law of human rights of respect for international norms of behavior

ISO 26000 (3/3) 6 Guidance on SR core subjects Provides separate guidance on a range of core subjects/issues and relates them to organizations. Organizational Governance  Labor Practices  Human Rights  The Environment  Fair Operating Practices  Consumer Issues  Community Involvement & Development 

ISO 26000 Volume e m o c e b It has l a n o i t a c u an ed f o t n e m u doc 100+ pages! …..Warnings on too big a size exist since Working Draft 2, late 2006…..

Who is „Industry“? Industry Stakeholder Definition (N48 rev1) The industry stakeholder group includes representatives of: Enterprises that manufacture products or provide services and pursue primarily commercial interests. This group includes supportive enterprises like energy and water supply, banking, communication, insurance or transport companies. Such enterprises exist of any size and legal form and may operate at local, regional or international level. Industry also includes employer organizations, business associations, special industry organizations and trade associations representing various industries at the national, regional and international levels.

Estimation of Main Users Industry and service organizations stand for 96% of all users.

60%

36%

Stakehol der Governme nt  Labor  Consumer s  NGO  Services Industry 

% 1,5 1 0,5 1 36 60

Who is drafting what for whom?

60 % are not Industry & Services

4 % are not Industry & Services

60% of WG SR experts represent 4% of users, but have a say on what 96% should follow

Working Stages and Comments (1/3) Initiation

NWIP Working Drafts

Here we are!

Committe e Draft DIS 2002

2004

2009

FDIS

IS 2010

Working Stages and Comments (2/3)



Working Drafts 1, 2 and 3 caused some 2.500 to 3.000 comments each WD 4.1 received 5.000+ comments WD 4.2 got 5.000+ comments



Committee Draft got 3.400+ comments





Working Stages and Comments (3/3) In view of the large number of comments, they  Were grouped into „key topics“  In meetings, solutions were sought for new language on these key topics

This process used was a way forward to manage the large quantity of comments, and designed to show progress, but it also lost a lot of substance offered in the details. Consequently many comments had to be repeated, many of them several times.

Positive Points  ISO 26000 will boost the global discussion on Social Responsibility  ISO 26000 will make many organizations rethink their behavior  WG SR has done an admirable work; found consensus of 400+ members

Critical Points  ISO 26000 will boost a consultant business because it is not easy to understand and does not offer tools  ISO 26000 is not for certification but certifiers will create “their SR Standards” and possibly decorate them with attributes like “…in line with ISO 26000”  ISO/DIS 26000 is not applicable to the vast majority of SMOs; small and medium organizations

About ISO and societal standards (1/10)

Foundation work areas - The Internationaland Standards Organization - Located in Geneva - Founded 1946 for standardization in technical areas; to foster trade and increase welfare - In the 1980’s expansion into so-called “Management System Standards”, like ISO 9000 or 14001 - ? Since 2004 on the way to expand into societal areas?

About ISO and societal standards (2/10)

ISO member bodies

 162 Members in total  106 full members, having voting rights, called “member bodies”  056 members, correspondent or subscriber members) not having voting rights (35%)

About ISO and societal standards (3/10)

Definition of “stakeholder” 2.1.20 stakeholder individual or group that has an interest in any decisions or activities of an organization

The proposal is to use the ICC definition that reads  “Individual or group significantly affected by an organization’s activities.”

About ISO and societal standards (4/10)

Definition of “organization” 2.1.12 organization entity with identifiable objectives and structure

NOTE 1 For the purpose of this International Standard organization does not include government executing duties that are exclusive to the state. NOTE 2 Clarity on the meaning of small and medium-sized  This (SMOs) includes all frominmultinationals to organizations is provided Clause 3.3.

shoemakers and social non-for-profit organizations;  Missing key words like governing bodies, functions, positions, authority for and delegation of…  Each legal entity is an organization

About ISO and societal standards (5/10)

Pricing policy onavailability ISOof 26000 Council Resolution 32/2009 (Free ISO 26000) Council, noting that the TMB Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG SR) has requested that ISO/DIS 26000 and ISO 26000 be made freely available, further noting that, in consultation with the Commercial Policies Steering Group (CPSG), the Secretary-General has agreed to make ISO/DIS 26000 freely available on the ISO Web site for the WG SR, having considered the rationale lying behind this WG SR's request, decides that ISO 26000 should not be made freely available and that therefore the current pricing policy should be applied with no deviation.

