Posts Tagged “auditor jobs”
As the threat of climate change mounts, Audit International know that businesses must take steps to counter its damaging effects. This is in order to meet ambitious government Net Zero targets, which aim to halve emissions in a little over a decade.
The promising news is that the majority of organisations now understand that sustainability must be made a priority when it comes to devising their overall strategy.
However, companies are often left in the dark as to how best to report on their ESG credentials in a way that’s impactful and means something to shareholders and other stakeholders. It’s clear that what’s needed is a uniform set of standards for measurement and reporting, just as there is for financial performance. This is particularly prevalent in the Accounting sector, where calls are increasingly being made to introduce universal and transparent ESG standards.
However, the world of sustainability reporting is a confusing and often disparate mass of names and frameworks. They include the Climate Disclosure Standards Board (CDSB), the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC), the Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD).
The good news is that a forerunner has emerged that promises to offer a single source of truth when it comes to ESG reporting. It is called the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB). The ISSB will do for sustainability reporting what the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) does for financial reporting. That is, develop standards for companies to report their performance to investors. Both will be under the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation umbrella.
Where did the new framework originate and what exactly is it?
Created at 2021’s COP26, ISSB will provide a global baseline for high-quality sustainability reporting that supports the work being done in the US by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the European Union (EU)’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD).
The ISSB is focused on ‘single materiality’ or the ESG information that drives valuation and matters most to investors. This is also the focus of the SEC and so the mandates are consistent. In contrast, the CSRD has a broader ‘double materiality’ mandate, which means it will cover information of interest to stakeholders, even if it is not of interest to investors. Linking the two is the concept of ‘dynamic materiality’, meaning that more light can be shed on ESG issues – such as climate change – moving forwards.
The ideal outcome is that ISSB becomes a global standard which integrates the work of all previous standards and frameworks focused on investor needs. Ideally, the SEC and EU can use its standards. The EU can then top these standards up with those covering double materiality. As dynamic materiality makes these relevant to investors, the ISSB can then take over responsibility for the standard setting process.
How can ISSB success be achieved?
The corporate community has a key role to play in ensuring the success of the ISSB. Investors are increasingly demanding information on a company of interest’s sustainability performance. At the same time, companies are increasingly being accused of greenwashing their sustainability reporting by making it appear more environmentally sound than it is.
Having standards, with proper audits, addresses both issues. That said, it’s important to note that standards aren’t targets for issues like carbon emissions or diversity and inclusion. Rather, they provide credible information on the reporting done by a company on its progress in achieving whatever targets it decides to set, if any.
While ensuring that ISSB is a success, companies can also take steps to secure their own long-term viability. The first way is to participate in the standard setting process. As with financial standard setting, exposure drafts for proposed standards will be published in the public domain. Companies need to join investors in providing their input, including constructive critiques. If a company has an opportunity to participate in any advisory councils and working groups or share its views in comment letters, it should make the effort to do so.
The second approach is to proactively adopt these standards. There will be an inevitable lag between when the standards are published and the country in which the company is headquartered making them mandatory. However, those who wait will likely lose out.
As some companies quickly adopt ISSB’s standards, investor pressure will mount for others to follow suit so they can compare companies’ performance and do their own analysis. Failure to report won’t give a company the benefit of the doubt. Rather, investors will likely assume the worst, all to the possible detriment of the company’s stock price.
Ultimately, the ISSB will make life better for any company which cares about having a sustainable, long-term corporate strategy. Therefore, companies should give their full support to make these standards the best and most accurate they can be.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
In this final article of the series, Audit International focus on the third element of ESG- Governance risk. This differs from the first two elements – Environmental and Social – in that several governance risks have long been recognized and included in our audit plans. However, many more have recently gained prominence. Therefore, it is important that internal audit understands these risks and is well positioned to provide assurance.
Governance risks :
Some governance risks are broad in nature. Others, are very narrow. Some have little in terms of universal benchmarks, while others have well-established frameworks or regulations. Here are some of the main risks that should be considered:
– Shareholder rights and engagement – are there any limitations on certain classes of shareholders, and does the business engage effectively on important issues?
– Board structure and diversity – are there independent directors, and does the board have sufficient diversity of experience, style, and background? Increasingly, neurodiversity is a consideration, and in some countries a workers’ representative is a requirement.
