ISO 26000 Guidance on

Social Responsibility
Development Status, June 2009
An Indus try V iew

Ri sk o f F ailure

David Fel in ski, Vice-President IFAN (International Federation

of Standards Users) and IFAN Expert to ISO/TMB WG SR, and
Gu ido Guert le r, ICC Observer to ISO/TMB WG SR
 Available Slide Series

• The Project
• ISO 26000 Contents and Players
• Applicability Aspects
• ISO 26000 CD Vote by March 2009
• Success Criteria
• Ri sk of Fa il ur e
• Tool: Check of Effectiveness

The pre sen t subs et is the on e marke d in bold

 Outline (1/2)
ISO 26000 will contribute to a more intensive worldwide
discussion of social responsibility and in that context, be
considered a success.
But it may not be the success an ISO STANDARD deserves.
Therefore, these slides highlight several risks at a time when
actions still could be taken to minimize them.
 Preface
 Two Key Statements
 Missing its “Key Market”
 Volume of Document
 Outline (2/2)

 Relevance of ALL Core Subjects

 Governments’ Responsibility
 Governments may misuse ISO 26000
 Certifiers may misuse ISO 26000
 Business may misuse ISO 26000
 Preface
 Risks can be viewed differently
 These slides describe major risks as seen
by the authors; there may be more
 To highlight them is intended to cause
actions toward preventing their
occurrence.

A co ncret e pr oposa l is ma de at the

end
 Two Key Statements
n The greatest positive
effect of ISO 26000 is the
promoti on of t he
globa l de bate on
matters of social
responsibility

• Ind ust ry is i n fa vor of an ISO

guidance standard on social responsibility
bu t it must be “good enoug h” for
industry, which will become the main user
group
 Who will be the Main Users?
Industry and Services
= Business, 96%

micro up to 10

36%
60%

small up to 50

medium up to 250
large more than
250 In industries, 98% are micro,
small or medium organizations
employees
 Missing its “Key Market” (1/2)
 ISO/TMB WG SR did not perform a user survey
in order to get the „primary user input“ into the
draft guidance standard
 An IISD Study “How material is ISO 26000 … to
SMEs?” of September 2008 is available at
http://www.iisd.org/pdf/2008/how_material_iso_260
 A “Quick User Survey” is available at
http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/quick_user_sur
 Missing its “Key Market” (2/2)
 Both the II SD Study and the Quic k
User Survey show limits to the
applicability and usefulness of ISO 26000
to small and medium organizations
 The ISO 26000 draft does not seem to
reflect this feed bac k fro m re ali ty

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

“direct views” of possible users
have not been taken into account
 Volume of Document
 Micro and small organizations, in general, will not
study 100+ pages in order to check for useful and
applicable items…
 …and in particular, not in the least if they don’t
conduct any trans-border activities…
 …and all the more, not so if their activities have
no interaction with developing countries
The 100+ pages have been repeatedly criticized since 12/2006

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

the document is too voluminous for
most of its potential users
Relevance of ALL Core Subjects
to ALL Organizations (1/3)
While the SCOPE of ISO 26000 states:
“This International Standard provides
guidance to all types of organizations,
regardless of their size or location, on:…

….and while the logic of ISO 26000 is that

ALL core subjects are relevant to
ALL organizations …
Relevance of ALL Core Subjects
to ALL Organizations (2/3)
…this is flatly refuted, particularly by SMOs

Some examples of non-relevance:

 Micro organizations vs. “Community
Involvement”
 Locally operating SMO vs. “Fair Operating
Practices”
Relevance of ALL Core Subjects
to ALL Organizations (3/3)
 Capital goods manufacturers vs.
„Consumer Issues“
 SMO in highly regulated countries vs.
„Human Rights“ and „Labour Practices“
 …and many more…

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

ALL core subjects being relevant to
ALL organizations is not realistic
Governments’ Responsibility (1/4)
 Prot ec ti on of i ts
citi ze ns is the core
obligation of govern-
ment (life, health,
property, …)

 Industries can neither take this obligation,

nor substitute government action
Governments’ Responsibility (2/4)
 It is governments’
social responsibility
to set the l ega l
fr amew ork under
which private
society related
actions can develop
Governments’ Responsibility (3/4)
 Fir st governments
need to care for their
constitution, laws and
regulations, and the
enforcement of same
 Then industries can
act effectively and
sustainably
Governments’ Responsibility (4/4)
 But ISO 26000 creates an
expectation as if the
private sector could
improve social deficits by
itself, wit ho ut pre ceding
and acc ompany ing
gov ernme nt act ion
ISO 26000 may risk failing because
this expectation on the private
sector is not realistic
 Governments may Misuse
ISO 26000
The DIS will express: "This International Standard is not a
management system standard. It is not intended or
appropriate for certification purposes or reg ula to ry or
contractual use . Any offers to certify, or claims to be
certified, to ISO 26000 would be a misrepresentation of the
intent and purpose of the International Standard."

