Sustainability Performance Benchmark for Microsoft Corporation

Sustainability Ratings

 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability metrics site CSRHub recently updated its ratings on Microsoft Corporation and the 304 companies in the Software and Internet industry.  Microsoft’s overall rating is now 65 according to their CSRHub page.
 

Click “Software & Internet” in the CSRHub Sustainability Ratings widget above to see all the companies in this industry. Please note, the Sustainability Ratings widget will continually update and show the latest ratings on CSRHub.

 
The average rating for the other companies in the Software and Internet industry maintained a rating of 55.  This has allowed Microsoft to move up fourteen points to 6th place on the list, using the CSRHub average user profile. Also see information about Microsoft at their CSRHub page here.

 

Microsoft has a particularly strong score in the Employees area of 77.  This is due to a high score in Compensation and Benefits of 82 —well above the average for this industry of 57.  The area with the greatest opportunity for improvement for Microsoft is the Transparency & Reporting subcategory.  Here, Microsoft gets a 50 —below the average for this industry which is 48.

 

See Microsoft Corporation’s Corporate Social Responsibility website, here.

CSRHub ratings are on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest. To see more on how CSRHub creates a score and the CSRHub rating rules, visit here.

 


CSRHub provides access to corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings and information on 8,900 companies from 135 industries in 102 countries. By aggregating and normalizing the information from 325+ data sources, CSRHub has created a broad, consistent rating system and a searchable database that links millions of rating elements back to their source. Managers, researchers and activists use CSRHub to benchmark company performance, learn how stakeholders evaluate company CSR practices and seek ways to change the world.

 

Tagged , , , , , ,

Are Both Sides Finally Meeting in the Middle?

By Bahar Gidwani

 

This past week brought two pieces of positive news on Climate Change activism.  A number of highly-influential and well-connected politicians publicly stressed the importance of addressing climate change.  One of these luminaries, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, recently took the additional sACSBtep of assuming the Chair of the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB).

 

Just yesterday, we heard from smaller companies.  Our friends at the American Council of Sustainable Businesses (ACSB) released a poll of 555 small businesses.  It showed that a majority of those polled were concerned about Climate Change.  The small business people included more Republicans and Independents than Democrats.  The bigwig contingent was equally diverse, politically.  The EPA’s recent pronouncement of state-by-state carbon limits adds further pressure on local politicians to fall in line.

 

While there was hand wringing and despair shown by the remaining climate doubters over the EPA action, I did not see any immediate attempts to reverse it (or to indict or impeach anyone!).  I take this as a further sign that we are moving towards a consensus that we should finally start to take concerted action to avoid further global warming.

 

Once we stop arguing over whether or not we need to do something, we can start arguing about what we need to do.  Carbon is not the only driver for warming—we need to deal also with other gases, deforestation, and changes in surface reflectivity.  Many corporate entities have already cut their carbon emissions by 30% or 50%.  We will need new technologies and management systems to go further than this.  And, we will need to find ways to encourage government agencies, not-for-profits and individuals to change their behavior.

 

We hope our database and the tools we have built will help this process.  As part of our commitment to our stakeholders (we are a B Corp), we have worked hard to keep our company’s carbon use low.  Still, we probably need to examine our own practices to see if we can find more savings and contribute our fair share to solving what is finally being acknowledged as one of the most important issues of our day.

 


 

Bahar GidwaniBahar Gidwani is CEO and Co-founder of CSRHub.  He has built and run large technology-based businesses for many years. Bahar holds a CFA, worked on Wall Street with Kidder, Peabody, and with McKinsey & Co. Bahar has consulted to a number of major companies and currently serves on the board of several software and Web companies. He has an MBA from Harvard Business School and an undergraduate degree in physics and astronomy. Bahar is a member of the SASB Advisory Board.  He plays bridge, races sailboats, and is based in New York City.

 

CSRHub provides access to corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings and information on 8,900+ companies from 135 industries in 102 countries. By aggregating and normalizing the information from 325 data sources, CSRHub has created a broad, consistent rating system and a searchable database that links millions of rating elements back to their source. Managers, researchers and activists use CSRHub to benchmark company performance, learn how stakeholders evaluate company CSR practices and seek ways to change the world.

