Integrated reporting is still emerging in the U.S. It’s a mostly bottom-up phenomenon with individual companies forging their own path. I explored these journeys in a report I released a few weeks ago. Now that I’ve had time to digest the findings, I am seeing three basic approaches. The first is the integrated summary report. This is the path taken by Coca-Cola, GE and JLL. Average length of these three reports was 44 pages. In this approach, the company leaves its current financial and sustainability reporting as is and adds a new report on top of it. Dunstan Allison-Hope calls this the “triangular approach” with an integrated report sitting on top of the two traditional reports. You could say that this kind of report is a synthesis of the traditional reports that connects the dots between them but don’t include all the detail. Continue reading “Three Paths to Integrated Reporting in the U.S.”
Month: October 2016
Samsung and Apple – Contrasting Value Creation Models
Apple and Samsung are the leading global smartphone brands. They sell products that essentially do the same things. But ask just about any consumer and they’ll tell you that the companies are radically different. This post explores these two companies using an integrated capital model to explore how and why these differences exist. Continue reading “Samsung and Apple – Contrasting Value Creation Models”
Samsung’s Value Creation Model
As promised, here is a summary model of how Samsung creates value. It’s meant to be a companion piece to the post I wrote last week on Apple. Next week I’ll compare the two.
Apple’s Value Creation Model
In follow up to my post on developing value creation models, I thought I would try to create some examples using familiar companies. This first example is for Apple. Continue reading “Apple’s Value Creation Model”