Description
The scope and level of detail of the strategy should be scaled to fit the needs and stage of the project (or company operations).
115 Tool 1: Template for Preparing a Community Investment Strategy
Tool 1: Template for Preparing a
Community Investment Strategy
The scope and level of detail of the strategy should be scaled to ?t the needs and
stage of the project (or company operations).
Introduction
– Brief project description: company operations, community context, and key social and environmental issues or impacts
Business Case
– Business rationale for supporting a CI program/anticipated business benefts
– Key site-level issues, risks, and opportunities to be addressed through CI
Local Context
– Key fndings of socioeconomic baseline assessment and stakeholder consultations
– Stakeholder analysis
– Key challenges and opportunities posed by the local context
– Institutional mapping: institutions, organizations, and potential partners
– Key government development priorities and plans
Community
Engagement and
Planning
– Process, mechanisms, and timetable for multi-stakeholder engagement on CI
– Key phases, activities, and timeline for community planning and input into CI priorities and strategy
– Key results from activities that assessed and ranked local development priorities
Objectives,
Guiding Principles,
and Criteria
– Goals and objectives of CI Strategy (linked to the business case and SMART*)
– Guiding principles, eligibility criteria, and selection criteria
Focus Areas
for CI
– Process and criteria (e.g., “screens”) used to select areas for company investment
– Key focus areas selected for CI (and supporting rationale for each)
– Typology of investments and allocation (short term versus long term)
Company Core
Competencies
and Resources
– Ways in which company can leverage its assets, resources, and unique role in support of CI focus areas (e.g., staff,
expertise, facilities, equipment, contacts, advocacy, etc.)
Sustainability,
Handover, and
Exit Strategy
– Proposed criteria/measures to avoid creating dependency and to ensure that programs can become self-sustaining once
the company reduces or withdraws its support
– Strategy and timeline for decreasing company support and building local self-suffciency for both management and
fnancing of projects and programs
Implementation
Planning
– Proposed delivery model(s) or structures (and rationale for selection)
– Potential partners
– Roles and responsibilities
– Implementation schedule
– Governance structure and composition (to ensure multi-stakeholder representation and decision making)
Internal
Coordination
and Alignment
– Coordination of CI with other company policies/programs affecting communities
– Mechanisms for coordination among units interacting with local stakeholders
– Cross-functional roles/accountabilities for units interacting with local stakeholders
Capacity
Building
– Company readiness (management support, internal preparedness/skills to engage)
– Capacity building needs identifed (i.e., target groups/skills needed)
– Capacity building activities undertaken to date
Staf?ng and
Budget
– Staffng resources to support CI (coordination, oversight, management)
– Budget assumptions and main sources of fnancing (including any plans for external funding, and arrangements to secure
long-term fnancial sustainability)
– CI Budget (multi-year) and contingencies
Results
Measurement
– Monitoring and evaluation activities to be undertaken
– Participatory methods/mechanisms to be used
– Key indicators to be tracked (including business benefts) and baseline data required
– Resource and budget requirements
Communications
– Internal and external communications plans
– Timetable, target audiences, communication channels to be used
* Speci?c, Measurable, Attributable, Results-oriented, and Timebound
116 Tool 2: Template for Preparing a Communications Plan
Tool 2: Template for Preparing a
Communications Plan
The following template provides a suggested structure for the preparation of a
communications plan to support a company’s community investment strategy. The
scope and level of detail of the communications plan may be scaled to ?t the needs
and stage of the project (or company operations).
Strategic communications is the use of internal and external outreach tools to achieve
measurable outcomes in support of business objectives. A good communications strategy:
• Identi?es key internal and external audiences
• Connects the company to its stakeholders and customers
• De?nes and delivers speci?c messages that will resonate with target audiences
• Is designed to reach measurable results
• Follows a long-term plan of action
Local Context
Challenges/Constraints
• Key challenges of the local, national, and international contexts to which the communications strategy should
respond (e.g., local opinions, historical legacies, or global campaigns against the industry)
Key Audiences and
their Informational
Needs
• Key stakeholder groups that have an interest in and/or need to be informed/infuenced by the communication
activities
• Stakeholder analysis: a) internal and external audiences; b) primary, secondary, and infuential/high value (e.g., political
decision makers and local opinion leaders) target groups
• Main informational needs of the target audiences (aligned with the CI program cycle)
Goals and Objectives
of Communications
Plan
• Overall goal of the communications plan in light of context, challenges, opportunities, and audience needs (linked
with the company’s overall business objectives)
• External (e.g., strengthen social license to operate) and internal (e.g., create buy-in) objectives of the communications
strategy
Key Messages • Key messages and tone of the key messages (e.g., factual and visual information that resonates with target
audiences)
External and Internal
Communications
Channels
• Existing internal and external communication channels
• Channels that allow two-way communication
• Most suitable channels (by stakeholder group) to communicate the key messages (e.g., rural radio, infuential
papers in the area, opinion makers/commentators)
Key Activities and
Timetable
• Dates/events for planned communication activities
• Dates/events that communication activities need to be coordinated with
• Activities to support long-term communications strategy (e.g., maintaining and monitoring a Web site,
maintaining good press relations)
• Risks/constraints that could affect the delivery of the communication activities (e.g., authorizations and
scheduling requirements, endorsements from other parties) and mitigation measures
117 Tool 2: Template for Preparing a Communications Plan
Crisis Response • Crisis communications team (e.g., senior executive, legal counsel, project manager, communications person)
• Designated company spokespersons in a crisis situation
• Media contacts for disseminating responses without delay
• Communication protocols (e.g., emergency communications “tree”)
• Written scripts for questions and answers about the company’s programs along with other communication
materials
Resources and Staf?ng • Staffng resources to support communications function
• Budget/resources to carry out planned communication activities (e.g., preparation and production of
communication materials, translation services, advertising costs, delivery of events)
• Opportunities to attract external partners/sponsors around planned communication activities
Key Spokespersons/
External Partners
• Key spokespersons and designated backups
• Main media contacts
• Implementing partners/local organizations whose research, on-the-ground networks, and unique communications
vehicles can be leveraged
Success Measurement • Key indicators to monitor progress vis-à-vis the expected results:
– Public perceptions (positive/negative)
– Number of third-party endorsements
– Level of community buy-in for CI (increasing/decreasing)
– Nature of civil society/NGO feedback
– Tone of media coverage (positive/negative)
– Level of political support (increasing/decreasing)
– Operational statistics (e.g., reduced number of production interruptions due to local unrest)
• Measures to ensure that performance information is used to adjust the communications plan (messages, tactics,
tools, and resources) as needed
118 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
The following guidance is part of the RuralInvest Toolkit developed by the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations for preparing successful rural
development projects—in terms of both income generation and social investment. The
toolkit comprises training courses, manuals, and custom-developed software which are
applicable for any agency, project, organization, or private investor managing funds for
small and medium-scale agricultural and rural investments.*
The institutional mapping activities given below can be used when undertaking local
context analysis for the purpose of identifying community groups, development
institutions, local organizations and/or other potential partners. (See Chapter 3).
Mapping Interest Groups
These groups may include: work groups, youth clubs, cooperatives, agricultural
worker associations, women’s organizations, parents’ associations, religious
organizations, saving and loan associations, irrigation boards, local development
committees, etc. The objective of the institutional mapping is to discover roles and
activities of these various groups.
Products that can be obtained:
• Brief information on interest groups existing in the communities
• A map or sketch showing the spatial distribution of the various interest groups
that operate in the communities
• A register of these various groups for the purpose of future planning
Useful questions:
• What are the interest or activity groups that operate in the community?
• What other organizations are there in the zone? What are their relations with
the community?
• How many members do they have?
• What are their aims?
• What activities do they undertake?
• How do they relate to other local stakeholders and/or the communities?
• What are the relations like between these organizations and the community?
• Are there any con?icts between the community and interest groups in the
zone? If there are, what is the cause? How can these con?icts be overcome?
* www.fao.org/tc/tci/ourrole/ruralinvest/it/
119 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Sample Format: Interest Groups in the Community
Organization and
date established
Activities carried out Role or function in
local development
Number of members
within the area
Mapping Development Institutions
Development institutions include public development institutions, private entities, and
NGOs. The main objective of the institutional mapping is to identify the activities these
organizations undertake (or have undertaken), the policy and development approach
adopted by them and, on the basis of this information, to identify their potential
contribution to the objectives and targets of the project or program under consideration.
Products that can be obtained:
• Summary of the development institutions that work in the zone, by sector
• A table or drawing to show what development institutions do, and the type of
relationship they maintain with the community
• A record of development institutions that work in the zone, for the purpose of
de?ning their role/function in local development
Useful questions:
• What public (state) institutions, local governments, private ?rms, and NGOs
have a signi?cant presence in the communities?
• In which sectors do each of these institutions operate and what concrete
activities have they carried out or are they currently carrying out?
• What do the of?cials of each of these institutions think of the organizations
participating in decision making in the projects and programs that they execute?
• How do members of the community rate the work of these institutions?
Sample Format: Development Institutions
Institution What activities does
it carry out?
Who does it work
with?
Level of participation
in decision making
120 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Mapping Management Capacity of Local Organizations
Where needed, institutional mapping may also explore questions around expertise
and capacity of local organizations that operate in the area. The objective of this
exercise is to ?nd out whether local organizations require strengthening and, if so,
in what areas.
Products that can be obtained:
• Identi?cation of the areas of training and technical assistance required by
different entities and local institutions
• Summary of the social capital and/or the management capacity of local
communities and organizations
Useful questions:
• What local organizations are there? Do they have legal status? Do they have
different functions?
• If there are several local organizations, are there tensions or con?icts among them?
• Do members of the community or organization(s) help ?nance the
organization’s activities?
• How frequently do their boards of directors meet?
• Are minutes kept of assemblies and meetings?
• Are balance sheets prepared and accounting records kept?
• Are such records manual or computerized?
• Are external audits performed?
• When and at what event was the current board of directors appointed?
• How and with what mechanisms do grassroots members assess their leaders’
performance?
• How often is community work done? Who participates in community work?
• What tasks are carried out collectively and free of charge?
• Do organizations and their communities have experience in managing
development projects?
• How are important decisions affecting all organization members taken?
• What mechanisms do community members have to supervise the work of
their leaders?
121 Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Social Network Analysis (SNA) is useful for visualizing patterns of engagement
between diverse local stakeholders and understanding how to use these
relationships to further a company’s CI objectives. Although it is enhanced by the
use of special software, one can get started without SNA software. SNA involves
the following three stages:
1. Participant Survey – A survey tool is developed by facilitators, often in
collaboration with participants. The survey includes questions about the ?ows
of information, resources and collaboration that are important to the local
community.
2. Data Analysis – The results of the SNA survey are tabulated in Excel or input
into a network analysis software application (such as InFlow or UCINet).* These
free or inexpensive applications have built-in algorithms that generate network
maps, positioning organizations or individuals according to their connections
with others.
3. Participatory Feedback – Stakeholder maps and metrics are used to facilitate
discussions between the company and community members. The questions
generated by analyzing the SNA results can help to draw out extremely
valuable observations about key actors, alternative ways to optimize the
“development supply chains,” and fresh insights into power brokers that hold
signi?cant in?uence over the working environment.
SNA maps and metrics are particularly effective when used in combination with
stakeholder dialogue, and can help project planners to identify key connectors,
community resource hubs, gatekeepers and brokers, who are described below.
Example of a Social Network Analysis (SNA) map
Company
International NGO
Local NGO
CBO
Other Business
Local Government
Connector
Resource Hub
Gatekeeper
Local
Gov5
Local
Gov6
Local
Gov1
Local
Gov2
Local
Gov3
Local
NGO3
Local
NGO2
Local
NGO1
International
NGO1
International
NGO2
CBO5
CBO4
CBO3
CBO2
CBO1
Company
Local
Gov4
Other
business5
Other
business4
Other
business3
Other
business2
Other
business1
Other
business6
* http://www.orgnet.com/in?ow3.html (InFlow) or http://www.analytictech.com/ucinet/ (UCINET)
122 Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Connectors are actors in a community who know large numbers of people and
who are in the habit of making introductions. Tap them early in the CI process to
get a complete 360 perspective. But never rely on a single voice. If the CI involves
an explicit networking component, then connectors are well placed to play a
leading role. Build them into your outreach plan.
Resource Hubs are individuals or organizations that provide programmatic
resources—funding, supplies, training, or intellectual capital—to local NGOs
and frontline community-based organizations that work directly with affected
individuals and communities. Community-based resources may present themselves
in surprising ways, such as family-owned small businesses, local law and accounting
?rms, and local consultants. Many of them may be wary of external investors and
corporations and initially keep a low pro?le.
Gatekeepers or Brokers are organizations and individuals that act as a bridge
between different constituencies, assisting or potentially hindering information ?ow
between sectors or regions. While connectors tend to “know everyone,” brokers
often know “the right people.” Connectors hold an extremely important position
in any new initiative and should be considered during the planning and project
start-up phases. Through SNA, brokers can be identi?ed who can help build bridges
between key project constituencies, including local government, government
ministries, and special interest groups.
123 Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
As discussed in Chapter 6, it is not uncommon for companies to face high
expectations for support and long lists of development needs and priorities from
local stakeholders. In such a context, exercising selectivity and strategic focus
regarding which activities to support becomes particularly important.
One way to prioritize among the numerous development issues and needs raised by
local stakeholders is by vetting them through the twin lenses of risk and opportunity.
(For other common “screens,” see the sample screening process outlined in Chapter
6). Risk and opportunity screening can be a useful decision-making tool that involves:
(i) the identi?cation of risks and opportunities associated with each community
priority area/issue; and, (ii) the evaluation and ranking of each identi?ed risk or
opportunity to determine potential priority areas for CI.
Identi?cation of Risks and Opportunities
Community engagement and planning processes typically reveal a set of
development issues or areas that are important to local stakeholders. Using this as a
starting point, map each issue against:
• the level of risk to the company (of not addressing this issue)
• the level of opportunity presented to address this issue (i.e., achievability in
terms of ease of execution and likelihood of success)
Community Issues
Level of Risk
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
O
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
• Community center
• Scholarships
• Training for women
• Support for
livelihoods
• Enterprise
development
• Jobs
• HIV/AIDS
• Low skilled youth
• Access to water
• Ecotourism
• Preservation of
heritage sites
• Upgrading of temples
• Primary education
• Malaria
• Protection of fishing and
farming livelihoods
• Capacity building of
traditional authorities
• Cultural activities
• Transportation
• Electrification
• Support to dairy
producers
• Crime and security
• Corruption
High
Med.
Low
High Med. Low
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
After mapping
potential risks and
opportunities, the
company chose to
invest in the areas
circled
Community
Issues Nature of Risk Nature of Opportunity
Level of Risk
(High, Medium,
or Low)
Level of
Opportunity (High,
Medium, or Low)
Prevalence of HIV/
AIDS in the local
area of operations
The local incidence of HIV/AIDS
could constitute a risk to the
company’s workforce, affecting
productivity, costs, and morale.
The company can partner to support
the delivery of HIV/AIDS awareness,
prevention, and treatment programs
for employees and local communities
High Medium
High rates of
unemployment/
lack of jobs
High expectations for jobs combined
with low levels of education and skills
within local communities could fuel
frustration and anti-company sentiment
Early phase investment in skills
training and entrepreneurship
programs can increase the income-
earning prospects of local residents
High High
124 Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
How to Rank Risks and Opportunities
For each identi?ed risk, the company should assign a rating of high/medium/low.
For consistency of ranking, it is important to establish a common de?nition of what
high/medium/low ratings mean. Factors to consider include:
• How great of a risk is posed to the company by this issue (whether it be in
terms of project delays and disruptions, social license, or reputation)?
• Is the issue considered high priority by a majority of local stakeholders or a
select minority?
• What is the probability or likelihood of a “risk event” should the need or issue
not be addressed?
• Has the issue received NGO or media attention?
To rate the level of opportunity presented by each issue, assess according to potential
“achievability”—that is, how easy it would be to execute through the company’s CI
program. Assign a rating of high/medium/low. As with the risk rating, common criteria
and de?nitions of ratings are needed. To determine the level of achievability, consider:
• Are there potential partner organizations with suf?cient expertise and
implementation capacity?
• Is the issue supported by government and included in local/regional/national
development plans?
• What is the estimated cost of the intervention?
• How practical and/or easy is the activity to execute (i.e., can it be done readily
by the company or a third-party)?
• What is the potential for impact (i.e., ability of the intervention to result in
broad-based bene?ts)?
It is also possible that some issues on the list should not be addressed through
CI (for example, areas that fall into management of or compensation for project
impacts, or are best addressed by government). These issues should be ?agged as
such and excluded from ?nal consideration.
As the ?nal step, the combination of the initial risk rating plus the achievability
rating will help determine whether or not the issue should be prioritized for
company support through CI.
High Medium Low
Level of
Achievability
(capital)
• Easy to address through the CI
program
• Partner organization is available
to implement
• Capacity to implement is
suffcient
• Cost of intervention is
reasonable relative to beneft
• Intervention is likely to achieve a
high development impact
• Can be addressed through the CI
program, but may be diffcult to
execute
• Cost of intervention is reasonable or
on the slightly higher side relative
to beneft
• Development impact is still likely to
be relatively high
• May be addressed through CI, but diffcult to
execute
• Major costs would be required relative to beneft
• The likelihood of high development impact is
not certain, or is too costly to achieve, or may be
infuenced by other factors beyond the scope of
the company to address
125 Tool 6: Examples of Tools and Methods for Organizational Capacity Assessment
Tool 6: Examples of Tools and Methods for
Organizational Capacity Assessment*
Name of the Tool/
Methodology
Description
Effective
Capacity
Assessment
for Nonpro?t
Organizations
(McKinsey and
Company)
Known as the McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid, this tool is designed to help nonproft organizations assess their
organizational capacity. The tool includes a description of seven elements of organizational capacity and their components.
Each variable of the grid is scored on a scale of 1 to 4.
Pros and Cons: A clearly described, comprehensive capacity assessment tool. It is user friendly and can be easily adapted
for use in different types of organizations.
Web site: www.emcf.org/pdf/mckinsey_capacitytool.pdf
Capacity
Assessment Tool
(CARE Somalia)
This is a brief questionnaire to assess the capacity of an NGO or partner organization. The assessment includes
governance, management and fnancial practices, service delivery, organizational mission, and sustainability.
Pros and Cons: A short, simple checklist and rating format supplemented by a rating scale.
Web site: www.careinternational.org.uk/download.php?id=39
Capacity Results
Framework (World
Bank Institute)
The Capacity Results Framework is a tool to facilitate strategic thinking on capacity issues. The framework looks at the
three levels of capacity—individual, organizational, and institutional—and identifes current and desired levels of capacity.
The assessment fndings are used to defne interventions to address gaps and to defne indicators that can be jointly
monitored with stakeholders.
Pros and Cons: This briefng paper provides a useful framework for thinking about capacity development. It does not,
however, provide user guidance or details on how to adapt the framework to different contexts.
Web site: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCDRC/Resources/CapacityBriefNo14.pdf
Capacity
Assessment
Framework
(UNDP)
This is a set of tools that include a Capacity Assessment Practice Note and a User’s Guide. UNDP’s Capacity Assessment
Framework provides a comprehensive view of the issues that could be addressed in capacity assessment. The assessment
process allows the user to develop a comprehensive work plan that specifes future capacities to be developed, strategies
and interventions to be used, specifc targets and indicators, and cost estimates.
Pros and Cons: The framework is interactive and very thorough. While the guidance is fexible enough to be used in
different contexts, the use of these materials is likely to require time and adaptation to the specifc context—and some
advance work and planning.
Web site: www.undp.org/capacity/
Participatory
Organizational
Evaluation Tool
(UNDP)
This is an organizational capacity assessment tool to assess capacity and levels of consensus in organizations against
seven areas (human resource management, fnancial resource management, equitable participation, sustainability of
program benefts, partnerships, learning, and strategic management). The methodology involves bringing participants
together in cross-functional, cross-hierarchical groups for open exchange to identify divergent viewpoints to foster growth;
to create consensus around future organizational capacity development activities; and to select, implement, and track
organizational change and development strategies.
Pros and Cons: This self-assessment/group discussion approach is highly participatory. At the same time, it is relatively
time consuming and the potential faws and risks of self-assessment need to be managed.
Web site: www.comminit.com/pdf/POET_UsersManual.pdf
Organizational
Capacity Self-
Assessment
(Academy for
Educational
Development)
This tool guides an organization through a capacity self-assessment based on a suggested ranking scale, and covers
different stages of organizational functioning and management. As the end result, the tool provides an organization with
capacity development priorities and a training plan.
Pros and Cons: The tool is simple to use, can be adapted to different contexts, and can be completed relatively quickly.
By design, however, this tool requires a knowledge facilitator to lead the discussion and assessment process. Flaws and
risks related to the process of self-assessment need to be managed.
Web site: www.aed-ccsg.org/resources/tools/IDAssess.doc
* Sources for this table:
A Brief Review of 20 Tools to Assess Capacity, UNDP, 2005, www.unpei.org/PDF/institutioncapacity/Brief-Review-20-Tools-to-Assess.pdf
Capacity Assessment Tools, Methodologies, Resources, Capacity For Disaster Reduction Initiative, www.unisdr.org/cadri/documents/
CAPACITY_ASSESSMENT_TOOLS_FINAL.pdf
126 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
The Sample Organizational Capacity Assessment below is an extract from the
McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool.* As presented below, the template can be
used by a company to assess the capacity of potential partners and/or as an input
when developing a company’s capacity building plan (see Chapter 5 for more
details). The company can also develop its own assessment based on the full
description of the tool and the related capacity framework.
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Overall strategy • Strategy is either
nonexistent, unclear, or
incoherent (largely set of
scattered initiatives)
• Strategy has no infuence
over day-to-day behavior
• Strategy exists, but is
either not clearly linked
to mission, vision, and
overarching goals, lacks
coherence, or is not easily
actionable
• Strategy is not broadly
known and has limited
infuence over day-to-day
behavior
• Coherent strategy has
been developed and is
linked to mission and
vision, but is not fully
ready to be acted upon
• Strategy is mostly known
and day-to-day behavior is
partly driven by it
• Organization has clear,
coherent medium- to long-
term strategy that is both
actionable and linked to
overall mission, vision, and
overarching goals
• Strategy is broadly known
and consistently helps
drive day-to-day behavior
at all levels of organization
Goals/
performance
targets
• Targets are nonexistent
or few
• Targets are vague, or
confusing, or either too
easy or impossible to
achieve
• Targets are not clearly
linked to aspirations and
strategy, and may change
from year to year
• Targets largely unknown or
ignored by staff
• Realistic targets exist in
some key areas
• Targets are mostly aligned
with aspirations and
strategy
• Targets may lack
aggressiveness, or be short
term, lack milestones,
be mostly focused on
“inputs,” or are often
renegotiated
• Staff may or may not know
and adopt targets
• Quantifed, aggressive
targets in most areas
• Targets linked to
aspirations and strategy
and mainly focused on
“outputs/outcomes” with
some “inputs”
• Typically multiyear
targets, though may lack
milestones
• Targets are known and
adopted by most staff
• Limited set of quantifed,
genuinely demanding
performance targets in
all areas
• Targets are tightly linked
to aspirations and strategy,
output/outcome-focused,
have annual milestones,
and are long term
• Staff consistently adopts
targets and works
diligently to achieve them
Funding model • Organization highly
dependent on a few
funders, largely of same
type (e.g., government or
foundations)
• Organization has access
to multiple types of
funding (e.g., government,
foundations, corporations)
with only a few funders
in each type, or has many
funders within only one or
two types of funders
• Solid base of funders in
most types of funding
sources
• Organization has
developed some
sustainable revenue-
generating activity
• Diversifed funding across
multiple source types
• Organization insulated
from potential market
instabilities (e.g., fully
developed endowment)
and/or has developed
sustainable revenue-
generating activities
Performance
measurement
• Very limited measurement
and tracking of
performance
• Performance partially
measured and progress
partially tracked
• Performance measured
and progress tracked in
multiple ways, several
times a year
• Well-developed and
integrated system (e.g.,
balanced scorecard) used
for measuring organization’s
performance and progress
on continual basis
* Accessible at www.vppartners.org/learning/reports/capacity/capacity.html
127 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Fundraising • Generally weak fundraising
skills and lack of expertise
(either internal or access to
external expertise)
• Main fundraising
needs covered by some
combination of internal
skills and expertise, and
access to some external
fundraising expertise
• Regular fundraising
• Needs adequately covered
by well-developed internal
fundraising skills
• Occasional access to
some external fundraising
expertise
• Highly developed internal
fundraising skills and
expertise in all funding
source types to cover all
regular needs
• Access to external
expertise for additional
extraordinary needs
Partnerships
and alliances
development
and nurturing
• Limited use of partnerships
and alliances with public
sector, nonproft, or for-
proft entities
• Early stages of building
relationships and
collaborating with other
for-proft, nonproft, or
public sector entities
• Effectively built and
leveraged some key
relationships with a few
types of relevant parties;
some relations may be
precarious or not fully
“win-win”
• Built, leveraged, and
maintained strong, high-
impact relationships with
variety of relevant parties
• Relationships deeply
anchored in stable, long-
term, mutually benefcial
collaboration
Local
community
presence and
involvement
• Organization’s presence
either not recognized or
generally not regarded
as positive; few members
of local community
constructively involved in
the organization
• Organization’s presence
somewhat recognized,
and generally regarded
as positive within the
community; some
members of the community
constructively engaged
with the organization
• Organization reasonably
well known within
the community, and
perceived as open and
responsive to community
needs; members of the
community (including
a few prominent ones)
constructively involved in
the organization
• Organization widely
known within the
community, and perceived
as actively engaged with
and extremely responsive
to it; many members of
the community (including
many prominent members)
actively and constructively
involved in the
organization (e.g., board,
fundraising)
Organizational
processes use
and
development
• Limited set of processes
(e.g., decision making,
planning, reviews)
• Use of processes is
variable, or processes
are seen as ad hoc
requirements
• No monitoring or
assessment of processes
• Basic set of processes in
core areas
• Processes known, used,
and truly accepted by only
portion of staff
• Limited monitoring and
assessment of processes,
with few improvements
made
• Solid, well-designed set of
processes in place in core
areas
• Processes known and
accepted by many, often
used
• Occasional monitoring and
assessment of processes,
some improvements made
• Robust, lean, and well-
designed set of processes
(e.g., decision making,
planning, reviews) in place
in all areas
• Processes widely known,
used, and accepted
• Continual monitoring
and assessment of
processes, and systematic
improvements made
Staf?ng levels • Many positions are
unflled, inadequately
flled, or experience high
turnover and/or poor
attendance
• Most critical positions are
staffed (no vacancies),
and/or experience limited
turnover or attendance
problems
• Positions are almost all
staffed (no vacancies); few
turnover or attendance
problems
• Positions are all fully
staffed (no vacancies); no
turnover or attendance
problems
Staff • Staff drawn from a narrow
range of backgrounds and
experiences; interest and
abilities limited to present
job; little ability to solve
problems as they arise
• Some variety of staff
backgrounds and
experiences
• Good capabilities,
including some ability to
solve problems as they
arise
• Staff drawn from diverse
backgrounds and
experiences, and bring a
broad range of skills
• Most are highly capable
and committed to mission
and strategy; eager to
develop and assume
increased responsibility
• Staff drawn from very
diverse backgrounds and
experiences, and bring a
broad range of skills
• Most staff are highly
capable in multiple roles,
committed both to mission
and continuous learning
• Most are eager and able
to take on special projects
and collaborate
128 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Decision-
making
framework
• Decisions made largely on
an ad hoc basis by one
person and/or whomever is
accessible; highly informal
• Appropriate decision
makers known; decision-
making process fairly well
established and process
is generally followed, but
often breaks down and
becomes informal
• Clear, largely formal lines/
systems for decision
making, but decisions are
not always appropriately
implemented or followed
• Clear, formal lines/
systems for decision
making that involve as
broad participation as
practical and appropriate
along with dissemination/
interpretation of decision
Physical and
technological
infrastructure*
• Inadequate physical
and technological
infrastructure, resulting in
loss of effectiveness and
effciency (e.g., insuffcient
workspace, limited number
of telephone facilities)
• Limited/no use of
computers or other
technology in day-to-day
activity
• Adequate physical
and technological
infrastructure that can
meet organization’s most
important needs (e.g.,
basic telephone and fax
facilities accessible to most
staff)
• Equipment sharing is
common; satisfactory use
of IT infrastructure
• A number of improvements
could help increase
effectiveness and effciency
(e.g., individual voicemails,
individual desks)
• Fully adequate physical
and technological
infrastructure for the
current organizational and
communication needs
• Solid hardware and
software; high usage of IT
by staff
• Infrastructure does not
impede effectiveness and
effciency
• Physical and technological
infrastructure well tailored
to organization’s current
and anticipated future
needs
• Well designed and
thought out to enhance
organization’s effciency
and effectiveness
• Reliable telephone and
fax facilities accessible by
all staff
• Networked computing
hardware with up-to-date
software applications used
regularly by staff
* For the purposes of this capacity assessment template, physical and technological infrastructures have been merged into one.
McKinsey Capacity Grid looks at these dimensions separately.
129 Tool 8: Exit/Handover Strategy Template
Tool 8: Exit/Handover Strategy Template
See Chapter 6 for further guidance on developing an exit or handover strategy
EXIT
STRATEGY
CONCEPT
Engage with
communities,
local
government,
and other
partners up front
to get their input
and buy-in.
1. What elements of the CI project need to be sustained? Check all options that apply.
—
An activity or program
—
A beneft or beneft stream
—
An institution
—
Funding
—
A service
—
Management capacity
—
A facility or infrastructure
—
None (because the project will naturally phase out)
2. Is the company going to be providing initial management or fnancial support or both?
—
Yes
—
No
3. Will fnancial support be a one-time allocation or ongoing? If ongoing, specify anticipated duration.
—
One-time allocation
—
Ongoing
4. Could the benefts be maintained without continued support from the company?
—
Yes
—
No
5. If answer above is “no,” reconsider company support for the activity. (For existing activities, consider “turnaround” measures
to make them more sustainable). If answer above is “yes” describe how? Are there other stakeholders that could take over and
sustain this beneft stream/activity (e.g., through community payments for services delivered, by the government taking over the
project, by another mechanism)? With what resources?
6. What kind of training and capacity building and/ or resources are required for this stakeholder to be able to take over and
sustain this activity?
7. What timeframe is needed for successful handover?
OPTIONS 8. Based on the above, which of the following exit / handover strategy approaches are most appropriate? Check all options that apply.
—
Phasing down over time:
• Company reduces activity level/fnancing level over time—may be in preparation for phasing out or transferring responsibility
• Special challenges include: timing; sensitizing target population; maintaining beneft stream; building capacity of
organization taking over responsibilities; viability of activity with reduced company support; managing reputational risks
—
Transfer of responsibility (handover):
• Successor institution identifed that will continue providing activity or service
• Company assists successor institution in securing needed resources and delivery or management capacity
• Special challenges include: timing and transition; capacity building; whether scope, scale and quality of activities can
continue; viability of handover; managing reputational risks to company if handover is unsuccessful
—
Phasing out:
• Company discontinues support and involvement
• No new sponsor is identifed (or needed) to continue the activity
• Special challenges include: impacts on target population; safety net considerations; reputational risks from abrupt or poorly
planned and managed exit
WORK PLAN 9. Summarize the details of the approach(es) you have selected. This may include:
• Identifying, where possible, viable successor organization(s)
• Key activities and milestones
• Timetable (phasing if necessary)
• Training/capacity building/mentoring (technical, management, fnancial, reporting, fundraising, etc.)
• Equipment (if necessary)
• Financing (if additional external fnancial support is required)
• Community consultation/involvement during exit process
• Managing the special challenges (see #10)
• Identifying key milestones and indicators for the transition/exit (see #11)
The above will be more accurate if a successor organization has already been identifed, which, ideally, will be the case.
MANAGING
RISKS
10. Describe how the special challenges and risks (listed in #8) associated with the exit option(s) selected will be addressed.
Include this in the work plan.
MONITORING 11. Describe how “degree of readiness” for the exit or handover will be tracked and assessed? Provide relevant indicators. The amount
of time, advance preparation, and capacity building required to ensure a viable transition/exit is almost always underestimated. Setting
key milestones and targets for handover is advisable for tracking progress and enabling mid-course adjustments where needed.
Readiness indicators should include targets and be aligned with the exit strategy work plan. Examples include:
• Financial indicators that measure the extent to which the necessary fnancial resources are in place at predetermined time intervals
(e.g., by year X, the successor organization will have secured contributions from external actors in the amount of Y)
• Organizational capacity indicators that measure the progress in building capacity of partners to manage/take over the project
activities after the company’s exit/handover
• Activity indicators that measure the progress in delivering certain activities (e.g., training, development of partnerships,
external fundraising) that are part of the exit strategy work plan
130 Tool 9: Turnaround Strategy Template
Tool 9: Turnaround Strategy Template
See Chapter 6 for further guidance on developing a turnaround strategy for
unstrategic and/or unsustainable CI activities
PROBLEM ANALYSIS 1. What are the problems facing the existing CI program? Check all options that apply.
—
projects are not sustainable if company withdraws
—
projects are not aligned with (new) CI strategy / do not support business objectives
—
lack of suffcient community involvement and ownership
—
gap between stakeholder expectations and CI results
—
lack of capacity of implementing parties (internal/external)
—
creation of dependency relationship
—
ad hoc collection of different projects with lack of clear focus or impact
—
projects are not aligned with the company’s core competencies
—
projects are not demonstrating value vis-à-vis time and resources invested
—
external factors (e.g., project impacts, government change, local confict, etc.)
—
other (please specify )
NEW CI STRATEGY:
OBJECTIVES, GUIDING
PRINCIPLES & CRITERIA
2. Summarize key aspects of the company’s new CI Strategy (objectives linked to the business case, guiding
principles, eligibility criteria, alignment with core competencies) using the process set out in this guidance.
ASSESS AND
CATEGORIZE CURRENT
PORTFOLIO OF CI
PROJECTS
3. Assess current CI portfolio in light of strategy set out in #2. Sort projects into three categories (and associated
sub-categories) based on their relevance to new CI objectives and principles.
Green = high relevance to new strategy
—
Retain
Yellow = possible relevance to new strategy
—
Can be continued, with redesign, to meet new strategy objectives
—
Objective remains relevant but implementation needs to be revisited
(e.g., project implementation needs to be transferred to a competent
local partner)
Red = not relevant to new strategy
—
Stop immediately (e.g., activity is having negative effects or wasting signifcant resources)
—
Use phased approach to ceasing activity
—
Use phased approach to cease activity but replace with alternative
(e.g., donation program that is very popular with the community but
creating dependency/not aligned with new priorities. If stopped,
needs to be replaced with another program delivering benefts but in a
more sustainable manner and in consultation with local stakeholders.)
WORKPLAN FOR
TURNAROUND
Effective engagement
of internal and external
stakeholders in the redesign
process to gain their
understanding and support
will be critical to the success
of the turnaround.
4. Develop a Turnaround Plan. Suggested components include:
• Assessment of existing activities - consider each existing project separately in terms of how it needs to be
addressed, while keeping track of the CI program’s direction as a whole
• Engagement with external stakeholders to create local buy-in to the redesign process (e.g., be transparent and
try to minimize any negative impacts on local communities)
• Engagement with internal stakeholders to create staff and management buy-in to the redesign process (e.g., be
transparent and be prepared to “sell” the new program to senior management based on internal business case
for the turnaround strategy)
Based on engagement process:
• Timeline for phasing out old projects and phasing in new ones (consider how best to do this with minimum
disruption)
• Identifcation of partners for existing, redesigned and/or new activities
• Capacity building program for partners and/or communities
• Transition process which prepares partners/successor organizations to take over and sustain existing programs in
the medium to long term, and to be ready to take on new ones.
MONITORING PROGRESS
Indicators can be used to
measure progress as well as
end results. Interim results
can be used for redesign
purposes as necessary.
Defne indicators to be used to monitor progress of the turnaround strategy.
• Status indicators (which measure program milestones and show progress against stated work plan objectives,
targets, and timelines given in #4 )
• Company-community relations indicators (which show how turnaround activities are perceived by key
stakeholders and effect on local perceptions of the company )
131 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation
Tool for Sustainability Investments
The Planning and Financial Valuation Tool (FV Tool) helps a company to measure
the ?nancial return of its sustainability programs and to establish the value of risk
mitigated through such activities. Speci?cally, it aims to answer three questions:
1. What is the optimal portfolio of sustainability investments for a given operation?
2. How large an economic return back to the company can be expected from
such a portfolio?
3. When is the ideal timeframe for making speci?c sustainability interventions?
The FV Tool can be used to assess the value of a company’s portfolio of CI programs
or to assess a broader spectrum of corporate investments in sustainability (e.g.,
biodiversity, workforce development, health, education, and so forth). Companies
can use this information to evaluate program effectiveness and to strategically
allocate ?nancial resources to those programs with maximum positive impact for
both local communities and the business operation.
The FV Tool draws on a growing global database of CI programs from the collective
experiences of the extractives industry at the project or asset level (rather than the
company as a whole). The current version of the FV Tool is suited to oil, gas, and
mining projects; in the future, it will be adapted for other sectors.
How the Model Works
The Excel-based model* estimates the expected net present value of a speci?c project’s
sustainability investment portfolio over the lifespan of the project (i.e., mine or pipeline).
* The model requires technical knowledge to set the input parameters. It is not a one-size-?ts-all
approach; the model’s variables are con?gured per project.
Level of Risk to Company
Company Risk Register
O
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
f
o
r
C
o
m
p
a
n
y
t
o
H
a
v
e
I
m
p
a
c
t
Telecom
Electrification
Population Inflow
Health Issues
Community Support
Water and Land
Biodiversity
Access to Water
Workforce Skills
Ecotourism
Responsible Supply
Chain
Transportation
Inflation
Housing
Impact on Agriculture
Ethnic Groups
Unions
Air Quality Impact on Marine-life
Freshwater Pollution
Bauxite Residue
Tenure over Land
Corruption - Political
Stability
Resettlement
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
High
Med.
Low
High Med. Low
After mapping
potential risks and
opportunities, the
company chose to
invest in the areas
circled
Primary Education
Local Industry
Development
Land Footprint
Carbon Intensity
Impact on Residents
Climate Events
132 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
The application of the tool includes the following steps:
1. Start with the asset/project’s existing ?nancial model.
2. Draw on the company’s existing analysis of project stakeholders, risks, and
opportunities.
3. Conduct cost-bene?t analyses of potential productivity gains from sustainability/
community investments, such as training to switch from expatriate labor to a
local labor force or an anti-malaria program that keeps the workforce and the
community healthier. This is referred to as “value creation.”
4. Analyze how much risk may be mitigated through such community investments
by costing out the potential savings by reducing the frequency and intensity
of negative events (i.e., delays in construction, disruptions in production, even
likelihood of expropriation—all of which may be affected by local stakeholders’
perceptions of the company). This is referred to as “value protection.”
5. Based on the “value creation” and “value protection” analyses, a Monte Carlo
simulation* is run to factor in randomness (not knowing if or when such costly
“risk” events might occur).
6. A range of probable net present value (NPV)** over the lifespan of the asset is the
output, broken down by the contributions of speci?c community investments.
FV TOOL OUTPUT
SUSTAINABILITY
ISSUE
Switch Value
Creation
NPV
Calculations
Value
Protection
NPV
Calculations
Total SD/
CR Added
Value
(NPV)
Relative
Share
Sharpe
Ratio
Stand
Alone
Standard
Deviations
In % of
Project
NPV
Standard
deviation
in % of
its Mean
Initiatives ?
Workforce on 259,509 21,861 281,370 12.90% 4.25 66,282 62.49% 23.56%
Local Suppliers on 72,538 10,930 83,469 6.45% 2.89 29,644 18.54% 35.52%
Health on 6,292 13,663 22,688 8.06% 0.55 36,200 5.04% 159.56%
Housing on 797 13,663 14,460 8.06% 0.40 36,187 3.21% 250.25%
Access to Water on -83 13,663 10,846 8.06% 0.38 36,187 2.41% 333.62%
Electri?cation on -83 8,198 13,579 4.84% 0.37 21,712 3.02% 159.89%
Legal on -525 10,930 7,672 6.45% 0.36 28,947 1.70% 377.28%
Primary
Education
on -1,144 13,663 23,449 8.06% 0.35 36,182 5.21% 154.30%
Community
Development
on -3,438 24,594 10,225 14.25% 0.32 65,125 2.27% 636.90%
Resettlement on -3,357 8,198 10,305 4.84% 0.22 21,701 2.29% 210.58%
Biodiversity on -6,909 16,396 6,754 9.68% 0.22 43,410 1.50% 642.73%
Food Supply on -42,741 13,663 -34,542 8.06% -0.80 36,178 -7.67% -104.73%
Total 280,583 169,426 450,279 100% 451,494
Figures in
US $ thousands
* Monte Carlo simulation methods (or Monte Carlo experiments) are a class of computational
algorithms that rely on repeated random sampling to compute their results. Monte Carlo methods
are useful for modeling phenomena with signi?cant uncertainty in inputs, such as the calculation of
risk in business. (Source: Wikipedia)
** The net present value (NPV) of a time series of cash ?ows, both incoming and outgoing, is
de?ned as the sum of the present values (PVs) of the individual cash ?ows. NPV is a central tool in
discounted cash ?ow (DCF) analysis, and is a standard method for using the time value of money to
appraise long-term projects. (Source: Wikipedia)
Measure of the excess return (or Risk
Premium) per unit of risk in an investment
asset
Standard deviation shows how much
variation there is from the “average”
mean
Total value created and protected
over lifespan of project
Direct cash savings or
revenue to company
Indirect
savings
through
risk events
avoided
Investment
selected
through
risk register
process
133 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
The user can go through this exercise for two or more portfolios of sustainability
investments to learn which approaches are more likely to yield greater value to the
company over time.
Lessons to date:
• The FV Tool brings together different business units across the company
to mine employees’ judgment and expertise in the areas of corporate
responsibility, risk, ?nance, human resources, law, and asset management.
• The added rigor and embedded stakeholder engagement leads to greater local
development impact from a company’s investments.
• Early ?ndings suggest that it may make good business sense for companies to
consider investing in communities earlier than is traditionally accepted.
Results:
The tool aims to incorporate sustainability investments into the core of a company’s
project planning process. This is not just an academic exercise; it fosters community
development through an incentive structure that is consistent with a company’s
bottom line.
Partners:
The FV Tool is being developed as a partnership comprising IFC, Rio Tinto Alcan,
Deloitte, and MIGA, with support from the Government of Norway. More
information is available at: www.commdev.org.
Cost Drivers Bene?ts Drivers
• Cost of baseline studies
• Fully loaded annual salaries (average)
% Full-time employees
– Company staff (+ travel costs)
– Local human resources
– Average local salaries (blue and white collar)
• Local literacy rate; # of adults to be trained
• Cost of training; # employees to be trained
– Pre-employment training per employee
– Vocational training per employee
– Technical training (e.g., seconded employees)
– Continuous training per employee (% of salary)
• Labor cost savings during construction and operations, derived from:
– Annual salary savings for foreign and expatriate worker
– % of labor force without sustainability objectives
(SCENARIO A) in construction and operations
» # Local
» #Foreign
» #Expatriate
– % of labor force with sustainability objectives (SCENARIO B)
Workforce
Cash Flow Basis
Phase Pre-Feasibility Feasibility Construction Operations (per year) Closure
Costs -1.487 -6.996 -2.059 -332 -501
Benefts 172.019 20.135
? Direct NPV= $247,369K (over lifetime of the project)
Inputs
EXAMPLE: Cost-Bene?t Evaluation of Community Investment - Workforce
135
Useful References
General Toolkits/Resources
1. IFC CommDev (Oil, Gas, and Mining Sustainable Community Development
Fund), www.commdev.org
2. Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community Relations Work, Zandvliet, L.,
and Anderson, M., CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2009
3. Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA (International
Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association), 2008,
www.ipieca.org
4. Socio-Economic Assessment Toolbox (SEAT), Anglo American plc, 2003,
www.angloamerican.co.uk/aa/development/society/engagement/seat
5. RuralInvest Toolkit, Food and Agriculture Organization, 2006,
www.fao.org/tc/tci/ourrole/ruralinvest/en/
6. Community Development Toolkit, ESMAP (Energy Sector Management
Assistance Program), World Bank, and ICMM (International Council on Mining
and Metals), 2005,
www.icmm.com/page/629/community-development-toolkit
7. Investing in People: Sustaining Communities through Improved Business
Practice, A Community Development Resource Guide for Companies,
International Finance Corporation, 2000, www.ifc.org
8. The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005,
http://go.worldbank.org/Y3UF0AM9T0
9. Good Practice Note: Addressing the Social Dimensions of Private Sector Projects,
Number 3, International Finance Corporation, 2003,
www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_SocialGPN/$FILE/SocialGPN.pdf
10. Community Engagement and Development Handbook, Australian Government
Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources, 2006,
www.ret.gov.au/resources/Documents/LPSDP/LPSDP-CommunityEngagement.pdf
Business Context
1. Development Without Con?ict: The Business Case for Community Consent,
World Resources Institute, 2007, www.wri.org
2. Brie?ng Note: A Systematic Approach to Project Social Risk & Opportunity
Management, Engineers Against Poverty,
www.engineersagainstpoverty.org/key_issues/social_risks.cfm
3. Brie?ng Note: Modifying Project Opportunities and Risk Analysis for Enhanced
Social Performance, Engineers Against Poverty and Overseas Development
Institute, www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/1420.pdf
4. Market Movers—Lessons from a Frontier of Innovation, International
Finance Corporation and SustainAbility, 2007, www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/
AttachmentsByTitle/p_MarketMovers/$FILE/Market+Movers_Final.pdf
136
Capacity Building
1. Capacity Development (web portal), UNDP, www.undp.org/capacity/
2. A Brief Review of 20 Tools to Assess Capacity, UNDP, 2005,
www.unpei.org/PDF/institutioncapacity/Brief-Review-20-Tools-to-Assess.pdf
3. Capacity Assessment Methodology Users Guide, Capacity Development Group,
Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP, 2008, http://content.undp.org/go/cms-
service/download/asset/?asset_id=1670219
4. Capacity Building for Local NGOs: A Guidance Manual for Good Practice,
Progressio, 2005, www.ciir.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=91674
5. Effective Capacity Building in Nonpro?t Organizations, McKinsey & Company,
2001, www.vppartners.org/learning/reports/capacity/capacity.html
Communications
1. Global Reporting Initiative, www.globalreporting.org/home
2. Strategic Communication for Community-Driven Development (CDD): A
practical guide for project managers and communication practitioners (draft),
World Bank, 2004, www.commdev.org/?les/1939_?le_stratcomm_CDD.pdf
Con?ict and Grievance Management
1. Addressing Grievances from Project-Affected Communities, International
Finance Corporation, 2009, www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/
AttachmentsByTitle/p_GrievanceMechanisms/$FILE/IFC+Grievance+Mechanisms.pdf
2. A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for
Development Projects, Of?ce of the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman,
International Finace Corporation, 2008,
www.cao-ombudsman.org/howwework/advisor/documents/implemgrieveng.pdf
3. Company-Led Approaches to Con?ict Resolution in the Forest Sector, Wilson, E.,
The Forests Dialogue, 2009, www.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/G02510.pdf
4. Con?ict-Sensitive Business Practice: Guidance for Extractive Industries,
International Alert, 2005, www.international-alert.org/pdfs/con?ict_sensitive_
business_practice_all.pdf
5. Community Development and Local Con?ict: A Resource Document for
Practitioners in the Extractive Sector (Draft), CommDev, 2008,
http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/1801/
6. Human Rights in the Mining and Metals Industry: Handling and Resolving Local
Level Concerns and Grievances, ICMM (International Council on Mining and
Metals), 2009, www.icmm.com/page/14809/human-rights-in-the-mining-and-
metals-industry-overview-management-approach-and-issues
137 137
Gender
1. Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
2. Women, Communities, and Mining: The Gender Impacts of Mining and
the Role of Gender Impact Assessment, Oxfam, 2009, www.oxfam.org.au/
resources/?lestore/originals/OAus-MiningAndGender-1209.pdf
3. Promising Approaches to Engendering Development (web portal), The World
Bank Group, http://go.worldbank.org/ECX6CB6JR0
Monitoring and Measurement
1. The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation
Measures—A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachin & Associates, Sustainable
Investment Group Ltd., and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006,
www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
2. Measuring Value: A Guide to Social Return on Investment (SROI), New
Economics Foundation, 2009,
www.neweconomics.org/publications/guide-social-return-investment
3. Managing Risk and Maintaining License to Operate: Participatory Planning
and Monitoring in the Extractive Industries, Parker, R., and Dakin, R., Business-
Community Synergies, 2008,
http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/2037/
4. London Benchmarking Group, www.lbg-online.net/index.php/lbg
5. Measuring Impact Framework, World Business Council for Sustainable
Development, 2008, www.commdev.org/content/document/detail/2184/
Partnerships
1. The Partnership Assessment Tool (web site), United Nations Global Compact,
www.unglobalcompact.org/issues/partnerships/pat.html
2. Partnering for Development—Making It Happen, UNDP, 2006,
www.undp.org/partners/business/UNDP-booklet-web.pdf
3. The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through
Collaborative Action, Harvard Initiative, 2007, www.hks.harvard.edu/mrcbg/
CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20Summary%20
20071018.pdf
4. Partnering for Success. Business Perspectives on Multi-Stakeholder
Partnerships, World Economic Forum, 2005, www.weforum.org/pdf/ppp.pdf
5. Building Alliances Series (web portal), USAID,
www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_partnerships/gda/sector_guides.html
6. The Partnering Toolbook, International Business Leaders Forum, 2004, http://
shop.iblf.org/DisplayDetail.aspx?which=20
138 138
Stakeholder Engagement/Community Engagement
1. Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing
Business in Emerging Markets, International Finance Corporation, 2007,
www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/Publications_GoodPractice
2. Community-Driven Development Decision Tools for Rural Development
Programmes, International Fund for Agricultural Development, 2009,
www.ifad.org
3. Breaking Ground: Engaging Communities in Extractive and Infrastructure
Projects, World Resources Institute, 2009,
www.wri.org/publication/breaking-ground-engaging-communities
4. From Words to Action: The Stakeholder Engagement Manual, UNEP,
Accountability, and Stakeholder Research Associates, 2006,
www.accountability21.net/publications.aspx?id=904
5. Tools for Development—A handbook for those engaged in development
activity, Department for International Development, 2003,
www.d?d.gov.uk/Documents/publications/toolsfordevelopment.pdf
6. The World Bank Participation Source Book, World Bank,
www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sbhome.htm
7. Guide to Engaging with NGOs, Business for Social Responsibility, 2001,
www.commdev.org/?les/1922_?le_BSR_Guide_to_Engaging_NGOs.pdf
139
Notes
139
1 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
2 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
3 Corporate Responsibility Report, ArcelorMittal, 2008, www.arcelormittal.com
4 Sources for this graphic:
Ayine, D., “Social Responsibility Agreements in Ghana’s Forestry Sector,” Developing
Legal Tools for Citizen Empowerment Series, IIED, 2008, www.iied.org/pubs/
pdfs/12549IIED.pdf
“Sino Gold in Chinese Agreements,” www.miningenvironmental.com/legal-brief/sino-
gold-in-chinese-agreements
Levi Strauss Foundation, www.levistrauss.com/Citizenship/LeviStraussFoundation/
GranteeSpotlights/GranteeSpotlight6.aspx
Ashley, C., Supply and Distribution Chains of Multinationals: Harnessing their Potential
for Development, Overseas Development Institute, 2009, www.odi.org.uk/resources/
download/4166.pdf
National Interpretation RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production
for Oil Palm Smallholders (Republic of Indonesia), Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil,
2007, www.rspo.org
Lutalo, M., “The Wellness Program of Serena Hotels, Kenya—A Case Study,” World
Bank, 2007, www.ifc.org/ifcext/aids.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/The+Wellness+Program+of
+Serena+Hotels/$FILE/GR-Serena_Final_Aug29_07.pdf
5 Development Without Con?ict: The Business Case for Community Consent, World
Resources Institute, 2007, http://pdf.wri.org/development_without_con?ict_fpic.pdf
6 “Planning and Financial Valuation Model for Sustainability Investments,” Presentation,
2009, http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/2596/
7 Nestlé – Creating Shared Value, www2.nestle.com/CSV/Pages/CSV.aspx
8 Sources for this box:
Business in the Community, www.bitc.org.uk/community/communitymark/
communitymark_companies/microsoft.html
Nestlé – Creating Shared Value, www2.nestle.com/CSV/Pages/CSV.aspx
Dialog Telekom PLC Sustainability Report 2008, www.dialog.lk/content/uploads/pdfs/
sustainability_reports/2008_sustainability_report.pdf
Fundación Wong, www.fundacionwong.org
9 Sources for this graphic:
Deutsche Bank Corporate Social Responsibility, www.db.com/csr/en/content/7238_7240.
htm
Nestlé in the Community, www.community.nestle.com/primary-education/asia/
philippines/Pages/donate-a-classroomprogramme.aspx
“Microsoft, Aga Khan to Launch Tech Centers,” www.dailytimes.com.pk
Harnessing Core Business for Development Impact, Overseas Development Institute,
2009, odi.org.uk/resources/download/2714.pdf
Khimti Neighborhood Development Project, UNDP, www.undp.org.np/pdf/projectdocs/
KIND%20project%20document.pdf
Sutton, N.C., and Jenkins, B., “The Role of the Financial Services Sector in Expanding
Economic Opportunity,” Economic Opportunity Series, Harvard University, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_19_EO%20Finance%20Final.pdf
Apollo Tyres, www.apollotyres.com/india_commuinity_aids_business.htm
140
10 Dialog Telekom Corporate Responsibility Report, 2007
11 For more detailed guidance on stakeholder identi?cation and analysis, please refer to
Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in
Emerging Markets, IFC, 2007, www.ifc.org/sustainability
12 Sources for this section:
“Participatory Approaches to Increasing Women’s Voice in CDD Projects:
Examples from Indonesia,” Promising Approaches to Engendering Development,
World Bank, 2004, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/
IndonesiaCDDPromisingApproach.pdf
Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations into
Communities Work at Rio Tinto, Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
13 Sources for this section:
The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005, http://go.worldbank.
org/FMTE6W8XX0
“CDD and Elite Capture: Reframing the Conversation,” Social Development How to
Series, World Bank, 2008, http://go.worldbank.org/414DCE1FE0
Making Services Work for Poor People, World Development Report, 2004,
http://publications.worldbank.org/catalog/content-download?revision_id=3435362
14 Sources for this section:
Community-Driven Development in the Context of Con?ict –Affected Countries:
Challenges and Opportunities, Social Development Department, World Bank, 2006,
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCDD/Resources/CDD_and_Con?ict.pdf
“Clarifying Challenges in Con?ict and Post-Con?ict Settings,” Social Development How
to Series, World Bank, 2008, http://go.worldbank.org/414DCE1FE0
15 Sources for this section:
Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development, International
Institute for Environment and Development, 2002, www.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/9084IIED.pdf
Scaling Up Local and Community Driven Development (LCDD). A
Real World Guide to Its Theory and Practice, World Bank, 2009,
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/
Resources/244362-1237844546330/5949218-1237844567860/Scaling_Up_LCDD_
Book_r?llesize.pdf
Ensminger, J., Getting to the Bottom of Corruption: A Case Study in Community Driven
Development, California Institute of Technology, 2007, commdev.org/content/document/
detail/1823
16 Sources for this section:
The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005,
http://go.worldbank.org/FMTE6W8XX0
Wright-Revolledo, K., Supporting the Capacity of Organizations at Community Level: An
Exploration of Issues, Methods, and Principles of Good Practice, INTRAC, 2007,
www.intrac.org/resources.php
17 Adapted from Annual and Sustainability Report, Aracruz Cellulose, 2008, www.aracruz.
com/minisites/ra2008/section/en/AracruzCelulose2008AnnualSustainabilityReport.pdf
18 Sources for this section:
Participatory Rural Appraisal, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_rural_appraisal
Chambers, R., Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory, Discussion Paper 311,
Institute of Development Studies, 1992, community.eldis.org/.59b4ab37/Dp311.pdf
Serrat, O., Social Network Analysis, Asian Development Bank, 2009, www.adb.org/
Documents/Information/Knowledge-Solutions/Social-Network-Analysis.pdf
Elliot, C., Locating the Energy for Change: An Introduction to Appreciative Inquiry,
International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999,
www.iisd.org/pdf/appreciativeinquiry.pdf
141 141
Ashford, G., and Patkar, S., The Positive Path: Using Appreciative Inquiry in Rural Indian
Communities, Department for International Development, International Institute for
Sustainable Development, MYRADA, 2001,
www.iisd.org/pdf/2001/ai_the_positive_path.pdf
19 Annual Report 2008 (Letter to Shareholders), Newmont Mining Corporation,
http://investor.shareholder.com/newmont/AR2008/letter.cfm
20 Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in
Emerging Markets, IFC, 2007, www.ifc.org/sustainability
21 Adapted from the following sources:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
22 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
23 Biswas, P., Finan, T., A Sustainable Livelihoods Assessment and Community Development
Planning: A Guidebook Prepared for Enterprise for Development International (EFDI) and
Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL), Tango International, 2006
24 Newmont Ghana, www.newmontghana.com
25 Lonmin staff and Lessons Learned Lonmin, IFC, 2009
26 DFID Guidance Sheets on Livelihoods Approaches, Eldis: Livelihoods Connect, www.
eldis.org/go/topics/dossiers/livelihoods-connect/what-are-livelihoods-approaches/training-
and-learning-materials
27 Biswas, P., Finan, T., A Sustainable Livelihoods Assessment and Community Development
Planning: A Guidebook Prepared for Enterprise for Development International (EFDI) and
Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL), Tango International, 2006
28 Sanginga, P., Chitsike, C., The Power of Visioning, A Handbook for Facilitating the
Development of Community Action Plans, Enabling Rural Innovation in Africa, 2005,
http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/handle/10625/38244
29 “Social Networks: Veracel Celulose,” IDIS, 2009, www.idis.org.br/library/cases/social-
networks-veracel-celulose-1/view?set_language=en
30 Sources for this example:
Veracel Sustainability Report, 2008, www.veracel.com.br/shared/relatorio2008_27agro.pdf
“Social Networks: Veracel Celulose,” IDIS, 2009, www.idis.org.br/library/cases/social-
networks-veracel-celulose-1/view?set_language=en
31 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
32 Sour ces for this graphic:
IFC’s Revenue Management Program, www.ifc.org/ifcext/lac.nsf/Content/Corporate_
Advice
Kinross Maricunga staff and www.comunidadcolla.cl
DFCU Bank staff and Creating Opportunities for Women, IFC, www.ifc.
org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/?y_Gender_Brochure_
CreatingOppsforWomen/$FILE/Creating+Opps+for+Women+Brochure.pdf
BHP Billiton Sustainability Summary Report, 2009, www.bhpbilliton.com/
bbContentRepository/docs/sustainabilitySummaryReport2009.pdf
33 IFC’s Revenue Management Program, www.ifc.org/ifcext/lac.nsf/Content/Corporate_
Advice and MIM program (the Web site in Spanish), www.mim.org.pe
34 UNDP Capacity Development Practice Note, 2008, content.undp.org/go/cms-service/
download/asset/?asset_id=1654154
142
35 Adapted from UNDP Capacity Development Practice Note, 2008, content.undp.org/go/
cms-service/download/asset/?asset_id=1654154
36 Gibbon, M., Labonte, R., and Laverack, G., “Evaluating community capacity,” Health and
Social Care in the Community 10 (5), 2002, portals.wdi.wur.nl/?les/docs/ppme/HSC_388.
pdf
37 Root Change, www.rootchange.org
38 Excerpted from Environmental and Social Performance Annual Monitoring Report,
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala, 2007, www.goldcorp.com/_resources/project_pdfs/
marlin/AMR_Marlin_2007_Final06068.pdf
39 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
40 Coca Cola Community Water Programs, www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/
community_initiatives.html
41 BG Group Social Performance Standard and Social Investment Guidelines
42 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
43 “Special Issue: Community Investment,” Ethical Corporation, 2008, http://commdev.org/
content/calendar/detail/2381
44 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
45 Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
46 Sources for this example:
Khimti Neighborhood Development Project, UNDP, www.undp.org.np/pdf/projectdocs/
KIND%20project%20document.pdf
Increasing Access to Electricity and Community Development: Khimti Neighborhood
Development (KiND) Project in Nepal, UNDP, www.undp.org/partners/business/resources/
cs_khimiti_nepal.pdf
Presentation at Annual Local Networks Forum, UN Global Compact, 2009,
www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/networks_around_world_doc/Annual_Local_Networks_
Forum/Istanbul/KF_Business_and_Peace_GCLN_Nepal_Business_and_Con?ict.pdf
47 Lihir Gold Sustainable Development, www.lglgold.com/asp/index.asp?pgid=10662
48 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
49 Sources for this table:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008
www.ipieca.org/activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through Collaborative
Action, Harvard University CSR Initiative, Economic Opportunity Program, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20
Summary%2020071018.pdf
143 143
50 Sources for this graphic:
BTC/SCP Georgia Community Investment Programme and Improved Schools Programme
Final Evaluation, Environmental Resources Management, 2006
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Project Community Investment Plan Final, 2003, www.commdev.org/
?les/2273_?le_CDP_BTC_Pipeline_Georgia_Azerbaijan_Turkey_2003_.pdf
Cargill Cares Councils, www.cargill.com/corporate-responsibility/cargill-volunteers/cargill-
cares-councils/index.jsp;
Newmont Ghana, www.newmontghana.com
Partnering for Success, World Economic Forum, 2005, www.weforum.org/pdf/ppp.pdf
Environmental and Social Performance Annual Monitoring Report, Montana Exploradora
de Guatemala, 2007, www.goldcorp.com/_resources/project_pdfs/marlin/AMR_
Marlin_2007_Final06068.pdf
51 Sources for this table:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through Collaborative
Action, Harvard University CSR Initiative, Economic Opportunity Program, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20
Summary%2020071018.pdf
52 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
53 BTC/SCP Georgia Community Investment Programme and Improved Schools Programme
Final Evaluation, Environmental Resources Management, 2006
54 Various project documents and the project team from COTCO (a consortium of
companies and governments of Cameroon and Chad operating the Chad-Cameroon
pipeline) and IFC
55 www.ge.com/citizenship/news_features/features_community_building.jsp
56 Suezan, L., Public-Private Partnerships for Development. A Handbook for Business,
USAID, 2006, www.issuelab.org/research/public_private_partnerships_for_
development_a_handbook_for_business
Partnering for a Better World, United Nations, business.un.org/en
57 Sources for this example:
“Conceptual Picture of Partnership Models Implemented in the Eastern Limb to Support
a Developmental State,” Presentation to World Bank Representatives, 2009
Smith, G.L., Dalomba, F.A.C., and Andersen, D.C., “The Challenges of Infrastructure
Development in the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld Complex of South Africa,” Third
International Platinum Conference ‘Platinum in Transformation,’ The Southern African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2008, www.platinum.org.za/Pt2008/Papers/367-374_
Smith.pdf
58 “Community Investment Award Winner (2009): Standard Chartered Bank,” www.
gbcimpact.org/itcs_node/9/502/award/1927
59 Leadership, Accountability and Partnership: Critical Trends and Issues in Corporate Social
Responsibility, Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government, 2004, www.hks.
harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_1_Launch%20Summary%20Report.pdf
60 Sources for this section:
Adapted from Putting Partnering to Work, Business Partners for Development, 2002,
www.grsproadsafety.org/themes/default/pdfs/Putting%20Partnering%20to%20
Work%20-%20MAIN%20REPORT.pdf
Malena, C., “Strategic Partnership: Challenges and Best Practices in the Management
and Governance of Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships Involving UN and Civil Society
Actors,” Background paper prepared by for the Multi-Stakeholder Workshop on
Partnerships and UN-Civil Society Relations, 2004, www.un-ngls.org/orf/partnership-
carmen-malena.doc
144 144
61 Adapted from Pro?les of the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices of Philippine
Mining Firms, prepared and written by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau and Hubo
C.L., The University of Asia and the Paci?c, 2003, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/
INTPSD/Resources/Philippines/phil_CSR_Case_Studies.pdf
62 Sources for this box:
Standard Charted, www.standardchartered.com/sustainability/community-investment/
living-with-hiv/en/index.html
Engro Food Pakistan and UNDP Partnership, http://business.un.org/en/browse/
partnership_stories/13
Starbucks Community Involvement Program, www.starbucks.com/sharedplanet/index.
aspx
63 Community Investment Indicators, 2008, www.commdev.org/content/document/
detail/2106
64 Sources for this box:
Rio Tinto staff and www.riotinto.com/ourapproach/17215_communities_17356.asp
Petrobras Social and Environmental Report, 2008, www2.petrobras.com.br/
ResponsabilidadeSocial/ingles/pdf/BSA2008_ING.pdf
Association Los Andes de Cajamarca (ALAC) staff and ALAC’s Web site at www.
losandes.org.pe/en/index.htm
65 Building a Sustainable Future, APRIL, 2008, www.aprilasia.com/images/Updates/
SustainabilityReport%2708.pdf
66 Parker, R., Dakin, R., Managing Risk and Maintaining License to Operate: Participatory
Planning and Monitoring in the Extractive Industries, Business-Community Synergies,
2008, commdev.org/content/document/detail/2037
67 Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
68 Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
69 Dialog Telekom staff and Enabling an Information Society, Dialog Telecom PLC
Sustainability Report, 2008, www.dialog.lk/content/uploads/pdfs/sustainability_
reports/2008_sustainability_report.pdf
70 McKinsey Global Survey Results: Valuing corporate social responsibility, McKinsey &
Company, 2009, http://commdev.org/?les/2393_?le_McKQ_Valuing_Corporate_Social_
Responsibility.pdf
71 The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation Measures
A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachnin & Associates, Sustainable Investment Group Ltd.,
and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006, www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
72 Adapted from Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-
Community Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf
Publishing Limited, 2009
73 Sources for this table:
“Planning and Financial Valuation Model for Sustainability Investments,” Presentation,
2009, www.commdev.org/content/document/detail/2557
A Guide to Social Return on Investment, New Economics Foundation, 2009, www.
neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/?les/A_guide_to_Social_Return_on_
Investment_1.pdf
The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation Measures
A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachnin & Associates, Sustainable Investment Group Ltd.,
and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006, www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
145
146
doc_773795801.pdf
The scope and level of detail of the strategy should be scaled to fit the needs and stage of the project (or company operations).
115 Tool 1: Template for Preparing a Community Investment Strategy
Tool 1: Template for Preparing a
Community Investment Strategy
The scope and level of detail of the strategy should be scaled to ?t the needs and
stage of the project (or company operations).
Introduction
– Brief project description: company operations, community context, and key social and environmental issues or impacts
Business Case
– Business rationale for supporting a CI program/anticipated business benefts
– Key site-level issues, risks, and opportunities to be addressed through CI
Local Context
– Key fndings of socioeconomic baseline assessment and stakeholder consultations
– Stakeholder analysis
– Key challenges and opportunities posed by the local context
– Institutional mapping: institutions, organizations, and potential partners
– Key government development priorities and plans
Community
Engagement and
Planning
– Process, mechanisms, and timetable for multi-stakeholder engagement on CI
– Key phases, activities, and timeline for community planning and input into CI priorities and strategy
– Key results from activities that assessed and ranked local development priorities
Objectives,
Guiding Principles,
and Criteria
– Goals and objectives of CI Strategy (linked to the business case and SMART*)
– Guiding principles, eligibility criteria, and selection criteria
Focus Areas
for CI
– Process and criteria (e.g., “screens”) used to select areas for company investment
– Key focus areas selected for CI (and supporting rationale for each)
– Typology of investments and allocation (short term versus long term)
Company Core
Competencies
and Resources
– Ways in which company can leverage its assets, resources, and unique role in support of CI focus areas (e.g., staff,
expertise, facilities, equipment, contacts, advocacy, etc.)
Sustainability,
Handover, and
Exit Strategy
– Proposed criteria/measures to avoid creating dependency and to ensure that programs can become self-sustaining once
the company reduces or withdraws its support
– Strategy and timeline for decreasing company support and building local self-suffciency for both management and
fnancing of projects and programs
Implementation
Planning
– Proposed delivery model(s) or structures (and rationale for selection)
– Potential partners
– Roles and responsibilities
– Implementation schedule
– Governance structure and composition (to ensure multi-stakeholder representation and decision making)
Internal
Coordination
and Alignment
– Coordination of CI with other company policies/programs affecting communities
– Mechanisms for coordination among units interacting with local stakeholders
– Cross-functional roles/accountabilities for units interacting with local stakeholders
Capacity
Building
– Company readiness (management support, internal preparedness/skills to engage)
– Capacity building needs identifed (i.e., target groups/skills needed)
– Capacity building activities undertaken to date
Staf?ng and
Budget
– Staffng resources to support CI (coordination, oversight, management)
– Budget assumptions and main sources of fnancing (including any plans for external funding, and arrangements to secure
long-term fnancial sustainability)
– CI Budget (multi-year) and contingencies
Results
Measurement
– Monitoring and evaluation activities to be undertaken
– Participatory methods/mechanisms to be used
– Key indicators to be tracked (including business benefts) and baseline data required
– Resource and budget requirements
Communications
– Internal and external communications plans
– Timetable, target audiences, communication channels to be used
* Speci?c, Measurable, Attributable, Results-oriented, and Timebound
116 Tool 2: Template for Preparing a Communications Plan
Tool 2: Template for Preparing a
Communications Plan
The following template provides a suggested structure for the preparation of a
communications plan to support a company’s community investment strategy. The
scope and level of detail of the communications plan may be scaled to ?t the needs
and stage of the project (or company operations).
Strategic communications is the use of internal and external outreach tools to achieve
measurable outcomes in support of business objectives. A good communications strategy:
• Identi?es key internal and external audiences
• Connects the company to its stakeholders and customers
• De?nes and delivers speci?c messages that will resonate with target audiences
• Is designed to reach measurable results
• Follows a long-term plan of action
Local Context
Challenges/Constraints
• Key challenges of the local, national, and international contexts to which the communications strategy should
respond (e.g., local opinions, historical legacies, or global campaigns against the industry)
Key Audiences and
their Informational
Needs
• Key stakeholder groups that have an interest in and/or need to be informed/infuenced by the communication
activities
• Stakeholder analysis: a) internal and external audiences; b) primary, secondary, and infuential/high value (e.g., political
decision makers and local opinion leaders) target groups
• Main informational needs of the target audiences (aligned with the CI program cycle)
Goals and Objectives
of Communications
Plan
• Overall goal of the communications plan in light of context, challenges, opportunities, and audience needs (linked
with the company’s overall business objectives)
• External (e.g., strengthen social license to operate) and internal (e.g., create buy-in) objectives of the communications
strategy
Key Messages • Key messages and tone of the key messages (e.g., factual and visual information that resonates with target
audiences)
External and Internal
Communications
Channels
• Existing internal and external communication channels
• Channels that allow two-way communication
• Most suitable channels (by stakeholder group) to communicate the key messages (e.g., rural radio, infuential
papers in the area, opinion makers/commentators)
Key Activities and
Timetable
• Dates/events for planned communication activities
• Dates/events that communication activities need to be coordinated with
• Activities to support long-term communications strategy (e.g., maintaining and monitoring a Web site,
maintaining good press relations)
• Risks/constraints that could affect the delivery of the communication activities (e.g., authorizations and
scheduling requirements, endorsements from other parties) and mitigation measures
117 Tool 2: Template for Preparing a Communications Plan
Crisis Response • Crisis communications team (e.g., senior executive, legal counsel, project manager, communications person)
• Designated company spokespersons in a crisis situation
• Media contacts for disseminating responses without delay
• Communication protocols (e.g., emergency communications “tree”)
• Written scripts for questions and answers about the company’s programs along with other communication
materials
Resources and Staf?ng • Staffng resources to support communications function
• Budget/resources to carry out planned communication activities (e.g., preparation and production of
communication materials, translation services, advertising costs, delivery of events)
• Opportunities to attract external partners/sponsors around planned communication activities
Key Spokespersons/
External Partners
• Key spokespersons and designated backups
• Main media contacts
• Implementing partners/local organizations whose research, on-the-ground networks, and unique communications
vehicles can be leveraged
Success Measurement • Key indicators to monitor progress vis-à-vis the expected results:
– Public perceptions (positive/negative)
– Number of third-party endorsements
– Level of community buy-in for CI (increasing/decreasing)
– Nature of civil society/NGO feedback
– Tone of media coverage (positive/negative)
– Level of political support (increasing/decreasing)
– Operational statistics (e.g., reduced number of production interruptions due to local unrest)
• Measures to ensure that performance information is used to adjust the communications plan (messages, tactics,
tools, and resources) as needed
118 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
The following guidance is part of the RuralInvest Toolkit developed by the Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations for preparing successful rural
development projects—in terms of both income generation and social investment. The
toolkit comprises training courses, manuals, and custom-developed software which are
applicable for any agency, project, organization, or private investor managing funds for
small and medium-scale agricultural and rural investments.*
The institutional mapping activities given below can be used when undertaking local
context analysis for the purpose of identifying community groups, development
institutions, local organizations and/or other potential partners. (See Chapter 3).
Mapping Interest Groups
These groups may include: work groups, youth clubs, cooperatives, agricultural
worker associations, women’s organizations, parents’ associations, religious
organizations, saving and loan associations, irrigation boards, local development
committees, etc. The objective of the institutional mapping is to discover roles and
activities of these various groups.
Products that can be obtained:
• Brief information on interest groups existing in the communities
• A map or sketch showing the spatial distribution of the various interest groups
that operate in the communities
• A register of these various groups for the purpose of future planning
Useful questions:
• What are the interest or activity groups that operate in the community?
• What other organizations are there in the zone? What are their relations with
the community?
• How many members do they have?
• What are their aims?
• What activities do they undertake?
• How do they relate to other local stakeholders and/or the communities?
• What are the relations like between these organizations and the community?
• Are there any con?icts between the community and interest groups in the
zone? If there are, what is the cause? How can these con?icts be overcome?
* www.fao.org/tc/tci/ourrole/ruralinvest/it/
119 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Sample Format: Interest Groups in the Community
Organization and
date established
Activities carried out Role or function in
local development
Number of members
within the area
Mapping Development Institutions
Development institutions include public development institutions, private entities, and
NGOs. The main objective of the institutional mapping is to identify the activities these
organizations undertake (or have undertaken), the policy and development approach
adopted by them and, on the basis of this information, to identify their potential
contribution to the objectives and targets of the project or program under consideration.
Products that can be obtained:
• Summary of the development institutions that work in the zone, by sector
• A table or drawing to show what development institutions do, and the type of
relationship they maintain with the community
• A record of development institutions that work in the zone, for the purpose of
de?ning their role/function in local development
Useful questions:
• What public (state) institutions, local governments, private ?rms, and NGOs
have a signi?cant presence in the communities?
• In which sectors do each of these institutions operate and what concrete
activities have they carried out or are they currently carrying out?
• What do the of?cials of each of these institutions think of the organizations
participating in decision making in the projects and programs that they execute?
• How do members of the community rate the work of these institutions?
Sample Format: Development Institutions
Institution What activities does
it carry out?
Who does it work
with?
Level of participation
in decision making
120 Tool 3: Institutional Mapping Questionnaire
Mapping Management Capacity of Local Organizations
Where needed, institutional mapping may also explore questions around expertise
and capacity of local organizations that operate in the area. The objective of this
exercise is to ?nd out whether local organizations require strengthening and, if so,
in what areas.
Products that can be obtained:
• Identi?cation of the areas of training and technical assistance required by
different entities and local institutions
• Summary of the social capital and/or the management capacity of local
communities and organizations
Useful questions:
• What local organizations are there? Do they have legal status? Do they have
different functions?
• If there are several local organizations, are there tensions or con?icts among them?
• Do members of the community or organization(s) help ?nance the
organization’s activities?
• How frequently do their boards of directors meet?
• Are minutes kept of assemblies and meetings?
• Are balance sheets prepared and accounting records kept?
• Are such records manual or computerized?
• Are external audits performed?
• When and at what event was the current board of directors appointed?
• How and with what mechanisms do grassroots members assess their leaders’
performance?
• How often is community work done? Who participates in community work?
• What tasks are carried out collectively and free of charge?
• Do organizations and their communities have experience in managing
development projects?
• How are important decisions affecting all organization members taken?
• What mechanisms do community members have to supervise the work of
their leaders?
121 Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Social Network Analysis (SNA) is useful for visualizing patterns of engagement
between diverse local stakeholders and understanding how to use these
relationships to further a company’s CI objectives. Although it is enhanced by the
use of special software, one can get started without SNA software. SNA involves
the following three stages:
1. Participant Survey – A survey tool is developed by facilitators, often in
collaboration with participants. The survey includes questions about the ?ows
of information, resources and collaboration that are important to the local
community.
2. Data Analysis – The results of the SNA survey are tabulated in Excel or input
into a network analysis software application (such as InFlow or UCINet).* These
free or inexpensive applications have built-in algorithms that generate network
maps, positioning organizations or individuals according to their connections
with others.
3. Participatory Feedback – Stakeholder maps and metrics are used to facilitate
discussions between the company and community members. The questions
generated by analyzing the SNA results can help to draw out extremely
valuable observations about key actors, alternative ways to optimize the
“development supply chains,” and fresh insights into power brokers that hold
signi?cant in?uence over the working environment.
SNA maps and metrics are particularly effective when used in combination with
stakeholder dialogue, and can help project planners to identify key connectors,
community resource hubs, gatekeepers and brokers, who are described below.
Example of a Social Network Analysis (SNA) map
Company
International NGO
Local NGO
CBO
Other Business
Local Government
Connector
Resource Hub
Gatekeeper
Local
Gov5
Local
Gov6
Local
Gov1
Local
Gov2
Local
Gov3
Local
NGO3
Local
NGO2
Local
NGO1
International
NGO1
International
NGO2
CBO5
CBO4
CBO3
CBO2
CBO1
Company
Local
Gov4
Other
business5
Other
business4
Other
business3
Other
business2
Other
business1
Other
business6
* http://www.orgnet.com/in?ow3.html (InFlow) or http://www.analytictech.com/ucinet/ (UCINET)
122 Tool 4: Social Network Analysis
Connectors are actors in a community who know large numbers of people and
who are in the habit of making introductions. Tap them early in the CI process to
get a complete 360 perspective. But never rely on a single voice. If the CI involves
an explicit networking component, then connectors are well placed to play a
leading role. Build them into your outreach plan.
Resource Hubs are individuals or organizations that provide programmatic
resources—funding, supplies, training, or intellectual capital—to local NGOs
and frontline community-based organizations that work directly with affected
individuals and communities. Community-based resources may present themselves
in surprising ways, such as family-owned small businesses, local law and accounting
?rms, and local consultants. Many of them may be wary of external investors and
corporations and initially keep a low pro?le.
Gatekeepers or Brokers are organizations and individuals that act as a bridge
between different constituencies, assisting or potentially hindering information ?ow
between sectors or regions. While connectors tend to “know everyone,” brokers
often know “the right people.” Connectors hold an extremely important position
in any new initiative and should be considered during the planning and project
start-up phases. Through SNA, brokers can be identi?ed who can help build bridges
between key project constituencies, including local government, government
ministries, and special interest groups.
123 Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
As discussed in Chapter 6, it is not uncommon for companies to face high
expectations for support and long lists of development needs and priorities from
local stakeholders. In such a context, exercising selectivity and strategic focus
regarding which activities to support becomes particularly important.
One way to prioritize among the numerous development issues and needs raised by
local stakeholders is by vetting them through the twin lenses of risk and opportunity.
(For other common “screens,” see the sample screening process outlined in Chapter
6). Risk and opportunity screening can be a useful decision-making tool that involves:
(i) the identi?cation of risks and opportunities associated with each community
priority area/issue; and, (ii) the evaluation and ranking of each identi?ed risk or
opportunity to determine potential priority areas for CI.
Identi?cation of Risks and Opportunities
Community engagement and planning processes typically reveal a set of
development issues or areas that are important to local stakeholders. Using this as a
starting point, map each issue against:
• the level of risk to the company (of not addressing this issue)
• the level of opportunity presented to address this issue (i.e., achievability in
terms of ease of execution and likelihood of success)
Community Issues
Level of Risk
L
e
v
e
l
o
f
O
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
• Community center
• Scholarships
• Training for women
• Support for
livelihoods
• Enterprise
development
• Jobs
• HIV/AIDS
• Low skilled youth
• Access to water
• Ecotourism
• Preservation of
heritage sites
• Upgrading of temples
• Primary education
• Malaria
• Protection of fishing and
farming livelihoods
• Capacity building of
traditional authorities
• Cultural activities
• Transportation
• Electrification
• Support to dairy
producers
• Crime and security
• Corruption
High
Med.
Low
High Med. Low
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
After mapping
potential risks and
opportunities, the
company chose to
invest in the areas
circled
Community
Issues Nature of Risk Nature of Opportunity
Level of Risk
(High, Medium,
or Low)
Level of
Opportunity (High,
Medium, or Low)
Prevalence of HIV/
AIDS in the local
area of operations
The local incidence of HIV/AIDS
could constitute a risk to the
company’s workforce, affecting
productivity, costs, and morale.
The company can partner to support
the delivery of HIV/AIDS awareness,
prevention, and treatment programs
for employees and local communities
High Medium
High rates of
unemployment/
lack of jobs
High expectations for jobs combined
with low levels of education and skills
within local communities could fuel
frustration and anti-company sentiment
Early phase investment in skills
training and entrepreneurship
programs can increase the income-
earning prospects of local residents
High High
124 Tool 5: Risk and Opportunity Screen
How to Rank Risks and Opportunities
For each identi?ed risk, the company should assign a rating of high/medium/low.
For consistency of ranking, it is important to establish a common de?nition of what
high/medium/low ratings mean. Factors to consider include:
• How great of a risk is posed to the company by this issue (whether it be in
terms of project delays and disruptions, social license, or reputation)?
• Is the issue considered high priority by a majority of local stakeholders or a
select minority?
• What is the probability or likelihood of a “risk event” should the need or issue
not be addressed?
• Has the issue received NGO or media attention?
To rate the level of opportunity presented by each issue, assess according to potential
“achievability”—that is, how easy it would be to execute through the company’s CI
program. Assign a rating of high/medium/low. As with the risk rating, common criteria
and de?nitions of ratings are needed. To determine the level of achievability, consider:
• Are there potential partner organizations with suf?cient expertise and
implementation capacity?
• Is the issue supported by government and included in local/regional/national
development plans?
• What is the estimated cost of the intervention?
• How practical and/or easy is the activity to execute (i.e., can it be done readily
by the company or a third-party)?
• What is the potential for impact (i.e., ability of the intervention to result in
broad-based bene?ts)?
It is also possible that some issues on the list should not be addressed through
CI (for example, areas that fall into management of or compensation for project
impacts, or are best addressed by government). These issues should be ?agged as
such and excluded from ?nal consideration.
As the ?nal step, the combination of the initial risk rating plus the achievability
rating will help determine whether or not the issue should be prioritized for
company support through CI.
High Medium Low
Level of
Achievability
(capital)
• Easy to address through the CI
program
• Partner organization is available
to implement
• Capacity to implement is
suffcient
• Cost of intervention is
reasonable relative to beneft
• Intervention is likely to achieve a
high development impact
• Can be addressed through the CI
program, but may be diffcult to
execute
• Cost of intervention is reasonable or
on the slightly higher side relative
to beneft
• Development impact is still likely to
be relatively high
• May be addressed through CI, but diffcult to
execute
• Major costs would be required relative to beneft
• The likelihood of high development impact is
not certain, or is too costly to achieve, or may be
infuenced by other factors beyond the scope of
the company to address
125 Tool 6: Examples of Tools and Methods for Organizational Capacity Assessment
Tool 6: Examples of Tools and Methods for
Organizational Capacity Assessment*
Name of the Tool/
Methodology
Description
Effective
Capacity
Assessment
for Nonpro?t
Organizations
(McKinsey and
Company)
Known as the McKinsey Capacity Assessment Grid, this tool is designed to help nonproft organizations assess their
organizational capacity. The tool includes a description of seven elements of organizational capacity and their components.
Each variable of the grid is scored on a scale of 1 to 4.
Pros and Cons: A clearly described, comprehensive capacity assessment tool. It is user friendly and can be easily adapted
for use in different types of organizations.
Web site: www.emcf.org/pdf/mckinsey_capacitytool.pdf
Capacity
Assessment Tool
(CARE Somalia)
This is a brief questionnaire to assess the capacity of an NGO or partner organization. The assessment includes
governance, management and fnancial practices, service delivery, organizational mission, and sustainability.
Pros and Cons: A short, simple checklist and rating format supplemented by a rating scale.
Web site: www.careinternational.org.uk/download.php?id=39
Capacity Results
Framework (World
Bank Institute)
The Capacity Results Framework is a tool to facilitate strategic thinking on capacity issues. The framework looks at the
three levels of capacity—individual, organizational, and institutional—and identifes current and desired levels of capacity.
The assessment fndings are used to defne interventions to address gaps and to defne indicators that can be jointly
monitored with stakeholders.
Pros and Cons: This briefng paper provides a useful framework for thinking about capacity development. It does not,
however, provide user guidance or details on how to adapt the framework to different contexts.
Web site: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCDRC/Resources/CapacityBriefNo14.pdf
Capacity
Assessment
Framework
(UNDP)
This is a set of tools that include a Capacity Assessment Practice Note and a User’s Guide. UNDP’s Capacity Assessment
Framework provides a comprehensive view of the issues that could be addressed in capacity assessment. The assessment
process allows the user to develop a comprehensive work plan that specifes future capacities to be developed, strategies
and interventions to be used, specifc targets and indicators, and cost estimates.
Pros and Cons: The framework is interactive and very thorough. While the guidance is fexible enough to be used in
different contexts, the use of these materials is likely to require time and adaptation to the specifc context—and some
advance work and planning.
Web site: www.undp.org/capacity/
Participatory
Organizational
Evaluation Tool
(UNDP)
This is an organizational capacity assessment tool to assess capacity and levels of consensus in organizations against
seven areas (human resource management, fnancial resource management, equitable participation, sustainability of
program benefts, partnerships, learning, and strategic management). The methodology involves bringing participants
together in cross-functional, cross-hierarchical groups for open exchange to identify divergent viewpoints to foster growth;
to create consensus around future organizational capacity development activities; and to select, implement, and track
organizational change and development strategies.
Pros and Cons: This self-assessment/group discussion approach is highly participatory. At the same time, it is relatively
time consuming and the potential faws and risks of self-assessment need to be managed.
Web site: www.comminit.com/pdf/POET_UsersManual.pdf
Organizational
Capacity Self-
Assessment
(Academy for
Educational
Development)
This tool guides an organization through a capacity self-assessment based on a suggested ranking scale, and covers
different stages of organizational functioning and management. As the end result, the tool provides an organization with
capacity development priorities and a training plan.
Pros and Cons: The tool is simple to use, can be adapted to different contexts, and can be completed relatively quickly.
By design, however, this tool requires a knowledge facilitator to lead the discussion and assessment process. Flaws and
risks related to the process of self-assessment need to be managed.
Web site: www.aed-ccsg.org/resources/tools/IDAssess.doc
* Sources for this table:
A Brief Review of 20 Tools to Assess Capacity, UNDP, 2005, www.unpei.org/PDF/institutioncapacity/Brief-Review-20-Tools-to-Assess.pdf
Capacity Assessment Tools, Methodologies, Resources, Capacity For Disaster Reduction Initiative, www.unisdr.org/cadri/documents/
CAPACITY_ASSESSMENT_TOOLS_FINAL.pdf
126 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
The Sample Organizational Capacity Assessment below is an extract from the
McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool.* As presented below, the template can be
used by a company to assess the capacity of potential partners and/or as an input
when developing a company’s capacity building plan (see Chapter 5 for more
details). The company can also develop its own assessment based on the full
description of the tool and the related capacity framework.
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Overall strategy • Strategy is either
nonexistent, unclear, or
incoherent (largely set of
scattered initiatives)
• Strategy has no infuence
over day-to-day behavior
• Strategy exists, but is
either not clearly linked
to mission, vision, and
overarching goals, lacks
coherence, or is not easily
actionable
• Strategy is not broadly
known and has limited
infuence over day-to-day
behavior
• Coherent strategy has
been developed and is
linked to mission and
vision, but is not fully
ready to be acted upon
• Strategy is mostly known
and day-to-day behavior is
partly driven by it
• Organization has clear,
coherent medium- to long-
term strategy that is both
actionable and linked to
overall mission, vision, and
overarching goals
• Strategy is broadly known
and consistently helps
drive day-to-day behavior
at all levels of organization
Goals/
performance
targets
• Targets are nonexistent
or few
• Targets are vague, or
confusing, or either too
easy or impossible to
achieve
• Targets are not clearly
linked to aspirations and
strategy, and may change
from year to year
• Targets largely unknown or
ignored by staff
• Realistic targets exist in
some key areas
• Targets are mostly aligned
with aspirations and
strategy
• Targets may lack
aggressiveness, or be short
term, lack milestones,
be mostly focused on
“inputs,” or are often
renegotiated
• Staff may or may not know
and adopt targets
• Quantifed, aggressive
targets in most areas
• Targets linked to
aspirations and strategy
and mainly focused on
“outputs/outcomes” with
some “inputs”
• Typically multiyear
targets, though may lack
milestones
• Targets are known and
adopted by most staff
• Limited set of quantifed,
genuinely demanding
performance targets in
all areas
• Targets are tightly linked
to aspirations and strategy,
output/outcome-focused,
have annual milestones,
and are long term
• Staff consistently adopts
targets and works
diligently to achieve them
Funding model • Organization highly
dependent on a few
funders, largely of same
type (e.g., government or
foundations)
• Organization has access
to multiple types of
funding (e.g., government,
foundations, corporations)
with only a few funders
in each type, or has many
funders within only one or
two types of funders
• Solid base of funders in
most types of funding
sources
• Organization has
developed some
sustainable revenue-
generating activity
• Diversifed funding across
multiple source types
• Organization insulated
from potential market
instabilities (e.g., fully
developed endowment)
and/or has developed
sustainable revenue-
generating activities
Performance
measurement
• Very limited measurement
and tracking of
performance
• Performance partially
measured and progress
partially tracked
• Performance measured
and progress tracked in
multiple ways, several
times a year
• Well-developed and
integrated system (e.g.,
balanced scorecard) used
for measuring organization’s
performance and progress
on continual basis
* Accessible at www.vppartners.org/learning/reports/capacity/capacity.html
127 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Fundraising • Generally weak fundraising
skills and lack of expertise
(either internal or access to
external expertise)
• Main fundraising
needs covered by some
combination of internal
skills and expertise, and
access to some external
fundraising expertise
• Regular fundraising
• Needs adequately covered
by well-developed internal
fundraising skills
• Occasional access to
some external fundraising
expertise
• Highly developed internal
fundraising skills and
expertise in all funding
source types to cover all
regular needs
• Access to external
expertise for additional
extraordinary needs
Partnerships
and alliances
development
and nurturing
• Limited use of partnerships
and alliances with public
sector, nonproft, or for-
proft entities
• Early stages of building
relationships and
collaborating with other
for-proft, nonproft, or
public sector entities
• Effectively built and
leveraged some key
relationships with a few
types of relevant parties;
some relations may be
precarious or not fully
“win-win”
• Built, leveraged, and
maintained strong, high-
impact relationships with
variety of relevant parties
• Relationships deeply
anchored in stable, long-
term, mutually benefcial
collaboration
Local
community
presence and
involvement
• Organization’s presence
either not recognized or
generally not regarded
as positive; few members
of local community
constructively involved in
the organization
• Organization’s presence
somewhat recognized,
and generally regarded
as positive within the
community; some
members of the community
constructively engaged
with the organization
• Organization reasonably
well known within
the community, and
perceived as open and
responsive to community
needs; members of the
community (including
a few prominent ones)
constructively involved in
the organization
• Organization widely
known within the
community, and perceived
as actively engaged with
and extremely responsive
to it; many members of
the community (including
many prominent members)
actively and constructively
involved in the
organization (e.g., board,
fundraising)
Organizational
processes use
and
development
• Limited set of processes
(e.g., decision making,
planning, reviews)
• Use of processes is
variable, or processes
are seen as ad hoc
requirements
• No monitoring or
assessment of processes
• Basic set of processes in
core areas
• Processes known, used,
and truly accepted by only
portion of staff
• Limited monitoring and
assessment of processes,
with few improvements
made
• Solid, well-designed set of
processes in place in core
areas
• Processes known and
accepted by many, often
used
• Occasional monitoring and
assessment of processes,
some improvements made
• Robust, lean, and well-
designed set of processes
(e.g., decision making,
planning, reviews) in place
in all areas
• Processes widely known,
used, and accepted
• Continual monitoring
and assessment of
processes, and systematic
improvements made
Staf?ng levels • Many positions are
unflled, inadequately
flled, or experience high
turnover and/or poor
attendance
• Most critical positions are
staffed (no vacancies),
and/or experience limited
turnover or attendance
problems
• Positions are almost all
staffed (no vacancies); few
turnover or attendance
problems
• Positions are all fully
staffed (no vacancies); no
turnover or attendance
problems
Staff • Staff drawn from a narrow
range of backgrounds and
experiences; interest and
abilities limited to present
job; little ability to solve
problems as they arise
• Some variety of staff
backgrounds and
experiences
• Good capabilities,
including some ability to
solve problems as they
arise
• Staff drawn from diverse
backgrounds and
experiences, and bring a
broad range of skills
• Most are highly capable
and committed to mission
and strategy; eager to
develop and assume
increased responsibility
• Staff drawn from very
diverse backgrounds and
experiences, and bring a
broad range of skills
• Most staff are highly
capable in multiple roles,
committed both to mission
and continuous learning
• Most are eager and able
to take on special projects
and collaborate
128 Tool 7: McKinsey Capacity Assessment Tool
Capacity
Components
Ranking
(Interpret the text loosely; keep in mind that you are trying to score
the organization on a continuum of “1” to “4.”)
Clear need for
increased capacity
Basic level of
capacity in place
Moderate level of
capacity in place
High level of
capacity in place
Decision-
making
framework
• Decisions made largely on
an ad hoc basis by one
person and/or whomever is
accessible; highly informal
• Appropriate decision
makers known; decision-
making process fairly well
established and process
is generally followed, but
often breaks down and
becomes informal
• Clear, largely formal lines/
systems for decision
making, but decisions are
not always appropriately
implemented or followed
• Clear, formal lines/
systems for decision
making that involve as
broad participation as
practical and appropriate
along with dissemination/
interpretation of decision
Physical and
technological
infrastructure*
• Inadequate physical
and technological
infrastructure, resulting in
loss of effectiveness and
effciency (e.g., insuffcient
workspace, limited number
of telephone facilities)
• Limited/no use of
computers or other
technology in day-to-day
activity
• Adequate physical
and technological
infrastructure that can
meet organization’s most
important needs (e.g.,
basic telephone and fax
facilities accessible to most
staff)
• Equipment sharing is
common; satisfactory use
of IT infrastructure
• A number of improvements
could help increase
effectiveness and effciency
(e.g., individual voicemails,
individual desks)
• Fully adequate physical
and technological
infrastructure for the
current organizational and
communication needs
• Solid hardware and
software; high usage of IT
by staff
• Infrastructure does not
impede effectiveness and
effciency
• Physical and technological
infrastructure well tailored
to organization’s current
and anticipated future
needs
• Well designed and
thought out to enhance
organization’s effciency
and effectiveness
• Reliable telephone and
fax facilities accessible by
all staff
• Networked computing
hardware with up-to-date
software applications used
regularly by staff
* For the purposes of this capacity assessment template, physical and technological infrastructures have been merged into one.
McKinsey Capacity Grid looks at these dimensions separately.
129 Tool 8: Exit/Handover Strategy Template
Tool 8: Exit/Handover Strategy Template
See Chapter 6 for further guidance on developing an exit or handover strategy
EXIT
STRATEGY
CONCEPT
Engage with
communities,
local
government,
and other
partners up front
to get their input
and buy-in.
1. What elements of the CI project need to be sustained? Check all options that apply.
—
An activity or program
—
A beneft or beneft stream
—
An institution
—
Funding
—
A service
—
Management capacity
—
A facility or infrastructure
—
None (because the project will naturally phase out)
2. Is the company going to be providing initial management or fnancial support or both?
—
Yes
—
No
3. Will fnancial support be a one-time allocation or ongoing? If ongoing, specify anticipated duration.
—
One-time allocation
—
Ongoing
4. Could the benefts be maintained without continued support from the company?
—
Yes
—
No
5. If answer above is “no,” reconsider company support for the activity. (For existing activities, consider “turnaround” measures
to make them more sustainable). If answer above is “yes” describe how? Are there other stakeholders that could take over and
sustain this beneft stream/activity (e.g., through community payments for services delivered, by the government taking over the
project, by another mechanism)? With what resources?
6. What kind of training and capacity building and/ or resources are required for this stakeholder to be able to take over and
sustain this activity?
7. What timeframe is needed for successful handover?
OPTIONS 8. Based on the above, which of the following exit / handover strategy approaches are most appropriate? Check all options that apply.
—
Phasing down over time:
• Company reduces activity level/fnancing level over time—may be in preparation for phasing out or transferring responsibility
• Special challenges include: timing; sensitizing target population; maintaining beneft stream; building capacity of
organization taking over responsibilities; viability of activity with reduced company support; managing reputational risks
—
Transfer of responsibility (handover):
• Successor institution identifed that will continue providing activity or service
• Company assists successor institution in securing needed resources and delivery or management capacity
• Special challenges include: timing and transition; capacity building; whether scope, scale and quality of activities can
continue; viability of handover; managing reputational risks to company if handover is unsuccessful
—
Phasing out:
• Company discontinues support and involvement
• No new sponsor is identifed (or needed) to continue the activity
• Special challenges include: impacts on target population; safety net considerations; reputational risks from abrupt or poorly
planned and managed exit
WORK PLAN 9. Summarize the details of the approach(es) you have selected. This may include:
• Identifying, where possible, viable successor organization(s)
• Key activities and milestones
• Timetable (phasing if necessary)
• Training/capacity building/mentoring (technical, management, fnancial, reporting, fundraising, etc.)
• Equipment (if necessary)
• Financing (if additional external fnancial support is required)
• Community consultation/involvement during exit process
• Managing the special challenges (see #10)
• Identifying key milestones and indicators for the transition/exit (see #11)
The above will be more accurate if a successor organization has already been identifed, which, ideally, will be the case.
MANAGING
RISKS
10. Describe how the special challenges and risks (listed in #8) associated with the exit option(s) selected will be addressed.
Include this in the work plan.
MONITORING 11. Describe how “degree of readiness” for the exit or handover will be tracked and assessed? Provide relevant indicators. The amount
of time, advance preparation, and capacity building required to ensure a viable transition/exit is almost always underestimated. Setting
key milestones and targets for handover is advisable for tracking progress and enabling mid-course adjustments where needed.
Readiness indicators should include targets and be aligned with the exit strategy work plan. Examples include:
• Financial indicators that measure the extent to which the necessary fnancial resources are in place at predetermined time intervals
(e.g., by year X, the successor organization will have secured contributions from external actors in the amount of Y)
• Organizational capacity indicators that measure the progress in building capacity of partners to manage/take over the project
activities after the company’s exit/handover
• Activity indicators that measure the progress in delivering certain activities (e.g., training, development of partnerships,
external fundraising) that are part of the exit strategy work plan
130 Tool 9: Turnaround Strategy Template
Tool 9: Turnaround Strategy Template
See Chapter 6 for further guidance on developing a turnaround strategy for
unstrategic and/or unsustainable CI activities
PROBLEM ANALYSIS 1. What are the problems facing the existing CI program? Check all options that apply.
—
projects are not sustainable if company withdraws
—
projects are not aligned with (new) CI strategy / do not support business objectives
—
lack of suffcient community involvement and ownership
—
gap between stakeholder expectations and CI results
—
lack of capacity of implementing parties (internal/external)
—
creation of dependency relationship
—
ad hoc collection of different projects with lack of clear focus or impact
—
projects are not aligned with the company’s core competencies
—
projects are not demonstrating value vis-à-vis time and resources invested
—
external factors (e.g., project impacts, government change, local confict, etc.)
—
other (please specify )
NEW CI STRATEGY:
OBJECTIVES, GUIDING
PRINCIPLES & CRITERIA
2. Summarize key aspects of the company’s new CI Strategy (objectives linked to the business case, guiding
principles, eligibility criteria, alignment with core competencies) using the process set out in this guidance.
ASSESS AND
CATEGORIZE CURRENT
PORTFOLIO OF CI
PROJECTS
3. Assess current CI portfolio in light of strategy set out in #2. Sort projects into three categories (and associated
sub-categories) based on their relevance to new CI objectives and principles.
Green = high relevance to new strategy
—
Retain
Yellow = possible relevance to new strategy
—
Can be continued, with redesign, to meet new strategy objectives
—
Objective remains relevant but implementation needs to be revisited
(e.g., project implementation needs to be transferred to a competent
local partner)
Red = not relevant to new strategy
—
Stop immediately (e.g., activity is having negative effects or wasting signifcant resources)
—
Use phased approach to ceasing activity
—
Use phased approach to cease activity but replace with alternative
(e.g., donation program that is very popular with the community but
creating dependency/not aligned with new priorities. If stopped,
needs to be replaced with another program delivering benefts but in a
more sustainable manner and in consultation with local stakeholders.)
WORKPLAN FOR
TURNAROUND
Effective engagement
of internal and external
stakeholders in the redesign
process to gain their
understanding and support
will be critical to the success
of the turnaround.
4. Develop a Turnaround Plan. Suggested components include:
• Assessment of existing activities - consider each existing project separately in terms of how it needs to be
addressed, while keeping track of the CI program’s direction as a whole
• Engagement with external stakeholders to create local buy-in to the redesign process (e.g., be transparent and
try to minimize any negative impacts on local communities)
• Engagement with internal stakeholders to create staff and management buy-in to the redesign process (e.g., be
transparent and be prepared to “sell” the new program to senior management based on internal business case
for the turnaround strategy)
Based on engagement process:
• Timeline for phasing out old projects and phasing in new ones (consider how best to do this with minimum
disruption)
• Identifcation of partners for existing, redesigned and/or new activities
• Capacity building program for partners and/or communities
• Transition process which prepares partners/successor organizations to take over and sustain existing programs in
the medium to long term, and to be ready to take on new ones.
MONITORING PROGRESS
Indicators can be used to
measure progress as well as
end results. Interim results
can be used for redesign
purposes as necessary.
Defne indicators to be used to monitor progress of the turnaround strategy.
• Status indicators (which measure program milestones and show progress against stated work plan objectives,
targets, and timelines given in #4 )
• Company-community relations indicators (which show how turnaround activities are perceived by key
stakeholders and effect on local perceptions of the company )
131 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation
Tool for Sustainability Investments
The Planning and Financial Valuation Tool (FV Tool) helps a company to measure
the ?nancial return of its sustainability programs and to establish the value of risk
mitigated through such activities. Speci?cally, it aims to answer three questions:
1. What is the optimal portfolio of sustainability investments for a given operation?
2. How large an economic return back to the company can be expected from
such a portfolio?
3. When is the ideal timeframe for making speci?c sustainability interventions?
The FV Tool can be used to assess the value of a company’s portfolio of CI programs
or to assess a broader spectrum of corporate investments in sustainability (e.g.,
biodiversity, workforce development, health, education, and so forth). Companies
can use this information to evaluate program effectiveness and to strategically
allocate ?nancial resources to those programs with maximum positive impact for
both local communities and the business operation.
The FV Tool draws on a growing global database of CI programs from the collective
experiences of the extractives industry at the project or asset level (rather than the
company as a whole). The current version of the FV Tool is suited to oil, gas, and
mining projects; in the future, it will be adapted for other sectors.
How the Model Works
The Excel-based model* estimates the expected net present value of a speci?c project’s
sustainability investment portfolio over the lifespan of the project (i.e., mine or pipeline).
* The model requires technical knowledge to set the input parameters. It is not a one-size-?ts-all
approach; the model’s variables are con?gured per project.
Level of Risk to Company
Company Risk Register
O
p
p
o
r
t
u
n
i
t
y
f
o
r
C
o
m
p
a
n
y
t
o
H
a
v
e
I
m
p
a
c
t
Telecom
Electrification
Population Inflow
Health Issues
Community Support
Water and Land
Biodiversity
Access to Water
Workforce Skills
Ecotourism
Responsible Supply
Chain
Transportation
Inflation
Housing
Impact on Agriculture
Ethnic Groups
Unions
Air Quality Impact on Marine-life
Freshwater Pollution
Bauxite Residue
Tenure over Land
Corruption - Political
Stability
Resettlement
High Priority
Medium Priority
Low Priority
High
Med.
Low
High Med. Low
After mapping
potential risks and
opportunities, the
company chose to
invest in the areas
circled
Primary Education
Local Industry
Development
Land Footprint
Carbon Intensity
Impact on Residents
Climate Events
132 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
The application of the tool includes the following steps:
1. Start with the asset/project’s existing ?nancial model.
2. Draw on the company’s existing analysis of project stakeholders, risks, and
opportunities.
3. Conduct cost-bene?t analyses of potential productivity gains from sustainability/
community investments, such as training to switch from expatriate labor to a
local labor force or an anti-malaria program that keeps the workforce and the
community healthier. This is referred to as “value creation.”
4. Analyze how much risk may be mitigated through such community investments
by costing out the potential savings by reducing the frequency and intensity
of negative events (i.e., delays in construction, disruptions in production, even
likelihood of expropriation—all of which may be affected by local stakeholders’
perceptions of the company). This is referred to as “value protection.”
5. Based on the “value creation” and “value protection” analyses, a Monte Carlo
simulation* is run to factor in randomness (not knowing if or when such costly
“risk” events might occur).
6. A range of probable net present value (NPV)** over the lifespan of the asset is the
output, broken down by the contributions of speci?c community investments.
FV TOOL OUTPUT
SUSTAINABILITY
ISSUE
Switch Value
Creation
NPV
Calculations
Value
Protection
NPV
Calculations
Total SD/
CR Added
Value
(NPV)
Relative
Share
Sharpe
Ratio
Stand
Alone
Standard
Deviations
In % of
Project
NPV
Standard
deviation
in % of
its Mean
Initiatives ?
Workforce on 259,509 21,861 281,370 12.90% 4.25 66,282 62.49% 23.56%
Local Suppliers on 72,538 10,930 83,469 6.45% 2.89 29,644 18.54% 35.52%
Health on 6,292 13,663 22,688 8.06% 0.55 36,200 5.04% 159.56%
Housing on 797 13,663 14,460 8.06% 0.40 36,187 3.21% 250.25%
Access to Water on -83 13,663 10,846 8.06% 0.38 36,187 2.41% 333.62%
Electri?cation on -83 8,198 13,579 4.84% 0.37 21,712 3.02% 159.89%
Legal on -525 10,930 7,672 6.45% 0.36 28,947 1.70% 377.28%
Primary
Education
on -1,144 13,663 23,449 8.06% 0.35 36,182 5.21% 154.30%
Community
Development
on -3,438 24,594 10,225 14.25% 0.32 65,125 2.27% 636.90%
Resettlement on -3,357 8,198 10,305 4.84% 0.22 21,701 2.29% 210.58%
Biodiversity on -6,909 16,396 6,754 9.68% 0.22 43,410 1.50% 642.73%
Food Supply on -42,741 13,663 -34,542 8.06% -0.80 36,178 -7.67% -104.73%
Total 280,583 169,426 450,279 100% 451,494
Figures in
US $ thousands
* Monte Carlo simulation methods (or Monte Carlo experiments) are a class of computational
algorithms that rely on repeated random sampling to compute their results. Monte Carlo methods
are useful for modeling phenomena with signi?cant uncertainty in inputs, such as the calculation of
risk in business. (Source: Wikipedia)
** The net present value (NPV) of a time series of cash ?ows, both incoming and outgoing, is
de?ned as the sum of the present values (PVs) of the individual cash ?ows. NPV is a central tool in
discounted cash ?ow (DCF) analysis, and is a standard method for using the time value of money to
appraise long-term projects. (Source: Wikipedia)
Measure of the excess return (or Risk
Premium) per unit of risk in an investment
asset
Standard deviation shows how much
variation there is from the “average”
mean
Total value created and protected
over lifespan of project
Direct cash savings or
revenue to company
Indirect
savings
through
risk events
avoided
Investment
selected
through
risk register
process
133 Tool 10: Planning and Financial Valuation Tool for Sustainability Investments
The user can go through this exercise for two or more portfolios of sustainability
investments to learn which approaches are more likely to yield greater value to the
company over time.
Lessons to date:
• The FV Tool brings together different business units across the company
to mine employees’ judgment and expertise in the areas of corporate
responsibility, risk, ?nance, human resources, law, and asset management.
• The added rigor and embedded stakeholder engagement leads to greater local
development impact from a company’s investments.
• Early ?ndings suggest that it may make good business sense for companies to
consider investing in communities earlier than is traditionally accepted.
Results:
The tool aims to incorporate sustainability investments into the core of a company’s
project planning process. This is not just an academic exercise; it fosters community
development through an incentive structure that is consistent with a company’s
bottom line.
Partners:
The FV Tool is being developed as a partnership comprising IFC, Rio Tinto Alcan,
Deloitte, and MIGA, with support from the Government of Norway. More
information is available at: www.commdev.org.
Cost Drivers Bene?ts Drivers
• Cost of baseline studies
• Fully loaded annual salaries (average)
% Full-time employees
– Company staff (+ travel costs)
– Local human resources
– Average local salaries (blue and white collar)
• Local literacy rate; # of adults to be trained
• Cost of training; # employees to be trained
– Pre-employment training per employee
– Vocational training per employee
– Technical training (e.g., seconded employees)
– Continuous training per employee (% of salary)
• Labor cost savings during construction and operations, derived from:
– Annual salary savings for foreign and expatriate worker
– % of labor force without sustainability objectives
(SCENARIO A) in construction and operations
» # Local
» #Foreign
» #Expatriate
– % of labor force with sustainability objectives (SCENARIO B)
Workforce
Cash Flow Basis
Phase Pre-Feasibility Feasibility Construction Operations (per year) Closure
Costs -1.487 -6.996 -2.059 -332 -501
Benefts 172.019 20.135
? Direct NPV= $247,369K (over lifetime of the project)
Inputs
EXAMPLE: Cost-Bene?t Evaluation of Community Investment - Workforce
135
Useful References
General Toolkits/Resources
1. IFC CommDev (Oil, Gas, and Mining Sustainable Community Development
Fund), www.commdev.org
2. Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community Relations Work, Zandvliet, L.,
and Anderson, M., CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, 2009
3. Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA (International
Petroleum Industry Environmental Conservation Association), 2008,
www.ipieca.org
4. Socio-Economic Assessment Toolbox (SEAT), Anglo American plc, 2003,
www.angloamerican.co.uk/aa/development/society/engagement/seat
5. RuralInvest Toolkit, Food and Agriculture Organization, 2006,
www.fao.org/tc/tci/ourrole/ruralinvest/en/
6. Community Development Toolkit, ESMAP (Energy Sector Management
Assistance Program), World Bank, and ICMM (International Council on Mining
and Metals), 2005,
www.icmm.com/page/629/community-development-toolkit
7. Investing in People: Sustaining Communities through Improved Business
Practice, A Community Development Resource Guide for Companies,
International Finance Corporation, 2000, www.ifc.org
8. The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005,
http://go.worldbank.org/Y3UF0AM9T0
9. Good Practice Note: Addressing the Social Dimensions of Private Sector Projects,
Number 3, International Finance Corporation, 2003,
www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/p_SocialGPN/$FILE/SocialGPN.pdf
10. Community Engagement and Development Handbook, Australian Government
Department of Industry, Tourism and Resources, 2006,
www.ret.gov.au/resources/Documents/LPSDP/LPSDP-CommunityEngagement.pdf
Business Context
1. Development Without Con?ict: The Business Case for Community Consent,
World Resources Institute, 2007, www.wri.org
2. Brie?ng Note: A Systematic Approach to Project Social Risk & Opportunity
Management, Engineers Against Poverty,
www.engineersagainstpoverty.org/key_issues/social_risks.cfm
3. Brie?ng Note: Modifying Project Opportunities and Risk Analysis for Enhanced
Social Performance, Engineers Against Poverty and Overseas Development
Institute, www.odi.org.uk/resources/download/1420.pdf
4. Market Movers—Lessons from a Frontier of Innovation, International
Finance Corporation and SustainAbility, 2007, www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/
AttachmentsByTitle/p_MarketMovers/$FILE/Market+Movers_Final.pdf
136
Capacity Building
1. Capacity Development (web portal), UNDP, www.undp.org/capacity/
2. A Brief Review of 20 Tools to Assess Capacity, UNDP, 2005,
www.unpei.org/PDF/institutioncapacity/Brief-Review-20-Tools-to-Assess.pdf
3. Capacity Assessment Methodology Users Guide, Capacity Development Group,
Bureau for Development Policy, UNDP, 2008, http://content.undp.org/go/cms-
service/download/asset/?asset_id=1670219
4. Capacity Building for Local NGOs: A Guidance Manual for Good Practice,
Progressio, 2005, www.ciir.org/Templates/Internal.asp?NodeID=91674
5. Effective Capacity Building in Nonpro?t Organizations, McKinsey & Company,
2001, www.vppartners.org/learning/reports/capacity/capacity.html
Communications
1. Global Reporting Initiative, www.globalreporting.org/home
2. Strategic Communication for Community-Driven Development (CDD): A
practical guide for project managers and communication practitioners (draft),
World Bank, 2004, www.commdev.org/?les/1939_?le_stratcomm_CDD.pdf
Con?ict and Grievance Management
1. Addressing Grievances from Project-Affected Communities, International
Finance Corporation, 2009, www.ifc.org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/
AttachmentsByTitle/p_GrievanceMechanisms/$FILE/IFC+Grievance+Mechanisms.pdf
2. A Guide to Designing and Implementing Grievance Mechanisms for
Development Projects, Of?ce of the Compliance Advisor/Ombudsman,
International Finace Corporation, 2008,
www.cao-ombudsman.org/howwework/advisor/documents/implemgrieveng.pdf
3. Company-Led Approaches to Con?ict Resolution in the Forest Sector, Wilson, E.,
The Forests Dialogue, 2009, www.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/G02510.pdf
4. Con?ict-Sensitive Business Practice: Guidance for Extractive Industries,
International Alert, 2005, www.international-alert.org/pdfs/con?ict_sensitive_
business_practice_all.pdf
5. Community Development and Local Con?ict: A Resource Document for
Practitioners in the Extractive Sector (Draft), CommDev, 2008,
http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/1801/
6. Human Rights in the Mining and Metals Industry: Handling and Resolving Local
Level Concerns and Grievances, ICMM (International Council on Mining and
Metals), 2009, www.icmm.com/page/14809/human-rights-in-the-mining-and-
metals-industry-overview-management-approach-and-issues
137 137
Gender
1. Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
2. Women, Communities, and Mining: The Gender Impacts of Mining and
the Role of Gender Impact Assessment, Oxfam, 2009, www.oxfam.org.au/
resources/?lestore/originals/OAus-MiningAndGender-1209.pdf
3. Promising Approaches to Engendering Development (web portal), The World
Bank Group, http://go.worldbank.org/ECX6CB6JR0
Monitoring and Measurement
1. The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation
Measures—A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachin & Associates, Sustainable
Investment Group Ltd., and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006,
www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
2. Measuring Value: A Guide to Social Return on Investment (SROI), New
Economics Foundation, 2009,
www.neweconomics.org/publications/guide-social-return-investment
3. Managing Risk and Maintaining License to Operate: Participatory Planning
and Monitoring in the Extractive Industries, Parker, R., and Dakin, R., Business-
Community Synergies, 2008,
http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/2037/
4. London Benchmarking Group, www.lbg-online.net/index.php/lbg
5. Measuring Impact Framework, World Business Council for Sustainable
Development, 2008, www.commdev.org/content/document/detail/2184/
Partnerships
1. The Partnership Assessment Tool (web site), United Nations Global Compact,
www.unglobalcompact.org/issues/partnerships/pat.html
2. Partnering for Development—Making It Happen, UNDP, 2006,
www.undp.org/partners/business/UNDP-booklet-web.pdf
3. The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through
Collaborative Action, Harvard Initiative, 2007, www.hks.harvard.edu/mrcbg/
CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20Summary%20
20071018.pdf
4. Partnering for Success. Business Perspectives on Multi-Stakeholder
Partnerships, World Economic Forum, 2005, www.weforum.org/pdf/ppp.pdf
5. Building Alliances Series (web portal), USAID,
www.usaid.gov/our_work/global_partnerships/gda/sector_guides.html
6. The Partnering Toolbook, International Business Leaders Forum, 2004, http://
shop.iblf.org/DisplayDetail.aspx?which=20
138 138
Stakeholder Engagement/Community Engagement
1. Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing
Business in Emerging Markets, International Finance Corporation, 2007,
www.ifc.org/ifcext/enviro.nsf/Content/Publications_GoodPractice
2. Community-Driven Development Decision Tools for Rural Development
Programmes, International Fund for Agricultural Development, 2009,
www.ifad.org
3. Breaking Ground: Engaging Communities in Extractive and Infrastructure
Projects, World Resources Institute, 2009,
www.wri.org/publication/breaking-ground-engaging-communities
4. From Words to Action: The Stakeholder Engagement Manual, UNEP,
Accountability, and Stakeholder Research Associates, 2006,
www.accountability21.net/publications.aspx?id=904
5. Tools for Development—A handbook for those engaged in development
activity, Department for International Development, 2003,
www.d?d.gov.uk/Documents/publications/toolsfordevelopment.pdf
6. The World Bank Participation Source Book, World Bank,
www.worldbank.org/wbi/sourcebook/sbhome.htm
7. Guide to Engaging with NGOs, Business for Social Responsibility, 2001,
www.commdev.org/?les/1922_?le_BSR_Guide_to_Engaging_NGOs.pdf
139
Notes
139
1 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
2 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
3 Corporate Responsibility Report, ArcelorMittal, 2008, www.arcelormittal.com
4 Sources for this graphic:
Ayine, D., “Social Responsibility Agreements in Ghana’s Forestry Sector,” Developing
Legal Tools for Citizen Empowerment Series, IIED, 2008, www.iied.org/pubs/
pdfs/12549IIED.pdf
“Sino Gold in Chinese Agreements,” www.miningenvironmental.com/legal-brief/sino-
gold-in-chinese-agreements
Levi Strauss Foundation, www.levistrauss.com/Citizenship/LeviStraussFoundation/
GranteeSpotlights/GranteeSpotlight6.aspx
Ashley, C., Supply and Distribution Chains of Multinationals: Harnessing their Potential
for Development, Overseas Development Institute, 2009, www.odi.org.uk/resources/
download/4166.pdf
National Interpretation RSPO Principles and Criteria for Sustainable Palm Oil Production
for Oil Palm Smallholders (Republic of Indonesia), Roundtable on Sustainable Palm Oil,
2007, www.rspo.org
Lutalo, M., “The Wellness Program of Serena Hotels, Kenya—A Case Study,” World
Bank, 2007, www.ifc.org/ifcext/aids.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/The+Wellness+Program+of
+Serena+Hotels/$FILE/GR-Serena_Final_Aug29_07.pdf
5 Development Without Con?ict: The Business Case for Community Consent, World
Resources Institute, 2007, http://pdf.wri.org/development_without_con?ict_fpic.pdf
6 “Planning and Financial Valuation Model for Sustainability Investments,” Presentation,
2009, http://commdev.org/content/document/detail/2596/
7 Nestlé – Creating Shared Value, www2.nestle.com/CSV/Pages/CSV.aspx
8 Sources for this box:
Business in the Community, www.bitc.org.uk/community/communitymark/
communitymark_companies/microsoft.html
Nestlé – Creating Shared Value, www2.nestle.com/CSV/Pages/CSV.aspx
Dialog Telekom PLC Sustainability Report 2008, www.dialog.lk/content/uploads/pdfs/
sustainability_reports/2008_sustainability_report.pdf
Fundación Wong, www.fundacionwong.org
9 Sources for this graphic:
Deutsche Bank Corporate Social Responsibility, www.db.com/csr/en/content/7238_7240.
htm
Nestlé in the Community, www.community.nestle.com/primary-education/asia/
philippines/Pages/donate-a-classroomprogramme.aspx
“Microsoft, Aga Khan to Launch Tech Centers,” www.dailytimes.com.pk
Harnessing Core Business for Development Impact, Overseas Development Institute,
2009, odi.org.uk/resources/download/2714.pdf
Khimti Neighborhood Development Project, UNDP, www.undp.org.np/pdf/projectdocs/
KIND%20project%20document.pdf
Sutton, N.C., and Jenkins, B., “The Role of the Financial Services Sector in Expanding
Economic Opportunity,” Economic Opportunity Series, Harvard University, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_19_EO%20Finance%20Final.pdf
Apollo Tyres, www.apollotyres.com/india_commuinity_aids_business.htm
140
10 Dialog Telekom Corporate Responsibility Report, 2007
11 For more detailed guidance on stakeholder identi?cation and analysis, please refer to
Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in
Emerging Markets, IFC, 2007, www.ifc.org/sustainability
12 Sources for this section:
“Participatory Approaches to Increasing Women’s Voice in CDD Projects:
Examples from Indonesia,” Promising Approaches to Engendering Development,
World Bank, 2004, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGENDER/Resources/
IndonesiaCDDPromisingApproach.pdf
Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations into
Communities Work at Rio Tinto, Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
13 Sources for this section:
The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005, http://go.worldbank.
org/FMTE6W8XX0
“CDD and Elite Capture: Reframing the Conversation,” Social Development How to
Series, World Bank, 2008, http://go.worldbank.org/414DCE1FE0
Making Services Work for Poor People, World Development Report, 2004,
http://publications.worldbank.org/catalog/content-download?revision_id=3435362
14 Sources for this section:
Community-Driven Development in the Context of Con?ict –Affected Countries:
Challenges and Opportunities, Social Development Department, World Bank, 2006,
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTCDD/Resources/CDD_and_Con?ict.pdf
“Clarifying Challenges in Con?ict and Post-Con?ict Settings,” Social Development How
to Series, World Bank, 2008, http://go.worldbank.org/414DCE1FE0
15 Sources for this section:
Breaking New Ground: Mining, Minerals, and Sustainable Development, International
Institute for Environment and Development, 2002, www.iied.org/pubs/pdfs/9084IIED.pdf
Scaling Up Local and Community Driven Development (LCDD). A
Real World Guide to Its Theory and Practice, World Bank, 2009,
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/EXTSOCIALDEVELOPMENT/
Resources/244362-1237844546330/5949218-1237844567860/Scaling_Up_LCDD_
Book_r?llesize.pdf
Ensminger, J., Getting to the Bottom of Corruption: A Case Study in Community Driven
Development, California Institute of Technology, 2007, commdev.org/content/document/
detail/1823
16 Sources for this section:
The Effectiveness of World Bank Support for Community-Based and -Driven
Development, Independent Evaluation Group, World Bank, 2005,
http://go.worldbank.org/FMTE6W8XX0
Wright-Revolledo, K., Supporting the Capacity of Organizations at Community Level: An
Exploration of Issues, Methods, and Principles of Good Practice, INTRAC, 2007,
www.intrac.org/resources.php
17 Adapted from Annual and Sustainability Report, Aracruz Cellulose, 2008, www.aracruz.
com/minisites/ra2008/section/en/AracruzCelulose2008AnnualSustainabilityReport.pdf
18 Sources for this section:
Participatory Rural Appraisal, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Participatory_rural_appraisal
Chambers, R., Rural Appraisal: Rapid, Relaxed and Participatory, Discussion Paper 311,
Institute of Development Studies, 1992, community.eldis.org/.59b4ab37/Dp311.pdf
Serrat, O., Social Network Analysis, Asian Development Bank, 2009, www.adb.org/
Documents/Information/Knowledge-Solutions/Social-Network-Analysis.pdf
Elliot, C., Locating the Energy for Change: An Introduction to Appreciative Inquiry,
International Institute for Sustainable Development, 1999,
www.iisd.org/pdf/appreciativeinquiry.pdf
141 141
Ashford, G., and Patkar, S., The Positive Path: Using Appreciative Inquiry in Rural Indian
Communities, Department for International Development, International Institute for
Sustainable Development, MYRADA, 2001,
www.iisd.org/pdf/2001/ai_the_positive_path.pdf
19 Annual Report 2008 (Letter to Shareholders), Newmont Mining Corporation,
http://investor.shareholder.com/newmont/AR2008/letter.cfm
20 Stakeholder Engagement: A Good Practice Handbook for Companies Doing Business in
Emerging Markets, IFC, 2007, www.ifc.org/sustainability
21 Adapted from the following sources:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
22 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
23 Biswas, P., Finan, T., A Sustainable Livelihoods Assessment and Community Development
Planning: A Guidebook Prepared for Enterprise for Development International (EFDI) and
Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL), Tango International, 2006
24 Newmont Ghana, www.newmontghana.com
25 Lonmin staff and Lessons Learned Lonmin, IFC, 2009
26 DFID Guidance Sheets on Livelihoods Approaches, Eldis: Livelihoods Connect, www.
eldis.org/go/topics/dossiers/livelihoods-connect/what-are-livelihoods-approaches/training-
and-learning-materials
27 Biswas, P., Finan, T., A Sustainable Livelihoods Assessment and Community Development
Planning: A Guidebook Prepared for Enterprise for Development International (EFDI) and
Chevron Nigeria Limited (CNL), Tango International, 2006
28 Sanginga, P., Chitsike, C., The Power of Visioning, A Handbook for Facilitating the
Development of Community Action Plans, Enabling Rural Innovation in Africa, 2005,
http://idl-bnc.idrc.ca/dspace/handle/10625/38244
29 “Social Networks: Veracel Celulose,” IDIS, 2009, www.idis.org.br/library/cases/social-
networks-veracel-celulose-1/view?set_language=en
30 Sources for this example:
Veracel Sustainability Report, 2008, www.veracel.com.br/shared/relatorio2008_27agro.pdf
“Social Networks: Veracel Celulose,” IDIS, 2009, www.idis.org.br/library/cases/social-
networks-veracel-celulose-1/view?set_language=en
31 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
32 Sour ces for this graphic:
IFC’s Revenue Management Program, www.ifc.org/ifcext/lac.nsf/Content/Corporate_
Advice
Kinross Maricunga staff and www.comunidadcolla.cl
DFCU Bank staff and Creating Opportunities for Women, IFC, www.ifc.
org/ifcext/sustainability.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/?y_Gender_Brochure_
CreatingOppsforWomen/$FILE/Creating+Opps+for+Women+Brochure.pdf
BHP Billiton Sustainability Summary Report, 2009, www.bhpbilliton.com/
bbContentRepository/docs/sustainabilitySummaryReport2009.pdf
33 IFC’s Revenue Management Program, www.ifc.org/ifcext/lac.nsf/Content/Corporate_
Advice and MIM program (the Web site in Spanish), www.mim.org.pe
34 UNDP Capacity Development Practice Note, 2008, content.undp.org/go/cms-service/
download/asset/?asset_id=1654154
142
35 Adapted from UNDP Capacity Development Practice Note, 2008, content.undp.org/go/
cms-service/download/asset/?asset_id=1654154
36 Gibbon, M., Labonte, R., and Laverack, G., “Evaluating community capacity,” Health and
Social Care in the Community 10 (5), 2002, portals.wdi.wur.nl/?les/docs/ppme/HSC_388.
37 Root Change, www.rootchange.org
38 Excerpted from Environmental and Social Performance Annual Monitoring Report,
Montana Exploradora de Guatemala, 2007, www.goldcorp.com/_resources/project_pdfs/
marlin/AMR_Marlin_2007_Final06068.pdf
39 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
40 Coca Cola Community Water Programs, www.thecoca-colacompany.com/citizenship/
community_initiatives.html
41 BG Group Social Performance Standard and Social Investment Guidelines
42 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
43 “Special Issue: Community Investment,” Ethical Corporation, 2008, http://commdev.org/
content/calendar/detail/2381
44 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
45 Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
46 Sources for this example:
Khimti Neighborhood Development Project, UNDP, www.undp.org.np/pdf/projectdocs/
KIND%20project%20document.pdf
Increasing Access to Electricity and Community Development: Khimti Neighborhood
Development (KiND) Project in Nepal, UNDP, www.undp.org/partners/business/resources/
cs_khimiti_nepal.pdf
Presentation at Annual Local Networks Forum, UN Global Compact, 2009,
www.unglobalcompact.org/docs/networks_around_world_doc/Annual_Local_Networks_
Forum/Istanbul/KF_Business_and_Peace_GCLN_Nepal_Business_and_Con?ict.pdf
47 Lihir Gold Sustainable Development, www.lglgold.com/asp/index.asp?pgid=10662
48 Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-Community
Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf Publishing
Limited, 2009
49 Sources for this table:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008
www.ipieca.org/activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through Collaborative
Action, Harvard University CSR Initiative, Economic Opportunity Program, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20
Summary%2020071018.pdf
143 143
50 Sources for this graphic:
BTC/SCP Georgia Community Investment Programme and Improved Schools Programme
Final Evaluation, Environmental Resources Management, 2006
Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan Project Community Investment Plan Final, 2003, www.commdev.org/
?les/2273_?le_CDP_BTC_Pipeline_Georgia_Azerbaijan_Turkey_2003_.pdf
Cargill Cares Councils, www.cargill.com/corporate-responsibility/cargill-volunteers/cargill-
cares-councils/index.jsp;
Newmont Ghana, www.newmontghana.com
Partnering for Success, World Economic Forum, 2005, www.weforum.org/pdf/ppp.pdf
Environmental and Social Performance Annual Monitoring Report, Montana Exploradora
de Guatemala, 2007, www.goldcorp.com/_resources/project_pdfs/marlin/AMR_
Marlin_2007_Final06068.pdf
51 Sources for this table:
Creating Successful, Sustainable Social Investment, IPIECA, 2008, www.ipieca.org/
activities/social/downloads/publications/SocialInvestmentGuide.pdf
The Role of the Private Sector in Expanding Economic Opportunity through Collaborative
Action, Harvard University CSR Initiative, Economic Opportunity Program, 2007, www.
hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_29_Harvard%20EO%20Dialogue%20
Summary%2020071018.pdf
52 Consolidated Report on Sustainable Livelihoods Assessments and Community
Development Plans for Selected Communities in Delta, Rivers, Bayelsa, Ondo, and Imo
States, Chevron Nigeria Ltd., 2007
53 BTC/SCP Georgia Community Investment Programme and Improved Schools Programme
Final Evaluation, Environmental Resources Management, 2006
54 Various project documents and the project team from COTCO (a consortium of
companies and governments of Cameroon and Chad operating the Chad-Cameroon
pipeline) and IFC
55 www.ge.com/citizenship/news_features/features_community_building.jsp
56 Suezan, L., Public-Private Partnerships for Development. A Handbook for Business,
USAID, 2006, www.issuelab.org/research/public_private_partnerships_for_
development_a_handbook_for_business
Partnering for a Better World, United Nations, business.un.org/en
57 Sources for this example:
“Conceptual Picture of Partnership Models Implemented in the Eastern Limb to Support
a Developmental State,” Presentation to World Bank Representatives, 2009
Smith, G.L., Dalomba, F.A.C., and Andersen, D.C., “The Challenges of Infrastructure
Development in the Eastern Limb of the Bushveld Complex of South Africa,” Third
International Platinum Conference ‘Platinum in Transformation,’ The Southern African
Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2008, www.platinum.org.za/Pt2008/Papers/367-374_
Smith.pdf
58 “Community Investment Award Winner (2009): Standard Chartered Bank,” www.
gbcimpact.org/itcs_node/9/502/award/1927
59 Leadership, Accountability and Partnership: Critical Trends and Issues in Corporate Social
Responsibility, Harvard University, Kennedy School of Government, 2004, www.hks.
harvard.edu/m-rcbg/CSRI/publications/report_1_Launch%20Summary%20Report.pdf
60 Sources for this section:
Adapted from Putting Partnering to Work, Business Partners for Development, 2002,
www.grsproadsafety.org/themes/default/pdfs/Putting%20Partnering%20to%20
Work%20-%20MAIN%20REPORT.pdf
Malena, C., “Strategic Partnership: Challenges and Best Practices in the Management
and Governance of Multi-Stakeholder Partnerships Involving UN and Civil Society
Actors,” Background paper prepared by for the Multi-Stakeholder Workshop on
Partnerships and UN-Civil Society Relations, 2004, www.un-ngls.org/orf/partnership-
carmen-malena.doc
144 144
61 Adapted from Pro?les of the Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Practices of Philippine
Mining Firms, prepared and written by the Mines and Geosciences Bureau and Hubo
C.L., The University of Asia and the Paci?c, 2003, http://siteresources.worldbank.org/
INTPSD/Resources/Philippines/phil_CSR_Case_Studies.pdf
62 Sources for this box:
Standard Charted, www.standardchartered.com/sustainability/community-investment/
living-with-hiv/en/index.html
Engro Food Pakistan and UNDP Partnership, http://business.un.org/en/browse/
partnership_stories/13
Starbucks Community Involvement Program, www.starbucks.com/sharedplanet/index.
aspx
63 Community Investment Indicators, 2008, www.commdev.org/content/document/
detail/2106
64 Sources for this box:
Rio Tinto staff and www.riotinto.com/ourapproach/17215_communities_17356.asp
Petrobras Social and Environmental Report, 2008, www2.petrobras.com.br/
ResponsabilidadeSocial/ingles/pdf/BSA2008_ING.pdf
Association Los Andes de Cajamarca (ALAC) staff and ALAC’s Web site at www.
losandes.org.pe/en/index.htm
65 Building a Sustainable Future, APRIL, 2008, www.aprilasia.com/images/Updates/
SustainabilityReport%2708.pdf
66 Parker, R., Dakin, R., Managing Risk and Maintaining License to Operate: Participatory
Planning and Monitoring in the Extractive Industries, Business-Community Synergies,
2008, commdev.org/content/document/detail/2037
67 Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
68 Why Gender Matters. A Resource Guide for Integrating Gender Considerations
into Communities Work at Rio Tinto, 2009, www.riotinto.com/documents/
ReportsPublications/Rio_Tinto_gender_guide.pdf
69 Dialog Telekom staff and Enabling an Information Society, Dialog Telecom PLC
Sustainability Report, 2008, www.dialog.lk/content/uploads/pdfs/sustainability_
reports/2008_sustainability_report.pdf
70 McKinsey Global Survey Results: Valuing corporate social responsibility, McKinsey &
Company, 2009, http://commdev.org/?les/2393_?le_McKQ_Valuing_Corporate_Social_
Responsibility.pdf
71 The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation Measures
A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachnin & Associates, Sustainable Investment Group Ltd.,
and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006, www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
72 Adapted from Zandvliet, L., and Anderson, M. B., Getting it Right: Making Corporate-
Community Relations Work, CDA Collaborative Learning Projects, published by Greenleaf
Publishing Limited, 2009
73 Sources for this table:
“Planning and Financial Valuation Model for Sustainability Investments,” Presentation,
2009, www.commdev.org/content/document/detail/2557
A Guide to Social Return on Investment, New Economics Foundation, 2009, www.
neweconomics.org/sites/neweconomics.org/?les/A_guide_to_Social_Return_on_
Investment_1.pdf
The sdEffect™: Translating Sustainable Development Into Financial Valuation Measures
A Pilot Analytical Framework, Yachnin & Associates, Sustainable Investment Group Ltd.,
and Corporate Knights Inc., 2006, www.sdeffect.com/sdEffectFeb2006.pdf
145
146
doc_773795801.pdf