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

government may mistakenly use it
for procurement purposes
 Certifiers may Misuse ISO 26000

The DIS will express: "This International Standard is not a

management system standard. It is not in ten ded or
ap pro priat e for cert ificat io n purp ose s or regulatory
or contractual use. Any offers to certify, or claims to be
certified, to ISO 26000 would be a misrepresentation of the
intent and purpose of the International Standard."

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

certifiers may ignore this
unambiguous purpose description
Industry may Misuse ISO 26000
The DIS will express: "This International Standard is not a
management system standard. It is not intended or
appropriate for certification purposes or regulatory or
co ntra ctu al use . Any offers to certify, or claims to be
certified, to ISO 26000 would be a misrepresentation of the
intent and purpose of the International Standard."

ISO 26000 may risk failing because

some business organizations may
mistakenly use it in contracts
Request of ISO’s Action (1/3)

ISO 26000 is a GUIDANCE

STANDARD, offering guidance,
advice and recommendations

This t ype of Docume nt is new , and not

as commonly known as other ISO „products“

That gives ISO the chance to address the

„education“ of users and jus ti fi es „aft er-
pu bl ica ti on a cti ons “ orga ni zed by ISO
 Request of ISO’s Action (2/3)

Ra tio nal e :
 ISO 26000 is a

relatively new type of

deliverable
 The le ss it is unde r-

stoo d , the great er

the potential for
(mostly) unintended
mis us e
 Request of ISO’s Action (3/3)
 The fi rs t cas es of
misuse have already
take n pl ac e wit ho ut
the do cument even
being publi shed , see
http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/misuse_of_iso_26000.ht
 Mor e cases to
come…
How to Manage the Risks? (1/5)

Building on the good work of WG SR Task

Group 2 on „Communications“, which may
be disbanded after the ISO 26000
publication, ISO should set up a permanent
unit called
“ISO 260 00 Us er Pl at fo rm ”

ISO normally does not care about the use of its standards,
but here it is recommended in view of the valu e of the
ISO 2600 0 co nte nt and its glo bal at ten tion .
How to Manage the Risks? (2/5)
The ISO 260 00 U ser Pla tfo rm would
address:
2. Taking measures to prevent the risks*
3. Clarifying any doubts or interpretations
4. Giving advice on concrete cases of use
5. Helping avoid cases of misuse
6. Running a website “pool of experiences”

* More details on the next slides

How to Manage the Risks? (3/5)
ISO 26000 may risk failing Proposed way
because… forward
1 … “direct views” of possible Perform a user
users have not been taken survey under the
2 into
… account
the document is too auspicesthe
Redraft of ISO
voluminous for the large document down to
majority of its potential some 40 pages max.
users or write an “ISO
3 … because ALL core 26000 User
Modify this claim
Guide”
by
subjects being relevant to leaving the decision
ALL organizations is not of relevance to the
realistic organization’s
 How to Manage the Risks? (4/5)
ISO 26000 may risk failing Proposed way
because… forward
4 … this expectation of Include guidance on
private sector action without governments’ social
preceding and responsibility more
accompanying government explicitly into the
action is not realistic ISO 26000
5 … because government may Awareness and
mistakenly use it for education; explain
procurement purposes examples on the
dedicated ISO
website
How to Manage the Risks? (5/5)

ISO 26000 may risk failing Proposed way

because… forward
6 … because certifiers may Awareness and
ignore this unambiguous education; explain
description of purpose examples on the
dedicated ISO
7 … because some industry Awareness
website and
organizations may education; explain
mistakenly use it in examples on the
contracts dedicated ISO
website
 In the end…

…it is all in ISO‘s hands

..unless users feel the need to develop

„their“ ISO 26000 User Guide(s),
But that is not a preferred option.

Thank You for yo ur Co nside rat io n!