reports

Commitment vs. Practice: A Comparison of CSR Performance of the UN Global Compact Signatories and Non-Signatories

Issue link: https://resources.ecovadis.com/i/1090105

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 7 of 29

8 Commitment vs. Practice Global Overview The key finding of the analysis of approximately 30,000 companies in the EcoVadis database reveals that companies which publicly endorse the Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact have more advanced CSR management systems compared to companies which do not participate in the UN Global Compact. In other words, our analysis confirms a correlation between the UN Global Compact endorsement and higher EcoVadis scores. Specifically, UN Global Compact participants score, on average, 12 points higher compared to non-participants. As illustrated in the graph below, the score distribution of UN Global Compact participants is visibly shifted to the right, with a Peak Score of 50, compared to 30 for non-participants. However, endorsing the UN Global Compact does not guarantee a comprehensive CSR management system. Of all UN Global Compact participants in the EcoVadis database, 13 percent score below global average of 43. This shows that UN Global Compact endorsement leads to a better CSR performance overall, but the results are not systematic. The commitment to the Ten Principles of the UN Global Compact is an important step for companies, but in order to have a positive impact on CSR performance, it needs to be consistently followed by concrete actions and reporting of results. EcoVadis Overall Score Distribution 0 20 40 60 80 100 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Average Score UNGC Signatory 54 Non-Signatory 42 Total 43 Performance Comparison by Company Size In most cases, small and medium-size companies (26-999 employees) are perform better than large ones (over 1,000 employees), achieving overall EcoVadis scores of 42.4 and 39.6 respectively. For those participating in the UN Global Compact, the Average Scores illustrate a more advanced performance, with an Average Score of 53 for large companies, and Average Score of 56 for their small- and medium-sized counterparts. This suggests companies participating in the UN Global Compact have a more advanced management system than non-participants. The overall gap in performance by size is linked to the risk that large companies are exposed to, and the complexity of implementing an advanced management systems across large multinational organizations. Conversly, for small- and medium-sized companies, with smaller scopes of operations and slightly lower inherent operational risks, implementing a EcoVadis Score Range

Articles in this issue

view archives of reports - Commitment vs. Practice: A Comparison of CSR Performance of the UN Global Compact Signatories and Non-Signatories