Manchester Airport demonstrates a quality approach to reporting but it needs to consider the opportunities rather than merely the obligations in its CSR strategy
Manchester Airport Group's fifth CSR Report is one of the better written reports you can find among the thousands published each year. It's clear, direct, aligned with MAG's CSR strategy and transparent about objectives, targets and achievements. The report provides just enough context in each area to help the reader understand the issues and MAG's approach.
While the report covers all of MAG's operations (four UK airports), data is presented for each airport individually in many cases, providing useful performance comparatives. The adherence to the GRI G3.1 (Application Level A+, GRI checked) framework is meticulous (with an index covering almost 40 pages of this 106 page report) and the assurance statement clearly states what information and data is included. Overall, this report demonstrates considered CSR thinking and a quality approach that supports a high level of credibility.
Having said this, there is room to improve the focus and strategic alignment of MAG's reporting. Materiality is addressed in this report with a matrix that lists issues which are material for MAG and for external stakeholders. MAG does not disclose the priorities defined by different stakeholders or the methodology applied.
Of a total of 32 material topics, seven are prioritised as most important: climate change; customer safety and security; customer service and satisfaction; local economic development; noise abatement; profitability and trust in MAG. These issues are dealt with by MAG in this report, but so are many of the others and the links between materiality, strategy and reporting structure are not explicit.
The structure of the report follows three main sections: achievements, operations, performance. Locating the narrative that relates to the most important material issues requires some digging, and the distribution of content relative to the level of importance of material issues is not immediately logical. Similarly, key performance indicators noted in the report are not consistent with targets and objectives defined in MAG's CSR strategy document, which is a separate download. Targets listed in the strategy document are not included in the CSR report. A lack of alignment between the strategy and the reporting processes indicates that there is still some work to do at MAG to embed CSR at all levels of organisational decision-making.
A good example of linking materiality to content is this report's coverage of noise abatement, an issue that could be expected to be material for a group of airports. Noise abatement earns three pages of narrative and comprehensive data about noise action plans, collaboration with Air Traffic Controllers and preferential routes with maps, as well as complaints received, fines paid and sound insulation grants made. On the other hand, reporting on customer service is rather light. The length of queues for passport control, boarding security checks, transfer arrangements and boarding processes, issues that must affect many passengers from time to time, are not explicitly discussed.
As might be expected, environmental impacts are well detailed in this report with a notable achievement in emissions reduction, supported by 100% purchase of renewable electricity, to meet a commendable commitment to carbon neutrality by 2015. In other areas, however, disclosure is more limited. A commitment to zero waste to landfill by 2015 appears to be more of a challenge as overall waste levels increased in 2013 and 20% went to landfill. The action plan to get to zero is not disclosed.
Time to climb
There may be room for MAG to consider the opportunities, rather than the obligations, of CSR in its strategy and reporting. MAG talks about "operating responsibly" (such as the Vision Zero programme for safety management) and local economic (such as being a good source of employment and revenue for local suppliers). These are important but indicate a rather risk-management approach to responsibility. The opportunity approach could help MAG reflect its truer value and contribution to society.
For example, from a CSR standpoint, we may be more interested in the way MAG creates economic value rather than hearing about how much local revenue is generated. Inclusive business practices through encouraging supplier diversity could be relevant here (SMEs, women or minority owned businesses), as well as the ways in which MAG creates development opportunities for non-white British population groups.
In future reporting, MAG could consider offering a fuller reflection of how the group uses its economic strength, scale and size to advance social well-being through its core business (not only through its educational and community engagement programmes). While MAG is clear on its responsibility, and this report is a good testimonial, the company is less clear on CSR as an opportunity to help support social value and change. Perhaps it’s time to climb to a slightly higher altitude.
Snapshot:
- Follows GRI? GRI G3.1 A+, GRI checked
- Assured? Yes – all information
- Materiality analysis? Yes
- Goals? Yes
- Targets? Yes - online
- Stakeholder input? No
- Seeks feedback? Yes
- Key strengths? Well-presented data
- Chief weakness? Too much focus on "operating responsibly"
- Pleasant surprise? Nice Venn diagram of MAG's sphere of influence
Elaine Cohen is a Sustainability Consultant and Reporter at Beyond Business and CSR blogger.
www.csr-reporting.blogspot.com
airports CR report review CSR report Manchester Airport