Corporation 20/20
Ratings Working Group
Meeting Minutes
August 1, 2008
1-3pm EST/10-12 PST
Present:
Alan Willis, Alan Willis Associates
Allen White, Corporation 20/20
Andrew Tassoy, B Corporation
Alvaro de Regil, The Jus Semper Alliance
Heerad Sabeti, Fourth Sector Network
Bonnie Nixon Gardiner, Hewlett-Packard
Rory Bakke, Stopwaste.org, S-BAR
Mike Wallace, Wallace Partners
Gil Friend, Natural Logic
Mark Heintz, Hewlett-Packard
Kiersten Regelin, Kellogg School of Management, Northwestern University
Absent:
Michael Marx, Corporate Ethics International
Danielle Harder, Microsoft Corporation
Next Steering Committee Meeting (Tentative):
09/04/08 10am-12pm PST Conference Call
Mission Statement –
Needs: Incorporate concept of Responsibility, Strengthen Language
Assumptions: Created through inclusive, consensus-based decisions
Adheres to “high bar” of rigor and transparency, and to Corporation 20/20 Principles of
Corporate Redesign
Proposed redraft:
To continually expand the contribution of business and other organizations worldwide to
sustainable development through the creation of a generally accepted, organization-level
sustainability rating framework for use by all stakeholders
Proposed Name:
Global Initiative for Sustainability Ratings (GISR)
How is the RWG framework clearly distinguished from existing initiatives?
 RWG's initiative is being developed through a multi-stakeholder process that will
involve all constituencies with an interest in a generally accepted sustainability
ratings system
 RWG is global in scope--we seek to achieve recognition and legitimacy
internationally
 RWG's products will serve all stakeholders including, but not limited to, the financial
community. It's architecture will incorporate a core ratings element designed to allow
customization and adaptation for specific user needs and sectors



RWG's core product will be a public good--accessible and transparent to all users at
nominal or no cost.
The RWG system will not be, per se, a certification system for companies, processes,
products or services in the sense of establishing threshold values for approval or
inclusion. However, certification bodies may wish to use RWG ratings as the basic
of, or as a component of, their certification methods. [Note: While any certification
program (LEED, FSC, MSC, etc) has some kind of underlying rating system against
which certification is measured, integrity will be better served if ratings are separated
from the certification function.]
RWG will collaborate with existing ratings initiatives to encourage and support
ventures, both for-profit and not-for-profit, to accelerate uptake of sustainability
ratings among all user groups. Such venture may include, for example,
customization, auditing, analysis of rated companies and sectors, training and
education.
What is the funding strategy?
 Anticipated ask is $4-5 million over two years
 Public Funding Options – EPA, State Department, ILO
 Initial Private Foundation Funding Targets:
BILL & MELINDA GATES FOUNDATION TRUST
W K KELLOGG FOUNDATION TRUST-T/A 5315
JOHN D & CATHERINE T MACARTHUR FOUNDATION
DAVID AND LUCILE PACKARD FOUNDATION
THE SKOLL FOUNDATION
The HP Foundation
WILLIAM & FLORA HEWLETT FOUNDATION
Merck Family Fund
Calvert Social Investment Foundation, Inc.
EIRIS Foundation
Rudolf Steiner Foundation, Inc. dba RSF Social Finance
Goldman Fund
Garfield Foundation
Omidyar Network
Overbrook Foundation
Tides Foundation
Sandler Family Foundation
As We Sow
George Soros Foundation Network
Wallace Alexander Gerbody Foundation
The Flora Family Fund
Microsoft Foundation