 

Tagged , , , , , ,

Ford Motor Company CSR Performance Benchmark

CSRHub

 

 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability metrics site CSRHub recently updated its ratings on Ford and the 87 companies in the Motor Vehicle Manufacturing industry.  Ford’s overall rating currently is 61 after the most recent updates to their CSRHub page.

 

Please note, the Sustainability Ratings widget will continually update and show the latest ratings on CSRhub. 

 

The average rating for the other companies in the Motor Vehicle Manufacturing industry is steady at 54.  Ford has gone up and is currently 7th on the list, using the CSRHub average user profile. You may see more information about Ford at their CSRHub page here.

 

Ford has a particularly strong score of 63 in the Employees area.  This is due to a high score in Diversity & Labor Rights subcategory of 69—well above the average for this industry of 54.  The area with the greatest opportunity for improvement for Ford is the Board category.  Here, Ford gets a 53 —which is still above the average for the industry of 46, but it is Ford’s lowest score.

 

Some highlights of the progress that Ford made in the past year include:

  •   Ford Embracing Analytics and Big Data to Inform Eco-Conscious Decisions, Stay Green

 

  •  Ford Reduces Water and Oil Use in Plants Globally with Expansion of Near-Dry Machining Technology

 

See Ford’s Corporate Social Responsibility website here.

 

CSRHub ratings are on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest. To see more on how CSRHub creates a score and the CSRHub rating rules, visit here.

 

CSRHub provides access to corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings and information on 8,900+ companies from 135 industries in 102 countries. By aggregating and normalizing the information from 325 data sources, CSRHub has created a broad, consistent rating system and a searchable database that links millions of rating elements back to their source. Managers, researchers and activists use CSRHub to benchmark company performance, learn how stakeholders evaluate company CSR practices and seek ways to change the world.

 

Tagged , , , , , ,

Sustainability Performance Benchmark for Apple Inc.

CSRHub

 

Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) and Sustainability metrics site CSRHub recently updated its ratings on Apple Inc. and the 69 companies in the Computers and Peripherals industry. Apple’s overall rating currently is 56 after the most recent updates to their CSRHub page.

 

Please note, the Sustainability Ratings widget will continually update and show the latest rating on CSRhub.

 

The average rating for the other companies in the Computers and Peripherals industry is 53.  Apple has gone up and is currently 9th on the list, using the CSRHub average user profile. You can see more information about Apple Inc. at their CSRHub page here.

 

Apple’s highest score is in the Employees area of a 61.  This is due to a high score in the Compensation and Benefits category of 70—well above the average for this industry of 53.  The area with the greatest opportunity for improvement for Apple is the Transparency and Reporting category. Here, Apple gets a 43—below the average for this industry which is 47.

 

See Apple’s Corporate Social Responsibility website here.

 

CSRHub ratings are on a scale of 0 to 100, with 100 being the highest. To see more on how CSRHub creates a score and the CSRHub rating rules, visit here.

 

CSRHub provides access to corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings and information on 8,900+ companies from 135 industries in 102 countries. By aggregating and normalizing the information from 325 data sources, CSRHub has created a broad, consistent rating system and a searchable database that links millions of rating elements back to their source. Managers, researchers and activists use CSRHub to benchmark company performance, learn how stakeholders evaluate company CSR practices and seek ways to change the world.

 

Tagged , , , , , ,

Does Climate Change Have Time for Transition Plans?

By Carol Pierson Holding

 

The USDA Forest Service is pushing through the sale of nearly 6,200 acres of Tongassrainforest rainforest’s old growth timber for 10-15 years of logging, claiming that’s what the timber industry needs to “transition” to second-growth timber management. Only the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Department’s investigation of possible violation of the endangered species act is forestalling the tragic event.

 

Forgive me if I’m cynical about transition plans, particularly in this irreplaceable natural treasure, where ancient giant trees greater than 10 feet in diameter can grow for many centuries, and support the habitat for five species of Pacific salmon, Steelhead, brown bear, black bear, wolves, Sitka blacktailed deer, river otter and marten.

 

The USDA’s 2013 Tongass sale was announced in a press release as “the logical transition to young growth timber harvests.” But back in 2010, the same U.S.D.A.Secretary Tom Vilsack pledged over three years to “end large-scale, old-growth timber harvest while…supporting bright spots in the regional economy such as fishing, tourism, visitor services, mariculture and alternative energy.”

