Tuesday, August 18, 2020

Why Should Companies Engage on ESG Issues to Its Investors?

Photo courtesy of Pexels, for illustration purposes only 

Introduction

Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) has unquestionably becoming the centre of attention in corporate strategy for organisations across industries and regions. Not that we have come to the desired maturity of adopting ESG in the overall business decision making process, but the increase ESG commitment should be taken positive and applaud. However, how can companies excel in communicating their ESG progress to one of their most important stakeholders i.e. investors?

 

Investors are Assessing Companies ESG Management

Recently, the world’s largest asset manager, BlackRock in a report had identified 244 companies that have not showcased their mitigation plans on climate change adequately enough through their business practices as well as corporate disclosures to their stakeholders including investors. Subsequently, BlackRock has drastically voted against directors at 53 out of those 244 companies while assuring to vote against the directors from the remaining companies in the following year if the companies fail to demonstrate ‘significant progress’ within a year.

This action would have ripple effect for other managers for sure. It’s important to be reminded that even before the COVID-19 pandemic crisis, ESG issues have already been gaining interest from asset managers worldwide. Now that the pandemic has shown great impact on a large group of stakeholders, and have cause constant social unrest, it would only mean that companies are pressured to not only initiate to reaching out to institutional investors and stakeholders on ongoing and future ESG risks and threats that could (and will) impact the entire value chain of all businesses regardless of their size.

Following is the overview of some key voting results for 2020 according to the report:

  • 2020: 5 environmental proposals passed (0 in 2019), including three    large-cap companies i.e. Chevron Corporation, J.B. Hunt Transport  Services, and Dollar Tree 
  • 2020: 55.1% increase in support for employment diversity proposals (38.5% increase in 2019), including for Fastenal Company, O'Reilly Automotive, and Fortinet.
  • 2020: 32.5%  Increase in average support for Board diversity proposals (18.7% in 2019)
  • 2020: Increase in percentage of political contribution-related proposals proportion i.e. 24 out of 27 (37 out of 60 in 2019).

Due to time restrictions because of the requirements for investor and shareholder proposals submission, the majority of the ESG items for 2020’s ballots were issued on quarter 4 or late 2019 i.e. prior to the COVID-19 crisis as well as the recent racial tension and economic inequality issues had peaked. All of these global developments have and will continue to require companies to see the rise in proposals related to diversity and inclusion, racial justice, socioeconomic inequality, health and safety, climate change and other ESG-related factors in the 2021 proxy season.

Understanding and responding these changes is one thing, but communication is another thing. During a pressured time like this, it’s important to stress repeatedly that if stakeholder engagement with investors are not being conducted strategically, frequently and quickly pertaining these emerging issues, companies could be swamped with proposals but most severely, with frustrated investors communicating their agitations through formal and informal channels. Thus, the responsible parties from the companies such as the Board, Senior Management, and particularly investors relations, public relations and legal will face excruciating pressure to address convincingly the companies’ responses to these issues. If not, the repercussions will turn out to be more complicated that could only mean companies will be affected financially.

 

How Should Companies Approach Investor Engagement Process?


Communicating ESG Issues to Investors

Regardless of the size of the investors, many investors nowadays are well-informed on current and arising ESG issues. Some of them also care about the companies’ efforts in ESG management. Questioning of companies’ ESG or Sustainability agenda has becoming more common and confirms the investors’ keen on the issues. So, when companies conduct engagement with investors on ESG issues, it is absolutely critical for companies to be aware of the best approach to take, what metrices are appropriate and easy to understand in order to monitor ESG performance and also to evaluate the level of acceptance of the responses by the investors. Making progress in ESG performance is certainly good to be transparent with the investors but it is also very important to ensure that investors obtain the most information on how effective the companies manage their ESG agenda.

A good place to start is for companies to assess the specific processes and resources that all relevant investors undertake to assess the ESG policies and practices. The assessment should cater to all investors, hence there should not be one generic approach for this. BlackRock for example, are observed to be focused on ‘corporate purpose’ as well as ESG-related topics. This trend is accelerating as investment firms with a stated ‘core’ emphasis on ESG would most like consist trained and specialized function to conduct their own company evaluation.

For some other investors on the other hand, may not be as robust as they would normally involve ESG-related engagement to regular and unspecified portfolio management teams. This will change, as it is demanded in the future that asset managers are to be familiar with embedding ESG as their mainstream investment portfolio.  

 

Understanding ESG Risks

To achieve productive and effective engagement with institutional investors, companies must first establish high level of knowledge and vision pertaining ESG trends and issues as well as its impacts towards business, including across the value chain, affecting all relevant stakeholders. Companies should be able to equip themselves with the resources to manage material ESG risks and opportunities particularly that represents the substantial ‘risk to value’ issues to the business and should be strategic in communicating on these issues with investors.

Conventionally, it is well understood that personnel from the investor relations would undertake the duty to engage with the investors. Not that this should be necessarily changed but it is important to note that personnel that drive and support ESG-related functions (within the organisation and across different levels) would possess the most valuable input pertaining the ESG issues that the investor relations personnel may be restricted to, or facing difficulties to convey the response effectively. In specific ESG issues, ESG personnel should be the key representatives to address these issues so that more insights and transparency could be presented to investors. 

 

Oversight and Reporting

As covered earlier, investors are keen to substantiate companies’ ESG performance and progress through an appropriate, suitable and standardised ESG performance tracking metrices, normally via reporting. From the companies’ point of view, it is agreeable that this is not an easy task especially taking account that there are widely different services and frameworks that provide ESG-related measurements and ratings including the widely referred to such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) as well as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) standards, that has been gaining attraction in developed markets. Recently, the GRI and SASB had announced a collaboration to standardise the two standards for better and effective adoption. This is just a proof or subsequent effect of how complicated these various frameworks is to reporting companies.

However, companies are still required to find the solution to ensure they can improve their reporting on ESG performance so that it meets the full expectations and understanding of the investors. Before adopting a framework, reporting companies must analyse which reporting frameworks are best suited for their institutional investors. At the end of the day, as long as the investors could maximise the input from the ESG reporting metrics, companies would be on the right track.

 

Now is the Time for Companies to Respond

Another matter that needs the attention from companies is on the most appropriate time to engage with institutional investors on ESG-related issues. Companies should never delay on the opportunity to engage so that communication on ESG matters are always up-to-date and observed as always one of the priorities by companies.

However, as stated, companies need to be mindful that prior engagement, they should be prepared and equipped with ESG issues and future trends as well as its impacts to the business explicitly on issues that have the highest level of priority and interest by each investors.

Rather than immediate financial returns, more investors are eager seeking long-term value creation from ESG risks so providing them the related information and would portray the companies are established with robust risk management process, market expertise, business resilient and overall, considered as sustainable companies to invest in in the long run. This being said, communicating with them on these information as quickly as possible, would increase confidence to the investors as they would view the companies as reliable and as future (or/and current) industry leaders.

 

Conclusion

It is a difficult time for public and private companies to strive in balancing financial and non-financial sustainability in this current disrupted economy due to COVID-19. The focus on ESG risks and opportunities is becoming more evident as all key stakeholders including customers, community, suppliers and governmental bodies are impacted. Investors should now be engaged more strategically than ever. Companies need to reset the traditional mentality on short and long-term targets and must incorporate ESG issues in the long-term targets – and educate and communicate the investors on the companies ESG ambition. Companies need to ask themselves, is the current investor engagement process still relevant and meets the demands for the future?

 

All views and opinions expressed on this site are by the author and do not represent any particular entity or organisation


0 comments:

Post a Comment