– Executive compensation – is this structured to be in line with corporate objectives, and is it consistent with peers in comparison to the wages of other staff?
– Anti-bribery and corruption – many countries have a comprehensive legal framework.
– Tax transparency and policy – what is the organization’s approach to tax, and particularly the jurisdictions it operates and pays taxes in?
– Ethics and culture – a broad topic, ethics encompass all the above and more. Culture has become a hot topic over the past 15 years with the link between a strong organization-wide culture and performance becoming increasingly apparent.
– Data protection – often also included as a social risk, good information governance is relevant here as well.
– Typical impacts for the organization will be reputational, legal and regulatory, people, financial, and ultimately strategic.
Getting started – Determining the key risks :
Compared with environmental and social risk, it is much more difficult to take a holistic approach to governance risk, given the breadth of topics. However, it is likely that many activities and risks are already in your audit universe. A governance code may have been adopted by your organization, although these may only cover some of the issues described above. Understanding the relevant governance code(s) –mandatory or optional – is a good starting point. This will depend on jurisdiction(s), market listings, regulators, and industry practices. Governance codes can be principle-based or more prescriptive, and will typically define some or all of the following, often on a “comply or explain” basis:
– Clarity of purpose
– Leadership
– Integrity
– Board composition and division of responsibilities
– Board effectiveness
– Decision making
– Risk management, internal controls, and audit
– Accountability, transparency, and reporting remuneration
In understanding governance risks, you should also take into account what specific legal or regulatory requirements there are around any of these issues. This may include reporting requirements around diversity or executive pay or matters which must regularly be reported and considered by the board. Also, consider what other stakeholder expectations are relevant. This is likely to focus on investors, as they have been increasingly vocal and prepared to vote against boards that do not adequately address specific issues.
With this background information, along with your consideration of the issues highlighted earlier in this article, you can ensure your risk assessment incorporates relevant governance risks.
How internal audit can make an impact :
As always, we should leverage work done by the first and second lines in considering where we can make the biggest impact. We should consider our risk assessment alongside any new information we have about regulatory changes, emerging issues in our sector, or jurisdictions, and investor interest.
Some Examples :
– Governance framework
– Governance codes were mentioned earlier in this article. Whether your organization has adopted a code in full or developed its own framework, it will need to produce a regular (typically, annual) report of compliance with the code. Assessing the processes supporting this reporting is often a good way to execute broad audit coverage of governance risks. Such reports are expected by regulators, provide assurance to the board, and are sometimes published (at least in part in the annual report). – Therefore, it is important that they give an accurate picture.
Reports may take many forms and will often include qualitative assertions and specific data or examples. It is important that any data reported is accurate, but equally as important that narrative assertions or examples are supported by evidence. Internal audit can provide assurance over the processes to collate this evidence, ensuring it is complete and accurate and that the right oversight controls are in place. We can also review the report and verify that the conclusions reached fairly reflect the evidence available. Generally, we take a combined approach to provide comprehensive and broad assurance.
Board composition :
Board composition has been under the spotlight, and while practices have improved there is often still a lack of transparency in recruitment, objective evaluation, and diversity. This is a sensitive audit which needs to be conducted by experienced auditors. When done well, it provides real insight and impact.
It is important not to make this about the individuals currently serving on a board, but about the effectiveness of processes around recruitment, structure, skills-determination, and performance evaluation. Consider some or all of the following:
Is there an evaluation of the skills required on the board and an up-to-date skills matrix? Is this specific enough to ensure the board members possess the right range of skills and experience but sufficiently flexible to attract a diverse pool of candidates?
Do recruitment processes include defining an ideal candidate profile, pre-determined selection criteria, and stakeholder involvement in the exercise? Are candidates sourced in a way that ensures a wide pool of candidates, recognizing that there may be a need for confidentiality?
How are conflicts of interest identified and managed?
What are the rotation policies/term limits for non-executive board members?
How is board performance evaluated? Is there a self-assessment process and a periodic independent assessment?
Is there a training plan for the board and individual board members? Is there an individual appraisal process?
Does the committee structure support effective delegation but ensure the board maintains its responsibility for strategy and oversight?