What was first survey feedback?
o Summary: See attached pdf
o Other Feedback:
o Most Important Issues:
 Is triple bottom line and governance integrated into every day
activities? Capability and effectiveness
 Embedded legal accountability to social and environmental
commitments
 Socioeconomic and financial return on investments
o Anticipated Benefits:
 Organizations will not want to expose weaknesses publicly unless
primary concern is improvement
 Universal codification of societal expectations of organizations
 Legally binding standards change business behaviors
o Anticipated Obstacles:
 Must be completely repeatable to be credible.
 Business incapable of moving from market, short-term, shareholder
value mindset
 Government unwilling to regulate due to opposing interests
 Must have economic component to be seen as realistic
 Existing ratings
o Justified Initiative:
 Only if it does not default to lowest common denominator
 Must be robust to be credible and accurate
 If sincerely puts people and planet first, corporations subordinate to
broader societal interests
o Involvement/Adoption:
 Only if is truly comprehensive with global perspectives
 Must give precedence to Corporation 20/20 Principles
o Rating Tool Feedback:
 Tool based on whole business management model
 360 degree approach that focuses on behaviors
 Simplistic
 Adaptable to orgs of all sizes and geographies
 Behavioral assessment as well as compliance assessment
 Not made for new generation of auditors/assessors, straightforward
way of deployment
o Additional Feedback:
 Clearly differentiate this project from others
 Emphasize modeled after the GRI
Governance:
Current Steering Committee (SC) 12-15 members :
Michael Marx, Corporate Ethics International (NGO)
Alvaro de Regil, The Jus Semper Global Alliance (NGO)
Allen White, Corporation 20/20 (Miscellaneous)
Allen Willis, Canadian Institute of Chartered Accountants (Financial)
Mike Wallace, Wallace Partners, (Financial)
Gil Friend, Natural Logic (Consultancy)
Bonnie Nixon Gardiner, Hewlett Packard Co, (Corporate)
Kiersten Regelin, Northwestern University-Kellogg School of Management, (Academic)
Additional Steering Committee Targets:
Disney or Mattel (Corporate)
- Disney contacted supports initiative and considering involvement
Timberland or Nike (Corporate)
- Timberland contacted – supports initiative and considering involvement
Levi’s or Gap (Corporate)
- Both organizations contacted, scheduled call w/Levi’s
Schwab or Wells Fargo (Financial)
- Schwab contacted, awaiting reply
Calvert or EIRIS or KLD or Domini (Financial)
ERM or FSG Advisors (Consultancy)
- ERM contacted and interested in getting involved
FTC or Co-Op (Consumer Groups)
Stuart Hart (Academic)
- Stuart Hart contacted, awaiting reply
INSEAD or Hong Kong University (Academic)
- Both organizations contacted, awaiting reply
Sub Working Groups (each led by one steering committee member):
 Business Model Development
 Rating Framework Development
 IT/Delivery Model (Led by Danielle Harder, Microsoft Corporation)
 Funding/Business Plan (Led by Michael Marx and Allen White)
 Outreach/Launch (Tentative – to be further discussed at next meeting)
Moving Forward Post-Funding:
 Steering Committee face-to-face meetings locations vary globally 3x/year
 Steering committee has approximately monthly teleconference, except when it
meets face to face
 Working sub-groups conduct business primarily via e-dialogue, teleconferences
 Ratings Framework development sub-work group meets approximately 4x/year
 Other sub-working groups meet 2x/year
 Piggy back on Steering Committee meetings for efficiency
What does collaboration with existing ratings initiatives look like?
 If someone came through w/exact mission and attributes of the RWG initiative,
we would be delighted to join forces

However, no such initiative exists to our knowledge though collaboration with
existing ratings initiatives is essential
 Such collaboration requires articulation of how the RWG will function in the
future
 We can’t know how much development needs to be done until funding is secured
and further research is done.
Put existing rating systems in a room and let them figure out what partnership looks like?
Perhaps Rockefeller could convene such a group
What are the next steps?






Action Items: Action Item: Send Kiersten funding contacts if you’re willing to share
Action Item: Personalized endorsement letter from each organization on letterhead
Action Item: Schedule date to convene funding institutions
Action Item: Reach out to Presidio students to determine interim leadership
options/working group support
o Appoint next RWG coordinator
Action Item: Reach out to targeted SC members
Continually reach out to stakeholders for feedback and support

Funding Deliverables:
o 3 page letter of intent will be an executive summary of the full proposal
o White paper modified to become full proposal
o Slide deck presentation including timeline w/milestones
o Letters of endorsement on organizational letterhead