Ethical Assessment Methods
Assessment Results

Ethical Assessment Methods

Enhancing the Transparency and Professionalism of Our Practices

In 2006, we continued our program, coordinated by the Ethics Committee, to ensure that the Code of Conduct is being properly applied. Known as "ethical assessment," the program is based on an innovative methodology developed by U.K. accreditation company GoodCorporation and validated by the Institute of Business Ethics in London. To develop a benchmark for the process, the action principles in the Code of Conduct were divided into six stakeholder categories—shareholders, employees, customers, suppliers and contractors, industrial partners, and host countries—and then broken down into 84 compliance criteria, known as “evidence points,” whose front-line application is verified externally by the GoodCorporation team.

This verification is supplemented by individual interviews with representatives of the different stakeholder categories. Each evidence point is thus assessed in four successive stages :

Does a policy exist for this point?

à

Is there a system in place to implement this policy?

à

Are there documents indicating that the system works in practice?

à

Do the stakeholders concerned believe that the system is fair and works?

Compliance is then graded as follows:

• Major non-compliance:There is no policy or criteria, or the system does not work.
• Minor non-compliance:There is a system in place, but it does not always work.
• Observation:The system works, but there is room for improvement.
• Merit:The system works well.
• Commendation:The system is a benchmark for best practice.

The 84 scores obtained make up the unit’s “ethical profile,” providing an outside view of our ethical and community outreach performance.

A Management Resource

Ethical assessment gives the unit concerned an accurate overview of how well its operations comply with Total’s principles and how well it is satisfying its internal and external stakeholders. This means the unit can compare performance with expectations, offering a clearer vision of its practices. In turn, this enables managers to rank compliance priorities, while respecting the distinctive nature of local challenges and requirements. At Group level, assessment enhances the consistency of corporate social responsibility policies, thereby promoting and facilitating the sharing of best practices and their implementation Group-wide. Although situations vary from one country to another, subsidiaries often face similar dilemmas, which underscores the benefits of having more effective information sharing on these issues. Available on the intranet since early 2006, a database of best practices provides responses for other units that are reviewing their practices and looking for ways to improve.

Assessment Results

Examples of results reported in certain subsidiaries profiled since 2002

	Best practices	Practices to be improved
Shareholders	· Methodical, regular reporting	· No promotion of the Code’s values
Employees	· Effective consultation systems and processes · High level of safety at operational sites	· Individual performance reviews · Unclear disciplinary and grievance procedure
Customers	· Efficient customer service · Continuous product improvement processes	· Customer feedback not consistently taken into account · No formal gift policy
Suppliers	· Strict control of compliance with safety regulations · Clear contracts, flexible terms and conditions	· Ethical assessment of suppliers · No promotion of corporate social responsibility
Industrial partners	· Clear contractual clauses · Effective data protection	· Incomplete assessment of the partner’s ethical risk · Code of Conduct not promoted outside Europe
Host countries	· Involvement in local projects outside Europe · Open dialogue with sensitive communities outside continental Europe	· Environmental risk management · Employees not encouraged to participate directly in local projects