How effective is the relationship between executives and non-executives? Does the structure facilitate both support and challenge?
Is there an effective process for succession planning?
Do boards allow time for open discussions and strategic thinking, as well as formal meetings?
Some of this can be done by document review — including board papers and minutes, skill matrix, recruitment process documents, etc. But much of this will also require interviews with board members and those who support the board, such as the corporate/company secretarial or corporate governance team.
This article concludes the series on what internal audit should know about ESG risks. If you missed the first two articles, be sure to go back and read our previous blogs, to get you up to speed on our suggestions on how internal audit can approach environmental and social risks.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
Transit systems. Healthcare facilities. Financial services firms. What do they all have in common? Organizations within these sectors — and essentially all industries, for that matter — have been hit by ransomware, a type of malware where cybercriminals demand a ransom payment to unlock access to your private and confidential systems and files.
While many cybersecurity risks exist, ransomware is often one of the more pressing challenges. Not only can it bring operations to a screeching halt, but it can also cause issues like data leaks and reputational damage. A global survey by cybersecurity software company Sophos finds that 66% of surveyed organizations suffered ransomware attacks in 2021. “It took on average one month to recover from the damage and disruption,” Sophos adds.
Given the severity of ransomware risk, internal auditors should aim to help their organizations reduce these threats, along with overall cybersecurity risks. How? As Audit International will examine in this article, internal audit departments can take steps such as conducting IT/cybersecurity audits and using technology like internal audit management software to improve internal controls and collaboration.
Review IT practices and controls :
Even though internal auditors generally aren’t responsible for choosing cybersecurity software and establishing employee training to recognize ransomware risks, they can still provide assurance over IT practices and controls, such as with an IT audit.
When IT teams conduct phishing tests to see whether employees are tricked by email scams that can cause ransomware issues, internal auditors are then able to review those results and ensure that the organization is meeting a sufficient standard to prevent social engineering. If the results demonstrate gaps in employee preparedness on ransomware risk or other cybersecurity risks, then internal auditors would likely want to communicate that risk to other stakeholders, like boards and senior management.
Internal audit leaders might also review remote work policies to ensure that IT teams are appropriately managing these with ransomware risk in mind, rather than just focusing on the functionality of work-from-home environments. While internal auditors often rely on guidance from IT leaders, they can still audit areas like access logs to ensure that only approved devices, with the appropriate threat intelligence and data protection technologies, are connecting to their networks.
Align key stakeholders :
Improving ransomware protection also means internal auditors need to align key stakeholders, rather than just collaborating with IT. That means pulling together information from multiple departments to make sure everyone’s on the same page.
Internal auditors should check with finance teams to see how they’re accounting for the potential costs of a ransomware attack, and then ensure that other key stakeholders, like boards and senior management, understand and agree with this approach. Otherwise, issues like not having a sufficient budget to recover from a ransomware attack may arise.
“Regardless of their size or revenue, organizations should assume they will be targeted with ransomware, and they should examine their prevention, detection, mitigation, response, and recovery measures,” notes Zachary Ginsburg, research director for the Gartner Audit and Risk practice, in a Gartner press release.
Leverage internal audit management software :
Internal auditors can mitigate ransomware risk by leveraging internal audit management software. Many technologies are designed to assist with cybersecurity risk management, but from an audit perspective, internal audit management software is important for gaining assurance.
Overall, internal audit teams have an opportunity to make a significant impact when it comes to ransomware risk management. Planning ahead and focusing on internal alignment can go a long way toward reducing ransomware attacks and other cybersecurity risks.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
Having considered how internal audit can address environmental risks in the first article in this Audit International series, this article turns to the second element of ESG, social risk. This can be a sensitive area, and many risks are hard to quantify. But over the last decade, expectations of organizations have evolved significantly, and internal audit has a key role in providing assurance over the risks that this presents.
Social risks :
Social risk can be viewed from several perspectives. While we traditionally look at business activities, here it can also be helpful to look through the lens of different stakeholders to ensure all risks are captured and completely understood. For example, consider impacts on the organization itself, staff, customers, suppliers, investors, other third parties, and the wider communities in which you operate. Below are some of the key risks – not an exhaustive list — but those that outline the main risk areas you will want to capture:
– Health and safety – consider both workplace and customer safety.