About ISO and societal standards (6/10)

Pricing policy, SMOs including Reduction of the consequences micro ISO 26000 organizations have to buy the document Increase of revenues at ISO itself

proliferation Increase of revenues at ISO member bodies*

* Several set the price of standards dependent on the number of pages

About ISO and societal standards (7/10)

Feature “national Composed of a few national ISO Technical delegations” delegates from Ctee participating ISO Members

ISO Member

ISO Member ISO Member ISO Member ISO Member National Mirror Ctees

….

National parties concerned; stakeholders

….

….

About ISO and societal standards (8/10)

Feature “one-country-oneOne vote, vote ” regardless

of size of population, culture, convictions and habits, religion, etc.

China can be formally outweighed by Mauritius, the US by Saint Lucia…

About ISO and societal standards (9/10)

Feature “comments The subject‘s The CD Committee complexitygrouping and ” received Draft

differences in 3.400+ comments understandings lead from ISO Member to 20.000+ Bodies comments on „Working Drafts“ Their was no other chance than from WG SR experts “grouping” them into “key issues” and try to find solutions; but this lead also to repeatedly presented comments

About ISO and societal standards (10/10)

Feature “ involvement of DAs an innovative process: direct participation in „technical” Liaisons work“ Participating “industry” relevant organizations: BIAC, ICC, ICMM, IFAN, ILO, IOE, IPIECA, NORMAPME, OECD, OGP, These organizations count for much more WBCSD, WSBI industry representation than all “national delegates”, but their voices count only numerically…. e.g. IOE can be outweighed by e.g. ‘Red Puentes’

?

Meeting the Design (1/2)Judgment Design Specification? Specification requirement (N049) “…is consistent with, and not in conflict with, existing documents, international treaties and conventions and existing ISO standards;”

Needs to be checked case-bycase

“…be applicable by all types of Not met organizations (e.g. regardless of their size, location, the nature of their activities and products, and the culture, society and environment in which they carry out their activities.)

Meeting the Design Specification? (2/2)

Design Specification requirement (N049) “…facilitate trade liberalization and remove trade barriers (implement open and fair trade)”

Judgment more than dubiously met

Not proven “…complement and avoid conflicts with other existing SR standards and to be met requirements.”

“The language must be clear, understandable and objective throughout the guidance standard.“

Not met

Who will vote on the DIS? (1/2) For CD and DIS the same ISO rules apply:

ISO member bodies can vote; i.e. full members only (currently 106 out of 162) D-Liaison organizations can raise their “voices”; they don’t have voting rights

Who will vote on the DIS? (2/2) country

CD Vot e wa s

Algeria

IANOR

Argentina

IRAM

Armenia

SARM

Australia

SA

Austria

ON

Azerbaijan

AZSTAND

Deve P- simpl YES NO Ab devel deve e sta oping lope lopin memb coun er of in d t g WG count SR ry Member 1 1   body Member body Member body Member body Member body Member body

1

1

1

1

1

1

 

1

1

 

1

1

1

1

1

1   1    

      1  

         

CD vote in words

Population of voting rights countries

1 1 1 1 1 1

35,5

Industr y rep in nationa l ctee

new

1

yes

1

silent

1

DIS voting rights

1

yes

1

no silent

1 0 1 1 1

39,7 3,8 20,3 8,3 8,7

The whole file is available at http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis__vote__analysis.html#dis-votean

CD vote results (1/3) These 10 countries did not vote: 1. Armenia 2. Azerbaijan 3. Bangladesh 4. Barbados 5. Iran 6. Russia 7. Saint Lucia 8. Trinidad and Tobago 9. Ukraine, and 10. Zimbabwe Their voices do not count.

These 4 countries abstained: 1. 2. 3. 4.

Bulgaria Ghana Lebanon Saudi Arabia

CD vote results (2/3) These 19 countries placed a negative vote: Note the substantial geopolitical and economic clout of those highlighted in Red 1. Austria 11. Mauritius 2. Belarus 12. Mexico 3. China 13. The 4. Cuba Netherlands 5. Fiji 14. Peru 6. India 15. Philippines 7. Indonesia 16. Syria 8. Jamaica 17. Turkey 9. Korea 18. United States 10. Malaysia 19. Viet Nam

CD vote results (3/3) 79 Pmembers -10 not voting 69 "votes cast"

69 "votes cast" -4 abstentions -19 negative votes 46 is exactly 2/3 of 69; the formal positive require-ments of the46 ISO Directives were met votes

D-Liaison Organizations “Voices” (1/3) Industry and service organizations stand for 96% of all users. 98% of them are micro, small and medium organizations. Business oriented D-Liaison organizations raised major concerns on the CD, some emphasizing that those have been presented repeatedly

D-Liaison Organizations “Voices” (2/3) As regards the ISO 26000 applicability to the main user group (SMO), business oriented D-Liaison organizations basically criticize the  



