Nordstrom’s web-based continual reporting model needs refinement
Before the Global Reporting Initiative injected rigour into corporate responsibility reporting, companies erred on the side of PR-heavy greenwash.
A quick look at US retailer Nordstrom’s latest offering could lead you to believe we are heading back to the bad old days. Or are we?
Nordstrom has more than 200 stores in 28 US states. It stocks hundreds of brands, among them reputable, high-quality labels such as Diesel, Hugo Boss and Ugg. Nordstrom also sells a small suite of own-brand products. It has a significant online presence, and is a revered name in US retail.
The company’s new corporate responsibility website, Nordstrom Cares, is dominated by news and feature stories relaying responsibility efforts across the company. There’s little of the detail that has come to characterise regular corporate responsibility reports. Pieces that add authenticity and transparency – stakeholder voices, admissions of shortcomings, and challenges – are missing. The site excludes important details from programmes and initiatives (for example, Nordstrom explains its audit approach to manufacturing sites, but doesn’t share any of the results). And there is no analysis of its most important impacts.
But what the site lacks in rigour, it makes up for in accessibility. The stories give often banal programmes a human touch. Although slightly overwritten, and at times a little frivolous, the articles are mostly an engaging entry into the efforts, helping the numbers make sense.
Data is not forgotten, although it does feel like an unwanted stepchild, bundled into a two-page PDF with little analysis. This treatment seems curt, but actually it’s a case study in efficiency. Analysts and geeks know exactly where to get their fill, without having to sift through swathes of text. Nordstrom seems to understand that this information is necessary housekeeping, and its message appears to be: let’s get on with the fun stuff.
Nordstrom is not alone. Patagonia has been providing engaging stories for many years (in its Tin Shed website). Recently Virgin Media produced its effort in a series of videos.
The lesson here is about audiences. Nordstrom et al are catering for those who would never read a GRI report: concerned consumers, employees and suppliers.
Consumers are key. Each of these three companies has built a reputation based on quality and service. Nordstrom’s customer service is legendary. Tales of shop assistants given a mandate to do anything to please the customer are shopping folklore. Apparently, a Nordstrom attendant once refunded a customer out of her own pocket for a product bought from a competitor’s store. She then went in her lunch hour to the right store to get her money back. Another describes the lengths to which a team of Nordstrom employees went to get an Armani suit sent overnight from New York to California, despite the retailer not even selling that brand.
It’s possible that by making responsibility reporting less granular, Nordstrom is giving its customers an accessible route into its agenda. The language of the website certainly suggests that – Nordstrom doesn’t do corporate responsibility, but “cares”; it doesn’t report, but “shares performance”; and its employees aren’t just recognised for good work, but designated “heroes”.
Hidden away
Unfortunately, there’s one sticking point. Nordstrom Cares is incredibly hard to find: a nondescript link at the bottom corner of the corporate site. The investment in the site merits bigger billing.
Regular updates are going to be crucial to the site’s success. If you’re presenting your stories like a newspaper, you’ve got to spend the time to keep it feeling like one. Nordstrom is on top of it, but only just. Six weeks after Christmas and the site’s lead story was still focused on a seasonal “Giving Tree”. The site needs to remain more relevant, more often.
For the corporate responsibility industry, Nordstrom Cares isn’t about turning the clock back to spin reporting, but meeting the needs of new, important audiences. This reflects a general shift to include a broader group of stakeholders in the discussion, especially employees, consumers and suppliers. This is good news because it shows the value of corporate responsibility efforts in bringing benefits to the business.
If the Nordstrom model is going to be successful, the challenge will be to maintain credibility by promoting transparency in an open, fun way. This can be achieved by providing solid performance data to stakeholders who demand it. That data does not have to be cleverly packaged or contained in a GRI report. But it does have to be on offer. Otherwise reporting’s future may very well look like its past.
Alex Parkinson is a consultant at Context America.
Alex@contextamerica.com
www.contextamerica.com
Snapshot
Follows GRI No
Assured No
Materiality assessment No
Goals Yes
Targets Yes
Stakeholder input No
Seeks feedback No
Key strength Use of stories to provide accessibility.
Chief weakness Important details are lacking.
Pleasant surprise How effective the presentation of performance data is.