– Labor standards – your own and those throughout your supply chain. This goes beyond compliance with legislation and international protocols to include issues such as well-being, benefits, and employee engagement.
– Equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) – very important to staff, customers, and the community, this is a significant topic in and of itself
– Sales practices – important to your customer base and the wider community, poor practices can quickly damage a reputation.
– Data privacy – sometimes considered a social risk, given its impact on staff, customers, and other partners.
– Community engagement – how effective is your organization in working with local (and broader) stakeholders to maximize the positive and minimize the negative impacts on the community. This started with CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) but often goes much deeper.
– Other broad, but important, issues such as human rights and the rights of indigenous peoples.
– Typical impacts for the organization will be the same as for many other ESG risks – reputational, legal and regulatory, financial, operational, and ultimately strategic. Other than potentially using different stakeholder perspectives when considering risks, this fits well into your risk assessment process.
Getting started – Determining the key risks :
Your risk assessment should always be the starting point. In order to do this, you will first need to go through several steps to get sufficient background context:
Understand your organization’s approach to social risk. Given the variety of risks and the number of stakeholders, it is likely that it will sit across the organization with many different risk owners. For example, staff-related risks and issues will be owned by Human Resources, whereas supply chain risks will be owned by the relevant business unit or a procurement function. Are there anywhere these risks are also considered and assessed together or across the organization, such as part of a risk function?
Consider who the key stakeholders are. Some will be common to all organizations – staff and customers for instance. Others will be specific to your business – such as a community close to a quarry.
As always, consider key sector and industry risks, drawing on industry guidance, frameworks, and other resources, and on standards such as GRI (Global Reporting Initiative).
Pay attention to your supply chain, particularly if sourcing (directly or indirectly) from jurisdictions where labor or safety standards may not reflect those in your home country.
Understand legal and regulatory requirements in all jurisdictions in which you operate.
With this background information, you can start to include social risks into your risk assessment, leveraging work done by the first and second lines, and begin to provide assurance over these key risks.
How internal audit can make an impact :
Clearly, we should be focusing on the biggest risks for the organization. However, we often need to consider the impact on stakeholder groups in aggregate, rather than just for each risk. Staff is a good example. We should certainly consider risks around compliance with labor laws but understanding the impacts on staff also requires the inclusion of wellbeing, health and safety, benefits, employee engagement, and EDI to assess the potential risk around staff as a group. Internal audit can add value by looking at risk in this way and provide more holistic assurance over risks relating to specific stakeholders.
Internal audit can also take a broader look at the organization’s approach to social risk. As I suggested earlier, it is often a distributed responsibility, but the risks do not exist in isolation. Some questions you can ask:
What is the organization’s attitude towards social risks? Are social factors (collectively or specific issues) considered in strategic planning or discussed at the Board level?
Have key stakeholders been identified? Do these make sense given what you know?
Is social impact considered in decision-making, particularly investment decisions and project evaluation? For government and social-purpose organizations, this will often be a core part of the decision-making process. But even in commercial organizations, evaluation of social risks and impacts will often be built in.
Are there targets and performance metrics in place? For key risks there often are metrics, but they may not be evaluated as a whole – which could be acceptable if they have sufficient prominence. As for other ESG risks, the availability and quality of the data may be a challenge as standards, systems, and processes are evolving. This provides an opportunity for internal audit to make an impact by evaluating systems and processes and by validating the data.
Some examples
Labor standards
The subject of labor standards is broad, but if we consider it in two parts, it may help. First there are fundamental rights at a global level which most countries are adhering to as members of the International Labour Organization. These cover issues such as forced labor, child labor, maternity, working hours, discrimination, health and safety, and unionization rights. Second, there are expectations beyond this, which often vary by country and include benefits, well-being, and employee engagement. There are many ways for internal audit to make an impact here. I will address two very different audit examples:
An organization’s own employment activities have always been part of an audit universe. There is an opportunity to take this further, providing insight and assurance into, for example, employee wellbeing and engagement. Most large organizations conduct surveys covering one or both, but how effectively do they select, track, and use metrics? Also, how effective are follow-up plans? These are sensitive areas, but this is largely about how data is collected and used, and how effectively plans are defined and implemented. All are very well aligned to core internal audit skill sets.
