unglobalcompact

1. The United Nations Global CompactMichelle WolfeUK Network Steering Group memberChair, Network Liaison working group www.unglobalcompact.org www.ungc-uk.net

2. Benefits of the Global Compact • UN provides international platform without side, national agenda. • Seeks to engage the corporate world in tackling some of gravest social and environmental challenges. • Harmonised effort – bringing together governments, trades union, academics, NGOs/civil society and businesses. • Business-led initiative.

3. GC UK Network • Established UK Network in June 2003. • Objectives: • Provide UK GC signatories with a forum to consider and advance issues of mutual interest and concern. • Provide a mechanism through which performance and reporting on GC principles can be improved by mutual support. • Enable participants to share and exchange practice and experience • Provide input to the GC on its future development and activity • Promote the GC principles throughout the UK business community • Help promote and support the GC worldwide

4. GC UK Network • Governance (38 members, 8 observers): • Participants – “corporate partners” (multi-nationals and SMEs) or “non-business partners” (e.g academic institutions) • Observers – civil society groups, trade unions, government departments • Steering Group – volunteers from participating organisations that oversee management and activities of UK Network. • Working Groups – address topics on behalf of UK Network e.g. marketing the GC to potential UK signatories, monitoring performance of existing UK signatories (i.e. COP Peer review) • Secretariat – IBLF, facilitate and support SG and participants • Membership fees: • Large company - £1,800 • SME (per adapted EU definition: <250 employees or <£39m turnover) - £450 • Non-business participant £450 • Observer – no fee

5. Benefits of the GC UK Network • Opportunity to share best practice and to be reviewed/assessed by your peers. • Cross-sectoral networking. • Representative – businesses (large and small), trades union, NGOs, academia and government. • Engaging with other networks and their member organisations.

6. Networking/sharing best practice • Quarterly network meetings. • Each meeting begins with knowledge session linked to GC principles: • Q1 2009 – Environment • Q2 2009 – Labour • Q3 2009 – Anti corruption • Q4 2009 – Human Rights • End of year event – government speaker, GC representative and opportunity to invite non-members • Working Groups

7. Working Groups • Communication on Progress • mentoring/peer review programme developed to raise standards of COPs • development of guidance (including SME) • members are required to act as peer reviewers and all members must submit their COP for peer review • The Peer Review programme also informs UNGC policies relating to COP • The Peer Review Programme objective is to review 50% of members’ COPs each year (from 2009) • Feedback shared with all members on website

9. Working Groups continued • Communications • Provide mechanisms to exchange information among signatories • Website development • Help shape focus for quarterly meetings/other events • Developed Webinar on “Why it’s worth communicating” about the GC • Link with GC Office

12. Working Groups continued • SME • Provide practical support, relevant guidelines and tools • Increase SME participation • Provide mentoring support function for SMEs wishing to join • Support and track the production of COPs for SMEs • Network Liaison • Represent UK network at external events • Assist emerging networks with governance issues • Support other network activities – e.g. Raising awareness of CR in Eastern Europe.

13. For more information: Contact: UK Network of the UN Global Compact Phone: 00 44 207 467 3669 Email: secretariat@ungc-uk.net www.ungc-uk.net

14. Appendices

15. Communication on Progress Mentoring & Peer Review ProgrammeUNGC UK Network COP Working Group

16. The main points • The Mentoring and Peer Review programme was developed to support UNGC UK Network members in raising the standards of Communications on Progress (COP); • The programme focuses on benefiting members and both peer reviewers and reviewees find the programme a valuable learning experience; • The Peer Review programme also informs UNGC policies relating to COP.

17. Background • All members must produce a COP within 12 months of signing the GC, annually thereafter; • All network members are required to act as peer reviewers and all members must submit their COP for peer review when called upon; • The Peer Review Programme objective is to review 50% of members’ COPs each year; • Peer reviews will be conducted 4-5 times per year, normally in Feb, Apr, June and Oct.

18. Choosing COPs for Review • Members are asked to inform the secretariat of their preferred review date; • For each review date, the secretariat selects a batch of 3-4 COPs for review using these criteria: • Those whose last COP peer review result was compliant with qualification or non-compliant • Those requesting a review • Random selection from the remainder

19. The Peer Review The secretariat randomly chooses a review leader and two other peer reviewers from network members who’s COP is not up for review; The group is sent a batch of 3-4 COPs to review along with guidance on what to look for; Reviewers assess the COPs independently, then consult by phone, email or in person to reach a consensus and produce a report.

20. The Required Contents of a COP: • CEO statement of continued support for the GC; • Description of practical actions taken to implement the GC’s principles (new signatories are only required to report on two issues areas); • A definition of performance indicators and a basic measurement of outcomes related to the issue areas covered by the COP.

21. Peer Review Results • The group assesses compliance with UNGC requirements, with three possible results: 1. Compliant 2. Compliant with qualification 3. Non-compliant with reasons • The review group is encouraged to offer advice on ways of improving the COP whether it is found to be compliant or not

22. Compliant Member informed of result by secretariat • Member posts COP on UNGC website • Compliant result reported to UNGC office • Well done!

23. Compliant with qualification • COP substantially meets UNGC’s minimum requirements, but some shortcomings are clearly identified by the peer reviewers; • Member is informed of result by the secretariat; • Member is expected to address shortcomings in their next COP which will automatically be selected for review the following year; • Compliant result is reported to UNGC.

24. Non-compliant with reasons • COP does not meet UNGC minimum requirements; • Review group clearly documents the areas of non-compliance and the leader contacts the member to discuss the result; • Review leader submits final result to the secretariat, who sends formal notification to the member; • Member may resubmit an amended COP to the next scheduled peer review round; if still non-compliant, the result is reported to the UNGC office; • Member may request mentoring.

25. Sanctions • Membership in the UK Network is contingent upon maintaining “active” status in the UNGC; • Failure to submit a “compliant” COP can lead to members being declared “non-communicating” or inactive”; • If a UK Network member is declared “inactive “ by the UNGC and fails to submit a compliant COP within 60 days, they will be expelled from the Network.