ISO/DIS 26000

Guidance
on Social Responsibility
Observations by October 2009
Start of the DIS commenting and voting
period (ending 14 February 2010)

Guido Gürtler, ICC Observer to ISO/TMB WG SR,

Member of the WG SR Industry Stakeholder
Group
guido.guertler@t-online.de
 Outline (1/2)
 Origination
 Key project data
 The Standard and its content
 Estimation of main users
 Who is drafting what for whom
 Working stages and comments
 Positive and critical points
 About ISO and societal standards
 Outline (2/2)
 Meeting the Design Specification?
 Who will vote on the DIS?
 CD voting results
 The voting process
 Voting options
 Possible D-Liaisons’ action
 Sovereignty in taking decisions
 Perspectives ABC
 Summary
ISO/DIS 26000 is a major
achievement and
not a bad document…

…but for its purpose and the

expectations raised it is
not good enough, yet.
 Origination (1/2)

 Gestation began early 90’s (primarily from the Nordic part of EU)
 4/01 ISO COPOLCO asked by ISO Council to consider viability of a
CSR Standard
 6/02 ISO/COPLOCO Workshop in Trinidad meeting – obvious strong
agreement that ISO should proceed
 9/02 ISO Council accepts report and establishes SAG
 ISO SR Advisory Group (SAG) late 2002 worked for 18 months on
comprehensive report to ISO TMB including an overview of
worldwide initiatives. Concluded ISO should go forward with the
work
There was an
overwhelmin
g demand
from
developing
countries
 Origination (2/2)
It‘s a Consumer Initiative
 COPOLCO is the ISO
Consumer Policy Committee
 The COPOLCO Workshop in Trinidad, June
2002, had some 90 attendees, with only 2
from industry, none from the banking
sector
 ISO Council decided about the COPOLCO
proposal as requested by ISO procedures
 Key Project Data

 Working since early 2005

 400+ members (experts and
observers)
 Many of them first time working
in an ISO project
 Majority from developing
countries
 About the Standard
 ISO 26000 “Guidance on Social Responsibility”
 Target: To be applied by all types of organizations

 Type of standard:
 International standard providing guidance;
 NOT for third-party certification;

 NOT a Management System Standard

ISO 26000 – Contents (1/3)
0 Introduction
1 Scope
2 Terms and definitions
3 Understanding SR of organizations
4 Principles of SR
5 Recognizing SR and engaging stakeholders
6 Guidance on SR subjects
7 Guidance on integrating SR throughout an
organization
Annex A: Voluntary initiatives and tools for SR
Annex B: Abbreviations
Bibliography
 ISO 26000 (2/3)
4 Principles of social responsibility
Identifies a set of SR principles:
 Principle of accountability
 Principle of transparency
 Principle of ethical behavior
 Principle of respect for stakeholder interests
 Principle of respect for the rule of law
 Principle of human rights
 Principle of respect for international norms of
behavior
 ISO 26000 (3/3)
6 Guidance on SR core subjects
Provides separate guidance on a range of core
subjects/issues and relates them to organizations.

 Organizational Governance
 Labor Practices
 Human Rights
 The Environment
 Fair Operating Practices
 Consumer Issues
 Community Involvement & Development
 ISO 26000 Volume
b e c o m e
It has
u c a t io n a l
an ed
u m e n t o f
doc
100+
pages!

…..Warnings on too big a size exist

since Working Draft 2, late 2006…..
 Who is „Industry“?
Industry Stakeholder Definition (N48 rev1)
The industry stakeholder group includes
representatives of: Enterprises that manufacture
products or provide services and pursue primarily
commercial interests. This group includes supportive
enterprises like energy and water supply, banking,
communication, insurance or transport companies.
Such enterprises exist of any size and legal form and
may operate at local, regional or international level.

Industry also includes employer organizations,

business associations, special industry
organizations and trade associations representing
various industries at the national, regional and
international levels.
Estimation of Main Users
Industry and service organizations
stand
for 96% of all users.
Stakehol %
der
Governme 1,5
nt 
36%
60% Labor  1
Consumer 0,5
s 
NGO  1
Services 36
Industry  60
 Who is drafting what for
whom?

60 % are not Industry & 4 % are not Industry &

Services Services

60% of WG SR experts represent 4% of

users, but have a say on what 96%
should follow
 Working Stages and
Comments (1/3)
Initiation

Here
NWIP
we
are!
Working
Drafts

Committe
e
Draft
DIS FDIS IS

2002 2004 2009 2010

 Working Stages and
Comments (2/3)
 Working Drafts 1, 2 and 3 caused some
2.500 to 3.000 comments each
 WD 4.1 received 5.000+ comments
 WD 4.2 got 5.000+ comments

 Committee Draft got 3.400+ comments

 Working Stages and
Comments (3/3)
In view of the large number of comments, they
 Were grouped into „key topics“

 In meetings, solutions were sought for new

language on these key topics

This process used was a way forward to

manage the large quantity of comments, and
designed to show progress, but it also lost a
lot of substance offered in the details.
Consequently many comments had to be
repeated, many of them several times.
 Positive Points
 ISO 26000 will boost the global
discussion on Social Responsibility

 ISO 26000 will make many organizations

rethink their behavior

 WG SR has done an admirable work;

found consensus of 400+ members
 Critical Points
 ISO 26000 will boost a consultant business
because it is not easy to understand and
does not offer tools

 ISO 26000 is not for certification but

certifiers will create “their SR Standards”
and possibly decorate them with attributes
like “…in line with ISO 26000”

 ISO/DIS 26000 is not applicable to the vast

majority of SMOs; small and medium
organizations
 About ISO and societal
standards (1/10)
Foundation
- The Internationaland work areas
Standards Organization
- Located in Geneva
- Founded 1946 for standardization in
technical areas; to foster trade and
increase welfare
- In the 1980’s expansion into so-called
“Management System Standards”, like
ISO 9000 or 14001
- ? Since 2004 on the way to expand into
societal areas?
 About ISO and societal
standards (2/10)
ISO member bodies
 162 Members in total

 106 full members,

having voting rights,
called “member
bodies”

 056 members,
correspondent or
subscriber members)
not having voting
rights (35%)
 About ISO and societal
standards (3/10)
Definition of “stakeholder”
2.1.20 stakeholder
individual or group that has an interest in
any decisions or activities of an organization

The proposal is to use the ICC

definition that reads  “Individual or
group significantly affected by an
organization’s activities.”
 About ISO and societal
standards (4/10)
Definition of “organization”
2.1.12 organization
entity with identifiable objectives and
structure

NOTE 1 For the purpose of this International Standard

organization does not include government executing duties that
are exclusive to the state.
NOTE 2 Clarity on the meaning of small and medium-sized
 This (SMOs)
organizations includes all frominmultinationals
is provided Clause 3.3. to
shoemakers and social non-for-profit
organizations;
 Missing key words like governing bodies,
functions, positions, authority for and
delegation of…
 Each legal entity is an organization
 About ISO and societal
standards (5/10)
Pricing policy
Council Resolution onavailability
32/2009 (Free ISOof 26000
ISO 26000)
Council,
noting that the TMB Working Group on Social Responsibility (WG
SR) has requested that ISO/DIS 26000 and ISO 26000 be made
freely available,
further noting that, in consultation with the Commercial Policies
Steering Group (CPSG), the Secretary-General has agreed to
make ISO/DIS 26000 freely available on the ISO Web site for the
WG SR,
having considered the rationale lying behind this WG SR's
request, decides that ISO 26000 should not be made freely
available and that therefore the current pricing policy should be
applied with no deviation.
 About ISO and societal
standards (6/10)
Pricing policy,
SMOs including Reduction of the
consequences
micro ISO 26000
organizations proliferation
have to buy the
document Increase of
revenues at ISO
Increase of
member bodies*
revenues at ISO
itself

* Several set the price of standards dependent on the number of

pages
 About ISO and societal
standards (7/10)
Feature “national Composed of a

delegations”
ISO Technical
Ctee
few national
delegates from
participating ISO
Members
ISO Member
ISO Member
ISO Member
ISO Member
National Mirror ISO Member ….
Ctees ….
National parties concerned; ….
stakeholders
 About ISO and societal
standards (8/10)
Feature “one-country-one-
One vote,
vote ” regardless
of size of
population,
culture,
convictions
and habits,
religion, etc.

China can be formally outweighed by Mauritius, the

US by Saint Lucia…
 About ISO and societal
standards (9/10)
Feature “comments
The subject‘s The CD Committee
complexitygrouping
and ” received
Draft
differences in 3.400+ comments
understandings lead from ISO Member
to 20.000+ Bodies
comments on
„Working Drafts“
from WG Their was no other chance than
SR experts
“grouping” them into “key issues” and try
to find solutions; but this lead also to
repeatedly presented comments
 About ISO and societal
standards (10/10)
Feature “ involvement
As an innovative process:
of D-
Liaisons
direct participation
work“
in „technical”

Participating “industry” relevant

organizations:
BIAC, ICC, ICMM, IFAN, ILO, IOE,
IPIECA, NORMAPME, OECD, OGP,
These organizations
WBCSD, WSBI count for much more

delegates”, but their voices count only

numerically….
?
industry representation than all “national

e.g. IOE can be outweighed by e.g. ‘Red

Puentes’
 Meeting the Design
Design Specification? (1/2)Judgment
Specification requirement
(N049)
“…is consistent with, and not in conflict Needs to
with, existing documents, international be checked
treaties and conventions and existing ISO case-by-
standards;” case

“…be applicable by all types of Not met

organizations (e.g. regardless of their size,
location, the nature of their activities and
products, and the culture, society and
environment in which they carry out their
activities.)
 Meeting the Design
Specification? (2/2)
Design Specification requirement Judgment
(N049)
“…facilitate trade liberalization and more than
remove trade barriers (implement dubiously
open and fair trade)” met

“…complement and avoid conflicts Not proven

with other existing SR standards and to be met
requirements.”

“The language must be clear, Not met

understandable and objective
throughout the guidance standard.“
Who will vote on the DIS?
(1/2)
For CD and DIS the same ISO rules
apply:

ISO member bodies

can vote; i.e. full members only
(currently 106 out of 162)

D-Liaison organizations can raise

their “voices”; they don’t have voting
rights
 Who will vote on the DIS?
(2/2) CD
Vot
e
country CD vote
in words
DIS
voting
rights
Population
of voting
rights
countries
wa
s
Deve P- simpl YES NO Ab devel deve Industr
e
lopin memb
er of coun
sta oping lope y rep in
nationa
in d
g WG t l ctee
count SR
ry
Algeria IANOR Member
body
  1 1 new 1 35,5
Member
Argentina IRAM
body
1 1 1
1     1 yes 1 1 39,7
Member
Armenia SARM
body
1 1 1
      1 silent 0 1 3,8
Member
Australia SA
body
  1 1
1     1 yes 1 1 20,3
Member
Austria ON
body
  1 1
  1   1 no 1 1 8,3
Member
Azerbaijan AZSTAND
body
1 1 1
      1 silent 1 1 8,7

The whole file is available at

http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis__vote__analysis.html#dis-votean
 CD vote results (1/3)
These 10 countries did
not vote: These 4 countries
1. Armenia abstained:
2. Azerbaijan
3. Bangladesh
4. Barbados 1. Bulgaria
5. Iran 2. Ghana
6. Russia 3. Lebanon
7. Saint Lucia 4. Saudi Arabia
8. Trinidad and Tobago
9. Ukraine, and
10. Zimbabwe
Their voices do not
count.
 CD vote results (2/3)
These 19 countries placed a negative
vote:
Note the substantial geopolitical and
economic clout of those highlighted in Red
1. Austria 11. Mauritius
2. Belarus 12. Mexico
3. China 13. The
4. Cuba Netherlands
5. Fiji 14. Peru
6. India 15. Philippines
7. Indonesia 16. Syria
8. Jamaica 17. Turkey
9. Korea 18. United States
10. Malaysia 19. Viet Nam
 CD vote results (3/3)
79 P-
members
-10 not 69 "votes
voting cast"
69 "votes -4
cast"
abstentions
-19 negative
votes
46 is exactly 2/3 of 69; the formal
require-ments of the46 positive
ISO Directives
were met votes
D-Liaison Organizations “Voices”
(1/3)
Industry and service
organizations stand
for 96% of all
users.
98% of them are
micro, small and
medium
organizations.

Business oriented D-Liaison organizations raised

major concerns on the CD, some emphasizing that
those have been presented repeatedly
D-Liaison Organizations “Voices”
(2/3)
As regards the ISO 26000 applicability to the
main user group (SMO), business oriented
D-Liaison organizations basically criticize the

 Volume of 100+ pages

 Language and tone (not easy to
understand)
 Relevancy of all core subjects
D-Liaison Organizations “Voices”
(3/3)
Such major concerns have been expressed on the
CD by:
•BIAC - Business and Advisory Committee to the
OECD
•ICC - International Chamber of Commerce
•IFAN - International Federation of Users of
Standards
•IOE - International Organization of Employers
•IPIECA - International Petroleum Industry
Environmental Conservation Association, and
•These
NORMAPME“voices”- European
weigh in with byof
Office farCrafts,
more Trade
“business
and
reality”
Small than
and that provided
Medium through
Enterprises the ISO national
for Standardization
member bodies*
* A number of national mirror committees don’t include industry
representatives
 The DIS Voting Count (1/3)
Country Acronym Membership
Afghanistan ANSA Correspondent member
ISO,
Albania DPS Correspondent member
Genev
Algeria
Angola
IANOR Member body
IANORQ Correspondent member
a
Antigua and ABBS Subscriber member
Barbuda
Argentina IRAM Member body
Armenia SARM Member body
….
Uzbekistan Member body
UZSTANDARD

Venezuela Member body

FONDONORMA 162 ISO members,
Viet Nam STAMEQ Member body
out of them
Yemen YSMO Correspondent member 106 ISO member
Zambia ZABS Correspondent member „bodies“
Zimbabwe SAZ Correspondent have voting
rights
The DIS Voting Count (2/3)
P-Member Vote

78 P-Members in WG
SR
51,4 66 % must be positive
8
52 positive votes make the
DIS accepted
27 negative votes would
make the DIS fail
Both P-Members’ and ISO member bodies’ votes
must be positive; if one of them is negative, the
vote failed
The DIS Voting Count (3/3)

ISO member bodies' vote

106 ISO member bodies can
vote
79,5 75 % must be positive
80 positive votes make the DIS
accepted
27 negative votes make the
DIS fail
Both P-Members’ and ISO member bodies’ votes
must be positive; if one of them is negative, the
vote failed
 Voting Options
In favor: supports
the document as it is; Abstain: feels too
comments may be small, didn’t find
made consensus etc.;
abstains don’t count
Against: does not
support the
document as it is;
comments must be
made
Votes must be sent by the ISO member body to ISO
Geneva, before 14 February 2010
Possible D-Liaison actions
(1/2)
Find a position Steps
on ISO/DIS 26000 ISO member
body
Chairman
Make that Secretary
position Member 1
publicly known Member 2
…
Make that position
known to national
ISO member
bodies
Since D-Liaison organizations don’t vote, ISO
encourages them to approach national ISO
member bodies with their position
 Possible D-Liaison actions
(2/2)
Time Line 2010-02-14

2009-09-14

106 ISO member

106 national bodies send
mirror their vote
committees find
their position

Reasonably an effective influence can

only be exerted in the early weeks and
months.
 Sovereignty in taking
decisions
ISO Member Body
have voting rights
and is sovereign in
its decision finding.

D-Liaison organizations
can raise their “voice”

Note: According to N105 Operating Procedures D-Liaison

organizations have the right of appeal to the WG Plenary; an
option normally not used because finding consensus is
considered more important
 Perspectives ABC (1/3)

“Minor Yes No “Major”

A DIS C
” change
vote s; DIS2
chang No
es B
No
DIS2
Yes vote
Final
work
Yes No
FDIS vote
Technical
Internationa B Report
l Standard
 Perspectives ABC (2/3)
Route A: is the fastest one; may be preferred
by all who want to end the project quickly,
regardless of its smaller or greater success

Route B: is a preferred option, including the

continua-tion of the project in a new to be
founded global organization for “Standards and
Benchmarks for Society”

Route C: continues with a second DIS and

major changes of the document (changes as
requested in all “general” and “technical”
comments”)
 Perspectives ABC (3/3)
Who will take the decision on how to
proceed?
ISO TMB, the ISO Technical Management Board that controls
and coordinates all technical work of the many ISO committees.
According to
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_technical_committee.html?com
the 12 members of 2009 are
ABNT Brazil (2011), AENOR Spain (2010) ; AFNOR France
(2011) , ANSI USA (2009) , BIS India (2011), BSI United
Kingdom (2009) , DIN Germany (2009) , JISC Japan (2010) ,
KATS Korea, Republic of (2011), SABS South Africa (2011),
SAC China (2011), SCC Canada (2010).

The „2009 members“ will change by January 2010.

This project will
remain exciting!
Abbreviations
CD Committee Draft
DIS Draft International Standard
COPOLCO Consumer Policy
Committee
FDIS Final DIS
IS International Standard
NWIP New Work Item Proposal
SMO Small and Medium
organization
WD Working Draft
WG SR Working group social
responsibility
Links (1/2):

- ISO/DIS 26000 as document N0172 at

http://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId

- Details on voting rights at

http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis_rules.h

- Personal comments at
http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis_comme
Links (2/2):

-ISO Members, at
http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_members.htm

- ISO member bodies having voting rights,

at
http://www.26k-estimation.com/html/dis__vote__