The broader issue of labor standards risk incorporates many parts of a business. As well as an organization’s own employees, we need to consider those in the supply chain, service companies, and any other partners. The focus of an audit is likely to be on procurement and contract management processes. Do contracts stipulate appropriate measures (which vary on the size and nature of the organization)? What independent verification is available that standards are complied with? What monitoring is in place within the organization to highlight emerging issues? All questions internal audit is well-positioned to consider and provide assurance over.
Sales practices :
Sales practices have been under the microscope at various points over the last century. Often it relates to providing dishonest or misleading information, or selling products or services are known not to be in the best interest of the buyer. The banking crisis of 2008 highlighted unethical practices which led to a significant shift to providing services based on the customer. Earlier examples are tobacco and baby formula, the health impacts of which were not accurately portrayed. In both cases, poor practices continued in parts of the developing world long after they were prohibited in the West.
Risks are primarily reputational, but often there are legal and regulatory considerations that can be substantial. Let’s look at two ways in which internal audit can make an impact in this area:
The first is not about the sales process itself, but about whether organizations are considering the customer in the products and services they sell. All jurisdictions have regulations about product quality or the types of services that can be sold to different groups of consumers. Examples range from food standards to complex financial products. In addition, there are overarching responsibilities to ensure customer health and safety (whether on-site or through the products or services they are using) that should be considered. This could be as obvious as ensuring products don’t cause a choking hazard or more complex such as the danger posed when providing social media platforms to young people. Internal auditors should understand the relevant regulations, and any voluntary codes, to provide assurance that there are appropriate controls over these risks, often as part of an existing audit. But you can also go further by considering the more complex aspects of risk and raising concerns if these have not been appropriately considered as customer needs and welfare are an integral part of product/service design and production.
Internal audit can provide assurance over the sales process itself. In any setting and for any customer group, there should be defined processes for marketing, customer communications, and best practices and guidelines a salesperson should consider when making the sale. For complex products such as insurance, this may be very structured, whereas a very light touch would be expected for simple products. Controls may include guidelines, review, and approval for marketing materials, standard templates for communications, and certifications and training for sales. When auditing, we need to be mindful of having realistic expectations for the type of products and services being sold but also be prepared to challenge when processes are insufficient or not well-evidenced. Additional considerations include data privacy, avoidance of discrimination, and the need to look at practices in all relevant jurisdictions.
To summarize, we have shown the variety of social risks within ESG and how internal audit can use their skill set to make an impact by providing assurance over some of these key risks. There are good sources of information freely available to understand different issues in more detail to help assess how social risks may impact your organization and your audit response.
The third and final article in this series will focus on the “G” (Governance) in ESG which covers a broad range of corporate activities. It is important to understand these risks as they provide the foundation for effective ESG program management.
This week Audit International are taking a look at the 4 ways how Internal Audit can get a seat at the table.
When it comes to risk management and compliance, most organizations operate on a 3 Lines of Defense (3LOD) model, in which operational management, compliance, and internal audit work together in tandem to assess and mitigate risk and manage controls and compliance.
This model may be successful in theory, but as the risk management and compliance functions have grown more complex, it doesn’t always work as well as you might hope. Given the rising sophistication of cybersecurity threats and incidents of fraud, and the increasing compliance requirements posed upon organizations of all sizes, it can be difficult to keep an organization-wide pulse on threats and breaches in compliance as they arise.
The problem is, the three branches don’t always collaborate effectively, which may leave internal audit out of the loop and unable to provide much value to the organization. They may not have access to the data they need to generate effective recommendations. The internal audit team’s focus may be simply on checking boxes and ensuring compliance, rather than providing strategic insights that will help your organization understand and take steps to mitigate new threats.
If you want your internal audit team to move the needle at your organization, you need to get the ear of executives who can advocate for your work. By partnering with leadership, you’ll be able to spearhead new initiatives and gain critical access to data that will help your organization save money and reduce risk, proving your team’s value.
Here are four strategies for doing that effectively:
Identify the key people who can support you, and make a plan to build relationships with them
Your audit team will naturally be in touch with the managers who can provide key information needed to conduct your audits—but by focusing only on these contacts, you’re missing out on building relationships with the leaders who will be able to help you gain a more visible role in the organization. Build a plan for conducting periodic outreach to higher-level executives within your organization, such as your chief risk officer or your CTO. You can solicit feedback from them on any open questions they may want your team to review in your audits, or provide high-level executive briefs showcasing work that you’ve done and issues they may want to explore in further detail. Make sure that they know you and your team are available to support them and open for feedback.
Proactively address organization-wide trends
Rather than focusing solely on issues identified in individual audits, start looking at your audit results in aggregate to identify trends. Is a single department or office location having trouble resolving a specific compliance issue, or is it an across-the-board trend that should be shared with your executive team? Review your data frequently to understand risks that should be mitigated, and come up with step-by-step action plans for how they should be addressed, including who’s responsible and what the benchmarks for success are.
Pay close attention to third-party risks
Many audit teams take an insular view of risk management, failing to uncover the external risks brought on by vendors and technology partners. Make sure that you have policies in place to carefully vet and automate compliance on your third-party vendors, pulling in external data that will alert you to any financial or legal issues they may face. Regularly track all of your solutions and technology partners for red flags, and ensure that you have a strategy for mitigating them. You can showcase your findings in sessions with executives and other partners throughout the business, and collaborate to come up with a plan for any of your scenarios. Keep in mind that risks from big providers such as Amazon or Facebook may impact a lot of your customers or partners as well, so ensure that you map out all of the variables that may impact your company’s business model across the board.
Use best-in-class GRC technology to automate compliance and analyze data
In order to provide the most useful insights to your leadership team, it’s important to integrate your entire risk management function across an easy-to-use GRC platform. Your GRC platform should come with pre-built content that will help you automate your controls framework, regardless of your industry. It should make it easy to monitor compliance status and risk levels across the organization at any given time, with triggers prompting action when control levels are not being met. You should be able to easily drill down into your data and generate executive dashboards, so that you can share insights to justify recommendations and help your leadership team make better informed business decisions.
By building a cohesive strategy for integrating with the 3LOD, backed by in-depth data analytics, real-time data feeds, and workflow automation, your audit team will be able to generate insights that can help to identify new risks, and develop new strategies for mitigating risks across the entire organization. This will help you to become a highly visible, influential, and trusted partner to the business.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
Audit International were in awe to hear this revolutionary news from the billionaire founder of the outdoor fashion brand Patagonia. He has announced just yesterday he is giving away his company to a charitable trust.
Yvon Chouinard said any profit not reinvested in running the business would go to fighting climate change.
The label has amassed a cult following due to sustainability moves like guaranteeing its clothes for life and offering reasonably priced repairs.
The brand’s website now states: “Earth is now our only shareholder.”
Mr Chouinard has always said he “never wanted to be a businessman”.
A rock climbing fanatic, he started out as making metal climbing spikes for himself and his friends to wedge into rocks, before moving into clothing and eventually creating a hugely successful sportswear brand with a cult following.
Founded in 1973, Patagonia’s sales were worth around $1.5bn this year, while Mr Chouinard’s net worth is thought to be $1.2bn.
He claimed that profits to be donated to climate causes will amount to around $100m (£87m) a year, depending on the health of the company.
“Despite its immensity, the Earth’s resources are not infinite, and it’s clear we’ve exceeded its limits,” the entrepreneur said of his decision to give up ownership.
The Californian firm was already donating 1% of its annual sales to grassroots activists and committed to sustainable practices. But in an open letter to customers, the apparently reluctant businessman said he wanted to do more.
Mr Chouinard said he had initially considered selling Patagonia and donating the money to charity, or taking the company public. But he said both options would have meant giving up control of the business and putting its values at risk.
Instead, the Chouinard family has transferred all ownership to two new entities. The Patagonia Purpose Trust, led by the family, remains the company’s controlling shareholder but will only own 2% of its total stock, Mr Chouinard said.
It will guide the philanthropy of the Holdfast Collective, a US charity “dedicated to fighting the environmental crisis” which now owns all of the non-voting stock – some 98% of the company.
“Each year the money we make after reinvesting in the business will be distributed as a dividend to help fight the crisis,” Mr Chouinard said.
Patagonia combines high-end outdoor fashion with its own brand of environmental and social activism. It’s a heady combination that certainly appeals to a loyal, if predominantly well-heeled following.
Part of the attraction comes from the fact that its environmentally conscious stance isn’t new. It was preaching eco-awareness years before sustainable fashion became fashionable.
But it’s still pretty hard to save the planet, if your business depends on selling stuff, however many recycled or renewable products you use.
By ringfencing future profits for environmental causes, Patagonia’s founder Yvon Chouinard has done his best to square that circle.
But he is also clearly trying to ensure that Patagonia brand is future-proofed and can never fall into the hands of the kind of companies he has accused of greenwashing in the past.
It’s nice to bring a good news story to you readers, and it will be interesting to see if any other climate conscious companies will follow suit. The bar has well and truly been set.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
Audit International have been thinking recently about what internal audit should know about ESG risks, and where best to start but with the E, which is for Environmental.
In this, the first in a series of three articles, we will drill down on Environmental risk and explore how internal audit can have an impact by focusing on key risks.
Environmental risks :
There’s no single taxonomy of environmental risks. Consider what categories your organization uses and what is used elsewhere in the sector. The following should all be covered, at a minimum, but may be described in different ways using different terminology:
Climate change :
This should include the effect of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions – we usually talk about carbon dioxide but there are seven gases covered by the GHG protocol
Pollution from emissions and discharge (i.e., water, soil, air)
Biodiversity loss and deforestation
Waste management
Resource use – impacts of raw materials, production, transportation, and distribution (consider water, energy, and other natural resources)
Hazardous materials
There is clearly an interplay between these risks, but as they represent the major environmental impacts, this offers a good starting point.
This should fit neatly into your existing risk assessment process. Typical impacts for the organization will be reputational, legal and regulatory, financial, operational, and ultimately strategic. All things we are very familiar with.
Getting started – Determining the key risks
Every organization is different. You will need to start with a risk assessment to determine the key risks, potentially using the list above. To do this, you will need to understand the main environmental issues in your business, considering a number of factors:
What sector(s) you are in, and what are the main impacts of that sector. Search out industry guidance from standard setters such as GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), international business groups, such as the World Economic Forum, and thought leaders, such as McKinsey. It is important to consider all the main parts of your business, from the environmental impact of the raw materials you source, through transportation, production, and sales. Although focus on your immediate impacts may be easier, the impacts outside your organization’s immediate control are often more significant. For example, a significant environmental impact of electronics is the extraction of rare earth metals essential for their production.
Where your business is based, the places in which you operate, where you source materials from, and where you sell to. This is important for a number of reasons. It drives the nature and extent of legal and regulatory risk that the organization faces. It also influences the attitudes of stakeholders, such as customers and consumers, as these may vary significantly. But bear in mind, that these factors can change quickly and this needs to be built into any risk assessment.
Requirements of your customers. This may be contractual for government or corporate procurement, or the preferences and attitudes of consumers. This is also partly based on location (as mentioned above), but in global markets, it is never that simple.
All of this (and more) should have been considered by the business (first or second line) and internal audit should leverage their work, effectively challenging and validating. If this has not been done, internal audit needs to be taking a step back and conducting a more basic evaluation of the maturity of the organization’s risk assessment process.
Some types of environmental impact will be universal and significant no matter what your business activity. These include climate change and waste, which Audit International will dig a little deeper into later in the article. Others may apply to a much greater extent in certain industries, such as those in extractive industries (oil and mining for example) and heavy manufacturing (where there may be high levels of resource use – both raw materials as inputs and energy and water in the production process).
How internal audit can make an impact :
As with any aspect of audit planning, the greatest value internal audit can bring will depend on the major risks identified. But we can’t just consider the inherent risks, we need to understand what other sources of assurance are in place and, most importantly, what activities are contributing to both the risk and the assurance. Think about the following:
What do we know about environmental management processes that are in place? What is the scope of these systems and processes?
What reporting is in place? Are external reports assured? Which stakeholders use and rely on these reports?
Are environmental factors (risks and costs) incorporated into project evaluation and capital decisions?
A common factor across many environmental risks is availability and the quality of the data. Process and controls for environmental data are generally less mature and systems are not always equipped or configured to meet the complexities and nuances of this data. This is often a great opportunity for internal audit to add value, both by providing assurance over processes and systems, and by validating the data itself. Both leverage core internal audit skills.
We can also go further, confirming that reports meet whichever standards are being applied, that management reports or projects evaluations fairly, and that these completely reflect risks as well as opportunities. However, this may require more specialized knowledge.
Some examples :
Climate change
All organizations need a response to climate change, and so while the specific needs will differ, this is an issue increasingly relevant for everyone. How can internal audit add value? Let’s look at two potential opportunities:
Has the business considered the potential physical and transitional impacts of climate change? Best practice suggests this should be done using scenario analysis that includes a range of realistic scenarios. Physical vulnerabilities may result from gradual, long-term changes in climate (chronic risks), or short-term (acute) risks, such as storms and fires during heatwaves. These potentially impact the cost-of-capital, the availability and cost of insurance rates, and cause operational disruption. Transitional impacts include changes in legislation, markets, technology, and stakeholder expectations. Internal audit can review the process used to establish scenarios and determine the impacts and, more importantly, assess actions to improve resilience, mitigate risk, and maximize opportunities.
Many corporations are now publishing disclosures under TCFD (Task Force on Climate Related Disclosures). These are becoming mandatory in some countries and are an increasing expectation from investors. External assurance, if any, is usually very limited in scope. Internal audit can provide assurance over the processes to collate data and support assertions made in the disclosures. It can also audit the data and assess the evidence supporting those assertions. Other organizations may provide (voluntarily or by regulation) data on, for example, energy use or emissions. Again, internal audit can provide similar assurance over these processes or this data, as any external assurance will generally be limited.
Waste :
Waste is an issue for all organizations, although the specific impacts will be very different across businesses. As well as the environmental impact, businesses have a cost-incentive to reduce waste, as it is increasingly expensive to treat and dispose of. Internal audit can add value in a number of ways.
Here are some examples:
– Assess whether policies support the organization’s waste strategy. Are they specific to the business and relevant for the types and locations of waste produced? Do they take into account legislation and regulation in each jurisdiction? Are they effectively implemented, understood, and followed?
– Companies often report waste information, either in annual reports or to different public authorities. How is this validated? For example, how do we know that waste is recycled or reused? Are there controls to independently verify how the waste has been treated? In many countries, responsibility for safe disposal rests with the waste producer, not the waste contractor.
To summarize, we have described the importance of environmental risk to all organizations and have shown how internal audit can respond to some of those risks. Internal audit can use existing tools and skills to get started, and leverage widely available sources of knowledge to find out more.
Keep an eye out for our next blog, discussing the S in ESG, which of course stands for ‘Social’.
We will explore how internal audit can address important social risks.
“Audit International are specialists in the recruitment of Auditors and various Corporate Governance Professionals including Internal Audit, Cyber Security, Compliance, IT Audit, Data Analytics etc across Europe and the US.
If you would like to reach out to discuss your current requirements, please feel free to reach us via any of the following:
Calling
– Switzerland 0041 4350 830 59 or
– US 001 917 508 5615
E-mail:
– info@audit-international.com”
Grant Thornton has strengthened its financial services tax team with the appointment of EY’s Richard Milnes as partner.
Previous to his post at EY, Milnes also worked in in international tax for Shell and as head of tax planning for Lloyds TSB before moving to a front office tax structuring and transactional role at Lloyds.
Milnes is to be based at Grant Thornton’s London office.
Continue reading »
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board have approved their 2014 fiscal-year budget as well as a 2013-2017 strategic plan that will hopefully see accounting firms expanding into consulting practices.
The PCAOB has noticed a growth in consulting revenue and acquisition activity in the past number of years. The Big 4 consulting firms have increased their consulting revenue by 33% in the past 5 years compared to a mere 6% increase in audit revenue. The PCAOB feel the consulting revenue will continue to increase.
Continue reading »
The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has settled disciplinary orders involving three audit firms and 3 people within these firms. The PCAOB is charging them with violating the federal securities laws and not keeping to the PCAOB auditing standards and rules in the audits of 10 public companies.
Continue reading »