Volume of 100+ pages Language and tone (not easy to understand) Relevancy of all core subjects

D-Liaison Organizations “Voices” (3/3) Such major concerns have been expressed on the CD by: •BIAC - Business and Advisory Committee to the OECD •ICC - International Chamber of Commerce •IFAN - International Federation of Users of Standards •IOE - International Organization of Employers •IPIECA - International Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association, and “voices”- European weigh in with byof farCrafts, more Trade “business •These NORMAPME Office and reality” than that provided through the ISO national Small and Medium Enterprises for Standardization member bodies*

* A number of national mirror committees don’t include industry representatives

The DIS Voting Count (1/3) Country Acronym Membership Afghanistan ANSA Correspondent member Albania

DPS

Algeria Angola

IANOR Member body IANORQ Correspondent member

Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia …. Uzbekistan

ABBS

Subscriber member

IRAM SARM

Member body Member body

Venezuela

FONDONORMA Member body

Viet Nam Yemen

STAMEQ Member body Correspondent member YSMO

Zambia

ZABS

Correspondent member

Zimbabwe

SAZ

Correspondent

Correspondent member

ISO, Genev a

UZSTANDARD Member body

162 ISO members, out of them 106 ISO member „bodies“ have voting rights

The DIS Voting Count (2/3) P-Member Vote 78

P-Members in WG SR 51,4 66 % must be positive 8

52 positive votes make the DIS accepted 27 negative votes would make the DIS fail

Both P-Members’ and ISO member bodies’ votes must be positive; if one of them is negative, the vote failed

The DIS Voting Count (3/3) ISO member bodies' vote 106 ISO member bodies can vote 79,5 75 % must be positive 80 positive votes make the DIS accepted 27 negative votes make the DIS fail Both P-Members’ and ISO member bodies’ votes must be positive; if one of them is negative, the vote failed

Voting Options In favor: supports the document as it is; comments may be made Against: does not support the document as it is; comments must be made

Abstain: feels too small, didn’t find consensus etc.; abstains don’t count

Votes must be sent by the ISO member body to ISO Geneva, before 14 February 2010

Possible D-Liaison actions (1/2) Steps Find a position on ISO/DIS 26000 Make that position publicly known

ISO member body Chairman Secretary Member 1 Member 2 …

Make that position known to national ISO member bodies Since D-Liaison organizations don’t vote, ISO encourages them to approach national ISO member bodies with their position

Possible D-Liaison actions (2/2) 2010-02-14 Time Line 2009-09-14

106 national mirror committees find their position

106 ISO member bodies send their vote

Reasonably an effective influence can only be exerted in the early weeks and months.

Sovereignty in taking decisions ISO Member Body have voting rights and is sovereign in its decision finding. D-Liaison organizations can raise their “voice” Note: According to N105 Operating Procedures D-Liaison organizations have the right of appeal to the WG Plenary; an option normally not used because finding consensus is considered more important

Perspectives ABC (1/3) A

“Minor ” chang es

Yes

“Major” change s; DIS2

No

DIS vote No B

Yes Yes Internationa l Standard

FDIS vote

No B

DIS2 vote Final work

Technical Report

C

No

Perspectives ABC (2/3) Route A: is the fastest one; may be preferred by all who want to end the project quickly, regardless of its smaller or greater success Route B: is a preferred option, including the continua-tion of the project in a new to be founded global organization for “Standards and Benchmarks for Society” Route C: continues with a second DIS and major changes of the document (changes as requested in all “general” and “technical” comments”)

Perspectives ABC (3/3) Who will take the decision on how to proceed? ISO TMB, the ISO Technical Management Board that controls and coordinates all technical work of the many ISO committees.

According to

http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_technical_committee.html?com the 12 members of 2009 are ABNT Brazil (2011), AENOR Spain (2010) ; AFNOR France (2011) , ANSI USA (2009) , BIS India (2011), BSI United Kingdom (2009) , DIN Germany (2009) , JISC Japan (2010) , KATS Korea, Republic of (2011), SABS South Africa (2011), SAC China (2011), SCC Canada (2010).

The „2009 members“ will change by January 2010.

This project will remain exciting!

Abbreviations CD Committee Draft DIS Draft International Standard COPOLCO Consumer Policy Committee FDIS Final DIS IS International Standard NWIP New Work Item Proposal SMO Small and Medium organization WD Working Draft WG SR Working group social responsibility

Links (1/2):

- ISO/DIS 26000 as document N0172 at http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId

- Details on voting rights at http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis_rules.h

- Personal comments at http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis_comme

Links (2/2): -ISO Members, at http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_members.htm

- ISO member bodies having voting rights, at http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis__vote__