 

In fact, old-growth logging is less than 1% of Southeast Alaska’s economy. Fishing brings in $6.4 billion, employs 94,000 people. Tourism accounts for another $2.42 billion and accounts for one in eight Alaskan jobs. Both industries are vulnerable to the proposed habitat destruction of logging.

 

Yet here we are. Again.

 

The struggle between the Tongass temperate rainforest and timber interests has been ongoing for 25 years. Didn’t The Tongass Timber Reform Act put in place in 1990 for practical purposes end logging in Tongass and force the two pulp mills there to shut down? Didn’t President Clinton, in 2001, pass protections for roadless areas?  And didn’t the house add an amendment to the Act in 2007 to specifically ban road construction in the Tongass forest?

 

So why now?

 

The New York Times reported that the Forest Service needs to raise money because it overspent fighting wildfires at the 2013 season peak and diverted $600 million from timber, recreation and other areas.

 

The drought was caused by climate change, which rainforests are uniquely designed to counter.

 

The irony is overwhelming.

 

To add a truly Kafkaesque twist: the Forest Service does not make a profit overall on Tongass timber, and by one analysis, has lost $1 billion since 1990.

 

Tongass timber companies have had since 1990 to “transition” out of old growth. Now they’re getting another 10-15 years. This in a country whose democratic capitalism demands constant reinvention. So when I hear that word “transition” applied to other climate change legislation, it sounds alarms.

 

Those alarms were clanging loudly when EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy touted the new power plant regulations plan for an “orderly transition” from coal.

 

Writing in this week’s Time Magazine, Michael Grunwald examines the plan’s 2030 goal: to reduce emissions from power plants by 30% from 2005 levels and coal generated electricity by 30% as well. But electricity from coal is already down 20% and another 10% of coal plants are scheduled for retirement. Its projections for renewable development are absurdly low.

 

In Grunwald’s words, the plan “undershoots the current pace of decarbonization in electricity.”

 

The EPA justifies its less than ambitious plan by asserting that its “transition” plan will forestall objections and lawsuits, especially from the big coal states. And objections have been muted so far. The American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity contends the rules will stress state-based power grids, increase electric bills and increase the risk of rolling blackouts, but so far, it’s just a PR gambit.

 

Lawmakers in fossil-fuel rich Louisiana are also condemning the plan, with Bill Cassidy, who is currently running for the Senate on an anti-Obama platform, summing up objections: “President Obama is proposing regulations that hamstring the economy, raising utility costs for families and destroying tens of thousands of jobs.”

 

As for potential lawsuits, that door was effectively closed Monday when the Supreme Court sustained EPA regulation of power plants by a vote of 7 to 2.

 

Maybe I’m wrong to be suspicious of “transition” plans that pull us back from where we were already headed. Certainly the Tongass old-growth sale, if it goes through, reverses course. Then again, sometimes, if you just stall, people sort things out for themselves. Obama stalled for 6 years on climate action against power plants, and even so, we’re already half-way to a 30% reduction in emissions by 2030. Now, there is an appetite for serious reduction in coal.

 

And Tongass? On June 10, with the summer timber harvest season about to start , a group of environmental NGOs brought suit against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service for delaying Endangered Species Act protection for the Alexander Archipelago wolf, a rare and visually stunning creature found only in the old-growth forests of southeast Alaska.

 

What does that mean for transition plans? Maybe they’re just another part of climate change itself — unpredictable, sometimes Kafkaesque, often devastating and in the end, inevitable. Hopefully, the inevitability of both climate change and their politics will converge in time to save the planet.

 

 


 

Carol Pierson HoldingCarol Pierson Holding writes on environmental issues and social responsibility for policy and news publications, including the Carnegie Council’s Policy Innovations, Harvard Business Review, San Francisco Chronicle, India Time, The Huffington Post and many other web sites. Her articles on corporate social responsibility can be found on CSRHub.com, a website that provides sustainability ratings data on 8,900+ companies worldwide. Carol holds degrees from Smith College and Harvard University.

 

CSRHub provides access to corporate social responsibility and sustainability ratings and information on 8,900+ companies from 135 industries in 102 countries. By aggregating and normalizing the information from 325+ data sources, CSRHub has created a broad, consistent rating system and a searchable database that links millions of rating elements back to their source. Managers, researchers and activists use CSRHub to benchmark company performance, learn how stakeholders evaluate company CSR practices and seek ways to change the world.

 


Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , ,