Imperial

Year end: Jun 2017
Assessment date: Feb 2018

Imperial’s reporting clear, with detailed reviews by leadership and useful responses to identified challenges. Significant disruption through divestments, acquisitions and restructuring (separation into two distinct businesses) dealt with through highly informative leadership reviews, detailing development of dual governance structure as part of strategy. Likewise, useful restructuring of reporting into separate sections (and separate sustainability reports) for each underlying business. Excellent cross-referencing of information.

Leadership details how ethical behaviour is being developed and embedded across both divisions, providing context (increasingly poor ethical climate) and purpose (put our own house in order), as well as listing initiatives. Evidence of mature leadership in the transparency of reporting on King IV shortcomings. Imperial generally proactive and involved (e.g. in developing voluntary code of conduct for the automotive industry), but performance reporting mostly superficial and in places misleading by omission (e.g. fatalities at Logistics).

While reporting on transformation biased, strong leadership supported by accountability through to executive remuneration. Reporting on customer issues generally lacking in useful performance numbers, but company appears well-positioned to respond to market trends and shifts in technology.

See the executive summary for a more complete overview of FarSight’s analysis for Imperial. Buy our full report for detailed analysis and supporting discussion.